The Church In Brief

[Olde Tymer]

.
FAQ: Where in the Bible do you find where it says apostolic traditions exist only in
the Bible's texts? What about 2Thss 2:15? "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold
fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a
letter of ours."

REPLY: The New Testament canon was incomplete when Paul penned his second
letter to the Thessalonian believers; and in the really early days of Christianity, the
primary source of New Testament teaching wasn't from books at all, but was totally
via word of mouth; viz: itinerant evangelism.

No doubt everything that Paul and Silvanus meant to pass on to their friends as
tradition, via word of mouth and/or via letters, was eventually put down in writing,
authored by not only Paul and Silvanus, but also by Peter, James, John, and Jude
too; as those men all preached a unified, homogenous, harmonious message (cf.
Gal 1:15-2:9, 2Pet 3:15-16). And whatever's supposedly missing from the sacred
texts, is dangerously subject to human error, private ambition, bias, and a fertile
imagination.

If Paul and his associates should show up here in Oregon at a speaking
engagement, then I will listen to the traditions that they teach by mouth. Until that
happens, I will obey his command to hold fast to the traditions he and his
associates taught by letter rather than what Rome claims those men taught by
mouth; and I would advise everyone to do the same.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
POSIT: There would be no Bible but for the Roman Catholic Church.

REPLY: The Old Testament portion of the Bible was already completed and in
circulation throughout the Greek and Roman worlds way before Jesus himself was
even born.

As for the New Testament; Constantine's panel merely condensed an already
existing abundance of early Christian manuscripts that neither he nor the Roman
Catholic Church itself authored; and his motives were far more political than
spiritual.

It's a well-known political principle that a nation divided in its religion cannot be
unified in its politics. For example: Islam's factions are causing serious problems
over in the MidEast. If someone could just find a way to unify Muslims, the entire
region would benefit considerably. It was Constantine's earnest intent that a
universal Christian handbook would unify the Christian factions in his kingdom;
subsequently bringing about an improved domestic tranquility. His scheme failed,
and still fails to this day, but he had to try.

Below is a book I highly recommend to anybody curious about the origin of the
Bible. I can't promise it's available in bookstores, but for sure was listed with
amazon dot com the last time I looked.

How We Got The Bible
By Neil R. Lightfoot
ISBN-10: 1-56731-722-7
ISBN-13: 978-1-56731-722-0
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
● Matt 7:24-25 . . Everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them
will be like a wise man who built his house on rock. The rain fell, the floods came,
and the winds blew and buffeted the house. But it did not collapse; it had been set
solidly on rock.

That passage speaks of the so-called Sermon On The Mount, which extends from
Matt 5:1 to Matt 7:28.

The inference is that people who live by the Sermon are in no danger of Hell; while
those who don't are of course dead men walking.

But there's a lot in the Sermon, and staying out of hell by means of compliance
with it is not easy. The problem is: God requires consistency. In other words; it
isn't good enough to comply with the Sermon some of the time, nor even most of
the time. No, in order to stay out of hell by means of the Sermon, it's necessary to
comply with it all the time, i.e. zero laxity.

● Rom 2:6-7 . . Go will repay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those
who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, but
wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.

The key word in that passage is "perseverance" which Webster's defines as
continued effort to do or achieve something despite difficulties, failure, or
opposition, i.e. steadfastness.

Ironically, Catholics are not allowed to assume themselves successful at
perseverance except under special circumstances.

"If anyone says that he will for certain, with an absolute and infallible certainty,
have that great gift of perseverance even to the end, unless he shall have learned
this by a special revelation, let him be anathema." (Council of Trent Session 6,
Chapter 16, Canon 16)

OBJECTION: Paul wasn't consistent (Rom 7:15-25). Are you suggesting he went to
Hell?

REPLY: Had not Paul decided to rely upon Christ's crucifixion as a way to avoid the
wrath of God instead of trying to merit his way; he certainly would have gone to
Hell; no doubt about it. (Rom 7:24-25, Phil 3:9)
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
A premise like "Rome Has Spoken" renders Rome's followers vulnerable to a
mental form of scotoma; which, if you've seen The Davinci Code, you know is a
subconsciously induced psychological blindness caused by the mind's propensity
to disregard concepts that are incongruous with deep seated, preconceived notions.

Scotoma is a serious condition. It causes Catholics to disregard what Christ has
spoken in favor of what Rome has spoken. Curiously, they don't deliberately
disregard what Christ has spoken in favor of what Rome has spoken; they actually
do so without even thinking about it because scotoma is a mental weakness rather
than a weakness of the will.

For example: note the grammar in Christ's statement below. The verb "has" is
present tense rather than future, indicating that people who correctly dine upon his
flesh and blood, obtain eternal life right then-- no delay and no waiting period -
rather than later in the next life after they pass on.

● John 6:54 . .Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life

The average pew warmer's mind will miss the grammatical tense of Christ's
statement; and without even thinking push the possession of eternal life into the
future because the pew warmer has had it drilled into their head ever since
catechism that the afterlife is where people obtain eternal life. There is no use in
debating this issue with them because their belief is a deep-seated, preconceived
notion that will resist any and all reasoning to the contrary no matter how well
presented.

Here's another example:

● John 5:24 . . I assure you, those who listen to my message, and believe in God
who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but
they have already passed from death into life.

According to Christ's statement, the one possessing eternal life in the here and now
will never be condemned for their sins; which means they are guaranteed to
persevere to the end. Ironically, the Church severely disciplines people who believe
such things.

"If anyone says that he will for certain, with an absolute and infallible certainty,
have that great gift of perseverance even to the end, unless he shall have learned
this by a special revelation, let him be anathema." (Council of Trent Session 6,
Chapter 16, Canon16)

I sincerely believe that Christ's statements qualify as special revelations. Rome
doesn't agree? Well all I can say is: shame on Rome.

● John 3:34 . . For he is sent by God. He speaks God's words, for God's Spirit is
upon him without measure or limit.

● John 3:36 . . He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does
not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
● 1John 4:1 . .Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are
of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

In order to "try" the spirits (whoever and/or whatever those spirits might be in,
whether thoughts, prophets, writings, clergy, or laymen) one must first have access
to an independent, non proprietary source of truth with which all other instructional
materials must comply. That in itself is an impossibility for rank and file pew
warmers because they depend entirely upon the integrity of Rome's magisterium
for the truth— a magisterium composed of human beings who, in reality, may be
under the influence of the very spirits whom Catholics are supposed to try; but
have no independent, non proprietary means to do so.

What I'm saying is this: if the Magisterium itself is inadvertently channeling dark
beings, then the rank and file are inadvertently following dark beings through their
trust in the integrity of Rome's magisterium; viz: a Catholic is the perfect patsy
because Rome has convinced the rank and file that the clergy alone has the truth,
and convinced them that, on their own, they cannot find the truth without the
clergy's help.

"The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its
written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching
office of the Church alone." (CCC 85)

In the study of logic, that's called circular reasoning; viz: pointing to Rome's own
proprietary teachings to prove that it's right. That kind of evidence is inadmissible
in a court of law because it's like releasing a criminal defendant simply by virtue of
the fact that he says he didn't do it. In other words, Catholics are confident Rome
has the true interpretation of The Holy Bible because Rome's teachings say it does.
Thus John Que and Jane Doe pew warmer are naïve children who render an utterly
thoughtless compliance to the string-pulls of an organization which the rank and file
have absolutely no way to validate except by taking its own word for it.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
● 2Pet 1:20 . . Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a
matter of personal interpretation

That verse is easily interpreted by merely reading the information that accompanies
it.

● 2Pet 1:21 . . for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human
beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.

You see: Peter isn't saying that John Que and Jane Doe pew warmer can't possibly
understand the Old Testament on their own; he's merely saying that the books of
the Old Testaments aren't the product of a fertile imagination and/or somebody's
creative writing skills like Steven King and/or Stephanie Meyer and Beatrix Potter.

When the language and grammar of 2Pet 1:20-21 are carefully examined; it's
readily seen that what Peter is actually talking about is not the understanding of
prophecy, but rather; the origin of prophecy.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
Christ's Jewish opponents weren't pagans. The religion that they professed to
believe and practice was the very same God-given religion that Christ himself
professed to believe and practice.

Their differences of opinion with Jesus came from the fact that Jesus went strictly
by the Bible; while his Jewish opponents were followers of a rabbinical form of
Judaism, which isn't purely Old Testament Judaism, but instead an unholy
aggregate of Scripture and Tradition.

While professing to follow God; the Roman Church opposes His son just as
vehemently as rabbinical Judaism opposed him 2,000 years ago. The rabbis
doctored Old Testament Judaism with tradition, just as Rome has done the very
same thing to New Testament Christianity; so that Rome doesn't go strictly by the
Bible like Jesus did.

OBJECTION: You are so wrong! Jesus wasn't a fundie at all, he was a radical.

REPLY: Webster's defines fundamentalist as: a movement or attitude stressing
strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles; viz: conservative, old liner.

The New Testament's Jesus was a Jewish man, born in the land of Israel of a Jewish
woman, and raised by Jewish parents in an orthodox Jewish home; and was, by
virtue of his genetics and his ritual circumcision, obligated to comply with every last
point of the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

Ergo: had Jesus been a radical, then he would have fallen under the covenant's curse.

● Deut 27:26 . .Cursed be he who will not uphold the terms of this Law and observe
them.

● Jer 11:3-4 . . And say unto them: Thus testifies Jehovah, God of Israel; Cursed
be the man that obeys not the words of this covenant, which I commanded your
fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt

● Gal 3:10 . .Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written
in the book of the law to do them.

● Gal 5:3 . .And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is
under obligation to keep the whole Law.

● Matt 5:17-19 . .Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish
the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to fulfill them. I assure
you, until heaven and earth disappear, even the smallest detail of God's law will
remain until its purpose is achieved. So if you break the smallest commandment
and teach others to do the same, you will be the least in the Kingdom of Heaven.
But anyone who obeys God's laws and teaches them will be great in the Kingdom of
Heaven.

Plus: Jesus' very purpose in life was to comply with his Father's instructions, i.e.
Jesus was micro-managed.

● John 4:34 . . My food-- said Jesus --is to do the will of Him who sent me and to
complete His work.

● John 8:26 . .He that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which
I have heard of Him.

● John 8:29 . .And He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone;
for I do always those things that please Him.

● John 10:30 . .I and my Father are one.

● John 12:49 . . I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He
gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

● John 14:24 . .The word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's who sent
me.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
FAQ: What happens to Christians who pass on with unconfessed sins?

REPLY: For folks "in Christ" this is actually a non issue.

● 2Cor 5:19 . . God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing
their trespasses unto them

The Greek word in that passage for "imputing" is logizomai (log-id'-zom-ahee)
which means to keep an inventory.

In other words: God isn't keeping a list of unconfessed sins with which to slam
Christ's followers at the Great White Throne event depicted at Rev 20:11-15, and
Jesus gave his word that such a tragedy will never occur.

● John 5:24 . . I assure you: Those who listen to my message, and believe in God
who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but
they have already passed from death into life.

FAQ: Well; if that's true, then what use is there for confession per 1John 1:9-10?

REPLY: In a nutshell: confession makes fellowship possible, which is translated from
a Greek word that basically pertains to unity; for example John 10:30 where we're
given to understand that Jesus didn't operate solo, independent of his Father's oversight.
So, if we want God to participate in our lives in a positive way, then we have to be
transparent, and we have to keep ourselves washed. (cf. John 13:4-10)
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
The doctrine of Immaculate Conception is an attempt to protect Jesus' mom from
contracting the so-called "stain" of original sin. (assuming Adam was Mary's
paternal ancestor)

Well; the attempt is futile because Adam's posterity were all joint principals with
him in real time, i.e. they are all reckoned as participants in the act.

● Rom 5:12-13 . . Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,
and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned

"all sinned" is past tense, indicating that original sin was instantaneous for
everyone all at once; even for those yet to be born in the future. This is somewhat
similar to Heb 7:9-10 where it's suggested that Levi paid Melchizedek a tithe before
he was born.

OBJECTION: According to Ezek 18:20, children aren't responsible for their parents'
sins.

REPLY: The laws of God don't go into effect until they are codified. As such, they
are not retroactive. (Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13 and Gal 3:17)
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
My eldest brother (for convenience sake, call him Larry) was ordained to the
priesthood in 1965 and remained so for 53 years prior to passing away at the age
of 78 in May of 2018.

Larry graduated from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. He taught at the
University of San Diego and served in parishes in San Diego, Mexico, Portland,
the Tohono O'odham Indian Reservation, and Huntington Beach. Larry served as
the Director of Pastoral Ministry and the first Rector of the Conventual Church of
Our Lady of the Angels at the Franciscan Renewal Center, Scottsdale, Arizona.

In 1973, he served at University of San Diego as an Assistant Professor of Religious
Studies in the College of Arts and Sciences. Larry then served as the University
Chaplain and Director of Campus Ministry from September 1974 until June 1984.

Larry entered the Franciscan Order to become a Friar in 1987 after serving as a
priest of the Diocese of San Diego for 22 years. During his semi retirement years,
Larry was a priest at the Mission San Luis Rey in Oceanside, California.

Supposing Rome's version of Christianity is mistaken? (This is only a hypothetical
question; I'm not alleging Rome is mistaken.) The ramifications of that would be
too awful to contemplate. It would mean that my deceased brother is right now,
this very moment, in Hell regardless of the quality and the extent of his devotion to
The Church. It would also mean that my brother was a minister of darkness rather
than light; thus everyone he influenced was led down a path leading directly to the
lake of brimstone depicted at Rev 20:11-15 where they would be facing a mode of
death akin to a foundry worker falling into a kettle of molten iron.

I can only imagine the crushing, unspeakable dismay that my brother would
undergo were it to turn out that all the while he sincerely believed himself serving
Christ's best interests, he was actually serving his own instead.
_