Sunday, November 21, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Top 10 Predictions for 2011:
Reprinted from the E-Mail Brigade News Report
1. The Bible will still have all the answers.
2. Prayer will still be the most powerful thing on Earth.
3. The Holy Spirit will still move.
4. God will still honor the prayers of His people.
5. There will still be God-anointed preaching.
6. There will still be singing of praise to God.
7. God will still pour out blessings upon His people.
8. There will still be room at the Cross.
9. Jesus will still love you.
10. Jesus will still save the lost when they come to Him.
Isn't It Great To Remember Who Is really in control, and that "the Word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Peter 1:25)
1. The Bible will still have all the answers.
2. Prayer will still be the most powerful thing on Earth.
3. The Holy Spirit will still move.
4. God will still honor the prayers of His people.
5. There will still be God-anointed preaching.
6. There will still be singing of praise to God.
7. God will still pour out blessings upon His people.
8. There will still be room at the Cross.
9. Jesus will still love you.
10. Jesus will still save the lost when they come to Him.
Isn't It Great To Remember Who Is really in control, and that "the Word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Peter 1:25)
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Papal Infallibility
This is from www.ianpaisly.org
The History and Falsehoods of Romanism
Professor CAM Noble
In our series on Romanism we come to one of the gravest and most damning errors ever taught by the Roman Catholic Church. It is called the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. In brief, it teaches that when the Pope, speaking in his official capacity as the successor to St. Peter (ex cathedra, or from his throne), he cannot be in error; his pronouncements on matters of doctrine and morals are infallible and are binding upon all Roman Catholics, and they are commanded to accept the decrees of the Pope without questioning.
The Pope, it is taught by this doctrine, is as much infallibly inspired in his teaching as the writers of the Scriptures. Previous to the adoption of the doctrine of Infallibility, the church councils added all the innumerable traditions to the Bible, but since the Pope was declared to be the infallible interpreter of the Scriptures and the final authority on doctrine and morals, the Church must now accept whatever new doctrine or "revelation" the Pope as head of the church imposes upon them.
The strange thing about this Papal infallibility is the fact that it was not accepted until in the latter half of the l9th century. During the reign of Pope Pius IX, a Vatican council convened to discuss the subject of Papal infallibility, which had been brewing for some time.
In 1869, less than 100 years ago (and 1800 years after God closed the canon of Scripture - Revelation 22:18), Pope Pius IX called this Council in which the issue was to be debated. Strong opposition was raised by certain prominent bishops, who pointed out the history of errors by past popes.
...the dark and sordid history of murder, incest, adultery and avarice associated with past popes. Among those most strongly opposed to this new dogma was Bishop Stossmayer, who traced the history of past Popes, and pointed out how the decrees of past infallible (!) Popes had been rescinded, reversed or set aside by other Popes. The Bishop pointed out the dark and sordid history of murder, incest, adultery and avarice associated with past popes.
In spite of the violent protests of a segment of the council, however, the Vatican Council enacted into dogma the doctrine of Papal Infallibility in July, 1870. Of course, this action raises a lot of questions. How is it that this doctrine was not revealed or adopted till 1800 years after Peter, their so-called first Pope, admitted that he could not even understand some things in the Scriptures written by Paul (II Peter 3:16)?
Was Pope Pius IX the first Pope who was infallible? Were the Popes before him also infallible? How then could they disagree, and one Pope set aside what another Pope had declared as an infallible revelation? How is it that the Assumption of Mary was never revealed until the 20th century? - but then, no one is supposed to ask such questions about an "infallible" Pope. The faithful Roman Catholic is not to ask questions at all: he is obliged to accept what his Church teaches.
Romanism is a usurpation of deity. Romanism is a usurpation of deity. The Roman system, while it professes faith in a Trinity, really denies the Godhead by assuming all the honours and powers belonging to God. The Fatherhood of God is an almost unknown subject in Romanism. Where do you ever meet with worship directed to God the Father in Romanism? God's place as an object of worship has been taken over by Mary.
The Pope has usurped the place of Christ by making himself the head of the Church, and the work of the Holy Spirit has been assumed by a man who claims to be the infallible teacher. Thus Romanism has virtually denied the work of a Triune God by taking over the offices of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Peter, described by Rome as "the first Pope" and whose successors all the Popes claim to be, must therefore have been 'infallible', but the Bible says: "When Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." (Gal. 2:11)
http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
The History and Falsehoods of Romanism
Professor CAM Noble
In our series on Romanism we come to one of the gravest and most damning errors ever taught by the Roman Catholic Church. It is called the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. In brief, it teaches that when the Pope, speaking in his official capacity as the successor to St. Peter (ex cathedra, or from his throne), he cannot be in error; his pronouncements on matters of doctrine and morals are infallible and are binding upon all Roman Catholics, and they are commanded to accept the decrees of the Pope without questioning.
The Pope, it is taught by this doctrine, is as much infallibly inspired in his teaching as the writers of the Scriptures. Previous to the adoption of the doctrine of Infallibility, the church councils added all the innumerable traditions to the Bible, but since the Pope was declared to be the infallible interpreter of the Scriptures and the final authority on doctrine and morals, the Church must now accept whatever new doctrine or "revelation" the Pope as head of the church imposes upon them.
The strange thing about this Papal infallibility is the fact that it was not accepted until in the latter half of the l9th century. During the reign of Pope Pius IX, a Vatican council convened to discuss the subject of Papal infallibility, which had been brewing for some time.
In 1869, less than 100 years ago (and 1800 years after God closed the canon of Scripture - Revelation 22:18), Pope Pius IX called this Council in which the issue was to be debated. Strong opposition was raised by certain prominent bishops, who pointed out the history of errors by past popes.
...the dark and sordid history of murder, incest, adultery and avarice associated with past popes. Among those most strongly opposed to this new dogma was Bishop Stossmayer, who traced the history of past Popes, and pointed out how the decrees of past infallible (!) Popes had been rescinded, reversed or set aside by other Popes. The Bishop pointed out the dark and sordid history of murder, incest, adultery and avarice associated with past popes.
In spite of the violent protests of a segment of the council, however, the Vatican Council enacted into dogma the doctrine of Papal Infallibility in July, 1870. Of course, this action raises a lot of questions. How is it that this doctrine was not revealed or adopted till 1800 years after Peter, their so-called first Pope, admitted that he could not even understand some things in the Scriptures written by Paul (II Peter 3:16)?
Was Pope Pius IX the first Pope who was infallible? Were the Popes before him also infallible? How then could they disagree, and one Pope set aside what another Pope had declared as an infallible revelation? How is it that the Assumption of Mary was never revealed until the 20th century? - but then, no one is supposed to ask such questions about an "infallible" Pope. The faithful Roman Catholic is not to ask questions at all: he is obliged to accept what his Church teaches.
Romanism is a usurpation of deity. Romanism is a usurpation of deity. The Roman system, while it professes faith in a Trinity, really denies the Godhead by assuming all the honours and powers belonging to God. The Fatherhood of God is an almost unknown subject in Romanism. Where do you ever meet with worship directed to God the Father in Romanism? God's place as an object of worship has been taken over by Mary.
The Pope has usurped the place of Christ by making himself the head of the Church, and the work of the Holy Spirit has been assumed by a man who claims to be the infallible teacher. Thus Romanism has virtually denied the work of a Triune God by taking over the offices of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Peter, described by Rome as "the first Pope" and whose successors all the Popes claim to be, must therefore have been 'infallible', but the Bible says: "When Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." (Gal. 2:11)
http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
