3 Falsehoods About the Ten Commandments

“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” Depending on who’s counting, that’s the Eighth or Ninth of the Ten Commandments. Either way, it’s part of the Ten Commandments, which makes it both ironic and unfortunate that so many falsehoods are spread about the Catholic Church and the Ten Commandments. Here are three that you might have heard.

James Tissot, Moses Destroys the Tables of the Ten Commandments (c. 1900)
James Tissot, Moses Destroys the Tables of the Ten Commandments (c. 1900)

1. No, Pope Francis Didn’t Change the Ten Commandments

There’s an Internet hoax claiming that Pope Francis is going to revise the Ten Commandments. As should be obvious from (a) an ounce of common sense, or (b) actually reading the article, this is false. I mean, here’s what the article is claiming:

Pope Francis said the Seventh Commandment, prohibiting adultery and, among other things, homosexuality, has been removed entirely, as instructed by God, in order to extend “God’s grace to all His children.” […]

Lastly, the Eleventh Commandment disallows personal idolization and the glorification of one’s self over God. Using the Kardashians, a highly publicized celebrity family, as an example, Pope Francis said, “Selfies are an abomination in the eyes of our Lord.”

You think that if Pope Francis had announced something like this, changing the Ten Commandments and declaring adultery and homosexuality no longer sins, you would be reading about in on a single website that you’ve never heard of before? You don’t think that might be headline news?

Plus, the Kardashian pop shot (pope shot?) is obviously a joke. And not a joke that the pope would make, given that he hasn’t watched TV since 1990, and thus hasn’t exactly been keeping up with the Kardashians.

According to the story, Francis said this during Mass in Guayaquil, Ecuador, on July 6, with over a million people in attendance. If you fell for this story, ask yourself: wait, there weren’t two people who thought, “Hey, I should say something about this online”?

Or maybe ask, “Does the Vatican publish the pope’s homilies online?” Because yes, they do. Here’s his homily in Guayaquil, Ecuador, on July 6. Sorry to disappoint, but it’s got exactly zero references to the Ten Commandments.

Pope-Francis-selfie
Also, about that “Selfies are an abomination in the eyes of our Lord” bit…

As ten seconds of research would have revealed, the website that ran this story, Real News Right Now, is also running stories claiming that the White House and Capitol were evacuated on Wednesday because of UFOs, and that yesterday, “American and European Protestant leaders met with Pope Francis last week to finalize the reunification of the two churches under the Holy See.” According to the article, the Anglican Church, Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, etc. all joined the Roman Catholic Church. You can read all about it here, or save your time and not bother, because it’s obviously a stupid hoax.

Given how stupid this is, and that sites like Snopes have already debunked it, you might be wondering why I’m bothering. Two reasons. First, because it’s been shared over 34,000 times on Facebook, and “liked” more than 44,000 times. To me, this means that some of us will still apparently believe anything that’s written on the Internet. So here I am, writing on the Internet: use your brain, and stop spreading this stupid garbageNow you have to, because I said it on the Internet. No more excuses.

The second reason is because the comments on both the original article and the Snopes link showed that people were willing to believe this obvious falsehood because they already believe a lot of ridiculous tripe about the papacy and the Church. One of the commenters explained that the story was believable because Catholics think the pope’s words are equal to the Bible (nope, nope, nope: the pope is infallible under very particular circumstances, and Dei Verbum 10 explicitly states that “This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.”). Another commenter added that the Church removed the Second Commandment (which I’ll discuss in a moment). In other words, having believed a whole pack of lies about the Church, they were primed to believe another, no matter how ridiculous.

That’s not just stupid, it’s evil. In the digital age, it’s so easy to share first, fact-check later. Don’t. Jesus Christ says in Matthew 12:36-37, “I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” You don’t want to stand before the Judgment Seat of God explaining why you falsely witnessed against Pope Francis because you were too lazy or incredulous to figure out that this sort of junk is slander, not news.

Maerten de Vos, Moses with the Tablets of the Law in the Midst of Israel (detail) (1575)
Maerten de Vos, Moses with the Tablets of the Law in the Midst of Israel (detail) (1575)

2. No, the Church Didn’t Remove One of the Ten Commandments.

Okay, so what do we make of this claim that the Catholic Church “removed” one of the Commandments? Groups like this one often claim that the Catholic Church removed the Second Commandment, and I’ve been asked about it by enough Protestants to know that this is a widespread error.

So here’s what you need to know: the Ten Commandments are listed twice in Scripture (Ex. 20 and Deut. 5), but the ordering is slightly different. Either way, more than ten things are commanded, and the Bible doesn’t number them. Take a look at Deuteronomy 5:6-21:

  • I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
  • Thou shalt not have strange gods in my sight.
  • Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any things, that are in heaven above, or that are in the earth beneath, or that abide in the waters under the earth.
  • Thou shalt not adore them, and thou shalt not serve them. For I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon their children unto the third and fourth generation, to them that hate me, And shewing mercy unto many thousands, to them that love me, and keep my commandments.
  • Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for he shall not be unpunished that taketh his name upon a vain thing.
  • Observe the day of the sabbath, to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.
  • Six days shalt thou labour, and shalt do all thy works.
  • The seventh is the day of the sabbath, that is, the rest of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not do any work therein, thou nor thy son nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant nor thy maidservant, nor thy ox, nor thy ass, nor any of thy beasts, nor the stranger that is within thy gates: that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest, even as thyself.
  • Remember that thou also didst serve in Egypt, and the Lord thy God brought thee out from thence with a strong hand, and a stretched out arm. Therefore hath he commanded thee that thou shouldst observe the sabbath day.
  • Honour thy father and mother, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee, that thou mayst live a long time, and it may be well with thee in the land, which the Lord thy God will give thee.
  • Thou shalt not kill.
  • Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
  • And thou shalt not steal.
  • Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.
  • Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife:
  • nor his house,
  • nor his field,
  • nor his manservant,
  • nor his maidservant,
  • nor his ox,
  • nor his ass,
  • nor any thing that is his.

Recall that chapter and verse numbers don’t come around until the second millennium of Christianity.  So Christians and Jews were left with the task of grouping those into Ten Commandments, in order to figure out where the numbers belong. And guess what? Different people and groups came up with different conclusions. On the Jewish side, Philo, the Jewish Talmud, and the Septuagint all number the Ten Commandments differently. On the Christian side, Augustine, Luther, and Calvin all disagree with one another.

Bear in mind: this is literally a dispute over the numbering, numbering which isn’t found in the inspired text itself. The conspiracy theorists claim that the Church removed the Second Commandment to make idolatry okay. But the prohibition against idolatry is still in the Ten Commandments: we just list it as part of the First Commandment. Look, read for yourself: this is Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 in the Douay-Rheims, the traditional English-language Catholic Bible. See Exodus 20:4? “Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth.” It’s still there. We just filed it under a different number.

So why do we treat it as part of the First Commandment? Two reasons. First, because worshipping someone besides God is idolatry, and idolatry is worshipping someone besides God. So Deut. 5:7-8 are dealing with the same sin. Second, because Deuteronomy 5:21 deals with both coveting your neighbor’s wife (lust) and coveting your neighbor’s property (greed). These are different kinds of sins: women aren’t property, and lust and greed aren’t the same thing. So we traditionally treat them as two separate commandments: the Ninth Commandment, against lust; and the Tenth Commandment, against coveting goods.

So our dispute is literally just over where we would pencil in numbers, if we were to annotate the Scriptures. By any reasonable measure, this just isn’t worth getting worked up over.

Nevertheless, there are those who think that we’re heretics for grouping the Ten Commandments like this (GotQuestions stops short of this, sort of, but claims that this organization of the Ten Commandments opens the door to idolatry). I’ve got bad news for them. You know who else grouped the prohibitions against worshipping someone other than God and idolatry as a single Commandment? Martin Luther, in his Large Catechism.  In fact, Luther actually omits the verse regarding making graven images in his listing of the Ten Commandments, so all of these anti-Catholic arguments work better as anti-Luther arguments. Or better yet, not as arguments at all, because it’s not even a debate over Scripture.

Francesco Campora, Moses and the Bronze Serpent (18th c.)
Francesco Campora, Moses and the Bronze Serpent (18th c.)

3. No, the Ten Commandments Don’t Forbid Images.

At the heart of the seemingly-trivial debate over the numbering of the Ten Commandments, there’s actually something deeper at work. There are Protestants who believe that this re-numbering was done to justify Catholic veneration (or in their view, worship) of images.

As a conspiracy theory, it’s not a very convincing one. After all, the Eastern Orthodox consider the prohibition against idolatry a separate Commandment, and yet their churches are full of icons. So clearly, eliminating one of the Ten Commandments wasn’t necessary for either Catholics or Orthodox to venerate icons. And you know why? Because the “Second” Commandment never forbade images. It forbade idolatry. Images, including images used in worship, are repeatedly ordered: Exodus 25:17-22, Ex. 28:33-34, Numbers 21:8-9, 1 Samuel 6:5, etc. The Temple had images engraved on its walls (1 Kings 7:40-44). And Christ uses a coin engraved with Caesar’s image to teach about rendering to Caesar and God what belongs to each of them (Matthew 22:20-21).

I’ve actually addressed this before, so I’ll just summarize those points:

  1. The Old Testament prohibits idols, not images;
  2. God sometimes commanded religious images in worship;
  3. In using religious images, we’re not to worship them (obviously);
  4. The mere fact that religious images could be (and sometimes were) abused as idolatry didn’t stop God from ordering them;
  5. The one major religious image taboo the Jews had, about the creation of Images of God Himself, is resolved in the Incarnation, since “the Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (Col. 1:15).
  6. Iconoclasm (the total rejection of images) has prevented untold scores of people from coming to Christ;
  7. The Church, in a Council accepted by Catholics, Orthodox, and many Protestants, orders the use of religious images.

For more on those points, I’d refer you over here.

115 Comments

  1. Bravo! thank you very much for writing this. I cannot understand how there can be so few thinking people and what causes them to hitch their wagons to preposterous untruths. Some studies indicate that when people feel weak and vulnerable, or threatened, they gravitate to ideologies that give them a sense of superiority or righteousness. That might be so, but I believe a lot of people never learned to think critically. If it’s in print, on TV, on the internet, or spoken by a celebrity it must be true. Our fundamentally illiterate society will continue to believe just about anything but the truth.

    1. How come they forgot to mention the fifth commandment. “Honour thy father and mother so that thy days may be long in the land the Lord thy God has given you?” isnt that the one the pope is accused of changing?

      1. I have been Protestant all my life and have heard plenty of accusations directed at the Catholic Church concerning this, and have never heard anyone bring up that one.
        This may be a matter of confusion regarding enumeration again. The fifth according to most Protestant sources, “Honor thy father and mother”, is typically the fourth in Catholic sources.
        There are many who understand the prohibition of idols and the placement of that in the Decalogue differently, as the article explains. And the Sabbatarian view usually adds that the Church changed the Sabbath commandment to eliminate the mention of the Seventh day (understood to be Friday sundown to Saturday sundown), which they find support for in some Catechism versions (if anyone knows of Catechisms that do the full text, I would be VERY interested to share that).
        I do remember being told that the Douay has the Commandments complete, and Yes it does.
        I am discovering that there many things about the Catholic Church that I heard growing up that are questionable, and many things I didn’t hear that show a very different picture than I thought I knew. I am still Protestant. I simply seek the truth whatever that may be, and to honestly represent the One who told Pilate, “I am truth.”

        1. “I am discovering that there many things about the Catholic Church that I heard growing up that are questionable, and many things I didn’t hear that show a very different picture than I thought I knew. I am still Protestant. I simply seek the truth whatever that may be, and to honestly represent the One who told Pilate, “I am truth.””

          Amen, brother! If you have questions or concerns about the Catholic Church, or just want to know more, please feel free to e-mail me directly (you can use the Contact button up top). I’d be more than happy to help to dispel whatever lingering falsehoods you might have, and to walk together deeper in the Truth. God bless!

          1. Thanks Joe,
            I may well avail myself of your offer as things arise. This article itself was very helpful.
            By way of introduction of sorts, most of my Dad’s family was Catholic but were far away and he was nonpracticing. Over the years I have become better acquainted with folks of the Church and found them just as varied as those in my own. And become less dualistic in the process of life. Which in turn primed me to appreciate the recommendation of an Anglican friend to check out Richard Rohr’s newsletter. I have found his insights and shares – including quotes and illustrations from Francis of Assisi, as he is Franciscan – to have depth of thought and have become a highlight of my regular reading.
            I also have his Old Testament volume of “Great Themes of Scripture”, and “Simplicity”.
            Peace be with you, Joe.

    2. Joshua 23:7
      Mentions that we are not to bow down before any image.

      So why then, all over the world, can we find Catholics bowing down before images of Mary, and various stone carvings of the saints?

      Even if you argue that this is not against the Ten Commandments successfully, ( which you haven’t), where in the bible are follower of Christ told to create these statues? Why does Jesus never mention his mother as something to be prayed to? Wouldn’t he do this if it was something that was important?

      1. Sorry the vrs is Leviticus 23:1
        Tells us not to bow before statues.

        Joshua 23:7
        Comments how there will be nations that hold fast to doctrines taught by men, but not of God. These nations will be a snare to our feet as a church.
        The Catholic Church teaches people to bow down before statues around the world, when there is absolutely nothing biblical about it. It is blasphemous, as can be found throughout the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church.

    3. l3vit1cus twenty-six:1
      I have to do that or they won’t let me lost hehe^^^
      Mentions that we are not to bow down before any image.

      So why then, all over the world, can we find Catholics bowing down before images of Mary, and various stone carvings of the saints?

      Even if you argue that this is not against the Ten Commandments successfully, ( which you haven’t), where in the bible are follower of Christ told to create these statues? Why does Jesus never mention his mother as something to be prayed to? Wouldn’t he do this if it was something that was important?

  2. As I was reading your explanation of the order of the Ten Commandments, I was thinking “So, no big deal because that is how we understand the order in the Lutheran church.” And then you go ahead and point out how Luther ordered them the same. As a side note, he orders them the same way in the Small Catechism as well as the Large Catechism. (at least he is consistent) Most Lutherans are more familiar with the Small Catechism because it is used as the basis of Confirmation. Yes, we have Catechism and Confirmation. Sound familiar? This is most certainly true!

    1. Yup. Luther treats the prohibition on idolatry as part of the First Commandment (not even quoting the relevant verse), and no one bats an eye. The Church does it, and everybody loses their minds.

      Seriously, though, it’s always nice when we realize the amount of common ground that we share.

      1. We have so much common ground that you are even starting to look like a Lutheran pastor in that photo! We have a lot more common ground than either church usually admits.

        By the way, you have handled the crazy here in the posts well. I might need to step up my crazy comment game. Peace!

    2. As a former Roman Catholic regarding idolatry, the author is correct on two points (but two only):
      First—where one commandment ends and another begins is not always clear
      Second—there is no commandment against creating images

      HOWEVER, those are not the issue. The real issues are:
      (1) The binding authority of the Ten Commandments; AND
      (2) How GOD defines idolatry, not man.

      FIRST—The Ten Commandments are part of Covenant, which is a binding agreement between God and man. Written by the finger of God on tablets of the Covenant (Ex. 34:27-28), placed inside the Ark of the Covenant (Ex. 25:16). They ARE NOT a set of arbitrary rules which can be changed by man the way a nation changes its laws. God clearly warns:

      Deut. 4:2—You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

      SECOND—How does God define idolatry? Read the words of the commandment. You can view it precept by precept at the end of this post. As you read, notice the following:
      (a) God does not define idolatry as simply creating an image;
      (b) God’s definition of idolatry requires both an image AND worship and it includes worship of any kind;
      (c) God does not limit idolatry to only an image of Himself (author’s claim #5);
      (d) BUT if that was the case, since Jesus IS GOD, then by the author’s own definition anyone with a image of Jesus is guilty of idolatry.

      John 1:1—In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

      Everyone must ask this question:
      Can man change the words of the Covenant which God wrote with His finger and sealed it with the blood of Christ?

      If you can say yes to this question – then the Catholic Church is for you.

      But it is NOT for me!

      Acts 5:29—But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

      To view all the words changes the Catholic Church made to God’s Covenant, see:
      http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/command.htm

      Note: Notice the subtle change in words from ‘no other gods’ to ‘no strange gods’. No other God means exactly that. By changing it to read ‘strange’—man can then define what a strange god is.

      The words of covenant regarding God’s definition of idolatry:
      Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing,
      nor the likeness of any things,
      that are in heaven above, or
      that are in the earth beneath, or
      that abide in the waters under the earth.
      Thou shalt not adore them,
      and thou shalt not serve them.

      1. Joe C.,

        You’re misunderstanding my point #5, although that may be due to my own lack of clarity in writing. I’m not saying that only images of God constituted idolatry. I’m saying that this was the “one major religious image taboo the Jews had” in their own worship. They were okay with images of plants and animals and even angels, but avoided depicting God Himself. (I’m explicitly talking about Jewish worship there, not about idolatry).

        Here’s how you define the “real issue”: “Can man change the words of the Covenant which God wrote with His finger and sealed it with the blood of Christ? If you can say yes to this question – then the Catholic Church is for you.”

        That’s both rude and ill-informed. It’s rude because it assumes that the world’s one billion Catholics, of which you once numbered yourself, are acting in bad faith, intentionally defying the living God. But it’s ill-informed, because it assumes that God wrote His Covenant in English.

        You think that the Church “changed” the wording of Exodus 20:3 from “other gods” to “strange gods” in some sort of bizarre plan to get Catholics to worship false gods that aren’t “strange.” As a conspiracy theory, it’s baseless slander, and I challenge you to point to a single Catholic who intentionally worships other gods on the basis that these gods aren’t “strange.”

        This is where we get to the language issue. “Strange,” in this context, means “other,” not “weird.” The word in question is ‘acher (אַחֵר), which can be translated as either “other” or “strange.” And both Protestant and Catholic Bibles translate it both ways. For example, the KJV translates it as “other” in Exodus 20:3, but as “strange” in Judges 11:2 (“strange woman,” used in the sense of “another woman,” not “a weird woman”). So some Catholic translations translate Ex. 20:3 as “other gods” and others as “strange gods,” and these mean the exact same thing.

        In the future, to avoid these kind of basic errors, I’d caution you to be prudent and humble. Don’t jump to conclusions, especially ones that assume the other people are all acting in bad faith, and especially when you haven’t done your own homework. If you don’t know why Catholics believe a certain thing, try asking us rather than ignorantly telling us. We disagree on some core issues surrounding Christianity, but we shouldn’t let that obscure the fact that we’re both trying to follow Jesus Christ in good faith.

        I.X.,

        Joe H.

        1. Joe M.

          I encouraged Catholics to look at the facts from the Bible, compare to what the Catholic Church teaches, and make an informed decision; to think for themselves. If that makes me rude; then you have an interesting definition. But I understand. As a defender of the Catholic faith it is your job to counter, deflect, or otherwise discredit those who oppose the teachings of the Church. No offense intended; none taken. Note I said the teachings of the Church – not the people.

          As for the use of the Hebrew word ʾaḥēr being translated as ‘strange’ – the Catholic Duay-Rheims is the only Bible translation I am aware which translates it that way. Not even your own Catholic New Jerusalem Bible translates it that way. Exodus 20:3 (NJB) ‘You shall have no other gods to rival me. (Hebrew word appears 166 times in OT. Most common translation to English is “other” or “another”. Most modern Bibles never translate the word as strange and found only 1 Bible that translated it more than once as strange. Though given the number of translations there are, I may have missed one along the line.)

          Having said that – where one commandment ends and anther begins or haggling over how one might translate a single word from Hebrew/Greek to English are not the most critical issues to this discussion.

          The issue is and still stands – can man (a created being) change the terms of the covenant of God? The Catholic Church say yes. I say the Bible does not support the claim.

          As I noted to De Maria – there is no record of the any commandment being changed by the apostles in the NT. In fact, the exact opposite is stated. Here is a small excerpt from my study notes on covenants in the Bible,. [Note: There are at least 20 covenants between God and man in the Bible. Similar number discussed between men and nations. Hebrew berît (284x) Greek diathēkē (33x)]

          QUESTION: What is the New Covenant?

          BIBLE SAYS: Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my LAWS into their minds, and WRITE them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

          COMMENT: OT – law written on stone; Ezekiel – God will take our hearts of stone and make them flesh; NT – law written on our hearts

          QUESTION: Why was a New Covenant necessary?

          BIBLE SAYS: Hebrews 8:7-8 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. 8 For he finds fault with THEM…

          COMMENT: The fault was with the people, not the terms of the covenant.

          QUESTION: If the terms of the Old and New Covenant are the same (i.e.: Ten Commandments), how then is it a better covenant?

          BIBLE SAYS: Hebrews 8:6 But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant HE mediates is better, since it is enacted on BETTER PROMISES.

          COMMENT: I have found about 50 verses from the Bible speaking about the superiority of the New Covenant – with Christ always at the center. My study is not done. I suspect I will find many more.

          QUESTION: How did Paul describe the difference between the Old and New Covenants?

          BIBLE SAYS: Galatians 4:22-23 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through PROMISE.

          COMMENT: Read Galatians 4:21-31 for the full context. In short: God promised Abraham he would be a father of a great nation but he had a problem, no son. Abraham waited many years and when no son came, Abraham and Sarah decided to try to fulfill God’s Promise by human effort – hence Ismael. But God delivered on His Promise using His divine effort – hence Isaac. Old = human effort; New = divine effort.

          So this brings us to an interesting question, how then does God accomplish writing the law on hearts and minds? Through Jesus – His life as example and His death a reminder of both God’s love for us AND the fullness of what evil will do.

          John 3:16 “For GOD so loved the world, that he GAVE his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

          My prayer is all who read this will take to prayer, go to the Bible to find for themselves what the Bible truly teaches about the character of God. We worship a loving God who like the Father in the story of the prodigal son is waiting for us with open arms. He is not some ruthless dictator who the only way to receive His grace is to sacrifice Jesus. His grace if freely given to those who turn to Him.

          John 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; …(Next to John 3:16 one of my top 5 verses of the Bible.)

        2. Strange or other, my question is:
          Why use items/images made by man, to represent God, and kneel, kiss, pray, worship before these?
          How can man, a creature, create an image of God, the creator?
          Man cannot fathom who God is and we ahould avoid using a very limited representation of God.
          Not even to aid worship. That worship is a lie and strange! Who has possession of the image of God? Any man-made drawing/sculpture/doll/picture/crude representation of God does not render a Just, Truthful image of our Creator! Its a disgrace and shameful rendition. God is Spirit and we must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.
          Who made the statue of ‘St. Peter’ in Rome?
          Was this sculpture taken from ‘Zeus’?
          In Revelations 22:6-19, John was rebuff for trying to worship the messenger Angel. We cant worship saints and angels.

      2. Joe C.,

        Thanks for your honesty. As for me, Jesus is God and Jesus gave the Church HIS authority when He said to Peter, I give you the keys to the Kingdom of heaven, what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and what you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

        With those words, Jesus gave St. Peter and the Catholic Church His own authority. This is why, in a different place, he also says, All power on earth has been given to me, therefore go out and make disciples of the world, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

        1. De Maria,

          Yes Jesus did say that. But you might want to consider the context of when Jesus said that and how did the apostles interpret it.

          Consider, the NT covers the about the first 40 years of the church.

          So if the apostles believed they had the authority to change God’s covenant or any part ofthe Ten Commandments, why is there no record of it in scripture? The Apostle Paul mentions several times idolaters, adulterers, thieves, murderers, blasphemes, etc – will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Each one of the items Paul mentions are in fact the principles found in of the Ten Commandments.

          But even past that. To me, what does it say about the character of God if true?

          Let me begin with this example. There are those who do not believe Jesus is God, but the first created by God. Keep in mind they quote scripture. But if true, what are the implications about God’s character? They point to scripture like when Jesus said the father is greater than me, just as one example.

          So I ask them the following:
          While I believe Jesus is God, just for the sake of discussion you are correct. So if Jesus is not God, then what you are saying is God created Jesus for the purpose of humiliating him and crucifying him. What are the implications of this? It’s obvious, God was not willing to give of Himself to save us. Which creates a paradox for Christ stated there is no greater Love than someone lay there life down for there friend. And then if God created Jesus, why only one? Why not a ten or a hundred or so on. So then satan’s insinuation that God was withholding something from Adam and Eve actually had some truth to it. You get the picture.

          Now, let’s say man can change one or more of the commandments, even though no record of apostles doing it. Why then did Jesus have to suffer and die the most humiliating and horrid of deaths? The most common biblical definition is sin is trangression of the law. The wages of sin is death. Most people would agree that at a minimum includes the Ten Commandments. So why did God not simply change them himself and spare Jesus?

          And on the same note, what does it say about God regarding thoses who were put to death for violating God’s commandments in OT? If God is love. If God knows all things. Why then did he tell Moses to put a man to death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath? (Numbers 15

          what I find most fascinating about this – is no one debates about the last six commandments like do not lie, steal, murder, etc. in fact they are the foundation of most religions and even atheists agree more or less to them. It is only the commandments summarized as love God with all your heart, mind and soul that there is ever any debate.

          1. Joe Cipriani says:
            September 25, 2015 at 2:52 am
            De Maria,

            Hi, thanks for your reply.

            I’ve read your message and all I can do is juxtapose my understanding next to it in order that the readers may compare to Scripture and decide for themselves which is more in line with the Word of God.

            The reason why your understanding is so different, is that you have jettisoned the most important context of the New Testament. The Sacred Traditions of Jesus Christ which He commanded the Church to pass on to the whole world (Matt 28:19-20).

            Yes Jesus did say that. But you might want to consider the context of when Jesus said that and how did the apostles interpret it.

            The context is this. Jesus Christ did not write the New Testament. Jesus Christ established a Church and commanded that Church to Teach His commands and make disciples of the world.

            Scripture calls this Church the Teacher of the Wisdom of God (Eph 3:10). Thus confirming the Sacred Tradition which has always been passed down through the Church, that the Church is infallible when Teaching God’s word.

            Consider, the NT covers the about the first 40 years of the church.

            So if the apostles believed they had the authority to change God’s covenant or any part of the Ten Commandments, why is there no record of it in scripture?

            There is. But you don’t recognize it.
            1. The first thing that was changed, was the Passover. Jesus Christ is the new Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7).

            2. The next thing that was changed was the Sabbath. Jesus Christ being given all power under heaven, gave His Church the authority to change it, since He is the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt 12:8).

            3. And the Apostles changed the Sabbath to the first day of the week:
            (1 Cor 16:2).

            4. And this gathering was declared mandatory (Heb 10:25-31).

            5. And there are many other changes which were made to the Covenant, since the Old Covenant has faded away and is replaced by a new and better Covenant in the Blood of Christ.

            The Apostle Paul mentions several times idolaters, adulterers, thieves, murderers, blasphemes, etc – will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Each one of the items Paul mentions are in fact the principles found in of the Ten Commandments.

            Correct.

            But even past that. To me, what does it say about the character of God if true?

            It says that God keeps His Word.
            Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

            Let me begin with this example. There are those who do not believe Jesus is God, but the first created by God. Keep in mind they quote scripture.

            The Jehovahs and others. By the way, we don’t believe in Scripture alone. For the aforementioned reason. We know that Jesus SPOKE His word and that the Apostles passed on His Word in Sacred Tradition. This Sacred Tradition is the basis of the New Testament. Unless you are steeped in the Sacred Tradition of Jesus Christ, neither you nor the Jehovah’s nor anyone else, has any hope of understanding the Word of God.

            But if true, what are the implications about God’s character? They point to scripture like when Jesus said the father is greater than me, just as one example.

            And because they don’t have the anchor of Sacred Tradition, they swept away by every wind of doctrine.

            So I ask them the following:
            While I believe Jesus is God, just for the sake of discussion you are correct. So if Jesus is not God, then what you are saying is God created Jesus for the purpose of humiliating him and crucifying him. What are the implications of this? It’s obvious, God was not willing to give of Himself to save us. Which creates a paradox for Christ stated there is no greater Love than someone lay there life down for there friend. And then if God created Jesus, why only one? Why not a ten or a hundred or so on. So then satan’s insinuation that God was withholding something from Adam and Eve actually had some truth to it. You get the picture.

            Yeah. But I’m not a Jehovah. So I don’t get the connection to Catholicism. Why are you telling me this?

            Now, let’s say man can change one or more of the commandments, even though no record of apostles doing it. Why then did Jesus have to suffer and die the most humiliating and horrid of deaths?

            There is no connection between the two.
            1. The Church did not change a Commandment. They changed the day it was celebrated.

            Seven comes from Sheva which means, oath. The day of the oath is no longer celebrated on the Seventh day. It is now celebrated on the First day. The Commandment is still kept. Simply on a different day as authorized by Jesus Christ, through the Church which speaks for Him upon this earth.

            2nd. There is a record of the Apostles changing the Sabbath day. That is in the Sacred Traditions which they passed down through the Church and which we obey to this day.

            3rd. The fact that you don’t recognize the Sacred Tradition is the reason why you don’t understand the Word of God in this and many other details.

            The most common biblical definition is sin is trangression of the law.

            That is the Traditional definition. The Scripture to which you refer was written based upon a pre-existing Sacred Tradition.

            The wages of sin is death. Most people would agree that at a minimum includes the Ten Commandments. So why did God not simply change them himself and spare Jesus?

            Non sequitur.

            1. Jesus did not die to change a Commandment. And no Commandment was changed.
            2. Jesus died in order to give man the opportunity to be saved (Hebrews 5:9) and to give us an example to follow (1 Peter 2:21).
            3. And to fulfill the Old Covenant promises in order that the sins of the Jews could be redeemed (Heb 9:15).

            And on the same note, what does it say about God regarding thoses who were put to death for violating God’s commandments in OT? If God is love. If God knows all things. Why then did he tell Moses to put a man to death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath? (Numbers 15

            It says that God is Sovereign Lord who gives life and takes it away.

            what I find most fascinating about this – is no one debates about the last six commandments like do not lie, steal, murder, etc. in fact they are the foundation of most religions and even atheists agree more or less to them. It is only the commandments summarized as love God with all your heart, mind and soul that there is ever any debate.

            I have no idea what you’re talking about. The Catholic Church maintains that love of God and neighbor are the foremost Commandments. It is Protestants who disdain the Commandment to love and focus on justification by faith alone.

            If I may ask, which sect do you represent?

          2. De Maria – I could not find a way to reply to your post – so I am posting my response here.

            To De Maria,

            When I made the decision to give my heart to Christ, I made a decision to follow the Bible and Bible alone. I did not realize at the time in making that decision it would put me odds with the vast majority of Christianity. Because of length, I am breaking up my response into three parts.

            As you read, keep Jesus’s parable of the wineskins in mind (Luke 5:37-39). Jesus used wine to symbolize teachings.
            —Old wine symbolizes false teachings.
            —New wine symbolizes true teachings.
            —Old wineskin symbolizes an unconverted person.
            —New wineskin symbolizes converted person.
            Luke 9:39: “No man also having drunk old wine desires new, for he says the old is better.”

            First witness: Let’s take the new Covenant Christ confirmed with His blood.

            A covenant is an agreement between two parties. Only in the case of the God’s covenant it is more sacred and binding. We may think of it as a contract, but in this instance more accurate to compare it to a Last Will and Testament. Consider the following:

            Question: Who is the only person who can write their Last Will and Testament? Answer: Only the testator (i.e.: the person who it applies to). Not even a spouse can do this.

            Question: When must the terms of the Testament be made – before or after death? Answer: Obviously before the person dies.

            Question: When do the terms of the Testament go into effect? Answer: After the person dies.

            Question: Can the terms of the Covenant be legally changed after the person dies. Answer: No

            While the questions and answers are rhetorical – they prove the point. Which is the exact statement made in the book of Hebrews 9:16-18.

            “For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.”

            Therefore the only person who can LEGALLY set the terms of the covenant is Jesus! And once sealed by His blood, the terms cannot be LEGALLY changed.

            NO ONE—not Paul, nor Peter, nor the church, nor pope —can legally change the terms of the covenant which Christ shed with His own blood.

            Jesus had this to say about His covenants thru the prophet Jeremiah 33:20:

            “Thus saith the LORD; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season;”

            The binding and unchanging nature of God’s covenant cannot be stated any clearer.

            I must admit one thing. I am surprised you claim the apostles changed the Sabbath to the first day of the week. Because the Catholic Church has claimed for centuries that there was no Biblical support for changing the day. So are you Protestant? Baptist perhaps? Methodist?

            And if you still hold onto the idea the Apostles changed the holiness of the seventh day from Saturday to Sunday, this is what you are saying:

            (1) A sinful man who needs a savior can make something holy
            (2) A sinful man who needs a savior has more wisdom than a Holy God
            (3) A sinful man who needs a savior can change the covenant which Christ sealed with His blood

            Keep in mind that the Ten Commandments are the covenant and are part of both the Old and New. Read Exodus 34:28:

            “And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.”

            Tablets of the Covenant – placed inside the Ark of the Covenant.
            The Ark of the Covenant symbolizing God’s throne.

          3. Part 2 of my response:

            Second Witness: The Catholic Church claims Peter was first Pope – yet you do not believe him.

            So if Catholics really believe Peter was the first pope – why then do you not believe the words he wrote?

            “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: (1 Peter 3:18)”

            Peter clearly states Christ died ONCE for sin. What is the Catholic Mass but offering up Christ as a sacrifice again and again? So if you do not believe the words of Peter, why should you believe anything else that quoted from the Bible?

            From ‘Dignity and Duties of the Priest’ which you can find on any number of Jesuit Priesthood websites – and is also Ex Cathedra.

            …Jesus has died to institute the priesthood. It was not necessary for the Redeemer to die in order to save the world; a drop of His Blood, a single tear, or prayer, was sufficient to procure salvation for all; …

            …Thus, by the celebration of a single Mass, in which he offers Jesus Christ in sacrifice, a priest gives greater honor to the Lord, than if all men by dying for God offered to Him the sacrifice of their lives. …

            I find it a fascinating claim that it was not necessary for Christ to die for lost humanity. I also find it an interesting claim that Christ really died to institute the priesthood. Though I am not sure why given the fact that God already had a priesthood.

            It makes one wonder what is the purpose of Christ being High Priest if we still have sinful men interceding for people? Hebrews 4:14 reads:

            “Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.”

          4. Third and final comment:

            Third Witness: John 3:16
            The most beloved verse in Christianity is John 3:16, which states:

            “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

            Question: What does ‘perish’ mean?
            — To die or be destroyed through violence
            Question: What does it mean to ‘die’?
            — To cease to exist

            In similar manner, Paul made this statement:

            For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus. (Rom. 6:23)

            Life thru Christ. Death thru sin. Jesus said it. Paul said it. Yet what do vast majority of Christian denominations teach – Catholic and Protestant alike?

            •Everyone has eternal life, the only difference is where one lives
            •The lost will suffer for eternity burning in hellfire
            •The saved will be in heaven

            Is there anyone that does not have at least one loved one or dear friend who has rejected Christ? And the saved will be in heaven looking across the gulf watching the lost suffer. And we are supposed to be happy?

            So what is the character of God portrayed by Catholic and non-Catholic alike?

            •God is love
            •But reject My salvation
            •I will burn you in hellfire for all eternity

            And you wonder why so many reject Christianity? I continue…

            GOD’S PRESENCE SYMBOLIZED AS FIRE
            How many times in scripture is the presence of God revealed as ‘fire’? Here are just a few.

            •Moses and the burning bush (Ex. 3:2)
            •Elijah taken up in a fiery chariot (2 Ki. 2:11)
            •Lucifer (before becoming Satan) walked among the ‘fiery stones’ (Ez. 28:14)
            •Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego cast into the fiery furnace (Dan. 3:19-20)
            •Tongues of fire at Pentecost (Acts 2:3)

            But my favorite is when Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu offered profane fire.

            So fire went out from the Lord and devoured them… (Lev. 10:2)
            So they went near and carried them by their tunics… (Lev. 10:5)

            Fire destroyed them but their garments were not harmed. Hum…

            I leave you with this statement about the ultimate end to Satan. Ezekiel 28:18 states:

            Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

            But if you don’t believe Peter about Christ having died ONCE, why should you believe Jesus – who is God – who cannot lie – when He says people will perish and He will turn Satan into ashes.

            Final Comments:
            (A)When I write to blogs like this – my hope is that there may be one or two people who are truly seeking God’s truth. That they will take what I have written in prayer to God and study for themselves what is truth.

            (B)For the record, the Apostles did not change the Passover as you claim. They understood the principle of type/antitype. Types are stories and events in the Bible which are designed to teach us about God and the plan of salvation. Abraham – go sacrifice your son. Jesus to Nicodemus – as Moses lifted up the serpent, so must the Son of Man. The Exodus journey is the plan of salvation acted out with Christ as the Passover lamb. The Tabernacle (and subsequent Temples) were given in pattern as a remembrance of the Exodus deliverance.

            (C)Jesus rebuked Nicodemus because he did not know a man must be born again – that is changed in character – to enter into the kingdom of heaven. Jacob becomes Israel is just one of dozens of stories in the OT which teach this principle. Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for lacking the spiritual eyesight to know this.

        2. De Maria you may want to re read this pasage again. as Christ asked Peter, whom do you say I am and Peter replied. “Thou art the Christ the son of the living God” and listen carefully what Jesus tells Peter. “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you” so who revealed this to Peter that Jesus is the Christ the son of the living God?” is it not the Holy spirit, so why are you giving credit to Peter, whom said of himself. “depart from me Lord, for I am a sinfull man” Peter knew he needed the grace of our Lord Christ Jesus, as Peter was often impeteous and being reprimanded by Christ when he told our Lord that the crucifixion would not happen, and the Lord chastised him and told him “get behind me satan.” so you see it is holding fast to the faith that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah) that agains this faith the gates of hell cannot prevail. Notice also that King David calls the Lord “My Rock and my salvation” who was the apple of God’s eye. as when we accept Christ as our Lord and saviour the Holy one of Israel, who makes the Lord God of Israel known to us gentiles, the Lord God pours His love into our hearts so that with His help we uphold the commandments. as it is impossible to love your neighbor as oneself if the love of God does not dwell within one;s heart.

          1. How can Jesus be God when in Genesis it is written “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and is God, and then turn to the gospel according to St John chapter one verse 10, And The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” Since Christ was co-creator with the Lord God at the beginning of creation. Notice “Let us make man into our image” and in another passage about Christ “Though He was equal with God, He did not grasp equality but humbled Himself” Also why would Christ call the Lord God of Israel His Father, He was constantly in touch with His heavenly Father, being the son of the Living God, until our sins came upon Him, while on the cross, when He cried out. “MY God, My God why hast thou forsaken me?” since God and sin cannot walk together. He paid the penalty for our transgressions and sealed the new covenant with His blood, as without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins, see Jeremiah 31 verse 31. Christ came to perfect Judaism, He is the son of God, whom King david speaks of Psalm 2 and Psalm 22, the Lord is my shepherd and Christ speaks of Him being the Good shepherd whom gives His life for the sheep. and the sheep know His voice. the same as Mary magdalene did not recognize Christ after His resurrection but knew whom He was as soon as she heard His voiice. we are the sheep of His pasture. Therefore we speak of God the Father Christ the Son, and the Holy spirit, three in one whom work together for the salvation of mankind. there is no other saviour beside Him also see Isaiah 53, the prophet whom speaks of Christ suffering, as He came to do the will of God, Through Adam we all die, through belief and faith in Christ whom conquered death and satan, we inherit eternal life.

      3. I agree with this but how do we view romans chapter 1 verse 23 in the light of making images of man? when verse 18 says that the “wrath of God” is revealed from heaven AGAINST ALL UNGODLINESS.. and this verse 23 shows this image making to be NOT OK with God even tho the majority of Christian scholars explain it away as shown above in the previous posts. In Acts chapter 17 Paul says “truly these times God winked ( overlooked) at but NOW COMMANDS ALL MEN EVERYWHERE to repent”……repent of what?? amonge other unGodily things and unrighteousness they are to repent of making IMAGES that represent deities even an IMAGE of God !!! why? because God made no pictures or photographs of Himself… we are to worship God in Spirit and in TRUTH.. thats what God demands.. no more Temple worship and no more IMAGES, no matter how sincere because we have to have FAITH… as He said to Thomas ” more blessed are they who have NOT SEEN ME ,but yet BELIEVE”

  3. Wonderful article. I’ve actually had to link the Vatican website to show that the image thing is listed right there because the person kept insisting (and linking to an anti-Catholic website) that it was gone. I also linked a Wikipedia article with a lovely chart showing how each religious group numbers mentioning the Lutherans. Still said person plugged up their ears. So I gave up. Some people would rather believe the lies than the truth.

  4. If I had to guess, I would bet that most people posting the article about Pope Francis allegedly changing the Ten Commandments don’t actually believe it is true. They probably just wish it were, and are using this article to point out the supposed inconsistency between condemning fornication and extending God’s grace to “all His children”.

    1. how can we all be his children when there are the children of disobedience and those of obedience who listen tot he Lord God who said when Christ was baptized. “This is my beloved Son, listen to Him” and since God has forbidden homosexuality and Christ suffered greatly to reconcile us to the Lord God by repenting of our sinfull ways and asking the Lord Jesus to come and open up our hearts to His Word, and since homosexual refuse to repent or believe it is a sin, then are they not the children of disobedience, whom are provoking the Lord God to wrath by mocking Christ suffering at Calvary? No the Lord God does not change. and did Christ not say “Think not that I have c ome to abolish the law but to fulfill it.” therefore we give thanks and praise to God the father for the gift of Christ who conforms us into His image and help us become children of God.

  5. I’m a Mormon,
    If you search the web for True Mormon content, it is hard to navigate through the lies
    and deceit. You have to find the right source.
    I’m sure there are many who will be deceived by this lie about our Catholic friends.
    My dad is Lutherin so I think my sources are right on Lutherin content.
    Where is the source on Catholic content?
    By the way Mormon content is found at http://www.lds.org

    1. If you’re looking for a source about anything written try the Holy See’s site: http://w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html

      For non-Catholics, I would start with the catechism. It’s pretty much a summation of every major belief. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

      In addition to not trusting anti-Catholic sites, you also have to be careful of sites that claim to be Catholic but are actually sedevacanists. They often have their own ideas. Stick to the Holy See. That’s a sure bet.

    2. Steve,

      Great question. There’s a saying (I think I heard it from Mark Shea), “I don’t believe in organized religion. I’m Catholic.” Comparing the Vatican’s website (Vatican.va) with LDS.org will show you what I mean. We’re still playing catch-up in terms of having a one-stop shop for all things catechetical, apologetical, historical, diplomatic, newsworthy, etc.

      The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a great way of establishing what the Church believes. Deltaflute linked to the version on the Vatican’s website, but I’m fond of this parish’s copy (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm), because it’s easier to search.

      Besides that, there are a number of unofficial Catholic sites that will handle these sorts of smaller issues, the sort of questions that aren’t big enough to warrant placement in the Catechism. Two that I would recommend are Catholic Answers (www.catholic.com/) and Called to Communion (www.calledtocommunion.com/). Additionally, you can feel free to e-mail me anytime at [email protected], and I’ll do my best to answer any questions that you might have.

      By the way, I know that misinformation is a frustration for both Catholics and LDS, so thank you for taking the time to actually find out from Catholics what we believe. God bless!

      Joe

  6. “Iconoclasm (the total rejection of images) has prevented untold scores of people from coming to Christ.” That’s a little out there. Even the illiterate can hear people and understand things, there is no real use for images to convey spiritual realities. I suppose you are making reference to the deaf and illiterate?

      1. Craig,

        This is the first I’ve heard of it. I looked in my spam folder (and accidentally deleted two non-spam messages), but didn’t see anything. I’m at a bit of a loss. I’ll keep looking, but feel free to try again (or post here). Sorry!

        I.X.,

        Joe

    1. ven the illiterate can hear people and understand things, there is no real use for images to convey spiritual realities.

      On the contrary, a picture, even today, is still worth a thousand words.

      1. a picture can convey a thousand words and more and this is the problem. not the solution. why? we have a Jesus with long hair or a Black jesus or a white jesus which looks like King Charlemange of france and we have negro jesus and Chinese Jesus and non are right. All are misleading. and non require FAITH. Paul warns in his letter to galatia that anyone who preaches another gospel is accursed of God. False Images of Jesus is a form of false gospel for the picture conveys a detracting understanding of the Person and lets face it we dont follow a religion of does and donts we are to have a loving and real relationship with God that only can happen by FAITh in the Son of God the Lord jesus Christ How would it be if I carried in my wallet fake pictures of my wife and children? what are passports all about if we can have a Black or whiet or versions of me that isnt me but shows an image of a different me on my passport? can i gain entry to a country if my features are not the same as on my passport?
        like wise heaven the real Jesus is our passport and we have never seen him but the Holy Father and Spirit has seen the Son and they recognise Him in those who are born again.images are misleading and dont bring anyone closer to God they cause a barrier and a stumbling block to real Faith

    2. Craig,

      I explain that point further in the linked post:

      “The prohibition against religious art and imagery isn’t harmless. To the left is a picture of the doorway to a Dutch church (St. Stevens), that was vandalized by Protestants in the 16th century. They cut the heads off of the statues of Jesus and the saints, and the angels from the doorway.

      Thank God that they didn’t find the Ark of the Covenant, because I can think of no coherent reason why they’d be against statues of angels in the doorway to a church, but fine with statues of angels on the Ark of the Covenant.

      Now, obviously, Protestants today aren’t roving around destroying Catholic art. But iconoclasm has ongoing negative impacts. When The Passion of the Christ came out, it was condemned as idolatry, with commenters making sweeping claims like “all pictures, statues or portrayals of our Lord are idolatrous.” Taken seriously, this goes a lot further than outlawing the local Nativity play (or creche).

      If re-enacting the words and actions of Christ constitutes idolatry, it’s hard to see how even Protestant Lord’s Suppers wouldn’t be idolatry, since the pastor speaks the words of Christ in the first person. For that matter, why is it okay to read the words of Christ out loud from the Gospels? It’s about as likely that someone hears their pastor reading Scripture and mistakes him for Jesus as is it that they’ll mistake Jim Caviezel for Jesus Christ.

      Can you get to Christ without visible imagery? Certainly. The blind do it all the time. But step back and consider the countless number of people brought to Christ by The Passion of the Christ, or by the Oberammergau Passion Play, or by the numerous Nativity scenes and even Christmas school plays. Those souls would be lost in the dreary world of the iconoclast. That’s far from harmless.”

      1. I have no issue with the existence of images, though personally I do not have any and do not feel comfortable with them. Movies I am fine with. I think it is a matter of personal conviction, because images are not necessary.

        That is not to say that I don’t find some of the practices associated with images to be strange. We already debated prayers to the dead and such, but let’s just say it’s good to do that. Why, in order to communicate with a saint to pray on my behalf, do I need an image to help me? From what I heard, Eastern Orthodox view icons as a portal into heaven…which is something that to me does not make sense. Praying is a portal into heaven (literally). An icon is just that, an icon. It has no power in of itself. So, the use of images has to me become superstitious.

        To answer your questions:

        “For that matter, why is it okay to read the words of Christ out loud from the Gospels? It’s about as likely that someone hears their pastor reading Scripture and mistakes him for Jesus as is it that they’ll mistake Jim Caviezel for Jesus Christ.”

        Other than people thinking that Jesus had long hair, which is extremely unlikely, I’d agree. However. just google “God” under Google images. The bearded gray guy in the sky is a popular image in our imaginations, though I would venture to guess that God does not appear that way if He is exposed to our sense of perception. So, at the very least, we can see that images have at least confused the masses, which I would say is bad.

        “[C]onsider the countless number of people brought to Christ by The Passion of the Christ, or by the Oberammergau Passion Play, or by the numerous Nativity scenes and even Christmas school plays. Those souls would be lost in the dreary world of the iconoclast. That’s far from harmless.”

        Well, not really. No one s converted by an image. Perhaps an image can be explained to someone, and the explanation is what God uses to convert him. I would say that would be the crucial difference between an image and a passion play. The passion play explains itself…a picture is supposedly worth 1,000 words, but I honestly cannot think of a single person brought to Christ by a picture with no prior or subsequent explanation of what it means.

        God bless,
        Craig

        1. Craig Truglia says:
          July 12, 2015 at 12:51 am
          I have no issue with the existence of images, though personally I do not have any and do not feel comfortable with them.

          And, its all about you?

          Well, not really. No one s converted by an image.

          Because you say so?

          Even the Bible is an image. The Bible is not God. It merely points to God.

          1. De Maria, do you believe in being kind to people? Because writing, “it’s all about you” is a little nasty, especially when I am not an iconoclast nor am I defending iconoclasts. I just simply said I choose in my own worship and house not to use images.

          2. Craig Truglia says:
            July 12, 2015 at 11:00 pm
            De Maria, do you believe in being kind to people?

            Yes.

            Because writing, “it’s all about you” is a little nasty, especially when I am not an iconoclast nor am I defending iconoclasts.

            1. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

            2. The question is meant to address your Sola Scriptura ideology. Sola Scriptura makes every individual the pope of his own personal religion.

            I just simply said I choose in my own worship and house not to use images.

            My point exactly.

          3. I’m still not quite sure if you get it. Just because images are permissible it does not mean that it is binding upon the conscience of every Christian to use them. I choose not to use them, that is no sin.

          4. Craig Truglia says:
            July 13, 2015 at 11:20 am
            I’m still not quite sure if you get it.

            I believe I do.

            Just because images are permissible it does not mean that it is binding upon the conscience of every Christian to use them.

            That is a minimalist sort of faith whose conscience would not impel it to surround himself with Sacred Images.

            1160 Christian iconography expresses in images the same Gospel message that Scripture communicates by words. Image and word illuminate each other:

            We declare that we preserve intact all the written and unwritten traditions of the Church which have been entrusted to us. One of these traditions consists in the production of representational artwork, which accords with the history of the preaching of the Gospel. For it confirms that the incarnation of the Word of God was real and not imaginary, and to our benefit as well, for realities that illustrate each other undoubtedly reflect each other’s meaning.28

            1161 All the signs in the liturgical celebrations are related to Christ: as are sacred images of the holy Mother of God and of the saints as well. They truly signify Christ, who is glorified in them. They make manifest the “cloud of witnesses”29 who continue to participate in the salvation of the world and to whom we are united, above all in sacramental celebrations. Through their icons, it is man “in the image of God,” finally transfigured “into his likeness,”30 who is revealed to our faith. So too are the angels, who also are recapitulated in Christ:

            Following the divinely inspired teaching of our holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church (for we know that this tradition comes from the Holy Spirit who dwells in her) we rightly define with full certainty and correctness that, like the figure of the precious and life-giving cross, venerable and holy images of our Lord and God and Savior, Jesus Christ, our inviolate Lady, the holy Mother of God, and the venerated angels, all the saints and the just, whether painted or made of mosaic or another suitable material, are to be exhibited in the holy churches of God, on sacred vessels and vestments, walls and panels, in houses and on streets.31

            1162 “The beauty of the images moves me to contemplation, as a meadow delights the eyes and subtly infuses the soul with the glory of God.”32 Similarly, the contemplation of sacred icons, united with meditation on the Word of God and the singing of liturgical hymns, enters into the harmony of the signs of celebration so that the mystery celebrated is imprinted in the heart’s memory and is then expressed in the new life of the faithful.

            I choose not to use them, that is no sin.

            Obviously, you have made for yourself, another religion.

          5. Again, I don’t think you get it. Reading a Bible is not needed to live a faithful, obedient life, let alone use images. They are not binding upon the consciences of Christians as necessary for salvation, though one can argue that they may be used in a useful manner. Hence, if I do not use an image, that in of itself is not bad.

          6. Hm? I got on here to respond to the guy who claims that the Catholic Church changed the Ten Commandments, but I happened to see this.

            You said:

            Craig Truglia says:
            July 14, 2015 at 2:53 am
            Again, I don’t think you get it. Reading a Bible is not needed to live a faithful, obedient life,….

            What does that do to the idea of Scripture alone, then?

        2. Hi Craig

          To say: “Well, not really. No one s converted by an image. Perhaps an image can be explained to someone, and the explanation is what God uses to convert him. I would say that would be the crucial difference between an image and a passion play. The passion play explains itself…a picture is supposedly worth 1,000 words, but I honestly cannot think of a single person brought to Christ by a picture with no prior or subsequent explanation of what it means.”

          That may be true in a sense, because God’s grace changes the heart, however, I know people that have in fact become Christian precisely because of the beauty of Christian art, images, statues, architecture, etc. One example that comes to mind is a former Morman family which left LDS (embracing the difficult family pressure) to become Catholic after spending time in a Catholic Church in Europe. They personally told me that the beauty and environment did something to them. So I am not sure if this fits as a counter point to what you were saying or not, but art, etc certainly has value in bringing people to Christ.

          God bless

          1. The art had to be explained on some level. I’m sure they didn’t just look at art and then totally understood Christianity and sought conversion.

      2. Hi thanks for the clarification, I heard about this and then took a look at it and in my research found the statements in regards to the present pope changing or intent to change the commandment to be incorrect as you said.
        On another note what is your understanding of the change of the fourth commandment which is claimed by the Catholic Church catechism in the last portion of the 1st or beginning of the first century AD

        1. Jimmy,

          Great question! There are several points worth making here, but for now, I’ll defer to St. John Paul II’s Dies Domini [Day of the Lord], which is dedicated to this very subject:

          “Because the Third Commandment depends upon the remembrance of God’s saving works and because Christians saw the definitive time inaugurated by Christ as a new beginning, they made the first day after the Sabbath a festive day, for that was the day on which the Lord rose from the dead. The Paschal Mystery of Christ is the full revelation of the mystery of the world’s origin, the climax of the history of salvation and the anticipation of the eschatological fulfilment of the world. What God accomplished in Creation and wrought for his People in the Exodus has found its fullest expression in Christ’s Death and Resurrection, though its definitive fulfilment will not come until the Parousia, when Christ returns in glory. In him, the “spiritual” meaning of the Sabbath is fully realized, as Saint Gregory the Great declares: “For us, the true Sabbath is the person of our Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ”.(14) This is why the joy with which God, on humanity’s first Sabbath, contemplates all that was created from nothing, is now expressed in the joy with which Christ, on Easter Sunday, appeared to his disciples, bringing the gift of peace and the gift of the Spirit (cf. Jn 20:19-23). It was in the Paschal Mystery that humanity, and with it the whole creation, “groaning in birth-pangs until now” (Rom 8:22), came to know its new “exodus” into the freedom of God’s children who can cry out with Christ, “Abba, Father!” (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). In the light of this mystery, the meaning of the Old Testament precept concerning the Lord’s Day is recovered, perfected and fully revealed in the glory which shines on the face of the Risen Christ (cf. 2 Cor 4:6). We move from the “Sabbath” to the “first day after the Sabbath”, from the seventh day to the first day: the dies Domini becomes the dies Christi!

          I’d also mention that this change from Saturday to Sunday happens during the Apostles’ lifetimes, and is mentioned in the first century Didache, and alluded to in Revelation 1:10. That gives it a special sort of authority: if we can’t trust the Apostles, we’re sunk.

          I.X.,

          Joe

          1. Joe thanks for your answer but , I can’t seem to understand why you would seek to use the apostles as a confirmation of this change of the Sabbath, when a good amount of catholic writings tells it clearly that there is no scriptural basis for this change and that it was an act of the Catholic Church not the early apostles .

            Here is a statement made by Catholic Priest T. Enright, CSSR,Lecture at Hartford, KS, Feb 18, 1884
            ” Ihave repeatedly offerd $1000 to any one who can furnish any proof from the Bible that Sunday in the day we are bound to keep the bible says, remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, but the Chatholic Church says, no keep the first day of the week, and the whole world bows in obedience.

            T.Enright along with many of your priest and others throughout the years have been very clear that there is no grounds for a change of the the bible sabbath that can be found in the scripture. yet you seek to allude to Revelation 1:10 as the change and that it was done during the early apostles time.

  7. Great article! As an aside to the “not bearing false witness” it is more than you think. The early Hebrews were very much nomads…there were no portable jails in those day to haul across the desert as they moved from area to area. Thus criminals who were convicted of crimes were put to death right way for there was no place to put them. Therefore if one spoke falsely against someone in the camp — that is, bore false witness — that person could be convicted by way of false testimony and put to death. In a nomadic community there was no appeal process nor portable jails. So, it was unlawful to bear false witness because such a false witness could cause an innocent person to lose his/her life!

  8. I was wondering how illiterate and deaf not blind, learned or understood things without a figure or should I say image… Language started with images… it just happened that our language has gone too far that we can not remember or will ever know what “a letter” stands for. . Chinese characters stand for an action, events, places, and many more.so with arabic, etc. Most concrete, I guess, is the hieroglyphs. . phonetics would have still be sounds not until we have the alphabet. How would you attend to a person whose language is different from yours?
    When our country was colonized by Spaniards, our ancestors didn’t know Spanish, and we had ALIBATA, our alphabet. .Certainly, our ancestors found completely strange to meet people of different language and race. . but Christian belief spread through the image of Holy Child Jesus. The fact is, our ancestors have strong belief already of an Absolute Being, though, it was more of polytheism, worshiped the sea, the heavens, mountains, the lightning and thunder, and even images, too, but with a superior god. . .So, the spaniards came. Conquered the land with Cross on the left hand and a sword on the right. Quite a history . But the point is, if this images have no real use to convey spiritual realities, we would have not been a christian country . Now, many people are turning away, with the way our ancestors have known God through His image because of the new ideas and concept of how to know and worship God. . .

    How do deaf people learn the language? basically, I would say, from several order of images interpreted in his brain. a single image would mean a lot, depending on whose interpreting. The succession of images which can be in the form of action, reveals a more specific meaning, so we have the sign language . Likewise, religious images remind me of an event or person worthy of reverence and imitation. If its God image, of course it reminds me of Him. Certainly, it depends on how a person treat the image. . . .Perhaps, it is just the meaning within. the story behind a saint that one can not know unless he starts asking to know the life of a saint upon seeing his image. the Bible itself, has no real use to convey spiritual realities unless one understand its meat. .. it would just be plain stains of ink on paper because those letters are actually mere symbols and images, which has evolved. . images evolve. . from what other call idols, and in the modern times, in different forms. . still and motion pictures. . .tarpaulin prints and billboards..

    on the other hand, illiterate blind people becomes educated with engraved images or symbols. . .. thanks to braille. . .and they would never know a cross of Christ till they touched its shape. They would never have the idea of Jesus’ crucifixion if not with the image. .It’s like that someone here is not blind but would not believe the symbol of His death even he sees it because his head is interpreting it for someone else.

    How would you perceive a wooden or engraved cross? . . I myself, can relate always to the precious death of My Savior, Jesus Christ. . If a believer in Christ, who can not relate a simple wooden cross to Christ’s Passion, is he really a christian? it’s true, there have a lot of people died on the cross, but, it was faith that tell me, that His Death on a cross, was the most precious. .. . If you watched “Passion of Christ” by Mel Gibson, Jesus was played by Jim Caviezel. How would you find Jesus there? perhaps, you would not believe it because it was Jim, not truly Jesus. . and you will conclude that it will not convey spiritual realities. you will not feel anything about His passion and at the end, the movie is useless. . . But I was not looking at Jim, but Jesus and find myself into contemplation. . I would say that it convey spiritual realities because it made me stop for a while and repent. Is repentance nor contemplation NOT a mean to spiritual reality? I believe, images are made to convey spirituality. . .Motion pictures was not invented during the time of Christ. . and images were the medium of instruction of Christ. . . . It is not just a mere art. . . It has a meaning in it. An image carries a christian life in it worth of imitation. . . .one just failed to look into that life because he stopped knowing what life is in it. . . how can a person be so unfair to GOd? when a picture of a prominent person is seen on billboards, he would have a picture of who that person is, who have lived a long time ago. . .Statue/ picture or image of a hero, a good leader, a president, actors and actresses, and many celebrities is remembered, offered with flowers, celebrated with a ceremonious program. But when it comes to an image of God, a person can not believe it. the person can not think of who Christ was, when He was still here. . Perhaps, if you see your picture during your childhood years, you would not think of anything, special or bad, likewise, you will be hardly convinced that it was you. Other people who have not seen you in your childhood would not believe it was you because it is just an image/picture. . your picture does not mean anything… For certain, you would not keep any picture/image of you, of your love ones, of your friends because they are useless, they will not convey anything to you. . .Does your prime pic in your FB, tweets, instagram…etc…. are useless? yes, it is useless. . Nobody will know that it is your face. . .Nobody can convey special thoughts. . If somebody’s slanderous/ blasphemous over your picture, you will not feel anything for sure. . If somebody tagged/blogged something about your pic with unethical or with immoral, blasphemous, it is nothing . Is that the way should I interpret it?

  9. What day is “Easter” celebrated? Sunday, right? And if Christ arose on Sunday, which He clearly did. And the Bible calls that day (“as it began to dawn on) the first day of the week.” In addition, as you pointed out in the 10 commandments it clearly says, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” (Exodus 20:8-11)
    So why are you, (and all catholics by order of the Pope) observing Sunday (the first day of the week) as the day of rest instead of the Sabbath (the seventh day of the week) as God commanded? The leadership of the Catholic Church admits that they changed the day of worship by the power of the church alone and by no authority of the Word of God. If you want to follow a man (the Pope), and the day he set apart, because he is the head of your church instead of the Lord Jesus Christ (who is the true head of the Church, see Ephesians 5:23) and the commandments of God, then you go right ahead. But I will keep God’s commandments and follow Him, as Jesus himself said, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” John 14:15. And to make sure the commandments did or didn’t change what does the Word of God say in Matthew 5:17-19 “Do not think that I have come to do away with, or change the law. . . until heaven and earth pass away not the least letter nor the smallest dot within the law shall pass away. . . therefor whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, or teaches others to do so, will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven….

    1. So why are you, (and all catholics by order of the Pope) observing Sunday (the first day of the week) as the day of rest instead of the Sabbath (the seventh day of the week) as God commanded?

      Because Christ said to Peter:

      Matthew 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

      Therefore, by the authority vested in the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ, the Church changed the Sabbath day to Sunday, the day our Lord rose from the grave.

      1. So sad to see the scriptures being perverted. Christ, Himself, is the Rock on which the Church was built, not Peter.

        Psa 118:22
        The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

        Isa 28:16
        Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

        Eph 2:20
        And are built upon the foundation of the apostle(S) [not just Peter] AND prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

        Under no authority does the Catholic Church have the right to alter the commandments written by the finger of God. The Seventh-day Sabbath is STILL binding, and it is up to us to observe it.

        1. Laurie says:
          September 6, 2015 at 7:16 pm
          So sad to see the scriptures being perverted. Christ, Himself, is the Rock on which the Church was built, not Peter.

          Matt 16:18-19 says that Jesus built His Church upon the Rock of Peter.

          Psa 118:22
          The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

          Isa 28:16
          Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

          That should give you pause, Jesus gave Simon, His own name. Thus indicating that Simon would walk in Christ’s place. Jesus appointed Simon the head of His Church.

          Eph 2:20
          And are built upon the foundation of the apostle(S) [not just Peter] AND prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

          That’s a different metaphor which does not contradict Christ’s own words.

          Under no authority does the Catholic Church have the right to alter the commandments written by the finger of God.

          On the contrary, God, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, gave the Church the authority to bind and loose, in heaven and on earth. Whatever the Church does on earth, God backs up.

          The Seventh-day Sabbath is STILL binding, and it is up to us to observe it.

          Wrong. Jesus Christ rose on the first day and the Church has transferred the celebration of the Covenant to the first day, which we call, Sunday.

          1. Matt. 16:18-19 is, unfortunately, a much misunderstood scripture upon which doctrines have been established, in error, for millennia. Throughout the Bible, Christ is referred to as the “ROCK,” the chief cornerstone, the ROCK of my salvation, the ROCK of my refuge, etc.

            1Co 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and THAT ROCK WAS CHRIST.

            1 Peter 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on HIM shall not be confounded.

            Christ was speaking about HIMSELF as being the ROCK, not Peter. It was simply a comparison between Peter’s name (a PEICE of a rock) and Christ’s own designation as THE Rock (the one and only Rock). He was very likely pointing to HIMSELF when He was explaining the difference in terms.

            Please explain how Eph. 2:20 is “a different metaphor that does not contradict Christ’s own words.”

            You say that the “second person of the trinity” gives the catholic church the authority to “bind and loose.” First, the Holy Spirit is NOT a PERSON; it is very simply the NATURE, MIND, and POWER of God. It is described as WIND, OIL, FIRE, A DOVE, etc.

            If it were a “person,” shouldn’t “he” be sitting on his own throne beside Christ who sits on the right hand of God? And, wouldn’t he be jealous because he doesn’t have a throne?

            Further, the allowance to “bind and loose” refers to DECISION-MAKING, and certainly DOES NOT permit alterations to the 10 Commandments which were written in STONE (which cannot be altered [without a really sharp chisel]) by the finger of God. “Binding and loosing” authority is only granted when it is WITHIN the LAWS, STATUTES, and DECREES of God.

            De Maria says, “Christ rose on the first day” of the week. This is another false doctrine which has been perpetrated and perpetuated throughout the eons. Because much of the knowledge of God’s commanded HIGH DAYS (Holy Days) [Lev. 23] has been lost, so has the true sequence of events and timing of the crucifixion and resurrection.

            Christ was murdered on a Wednesday afternoon and arose on Sabbath afternoon (the 7th day) after THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS. Thursday was a “High Day” (1st Day of Unleavened Bread, a holy convocation), then the weekly Sabbath followed. [John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an HIGH DAY,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.]

            The only sign that Christ gave was that of Jonah: Matt. 12:40 For as Jonas was THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS in the heart of the earth.

            How is it possible to count THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS from Friday to Sunday morning? Please don’t say that it is a “GREEK idiom” which refers to “partial” days. Ludicrous. This defense holds no water, since Christ makes reference to the Book of Jonah which WAS WRITTEN IN HEBREW. Three days and three nights (three complete 24-hour periods) cannot be understood any other way than just that…THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS.

          2. Laurie,

            I noticed that you deny that there are Three Persons in the Trinity. Can you explain yourself a little more? Right now, it looks like you’re saying that since the Holy Spirit descended as a Dove, He can’t be a Person. That seems like a confused understanding of Personality.

            Also, for the sake of clarity, what religion are you?

      2. Haha your funny. Why do Catholics use that scripture and think Yeshua was talking about catholocism. I’m curious why the vatican has pagan symbols

        1. Paul says:
          September 10, 2015 at 3:52 am
          Haha your funny. Why do Catholics use that scripture and think Yeshua was talking about catholocism. I’m curious why the vatican has pagan symbols

          Because a member of the Catholic Church wrote that verse. Therefore, the Church knows what it means.

      3. De Marie,

        Peter made a confession , Peter believed the message that Jesus was teaching and preaching , that he “Jesus ” was and is the only begotten son of God , the promise one, the lamb of God, and this is the “Rock on which the church is built” all the teaching of Jesus “the gospel” is the Key of the kingdom, as many believe the gospel can receive life everlasting. they that believe are condemn already according to John 3:18,19.

        Paul puts it this way “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation to them that believe”.

        It is this that Jesus commanded his disciples in Matt 28:18 – 20.

        You would note clearly from scripture (New Testament) there was no popes or single person that was a visible head , there were the Apostles , elders, deacons . the Holy Spirit was given to them all on Pentecost , they all preach the gospel. but the Apostles were collectively leading the Church and the work.

    2. Johnathan,

      There’s an Adventist myth that the early Christians worshipped on Saturday until Constantine or the pope forced them to change to Sunday. It’s not true.

      The practice of Christians from the time of the Apostles was to meet together on Sunday, which Revelation 1:10 refers to as “the Lord’s Day.” The first-century Didache describes the Christian community coming together for the Sacrifice of the Mass every Sunday:

      “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.””

      So why did the Christians make this switch? The short answer is the Resurrection. For a longer answer, Pope St. John Paul II wrote an encyclical on just this question, Dies Domini. One point worth quoting:

      “It is the duty of Christians therefore to remember that, although the practices of the Jewish Sabbath are gone, surpassed as they are by the “fulfilment” which Sunday brings, the underlying reasons for keeping “the Lord’s Day” holy — inscribed solemnly in the Ten Commandments — remain valid, though they need to be reinterpreted in the light of the theology and spirituality of Sunday”

      So I would recommend you read the encyclical with an open heart and, if you have any remaining questions, ask away. God bless!

      1. Revelation 1:10 and its reference to “the Lord’s day” does not describe the weekly Sabbath day of worship. It is not describing “worship” at all.

        The entire PROPHETIC book of Revelation delineates “THE DAY OF THE LORD.”

        Isa 13:6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

        Jer 46:10 For this is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries: and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood: for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.

        Eze 13:5 Ye have not gone up into the gaps, neither made up the hedge for the house of Israel to stand in the battle in the day of the LORD.

        2Pet 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

        There are numerous scriptures that refer to “The Day of the Lord.”

        It is bewildering how the phrase “the Lord’s day” can somehow be understood that John (who was imprisoned on the isle of Patmos) was worshipping on the Sabbath. This is the ONLY time throughout the entire Bible that the term “the Lord’s day” is written. This phrase has never been associated with the Sabbath Day. Multiple times, however, it has been associated with the Day of God’s vengeance–The Day of the Lord.

        There is NOTHING in this book of death and destruction that would indicate, in any way, that John was doing anything but WARNING THE WORLD (through Christ’s revelation [Rev 1:1]) of its impending doom.

      2. it is quite intresting Joe, that you would use Revelation 1:10 that makes refrence to “The Lord’s Day” which supplies no context that would supply any identification of which day of the week it make refrence to, injecting the first day of the week into this text would be simply conjecture, at no time in scripture the first day is identified as “The Lord’s Day”

        Intrestingly why can’t this be a day that the Lord has already identified or call his day as was said in a previous post, or simply the Sabbath of the fourth commandment , Mark 2:28 say’s “the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath”, Ex 20:10 say’s “but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God”.

        The practice of the Apostle and Jesus are very clear that they met on just about every day of the week but the only ones that were of any spiritural significance was the weekly Sabbath or ceremonial days , for example: passover, feast of pentecost, feast of tabernacles, intresting enough the 1st day of the week is mentioned in the new testament eight times and only once was a religous meeting held on it in Acts 20:7, but religous meetings were held every week on the Sabbath Acts 13:14,42; 16:13. It was Jesus Custom to go into the synagogue on Sabbath day according to luke 4:16. intrestingly Jesus in Matthew 24:20 predicts the siege of Jerusalem which occurred in AD 70 and from the text Jesus still expected the Sabbath to be observed by his Apostles who would be fleeing the city.

        I admire the honesty of the catholic church on this point,but as she says there is no scriptural basis for this change.

        Jesus in Mark 7:6 – 13 rebukes the Pharisees and Scribes for laying aside the commandment of God and replacing it with their traditions and teaching the people to put aside God commandment to obey their traditions.

        This is the very same thing happening here with the Sabbath of the commandment.

  10. all those shows end time..every man have an ear to listen if you still believe its not idolatry God shall judge

    1. Fred,

      I live right by St. Peter’s square, and can tell you for a fact that isn’t true.

      Look, if we actually worshipped idols, I would agree with you that this would be a violation of the Ten Commandments. But we don’t. And you can’t convince me that we do by simply repeating the same falsehood ad nauseum.

      What is true is that we have religious statues that we incorporate in our worship of God, but that’s also true of the ancient Jews. And we know that wasn’t contrary to the Ten Commandments because they were ordered to make these statues by God. It’s right there in the Book.

      I.X.,

      Joe

      1. Praying to or honoring in any way a stone, bronze or cement statue and praying to dead people IS idol worship. There’s just no getting around it.

    2. I don’t live by St. Peter’s. But I do bow to statues. Not to idols.

      The difference between you and I, is that I understand the difference between a representation of something and the something which is being represented.

      For instance, when I kiss the photo of my mom, I know that I’m pressing my lips on a piece of paper, not on my mom’s cheek. Yet, I am kissing my mom and not the piece of paper. Because it is my mom whom I love and the piece of paper which bears her image, I cherish, because of her image which is upon it and which reminds me of her.

      I don’t kiss photos of bears or tigers. I don’t bow to images of dogs and cats.

      So, I bow before images of the Saints because Scripture says:

      Psalm 116:15 Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints.

      Now, if God holds His Saints precious, who am I to do any less. I show my respect for those whom God loves and honors, in imitation of my Lord for whom I live.

      And anyone who doesn’t honor the Saints of God needs to check himself to see if he truly honors God who holds those men precious in His sight.

  11. Is the Sabbath important to us Today?

    I found this argument against keeping the Sabbath holy. How true is it?
    I have mingled the argument with the response.
    Your answer

    This complex explanation is so very confusing, that I have to tackle a paragraph at a time, and we will see the truth in it, if there is any.

    Paragraph 1: Many people assume that because the weekly Sabbath is in the Ten Commandments, it must therefore be a law for all times and for all people to keep. They conclude that Christians are obligated to keep the Sabbath as “holy time.”

    Response: It is true that it is a law of all times. Firstly, The ten Commandments are eternal and will never change – “”Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18″For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Matthew 5:17,18. Secondly, God changes not in His will for us – “Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.” James 1:16,17

    Paragraph 2: We cannot make a blanket statement that the law of God or the Ten Commandments are “done away.” Two of the Commandments tell us not to commit idolatry or to murder. These laws are not done away.

    Response: Here we are trying to avoid being guilty of brushing all other laws away. We can not do away with any – “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. 11For He who said, “DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY,” also said, “DO NOT COMMIT MURDER.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.” james 2:10

    Paragraph 3: The Law of Moses tells us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Leviticus 19:18) and to love God with all our soul, mind and strength (Deuteronomy 6:5). Jesus reaffirmed these as the two greatest commands in existence (Matthew 22:34-40). These great laws of God are not done away. As Christians we are “under” them in the sense that we should do what they command, loving God above all else and our neighbor as ourselves.

    Response: I agree with this paragraph fully and without any difficulty. Only that we shouldn’t forget that Jesus said, – “”If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” John 14:15 and John writes again that – “By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him” 1 John 2:3-5

    Paragraph 4: The question about God’s law ought to be put in these terms: Which “laws of God” are Christians to have written on their heart, and which are they obliged to keep? Does that obligation include keeping the Sabbath day holy? Let’s begin by looking at one of several New Testament scriptures that talk about keeping the commandments of God. What are the “commandments of God” that Christians are to obey?

    Response: Now we are getting naughty here. Are there laws to be written on our hearts and not to be done? I don’t think so. If a law is written in our hearts, it is not to be ignored but to be kept without being compelled. When we ask “Does that obligation include keeping the Sabbath day holy?” We are like telling God, You were not serious about that one. We want it our way. This writer agrees here that several New Testament scriptures talk about keeping the commandments of God and goes ahead to ask, “What are the “commandments of God” that Christians are to obey?… This raises a question, How many commandments do we have? and how many did Jesus Keep? It is clear that Jesus kept the Sabbath holy – “And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read.” Luke 4:16

    Paragraph 5: There is an important principle to consider here: We must be careful to understand the words “law” and “commandment” when we find them before the giving of the old covenant in the Old Testament, and especially after the new covenant was instituted in the New Testament. We need to be careful how we understand and apply the words “law” or “commandments” when we see them in various places in the Bible. If we casually refer to these words when they are used in Scripture—and say they mean that Christians must keep the old covenant law—we can lead ourselves astray.

    Response: The law of God is His Commandments. We cannot separate the two terms here. I would agree that this was true, only if the ten commandments and the law of God was composed on this world by men. The Bible records that the terbanacle that was in this earth was a replica of what is eternal in heaven- “They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” Hebrews 8:5,6. We can not call God’s law the “old covenant law” because God is timeless and His commandments are pure and holy.- “The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.” Psalms 19:8

    Paragraph 6: The words “law” or “commandments” don’t always refer to the Ten Commandments, or the Mosaic law as a system. When we claim this, we are “reading back” our already-held belief that Christians must keep every one of the Ten Commandments in their entirety, as well as the Mosaic law. But we should allow the Scriptures to speak for themselves.
    For example, Christians must keep the “law of Christ,” which the Holy Spirit puts into our hearts (Galatians 6:2; Romans 8:2). But it is not the entire set of ceremonial, sacrificial and civil regulations found in the Mosaic law from Exodus through Deuteronomy. Otherwise, Christians would have to obey every single law in those books, including the purification rites, sacrificial laws, priestly laws, and physical circumcision. But these laws are not to be kept by Christians. The book of Hebrews and the New Testament makes this clear.
    So we need to be careful when we read about “commandments” in the Bible—particularly in the New Testament. We should not confuse them with the Ten Commandments as a group, or the package of legal requirements (the Law of Moses) the old covenant was based on. The issue is not whether we are to keep the Ten Commandments or the old covenant Mosaic laws as a group. The question is, which commandments are Christians to obey?

    Response: Now we should be very careful here. The commandments of God can never be grouped with the Mosaic laws of Moses. Moses in His last speech clearly said that the Commandments of God were written with God’s own finger!!! – “The LORD gave me the two tablets of stone written by the finger of God; and on them were all the words which the LORD had spoken with you at the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly.” Deuteronomy 9:10. When we are talking of the Sabbath, Let us talk about it knowing that it is the fourth of the ten commandments spoken by God Himself in a Mighty manifestation on Mount Sinai in Exodus 19 and 20. The same that Jesus said that He didn’t come to put away in Matthew 5:17 and the same that is referred to by James in James 2:10. This question is not good – “Which commandments are Christians to obey?”… When we ask ourself this question, we are trying to choose for ourselves what seems good for us. but God is God and we should be obedient to every level.

    Paragraph 7: The answer is, we are to teach the commandments of Jesus Christ (Matthew 28:20). What did Jesus say in John 14:15? He said, “If you love me, you will obey what I command.” Matthew concludes his Gospel with the same thought about obeying Jesus’ commandments: “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19-20).
    But what did Jesus command? He told Jews still living under the old covenant to keep the purification rites of the old covenant, for example (Luke 5:14). We know from Hebrews that Christians don’t need to keep these ceremonial regulations. To which commandments, then, was Jesus referring?

    Response: I understand here that Jesus gave commandments. We are trying to put off the Sabbath because Jesus didn’t mention the Sabbath every time He talked of the commands… well, did He mention Sunday anywhere? Let’s be serious here. Did Jesus have to remind them every time that the Sabbath is among the commandments while everyone fully knew that? Sabbath is an issue now, not because God changed it but because man changed it under the devil’s influence.

    Paragraph 8: He summarized them in John 15:12: “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.” What Jesus talked about—what he commanded to his disciples—was that they should love each other selflessly. This is a tall order. His commands had to do with loving neighbor and God, not keeping ceremonial regulations such as not working or avoiding personal pleasures on the Sabbath. This shouldn’t surprise us, for he said that the greatest commandment is to love God, and the second greatest is to love our fellow human beings. (Two of the most important commandments are to believe in Jesus Christ and to love one another, as 1 John 3:24 tells us.)
    The orientation of the new covenant is to Christ and the cross, not to Moses and the tables of stone. The great sermon of the new covenant is not the one given at Mt. Sinai, but by Jesus Christ, in his Sermon on the Mount. There he began to explain the principles of the new covenant.

    Response: Now we are attacking God here. We are not mindful of God’s emotions when we say that we love him, but we are to choose just how. The division of the commandments to loving God and loving man is the first four to God and the last six to fellow man. Why on earth should we omit the fourth and say that all the rest are good? And by the way, If God came to die because we didn’t keep the Sabbath as we were supposed to, would His death give us permission to break it the more? think about that for a while.

    Paragraph 9: Similarly, let’s ask what we mean by “God’s law.” What commandments of God are Christians obliged to obey? When we think of the aspects of God’s law that are eternal, we see the kinds of principles that govern our conduct in relationship primarily to other people. That is, we shouldn’t steal, be drunkards, bear false witness or slander, be sexually immoral, be greedy or arrogant, and so on. The New Testament contains ample teaching in these areas.
    The eternal aspect of God’s law also tells us to love God with all our soul and mind and strength. This tells us we shouldn’t be idolaters and have any thing or any god in place of the true one. In that sense, this law also reflects principles of an eternal, moral law.
    The New Testament is filled with admonitions not to break these “spiritual-moral laws,” if that’s what we want to call them. The book of James discusses many of these moral failures as examples of the breaking of the “royal law” of loving your neighbor as yourself (2:8). Some Scriptures contain what are called “sin lists.” These mention a number of wrong human actions that God’s spiritual-moral law would prevent, if followed. (For three examples, see Mark 7:20-23, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and Galatians 5:16-24.)
    To break the spiritual-moral law of God described above is to be a wicked and sinful person. To follow this law of God is to exhibit the “fruit” of the Holy Spirit, and thus to be in concert with the will of God. Those are the commandments of God that Revelation 12:17 tells us to follow.

    Response: Hahaha! this is funny. This guy picks the verses that explain about law breaking, and because Sabbath is not mentioned there, He says that Sabbath is not in the Scripture. Please give God a break. Why are we forgetting that Jesus Kept the Sabbath? Paul Kept the Sabbath holy too and so did all the apostles! Sabbath came to be put away with many centuries after Jesus had already gone to heaven and the Church had already had a foundation. We can never get an evidence in the Bible for any other day of worship. You better get other ways to explain but not from the scriptures.

    Paragraph 10: Probably most—or even all—the spiritual-moral laws one might think of can be found somewhere in both the New and the Old Testament. The Law of Moses is heavily sprinkled with these laws. Nine of the Ten Commandments, the centerpiece of the Mosaic law, are moral-type laws of one sort or another. The first three commandments can be thought of as spiritual-moral in that they tell us not to worship anything that is not the true God. Breaking these laws is idolatry, a sin that is mentioned in the New Testament, too.
    However, we are only partially correct in saying that the Ten Commandments and the Mosaic laws are spiritual-moral in nature. The problem is that all of its laws do not all fit into this category. The law of Moses also includes ceremonial as well as spiritual-moral laws.
    The Sabbath day, even though it is in the Ten Commandments, must be counted as a ceremonial law. We can look at the situation in this way. A spiritual-moral law would have no exceptions. It’s not enough for us to refrain from stealing, greed or sexual immorality on one day and commit it on six others. We can’t refrain from worshipping idols on one day but do so on the other six. These practices are intrinsically wrong, and are contrary to eternal, moral laws.

    Response: Now we are teaching God how to make His commandments. Look at this line: “The Sabbath day, even though it is in the Ten Commandments, must be counted as a ceremonial law.” Wow! this is Blasphemy of the highest order. It is like saying, “God, you misplaced this. it should be written by Moses and not by you”. What else can I say to show you the errors in this article?

    1. Mission Control to The New Age. Come in, please.

      Mission Control to The New Age. We have a problem…

      Jeremiah 31:31″Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant which they broke, though I was their husband, says the LORD. 33 But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each man teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

      St. Paul doesn’t agree with you either.

      Hebrews 8:1* Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent * which is set up not by man but by the Lord. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; hence it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. 4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. 5* They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary; for when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, “See that you make everything according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain.” 6 But as it is, Christ * has obtained a ministry which is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second. 8* For he finds fault with them when he says: “The days will come, says the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; 9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my covenant, and so I paid no heed to them, says the Lord. 10 This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach every one his fellow or every one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.” 13 In speaking of a new covenant he treats the first as obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

      The New Covenant was establish by Jesus Christ, Who is the Second part of the Holy Trinity. God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, eternally begotten not made. Is Jesus Christ not the visible image of God in Heaven? John 14: 6* Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen him.” 8Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” 9* Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father?”

      The Sabbath is for the Jews, The Lord’s Day (The Resurrection) is for Christians. So, since Jesus Christ is God, then wouldn’t one expect God to keep His promises?

      I suggest you read the writings of some of the Early Church Fathers because even they don’t agree with you.

  12. Paragraph 11: But the Sabbath, in its major old covenant regulation, forbids work on one specific day each week. However, work is not an evil, but something that is a necessary part of life. Work is permitted on the other six days of the week. In contrast, lying is always wrong, because it is intrinsically a violation of a spiritual-moral law. Making a graven image for purposes of worship or being disobedient to parents is always a sin.
    Yet, working is not wrong, and was only ceremonially banned on the Sabbath and the annual festivals in a certain situation, that is, when the old covenant was in force. Working, per se, is not sin. Its opposite, laziness, is condemned as morally unsound (1 Timothy 5:8; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-12).
    The principle when speaking of “God’s law” or “commandments” is the following. No requirements from the old covenant—including the Ten Commandments—are binding on Christians except the spiritual-moral principles, which are repeated in the Scriptures of the new covenant—the New Testament. However, keeping the Sabbath by not working is not based on any eternal, spiritual-moral principle. Nor is it mentioned in the New Testament as a Christian requirement. We must conclude that, at its heart, Sabbath regulations were ceremonial practices and not necessary for Christians to “keep holy.”

    Response: Read this sentence: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9″Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God” Then read this other sentence: “Sabbath, forbids work on one specific day each week. However, work is not an evil, but something that is a necessary part of life.” If you don’t see a problem there, there is a problem somewhere. God is not happy of this paragraph at all.

    I am not always right, but whoever wrote this is a liar. He or she is not sent of God.

    For the patient ones, this is enough proof of the errors in sunday worship.

    1. “The New Walk,” do you ever lie? Do you covet? Do you commit adultery with your eyes? You break all of these commandments and you really think if you keep the Sabbath holy, that God will overlook that you break all of His other commandments?

      1. None of them do I ever do as deliberately as Sabbath breaking is done. Do you break the Sabbath deliberately because you also break the other commandments? That is taking God’s grace for granted. We weren’t given grace to sin more.

        1. The New Walk

          YOU SAID:”None of them do I ever do as deliberately as Sabbath breaking is done.”

          Uhhhh…last I knew, ANY lie is considered deliberate. There is no such thing as “lying” if one is ignorant. It is simply that the person doesn’t know the proper information, which would now lead to another dilemma, that of repeating something you know nothing about and claiming it to be true. If one knows they are uncertain, they should morally state: “I know not”.

          But your words “as deliberately” just demonstrates that you have a conscious awareness that you are doing something sinful and such an act is sinful. A sin is a sin. So, you just admitted that you are taking God’s grace for granted.

        2. Well, New Walk, its actually a lot more simple than you make it out.

          Christ is the Lord of the Sabbath:

          Luke 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

          The Lord of the Sabbath, gave unto Peter the Keys to the Kingdom, which lock on earth and in heaven.

          Matthew 16:18-19King James Version (KJV)

          18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

          19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

          The Catholic Church, by virtue of the power vested in the keys given to St. Peter, changed the Sabbath day. We still honor the Sabbath day, but on a different day. On the day that our Lord came out of the grave.

          Now, you might ask, how can the 7th or Sabbath be changed to the 1st or Sunday?

          The word “sabbath” has a double meaning. It means 7th and it means “oath”. We honored the Seventh day because on that day, God blessed creation.

          Genesis 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

          But now God has blessed the 1st day by rising from the grave on that 1st day. Therefore, God has transferred the blessing from the seventh to the first day. And therefore, the Catholic Church has transferred the Sabbath from the 7th day to the 1st.

          1. No keys were given to Peter, exclusively.

            Eph 2:20
            And are built upon the foundation of the apostle(S) AND prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

          2. De Maria

            This matter of keys of the kingdom is made out to authorized the change of what God has commanded , Jesus rebuked the Pharisees and scribes of his day for seeking to do the same; there is no such understanding made known by Peter or any other apostle of Christ.

            It is profoundly clear that they received the teachings of Jesus and shared those teachings unaltered to those who heard them and believed on Jesus and kept his commandments unaltered even at the treat and punishment of death.

            It is interesting that you would claim that Jesus rising on the first day of the week blesses the first day of the week therefore the sabbath day was changed to the 1st day of the week .

            Well I would like to informed you that Jesus is the mediator of the. New covenant ( or testament) , he is also the testator of the will; and if he himself did not willed it before his death it could not be added according to the writer of the book Hebrews , his shed blood ratified the new covenant and his death actuated his will.

            Even today we know that the will of the dead is enforced and can’ t be altered.

            He added before his death the Lord supper , which he said as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup you do it in remberance of me!

            His disciples that came to anoint his body for burial dared not do this , in order that they might keep the Sabbath according to the commandment, this is what they learnt from Jesus.

            The scripture is clear that they add or take away from the word of God , shall receive the plages written therein.

            Peter said to the leaders of his day “when they requested him and others to stop preaching the forgiveness of sins in the name of Jesus” , we will obey God rather than man.

            The early apostles suffered at the hands of the Jewish and Roman leaders because they dared not tampered with the teachings of Jesus to appease public or church officials .

            Now on the other hand there were some that claimed to be of the church that altered the word of God to escape persecution and death, altering the Sabbath to distant themselves from the Jewish Christians.

          3. If you are convinced that “the keys were given to Peter” how do you figure it end up in the hand of someone else and at that ” The Roman Catholic Church” , John the apostle on the isle of Patmos missed it being the last of the Apostles and spoke nothing of this keys being passed down , all the other apostles including Peter did not speak of it being passed down. They displayed no knowledge of keys that give them authority to change or alter the word of God, however they spoke endlessly of the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation , which they warned that some would come in after their departure , which will bring in damnable teachings to corrupt the way of truth, their council was and still remain , give no place to them.

        3. “The New Walk,”

          I’ll be more than happy to answer your questions after I can get a response about your breaking of the Law. It sounds to me that you broke several commandments. Do you know what the wages of sin are?

          1. De Maria, let him answer the question. I am not talking about any of our differences in interpretation or doctrine, I am asking him if he upholds the Law which he believes is in full effect.

          2. Craig Truglia says:
            July 12, 2015 at 11:02 pm
            De Maria, let him answer the question.

            No one is stopping him from answering the question.

            I am not talking about any of our differences in interpretation or doctrine,

            Yes, you are.

            I am asking him if he upholds the Law which he believes is in full effect.

            The Law is a basic element of Scripture and Judeo Christian Doctrine.

            And, since you both believe in Sola Scriptura, a doctrine which permits each individual to interpret Scripture anyway they want, he can interpret whether he has to uphold the law or not. Or how to uphold that law. That’s how Sola Scripturists justify the existence of 66,600 Protestant denominations.

          3. I don’t think you are understanding my point. He posted a huge reply on a billion things, especially the Sabbath, judging everyone other than himself as lawbreakers. I am merely pointing him to the fact that he too is a lawbreaker and needs forgiveness for his sins.

        4. It’s good to consider the eternal words of Our Lord Jesus Christ on the subject of the Sabbath when he taught:

          “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath. [28] Therefore the Son of man is Lord of the sabbath also.”

          1. Sorry, De Maria, I didn’t catch your quote from Luke 6:5, above, before posting.

            Never the less, Jesus indeed is the “Lord of the Sabbath”, and His resurrection ushered in a ‘new Heaven and a New Earth”, wherein faith and grace that is sufficient obtaining eternal life is available for those who seek it.

          2. No need to apologize. We all need to be repeating Our Lord’s words:

            Acts 2:17And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy….

  13. You do worship pop….you call him holly father and we all know that no man is considered holly before God…we all know that God forgives sin when we ask for forgiveness through Jesus Christ why do you ask the dead which you call saint….then who said a man has power to pronounce the dead as saint?

    1. Chris,

      It’s very apparent that you have an issue with “truth” because you are doing nothing but parroting old anti-Catholic propaganda that has been disproved over the last 500 years. Instead of actually researching what you claim, you simply regurgitate old filth, demonstrating that one isn’t even remotely interested in discovering what is true in Catholicsim. By the way…we don’t worship “pop” but we may on occasion drink one. I believe you meant “Pope”.

      So, I’m going to extend you an opportunity here to please provide the passage, or passages from the Catechesis of The Catholic Church, documentation from any Early Church Father, any documentation from the Vatican, any writings by any “Christian” between 33 A.D. to the end of the 18th century that demonstrates the manner and process by which Catholics allegedly worship the Pope. Please provide the prayers to be spoken, the liturgical form of worship, what rubrics are considered necessary, and what “sacrifices” we Catholics are to make to this alleged “god-Pope”. Thank you and I look forward to your reply.

      Can you please provide us with the multiple meanings for the word “holy” and how it might be used in conjunction with the term “Holy Father”. And since you claim that “we all know that no man is considered holy before God”, are you insinuating Jesus Christ was not holy either? Are you claiming Job was not holy either? How about Moses? How about Zachariah, or Ezekiel? By the way…it’s “holy” not “holly”. “Holly” is something that grows on trees 🙂

      You are correct that God forgives sin when we ask for forgiveness through Jesus Christ, but did you know that God also refuses to forgive sins as well? Can you demonstrate the absolute certainty of that forgiveness?

      You claim that we “ask the dead which we call saints”. See, Chris. Perhaps you might want to go back and read Scripture again and, as I said above, do some research. Saints aren’t dead, unless you believe that the Words of Jesus Christ are false and The Resurrection never happened. The Saints are those who are alive in heaven, united to the perfect Mystical Body of Christ. Can you explain to me why Moses and Elijah were consulting with Jesus Christ on Mt. Tabor if they were dead?

      You ask: “then who said a man has power to pronounce the dead as saint?”. The Catholic Church doesn’t pronounce “dead people” as Saints, She pronounces those who have proven themselves to be (through a rather long and thorough investigation) united with The Mystical Body of Christ, a power that was granted to Her by Jesus Christ, Himself. “Whatsoever you bind on earth….”

      1. Mark Allen you seem to be an intelligent man, explain to me the oath that Jesuits take. Also did archbishop Jose Mario bergoglio on his watch not let a gay cpl baptize their child. Also I’m curious on forgiving the mothers on aborting their child, there seems to be a certain amount of acceptance with this, have you ever googled abortion clock. This is extremely disturbing. Now if someone repents only God knows their heart but like I said there seems to be a certain amount of acceptance. I’m also curious about John Paul kissing the Koran and saying muslims and Catholics worship the same God. The Koran was inspired by an angel specifically satan. How bout francis saying God didn’t wave his magic wand like a magician when it came to creation. I grew up a catholic fell away but I’ve redevoted my life to the Great I Am Yahweh and Yeshua Hamashiac as my personal savior. Even though Francis says a personal relationship with Jesus can be dangerous. The only danger is im on fire for Christ. Too much man made garbage with Catholicism for me. I pray for the RC church and it’s followers will one day find the truth
        John 15: 18-19
        If the world hates you, remember that it hated me before you. If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you do not belong to the world, because my choice withdrew you from the world, therefore the world hates you. I don’t hear of a lot catholic persecution, except on sites like this wich is hardly persecution, but I do hear of a lot of christian persecution. God bless and I can’t wait for the return of Yeshua

    2. chris says:
      July 12, 2015 at 10:31 am
      You do worship pop….

      We honor the Pope, yes.

      you call him holly father and we all know that no man is considered holly before God…

      Since when?

      Daniel 4:17 This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: ….

      Holy ones? Who is that a reference to if not men?

      Ephesians 3:5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

      The apostles and prophets were men, were they not?

      Titus 1:8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;

      2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

      From where I sit, you seem to be contradicting Scripture.

      we all know that God forgives sin when we ask for forgiveness through Jesus Christ why do you ask the dead which you call saint….

      Not sure what you’re talking about there.

      We don’t ask the dead for forgiveness. We ask them to intercede for us before God. And we do so because we walk amongst them and they are part of the body of Christ:

      Hebrews 12:22-24King James Version (KJV)

      22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

      23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

      24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

      We do so because we consider them our brothers and sisters in Christ.

      then who said a man has power to pronounce the dead as saint?

      Christ.

      Matthew 16:18-19King James Version (KJV)

      18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

      19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

      and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

      WHATSOEVER

      1. De Maria

        You say that you as the dead to intercede for you ?

        Eccl 9:4 – 6 say’s ” For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
        For the living know that they shall die but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more reward; for the memory of them is forgotton.
        Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

        Ecc 3:19 -21 tells that the breath given to beast was given to man and that the spirit of man return to God who gave it and the spirit of the beast goeth down to the earth.

        neither are knows or are aware of anything that happens in earth or any where else for that matter.

        When speaking about David the apostle said the David did not ascend into heaven, we have his grave with us even to this day (paraphrased) .

        Paul makes it very clear , that the resurrection of the dead will occur at the second coming of Jesus .

        the story or parable of Lazarus carried into the bosom of Abraham was just that ” a parable” to teach a special lesson of the reward of the righteous and the wicked at the second coming of Jesus. not purgatory.

        1. Jimmy johnson says:
          September 25, 2015 at 8:08 am
          De Maria

          You say that you as the dead to intercede for you ?

          Yes. Dead Saints. Jesus said:
          John 11:25King James Version (KJV)

          25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

          Thereby declaring that those who die in Christ, are alive in Christ. Therefore, the dead to whom I ask for intercession, they are alive in Christ.

          Eccl 9:4 – 6 say’s ” For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
          For the living know that they shall die but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more reward; for the memory of them is forgotton.
          Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

          Ecc 3:19 -21 tells that the breath given to beast was given to man and that the spirit of man return to God who gave it and the spirit of the beast goeth down to the earth.

          neither are knows or are aware of anything that happens in earth or any where else for that matter.

          That’s the Old Covenant. We have a New Covenant with better promises. Do you not know that we walk on Mount Sion with the spirits of men made perfect?
          Hebrews 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

          When speaking about David the apostle said the David did not ascend into heaven, we have his grave with us even to this day (paraphrased) .

          Paul makes it very clear , that the resurrection of the dead will occur at the second coming of Jesus .

          Does that say that David’s spirit is not in heaven?

          the story or parable of Lazarus carried into the bosom of Abraham was just that ” a parable” to teach a special lesson of the reward of the righteous and the wicked at the second coming of Jesus. not purgatory.

          Yes, Jimmy, it is Purgatory. And here’s another verse which teaches Purgatory:

          1 Corinthians 3:10-15King James Version (KJV)

          10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

          11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

          12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

          13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.

          14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

          15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

  14. Ignorance is bliss and I congratulate you one and ALL on Your BLISSFULNESS!!! “nough said. I SUGGEST and RECOMMEND WE ALL READ GOD’S HOLY WORD from BEGINNING to END, OVER AND over again. wHY WOULD i WANT TO FOLLOW AND WORSHIP ANOTHER SINFUL HUMAN BEING in place of JESUS CHRIST, the SINLESS ONE. We have ALL SINNED and COME SHORT OF GOD’S GLORY and that includes ALL HUMANS WHO HAVE WALKED THIS EARTH, POPES INCLUDED.ANYONE who stands on the TRADITIONS and FALSE TEACHINGS of MAN rather than GOD’S HOLY, RIGHTEOUS WORD, the Bible are making a GROSS and GRAVE MISTAKE!!! JESUS DIED AS OUR SACRIFICIAL LAMB in our place..It is HIS and ONLY HIS SAVING, CLEANSING, HOLY, RIGHTEOUS, INNOCENT SHED BLOOD on the Cruel Cross of Calvary that SAVES ANYONE, ANYBODY!!! HE IS OUR ONLY HOPE and as it says in John 15:5 without Him we can do NOTHING GOOD without Him controlling our mind, heart, and soul. Incidentally, He also says in John 14:15, If YOU LOVE ME, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS!! DO you THINK HE MEANT ALL of them?? Of course, HE DID!!! THAT INCLUDES THE 4TH, the ONLY ONE GOD, HIMSELF, SAID to REMEMBER!!! Absolutely NONE of us are Perfect!! Every single one of us NEED TO GET ON OUR KNEES in HONEST, SINCERE PRAYER and REPENT, CONFESS and FORSAKE OUR SINS, ALL of THEM, TO JESUS CHRIST and GOD the Father rather than to another sinner such as a Priest or the Pope!

    1. Ricky,

      So, since it’s obvious you don’t believe in following all that Jesus Christ commanded us to do, then might I ask, which “Jesus” do you worship? You “recommend” that we all read Scripture from “BEGINNING to END, OVER AND over again.”, but it’s apparent from your comments that you need to practice what you preach.

      I don’t think anyone here doubts the salvific power of the Blood of Jesus Christ. We all believe in Jesus Christ as Our, One True Savior. But what is apparent is your misunderstanding of the Catholic Doctrine because we DO NOT place our hope of Salvation upon any other. I suggest you continue to research that 🙂

      Yes, living in ignorance may be bliss but your some of your comments should be considered as the poster child for what it represents. A Good Example:”wHY WOULD i WANT TO FOLLOW AND WORSHIP ANOTHER SINFUL HUMAN BEING in place of JESUS CHRIST, the SINLESS ONE. We have ALL SINNED and COME SHORT OF GOD’S GLORY and that includes ALL HUMANS WHO HAVE WALKED THIS EARTH, POPES INCLUDED.” Do you see the contradiction there, buddy?

      Are you telling me that someone who suffers from a lack of mental development commits sin? Are you telling us that children under the age of six can sin?

      I’m going to ask you too, Ricky, like I asked Chris above: Please provide the source that clearly states we Catholics worship any sinful human being. Please provide the rituals used, the rubrics necessary, any prayers spoken, the type of sacrifice that is required, and any documents from the early Catholic Church that claims we worship someone other than God.

      Funny thing that you attack “Tradition” but you, yourself are demonstrating a perfect example of “tradition” which you attack. Keep searching….you might wake up from your “blissful” state.

      1. What I’m finding here is that Jesus Christ is not sufficient for many. All, men I’ve found to be praised in manors I don’t agree with that, are followers of Jesus Christ simply are pointing back to Jesus Christ as Savior and King of there lives. We should, instead do as they did Praise THE FATHER rather than suggesting we need anymore of them than THE MESSAGE they were brought to conviction by THE FATHER to Deliver to us. I suggest we take there advice ( the ones being praised) and look toward Jesus Christ as Sufficent. He is and always will be for me,
        (JESUS CHRIST) that is. Mere man used by GOD to encourage, and point the way now being praised as if there greater than all the rest of man. God himself says and deciribes to us, who we as man really are outside of Christ. If you become curious please open the pages of THE BIBLE and read for yourselves. Often, as a follower of CHRIST and DELIVER of THE NEWS, I MUST BE VERY CAREFUL I’m not viewed or thought of as nothing more than A SINNER SAVED BY GRACE, I’am SO GREATFUL THAT GOD REVEALED HIMSELF TO ME and that HE used HIS CREATION TO DO IT !!! BUT ITS NOT MEANT FOR US TO MAKE IT ABOUT HIS SERVANTS. IF THEY COULD SEE WHAT WE, HAVE MADE OF IT. THEY THEMSELVES WOULD SAY DONT DO IT, I’am NOTHING, SEEK THE ONE I’M POINT TO HE IS EVERYTHING.
        FOLKS LOOK TO JESUS CHRIST and SURRENDER YOUR MIND and LIVES TO HE THAT IS GREATER THAN ALL THAT EVER WAS OR WILL BE. A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LORD IS WHAT HE DESIRES AND HE USES IT TO HEAL YOUR SOUL AND CHANGE LIFE.
        RELIGION VS A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

    2. Ricky says:
      July 13, 2015 at 12:30 am
      Ignorance is bliss and I congratulate you one and ALL on Your BLISSFULNESS!!! “nough said. I SUGGEST and RECOMMEND WE ALL READ GOD’S HOLY WORD from BEGINNING to END, OVER AND over again….

      Me too. Here’s what Scripture says:

      First, Jesus Christ appointed a Pastor as head of the entire Church:
      John 21:17
      He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

      I see only a few Churches with such a Pastor. Further, Jesus Christ said that the Pastor over His Church would be infallible:

      Matthew 16:17-19 (King James Version)
      17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

      The list of Churches accept this teaching gets smaller. Certainly, all Protestant denominations can now be eliminated.

      Jesus Christ not only said that the Pastor was infallible but Scripture describes the Church as infallible:
      Ephesians 3:10
      To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

      The list remains the same, but now I can certainly eliminate all Protestant denominations.

      Back to Matt 16:18, Scripture says that Jesus Christ established one Church. History shows that all the Churches sprang from the Church which is frequently described as the Mother Church. The Catholic Church.

      So, even using just a few verses we can eliminate the Protestants. None of their denominations even come close to being in Scripture. But we can continue to find Catholic indicators throughout the Bible:

      The Church which is infallible (1 Tim 3:15; Eph 3:10).
      The Church which is united (Eph 4:5).
      The doctrines of the Catholic Church which are distinctive from other churches:
      Purgatory (1 Cor 3:15).
      Eucharist (1 Cor 11:23-27).
      Communion of Saints (Rom 12:12-20).
      The Mass and the necessity to attend (Heb 10:25-31).
      The Sacrament of Confession (Heb 13:17).
      The Sacrament of Holy Orders (1 Tim 4:14).
      The Sacrament of Baptism (Titus 3:5).
      Justification and salvation by faith and works (Rom 2:1-13).

      And we find that the Protestant doctrinal pillars all contradict Scripture. For instance:

      Sola Scriptura contradicts 2 Thess 2:152 Thessalonians 2:15
      King James Version (KJV)
      15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

      Sola Fide contradicts James 2:24
      James 2:24
      King James Version (KJV)
      24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

      OSAS contradicts Heb 6:4-6
      Hebrews 6:4-6
      King James Version (KJV)
      4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

      5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

      6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

      Salvation by grace alone contradicts:
      Philippians 2:12
      Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

      and also:
      Romans 6:16
      Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

      Every Protestant doctrine which contradicts the Catholic Church also contradicts the Word of God in the Bible.

      Yessirree Bob. I suggest that every Protestant read the Bible at least once. Then they can become Catholic and read the entire Word of God which is contained in Scripture AND Tradition.

      wHY WOULD i WANT TO FOLLOW AND WORSHIP ANOTHER SINFUL HUMAN BEING in place of JESUS CHRIST, the SINLESS ONE. We have ALL SINNED and COME SHORT OF GOD’S GLORY and that includes ALL HUMANS WHO HAVE WALKED THIS EARTH, POPES INCLUDED.ANYONE who stands on the TRADITIONS and FALSE TEACHINGS of MAN rather than GOD’S HOLY, RIGHTEOUS WORD, the Bible are making a GROSS and GRAVE MISTAKE!!! JESUS DIED AS OUR SACRIFICIAL LAMB in our place..It is HIS and ONLY HIS SAVING, CLEANSING, HOLY, RIGHTEOUS, INNOCENT SHED BLOOD on the Cruel Cross of Calvary that SAVES ANYONE, ANYBODY!!! HE IS OUR ONLY HOPE and as it says in John 15:5 without Him we can do NOTHING GOOD without Him controlling our mind, heart, and soul. Incidentally, He also says in John 14:15, If YOU LOVE ME, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS!! DO you THINK HE MEANT ALL of them?? Of course, HE DID!!! THAT INCLUDES THE 4TH, the ONLY ONE GOD, HIMSELF, SAID to REMEMBER!!! Absolutely NONE of us are Perfect!! Every single one of us NEED TO GET ON OUR KNEES in HONEST, SINCERE PRAYER and REPENT, CONFESS and FORSAKE OUR SINS, ALL of THEM, TO JESUS CHRIST and GOD the Father rather than to another sinner such as a Priest or the Pope!

    3. Hi Ricky welcome to this great blog!

      Catholics agree with everything you just said. Except for two, maybe three things. First we would disagree with your scolding and potentially insulting tone, especially the first sentence. Secondly, God alone forgives sins, however, He saw fruit in granting us priests as conduits to become a visible avenue to confess our sins. There’s more on that, but here’s some scripture on it:

      John 20:21-213
      21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

      Thirdly, you say read the Bible. Of course we agree with that. My question is how many books are in your Bible? The Bible has 73 books. Does yours? If not why? When were they removed?

      Anyway, I hope that helps! Warm regards and God bless. Please keep posting and reading.

  15. Matthew 16:17-19 (King James Version)
    17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven
    Right eyes can see so as Right ears can hear !

  16. You do not know what your church teaches, u don’t know that the church did change the 10 commandants. Don’t understand what part of the 2 that u don’t understand when it specifically forbids the worship of anything in heaven, on earth etc. Israel was punished over and over again for breaking this commandment. The Catholic Church has in her books that show her 10 commandments are different than given in the bible. You must study the scriptures for yourself and not what someone says it teaches. What the Catholic Church teaches is not what the bible teaches. Isaiah 8:20 ‘to the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it’s because they have no light in them’. Also I suggest reading and studying the books of Daniel and Revelation.

    1. River,

      Are you kidding? I provided links to the Douay-Rheims, the traditional English-language Catholic Bible. If you want to read the newer Catholic Bible, the New American Bible, I’d be happy to provide those links as well.

      Anyone who can read can see that you’re wrong.

      So given this, why are you convinced that you know more than Catholics what Catholicism teaches, and where are your sources?

  17. Question about the anti-Catholic link in the article which may or may not be answerable: why does the page cite a Catholic school textbook, as opposed to, like, a Catholic bible or the catechism? Something about that seems really off, because textbooks are meant to be elaborated on in class right? Did that group deliberately find a not-quite-complete source of info, or do they not know the catechism exists, or does the catechism not say that (I avoided reading it in year of high school), or are they just being kinda stupid? Or is there something else happening that I didn’t see?

  18. Just copy/paste what was written above:

    Take a look at Deuteronomy 5:6-21:

    * “I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out
    of the land of Egypt, out of the house of
    bondage.”

    * “Thou shalt not have strange gods in my sight.”

    * “Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any things, that are
    in heaven above, or that are in the earth
    beneath, or that abide in the waters under
    the earth.”

    * “Thou shalt not adore them, and thou shalt
    not serve them. For I am the Lord thy God, a
    jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the
    fathers upon their children unto the third
    and fourth generation, to them that hate
    me, And shewing mercy unto many
    thousands, to them that love me, and keep
    my commandments.”

    Does these words not clear:
    THOU SHALL NOT MAKE…
    GRAVEN THING…
    NOR THE LIKENESS OF ANY THINGS…
    IN HEAVEN ABOVE…
    IN THE EARTH BENEATH…
    IN THE WATERS UNDER THE EARTH…

    WHY SAY IT ONLY PROHIBITS IDOLS AND DON’T FORBID IMAGES..?

    1. well selfies are images, it takes vanity to take a picture of self. and no am not bearing false witness against the roman catholic church. just because the pope blesses the water, doesnt make it holy. The water is a gift from the Lord God to cleanse our bodies, sustains us and stops us from dehydration, so we need to give thanks for the gift of water. not like my girlfriend caught the priest combing his hair in the water fountain, would that make it extra holy?

  19. why Roman Catholic allowed homosexual marriage? Sodom and Gomorrah where homosexuals where burned live because God hates that kind of thing. What made the Roman Catholic allowed that kind of relationship? Aren’t you afraid that God will pour His wrath to those people who insisted abnormal relationships?

  20. I have read some, if not most or all of the comments on here. I was originally intending to react to the lies written about Pope Francis and his “changing of the commandments.” As far as I am aware, the Bible explicitly condemns homosexuality; the Roman Catholic Church does not approve of homosexuality; I believe the act of homosexuality to be a sin.
    I was brought up as a Roman Catholic, though I now see myself more as a member of the universal catholic church (the lower case “c” being deliberate)as I feel that in this day and age, the walls between the denominations are man made, therefore dangerous and divisive. By involving ourselves in criticising one another, we are playing into Satan’s hands. (NB Try reading CS Lewis’s Screwtape Letters).
    Surely, rather than having long, theological discussions, we should be out on the highways and byways, spreading the Gospel, preaching the Good News to the poor, giving sight to the blind etc etc. As Jesus himself said: “Look at the Scribes and Pharisees…” Let us not be like them in word and deed. Let us instead simply give thanks and worship our Lord, Jesus Christ as we were instructed. It is Easter Sunday tomorrow when He did all that was necessary to save the world, and all the peoples in it. We must all be born again, with eyes and ears to hear His voice alone, which comes to us through His Word and the voice of the Holy Spirit.
    May God bless you and give you peace, and may He make His face to shine upon you NOW and ALWAYS.

  21. Strange how the Catholic Church claims Jesus gave Peter and the Catholic Church the keys to the Kingdom. Has anyone looked up the date and time the Catholic Church was formed. It was not in Peters day, how about 300 or more YEARS later!!! Kinda hard to have a Pope over a church that didn’t even exist yet, but I’m sure some method of back dating or other claim will be made.

    1. Gary,

      That would be a HUGE disproof of the Catholic Church if it were even remotely true. So let’s find out if it is true, or if you’re spreading falsehoods. When was the Catholic Church founded? By whom? Who was the first pope? What did the Christians at the time have to say about the creation of a new church?

      I.X.,

      Joe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *