Tag Archives: Catholic

Bible

Sorry, but Mary can’t save you or even hear you. Don’t pray to her.

This showed up in my stats from 2009, so I thought I’d update and rerun it.  It is still wrong to pray to anyone other than the Trinity.

I finally figured out how to turn comments off.  I think 308 is enough.  Thanks to all the commenters for participating.  Everything has been said multiple times by now.  If you don’t like something, just keep reading, and you’ll find someone who agrees with you.

The comments at Dawn Eden’s place were the same arguments refuted here.  Ironically, she titled her piece Attention, Catholic apologists: Share Mary with a skeptical Evangelical, thus tipping her hand that it is just as much about sharing Mary as it is about sharing Jesus for them.  While I might talk about Paul, Peter, or others in the Bible, it would never occur to me to say I would “share” them with someone.  It should all be about Jesus when it comes to that.

For the record, I am not skeptical at all.  I am highly confident that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.  I am equally confident that his mother, while a sinner in need of a Savior, was a great woman of God whose life teaches many important lessons. But under no circumstances should we pray to her or bow down to an idol of her, and under no circumstances are we required to have a relationship with her to get to Jesus.

Here are some of the more common arguments of the “Mary defenders.”

—

A common false dichotomy was that you are either on the Catholic bandwagon for Mary or you are dishonoring her.  There is at least one other option: A proper understanding of her role.  This came up over and over.

—

They agree that the Bible is infallible, which should be a great foundation for us both to reference.  However, they then dive into a circular reference where they insist that you need the authority of the Catholic church to determine what the Bible really says.  But where do they get that authority?  I challenged them to demonstrate it from the Bible and no one offered anything.  Even if they found something, it would be circular.  They often beg the question and assume that “church” means “Roman Catholic Church.”

As noted elsewhere, if we can’t read the Bible and understand it without the Catholic church’s interpretation, what guarantees that we’ll be able to understand the Catholic church’s interpretation?   Of course, it is helpful to have experts and study guides, but the Bible doesn’t require that.

—

There are many non-sequiturs about how Jesus loved his mother, so [fill in the blank]. Yes, Jesus loved his mother, but that doesn’t mean we should pray to her or bow to her idol.

—

The immaculate conception argument about Mary goes in circles.  They want to claim that she had to be without sin so Jesus could be born un-tainted.  But then it stands to reason that Mary’s parents must have been born without sin as well, and their parents, and their parents . . .  otherwise Mary would have been tainted.  Then they backtrack to say that something special was done at Mary’s birth.  But, uh, why couldn’t that have been done at Jesus’ birth as well?  Back to the beginning.

—

Read the New Testament and look for mentions of Mary.  The Book of Acts: one passing note that she was in the room.  That’s it.

Romans?  Zero.  1 Corinthians?  Zero.  2 Corinthians?  Zero.  Hebrews?  Zero. And on and on.

I am not dismissing her importance, but the facts are clear: She was not a part of the Gospel message.  There are no references to her leading people to Jesus, answering prayers, appearing to anyone, etc. 

The apparitions of Mary typically have unbiblical or anti-biblical messages.  Therefore, they are not from God.

—
Despite claims to the contrary, there is much evidence of people praying to Mary and other saints and bowing to idols of her. I’ve seen it myself, and many on this thread conceded that they pray to saints—not just talk to them but pray to them.

Here is a sample of documentation.

—

A common argument was that we ask friends to pray, so we can ask the deceased to pray as well.  I think the difference is fairly obvious:

  1. The deceased are deceased, unlike friends here who are alive.
  2. The Bible says not to contact the deceased.
  3. The Bible does give examples of asking the non-deceased to pray.
  4. The Bible does not even hint that the dead have omniscience or anything close to it.

—
A common claim was that if the Catholic church got the Bible right, all tradition is infallible. Does anyone see how that doesn’t follow?  Paul got his letters just right, but not everything he did was inspired.

They don’t demonstrate how the organization that administered the Canonization process is synonymous with the Roman Catholic Church.

They ignore the laundry list of errors the church has committed.  Again, I’m not saying the Protestants get everything right.  But they aren’t claiming infallible traditions, either.

We agree that the Bible is infallible, which is a great starting point. However, no one has ever demonstrated from our common source that the Catholic church’s tradition is infallible.

—-

I’ve heard of people praying to Saint so-and-so when they lose their keys.  Then they find the keys and treat that as validation.

But remember that Satan knows where your keys are. If you pray to the dead in clear violation of Scripture, then God is under no obligation to answer you or protect you.

—–

The “infallible tradition” position and the notion that we have to have the Roman Catholic Church interpret the Bible for us fail in other ways.

First, consider that the Bible teaches how to handle disputable matters in Romans 14. Now if the church was infallible and couldn’t get the interpretation wrong, why would the Bible mention such a thing?

Second, how do you know if you properly understood the church’s message? If you can’t be trusted to understand the infallible Bible, then why can you be trusted to understand the church’s allegedly infallible interpretation of it? Think carefully about that. It is bulletproof.

—–

When addressing the false teachings about praying to saints, I typically start by pointing out that the Catholics have the burden of proof to demonstrate from scripture that the saints can hear the prayers of nearly 8 billion people 24 x 7 x 365 in any language.

I read countless “just so” stories and hypothetical situations, but none with scriptural evidence and many that were in direct violation of scripture.

We should only pray to God.  Simple stuff.
—–

Update: A special welcome to visitors from Dawn’s blog!  Feel free to comment or look around.  We will probably not agree on Marian devotion, but you might enjoy some of the pro-life, pro-family, and other pieces.

—–

I greatly respect Dawn Eden’s pro-life endeavors and her promotion of abstinence in her book, The Thrill of the Chaste: Finding Fulfillment While Keeping Your Clothes On.  She makes winsome and compelling cases on some important issues.

But a sad side of her life transformation is that she has wholly embraced Catholicism and its false teachings.  Please note that I know many Catholics who hold authentic Christian beliefs about the essentials.  They are “bad Catholics” in the sense that they don’t buy the un-Biblical dogma from the bowels of the Roman Catholic Church, such as Mary worship, praying to the saints, purgatory, salvation by works, Papal infallibility, etc.  Their local parishes actually teach fairly sound doctrine.  I think there are many saved people in Catholic churches, just as there are many unsaved people in Protestant churches.  It all comes down to having true faith in Christ.  But we should seek to avoid all errors and find the most sound churches we can.

Dawn recently had a link highlighting a video about a man struggling spiritually. He was crying out for help. Guess who saved him? Jesus? No, it was Mary. The “highlight” of the video was a vision of Mary that shifted to a statue of Mary. It was just your basic idol worship.

I’ve read the Bible a bunch.  I see remarkably few passages about Mary and none that even hint at the role the Catholic church ascribes to her.  Granted, Protestants sometimes overreact in the other direction and ignore her, but they are far closer to the truth than Catholics.

I submit that if a vision of Mary comes to you, then it isn’t the real Mary.  It is Satan who is leading you away from the truth.

Mary can’t save you.

Jesus can.

I encourage commenters to focus on the post itself and not just attempt to recreate the Reformation (as great as the first one was!). The video in question wasn’t just about admiring Mary. The protagonist specifically cries out for God, and Mary appears. That’s really, really bad theology.

False teachers

So the “Holy Spirit” told Francis Chan NOT to tell a Catholic what was wrong with her church . . .

9 Comments

A Catholic asked Francis Chan if he “had any words for the Catholic Church and the time that we’re in.”

What did he tell her?  Nothing.  He paused for about 30 seconds then said, “I don’t believe I’m supposed to answer that question. I don’t believe the Holy Spirit wants me to answer that question.”

Riiiiight.  The Holy Spirit said not to share the real Gospel with someone whose religion has at least 95 things wrong with it.

Question: How can you miss a softball that badly?

Answer: When you are a wimpy world-lover.

All he had to do was point out how wildly Catholicism differs from true Christianity.  He could have liberated her from a works-based, man-made religion.  But he took the easy way out and muttered some gibberish about her and how we all need to get along blah blah blah.

Note that this is one of the many ways that people use “sloppy God talk” to justify all sorts of bad behavior.  You see, God gives Francis direct revelation on command, so he’s extra special and if you disagree with him you are obviously disagreeing with God.

Though did you notice that it came through a little fuzzy?  He “didn’t believe” the Holy Spirit wanted him to answer.  Did the Holy Spirit mumble?  Or did Francis make that up and blame the Holy Spirit?  You decide.

He also hangs with phonies like Benny Hinn and Mike Bickle.

Run, don’t walk, from people like Chan.

False teachers

Reason #96

4 Comments

You don’t need any new reasons to leave the Catholic Church.  Luther’s 95 theses covered everything you need to know.  But the Catholics’ unrepentant homosexual priest situation is yet another reason to leave.  Not only youths but adults were serially abused throughout the world, leaders deliberately covered it up and continue to do so, and many leaders live in open relationships of sodomy.  This has happened with the knowledge of Bishops and the Pope and their distractions are pathetic. (Look! We’ve discovered weather! The climate changes, so we have to deal with that right now! We don’t time to talk about that pesky homosexual infestation in the church!)

The media is schizophrenic when it comes to Catholics.  Usually they reflexively bash them, but this vast network of homosexual priests has little, if anything, to do with pedophilia.  Therefore the media is ignoring the story.

This article, The Catholic Church Is Breaking Apart. Here’s Why., is good news.  It outlines the situation well, though you have to ignore some of the pro-Catholic assumptions of the author (e.g., it still isn’t “Peter’s throne.). Ironically, as open as he is about the homosexual situation he seems tone-deaf as to how it undermines so many assumptions that Catholics have about Popes, doctrine, etc.  But his premise is sound: The Catholics have the biggest problem they’ve had in 500 years.  Their only hope is to hide and deflect, which they have been doing along with their media accomplices. The Pope is indistinguishable from any other pro-LGBTQX / pro-Communist “Christian” Leftist.

During his time on Peter’s throne, Francis has worked to dismantle many orthodox positions in an attempt to radically reorient the church toward—by total coincidence—the long-held preferences of those four radical cardinals. For instance: He has criticized Catholics for being “obsessed” with abortion, gay marriage, and contraception. He has derided Catholic women for having too many children and behaving “like rabbits.” He sent a papal blessing to the lesbian author of the Italian version of Heather Has Two Mommies—a tract for children extolling the virtues of same-sex parenting.

All of this is in addition to his bizarre insistence that “never has the use of violence brought peace in its wake” and that the benefits of free-market growth have “never been confirmed by the facts.” (In case people didn’t get the message, Francis posed for pictures with a crucifix made of a hammer and a sickle.) Yet as bad as free market capitalism is, the pope insists “the most serious of the evils that afflict the world these days are youth unemployment and the loneliness of the old.” Which is a . . . curious view of our fallen world.

. . .

At the same time, the math is pitiless: According to our best data, a mammoth CDC study done in 2013, 1.6 percent of Americans identify as gay. Yet 80 percent of the abuse cases involve priests abusing other males. You can include all the caveats you like—maybe there’s selection bias, maybe the percentage of homosexuals in the priesthood is many times higher than 1.6 percent, maybe not all male-on-male abuse is perpetrated by men who would identify as gay. But the correlation is still high enough that it is impossible to ignore.

And despite the fact that everyone wants to insist that abuse by priests has nothing to do with homosexuality, it’s strange that the people who most want to open the church sacramentally to homosexuality are the ones strenuously ignoring the abuse. Priests such as Cardinal Cupich are certainly acting like they think there’s a linkage and that if the church were to crack down on abuse and the bishops who enabled it, it would somehow endanger their project.

I still hold that some in the Catholic church are saved because they have somehow heard of the real Jesus and have repented and believe in him (and of course there are countless people in Protestant churches who aren’t really saved – I know, because I used to be one of them!). Yet even those Catholics are still living under an exhausting works-based salvation theology and can’t enjoy the assurance of salvation that Christianity provides.

I encourage people to get out. The Reformation happened for a reason – actually, 95 of them – and the Catholics still get vitally important doctrines like justification completely wrong. And the Mary-worship, indulgences, purgatory, praying to the dead, the lie that you need the church to interpret the Bible for you and should’t read it for yourself, etc. all mock Christ and the cross.  Their recently unmasked pro-perversion doctrines are just another reason to go.

If Protestants were smarter they’d leverage this and make a major outreach to Catholics.

P.S. If any Catholics are wounded by this, remember that your faith explicitly says that Protestants are anathema because of our views.  I’m not offended if you think that, but I am amused if you didn’t know it and then take offense that I’d criticize Catholicism.

P.S.S. This is just a side note, but if/when Francis comes out as gay I won’t be a bit surprised.

P.S.S.S. There are also huge problems within Protestantism, of course, which is why I spend most of my time on them (I rarely write about Catholics). But those problems aren’t with Protestantism per se, but with bad doctrines and behavior within the church.

Bible

Should you study the Bible for yourself or just trust the Catholic religion to interpret it for you?

17 Comments

The foundational fallacy of the Roman Catholic Church is so glaring that it takes a unique spiritual blindness to miss it. The RCC claims sole authority to properly interpret scripture. But if we aren’t capable of understanding the direct words of God as revealed in the Bible, then how can we be sure we are properly understanding the words of the RCC?

If the Catholic church insists that you can’t trust your interpretation of the Bible, how can you trust your interpretation of their interpretation?  Are they claiming that their words are more powerful than the Bible – that is, that their words can’t be misunderstood but those of the Bible can be?  And how can you trust their interpretation that the Bible teaches that you should only trust their interpretation?

I concede that many people can and do misinterpret the Bible. That is what I accuse the RCC of doing. My point is that if we both claim that the original texts turned out as both the Holy Spirit and the human authors desired then it should be our common ground.

I recommend reading the Bible carefully for yourself every day, while also reading from commentators with a reputation for sound theology (e.g., not the Catholic church).

False teachers

The schizophrenia of the “Christian” Left

1 Comment

This is another fallacious and malicious meme from the “Christian” Left.  Their obsession with advancing child-killing in the womb and LGBTQX perversions leads them to put out things like this — as if the Bible’s warnings from Jesus and others about false teachers were because first-century Jews weren’t killing enough babies or pushing oxymoronic “same-sex marriage.”   All they seem to think about are gays and abortion.

chl2

This is even more despicable than usual for the “Christian” Left — and they are always kinda despicable. They are the ones who deny the divinity and exclusivity of Christ, who mock the Bible, and so much more. Oh, and the ones claiming to be tolerant and loving.

As usual, they finish the sentence: They want women to have the choice to kill their children. Sounds different, eh?

And of course we don’t hate gays. We love them enough to tell them the truth: LGBTQX behavior is physically, spiritually and emotionally destructive. They just lie and say that, just as their father taught them.

Example: If you really love people you’ll warn them that the gay lifestyle is a coin flip away from getting HIV. “Gay and bisexual men represent an estimated 2% of the U.S. population but more than half of all people living with HIV and 66% of new HIV infections. They are the only population group in the United States for which HIV infections are rising. Projections have shown that if current trends continue, half of all gay and bisexual men will be HIV-positive by age 50.”

But the “Christian” Left loves themselves more than their neighbors. Churchgoers who support “same-sex marriage” have nearly identical views to the world. It shows who their real father is.

1 John 2:15-16 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world.

Jude 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

So for the record, the “Christian” Left thinks the entire Catholic church is a wolf in sheep’s clothing (OK, we agree on part of that!), as were nearly all of their denominations until a couple years ago, as are nearly all denominations outside of the West, as are countless denominations in the West still, as was President Obama and most Democrats until a few years ago, and so on . . .

But it gets sillier.  The “Christian” Left has a bromance with their new BFF, Pope Francis, because he sometimes talks about helping the poor (and of course, they assume it is always their definition of helping them with other people’s money).  But Francis is clear about being anti-abortion and pro-real marriage.

Consistency and clear-thinking isn’t their strong suit.

Christian worldview

Responding to a common Catholic objection about being saved by faith alone

8 Comments

Stop me if you’ve heard this before:

The Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone means they believe they think they can sin as much as they want and still be saved!

When you get that — and you will, if you interact much with Catholics online — just ask if the Bible addresses that possibility.  Then listen to the crickets chirping.  Then ask them if they’ve ever read Romans.

Romans 6:15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!

What?!  You mean Paul asked and answered their question?  Yes, we’ve had that answer for nearly 2,000 years.  If they read the Bible for themselves, they would know it.

Seriously, ask it nicely and try to plant seeds.  Hopefully they’ll realize that if they read their Bibles more they’d know the truth.

Next!

Bible, False teachers

I agree that it was a message from demons . . .

6 Comments

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

Lest anyone think this is gratuitous Catholic-bashing, please note that I spend way more time addressing false teachers within Protestantism.

The Mother Mary Facebook page shared this story about how demons allegedly fear Mary and her power for salvation.  These demons also give you tips on how to be saved — but only because they were allegedly forced to.  I completely agree that the message is demonic in nature, just not in the way the author intended it.  I see these possibilities:

1. A demon really said it, but was lying because Satan wants to confuse people about Mary’s role, take away glory from Jesus and keep people in bondage.

2. Someone made it up as “evidence” of the Catholic Church’s false claims about Mary.  And we know who the father of lies is.

This is only believable to those who don’t study the Bible and/or those who are hostile to its truths.

When Saint Dominic was preaching the Rosary near Carcassone, an Albigensian was brought to him who was possessed by the devil. Saint Dominic exorcised him in the presence of a great crowd of people; it appears that over twelve thousand had come to hear him preach.

During the exorcism, the demon was forced to speak the following about devotion to the Mother of God: “Listen well, you Christians: the Mother of Jesus Christ is all-powerful, and She can save Her servants from falling into hell. She is the Sun which destroys the darkness of our wiles. It is She who uncovers our hidden plots, breaks our snares, and makes our temptations useless and ineffectual.

Please stop and consider for a moment whether a demon of Satan just might lie about how people are really saved. 

So we are supposed to be her servants and not Christ’s?  Mary is all-powerful?

The Holy Spirit forgot to mention any of that in the Bible when He addressed the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

“We have to say, however reluctantly, that not a single soul who has really persevered in Her service has ever been damned with us; one single sigh that She offers to the Blessed Trinity is worth far more than all the prayers, desires, and aspirations of all the saints.
“We fear Her more than all the other saints in Heaven together, and we have no success with Her faithful servants. Many Christians who call upon Her when they are in the hour of death, and who really ought to be damned according to our ordinary standards, are saved by Her intercession.

They slip up here when referring to “our ordinary standards.”  Uh, wouldn’t that be God’s standards that are involved with the damnation question?

“Oh, if only that Mary (it is thus in their fury that they called Her) had not pitted Her strength against ours and had not upset our plans, we should have conquered the Church and should have destroyed it long before this, and we would have seen to it that all of the Orders in the Church fell into error and disorder.

So they fear Mary but not Jesus?  Interesting.

“Now that we are forced to speak, we must also tell you this: nobody who perseveres in saying the Rosary will be damned, because She obtains for Her servants the grace of true contrition for their sins, and by means of this they obtain God’s forgiveness and mercy.”

So we’re saved by saying the rosary and not by repenting and believing in Jesus?  I missed that part in the Bible.  Must have been right after the part about vain repetition.

For the record, I think that some people in the Catholic church are saved but just don’t know what the foundations of the religion really are (works-based justification, Mariolatry, indulgences, purgatory, etc.).  I also think that many in the Protestant church aren’t saved.

But people who believe what that Facebook page said have some wildly inaccurate theology.  The comments there were as creepy and sad as the post itself.  I beg people to read the Bible for themselves and abandon these man-made / demon-made tales.  Read the Book of Acts, the history of the early church, and ask why Mary was only mentioned once — and that was merely noting her presence a room.  Why no mentions in Romans?  And 1 Corinthians?  And 2 Corinthians?  And so on.  If the Bible was given to us by the Catholic religion, as it falsely claims, then why doesn’t it include more about Mary?

This is from another post on that site.  I don’t recall any Bible verses about this, either.

mary

Roundup

Roundup

4 Comments

Shocking Video: ‘Normal’ Muslims Supporting ‘Punishments in the Koran’ Like Stoning for Gays, Adulterers — So who are you going to believe, the false teachers and useful idiots who say that Islam is a religion of peace, or the words of these mainstream Muslims?  He claims that every Muslim has these views but doesn’t tell others about them.

The conference was held in Oslo and was sponsored by Islam.net. In the video clip in question the event’s moderator and organizer, Fahad Qureshi (seen above), openly asked the audience questions about the punishments in the Koran and if any agreed that such punishments are OK to use still today. Time after time the crowd enthusiastically agreed that the archaic punishments are perfectly acceptable to them even today. As he began, Qureshi asked, “How many of you are normal Muslims, Sunni Muslims?” Most in the audience raised their hands. Next he asked, “How many of you agree that men and women should sit separate?” Again most agreed. Qureshi then got more explicit. “How many of you agree that the punishment described in the Koran and sunna–whether it’s death, whether it is stoning for adultery, whatever it is, if it’s s from Allah and his messenger – that is the best punishment ever possible for humankind–and that is what we should apply in the world? Who agrees with that?” When nearly every one agreed again, he joked, “Are you all radical extremists? No one?” “So what’s the politicians gonna say now?” Qureshi concluded. “What’s the media gonna say now? That we’re all extremists?”

—

‘GAYS’ ADMIT ENDA GAME: OUTLAW CHRISTIAN MORALITY — You shouldn’t be surprised.

One of the most dangerous and discriminatory pieces of legislation in modern times – the ironically tagged “Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” or ENDA – passed the U.S. Senate on Thursday by a vote of 64-32. Ten Republicans disgracefully joined liberal Democrats in this effort to ultimately outlaw the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. According to its leftist proponents, ENDA would merely insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual conduct (sexual orientation) or those who suffer from gender confusion (gender identity) against employment intolerance. In truth, however, this legislation effectively would codify the very thing it purports to combat: workplace discrimination. Writing in the Huffington Post, popular homosexual radio personality Michelangelo Signorile confessed that, of any potential ENDA legislation that might reach President Obama’s desk for his pledged signature, “none should include any religious exemptions” whatsoever. If Signorile and other “LGBT” activists get their way, this would mean that churches, mosques, synagogues, religious schools, Bible bookstores, as well as any and every other business in America with 15 or more employees, would be forced, under penalty of law, to abandon the biblical and traditional-values viewpoint on human sexuality, and hire (and otherwise not offend) those who openly flaunt expressly sinful and demonstrably self-destructive sexual behaviors. Though in its current form ENDA contains an extremely weak religious exemption that might – and I mean might – partially protect some churches and religious organizations (until they’re sued by “gay” activists), this so-called exemption would leave most others – such as the aforementioned Bible bookstores and many Christian schools and para-church organizations – entirely unprotected. It would additionally crush individual business owners’ guaranteed First Amendment rights. Although Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., attempted to amend the bill to strengthen religious protections, his amendment was shot down 55-43. Unbelievably, he voted for ENDA anyway. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., on the other hand, wasn’t even considerate enough to feign concern for the First Amendment. He promised homosexual pressure groups that Democrats would remove all protections for Christians and other people of faith on the flipside – after ENDA passed. The homosexual news site Washington Blade reports that homosexual activist Derek Washington of “GetEqual” confirmed Reid’s promise. In a conference call with homosexual activists last week, Washington admitted that Reid vowed, as goes any religious exemption, “the main thing to do was get the vote taken care of, and then deal with it later. As often times happens, you don’t get something perfect the first time around, you go back and fix it later, so that was basically his take on it.” According to the Blade, “That account was corroborated by Faiz Shakir, a Reid spokesperson, who said the Democratic leader understands the concerns, but wants to get the bill passed first, then go back and address the exemptions.” They’ve stopped pretending, folks. This is about criminalizing Christianity.

—

In Hookups, Inequality Still Reigns — As if women needed any more reasons to avoid casual sex.

Like generations before them, many young women like Ms. Gadinsky are finding that casual sex does not bring the physical pleasure that men more often experience. New research suggests why: Women are less likely to have orgasms during uncommitted sexual encounters than in serious relationships.

—

Sexual orientation link to past: study — Still not “born that way.” Then again, Lady Gaga wrote a song saying otherwise, so there’s that rebuttal.

New Zealanders who identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual, or who have had a same-sex encounter or relationship, tend to come from more disturbed backgrounds, a University of Otago researcher has found. Information extracted from 13,000 face-to-face interviews clearly showed those with same-sexual or bisexual orientation were more likely to have experienced negative events in childhood, Associate Prof Elisabeth Wells said yesterday. People who had experienced sexual abuse as children were three times more likely to identity themselves as homosexual or bisexual than those who had not experienced abuse, she said. Also, the more adverse events someone experienced in childhood, the more likely they were to belong to one of the “non-exclusively heterosexual” groups.

—

Coming Next: Race-Based Car Loans — Because car dealers and banks would much rather be racist than make money by selling to people who are likely to repay their loans.

—

And even more against the “born that way” lie — Evidence that teens CAN change sexual orientation.  Don’t expect that to be taught in so-called “comprehensive” sex ed classes.

—

The Rosary — from the Sola Sisters on Facebook.

A Christianized pagan ritual to assuage the consciences of those enslaved to the dead religious system of Roman Catholicism.

rosary

Bible, Christian worldview, False teachers

Satan knows where your lost keys are.

15 Comments

No, the title isn’t the worst name ever for a horror film.  It is the thought that goes through my mind when I read things like Novena [a devotion] to Saint Anthony to Find a Lost Article –The Patron Saint of Lost and Found:

St. Anthony of Padua is invoked thousands (maybe millions!) of times daily to help find items that have been lost. This novena, or nine-day prayer, to find a lost article reminds us as well that the most important goods are spiritual.

NOVENA TO SAINT ANTHONY TO FIND A LOST ARTICLE

St. Anthony, perfect imitator of Jesus, who received from God the special power of restoring lost things, grant that I may find [name the item] which has been lost. At least restore to me peace and tranquility of mind, the loss of which has afflicted me even more than my material loss. To this favor, I ask another of you: that I may always remain in possession of the true good that is God. Let me rather lose all things than lose God, my supreme good. Let me never suffer the loss of my greatest treasure, eternal life with God. Amen.

I mean the title quite seriously.  This Anthony fellow is dead and there is no biblical support that he can hear the prayers of billions of people simultaneously in all their languages and that he then can tell you where to find your keys (or whatever you lost).

Let me break that out for emphasis.  Allegedly, he and other saints can:

  • Hear from billions of people at once and know which messages are for them
  • Understand all languages
  • Have the power to communicate back to you in some way

So having read the Bible through quite a few times I’m pretty skeptical of those claims.  Apparently people think that certain dead people can answer certain types of prayer requests.  It reminds of the line in This is Spinal Tap about St. Hubbins being the patron saint of quality footwear (see the 2:03 mark here).

But guess who does know where your keys are?  Satan and/or his demons.  I think it is much more likely that any prayer to Anthony is being “answered” by Satan, because by praying to the dead you opened yourself up to it.

I encourage people to read the Bible and just go straight to Jesus.  There is one mediator between God and man, and He is Jesus.  Do not pray to Mary or any other human being, dead or alive.  Just stick with any member of the Trinity, or any combination of the three.

Bible

Now let’s talk about Mother Teresa . . .

14 Comments

. . . because taking on Gandhi last week wasn’t enough.

First, I must say that I appreciated her anti-abortion efforts.  I love how she got in the faces of Clinton et al on the topic.  Good for her.

But theologically speaking, I have some sizable issues with her.  These articles explained them well:

First, The Myth of Other Teresa:

She was revered around the world as an example of Christian love and charity and as someone who dedicated her life to the noble cause of advancing the gospel to the poor and needy of the world while caring for their physical needs. Her legacy will doubtless be as one of history’s great humanitarians.

Upon examination, though, the Mother Teresa portrayed by the media and popularized in our culture is glorified (soon to be beatified) and almost deified. A close examination of her beliefs and the work she did shows that her legacy may be little more than fiction. . . . We also see her belief that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is a mediator between God and ourselves (see Catholic Catechism, paragraph #969, #1172 and #494) and as such, plays a role in our salvation. . . .Through the entire book there is never a hint that she relies on Christ alone for her salvation. Rather we read things like, “I’ve always said we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic” . . . “I love all religions. … If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there.” Or in another place, “All is God — Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, etc., all have access to the same God.”

Her soteriology (he doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ) was a train-wreck:

“We never try to convert those who receive [aid from Missionaries of Charity] to Christianity but in our work we bear witness to the love of God’s presence and if Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, or agnostics become for this better men — simply better — we will be satisfied. It matters to the individual what church he belongs to. If that individual thinks and believes that this is the only way to God for her or him, this is the way God comes into their life — his life. If he does not know any other way and if he has no doubt so that he does not need to search then this is his way to salvation.”

. . . Time and again we see her expounding such universalist beliefs. In an interview with Christian News a nun who worked with Mother Teresa was asked the following in regards to the Hindus they worked with, “These people are waiting to die. What are you telling them to prepare them for death and eternity?” She replied candidly, “We tell them to pray to their Bhagwan, to their gods.”

Huh?!  But the Bible teaches over 100 times that Jesus is the only way to salvation!  You can’t miss it.

And she chose to let people suffer:

Contradictions in her beliefs, then, are apparent. We see similar contradictions in her humanitarian work. The common belief is that Mother Teresa worked with the sick and destitute to lovingly return them to health. An examination of her missions will show that this is far from the case. Mother Teresa believed that there is spiritual value in suffering. Once, when tending to a patient dying of cancer, she said “You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you.” (Christoper Hitchens – The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice, p. 41). For this reason she would not prescribe pain killers in her clinics, choosing instead to allow her patients to experience the suffering that she believed would bring them closer to Christ. Despite the tens of millions of dollars donated to her charity each year, her missions were rudimentary and offered no real health care. Her missions mainly catered to the critically ill and simply afforded them a place to go to die. It is interesting to note that when Mother Teresa became ill she would travel to the finest health care facilities to receive treatment. . . .

What, then, is the importance of debunking the myth of Mother Teresa? The answer is this. Pastors of Protestant churches around the world continue to speak of Mother Teresa in saintly terms. They hold her up as the ultimate example of self-sacrifice for the sake of the gospel. From the pulpits they discuss how she responded to Christ’s Great Commission to spread the gospel to all lands. The reality, though, is that if she preached at all, she preached a false religion. In so doing she provides us with an example not of a Christian responding to God’s call, but an example of deeds of charity and compassion completely separated from the Truth.

Also see Mother Teresa in her own words:

In an interview with her biographer, the following exchange was recorded:

Biographer Naveen Chawla: “Do you convert?” Mother Teresa: “Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you’ve found God, it’s up to you to decide how to worship him.”

That doesn’t sound very Christian.

Finally, see French study claims Mother Teresa not so saintly:

She was “anything but a saint,” the Canadian study authors found, as Newser reports. In fact, she found beauty in watching people suffer, the authors say.

The study is based on accounts of doctors who visited Mother Teresa’s so-called “homes for the dying.” The found terrible conditions, Newser reported — poor hygiene among patients, hunger, lacking medical supplies. Some patients were even denied necessary medical care, doctors said. Even Mother Teresa didn’t get care there — she went to an American hospital, Newser reported.

And the reported conditions weren’t for lack of money. Teresa’s Order of the Missionaries of Charity had hundreds of millions in donations, Newser reported.

The authors of the study allege the Vatican purposely ignored the truth of Mother Teresa’s charity. Rather, church officials helped to set the stage for her image as a saint, and even pushed through her beatification to avoid scrutiny.

Did she do some good?  I suppose so.  But it is unfortunate that she is held up as such an icon when her theology was false and her good deeds rather suspect.