Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

The Roman Catholic Church

*This is especially for many people propping up the Catholic Church as almost divine like Oil Empire
praising the Pope in his condemnation of the Iraq War, etc. Orbiting the Roman Catholic Church are
heresies and great superstitions. The origin of the Catholic Church appears to be when Emperor
Constantine created a state church 312 A.D. after his “conversion to Christianity.” By 606 A.D., the
modern Papacy as you see it today was fully activated. Very few Christians expose its false
doctrines since it’s composed over 1.1 billion individually globally. People are also scared
because of the backlash since Catholicism worldwide is extremely potent in the media, religious
affairs intentionally, etc. Sometimes taking the unpopular course is the most courageous stance for
to hate the world and go against the grain is a sign of being of God. Usually [it happened to me]
when anyone legitimately layout bible verses and other evidence that contradict the precepts
of Roman Catholicism, Catholics and pro-Papist Protestants will label you as an anti-Catholic
bigot or a basher. The fact of the matter is that I hate the Catholic religion and never Catholics
personally. Manifesting Roman Catholicism’s deceit show care and love for deluded Catholics not
There are numerous Catholics who are trying their best to find a real relationship with God, but God
in Revelation is calling them to leave. It’s not necessary to be apart of a church incorporating
falsehoods for so long then expecting it to reform. Some Catholic apologists attempt to discredit
Bible-believers claiming that before Luther; only the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches existed.
This is flat out false for before the Reformation, Waldensians, the Anabaptists, The Celtic Church,
Benegarians, the Church of the East, independent groups, and other religious Christian churches
existed from the time of the Apostles to 1519 as the remnant. God said he will preserve his church
forever. Other Catholic apologists claim that Protestantism is flawed because it split into 25,000 to
30,000 different denominations.

Additionally, they view that Protestants exhibit so much disagreement, that no Protestant is apart of
Christ’s church. Is this a just case? No, see there is basic unity among all Protestants and Baptists
for we all agree on the Foundational doctrines of Christianity (This is what makes you a Christian like
the Incarnation, the Atonement, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Second Coming of Jesus
Christ, Salvation by grace through faith alone, the authority of the Scriptures being infallible, etc.) All
bible-believers subscribe to this and:

“Some things are negotiable. These include things such as the form of baptism, the kind of
worship music, the form of church structure and organization, defining the relationship
between free will and predestination, and eschatology (beliefs about what will happen during
the End Times). These are important issues. They can affect the quality of a person's
Christian life. But they do not determine whether or not a person is a Christian. These are
areas in which Christians can agree to disagree. Differences among genuine Protestants
occur in the second area, the negotiable items. They could be compared to flavors of ice
cream. There are many kinds of ice cream, but they are all ice cream. They aren't pie, or cake,
or salad. In real life, people know when they are eating ice cream, and when they are eating
something else. Some Catholic apologists say that there are 30,000 different Protestant
denominations. This is not true. Dr. Eric Svendsen has made an in-depth study of this claim.
There is no valid foundation for it. His book "On This Slippery Rock" has a chapter about it,
which you can read on-line. Dr. Svendsen also has an on-line article about diversity in
Catholic beliefs. [Note 2 gives addresses.]… Let's compare this to something in everyday life.
There is a huge difference between cats and dogs and horses. Now if you narrow it down to
dogs, there are many different varieties. And within each variety, there are subgroups. For
example, there are different kinds of collies and different kinds of poodles. Catholic
apologists act as if differences in Protestant churches are like the huge differences between
cats and horses and birds and dogs. In reality, they are like the differences between different
kinds of dogs (variations in the same kind of thing.) Often, they are like the differences
between different kinds of poodles or different kinds of collies (small variations in things
which are essentially the same)…” (From www.jesus-is-lord.com/spiritof.htm#ch11 “The Spirit of
Roman Catholicism What Lies Behind the Modern Public Image?” by Mary Collins in 2002)

It’s time to further explain Dr. Svendsen’s “On This Slippery Rock” which refutes the 30,000
Protestant denominations claim more elaborately. Svendsen’s work has found according to Barret’s
research that there are 8,196 denominations of Protestants and 223 denominations of Catholics
(which Barret broke down into 2,942 Catholic separate denominations in just 1970with 3,294
Protestant denominations in the same year). Barrett also unified many names of the same
Protestant group into denominations even if there are no theological differences between them.

Not to mention that there are only about less than 2 dozen main Protestant groups not 30,000.
Catholicism itself are in numerous divisions like Catholic feminists, (nuns, priests, and historians who
openly defy the Pope, Liberation theology Catholics, Catholic Pentecostals, Christo-Pagans [Latin
American Catholic influenced by folk Catholicism with Amerindian paganism], and Evangelical
Catholics. I forgot about the Spiritist Catholics, moderates, conservatives, traditionalists,
Sedevacantists, and cafeteria Catholics. No Catholic apologist mentions this at all. What is the
reason why Catholicism isn’t Christian?

Basically, Roman Catholicism acquires a false base of authority which are the Pope and its tradition.
Also, it teaches the wrong way of salvation. It emphasis is misplaced in the 7 sacraments to be
saved instead of Christ’s blood alone. Its acceptance of Christ’s divinity is accurate, but it believes
that an object transforms into God plus Christ’s death wasn’t enough for atonement. It also gives
unnecessary adulation to Mary plus adds false dogma as integral of its creed like: the infallibility of
the Pope in 1870, Scapular in 1521, purgatory proclaimed as a tenet in 1439, etc. You can copy this
expose to assist Catholics to leave that church and believe on real concepts.

Catholicism (like Masonry) is one of the easiest religions to refute, but its supporters are one of the
toughest to get through. I guess since they’ve been so conditioned (almost in a cultic way) in
following those systems. They are involved in the Inquisition, murder of Jews and real Christians,
supporting the One World Religion, the international slave trade, pedophile priests, false doctrines,
and even never excommunicated Adolf Hitler. This doesn’t mean we promote hatred of Roman
Catholics. We love all humans regardless of their gender, creed, race, etc. What we do is show the
Gospel to Roman Catholics with love and clear, yet firm examples.

The Priesthood

*I have over 200 verses to refute Catholicism, but this is a simple summary to simply refuted
their primary doctrines. Roman Catholicism institutes a select priesthood, but priests as
clergy has no basis from scripture today. Only in the Old Law were priests instrumental in
religious services as performing sacrifices, etc. Now in the New Testament, The Lord Jesus
Christ is the only High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, his new title. Behold this 2
verses to prove that: “Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high
priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” (Hebrews 6:20) and: “But Christ being come an
high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands,
that is to say, not of this building.” (Hebrews 9:11). Christ Jesus is the only mediator between God
the Father and man (1 Timothy 2:5). Yet, priests in Catholicism have claimed a special status as a
mediator to “forgive” sins. On the other hand, Mark 2:7 is rather clear that: “…who can forgive sins
but God only?“ (Mark 2:7). The priesthood today is extended unto all believers (1 Peter 2:5-9,
Revelation 1:6). Early church writes such as Chrysostom (350 AD), and Basil (350 AD) wrote
strongly about confessing sins to God only.

The Levitical priesthood had the old law of using the blood of animals, but now they can
never atone sin, but through the precious blood of Christ alone. Catholic priests are celibate,
but mandatory celibacy enforced by anyone is forbidden and a doctrine of devils. (1 Timothy
4:1-3). Elders, bishops, pastors are many titles of select clergy not priest plus even a bishop should
have one wife in marriage. (1 Timothy 3:2-6). The Scriptures in Hebrews 13:4 says that: “…Marriage
is honorable in all..“ The Bible never forbids people to be celibate voluntarily (like eunuchs of
course). Yet, the Scriptures does forbids forcing people to be celibate for the sake of a
religious tenet. Romanism forcing priests, bishops, and other clergy to be celibate whether they
want to or not. These restrictions (among other reasons) contributed to the epidemic of Roman
Catholic priests abusing young children and other people. This child abuse isn’t limited to the Roman
Catholic Church though. Again, 1 Timothy 4:1-3 outlines that: “…Now the Spirit
speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,
giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in
hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with hot iron; forbidding to marry,
and commanding to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received
with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth…”
The Papacy

The Papacy is a system whose head is the Pope and Catholics proclaim Peter as its first. According
to Catholicism, Peter is the Rock, but throughout the OT and NT, Christ is the Rock and foundation
not Peter: “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed
them: and that Rock was Christ” (1 Cor. 10:4), “For other foundation can no man lay than that is
laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11), “As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumbling stone
and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” (Romans 9:33)

Mt. 16:16-20 is the prime verse apologists use to justify Peter’s Papacy, but that isn’t the case. The
Lord Jesus Christ said “thou art Peter [in Greek that’s Petros or a masculine word for small rock] and
upon this rock [Petra, or a feminine Greek word for a large rock], I will build my church.” The Rock is
Christ or his and the confession that built his church. Even John 1:42 gives the name of Cephas as
meaning a stone. Cephas is Petros in Greek not Petra. Mt. 18:18 has the keys of heavens, but in the
sense of opening the door of salvation to Israel first then the Gentiles, so all men can have a chance
to enter in the kingdom of God. That power is also given to Christ’s apostles and disciples (John

Let’s remember that the foundation of the apostles is connected to Christ and Christ is the head of
the Church (Eph. 2:20, Col. 2:19) The Pope is proclaimed as “Holy Father”, but Holy Father is a
name utilized for God alone and it’s blasphemy to call a man by God’s name. (John 7:11, Rev. 15:4,
1 Samuel 2:2). Christ forbids to call a man father in part of a spiritual teacher like a rabbi (Mt. 23:7-
9). God tells us to address him not as father. Father is used in the Bible for human offspring or
lineage, but not spiritual religious titles for clergy (2 Cor. 6:18, 1 Tim. 5:1, John 8:38-39). Therefore,
no where in the Scriptures do we call the Pope Holy Father since Holy Father is title given unto God
alone. Peter was never a Pope for Peter was married (Mt. 8:14, 15) while popes aren’t, Peter would
never let a man bow before him (Acts 10:25, 26), yet people bow before Karol, and Peter never
exhibited supremacy over the Church. James’ advice on the Jerusalem Council was followed not
Peter’s (Acts 15:13-19), Paul rebuked Peter, and Christ exhorted the greatest to be a servant for all
(Mark 9:33-35) with no special papal leadership given unto Peter. The concept of a pope yet along
the word Pope is no where in the Bible. Pope comes from Papa, a title for pagan Roman Emperors.
Christ is the only foundation indeed. (1 Cor. 3:10).The early church had autonomous Bishops in the
early centuries of A.D. Even the early Christian Cyprian didn’t want a bishop to be a bishop of
bishops in a control freak manner. He said: “…For neither does any of us set himself
up as a bishop of bishops, nor by tyrannical terror does any compel his
colleague to the necessity of obedience, since every bishop, according to the
allowance of his liberty and power, has his own proper right of judgment, and
can no more be judged by another than he himself can judge another…” Cyprian
said these previous words at the Council of Carthage. Many Popes throughout history have acted in
an immoral fashion. For example, Pope Hadrian II (867) declared civil marriage to be valid, but Pope
Pius VII (1800-23) declared it to be invalid. Pope Eugene IV (1431) had Joan of Arc burned alive as
a witch, but later Pope Benedict IV in 1919 declared her to be a saint. Pope Alexander VI (1492-
1503) won election by bribing the College of Cardinals. He had 5 children by one lady. He lived in
public incest with his two sisters, fathering a daughter by one of them; Lucretia Borgia. Pope
Benedict IX (1033-1045) was made pope at the age of 12. This pope committed adultery and murder
openly and flagrantly. Hence, Popes aren’t role models that I want to follow.

The Antichrist concept is very interesting. Now, Antichrist is made up of 2 syllables. One is anti-
meaning in the place of (according to Webster’s 1828’s Dictionary. Anti comes from the Greek word
of Ante). Therefore, Antichrist means in the place of Christ or another Christ. The Antichrist is a false
Christ. It’s doesn’t take a genius to figure out that numerous Pope claim to have the title of Jesus
Christ. For example, the Pope is called the Vicar of Christ. The Vicar of Christ is the concept that the
Pope is God’s representative on Earth. That’s false and blasphemy of course since no human can
take the place of God at all. Now, according to the Webster’s 1828 Dictionary, Vicar comes from the
Latin word vicarious and vicis. Vicar means a substitute in office. The Pope claims also to be a
substitute of Jesus Christ on Earth. Pope Leo XIII claims to hold God’s place in Earth in a sick way.
He said:

"[W]e hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty."


Cited in Double Cross by Chick Publications, p. 27

p. 304, Benziger Brothers (1903) Here’s other quotes where the Catholic Church falsely claim to have power
over the whole church and the world:

"For the Roman pontiff (pope), by reason of his office as VICAR OF CHRIST, and as pastor of the entire
Church has full, supreme, and universal POWER over the whole Church, a power which he can always
exercise UNHINDERED."


"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely NECESSARY FOR the SALVATION of every
human creature to be SUBJECT TO THE ROMAN PONTIFF (POPE)."

The Bible is clear that only Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation completely, not a Pope at all. The
Bible in Acts 4:12 outline the name of Jesus as necessary for salvation. The Bible is clear form John
16 and John 14:26 that the Holy Father (as sent by the Father) is the true teacher of believes, not a
Pope. The Bible is clear that all authority is held by Jesus Christ not a Pope: “…"Then Jesus came
to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go
and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And
surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20). The Pope is a
mere man. In prophecy from 2 Thessalonians 2:2-4, its shows the Antichrist as falsely claiming to be
God in a Temple. Revelation 13:4-5 refers to the Beast as speaking blasphemies, which Popes have
historically have done. Not to mention that Pope Leo XIII’s boast of taking the place of God is very
similar to Lucifer’s boat of being like the most High (or God) from Isaiah 14:14. The Bible is clear
from Isaiah 42:8 as showing the words of God that: “…I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory
will I not give to another…” By these quotes and the Scriptures, it’s apparent that the Pope is an
Antichrist that falsely tries to take the place of God on Earth. The Bible warns of many antichrists on
"Little children, it is the last time:
the Earth before the one Antichrist during the end times:
and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many
antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." (11 John 2:18)
2:18 . Archbishop
Milingo have accused that Vatican of embracing Satanism by some of their high level members. The
Papal follows the false doctrine of Papal infallibility. It was officially declared by the Papacy in 1870.
Now, Papal infallibility means that by action of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is preserved from even the
possibility of error when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the Church a dogmatic teaching on
faith or morals. This is nuts, because all men commit error from time to time. Only God is without
error. Popes Innocent III, Gregory XI, Clement IV, Hadrian VI, and Paul IV all disagreed with papal
infallibility. So, there is confusion in the Pope’s interpretation of infallibility.

Mary is a great, brave woman, but she isn’t the Mother of God for God pre-existed Mary.
Isaiah 43:10 quotes God as saying “Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant
whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before
me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” God is from everlasting to
everlasting and only Mary is the earthly mother of Jesus Christ not the mother of whole pre-
existence. God has no mother. The Vatican believes in the Immaculate conception (or that
Mary was born without sin, and he was ascended into Heaven). The Bible refutes this heresy
easily. Mary does have sin for all humans including Mary are sinners, so it’s impossible for
Mary to be without sin: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;” (Romans
3:23) and “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with
another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. Even Catholic scholar
Ludwig Ott admits, "Neither Greek nor Latin Fathers explicitly teach the Immaculate Conception of
Mary." (Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 1960, p.201). A list of just some of the many who
opposed the Immaculate Conception include: Augustine, Chrysostom, Eusebius, Ambrose, Anselm,
Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Cardinal Cajetan and Popes Gregory the Great and Innocent III.
Furthermore, the New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, vol. VII, pp. 378-381) admits that the origin of
this belief finds no Scriptural support:

"...the Immaculate Conception is not taught explicitly in Scripture... The earliest Church
Fathers regarded Mary as holy but not as absolutely sinless... It is impossible to give a
precise date when the belief was held as a matter of Faith, but by the 8th or 9th century it
seems to have been generally admitted... [In 1854 Pope Pius IX defined the dogma] 'which
holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin in the
first instant of her conception.'"

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8).
Romans 5:12 proves that more. Luke 1:28 is a verse Catholics use to justify her as sinless and
superior to all women, but it only says that Mary is highly favored among women not above women
or full of grace. Only God is full of Grace: “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
(and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and
truth.” (John 1:14). Other people are bestowed graced, blessed, and favored as well not just
Mary (Mt. 25:34, Eph. 1:6, Romans 6:15). Mary was definitely a virgin until Jesus was born. This is
found in Matthew 1:25 as she had children with Joseph. When Jesus started his earthly ministry at
the age of 30, Mary is to be commended for telling the people at the wedding at Cana to do what
Jesus Christ tells them to do as found in John 2:5. One smoking gun piece of evidence to prove that
Mary is equal to the apostles and all believers is how Jesus told Mary that all believers are his
brothers and sisters. This is found in the book of Matthew 12:46-50. Matthew 13:55-56 and Mark
6:3 have Mary’s children being shown (Sisters are mentioned in those verses. Sister in Greek
concordance of the NT means blood relative sisters not cousins). Some Roman Catholics view
Mary as the Mediatrix. The 1994 Catholic Catechism on p.252, # 969 says that: “,,,Therefore the
blessed Virgin is invoked in the church under the titles Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and
Mediatrix." 1 Timothy 2:5 describes the truth Mediator between God and man: “…For there is
one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” The Catholic
Church calls Mary the Queen of Heaven, yet the Bible doesn’t say that at all. In fact, the book of
Jeremiah forbids offerings to the false Goddess of the Queen of Heaven. Here‘s a verse on this
subject: "The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead
their dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings
unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger." (Jeremiah 7:18). The Queen of
Heaven is a pagan title that should be rejected by real believers in God. There is no
evidence that we pray to or through Mary. Doing that would be bordering necromancy. I
respect Mary greatly. I just don’t venerate or worship her at all.
The Mass

“The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priest, who
then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." In this divine
sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a
bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner."
(#1367, p.381)

The tabernacle is to be situated "in church in a most worthy place with the greatest of honor. The
dignity, placing, and security of the Eucharistic tabernacle should foster adoration before the Lord
really present in the Blessed Sacrament of the altar." (#1183, p. 335).

This is transubstantiation or the belief that the bread and wine of the mass becomes the actual body
and blood of Jesus Christ, but the appearance and texture of the bread and wine remain the same.
That church gives their mass in an unbloodly manner, yet Christ had one bloody sacrifice (Hebrew
9:22). Historically, the early church never uniformly accepted the modern tenets of transubstantiation
at all. In the 9 century, Pashasius Radbertus (who was a French monk) made up the modern
version of the doctrine (though others before him believed in this lie). Ironically, Johannis
Scotus, Erigena, the founder of the University of Paris in the 800’s A.D. opposed plus
exposed transubstantiation. Scotus came into France, wrote a book exposing Radbertus’
falsehoods, and he was a wise man. This work of Johannis Scotus has been written about in
the book entitled, “History of the Scottish Nation, Vol. III). We do know that the Christian
Berengarius opposed transubstantiation as well. There is also the adoration of the Masses’ host
wafer, which is idolatry of course. Many religious Catholic would bow before the Host.

In religious services, all believers are forbidden to eat blood, yet Romanism claims they have the
same blood and body of Jesus Christ. (Acts 15:10, Acts 21:25) Eucharistic adoration violates the
2nd commandment since we are to never worship to bow religiously to anything, but only to God.
The mass is just an object and isn’t God (Exodus 20:4-5) Communion is solely a remembrance and
John 6 utilized metaphors to mention the method of salvation (Luke 22:19). Throughout John 6,
Christ present the belief that belief on him saved not eating his flesh. John 6:43-47, John 6:34-36,
John 6:36-40 all show that eating physical bread will leave our body, but the internalizing of him will
lead to salvation. John 6:63 called the spirit of God which gives life not the flesh profiting nothing (as
found in these words: “…Doth this offend you? It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth (gives
life); THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: the words that I speak unto you, THEY
ARE SPIRIT, and they are life..."). The eating of Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood literally
aren’t mentioned in John 6 for that will be cannibalism which is forbidden in the Bible. Christ only has
2 comings in his total physical form not multiple masses (1 Thes. 4:16). Christ’s sacrifice on the
cross was an one-time event with no repeats in the mass. Even Paul said that Christ’s presence
physically in communion is non-existent (1 Cor. 5:16) Christ is not contained in an Eucharistic temple
(Acts 7:48-49). The mass decays, but Christ’s blood and body can’t (Psalm 16:10). Luke 22:19
states clearly that the Lord's supper is for remembrance purposes: "This do in remembrance of
me." This is a metaphor, where one thing is said to be another thing because of it's similarity. A
metaphor is a figurative use of terms without indicating their figurative nature, for example, he shall
eat his words. It’s obviously that the Bible has symbols to represent things.

Sola Scriptura

The Scriptures are superior to tradition and here’s logic reasons how and why. The Word of God is a
compass to a person’s spiritual hearth and one of the breaths that gives life to Christians. All
scriptures is inspired and God’s word is place above his name not tradition: “But continue thou in the
things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto
salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of
God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:14-17)


“I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy loving kindness and for thy truth:
for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name” (Psalm 138:2). Sola Scriptura means simply
that using the Scriptures alone is sufficient enough to derive the decrees of God. You can be
reassured with the scriptures (Acts 17:1-5).

Tradition is never given as much praise and magnification as the Bible has. Here’s what is Truth:
“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17). The Scripture cannot be
broken (John 10:38). In comparison, no tradition have been propelled on such a level as the
scriptures have, therefore the scriptures are superior to tradition. We ought to reject any theologian
that promotes a doctrine that is against what the Scriptures say: "If they speak not according to
this Word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20). Roman Catholicism have their
tradition made up of a long list of Papal decrees, writings from church leaders, and other sources of
information. Much of their tradition is different from other parts of Papal tradition. Some of tradition
doesn’t present an uniform, consistent message like the Bible can. Also, not all of Catholic
tradition are accessible, while the Word of God is easily accessible within 66 books. To follow
all Papal tradition, you must find all of it. That’s a difficult task to accomplish. On the other hand,
you can find all of the Scriptures preserved though.

Christ in Matthew 15:1-3 condemned the Pharisees’ tradition since it was contrary to the Word of
God: “Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do
thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they
eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the
commandment of God by your tradition?” If the scriptures were equal to tradition, then no
tradition would be condemned, but some verse have derogatory comments about some traditions.
Now, the Scriptures are unique. It has been preserved for over 2,000 years. It has 66 books that
are easily accessible to use and compare. It has all the sufficient information for a great
Christian walk from the resurrection, early church history, baptism, Heaven plus Hell,
prophecy, commands of God, etc. If the Scriptures have these thing, there is nothing I need
from tradition. The reason is that the Bible has all the ingredients of living righteously, etc.
Where is the need to add tradition to scripture when the scriptures already tell me the concepts
needed to live a godly life, etc. The answer is you don’t need man made tradition. The Holy Bible
was finished by ca. 100 A.D. It has been preserved in the Byzantinum Text and then through the
Received Text for centuries unto today.

Christ never condemned the Word of God at all. Therefore, tradition isn’t equal to the word of God. It
is the word of God alone that is living and active: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and
sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of
the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12).

"The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation." (Pg. 352, #1257)

"The Church does not know of any other means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal
beatitude..." (Pg. 352, #1257)

Actually, baptism is not necessary for salvation, but Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation.
Baptismal regeneration not only originated from pagan religions, but has no basis in scripture for
belief is required before baptism. (Acts 8:36-37) Salvation is done by confessing your sins to God
and believe on Christ and his burial and resurrection. This is the prime verse for believers’ baptism.
Only unbelief condemns you to hell (Mark 16:16). The blood of Christ cleanses all sins not baptismal
water (Mt. 26:28, James 3:25). Paul didn’t even come to baptize, but to save souls without it (1 Cor.
1:14-17, Acts 8:34).

Christ didn’t baptize a soul except his disciples and he saved people (John 4:2). Baptism comes
from the Greek word “baptize” meaning immersion not sprinkle. Peter gives the perfect definition of
baptism as a good answer of good conscience toward God as a figure. (1 Peter 3:21) As for
confession only God can forgive sins. (Mark 2:7, Acts 8: 22, Hebrews 4:16) not priests. James
only mention to confess your faults one to each other never to confess your sins to a man
and expect a man to forgive all of your sins. (James 5:16) The apostles solely had the power to
allow the Holy Spirit to proclaim the forgiveness of sins (John 20:22-23). Even the thief on the cross
died without baptism to be in heaven (Luke 23:43). Throughout the NT, the son of man (Christ) had
the power to forgive sins. John 3:16 eloquently issues the real way to be saves. So, baptism is after
salvation for Paul only baptized souls after they believed (Acts 8:36-37, Acts 10:30, 31, 33, Acts
18:8, Acts 2:4, Acts 8:12, Acts 8:13). Infant baptism is no where at all mentioned in the Bible. A baby
can’t show a good conscience toward God, so a baby doesn’t need to be baptized.

By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
March 22, 2005
12:26 pm. EST

Edited: January 25, 2009






P.S. I will add more information, so this isn’t the end of this article yet.