Religious Commentary
Light of Christ - New Creation


The Amazing Truth - Exposing the False teaching of the Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA)
 

Home   


2017 - 500 years after Luther (500YAL) – a Catholic Response






Resources

Free online videos and reading
See Below


Take the SDA Truth Challenge
- Website


Catholicism and Adventism
- Website


SABBATH AND THE FIRST DAY
DEFENDING THE BRIDE

- Website


The Didache
- The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations.

- Website


Sabbath or Sunday
- Website


Who are the Early Church Fathers
- YouTube


Who are the Early Church Fathers
- Book by Marcellino D'Ambrosio


Dr. Brant Pitre, Jesus & the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist
- YouTube


Dr. Brant Pitre, The "Brothers" of Jesus: A Fresh Look at the Evidence
- YouTube




2017 - 500 years after Luther (500YAL) – a Catholic Response
What has gone wrong since the time of Luther?

Last Updated:   08.09.2017


The Seventh-day Adventist Church has produced a booklet called, ‘ 2017, 500 Years After Luther’ , which I shall shorten to 500YAL.  The booklet falsely represents what the Catholic Church teaches.  This article is a brief response to just a few incorrect points made about the Catholic Church, exposes incorrect doctrines of the SDA Church and gives the Biblical foundation for Catholic Doctrine.  Some glaring issues will be exposed first and others will be added later.  Quite honestly, the SDA Church has failed to use the Catechism of the Catholic Church to teach authentically what the Catholic Faith teaches and this response shows the SDAs fail to uphold scripture themselves.



2017 - 500 years after Luther (500YAL) – a Catholic Response
What has gone wrong since the time of Luther?

Read the pamphlet:   HERE

Real all about Luther: HERE

For comments on each of the points made about the pamphlet, click on the  Point  in the Contents Table or the  1 - 38  List below.



1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38  

Also see: Topics



Contents:

Point 1
  Pg. 1 – 9   Is about the Reformation and scripture.
Point 2
  Pg. 9   says:   …Reformers of today continue in the path of Luther and the Reformers of his time, having the Bible and Bible alone as the foundation of faith and teaching.
Point 3
  Pg. 12   says:    …They (Catholics) believe that Peter was the first pope, but imperfect Peter could not be the Vicar of Christ
Point 4
  Pg. 12   says:   ‘ …The word Petra means rock.   The original Greek word for the word Peter = Petro…’
Point 5
  Pg. 12   says:   ‘ …It is upon Christ we shall build our church…’




Point 6
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ …The Catholic Church believes that when the priest shares the bread during the Lords Supper and says some mystical words, the bread then literally turns into Jesus flesh.   In they offer Jesus’ body as a new sacrifice every time they partake of the bread in connection with the Lords supper.
Point 7
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ …When we eat the bread, it is to remind us of Jesus’s sacrifice on Golgotha’s cross….’
Point 8
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ …It is a mockery of Jesus and His sacrifice…’
Point 9
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ …The Catholic Church has removed the second commandment from its catechism…’
Point 10
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ …Images of Mary are worshiped…’




Point 11
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ … Mary (is) worshiped…’
Point 12
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ … just like all others who have died and await the resurrection morning.
Point 13
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ … The Bible (King James ) clearly states that “there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (1 John 5:7) ….but not in the Catholic Bible…’
Point 14
  Pg. 13   says:   ‘ … Jesus is the only mediator…..
Point 15
  Pg. 14   says:   ‘ … The Pope and the Priesthood can forgive sins..




Point 16
  Pg. 14   says:   … Let no man deceive you by any means … 2 Thessalonians 2: 3-4 ….He sits in God’s temple as if he were God.   It is none other than the pope we are talking about…
Point 17
  Pg. 15   says:   ‘ … It (the Bible) says that humans become living souls and do not receive a soul.
Point 18
  Pg. 15   says:   ‘ … The teaching of the immortality of the soul has its beginning from Satan’s first lie in the Garden of Eden.. …
Point 19
  Pg. 16   says:   ‘ … (1 Thessalonians 4 : 15 – 17) -   So you see that the dead are in the graves and will be awakened by Jesus.’
Point 20
  Pg. 16   says:   ‘ … Jesus said to him:   “Lazarus, come forth”,   ( John 11: 43).   Lazarus did indeed come out of the grave.   Many ministers preach that, when a person dies they go to heaven or hell.   If the righteous dead went to straight to heaven when they died, then we would believe that Lazarus, Jesus’ friend had gone to heaven, but he did not come down from heaven, or the clouds, or from space …….




Point 21
  Pg. 16 and 17   says:   ‘ … The Bible says that it is only Jesus that has immortality….   (1 Timothy 6: 15 – 17 and also 1 Corinthians 15 : 51 – 54.) … and that humans become dust..   the Bible completely rejects the teaching of immortality…
Point 22
  Pg. 18   says:   ‘ … The Catholic Church frightens people with the teaching of eternal torment…
Point 23
  Pg. 18   says:   ‘ … During the Reformation period, purgatory was understood to be a place where people were punished for their wrong doing…   …Luther was of the opinion that such a teaching was totally unbiblical…   Those who end up in purgatory cannot come out by themselves but can have help from others…
Point 24
  Pg. 18   says:   ‘ … The Pope also offered forgiveness in exchange for money.   This was known as indulgences.
Point 25
  Pg. 18   says:   ‘ Tetzel …declared … (of indulgencies) …any sin committed in the future would be forgive..




Point 26
  Pg. 19   says:   ‘When it (the Bible) says that the wages of sin is death, there is then no torment.   The Bibles says that the godless will receive their punishment according to their works (Revelation 20: 13) …
Point 27
  Pg. 20 -22   says:   Even Sodom and Gomorrah, 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 vengeance of eternal fire.   (Jude 7).   ‘…the fire stopped once everything had been burned up…’.   ‘..and there shall be wailing and grinding of teeth.   ‘The word eternal comes from the Greek word aion..’.   ‘New heave and new earth..’   ‘… and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth…Ezekiel 28: 19-19.’
Point 28
  Pg. 22 -23   says:   Infant baptism has its roots in Augustan’s original sin teaching.   ‘…it is the godparents who are to believe on behalf of the infant. ‘   ‘…those who want to be baptised must have personal faith…’   ‘…baptism is symbolic…’.
Point 29
  Pg. 22 -23   says:   ‘…believed that a child was born with sin.’   ‘…But the small child has not done anything wrong…’   ‘… sin is the transgression of the law…’   ‘The son should not bear the iniquity of the father. Ezekiel 18: 20.’
Point 30
  Pg. 24 -25   says:   ‘Confirmation was introduced by the Catholic Church in the 13th century.’   ‘Martin Luther did away with confirmation…’   ‘Infant baptism and confirmation are traditions enacted by people.   They are a form of substitution for Biblical baptism.   This is just how the Devil works.   He substitutes Biblical truth with counterfeit...’






Point 31
  Pg. 25   says:   ‘…true baptism is not infant baptism/sprinkling…’
Point 32
  Pg. 25 -27   says:   ‘…Luther stood on his feet and realised he was crawling on his knees in order to obtain salvation; he thought works could save him.’
Point 33
  Pg. 28   says:   ‘…The Reformers understood what it meant to accept salvation in Christ Jesus.   ‘ …Anabaptists,… Luther…, Huss…, Wesley…, Miller…,’.   ‘What about us?   Well, we have learned a little about each of these and so we are more knowledgeable than those who have gone before us.'
Point 34
  Pg. 28 - 30   says:    ‘…The Catholic Church has changed God’s Ten Commandments.’
Point 35
  Pg. 31   says:    …The Catholic Church unequivocally states that they have changes the day of rest.’   ‘ Emperor Constantine was the first to institute Sunday as the day of rest by law in 321 AD.’




Point 36
  Pg. 33   says:    ‘…Council of Trent …the argument that prevailed …was the changing of the Sabbath (the day of rest). …’
Point 37
  Pg. 34   says:    ‘…Martin Luther dared to stand up against and reprove the Catholic Church, which he later abandoned.   He did not have a clear understanding of God’s law being changed, including the change of the day of rest…’   ‘ …Protestants have gone wrong regarding the day of rest…’.
Point 38
  Pg. 35 - 38   says:    ‘…mark of the beast…’



Comments:


Point 1

Pg. 1 – 9  Is about the Reformation and scripture.


Answer

The Catholic Church was never against having the words of scripture in local languages.   The early Celtic scriptures and the Lindisfarne Gospels of the 7th century show early translation into local languages were allowed and did exist. *   Work by the Venerable Bede also shows this.   What the Catholic Church was concerned about was Martin Luther chucking out whole books of the bible, which he did.   He even wanted to chuck out the epistle of St. James and the Book of Revelation because it did not fit his own personal invented doctrine but some friends of his persuaded him to retain these.   Old Testament books chucked out by Luther were many and include the Book of Wisdom, Maccabees 1 and 2.   It is Maccabees which tells us how the Jewish Feast of Hanukkah - the Rededication of the Temple in Jerusalem, came about, which Jesus Himself celebrated and is recorded in the Gospels.   Other Reformers changed the words of scripture rather than make an honest translation such as using the word ‘elder’ rather than the original Biblical word ‘bishop’ because they were prejudice against bishops and did not want to have them in their church and so they made their own false bibles rather than an honest translation.

SDAs have done the same thing with their Clear Water bible – not a translation of scripture but a re-writing of scripture.   SDAs should be up in arms that they do not have an honest translation of the Bible.   If Catholics had started changing the Bible, which they did not, the SDAs would be outraged, but somehow it is OK for the SDAs to do so.   The Catholic Old Testament is based on the Hebrew translated into Greek made 200 years before Christ (200BC) with clear evidence that the writes of the New Testament used this as their reference, called the Septuagint, while most Reformers used much later translations.   So the Catholic Old Testament is based on a much older original version of the text then the Protestant one.

*  Just to note:    the authority of Rome and the papacy were venerated as strongly in Celtic areas as they were in any other region of Europe :   See (Corning, Caitlin (2006).   The Celtic and Roman Traditions: Conflict and Consensus in the Early Medieval Church.   Palgrave Macmillan.   ISBN 1-4039-7299-0.)   The Celtic Catholic Church did allow early local language text to be used as was King Alfred’s Wessex Gospels of 990AD, and the Northumbrian Gloss is in the form of Anglos-Saxon spoken dialect .

Back To Top



Point 2

Pg. 9 says:   …Reformers of today continue in the path of Luther and the Reformers of his time, having the Bible and Bible alone as the foundation of faith and teaching.


Answer

Where in the Bible does it say that the Bible alone is to be the foundation of faith?   It does not.   In fact the Bible says the opposite.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 says,   ‘ … cling to the  traditions  we taught you whether by speech or by letter .’   What the Apostles taught by speech is what the Catholic Church calls  tradition  and the  written letter  is what has been put into the book we call the Bible.   So, there is the spoken word and the written word of God.   Protestant reject the ‘oral teachings’, the ‘Spoken Word’ of God and hold to the ‘Written Word’ only.   Catholics hold to the ‘Whole Word of God’, both Spoken and Written, we call this the Deposit of Faith.   Protestants are therefore lacking the Whole Deposit of Faith.

John 21: 25 says,   ‘There are many more things that Jesus did.   If all of them were written down, suppose not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.’   Clearly Jesus said and did more which has not been written down but the spoken word of God passed on by the Apostles still lives on.

So we can ask Protestants and SDAs the question:  Was the Gospel preached before it was ever written down?   The answer is:  Yes it was.   And that is what the Catholic Church has been saying all along.   Jesus preached His Gospel from before His incarnation, before it got written down;  the Angle Gabriel preached the Gospel to Mary, before it ever got written down;  Jesus preached His Gospel to the world and died on the cross, before it ever got written down;  the Apostles preached the Gospel and yet is did not get put on paper or parchment until later.   Did anybody convert to Christ without reading the Gospel or the Bible?   Yes they did.   So you do not need to have read the Gospel or the New Testament or even the Old Testament to become a Christen.   All Christians rely on is the spoken word, the preached word of God, the written word comes later and is a good reference and teacher, and is inspired and is the Living Word of God.   Yet if the Gospel was not written until later, how could there be the first Christians?   They did not have the Bible to be their authority, they all relied on what the Catholic Church has always claimed, that we must all keep to the traditions of the Apostles’, otherwise known as the ‘spoken word of God.   Nowhere in the Bible does it say Bible alone is to be your authority.   So, there was no ‘Bible Alone’ for the first Christians, because there wasn’t one.   It is the deposit of faith from Christ to the Apostles inspired by the Holy Spirit which should be your authority, yes the Apostles and their descents through he laying on of hands, is the Biblical way, not Bible Alone.

Ellen White’s own writings condemn all Reformers and all Protestant Churches as ‘Babylon’ and the ‘fall of Babylon’ of Revelation 14, that they ‘do not benefit from the intercession of Christ’, and that Reformers and all Protestant Churches are 'the work of Satan’, yet this SDA pamphlet is celebrating the Reformers as page 9 of the pamphlet states.   Why is the SDA Church celebrating what Ellen White calls ‘the work of Satan’?

Read more about Ellen White’s condemnation of Protestants as the work of Satan.   HERE

Read more about true Christian Biblical authority   HERE

Back To Top



Point 3

Pg. 12 says:    …They (Catholics) believe that Peter was the first pope, but imperfect Peter could not be the Vicar of Christ


Answer

Jesus chose imperfect people to join Him in his ministry as Apostles.   All the Apostles were imperfect.   Jesus himself said ,   “I have NOT come to call the righteous, but sinners …”.   (Luke 5:32).   Christ calls the sinner, not the so called perfect.   Which SDA minister is perfect?   None of them.   So why does the SDA church require the First Pope to be perfect?   We are all called to perfection through the Grace of Christ.   If Christ has chosen Peter, why do the SDA reject Christ’s choice.   To reject the Apostle Peter or to reject any other Apostle, and their authority given by Christ Jesus, is to reject Christ Himself.   Jesus said,   “Whoever listens to you listen to me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me”.   (Luke 10:16).   In this passage Christ was talking of the Apostles.   To reject the Apostle Peter, the Head Apostle and therefore the First Pope, is to reject Christ’s authority to choose who He wants to lead His Church.   This is the foundation of Protestantism, the rejection of Christ’s appointed.

For more info see:   Peter and the Papacy   by Steve Ray.

For more info see:   Peter, the Rock, the Keys and the Chair   by Steve Ray.

Back To Top



Point 4

Pg. 12 says:   ‘ …The word Petra means rock.   The original Greek word for the word Peter = Petro…’


Answer

The word Petra is a feminine word.   The word had to be changed into a masculine name which is Petros rather that Petra.   For instance, if the word for rock was Stephanie, Christ would have called him Stephen making a feminine word into a masculine word.   Peter’s mother never called him Peter, she called him Simon.   Christ gave him a new name,   Rock,   with a masculine sound not a feminine sound.   We should all celebrate what Christ is doing here – after all, God the Father had just revelled something special and unique to Pater, that Jesus was the Christ, something God would continue to do with Peter, eg. it was Peter who rejected the Old Covenant sign - circumcision, a covenant sign promise God made with Abraham, but it was St. Peter, under guidance of the Holy Spirit, who did away with circumcision.

Mat 16: 17 -19,   says:

17 And Jesus answered him,   “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona!   For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.   18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.   19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Jesus said to Peter,   “You are rock and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”.   Then Jesus says,   ‘…whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, I give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven… ".   So Christ founded His Church on Peter.   Authority is given by Christ to St. Peter to make decisions here on earth and it will be bound in heaven.   The keys to heaven were given to a man - Peter – but this is Christ’s choice – we are to accept it as Christ’s will - not what the SDA like to hear.

Interesting question for SDAs, does Peter have a successor and who was he?   SDAs reject Christ’s appointed leader, St. Peter and his successors, and appoint their own leader – Ellen White.

Read more about Peter the Rock   HERE .

What is even more concerning is that Christ giving the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven to St Peter is given as a type or a biblical or historical model, but not a prophecy, from the Old Testament by Isaiah, but SDAs and other Protestants do not tell their followers about this Biblical backdrop to Peter and the Keys.     Walter Veith  tells us he loves ‘types and anti-types’, and Doug Batchelor has preached against St Peter being the first Pope, but both do so without recognising the Biblical prophecy.

The prophecy is in Isaiah 22: 19 - 23, , where Shebna is removed from office and God appoints Eliakim:

19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your post.   20 On that day I will call my servant Eliakim son of Hilkiah, 21 and will clothe him with your robe and bind your sash on him.   I will commit your authority to his hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.   22 I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and no one shall shut; he shall shut, and no one shall open.   23 I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his ancestral house.   24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his ancestral house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons.   25 On that day, says the LORD of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way; it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will perish, for the LORD has spoken.

King David is a type of Christ and Jerusalem is the foreshadowing of the Church founded by Christ.   Eliakim is a foreshadow or type of St Peter who was given the keys to the Kingdom.   Jesus says to St Peter, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.   Eliakim will be called Father of Jerusalem, Peter is called Pope, meaning Papa, father.   Eliakim is robed, so is Peter.   Eliakim has authority from God, so does Peter.   Eliakim is given a throne of honor, St Peter is given the seat of authority from God over the Church.   On the shoulder of Eliakim is placed the great burden of the safety of the city of Jerusalem, so too with St Peter, Christ places the burden to protect the Church from false entry of error.   Both St Peter and Eliakim have authority from God to open and to close, but SDAs reject this authority.

As Steve Ray says in his article:   The Peg in Isaiah 22 and the Petrine Succession  ,

‘Jesus is King.   He has an eternal kingdom.   The kingdom will resemble what the Jews already know because what Jesus is founding is not a democracy but a kingdom.   And kingdoms have stewards and the steward of THIS kingdom will be Peter.’

Steve Rays own story is interesting and can be read   here  ,  and his testimony can been seen on Youtube   here  .

For more info see:   Peter and the Papacy   by Steve Ray.

For more info see:   Peter, the Rock, the Keys and the Chair   by Steve Ray.

Back To Top



Point 5

Pg. 12 says:   ‘ …It is upon Christ we shall build our church…’


Answer

SDA’s claim they want to ‘build their own church’, and they want to build it on Christ, but this would be a man-made church.   SDAs do not need to build a church.   Christ has already built His Church and appointed 12 Apostles to run it for Him.   I want to belong to the Church founded by Christ on the Apostles, not one founded by Ellen White.   Christ chose the 12 Apostles to be our teachers and the leaders of His Church, not Ellen White, and yes they were to betray him, and it is these men and those they in turn appointed, such as Matthias who was chosen to replace Judas,   (Acts 1: 12-26), on whom Christ continues to maintain His Church, as His Church shall never pass away.   Christ is the Cornerstone and Head of His Church, and Christ said of the Apostles, “he who hears you hears me.”   Clearly we are to keep to the traditions of the Apostles - not to a church founded on and by a women – Ellen White.   This is why the SDA church is a false church, not the one built by Christ on the Apostles.   Jesus said in Matt 16: 16 - 19

He said to them,   “But who do you say that I am?”   16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”   17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona!   For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.   18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.   19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

The Bible truth is clear - Peter is the Rock on which Christ has chosen to build His Church - to reject this is to reject Christ’s chosen, it is to reject Christ and the One Who sent Him.

Back To Top



Point 6

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ …The Catholic Church believes that when the priest shares the bread during the Lords Supper and says some mystical words, the bread then literally turns into Jesus flesh.   In this way they offer Jesus’ body as a new sacrifice every time they partake of the bread in connection with the Lords supper.


Answer

Wrong on so many points.   In the Catholic Church, at Mass the Passover of Christ is celebrated - there is NO NEW SACRIFICE.   Christ IS NOT sacrificed again and again.   The One Sacrifice of Christ made 2000 years ago is made present, here and now, at that Mass.   Christ and His Power are not limited to time or space.   See how the Jews, when they celebrate the Passover today, make the Passover of Moses present here today.

Ask an Adventist – at the Last Supper, did Jesus give the Apostles His Flesh to eat and His Blood to drink?   Clearly the Bible tells us He did.   The Apostles were told by Christ to do what He did, which was to take bread and take wine, and by the power of God the bread became His Body and the wine became His Blood.   Jesus said so.   The Apostles at the Last Supper eat the Body of Christ and drank the Blood of Christ and then Christ told them to do what He had just done, so that we all may have a Communion with the Lord.   In obedience to Christ, the Apostles and their successors do what Christ did, they take bread and wine, and by the Power of God, the bread and wine become the Real Body and Blood of Christ.   The Bible tells us so.

Earlier in the Scriptures Jesus said to a large crown listening to Him,   “Unless you eat my Body and drink my Blood you cannot have life within you."   The Jews were horrified that they were being asked to eat human flesh and drink human blood, so they left him and walked away.   They could not take this teaching.   Jesus did not call them back and say he only meant it symbolically.   In fact He went on to confirm with those who stayed, that he meant his Body and Blood to be eaten because he said, “My Body is real food and My Blood is real drink.”   Why do SDAs not want to have Communion with Blood Christ Jesus?   Why do SDAs not want to eat the Body of Jesus and drink His Blood?   You cannot have life within you if you do not eat.   He is the True Manna which came down from Heaven.   He is the Bread of Angles.   And His Flesh is real food – BECAUSE HE SAID SO.

1 Corinthians 11:27-28 says:

27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup.

The Bible tells us in 1 Corinthians 11: 27-28 that the Apostles went on to celebrate the Last Supper and they eat Christ’s Body and drank Christ’s Blood.   If it was just bread how could someone sin against bread? – we sin against God not bread, so it is the Body and Blood we sin against if we receive the Body and Blood unworthily.   Of course none of us is worthy of receiving the Body and the Blood of Christ so the scripture is referring to whether or not we believe in the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ, and how we revere the Real Presence – with awe and, and whether or not we are in serious sin which need confessing before receiving.

Find out more about the   Jewish roots of the Catholic Eucharist  by Dr Brant Pitre.

For more info see:   The Eucharist   by Steve Ray.

Back To Top



Point 7

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ …When we eat the bread, it is to remind us of Jesus’s sacrifice on Golgotha’s cross….’


Answer

Once a year the Jews celebrate the Passover meal.   Even today, they gather together and celebrate the time when, as slaves in Egypt, God passed over their homes and saved the lives of their first born, but of the Egyptians - God smote.   The Jews were to eat their meal in a hurry, standing up, and they were to flee Egypt after the meal and start their journey to the Promised Land – Israel and Jerusalem.   By the Passover, God saved the Israelites from captivity and slavery and began their journey of freedom to the Promised Land.

The sages teach:   in each and every generation an individual should look upon him or her self as if he or she (personally) had left Egypt.   It’s not enough to recall, in some abstract sense, the deliverance of the Jewish people in ancient Egypt, but each Jew is responsible to personally view Passover as a time to commemorate their own personal deliverance from the bondage of Pharaoh.    Therefore the seder leader will call each of us to recite the following in unison:

B'-chol dor va-dor, cha-yav a-dam lir-ot,
Lir-ot et atz-mo k'-i-lu hu, k'-i-lu hu ya-tza mi-mitz-ra-yim.

So too when Catholics celebrate Mass, which is the Passover of the Lord, that which took place 2000 years ago, the One Sacrifice of Christ, is made present by the Power of God, here and now.   Jesus said, …’ unless you are my body and drink my blood you have no life in you.’

How are SDAs going to eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood as he commanded us to do when they do not believed the words of Christ?

Find out more about the   Jewish roots of the Catholic Eucharist  by Dr Brant Pitre.

For more info see:   The Eucharist   by Steve Ray.

Back To Top



Point 8

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ …It is a mockery of Jesus and His sacrifice…’


Answer

SDA’s have to decide if, when Jesus gave the Apostles the bread and said, THIS IS MY BODY, and gave them the cup filed with wine and said, THIS IS THE CUP OF MY BLOOD, THE BLOOD OF THE NEW AND EVELASTING COVENENAT, did Jesus give them His Body and Blood to eat and drink and did the Apostles eat His Body and drink His Blood?   The Bible tells us He did and that the Apostle did eat His Body and drink His Blood.   So, NO MOCKERY, but a full act in obedience to the words of Christ.   Why do the SDAs not recognize Christ in the Breaking of the Bread - as at the Last Supper and at Emmaus.

Find out more about the   Jewish roots of the Catholic Eucharist  by Dr Brant Pitre.

For more info see:   The Eucharist   by Steve Ray.

Back To Top



Point 9

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ …The Catholic Church has removed the second commandment from its catechism…’


Answer

No it has not.   The Catechism of the Catholic Church states clearly the text from Exodus.   The point about graven images is that we are not to be worshiping graven images as god.   If the SDAs were to read on in the Bible they will find that after God had banned the worship of graven images He then commands the Israelites to make graven images of angels to make part of the container, a mercy seat, to hold the Ten Commandments, the Holy Bread, etc.   Is God commanding the Israelites to break the commandments he had just give?   Of course not.   It is not the making but the worshiping of them as gods that is band.   If the SDAs were only to read the whole word of God in context they would understand this.   Read the following from Exodus.

Exodus 25 17 - 22
17 Make a mercy seat of pure gold, 45 inches long and 27 inches wide.   18 Make two cherubim of gold; make them of hammered work at the two ends of the mercy seat.   19 Make one cherub at one end and one cherub at the other end.   At its two ends, make the cherubim of one piece with the mercy seat.   20 The cherubim are to have wings spread out above, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and are to face one another.   The faces of the cherubim should be toward the mercy seat.   21 Set the mercy seat on top of the ark and put the testimony that I will give you into the ark.   22 I will meet with you there above the mercy seat, between the two cherubim that are over the ark of the testimony; I will speak with you from there about all that I command you regarding the Israelites.

The prohibition in Exodus 20 is not against religious art as such, which includes things in heaven (angels) and on earth (humans or animals).   Rather, it was against using any image as an idol.

Back To Top



Point 10

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ …Images of Mary are worshiped…’


Answer

No they are not.   For starters the SDAs do not believe in the Communion of Saints because of their unbiblical view of the dead.   The Bible tells us about the ‘Clouds of Witnesses’ in Hebrews 12: 1 which shows there are those who are not seen but are witnesses to the word of God.   This is confirmed by Rev 6: 10 where the Bible tells us of the souls in heaven, under the alter of God, pleading for justice for they are the souls of the just, and they plead for justice against those still on earth, whom they can see and who killed them while they were in their bodies on earth.   Clearly, this is not an event or situation happening at the end of time.   Here in Revelation, a soul, separated from its body, is aware of its state, aware that it is in heaven, aware that there are those on earth guilty of their death in the body but not the death of their soul, able to plead with God Himself.   They see God with the eyes of the soul, not they eyes of the body, they plead with God with their soul, not their lips, as their body is dead in the ground.   This scriptural reference Rev 6: 10, is completely opposite to the SDAs beliefs on the nature of the soul and the dead in the body.   Catholics believe that at death the soul separates from the body, and as stated in Ecclesiastes 12, the soul returns to God who gave it and an immediate judgement of the person takes place and the soul is then either destined for heaven or hell.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 11

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ … Mary (is) worshiped…’


Answer

Since all the souls, not yet their bodies, of those who have died in Christ Jesus are in heaven or are being purified, those in heaven are aware of their surroundings, worshiping God with the angles, aware of the needs of those still on earth, it is right that as the Church in Heaven, they pray for us who are the Church on earth.   SDAs pray for those in need, and ask others to pray for them.   Since there is already the Church in Heaven, Catholics call them the ‘Communion of Saints’, which are not just those who have been named saints by the Church, but are all those who have died in Christ Jesus, then it is right that we all ask them to pray for us to Christ Jesus whom they are already worshiping and already they see Him face to face, see Him with the eyes of the soul and love him with heart of the soul.

Mary is clearly one of those Saints in heaven, and clearly the Bible tells us that she is ‘Blessed among all Women.   The Bible tells us she is ‘full of grace’.   Since it is only God that can make someone ‘Full of Grace ‘, this means she is not lacking in any Grace given to her by God, then she is truly one who has responded fully with God's Grace.   The Bible tells us so.   This is no ‘man made invention’ but a reality.   The Lord is clearly ‘with her’.   She is clearly ‘blessed among all women’, and the fruit of her womb is Jesus Christ.   God became man in her.   In her womb, the Saviour of the World took on flesh from her flesh.   God becoming man is part God’s great act of salvation, but God did not force his plan on Mary, He asked her, via an angle, and she said YES to His plan.   It is her YES, her participation in the plan of God, that she is so highly favoured, not just by us but so highly favoured by God, that He chose her.   Her soul ‘magnifies the Lord’, the Bible tells us.

Mary’s cousin Elizabeth, when she greets Mary, said how wonderful that the ‘MOTHER OF MY LORD’ should come to visit me, and Elizabeth’s baby, John the Baptist, leapt in Elizabeth’s womb – why?   - because God Himself was present within Mary.   Mary is the only person to have ever contained God within them.

To have such a person in heaven to pray for us to Christ her son, who would not ask her to pray for them?   The Bible tells us that, all generations shall call Mary 'blessed’ and that is what the 'Hail Mary' prayer says:

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you, blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus.   Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death.

It is such a Biblical prayer.   SDAs should pray this Biblical player.

Is Mary the Mother of God?   The word Lord in the Bible means God.   Elizabeth proclaims, in Luke 1: 43,   "…why am I so honoured, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"   Clearly Elizabeth is saying, why should the Mother of My Lord (The Mother of My God) come to me.   The Bible tells us Mary is the Mother of God.

SDAs need to see this Youtube video by Steve Ray on Mary and how Mary relates to the Bible, 2 Samuel 6, about the Ark of the Covenant.    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-uGWSMgPuE

Back To Top



Point 12

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ … just like all others who have died and await the resurrection morning.


Answer

We all await the resurrection of the body as the body is dead in the ground, but clearly the soul is not dead in the ground or wondering around in nothingness, as the SDAs falsely claim.   The soul ‘returns to God who gave it' at the moment of the death of the body.   The SDA try to claim that the body and soul are dead to the world and even to God, but this is not what the Bible says since in Ecclesiastes 12 says the soul returns to God who gave it.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 13

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ … The Bible (King James ) clearly states that “there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (1 John 5:7) ….but not in the Catholic Bible…’


Answer

If you read other non-Catholic Bibles, eg NIV,   you will find an explanation, the King James Bible added these words which are not found in the original Greek text.   So the Catholic Bible has the original text while the King James bible added them.   So the Catholic Bible has the original text while the King James bible added them.   See the NIV Study Bible, Page 1872.

Back To Top



Point 14

Pg. 13 says:   ‘ … Jesus is the only mediator…..


Answer

Of course Jesus is the only Mediator but if an SDA person prays for someone are they not mediating to Christ on behalf of someone?   SDAs are just trying to make mischief with the fact that we can pray for others and we can ask others to pray for use.   Asking others to pray of us, especially those already in heaven, does not stop Christ being the Mediator, just because the SDA deny any soul is in heaven yet, their position has been shown in the above points to be contrary to scripture.

Back To Top



Point 15

Pg. 14 says:   ‘ … The Pope and the Priesthood can forgive sins..


Answer

SDAs seriously deny scripture on this point.   Just read John 20: 22-23.   The Bible tells us that after Jesus rose from the death he appeared to the Apostles and breathed on them and said receive the Holy Spirit.   This was before Pentecost.   Once Jesus had breathed on the Apostles He said, when you forgive sins they are forgive, when you bind them they are bound.   Clearly, Jesus breathed only on the Apostles.   He never went around his followers and breather on them – only the appointed Apostles, the leaders Christ Himself chose.   To them alone he said, when you forgive sins they are forgiven, when you bind sins they are bound.   So which Church is keeping to the scriptures on this doctrine? - the Catholic Church with its priest, bishops and the Pope, the successor of St Peter, or the SDAs who do not have the authority from Christ to forgive sins?

The Bible goes on to say that your sins must be confessed one to another, not just to Jesus.   James 5: 16 says:

16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed.   The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.

Jesus gave authority to his Apostles to forgive sins, but the Apostles have to know what sins to forgive, so Christ’s followers are to confess their sins to His Apostles.   This is clearly not a man-made policy but a Christ made requirement.   If Christ choses to forgive people's sin through His Apostles, why do the SDAs try and change Christ’s method of forgiveness?   According to the Bible the Apostles can administer Christ’s forgives since Christ has given the Apostles alone authority to do this.   SDAs reject the authority of Christ and His appointment of Apostles to forgiving the sins of the faithful.   SDA have to stop rejecting the Bible on the Apostolic authority from Christ to forgive sins.   How are SDAs going to have their sins forgiven if the Bible tells them to confess their sins one to another, to the Apostles?

When a Catholic confesses his sins to Christ via the Apostles, or his decedent such as the Bishop or the priest, he is obeying Christ and the Word of God in the Bible, and Christ forgives the sin through the administrator, the priest, in obedience to the job given them by Christ.   This job of the Apostles is recorded in the Bible.   SDAs refuse this work of salvation of Christ in rejecting Apostolic authority – which comes from Christ.   Not a man-made practice as claimed by the SDA but a God made practice instituted by Christ Himself.   God has chosen to work his Grace through men He has appointed.   SDAs reject this Grace.

Back To Top



Point 16

Pg. 14 says:   … Let no man deceive you by any means … 2 Thessalonians 2: 3-4 ….He sits in God’s temple as if he were God.   It is none other than the pope we are talking about…


Answer

SDAs conveniently do not quote the previous verse - 2 Thessalonians 2: 1 - 2 which says:

Concerning the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled, or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.   Do not let anyone deceive you in any way for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs…

The reason SDAs do not like to quote verses 1 and 2 of 2 Thessalonians, Chapter 2,   is because the Seventh-Day Adventist Church was founded on a false prophesy of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

Three   different dates  were   prophesised  by William Miller and when Christ still did not come on any of the different dates given, the last dated given being 22 October 1844, and still no Return of Christ, Miller said to his congregation it is all wrong, he was mistaken and he sent them away, but the founder of the Seventh-Day Adventists, Ellen Gould-White, said that the date was right (that would be the last date given not the previous dates), just the event was wrong.   They had miss judged the event.   This failure of Christ to return in 1844 the SDAs call the Great Disappointment.   Instead of admitting false prophecy they went and give a further deception – the supposed event Ellen White gave was that from 22 October 1844 Christ in heaven began going through the books judging the souls fit for heaven.   Of course this event never happened either.

Christ’s true prophets never make mistakes in dates or times or events.   In addition Christ Himself forbids anyone making any prediction about His Second Coming.   The SDAs are founded by an act of disobeying Christ and disobeying the Bible.

Matt 24: 36,   No-one knows the day or the hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

The SDAs claim that the Pope has placed himself in the place of God but really William Miller and Ellen White are the ones who have placed themselves in the place of God by trying to predict the Second Coming since only God the Father knows when Christ will return.   Does this make the Founders of the SDA the ‘sons of perdition’?   And what of those who are victims of SDA false prophesy and false doctrine?   Come out of her we say.   Since SDAs have got their foundation wrong, the whole thing is wrong.

SDAs think that the Catholic Church was founded by the devil himself and as a consequence, everything said and taught by a priest or bishop or member of the Catholic Church is of the devil and is a lie, even if it sounds right, it is a lie because the devil can make things sound and look like the truth even when it is a lie.   As a consequence SDAs have to reject any attempt by Catholics to show them where SDAs have gone wrong and reject any attempt by Catholics to show how Catholic doctrine is based on the truth and has Biblical foundations for what it teaches.

See website links for further information on the history of the SDAs 1844 prophecy:


https://nonsda.org/egw/miller.shtml

http://www.nonegw.org/egw11.shtml

http://www.nonegw.org/2300days.shtml

Further reading

  1. How Ellen White’s ‘Investigative Judgement’ doctrine is unbiblical and how Ellen White contradicts herself on this.
    http://www.nonegw.org/egw36.shtml

  2. How Ellen White kept changing her message down the ages each time it was show to be wrong.
    http://www.nonegw.org/egw21.shtml

  3. What the SDAs do not want you to know about 1844.
    http://www.nonegw.org/egw11.shtml

  4. SDAs Fifteen different (false) ways to calculate the Second Coming of Christ.
    http://www.truthorfables.com/Miller's_Time%20_Proved_15_Ways.htm

Back To Top



Point 17

Pg. 15 says:   ‘ … It (the Bible) says that humans become living souls and do not receive a soul. …


Answer

SDAs seem to believe that when someone dies both body and soul die and know nothing until the resurrection of the body at the Second Coming.   However, Jesus tells us differently.   Jesus said in Matt 10: 28,

“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul.   Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”

So Jesus tells us the body can be killed without the soul being killed.   Clearly Jesus teaches us that the body can be killed while the soul lives on.   A murderer kills the body but he cannot kill the soul.   The soul is not killed by the murder.   Of course we can be alive in the body but have a ‘spiritually dead soul’ in that our soul is full of sin, spiritually dead, particularly a soul rejecting God although all sin is some form of rejecting God or at least a rejection of His grace which can overcome temptation.

Ecclesiastes 12 tells us that at death, the body returns to dust while the soul returns to God who gave it.   Where is God? – heaven - and outside of time, so the soul returns to God, separate from the body, but it cannot enter heaven before it is judged so God judges the soul.   If the soul is so rejecting of God the soul is destined for hell, but if it is not ‘rejecting’ of God, it is destined for heaven.   However, Revelation 21: 27 tells us that there is no sin in heaven, ‘nothing impure may enter it’, yet we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, so how can a soul which has sinned, even after it has been baptised we still sin, how can a soul which has sinned, even with the slightest impurity, - how can it enter heaven? – it has to be cleansed before it may enter heaven and into the presence of God.   The body is still dead in the ground waiting for the resurrection of the body at the end of time at Christ’s Second Coming, but the soul is before God as Ecclesiastes 12 says.   This cleansing is a purging from sin, a process of purifying the soul so it is fit for heaven and this is the pure mercy of Christ our Saviour which accomplishes such purification, the pure mercy of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ.   Purgatory – being purged - is the name given to the process of being cleansed, being purified, it is not a place but a process and is outside of time because God is outside of time.

SDAs keep quoting Ecclesiastes 9 about the ‘dead in the ground know nothing’, and of course their bodies and their brains are dead and do not work so they know nothing but if SDAs were only to read on in Ecclesiastes 12 they will find the author of Ecclesiastes comes to a different conclusion to the SDAs because he says that the soul returns to God who gave it.   Also see in Revelation 6: 9 that the souls of the just – without their bodies, are in heaven, underneath the alter in heaven, aware of their condition, aware that they were martyred for the word of God, and plead with God for justice.   So, the soul is knowing and can plead, knowing not with their brain but with their soul, pleading not with their lips but with their soul, and there are still people on earth when these souls are pleading so this is before the Second Coming of Christ.

The Bible is clear that to the physical material body created by God, God breaths the spiritual soul into it.   The soul is clearly distinct from the body, but both are united in the person.   The soul is the breath God.   The breath of God – what is it but the spirit.   Ecclesiastes 12 says that when someone dies, the body returns to the dust from which it is made and the soul returns to God.   Ecclesiastes 12 says nothing about the soul dying, only the body dying and the soul returning to God who gave it and Christians await the resurrection of the body at the Second Coming of Christ - so then the soul is to be re-united to the body.   Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the soul, separated from the body, cannot know God.

God did not Breathe into the nostrils of any animals or plants, yet they are alive and breath without God’s Breath.   So God Breathing into Adam is more than making Adam alive so he can breathe.   It is God Breathing a soul into Adam’s body.

We know that the breath of God never dies.   The breath of God in us is what makes the body have a spiritual soul and so the soul of man never dies since it is the Breath of God.   The soul can die a spiritually death in that it can reject God for the soul has free will.   It is the soul which choses to sin or not.   We can use our body to sin but it is a free will.   The soul therefore will exist for ever in hell which is an eternal spiritual death, separated from the presence of God or the soul exists for ever in heaven, so the soul is not annihilated but exists eternally either in heaven or in hell.   So the soul is immortal.   We have a mortal body, they die as Ecclesiastes 12 says but the soul is immortal in that it returns to God who than judges it for heaven or hell.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 18

Pg. 15 says:   ‘ … The teaching of the immortality of the soul has its beginning from Satan’s first lie in the Garden of Eden.. …


Answer

SDAs make a lot of mischief with this and are dishonest about what the Catholic Church teaches.   The Catholic Church teaches that we all die bodily and that we can all die spiritually.   The immortality of the soul ‘is not the lie of Satan’ because the Bible teaches us that the soul is the Breath of God and the Breath of God never dies.   As said in above points:

SDAs keep quoting Ecclesiastes 9 about the ‘dead in the ground know nothing’, and of course their bodies and their brains are dead and do not work so they know nothing but if SDAs were only to read on in Ecclesiastes 12 they will find the author of Ecclesiastes comes to a different conclusion to the SDAs because he says that the soul returns to God who gave it.   Also see in Revelation 6: 9 that the souls of the just – without their bodies, are in heaven, underneath the alter in heaven, aware of their condition, aware that they were martyred for the word of God, and plead with God for justice.   So, the soul is knowing and can plead, knowing not with their brain but with their soul, pleading not with their lips but with their soul, and there are still people on earth when these souls are pleading so this is before the Second Coming of Christ.

We know that the breath of God never dies.   The breath of God in us is what makes the body have a spiritual soul and so the soul of man never dies since it is the Breath of God.   The soul can die a spiritually death in that it can reject God for the soul has free will.   It is the soul which choses to sin or not.   We can use our body to sin but it is a free will.   The soul therefore will exist for ever in hell which is an eternal spiritual death, separated from the presence of God or the soul exists for ever in heaven, so the soul is not annihilated but exists eternally either in heaven or in hell.   So the soul is immortal.   We have a mortal body, they die as Ecclesiastes 12 says but the soul is immortal in that it returns to God who than judges it for heaven or hell.

Please read   Point 17  for more information.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 19

Pg. 16 says:   ‘ … (1 Thessalonians 4 : 15 – 17) -   So you see that the dead are in the graves and will be awakened by Jesus.’


Answer

SDAs suggest that the souls of the dead are in their graves with their bodies.   This is not what the Bible says.   The bodies of the dead are in their graves, as Ecclesiastes 12 says, but their souls have ‘returned to God who gave them’, as Ecclesiastes 12 also says.   Christians are waiting for their bodies, which are in their graves to be raised from their graves and reunited to their souls at the Second Coming of Christ, but their souls are not in their graves as suggested by SDAs.

For what happens to the soul after death but before the Second Coming of Christ please read   Point 17  .

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 20

Pg. 16 says:   ‘ … Jesus said to him:   “Lazarus, come forth”,   ( John 11: 43).   Lazarus did indeed come out of the grave.   Many ministers preach that, when a person dies they go to heaven or hell.   If the righteous dead went to straight to heaven when they died, then we would believe that Lazarus, Jesus’ friend had gone to heaven, but he did not come down from heaven, or the clouds, or from space …….


Answer

This statement is such a glaringly obvious misunderstanding of the whole purpose of Christ becoming man.

Before Christ died no one had access to heaven.   No one went to heaven because no one had access to Salivation.   It is Christ alone who brought Salivation, on His Cross by His Death.   Lazarus’ soul went to where all the dead souls went before Christ made access to heaven possible, which is what we call Hades.   It is called Hades because all who are ‘there’ or in that ‘state’ are deprived of the vision of God.   Heaven is where we see God Face to face.   Adam and Abraham and Moses were not in Heaven until Christ Himself had died on the Cross for them.   Jesus Himself went to Hades, to bring the souls of those who had died before His own death, with Him to Heaven.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 21

Pg. 16 and 17 says:   ‘ … The Bible says that it is only Jesus that has immortality….   (1 Timothy 6: 15 – 17 and also 1 Corinthians 15 : 51 – 54.) … and that humans become dust..   the Bible completely rejects the teaching of immortality…


Answer

The Bible teaches us that our bodies are mortal, they die a physical death, but our souls, since they are the Breath of God and the Breath of God never dies, so the soul, being the Breath of God, is immortal.   Jesus spoke with Moses and Elijah and yet both had passed from this life, Matt 17, 1 – 13.   Where were they before they had access to heaven through Christ’s death? - we call it Hades.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 22

Pg. 18   ‘ … The Catholic Church frightens people with the teaching of eternal torment…


Answer

Not just the Catholic Church but most denominations, because the Bibles says so.   However, what Bible evidence shows that hell is a torment for those who go there – Jesus says so Himself.   Just because SDAs do not like the idea that being separated from God as an experience of torment, in reality, there can be no GREATER TORMENT then being separated from God, deprived of the ‘Beatific Vision’, deprived of seeing God Face to face, deprived of being in His presence.   Hell is separation from God.   Heaven is seeing God Face to face.

Back To Top



Point 23

Pg. 18   ‘ … During the Reformation period, purgatory was understood to be a place where people were punished for their wrong doing…   …Luther was of the opinion that such a teaching was totally unbiblical…   Those who end up in purgatory cannot come out by themselves but can have help from others…


Answer

No it was not.    Purgatory is not a place, nor is it a punishment but a cleansing.   The Bible tells us that in heaven there is nothing impure there, Rev 21: 27, so we all need to be made pure by the Mercy of Christ who gained Mercy for us on His Cross.

Read Point 17 for a full explanation, however:

Ecclesiastes 12 tells us that at death, the body returns to dust while the soul returns to God who gave it.   Where is God? – heaven - and outside of time, so the soul returns to God, separate from the body, but it cannot enter heaven before it is judged so God judges the soul.   If the soul is so rejecting of God the soul is destined for hell, but if it is not ‘rejecting’ of God, it is destined for heaven.   However, Revelation 21: 27 tells us that there is no sin in heaven, ‘nothing impure may enter it’, yet we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, so how can a soul which has sinned, even after it has been baptised we still sin, how can a soul which has sinned, even with the slightest impurity, - how can it enter heaven? – it has to be cleansed before it may enter heaven and into the presence of God.   The body is still dead in the ground waiting for the resurrection of the body at the end of time at Christ’s Second Coming, but the soul is before God as Ecclesiastes 12 says.   This cleansing is a purging of sin, a process of purifying the soul so it is fit for heaven and this is the pure mercy of Christ our Saviour which accomplishes such purification, the pure mercy of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ.   Purgatory – being purged - is that name given to the process of being cleansed, being purified, it is not a place but a process and is outside of time because God is outside of time.

So ‘Purgatory’ is a GOOD experience in that we are purged of our, made pure by Gods Mercy, so we are fit to see God Face to face.

Biblical evidence for Purgatory is found here

As for praying for those in Purgatory, no one can save themselves, only Christ and His Mercy can do that, and we should all pray for each other, that we may all see the Face of God, this is the most basic act of charity we can do for someone else, but it is Christ’s Mercy doing the cleansing.

We should note that before Christ died on the Cross, no one had access to heaven.   So from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Lazarus of the New Testament, all who had died before Christ had made access to heaven possible through His death on the Cross, all those souls who had died before Christ’s death went to what is called Hades.   This is confirmed by the fact that Christ went and preached the Gospel to the ‘spirits (souls) in prison’, otherwise known as the dead in Hades, this was after He had died on the cross but before His Resurrection.   (1 Peter 3: 10-19 and 1 Peter 4: 6).   His body was in the tomb, so His soul ‘preached the Gospel to the dead’, who had died before Him, those such as Moses, who were waiting to be released from the ‘prison’ of Hades and have access to heaven by Christ ‘s victory of Salivation.   I make this clear now because you will see a reference to this in Point 20.

Back To Top



Point 24

Pg. 18   ‘ … The Pope also offered forgiveness in exchange for money.   This was known as indulgences.


Answer

No it was not.   As shocking as it may seem to SDAs and others, indulgencies have nothing to do with paying money.   Indulgencies are very closely linked with penance and an understanding of penance helps to understand indulgencies.

Protestants often object to penance claiming penance is ‘salvation by works’ since Christ paid the price for our sins on the cross, we have nothing to pay, we do not have to pay anything - Christ paid the price.   However, far from being ‘salivation by works’, penance and indulgences are ‘salvation by God’s grace’.   How can that be?

In Baptism we have repented of our sins but what about sin after Baptism?   How are we to be forgiven of our daily sins?   The Gospel calls us not only to confess our sins, which is to list them, but also to repent of our sins, which means to be sorry form them.

To repent of our sins means to move away from them with sorrow and tears.   It is an act of rejection of our sin, a detestation of our sin and an act of moving spiritually toward God, which can only be done by God’s Grace.   So repentance is an act of prayer and submission to Christ’s Mercy.   Daily sin needs daily repentance.   The word penance means sorrow for sin, a root requirement for repentance.

In addition to sorrow, the Bible tells us in 1 Peter 4: 8   ‘loving others covers a multitude of sins’,   and God Himself is the source of true spiritual love, which the Bible calls charity.   We cannot just confess our sin to God and then do nothing about it.   For example, how can you be repentant, and yet refuse to return stolen goods.   You cannot.   Penance is the act of putting repentance into action, correcting a wrong as far as possible.   God forgives the guilt of the sin, but if we refuse to return the stolen goods, it is not true repentance and God will not forgive an unrepentant heart, so penance is needed.   We have to return the stolen goods to repair the damage.   Does confessing the sin and receiving God’s forgiveness return the stolen goods?   No it does not.   So God forgives the guilt of the sin but the damaged done needs our attention, needs to be corrected.   It is called ‘satisfaction’ for the sin.   Such ‘satisfaction', or penance, or corrective action, ‘…must correspond as far as possible with the gravity and nature of the sins committed.   It can consist of prayer, works of mercy, self-denial, service of others, but above all, acceptance of the cross we must bear.   Such penances help configure us to Christ, WHO ALONE EXPIATES OUR SINS ONCE FOR ALL.   Such penances allow us to become co-heirs with the risen Christ, ‘provided we suffer with him’.

The biblical reference for ‘ suffering with Christ’ is:

Romans 8: 17
if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

1 John 2 : 1 -2
My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;   2 and he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

Remembering that penance means satisfaction and satisfaction means corrective action, Protestants might be heartened by the words of the Council of Trent:

The satisfaction that we make for our sins, however, is not so much ours as though it were not done through Jesus Christ.   We who can do nothing ourselves, as if just by ourselves, can do all things with the cooperation of "him who strengthens" us.   Thus man has nothing of which to boast, but all our boasting is in Christ . . . in whom we make satisfaction by bringing forth "fruits that befit repentance."   These fruits have their efficacy from him, by him they are offered to the Father, and through him they are accepted by the Father.

So, acts of penance, corrective action, are part of repentance.   How is penance and repentance linked to indulgencies?   Remembering that when Jesus had risen from the dead but before He had ascended into heaven, He appeared to the Apostles, He breathed on them and said, “If you forgive sins of any, they are forgiven, if you retain the sins of any, they are retained”,   John 20: 23.   Christ himself entrusted the Apostles with the ministry of reconciliation and so the bishops who are their successors, have the power from Christ to forgive sins, ‘in the name of the Father, and of the So, and of the Holy Spirit.   The confessor, (priest or bishops) is not master of God’s forgiveness but its servant.

In this sacrament, the sinner, placing himself before the merciful judgment of God, anticipates in a certain way the judgment to which he will be subjected at the end of his earthly life.   For it is now, in this life, that we are offered the choice between life and death, and it is only by the road of conversion that we can enter the Kingdom, from which one is excluded by grave sin.   In converting to Christ through penance and faith, the sinner passes from death to life and "does not come into judgement as John 5: 24 says:

24 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

And Ephesians 4 : 22 & 24 shows that:

….. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the "old man" and to put on the "new man."

The ‘putting off of the old man and the putting on of the new man’ is a daily decision and a personal daily act of the will in union with God’s Grace.   The Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and to become holy with the help of God's Grace is not alone.   "The life of each of God's children is joined in Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single mystical person," we call the Church.

Clearly Christ has paid the price for sin.   For sin to be forgiven we need both confession and have ‘satisfaction’ for true repentance.   The consequence, or punishment of sin is death but sin also harms others and ourselves.   To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence.   Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin.   On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory.   This purification, either here on earth or after death, frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin, because God forgave the sin due to our honest confession and sorrow, but have we ‘returned the stolen goods’, that is, made corrective action?   These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin.   A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.   Read Point 23 for information and Biblical reference for Purgatory.

The word indulgence from the Latin indulgentia, from indulge, means to be kind or tender, primary sense to signify the kindness and mercy of God.   But in the special sense in which it is here considered, an indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven.

The Bibles shows us penance and indulgencies being given to Christians.   The    Pathos website   has a good article on penance and indulgencies and I quote the following:

‘Did Paul even publicly name sinners to whom he assigned penance?

1 Timothy 1: 19-20 holding faith and a good conscience.   By rejecting , certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith,   [20] among them Hymenae’us and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.’

Here Paul is saying that some have made ‘shipwreck of their faith’, and he has given him penance, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

‘Does the Church have the authority to grant an indulgence?

2 Corinthians 2: 6-11 For such a one this punishment by the majority is enough;   [7] so you should rather turn to forgive and comfort him, or he may be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.   [8] So I beg you to reaffirm your love for him.   [9] For this is why I wrote, that I might test you and know whether you are obedient in everything.   [10] Any one whom you forgive, I also forgive.   What I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ,   [11] to keep Satan from gaining the advantage over us; for we are not ignorant of his designs.’

On these verses of 2 Corinthians 2: 6 – 11, the NIV Study Bible says this:

‘Speaks of a particular person who has been the cause of serious offence in Corinth and upon whom church discipline has been imposed.   Paul admonished the Corinthians that because the offender has shown genuine sorrow and repentance for his sin the punishment should be discontinued and he should be lovingly restored to their fellowship.’

Clearly the early Church gave penance and brought people back after corrective behaviour, and ‘to keep Satan from gaining the advantage over us’, so the Apostle delivers the sinner from Satan, providing an indulgence, a corrective time of penance.

In addition:

Matt 12: 32 says:
“Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgive, either in this age or in the age to come”

This implies that other sins may be forgiven in the age to come, i.e., in the next life.   Since that can’t apply to anyone who dies outside the grace of God –after death it’s too late to be saved – and anyone who dies in the grace of God has already had his eternal debt forgiven, it must be to the temporal debt of those who die in God’s Grace.

1 Corinthians 3: 13-15, St Paul writes that Christ-centred works will survive the test of fire, but self-cantered works will be consumed.   If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, through he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

Christ said of Peter, “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”   Indulgencies, a purification by penance, are an act in obedience to the words of Jesus Christ and is a Biblical act.   If you do not have indulgences you are not living out the Bible.

Read Point 23 for information and Biblical reference for Purgatory.

Back To Top



Point 25

Pg. 18   ‘ Tetzel …declared … (of indulgencies) …any sin committed in the future would be forgive..


Answer

This has proven not to be the case.   Historians have shown that Tetzel never said that sins yet to be committed would be forgive now.

The New Advent website says:

The charge that the forgiveness of sins was sold for money regardless of contrition or that absolution for sins to be committed in the future could be purchased is baseless.   An indulgence,   … can be applied only "to the pains of sin which are confessed and for which there is contrition".   "No one", he furthermore adds, "secures an indulgence unless he have true contrition".

Read more here.

Back To Top



Point 26

Pg. 19 says:   When it (the Bible) says that the wages of sin is death, there is then no torment.   The Bibles says that the godless will receive their punishment according to their works (Revelation 20: 13) …


Answer

No torment ! – Where does the SDA get that idea from?   I think the author of this pamphlet is veering off from what the SDAs actually teach on this which is that the dead will suffer until they are annihilated.   SDAs believe that for the ‘godless’ there is no continuous torment after death, once they have been ‘burned up’, ‘consumed by the fire’, they no longer exist.

The pamphlet quotes Revelation 20: 13, however, if the SDA were only to read the previous paragraph of Revelation, that is Rev 20: 7 – 10, they will find that the Bible says:

Rev 20: 7 – 10
7 When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison,   8 and will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together for the war; the number of them is like the sand of the seashore.   9 And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down from heaven and devoured them.   10 And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

SDAs will say, this passage is only referring to the Devil, didn’t you read – it said the devil.   However, Rev 20: 7 – 10 shows the condition of the devil in hell being ‘tormented day and night’ but Revelation 14: 11 shows that the ‘godless dead’ also experience this same torment, day and night for ever and ever.

Rev 14: 11
11 And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

The NIV Bible is a Calvinist Bible and the NIV Study Bible has its studies written by Calvinists – often seen as heroes by the SDA church, yet the Calvinists completely reject the SDAs interpretation for the ungodly after death.   SDAs believe in ‘annihilation’, that the wicked who dies will be non-existent once they have been ‘burned up’ in hell and therefore they will not suffer for ever and ever.   The NIV Study Bible commentary says on Rev 14: 11:

‘Revelation offers no support for the doctrine of the annihilation of the wicked.’

There is a website which list what they call the Foundational Verses For Eternal Punishment In Hell.   In addition it quotes St Augustine of Hippo, 354 – 430 AD:

“who cautions us against following the example of those who, ‘while not slighting the authority of the sacred Scriptures, . . . nevertheless interpret them wrongly and suppose that what is to happen will not be what the Scriptures speak of, but what they themselves would like to happen” (City of God 21.27).

SDAs do not like the idea that God would punish people for eternity, however, it is people who choose to separate themselves from God, because God never rejects us, it is we who reject Him.   Hell is separation from God, a separation from God which is for ever and ever.

Jim Akin   explains it well when he says that the soul in hell for ever and not annihilated, giving the analogy that it is like some who has made a huge financial investment and the investment is lost, someone will say, ‘I have been ruined’ or I am ruined’ or ‘I have been destroyed’, they do not mean they do not exist.   So hell is the state of the soul, it is in a state of ‘ruination’, not annihilation.

The pamphlet goes on to say the more sins someone does the longer the burning in hell.   The Bibles does not say this.   The Bible says if our works are of God then we go to heaven if our works are bad and without repentance then we go to hell.   Nowhere does it say we have a longer time in hell – as already sated, hell is eternal.   SDAs are trying to prove hell is not eternal, but nowhere does it say more time burning for more sins committed.   Hell is separation from God.   That is the torment.

Back To Top



Point 27

Pg. 20 – 22 says:   Even Sodom and Gomorrah, 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 vengeance of eternal fire.   (Jude 7).   ‘…the fire stopped once everything had been burned up…’.   ‘..and there shall be wailing and grinding of teeth.   ‘The word eternal comes from the Greek word aion..’.   ‘New heave and new earth..’   ‘… and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth…Ezekiel 28: 19-19.’


Answer

The translation used here by the SDA has misled them.   The King James Version says, ‘...and the cities about them in like manner.’   However, the New King James Version makes the text clearer.   The NKJV which had 130 translators, believed in faithfulness to the original Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew texts including the Dead Sea Scrolls.   Their translation of the verse goes like this:

Jude 7
‘…as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.’

The NKJV says that, ‘… the cities around them in a similar manner ….’   And the NIV Study Bible Comment says:

‘In a similar way.   Does not mean that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was the same as that of the angles or vice versa.   This phrase is used to introduce the third illustration of the fact that God will see to it that the unrighteous will be consigned to eternal punishment..’

Most Christens think that where God is, that is, in heaven, is outside of time.   Heaven is ‘outside of time’ because God has no beginning or end.   This means that once someone dies and their body ‘is in the ground and their soul has returned to God who made it’, Ecclesiastes 12, then that soul is also ‘outside of time’.   The soul is judged ‘instantly’ at death because the soul is outside of time.   The unrighteous soul will be in the state of being separated from God, which is what hell is, separation from God is torment, and because it is outside of time cannot come to an end.   So the soul in hell does not get ‘burned up’ so that it does not exist anymore.   The SDA pamphlet goes on to say, ‘...and there shall be wailing and grinding of teeth.’   This is describing the torment that is hell, not a process that will end.   Being separated from God is torment.   There is no evidence for annihilation in the Bible.   Sodom and Gomorrah is not an example of what hell is like, it is an example that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is condemned, it is not an illustration of the nature of the dead.   SDAs have invented doctrine on the nature of the dead in opposition to Scripture.   The quote from Ezekiel 28 says that death destroys the body which become ashes ‘dead in the ground’, but Ezekiel 28 says nothing about the state of the soul separated from the body.

The SDA pamphlet goes on to say that, ‘The word ‘eternal’ comes from the Greek word aion..’, and they try to use this to mean that hell is not eternal, however, that would mean that heaven is not eternal either.   This is a further invented doctrine of the SDAs.

The SDAs misunderstand the Biblical reality of the ‘new heaven and new earth’.   The New Heaven and New Earth is brought about by Christ Jesus.   Through His cross, access to heaven is now possible – so there is a new heaven and a new earth.   The New Heaven and the New Earth is the New Jerusalem, which is already here;   the New Jerusalem is the Church of Jesus Christ, it is the body of Christians which make up the Body of Christ, the Church;   it is what we are Baptised into.   EWTN makes this very clear:

‘With regards to the New Jerusalem, it is clear that we are dealing with an image of the Church.   For just as Jerusalem was the physical capital and core of the Old Testament Kingdom of God where His presence was most directly experienced in the Temple sanctuary of this world, so by analogy the New Jerusalem is the place in which the presence of God is experienced, most especially in the worship of the Mass.   A further indication that the New Jerusalem is the Church is the description of it as “a bride adorned for her husband.”   The Church as the Bride of Christ runs throughout the New Testament and is most explicitly stated by St. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians: 5

22 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.   23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour.   As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. …..

…Now just as the prophecies of the Old Testament often have multiple, successive fulfilment, so too the prophetic work which is the Apocalypse.   The New Jerusalem is the Church and as such it has been definitively established here on earth, having replaced the original Jerusalem as the centre of religious life and worship.   However, it will only be fully realized in the heavenly Kingdom wherein the saints now exist in perfect happiness and which we look forward to.   The final realization of the New Jerusalem will be when this world has passed away and there remains only the New Jerusalem in its perfection.’

Back To Top



Point 28

Pg. 22 – 23 says:   Infant baptism has its roots in Augustan’s original sin teaching.   ‘…it is the godparents who are to believe on behalf of the infant. ‘   ‘…those who want to be baptised must have personal faith…’   ‘…baptism is symbolic…’.


Answer

No it does not.   Infant baptism is Biblical.   In the New Testament, whole households were baptised on the belief of the head of the household.   Christ himself said of the children, the kingdom of heaven belongs to these.   In Matt 19: 14 is says:

14 but Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.”

In addition, since baptism replaced circumcision, and circumcision was for babies eight days old then it is right the children should be baptised.   See   Col 2: 11-12 .

Also see more about infant baptisam here.

Whole households were baptized, the Bible tells us so:

Acts 16: 33-34
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family.   34 Then he brought them up into his house, and set food before them; and he rejoiced with all his household that he had believed in God.

And as with Jewish circumcision, the child is circumcised on the faith of the parents, believer’s circumcision, so too the child is baptised with the faith of the parents, it is believer’s baptism because, the parents are believes as are the Jewish parents believer’s in circumduction.   In addition, in the Jewish circumcision celebration there are godparents – witnesses who will foster the child in the faith as well as the parents.   Did the child being circumcised have personal faith? – it was the faith of the parents who bring the child up in the faith having joined the community of God’s select through circumcision, so too, the child having been baptised is also brought up in the faith.   SDAs need to learn that the Catholic baptismal practice is both Biblical and has strong Jewish roots.   Remember, Baptism replaced circumcision.   Circumcision on the whole is for babies, eight days old, so too is baptism for Christian parents’ babies, but adult baptism is also another way someone joins the Body of Christ – His Church.

Baptism is not symbolic but a real event, a real change takes place.   SDAs do not see Baptism as a sacrament, an act of God on the soul.   A sacrament, like baptism, is not a mere human action, but God acting on the soul through the act of baptism, where God pours His Grace upon the soul, through the act of being baptised.   SDAs refuse this Saving Grace for their children.

Back To Top



Point 29

Pg. 22 – 23 says:   ‘…believed that a child was born with sin.’   ‘…But the small child has not done anything wrong…’   ‘… sin is the transgression of the law…’   ‘The son should not bear the iniquity of the father. Ezekiel 18: 20.’


Answer

Again, SDAs fail to understand Scripture and what happened to Adam and Eve when they first sinned.   The Bible tells us that since Adam and Eve sinned, all have sinned.

1 Cor. 15:22
For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life,

So, Baptism frees us from the First Sin committed by Adam, the First Sin of Adam being called man’s original sin; the original sin and personal sin is washed away in Baptism, in the name of the Trinity: in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.   SDAs use Ezekiel 18 to contradict the New Testament on Baptism which shows how the SDA misuse the Bible.

Read more:   here

Back To Top



Point 30

Pg. 24 – 25 says:   ‘Confirmation was introduced by the Catholic Church in the 13th century.’   ‘Martin Luther did away with confirmation…’   ‘Infant baptism and confirmation are traditions enacted by people.   They are a form of substitution for Biblical baptism.   This is just how the Devil works.   He substitutes Biblical truth with counterfeit...’


Answer

No, confirmation was not  ‘introduced in the 13th century.’   Confirmation is the laying on of hands by an Apostle on an already baptized person for that individual to receive the Holy Spirit.   The Bible is clear on the laying on of hands to receive the Holy Spirit.   See what Saint Peter, the Apostle and first Pope and St John, the youngest of the Apostles, did in Samaria.

Acts 8: 14-17
14 And now the apostles at Jerusalem, hearing that Samaria had received the word of God, sent Peter and John to visit them.   15 So these two came down and prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit,   16 who had not, as yet, come down on any of them; they had received nothing so far except baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus.   17 Then the apostles began to lay their hands on them, so that the Holy Spirit was given them,

In the same way that baptism is a sacrament, so too is confirmation.   In confirmation the Holy Spirit comes upon the soul of the person being confirmed by the Bishop.   Again, confirmation is not symbolic but a real event, a real change takes place.   SDAs do not see confirmation as a sacrament, an act of God on the soul.   A sacrament, like baptism or confirmation, is not a mere human action, as suggested by SDAs, but God acting on the soul through the act of confirmation, where God pours His Grace upon the soul, through the act of being confirmed.   SDAs refuse this Biblical Saving Grace of confirmation for their children.

The Acts of the Apostles tells us that when one of the Apostles dies, someone is elected to take his place and the other Apostles lay their hands on them.   So by the laying on of hands from the Apostles we have what are called Bishops.   As the Church grew so more Bishops were needed and so more were made.   In the same way that Saint Peter was the Head Apostle and was the Bishop of Rome, so too the current Pope is Apostle Peter‘s successor, and the Bishop of Rome.

Conformation is clearly Biblical but the SDAs do not have this Biblical practice.   SDAs do not have Bishops so they cannot have confirmation.   SDAs fall short of proclaiming the Bible in all its fullness.

The SDA church claims Martin Luther did away confirmation, yet confirmation is shown to be Biblical.   As shown in above Points, Luther did away with many books of the Bible.   He also wanted to get rid of the Epistle of James and the Book of Revelation because it did not fit in with his own person view, but some of his friends persuaded him to keep these two books in his re-design of the bible.   It is this which makes a man-made unbiblical church.   The SDA pamphlet claims that being ‘unbiblical’ is the work of the Devil.   So that is Martin Luther’s work then, the Devil's work, upheld by the SDA, the rejection of Biblical confirmation, the rejection of Peter appointed by Christ as Head of His Church, the rejection of Christ breathing on the Apostles telling them when they to forgive sins they are forgive, the rejection of Christ's words – “This is My Body, this is My Blood.”   It seems to me the Catholic Church embrace the whole of scripture while Luther and those who follow his teaching, including the SDA, reject a whole lot of scripture.   It seems to me that it is Luther, and those who follow him, who have the counterfeit Bible, the counterfeit teaching and the counterfeit church.

There may well be an underlying reason why SDAs reject sacraments, such as Baptism, Confirmation and the Eucharist as the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ.   It is because sacraments reveal the true nature of the soul; that the soul is acted upon by God in a special way, it is the soul which receives God’s Grace, it is in the soul where the guilt of our sins lie, and, as Jesus said, where sin has its root.   But SDAs reject the soul as something special and animated by God.   Rather they believe that the soul is just air, they say, “Adam became a living soul, not that he had one”.   That is why SDAs think the soul ‘knows nothing once dead’, but we know that it is the body which knows nothing once dead, the ‘soul returns to God who gave it’, Ecclesiastes 12, and the soul is animated, effected by the Grace of God, such as in Confirmation.   There are seven Sacraments in all.

Throughout the pamphlet the SDA church has used Luther and Protestantism to attack the Catholic Church then, on page 25, the SDAs attacks Protestants who reject SDAs interpretation of Scripture, calling them apostate Protestants.   Of course the SDAs are the real apostates with their counterfeit teaching.

Back To Top



Point 31

Pg. 25 says:   ‘…true baptism is not infant baptism/sprinkling…’


Answer

Both the Old and New Treatments refer to ‘living waters’, which for the people of that time meant ‘live rivers’, flowing water or running streams, not a bowel or jug of water.   It certainly did not mean stagnant water.

There is a very early document which records the early Church’s basic beliefs and practices.   The document is called   The Didache  .   The word Didache means ‘Teaching’.   The document is also known as The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and is a brief anonymous early Christian treatise, dated by most modern scholars to the first century.   The first line of this treatise is "The teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles (or Nations) by the twelve apostles".

Chapter 7 of the Didache, says on Baptism:

And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water.   But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm.   But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit.   But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

So, clearly the early Church baptised with water from a bowel or a jug three times.   This is how may Christians are baptised and it is a valid baptism.   Not may SDAs go down the local river to be baptised in ‘living water’, but SDAs seem to expect Catholics to do so.   Again, a false allegation by the SDA church.

For more info see:   Faith Alone   by Steve Ray.

Back To Top



Point 32

Pg. 25 – 27 says:   ‘…Luther stood on his feet and realised he was crawling on his knees in order to obtain salvation; he thought works could save him.’


Answer

The Catholic Church has never taught salvation but works.   Catholics believe we are saved by God’s grace but we have to respond to God’s grace with a yes.   SDAs and other Protestants believe that we are saved by Faith Alone.   However, Faith Alone doctrine is unbiblical.   Catholics believe we are saved by faith and love, faith and action together, just as the Bible tells us.   The only mention in the Bible where the word alone is linked to the word faith is where the Bible says: NOT BY FAITH ALONE.

James 2: 24
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

So, we are saved by faith and works together, just like the Catholic Church teaches.   Let us read James in context:

James 2: 14-266
14 What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works?   Can his faith save him?   15 If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food,   16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?   17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.   ” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.   19 You believe that God is one; you do well.   Even the demons believe—and shudder.   20 Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren?   21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?   22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works,   23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God.   24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.   25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?   26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.

So, faith alone is dead faith and a dead doctrine.   Luther and the SDAs are preaching their own version of the Bible, not what the Bible teaches.   Luther and the SDAs are teaching a dead faith – not a living faith.   The Catholic Church never says we can save ourselves.   We always need the Grace of God to be saved, but we have to respond to the grace in order to be saved.

Stephen Ray, in his book   Crossing the Tiber  , speaking of Protestant ‘alone doctrine’ such as 'faith alone' or 'scripture alone', says of:   believing, confessing, repentance, baptism, works, grace, riotousness, the Cross,

‘Can we cut out any one of these of the list and proclaim it alone as a means of salvation?   Can we be saved without faith?   without grace?   without repentance?   without baptism?   without the Spirit?   These are all involved and necessary; not one of them can be dismissed as a means of obtaining eternal life.   Neither can one be emphasised to the exclusion of another.   They are all involved in salvation and entry into the Church.   The Catholic Church does not divide these various elements of salvation, overemphasising some while ignoring others; rather, she holds them all in their fullness.   (Crossing the Tiber: Pg. 100 -101.)'

Read more here about :   Aren’t we saved by Faith Alone?

Note  :
The following website commentary entitled:   History or Her Story  ,   comments on Ellen Whites book The Great Controversy , and shows that Ellen White had not a clue about Martin Luther’s real life as her accounts of them bears no resemblance to the facts.   She invented many and plagiarizes false accounts, so too, the SDA booklet entitled:  500 Years after Luther!  perpetuates these same fails accounts.   Why?   Because SDAs have to keep to Ellen White’s accounts and teachings otherwise they are no longer SDAs.

Back To Top



Point 33

Pg. 28 says:   ‘…The Reformers understood what it meant to accept salvation in Christ Jesus.   ‘ …Anabaptists,… Luther…, Huss…, Wesley…, Miller…,’.   ‘What about us?   Well, we have learned a little about each of these and so we are more knowledgeable than those who have gone before us.'


Answer

No, the Reformers did not understand what it meant to accept salvation in Christ Jesus.   As mentioned above in Point 30, Anabaptists, Luther, Huss, Wesley and Miller, all reject the word of God and the words of Christ with their:

‘… rejection of Peter appointed by Christ as Head of His Church, the rejection of Christ breathing on the Apostles telling them when they to forgive sins they are forgive, the rejection of Christ’s words – “This is My Body, this is My Blood.”

After trying to convince the reader that they must believe the teachings of those listed such Luther, the SDA pamphlet goes on to say the author of the pamphlet is greater than their teachers.   Of course this is unbiblical.   Jesus says that no man is greater than his master.   From Point 1 in this response it has been shown that the beliefs of these teachers listed and that of the SDA are completely flawed, especially Ellen White and William Miller, founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.   SDAs are quite prepared to use the teaching of others such as Anabaptists, Luther, Huss, Wesley, and then to reject them when is suits them, a sure sign that the SDAs are a pick and choose man made movement.

SDAs beliefs have changed over time, such as their ‘Shut Door doctrine’, which was that all Protestants who did not believe in their prediction of the Second Coming of Christ, during any of the dates the SDAs gave including the 22 October 1844 date, were doomed to damnation for ever and that salvation was no-longer open to those who rejected what Ellen White said, because salvation had ‘Shut its Doors’, heaven had ‘Shut its Doors’ on such Protestants.   This of course made a huge problem for the SDAs when Christ did not come after they said he would, because now they had condemned everyone who did not believe what they were saying, when they were the ones who were in the wrong and gave false prophecy leading many astray.   For more information of the ‘Shut Door’ teaching of the SDA church click here .

Back To Top



Point 34

Pg. 28 - 30 says:    ‘…The Catholic Church has changed God’s Ten Commandments.’


Answer

No, the Catholic Church did not change the Ten Commandments.   Careful reading will show that Protestants have created the Second Commandment by moving the numbering around and they put women in at the bottom of the Ten Commandments making women out to be the property of men.

The following website link shows that:

'There are five key points to be made concerning this common misunderstanding among Protestants as well as many quasi-Christian sects.'

‘The inspired author of Deuteronomy now makes the distinction between wife and property sharper by using two different Hebrew words for “covet” and “desire” and by only using the word “covet” with regard to the wife.   The two separate commandments now become undeniable.’

To find out more please click   here  .

Back To Top



Point 35

Pg. 31 says:    ‘…The Catholic Church unequivocally states that they have changed the day of rest.’   ‘Emperor Constantine was the first to institute Sunday as the day of rest by law in 321 AD.’


Answer

The SDA church does not believe that St Peter was appointed by Christ as Head of the Church.   Neither do they accept the person who was elected to take St Peter’s place after St Peter was crucified upside down in Rome, who was called Clement.   SDAs reject what is called Apostolic Succession.   Yet, that is God’s design for His Church.

The Acts of the Apostles tells us that when one of the Apostles dies, someone is elected to take his place and the other Apostles lay their hands on them.   So by the laying on of hands from the Apostles we have what are called Bishops.   As the Church grew so more Bishops were needed and so more were made.   In the same way that Saint Peter was the Head Apostle and was the Bishop of Rome, so too the current Pope is Apostle Peter's successor, and the Bishop of Rome.

There is a very early document which records the early Church’s basic beliefs and practices.   The document is called The Didache.   The word Didache means ‘Teaching’.   The document is also known as The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and is a brief anonymous early Christian treatise, dated by most modern scholars to the first century, AD 70.   The first line of this treatise is "The teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles (or Nations) by the twelve apostles".

The   Didache  , Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord's Day, says:

But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure.   But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned.   For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: "In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations."

Justin the Martyr wrote the following to a Jewish friend:

"But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead"   (First Apology 67 [A.D. 155]).

The Bible also tells us that the Apostles gathered together on the First Day of the week, Sunday, to break bread.

Acts 20: 7
On the first day of the week we came together to break bread.   Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.

What is so special about the First Day of the week that the Apostles should gather together and break bread on that day and not Saturday?

The answer is clear, the First Day of the week, Sunday, is the day of salvation, the day when Christ rose from the dead and conquered death.   Christ saved the world from sin on the Cross but he saved us from death by conquering death through His Resurrection    Christians are people of the Resurrection.   It was God who chose the First Day of the week, Sunday, for salvation, not man, not Constantine, but God alone.   Sunday is the day of the week when the greatest event ever in the history of all creation happened, the Resurrection of Christ.   By our Baptism we go down into the water to die with Christ, we come up out of the water to rise with Christ.   Our Baptism shows us we are people of the Resurrection.

Christ came into the world to die and to Rise again that we may have salvation.   Sunday is the DAY of SALVATION, and so Sunday is the Lord’s Day, the Day of His Victory.   What did God create on Day One of Creation? – He created ‘light’, physical light.   With Christ’s Resurrection, there is a New Creation in Christ Jesus.   He is the Light, the True Light, not a created light but the True Light, the Light of the New Creation, the Light which overcome the darkness of sin and death.   Christ gave us a New Covenant.   Saturday is the sign of the Old Covenant.   Sunday is the First Day of the New Creation, the day of the Light of Christ.

SDAs reject this otherwise they would celebrate Christ’s Victory of the Day of His Victory, Sunday.   SDAs not only condemn Sunday gathers, that is they condemn most Christians, claiming they are breaking God’s Commandments by not keeping the Saturday Sabbath, SDAs also claim that Sunday worship is worship of the Devil and so Catholics and others who gather on Sunday are devil worshipers and have the mark of the beast and that in the end God will judge Sunday gathers and condemned to hell while Saturday gathers, such as SDAs, are saved for heaven.   This is how SDAs make their church members fear Sunday gatherings.   SDAs claim that you are not loving God’s law if you do not keep Saturday gatherings.

So, we have the Bible which tells us that the Apostles kept the Sunday to celebrate the Resurrection by breaking bread, we have the Didache written 70 AD telling us that Sunday is the day to gather and celebrate the Resurrection by breaking bread, and we have James the Martyr of 155 AD telling us the Sunday is the common day for Christians to meet, why? - because Christ rose that day.

So, the SDAs are wrong again, it was not Emperor Constantine who changed the observance from Saturday to Sunday.   Christ Himself, the Apostles and those whom they ordained, who kept Sunday Special, because God Himself made Sunday Special – by His Resurrection.   Christ promised He would rise on the third day – so He kept Sunday special because He kept His promise.

For more info click   here  and   here  .

SDAs claim that the Catholic Church WAS NOT founded by Christ on the Apostles, but by the Roman Emperor Constantine, a pagan who became a Christian and in 321 AD, they claim, Constantine changed Saturday Sabbath to Sunday.   If the Catholic Church was founded by Constantine at this date then the SDAs cannot accuse the Catholic Church of changing the day of the week from Saturday Sabbath Rest to Sunday because we have both Biblical and other writings of early Christians which shows that the First Christians were keeping Sunday special long before Constantine.   However, Constantine did not found the Catholic Church, all Constantine did was to make laws which protected the First Christians of the Catholic Church founded by Christ on the Apostles from being prosecuted or worse, killed, for not worshiping pagan gods.

Because the Catholic Church has Apostolic Authority, give to the Apostles by Christ Himself, so the Catholic Church has authority from Christ to arrange the way its members should live and has authority to provide authentic Christian teaching.   SDAs reject this authority and this authentic Christian teaching.   As the Bible says, "keep to the traditions of the Apostles" – traditions here does not mean man-made traditions, it means the spoken word of God, not just the written word of God in the Bible since not all was recorded there as the Bible tells us, but tradition here means the spoken word of God through the Apostles, which still lives on in the Church.   This is what the Catholic Church means when it mentions the word traditions, not man-made but God made, God's word not written down.   It was after all St Peter who decide that circumcision was no- longer required for someone to become a Christian and yet circumcision was the sign of the Covenant made by God with Abraham, circumcision was how someone became a member of God’s elect, yet the appointed man of Christ, St Peter, changed the decree, changed the sign of the Covenant for Christians – because Christ said of Peter, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven – and I want to be a member of that Church – The Church of Jesus Christ – Catholic Church.

The historical evidence is that the Apostles and first Christians were in fact Catholic.   Read this   Letter to Adventists  by James Likoudis.

Historically, was Constantine the founder of the Catholic Church?   Protestants fail to validate their arguments in regard to this and keep pushing fake history.   For instance, Constantine did not make Christianity or the Catholic Church a state religion.   All Constantine did was to make it legal to practice Christianity where before it have been illegal, period, that is all he did.   For proof of this read Jon Sorensen:   HERE  .   And see this by Jim Akin:   HERE  .

You will see that the early Christians, that is, Catholic Church, in 325AD, conquered Constantine’s heretical errors, which shows the Church had power over Constantine, not Constantine over the Church, as Protestants claim.

Back To Top



Point 36

Pg. 33 says:   ‘…Council of Trent …the argument that prevailed …was the changing of the Sabbath (the day of rest). …’


Answer

This may well be one of the most pivotal subjects to point out to SDAs.   SDAs main focus is on their keeping the Jewish Sabbath day, the seventh day of the week, Saturday, based on Ex 20: 8-11.   They fail to see what the Sabbath is really all about because they have not taken the Bible as a whole.   Deuteronomy 5: 13 – 14, tells us that the Sabbath is for resting and worshiping God but then Deuteronomy 5: 15 goes on to tell us what the real purpose of the Sabbath rest is.

Deut. 5:15
Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm.   Therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

So the real purpose of the Saturday Sabbath is to remember that the Israelis were slaves in Egypt and that they had been freed by God Himself.   Sabbath is about the Chosen People remembering that they have been freed from slavery in Egypt, in other words, every Sabbath is a Passover for them.   The Sabbath of the Old Testament and the Passover in the Old Testament in truth is a prefiguring of Christ, the True Saviour of the World, who saved us from slavery to sin and death, accomplished by Christ at His Resurrection on the First day of the Week, Sunday.   So, for the Christian, the True Sabbath of Christ is Sunday, the day of Resurrection, the day when we remember our salvation from slavery to sin and death.

SDAs say that Christ kept only the Saturday Sabbath, therefore so should we all, however, Christ could not keep the Sunday Sabbath until he had accomplished His mission and then Christ kept the true Christian Sabbath, Sunday, as he promised He would, by rising from the dead, when he brought us out of slavery with ‘outreached arms’, by His Cross and Resurrection we have been freed form sin and death.   So too are we, as Deuteronomy calls us to, to keep and remember our being freed from slavery by Christ on the Day Christ freed us, Sunday.

The True Christian Sabbath is the Sabbath of Jesus Christ, Sunday, the First Day of the Week.   In the Mass the Catholic Church celebrates the Passover of Jesus Christ and keeps the True Sabbath of Christ, Sunday.

Back To Top



Point 37

Pg. 33 says:   ‘…Martin Luther dared to stand up against and reprove the Catholic Church, which he later abandoned.   He did not have a clear understanding of God’s law being changed, including the change of the day of rest…’   ‘ …Protestants have gone wrong regarding the day of rest…’.


Answer

One of the main problems with Protestantism is that every church decides for itself what it wants and they admit they or others are wrong.   Within 50 years of Luther the Protestants were saying that the fact they cannot agree among themselves would be proof they were not of God’s plan for the Church.

In 1519, more than a year after Martin Luther wrote his ninety-five thesis, writing to Pope Leo X, he said:

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity… The Roman Church is more honoured by God then all others is not to be doubted… Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church.   On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better… There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body”   (Patrick O’Hare in The Facts about Luther, 356. Ref in Crossing the Tiber by Stephen K Ray)

Again, in his book,   Crossing the Tiber  , Stephen Ray quotes   The Facts about Luther by Patrick O’Hare  , he quotes:

'Swiss Reformer John Calvin (1509 – 1564) wrote to Philip Melanchthon (1497 – 1560, Luther’s theologian):   “it is indeed important that posterity should [not] know of our differences; for it is indescribably ridiculous that we, who are in opposition to the whole world, should be, at the very beginning of the Reformation, at issue among ourselves”.'

It is important to understand that in the Catholic Church, doctrines do not change but they do develop in greater understanding, especially if they are challenged and therefore need to be more defined in order to defend their validity as doctrine.   The Catholic Church is often accused of inventing or adding beliefs not found in the Bible but really it is defining beliefs already held which have a Biblical basis to it.   An obvious example of this would be ‘The Immaculate Conception’, based on the Biblical text of the Gospel, Luke 1: 28, which tells us that Mary was: ‘Full of Grace’, therefore she was never ‘Lacking Grace’, so she cannot be with sin, since sin is a lack of Grace, but also she was ‘FULL’ of Grace, meaning there was no space for sin, not even original sin.   The Bible does not tell us that she became full of grace, but that she ‘was full of grace’.   The Bible tells us that God made her this way since heaven declares: ‘Hail Mary, full of Grace”.   It comes from pondering the Word of God in its fullness.   Such doctrines are moved by the Holy Spirit.

It is also important for Protestants and especially SDAs to read the Church Fathers, those who were appointed by the Apostles and their Apostolic decedents.   Then they will see that what the Catholic Church teaches is both Biblical and historically First Christian Teaching.   A good introductory book on the Church Fathers is:   Who Were the Church Fathers, by Marcellino D’Ambrosio  .

The SDAs pamphlet is all about celebrating Luther after 500 years but SDAs are more   Zwingly or John Calvin  than Luther.   Luther believed in sacraments including the Sacrament of the alter, both Luther and Calvin believed in infant baptism, SDAs do not.   So it is a real pick and mix.

Holding Luther up as an example for Christians to follow is problematic with Luther adding to the word of God in his translation of the Bible into German.   Stephen Ray says in his book,   Crossing the Tiber  :

'Martin Luther, in translating the Book of Romans into the German language, inserted the word “alone” to explain the word “faith”   (e.g., Rom 3: 28; 5: 1) where the Greek original did not call for it.   The pivotal text was Rom 3: 28.   The inclusion of the word “alone” radically altered the meaning of the text and Pauls thought.   Calvin said the whole of the Reformation would stand or fall on that verse and the newly devised interpretation.   This has become part of the Protestant tradition, an example of how Protestants have added to the word of God…’

Luther actually deplores Protestants deciding their own doctrines base on their own interpretations of scripture, as Stephen Ray in   Crossing the Tiber  , shows:

‘In his Commentary on the Psalms, Martin Luther wrote, “Scriptura sui ipsis interpres”, or in English, “The Bible is its own interpreter.”   It is not difficult to see where that idea led.   Even Luther quickly saw the devastating effect.   He wrote, “There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads; this one will not admit Baptism, that one rejects the Sacrament of the alter; another places another world between the present one and the day of judgement; some teach that Jesus Christ is not God.   There is not an individual, however clownish he may be, who does not put forth as prophecies his own ravings and dreams”   (cited in Leslie Rumble, Bible Quizzes to a Street Preacher [Rockford Ill.: Tan Books, 1976], 22)   See Also O’Hare, Facts about Luther, 208.   In a letter to Heinrich Zwingli, Martin Luther conceded that reformers would again have to take refuge in the Church councils in order to preserve the unity of the faith on account of the many interpretations that were given to the Scriptures   (see Epis. ad Zwingli).

The legacy of the Reformation is more than twenty-three thousand different sects and schisms (denominations), with a new one starting every day, according to the World Census of Religious Activities   (New York: U.N. Information Centre, 1989).   Any unity now would be possible only through a sovereign act of God.   The unity of the Church in the New Testament, and for the first ten centuries, was understood to be an organic, visible unity.   Apostolic tradition and the teaching authority of the Church were the internal “cement”. ‘

Note: there is an old online version of   The Facts about Luther  , in pdf format but it takes a long time to download as it is 367 pages long.

Back To Top



Point 38

Pg. 35 - 38 says:    ‘…mark of the beast…’


Answer

After having read Point 37 of this Commentary, where Luther is recorded as saying,

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity… The Roman Church is more honoured by God then all others is not to be doubted… Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church.   On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better…There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body”   (Patrick O’Hare in The Facts about Luther, 356. Ref in Crossing the Tiber by Stephen K Ray)

It is then quite odd that Luther should then have attacked the Church in calling her the ‘Harlot of Babylon’ and that for SDAs to claim her members to have the ‘Mark of the Beast’.   George Sipe, a Protestant convert to Catholicism, on his website entitled:   Convert Journal   , says of Luther:

It was Luther who first made the association of the Catholic Church to harlot of Babylon and the Pope as the Antichrist in his angry attack  On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church .   Luther declares, “ I now know of a certainty that the papacy is the kingdom of Babylon.   (See also the Lutheran Book of Concord which continues this theme).

The irony of this is that when Martin Luther removed (by first demoting) Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1 & 2 Maccabees from the Bible, he wanted to go further but his political support base objected.   On the chopping block were parts of Daniel, Ester, and all of James, Jude and Revelation.   Yes – Revelation, the same book he drew on to attack the one true Church.   Of Revelation he said that he could “in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it.”   The complete Bible, unlike Martin Luther’s subset, remains unchanged from St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation in 397AD.

What SDAs and other Protestants need to realise is that this shows Luther’s lack of trust in the Holy Spirit, who wrote the Scriptures, using the pen of men.   It shows Luther’s fight against God.   Luther ended up re-writing and editing out the Word of God.   How can Protestants’ interpretation of scripture be trusted, especially with their competing interpretations, when they reject whole swathes of the Bible as the Word of God, and refuse to have these Books in their bible version, with Martin Luther refusing to accept that Revelation was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.


Millennialism

Another problem Protestants have is that they take figurative Biblical language, such as the ‘1000 years’ from Revelation 20, and say that it is to be understood literally, and Biblical doctrines which should be taken literally, such as the Words of Christ at the Last Supper, “This is My Body, This is My Blood”, they take figuratively.

This is why, when Protestants come to identify such things as, “ The Mark of the Beast”, “The Whore of Babylon” and “End Time Prophesies” such as “Millennialism”, which are common themes among Protestants including SDAs, they clearly misinterpret scripture.   For example, the website   CUF  explains the problems with Millennialism in their article entitled:   The Church, The Millennium and the Rapture  , which sates:

Issue:
Revelation 20 speaks of Satan being bound and Christ reigning with His saints for a thousand years (a millennium).   Many Protestants understand this 1,000-year reign literally and believe that it will occur on earth in the future.   They also cite 1 Thessalonians 4: 17 and try to make an historical connection between something called “the rapture”—when Christians are “taken up”—and this millennium.   What does the Church teach regarding millennialism and the rapture?

Response:
There are three basic interpretations regarding Revelation 20 and “the millennium.”   The Church has traditionally taught one commonly known as “amillennialism,” which means that the reign of God began with Christ’s death and resurrection and the “thousand years” is a figurative number to describe the reign of His Church    ( 2 Pt. 3:8-10  ; Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 664, 668-682).

In the past two centuries, two other interpretations have become popular among Protestants.   One is called “postmillennialism,” which was big in the 19th century.   It teaches that the world is being Christianized over time and that Christ’s return will follow a long period of peace on the earth called “the millennium.”   The second is “premillennialism,” which is the most popular among Protestants of this century and is also called “millenarianism” and “chiliasm.”   Premillennialists believe that Christ is going to establish a literal reign of 1,000 years on earth between the Second Coming and the Last Judgment.   Properly understood, the “rapture” refers to Christ’s gathering His followers at the end of time.   Catholics believe that this event will happen at the general resurrection and Last Judgment, but they do not refer to the event as “the rapture.”

Discussion:
Postmillennialists, as noted, believe that the world is being Christianized over time and that Christ’s return will follow a long period of righteousness and peace on the earth called “the millennium.”   This was a very popular view in the 19th century when people had an optimistic view of world history, believing that everything was getting better and better.   This view, however, lost favor among its proponents this century, after two world wars and many atrocities provided substantial evidence of a moral decline, not an advance.   Though postmillennialists do not necessarily interpret the number 1,000 literally, they do interpret the “reign of Christ” to mean that the earth will have a “paradise-like” period before Christ’s Second Coming and the Last Judgment.

This position is problematic for many reasons.   The chief reason is that Scripture does not depict a period of worldwide Christianization before the Second Coming and the Last Judgment.   Many scriptural passages portray the time between the two comings of Christ, i.e., the age we live in, as a time of trial and tribulation for Christians.   For example, the Gospel of Matthew portrays both wheat (righteous men) and weeds (evildoers) living together in a field (the world) until the final harvest of the Last Judgment   ( Mt. 13:24-30, 36-43 ).

Premillennialism
This interpretation is currently the most popular one among Evangelical and Fundamentalist Protestants.   Like the postmillennialists, they believe in an earthly paradise of Christianization before the end of the world.   Unlike the postmillennialists, though, they believe that this paradise will take place between the Second Coming and the Last Judgment, two events which actually occur on the same day, as will be shown.   But for premillennialists, Jesus will literally be a worldwide King on earth in the future.   Many also believe that this “reign of Christ” will last, literally, one thousand years.

This position is also scripturally problematic because the Bible does not depict a 1,000-year period between Christ’s Second Coming and the Final Judgment. [1]     Scripture speaks of “this age” (in which men marry, etc.) and “the age to come” (in which Christians receive eternal life, etc.), but not of a third period between those ages. [2]     If Jesus refers to only two “ages,” and the Last Judgment occurs at the end of this age  ( Mt. 13:39 ), where is the premillennialists’ millennium?   The Last Judgment happens on the “last day” at the end of this age  ( Jn. 12:48;   Mt. 13:39 ); the resurrection of the righteous—which some call “the rapture”—occurs on the “last day” at the end of this age   ( Jn. 6:54;   Mk. 10:30  ); and these both happen on the day of Jesus’ return, i.e., “the day of the Lord.” [3]  

In the 1940s, the Vatican declared that “millenarianism,” another term for “premillennialism,” cannot be safely taught   (see Catechism, no. 676).

Premillennialists have spent countless hours and pages debating when the rapture will occur, such as before, during, or after “the tribulation.”   The problem with most of the views—with the exception of the one called “post-tribulation”—is that Jesus will only return once, not two or three times.   The Church teaches that Jesus will return once, and that the general resurrection and Last Judgment, in which Christ gathers His faithful, will follow—just as the Bible indicates.

An important thing to remember when dealing with “dispensationalist” premillennialists, is that they do not recognize the New Testament Church as the fulfillment of Old Testament Israel.   They consider the “Church Age” as one period in a string of otherwise unconnected dispensations in history, and not the continuous unfolding of a single divine plan for salvation.   Unfortunately, such are the theories conceived to compensate for a lack of continuous Christian history from Christ’s day to the present.

In contrast, Catholics believe that the Church is the new Israel, [4]     the Body of Christ, [5]     and the seed of the Kingdom [6]     to which the faithful of all covenants with God belong.   In Romans 11, Paul uses the analogy of an olive tree.   A single olive tree is the Israel of God, from which natural and wild branches (Jews and Gentiles) may be cut and to which natural and wild branches (Jews and Gentiles) may be grafted.   There are not two separate trees.   As Christ is the fulfillment of all previous covenants  ( Mt. 5:17 ), the Church (His Body) is the fulfillment of Israel. [7]  

Amillennialism
“The Church of today, of the present, is the Kingdom of Christ and the Kingdom of Heaven” —St. Augustine

Amillennialism, which corresponds to the Catholic understanding, interprets the 1000-year reign of Christ in Revelation 20 more symbolically.   (After all, when John refers to binding a spirit like Satan with “chains,” the language can only be figurative.)   According to this view, the millennium is not an earthly golden age of total Christianization, but rather the present period of Christ’s rule through His Church: “Behold, the Kingdom of God is in the midst of you” (   Lk. 17:21 ) .   Christ reigns right now with His saints in Heaven, [8]     and the Church on earth participates in that reign in a way that will be fulfilled—fully realized or completed—at the Second Coming.   The Church, the Kingdom, the Israel of God, and the millennium all refer to the same thing.   Until the fulfillment of the Kingdom already planted   (   Lk. 13:18-19 ) , the righteous and the evildoers will remain on earth.

It has clearly been more than a thousand years since Jesus’ reign through the Church began.   The number “1,000” is often used figuratively in scriptural writings to show a vast number conveying completeness.   For example,   Psalm 50:10  tells us God owns “the cattle on a thousand hills,” but we know that in reality God owns all cattle everywhere, which would be a number much bigger than a thousand hills.   Remember also the words of St. Peter: “[W]ith the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”   (  cf. 2 Pt. 3:8-10  ) .   To God in eternity all time is present, and we must understand “1,000” figuratively, remembering the popular phrase “God works in His Own time.”

But what of Satan being “bound” during this period?   Amillennialists believe that Satan is already “bound” in a sense because he cannot prevent the spread of the Gospel—which liberates people from his control—throughout the world.   Although Satan can tempt us as individuals, he is unable to force anyone’s will away from God   (  Rom 8:38-39  ) , which means he is already hindered in “deceiving the nations.”   Jesus says that the “strong man” (Satan) must be bound before his house can be plundered, i.e., before Jesus can rescue souls from Satan’s grip.   He further says, “If it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you”   (  Mt. 12:28-29  ,   Lk. 11:20  ) .   So the binding of Satan and the coming of God’s Kingdom must have already taken place in some sense.   The Kingdom’s full inauguration came through Christ’s death and resurrection, and that reality became more manifest to the world on Pentecost through the Church   (Catechism, no. 1076).

Although Catholics do not generally call their eschatological view “amillennialism,” which is somewhat of a misnomer, this is the Church’s teaching regarding Revelation 20, a teaching, as always, in harmony with the scriptural data   (Catechism, nos. 668-682).

--------------
[1]   Mt. 16:27 ,   25:31-46 .
[2]  See   Mk. 10:29-30  and   Lk. 20:34-35  .
[3]   2 Pet. 3:10 ;   Mt. 16:27 ,   25:31-46 .
[4]   Gal. 6:16 ,   Eph. 2:11-13 ,   Rom. 9:6-8 .
[5]   Col. 1:18 ,   1 Cor. 12:12-13 .
[6]   Lk. 13:18-21 .
[7] See CUF Faith Fact   “Rock Solid: The Salvation History of the Church.”   This Faith Fact explains clearly and in detail how the Church is the new Israel, the prophesied restoration of the House of David.
[8] Revelation 20 does not say Christ will reign as an earthly King.
--------------


So, in Psalm 50, verse: 10, God says, “I own the cattle on a 1000 hills”.   Does this mean that God owns all the cattle only on a thousand hills or is God really saying that He is Creator and he owns all of creation, all cattle on all hills are His, and not just on all hills, but all mountains and valleys and barns too?   In other words, the biblical language of ‘1000’ means God owns ‘everything’, a huge number, a countless number, as numerous as the grains of sand on the sea shore.   So too is the 1000 year reign of Revelation 20 a countless long period of time.   A thousand, or a millennium, is a biblically undefined large number.   This long reign of Christ has already begun.   It began at the Incarnation of Christ and the Final Judgement will be only a day because it is the Day of Judgement.

Since the Incarnation of Christ, that is, God the Son taking on human form, being fully God and fully man, conceived in the womb of Mary His Mother, the New Testament tells us, that since the First Coming of Christ in the womb of Mary, we are already in the ‘last days’, as said by St Paul in   Hebrews 1: 1 - 2  , and as the   CERC website  shows.

And as St. Peter says in Acts:

Acts 2: 15 – 17
“For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only the third hour of the day; but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel: And it shall be in the last days, ‘God says, then I will pour forth my spirit on all mankind…”

So, we are in the period of the ‘last days’, right now, since the Incarnation of Jesus Christ over 2000 years ago.   The ‘1000 years reign’ or the millennium, is from the Incarnation through to now, the present day, and will continue until the Day of Judgement.   The Magi brought Christ gold, because He is King, and he conquered death by His Resurrection and he Reigns Victorious over death right now.   The Church of Jesus Christ is the New Jerusalem ‘come down from heaven’, founded on the Apostles by Christ and confirmed at Pentecost, through the Holy Spirit, the New Jerusalem which John saw, recorded in Revelation 20, not a prophesy for the future but a present day reality, because the Old Jerusalem with its Temple and its Old Sacrifice has been destroyed and has passed away.   The New Jerusalem and the New Temple, the Church of Jesus Christ, is not separate from but is the fulfilment of the People of Israel founded by God, with the Gentiles ‘grafted in', the New Israel.

The New Jerusalem and the New Temple, the Church of Jesus Christ, has been established with its New and Permanent Sacrifice, once for all by Christ, of Himself as Victim, both Victim and Priest, on the Cross, which we have access to through Baptism, because Baptism forgives sins, and through the Mass, where that Sacrifice once for all is made present, here and now, so we too can share in the Body and Blood of Christ at Mass, a share in heaven here on earth.   Catholics believe we begin our heavenly life here on earth through Baptism and share in the heavenly banquet here and now in the Eucharist at Mass.   This is why Mass is Everything.   Here at Mass, every tear IS WIPED AWAY, because it is Him we encounter.

As Carl E Olson says in his article entitled,   The End of the World As We Know it  :

The Eucharist is the Marriage Supper of the Lamb
All of the sacraments have an eschatological character and purpose—that is, they are oriented to our eternal communion with God.   This is especially true of the Eucharist, for it is the “pledge of glory” and “an anticipation of the heavenly glory”   (CCC, 1419, 1402).   It is the true body and blood of the Risen Lord who transforms humanity through the most holy sacrament, preparing man for the beatific life and the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:7-9).

The New Jerusalem is the Bride of Christ, the Church.  Catholics believe that the Church is present both on earth and in heaven at the same time as all Christians who are in Christ Jesus are part of His Body the Church.

Millennialism was roundly condemned at the First Council of Constantinople in 381.


The Whore of Babylon

An anti-Catholic writer, David Hunt, is a big promoter of the idea of the Roman Catholic Church being the Whore of Babylon, but James Akin demolished this theory completely as Carl Olson says in his article,   The Time is Near  :

Fundamentalists such as Hunt claim that since Rome is built on seven hills the Catholic Church is therefore the woman-who is a city-who sits on "seven mountains" (Rev. 17:9)-in other words, Vatican City.   Yet Vatican City doesn't sit on any of the famed seven hills of Rome, as James Akin has pointed out: "Vatican City is not built on seven hills, but only one: Vatican Hill, which is not one of the seven upon which ancient Rome was built.   Those hills are on the east side of the Tiber river; Vatican Hill is on the west" ("Hunt-ing the Whore of Babylon," This Rock, September-October 1994).

James Akin demolishes all nine of Hunt’s ‘Whore of Babylon’ augments listed in in his article:   ‘HUNT’-ING THE WHORE OF BABYLON – Part 1 and Part 2  and says:

When we bring in the distinction between Vatican City — the city where the Catholic Church is headquartered — and the city of Rome, Hunt’s postulate is even more unlikely, since Vatican City is not built on seven hills, but on only one: Vatican Hill.   This hill is not one of the seven Rome was constructed upon.   Those seven (the Quirinal, Viminal, Esquiline, Caelian, Aventine, Palatine, and Capitoline hills) are located on the east side of the Tiber River.   Vatican Hill is located on the west side.

Elsewhere in the article James Akin also states that:   “there was no Vatican City.   The Vatican became a separate state only in 1929, when the Holy See and Italy signed the Lateran Treaty.”

So the Vatican City is on only one hill not seven and is on the wrong side of the Tiber to be the Biblical Whore of Babylon.   James Akin goes on to tell us that the Bible shows that Babylon the Great of Revelation 11 is Jerusalem, where Christ was crucified, and that pagan Rome martyred Christians not Christian Rome; that the colour of vestments used by Christians are not of pagan Rome but are found in the Old Testament Leviticus, Numbers and Exodus, to be the colours used in the Temple and worn by the Priests of Israel, founded by God Himself.

James Akin goes on to conclude:

'Soon after making Christianity a tolerated religion in the early fourth century, Constantine moved the capital of the empire to his new city, Constantinople.   It, not Rome, ruled over the Christian empire.   In the seventh century large amounts of territory were lost to the Muslims, removing from Rome any prospect of its ruling them.   The eleventh-century schism by the Eastern Orthodox churches removed still more territory from Rome’s potential rule.   The Protestant movement took away northern Europe and the British Isles.   Emerging nationalism in France and other countries removed lands over which popes enjoyed some temporal authority.   Only the tiny Papal States, located in central Italy, were left, and they vanished in 1870.   Today Vatican City rules nothing but itself.'

Isaiah 1: 10 calls Jerusalem Sodom, and it is where Christ is crucified, so Old Apostate Jerusalem which has rejected Jesus and crucified Him is the Whore of Babylon.   In Isaiah 1: 21 God Himself calls Jerusalem the Harlot.


Note  :
Speaking of Babylon, Protestant churches or individuals who rejected the SDAs Second Coming of Christ prediction of 1844 were right to do so and the SDAs were wrong about this event and date, as they had been on the previous dates.   However, that did not stop Ellen White claiming that any Protestant church or individual who rejected the SDA prediction of the Second Coming of Christ, were condemned by her, and she said they were also condemned by God, as being :    ‘Babylon’, and that these churches and individuals were untied to Satan.   She claimed them to be Babylon and unconverted.   Ellen White also said it was God’s fault that He failed come when the SDAs predicted He would, and she said that God used this ‘deception of God’ to accomplish His work.   In reality, God does not make false predictions or false messages, Satan does.   Ellen White and the SDAs were the ones duped.   See Ellen White's    Early Writings  23.   Also see webpage    http://www.nonegw.org/egw11.shtml   statements 12, 9 and 16.

Regarding Revelation 14 and the Second Angel message which says that ‘Babylon has fallen’, Ex SDA member, Dirk Anderson, identifies who or what ‘Babylon’ is, and he puts it very succinctly on his website   Nonsda   under the section on the   Three Angles Message  , he says:

The second [Angle] message tells us that Babylon is fallen.   The Bible very clearly identifies who Babylon is.   In Revelation 18, Babylon is described as a female who commits fornication with the kings of the earth (Rev. 18:3).   This could only refer to the "whore" of Revelation 17.   Rev. 17:18 says the "whore" is "that great city."17   The "great city" is identified in Rev. 11:8 as the city where "our Lord was crucified."   All Christians agree that Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem.   To review more evidence proving this point,   Amazing Fiction  .


Mark of the Beast

Having exposed Protestants Millennialism and the Whore of Babylon theories as unfounded, SDAs ‘Mark of the Beast theory’ as Sunday Worship, is also shown to be unfounded.

The NIV Bible Introduction to Revelation says that we know that from as early as Justin the Martyr in the second century AD that the author of Revelation was St John the Apostle of the New Testament and was the son of Zebedee as in Matt 10: 2.   If Justin the Martyr is used to authenticate the author of Revelation then his writings can be used to help us understand that the Earl Church of Christ met on the First Day of the Week for the Eucharist, as Justin the Martyr says, and that the Early Church believed as do Catholics today, in the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, and that the Eucharist is the Real Presents of Christ, and that Sunday worship is not the sign or Mark of the Beast of Revelation, as SDAs would have us believe, but that Sunday Eucharist is a sign of the True Church of Jesus Christ.

How can the Beast of Revelation be truly identified?   Revelation says the name of the Beast has a number which adds up to 666.   In Jim Akin’s article entitled:   666  , he shows how Nero’s name in Hebrew adds up to 666.

In another article by Jim Akin entitled:   The Beast of Revelation  , he lists a number of problems in trying to claim that the Catholic Church is the Beast and he shows that the Beast is unlike that of Daniel 7:

‘One problem with this reasoning is that it focuses only on part of the symbolism in Revelation 13.   Not only does the beast John sees have ten horns, like Daniel’s fourth beast, it also has a body like a leopard  (13:2a), like Daniel’s third beast (7:6), feet like a bear’s (13:2b), like Daniel’s second beast (7:5), and a mouth like a lion, like Daniel’s first beast (7:4).   The beast John sees thus incorporates symbolism from all of Daniel’s four beasts, making it impossible to simply identify it with the fourth of the series.’

Akin’s article about Nero and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in AD 70 show that the Beast of the Book of Revelation refers to this occasion and time, that is, the first century.   There is in Revelation a reference to the Mark of the Beast and commerce which is covered by Akin in another comprehensive article entitled: Hunting the whore of Babylon  .


A comment on both the Beast and the Whore of Revelation, the Beast being Pagan Rome of the first century and the Whore being Apostate Jerusalem, brings some clarity to the study of Revelation.   In an article by CA entitled:   The Whore of Babylon  , it says:

Continuing in Revelation, the angel begins to explain to John the woman’s symbolism:   "This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while"   (Rev. 17:9–10).

Fundamentalists argue that these seven mountains must be the seven hills of ancient Rome.   However the Greek word here, horos, is almost always translated "mountain" in Scripture.   Mountains are often symbols of kingdoms in Scripture (cf. Ps. 68:15; Dan. 2:35; Obad. 8–21; Amos 4:1, 6:1), which might be why the seven heads also symbolize seven kings.   The mountains could stand for a series of seven kings, five of whom have already fallen.

This passage gives us a key rule of Bible interpretation which is often denied by Fundamentalists:   A symbol does not have to refer to one and only one thing.   Here Scripture itself tells us that the heads refer both to seven mountains and seven kings, meaning the symbol has multiple fulfilments.   Thus there is not a one-to-one correspondence in the Bible between symbols and their referents.

Also, the mountains could be a reference to pagan Rome, yet the Whore could still be a reference to apostate Jerusalem.   In this case, her sitting on the Beast would not indicate a geographical location but an alliance between the two powers.   The Whore (Jerusalem) would be allied with the Beast (Rome) in persecuting "the saints and . . . martyrs of Jesus."   (Note that the Whore also sits on many waters, which we are told are many peoples, [cf. 17:15].   The context makes it clear that here her "sitting" on something does not refer to a geographical location.)

This passage gives us one reason why the Catholic Church cannot be the Whore.   We are told that the heads "are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come."   If five of these kings had fallen in John’s day and one of them was still in existence, then the Whore must have existed in John’s day.   Yet Christian Rome and Vatican City did not.   However, pagan Rome did have a line of emperors, and the majority of commentators see this as the line of kings to which 17:10 refers.   Five of these emperors are referred to as having already fallen, one as still reigning in John’s time, and another yet to come.   Since Jerusalem had no such line of kings in the first century, this gives us evidence that the Beast (though not the Whore) is Rome.

After having written these 38 points regarding the SDA pamphlet which celebrates the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther’s Reformation I came upon a website which shows that Sunday worship is the True Christian Sabbath.

Scripture itself, Bible prophecy, actually shows that the Saturday Sabbath would be done away with as the following website entitled:   Is Saturday the True Sabbath?  ,

We will see later, in our survey of the Church Fathers on the subject, that Scriptural support for the abrogation of the Seventh-Day-Sabbath was hardly lacking; it was foretold generations before Christ in the holy prophets, so it can hardly be said that the change was made solely on the authority of the Church.   But even if it were so, even if our only support for the change rested on the Church alone, this too would be Scriptural, if we would only recall the words of Our Lord to the “Magisterium” of the infant Church: “Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven” (Matt. 18:18, emphasis added).   If any authority on earth has the jurisdiction to make these changes, to “loose” us from the requirements of circumcision and the Seventh-Day-Sabbath, it is the Church.

Thus we can establish at least the basic principle to support our case:   1) the fact that the Seventh-Day-Sabbath is called “perpetual” need not necessarily mean that it could never be abrogated, because the covenant of circumcision also was called a “perpetual sign,” and it was abrogated;   2) Our Lord bequeathed to the Church the authority to make precisely these kinds of disciplinary and juridical decisions, which authority we can see being exercised at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.

And it continues:

Still later in this chapter we read, “And after eight days, again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them.   Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said: Peace be to you” (John 20:26, emphasis added).   This is an exact literary repetition of verse 19, with the exception that it is not now “the first of the week,” but “after eight days.”   That is to say, this event (the story goes on to relate how Our Lord revealed Himself to St. Thomas for the first time) took place — to use Catholic terminology — on the octave of Easter Sunday.   The Resurrection, the commissioning of the Apostles, and the revelation to St. Thomas all took place on Sunday.   If we may be granted a bit of liberty in interpreting the texts of St. John’s Gospel with a hint of “mysticism,” we may certainly say that St. John wishes us to understand that Sunday is the day upon which we meet the Risen Christ; Mary Magdalen met Him on that day; the Apostles met Him on that day; St. Thomas met Him in a special way on that day; we too will meet Him on this day (or so St. John seems to be relating to us by implication).

The SDAs are quick to point out that the Apostles continued to give honor to the Seventh-Day Sabbath by going up to the temple every Sabbath day.   But there is no reason the Apostles should not have done this.   They were still Jews, after all, and the radical break with Judaism did not happen until God Himself radically broke the Jewish religion by sending the Romans to destroy the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD. Until that time, there was a necessary period of overlap, during which these born-and-bred Jews (who also happened to be Apostles of the New Covenant) did what was natural to them: they went up to the temple to pray at the appointed times.   (The temple was still a holy place, the Old Covenant ritual observances — as the Church explains it — were dead but not deadly.)   What they most assuredly did not do, as we may infer from St. Paul’s blistering rebuke of the Galatians, is treat these Jewish customs as binding and necessary for salvation.   As the Church moved on into history, many Jewish converts continued to practice certain Jewish customs, and the Church tolerated this (though, significantly, treating it as a weakness) so long as no one said that these customs were binding or salvific.

And it continues:

While some Jewish converts continued to observe the Seventh-Day-Sabbath, it also is true that the new Christians met together to worship their Risen Lord on Sunday, the day of His Resurrection.   Thus, we read in Acts 20 that “on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with [the believers in Troas] … And he continued his speech until midnight … And a certain young man named Eutychus, sitting on the window, being oppressed with a deep sleep . . . by occasion of his sleep fell from the third loft down and was taken up dead.   To whom, when Paul had gone down, he laid himself upon him and, embracing him, said: Be not troubled, for his soul is in him.   Then going up and breaking bread and tasting, and having talked a long time to them, until daylight, so he departed”   (Acts 20:7-11, emphasis added).

I have taken the time to quote a good portion of this story, because there is something mystical in the whole thing.   Not only do we have the mention of “the first day of the week” combined with the practice of meeting together as an assembly “to break bread” (the early Church’s term for the Mass), we also see several interesting motifs.   One scholar of St. Luke’s writings says that “this gesture [of breaking bread] is closely related to the ‘death’ and the ‘resurrection’ of Eutychus. . . . We note also the imagery of the night and the dawn, related to the negative moment and the positive moment, respectively.”[21] Thus in this single narrative, we have the Eucharist, coupled with a kind of “death” and “resurrection,” which takes place in the context of a transition from the night to the dawn, all on the “first day of the week” (not to mention the seemingly-superfluous detail that the young man fell “from the third loft”)!   This may not be an explicit text that plainly says “the seventh day Sabbath was abrogated in favor of a Sunday Sabbath,” but it is more than enough proof for those who have eyes to see.

And it continues:

At this point, we will examine claims of the SDAs that it was a pope or a Church council which, in the mid-fourth century at the earliest, imposed the exchange of the Seventh-Day-Sabbath for the Sunday Sabbath, thus fulfilling the prophecy of Daniel concerning the anti-Christ who would “think to change” the holy law.   We may begin with the witness of St. Ignatius of Antioch, writing around 110 AD (within living memory of the Apostles, and within a mere ten years of the death of St. John):

If then those who had walked in ancient practices attained unto newness of hope, no longer observing Sabbaths but fashioning their lives after the Lord’s day, on which our life also arose through Him and through His death . . . if this be so, how shall we be able to live apart from Him?[22] (emphasis added)

What is most noteworthy in this passage is that St. Ignatius specifically contrasts the Old Covenant “Sabbaths” with “the Lord’s day,” which is then identified with the day of His Resurrection.   This is to the point because the SDAs often claim that every reference to “the Lord’s day” in the New Testament must be assumed to be referring to the Seventh-Day-Sabbath, since that was the Lord’s day in the Old Covenant and there is no Scriptural warrant for calling Sunday “the Lord’s day.”   Preble, for example, says “Rev. i. 10, is the only other place that can be construed to favor the first day — John says ‘I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day.’ — Now, who knows whether he meant the first or the seventh day?   I think the latter, because it is called ‘the Sabbath of the Lord thy God,’ but the first, is nowhere called so!!”[23]   Here, however, we have the witness of a New Testament Christian who lived during the episcopal reign of St. John (whose words in Apoc. 1:10 are here under dispute), who no doubt studied under St. John before the Apostle’s exile, and who afterwards became himself the bishop of St. John’s churches in Asia Minor.[24]   St. Ignatius gives us explicit testimony that in this age of the Church “the Lord’s day” referred to Sunday, and not to the old “Sabbaths.”

So where is the Old Testament prophecy of the eighth day being the new Sabbath?

In his epistle, St. Barnabas, companion of St. Paul (and one of the seventy-two disciples of Our Lord), quotes from Isaiah 1:13, “Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure,” and comments, “Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but . . . I shall make a beginning of the eighth day . . . Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead.”

Amazing as it may seem I quote only a small portion of this tract entitled: Dies Domini: Is Saturday the True Sabbath?   so SDAs need to read the whole thing.

Further comment from the   CNA  website provides a passage which shows the teaching of the Ellen White, Founder of the SDAs, in a booklet with a collection of excerpts from her book, The Great Controversy, is based on inaccurate information when she claims Sunday worship is the Mark of the Beast. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/apologetics/catholic-doctrines-and-practices/the-sabbath-or-the-lords-day/

The   CNA  website says:

The early Christian writers also bear witness to the observance of the Lord's Day (Sunday) over the Hebrew Sabbath (Saturday).   The (SDA) booklet attempts to discredit the historical writings of Eusebius in the fourth century by claiming collusion with Emperor Constantine; however, we have no need to rely on Eusebius.   We can directly cite the writings of Christians who lived in the first century - centuries before Eusebius or Constantine.   Even though these writings do not have the same authority as the Bible, they are still reliable historical sources - preserving the thoughts, beliefs and lifestyle of Christians during the first century.   These writings include the Didache (a church manual written by the Apostles during the 1st century), the Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100 A.D.) and the letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch who was martyred in Rome before 110 A.D.   Translations of these classic Christian writings can be found at the local public or university library.   The following quotes were cited from Early Christian Writings (Penguin Classics, 1987).


Conclusion

So, as stated above, the writings of First Century Christens are a witness and are evidence to help us understand that the Early Church of Christ met on the First Day of the Week for the Eucharist, as Justin the Martyr says, and that the Early Church believed as do Catholics today, in the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, and that the Eucharist is the Real Presents of Christ, and that Sunday worship is not the sign or Mark of the Beast of Revelation, as SDAs would have us believe, but that Sunday Eucharist is a sign of the True Church of Jesus Christ.

And, as mention in point 36 above about Deuteronomy 5: 15 and that this may well be one of the most pivotal subjects to point out to SDAs.   SDAs main focus is on their keeping the Jewish Sabbath day, the seventh day of the week, Saturday, based on Ex 20: 8-11.   They fail to see what the Sabbath is really all about because they have not taken the Bible as a whole.   Deuteronomy 5: 13 – 14, tells us that the Sabbath is for resting and worshiping God but then Deuteronomy 5: 15 goes on to tell us what the real purpose of the Sabbath rest is.

Deut. 5:15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm.   Therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

So the real purpose of the Saturday Sabbath is to remember that the Israelis were slaves in Egypt and that they had been freed by God Himself.   Sabbath is about the Chosen People remembering that they have been freed from slavery in Egypt, in other words, every Sabbath is a Passover for them.   The Sabbath of the Old Testament and the Passover in the Old Testament in truth is a prefiguring of Christ, the True Saviour of the World, who saved us from slavery to sin and death, accomplished by Christ at His Resurrection on the First day of the Week, Sunday.   So, for the Christian, the True Sabbath of Christ is Sunday, the day of Resurrection, the day when we remember our salvation from slavery to sin and death.

SDAs say that Christ kept only the Saturday Sabbath, therefore so should we all, however, Christ could not keep the Sunday Sabbath until he had accomplished His mission and then Christ kept the true Christian Sabbath, Sunday, as he promised He would, by rising from the dead, when he brought us out of slavery with ‘outreached arms’, by His Cross and Resurrection we have been freed form sin and death.   So too are we, as Deuteronomy calls us to, to keep and remember our being freed from slavery by Christ on the Day Christ freed us, Sunday.

The True Christian Sabbath is the Sabbath of Jesus Christ, Sunday, the First Day of the Week.   In the Mass the Catholic Church celebrates the Passover of Jesus Christ and keeps the True Sabbath of Christ, Sunday.


Re-Cap

  1. There is no millennium after the Second Coming of Christ.   The wheat will grow with the weeds until Christ’s return.   Christ said he would return and then Judge, and separate the sheep from the goats, on the Last Day, which is His Second Coming.

  2. The millennium is already here as of Christ Jesus’s First Coming, His Incarnation, and 1000 years of Revelation 20 means a long period of time, from His Incarnation until his Second Coming.

  3. Jesus Christ already reigns as King, born a king to die, and reigns victorious over sin and death as of his death and resurrection.   John 16 : 33 Jesus say, ‘.. I have overcome the world,’ so He is already victorious.

  4. Jesus’s Second Coming is the Last Day, there are no more time after this.   His Second Coming is the End of Time.   The bodies of those who have already died and are in either heaven or hell will have their bodied join them.   Those who have not yet died will be judged.   Those who have already died have already been judged by God.   Heaven and hell are outside of time already.   The End of Time is the End of the World as the beginning of the World is the Beginning of Time.

  5. The Church of Jesus Christ is the New Jerusalem come down from heaven already, definitively established on earth by Jesus Christ.

  6. There is a New Heaven and a New Earth, here and now, as of Christ’s Resurrection, heaven has been opened to us as of the Resurrection and Christ’ kingdom is on earth already established when Christ established His Church.   Jesus Christ says the Kingdom of God is within you.

  7. We live in the Kingdom of God, right here right now, when we become members of the Church of Jesus Christ, through Baptism, and we share in the union of God and have a taste of heaven when we participate in the Eucharist.   The Eucharis is a taste of the Marriage supper of the Lamb.

  8. The Vatican City is the site of St Peter’s death and is not the site of the Whore of Babylon.   The Vatican City is not build on the Seven Hills of Rome and is the wrong side of the Tiber.   Nero, and others who came after him, was the one who persecuted Christians and was based on the Seven Hills of Rome.   Nero’s name in Hebrew has the numerical value of 666.   Both Nero’s Rome and the Old Jerusalem which refused Christ and even crucified Him.   Isaiah 1: 10 calls Jerusalem Sodom, and is where Christ is crucified, so Old Apostate Jerusalem which has rejected Jesus and crucified Him is the Whore of Babylon.   In Isaiah 1: 21 God Himself calls Jerusalem the Harlot.

  9. The Anti-Christ is anyone who rejects Christ as Lord and anyone who tries to predict His Second Coming as not being the end of time.


Further Reading

  1. Who is the Whore of Babylon?


  2. The Mark of the Beast


  3. Are We Living in the Last days?


  4. The Beast of Revelation


  5. 666


  6. Common Misinterpretations Of The Book Of Revelation,


  7. The Hunt-ing of the Whore


  8. Best Info on Catholic Faith Explained with Biblical References.    and example of this is:


  9. CNA commentary of SDA Founder, Ellen White’s book: The Great Controversy.


Back To Top



Topics:

Atonement

Original Sin

Back To Top



Atonement

The Atonement – Catholic Belief vs The Reformers

The Catholic belief of the Atonement is reflective of the Bible.   Jesus says that He does not have His life taken away from Him but He freely gives it up.

Jesus says in John 10: 18,

No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord.   I have power to take it up again.   I have received this command from my Father.

The Reformers claim that in Christ’s passion and death, Christ was punished by God the Father for our sins but Catholic belief confirms what the Bible says, that Jesus freely laid down His life, of His own free will, as a sacrifice for all the world, out of love for all mankind and out of love for the Father, to do the Father’s will, not as a punishment from God the Father, because God the Father does not punish the innocent, and Christ was innocent and is innocent.   For a full explanation see the website:  Called to Communion, and the article entitled:   Catholic and Reformed conceptions of Atonement .   This website answers questions on various Biblical texts Reformers use to support their view.

However, as for the rather complicated issue of SDAs understanding of the Atonement, there is a very good explanation and expose found on the website   https://www.nonsda.org/  .   Specifically on the SDA teaching about the Sanctuary  :   https://www.nonsda.org/study5.shtml  ,   and on the SDA teaching about the Investigative Judgment  :   https://www.nonsda.org/study4.shtml  .

In Brief:

  1. Christ never entered the Most Holy of Holies in 1844 - He was already there as from His Ascension because He Ascended to the Right Hand of the Father Who is sat on the Mercy Seat and the Mercy Seat is in the Most Holy of Holies.

  2. Sins are not transferred to the Most Holy of Holies for Christ to cleanse but confessed sins are blotted out on the Cross of Christ.

  3. As a doctrine, Investigative Judgment was invented by Ellen White to compensate for the SDAs three times failure to predict Christ’s Second Coming, spring 1843, spring 1844 and October 22, 1844.

    The SDA Church teaches that which Ellen White taught, that the Atonement of Jesus Christ began October 22, 1844, with the ‘Investigative Judgment’.  However, the King James Bible (KJV), Romans 5: 11 reads:

    11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the  atonement  .

    So, how can it be that St Paul, writing the Epistle to the Romans in the years of the mid 50s, around 55/56 AD?   This being the case, how can the Apostle Paul claim to have ‘received the atonement’ in 55 AD when Ellen White teaches that the Atonement of Jesus Christ did not begin until 1844, well after the death of the Apostle Paul?

    Read the full story here   http://truthorfables.com/Day_of_Atonement.htm

    SDAs Investigative Judgment is without Biblical foundation.   This alone ends the SDAs very foundation.   SDAs no longer have a reason to exist.

Back To Top



Original Sin

The Rest Of This Response Is Still Being Written.

Back To Top









Light of Christ
© Copyright - All Rights Reserved 2005 - 2017 inclusive.