Catholicism’s Denial of The Holy Spirit’s Teaching

If the teaching of the Holy Spirit in the pages of the New Testament is truth then whatever denies that truth is false, is false teaching and error.  The thesis of this article is that the Roman Catholic Church has rejected the Holy Spirit’s teaching that there was an all-sufficiency of doctrine given in the first century sufficient to save the souls of humanity across all time to come.

I am sure the Catholic Church would deny this but how can they?  Reason says that if everything needed to save mankind's souls was given in the first century there is no reason or need for additional doctrines in the centuries following.  Yet the Catholic Church has piled new doctrine upon new doctrine seemingly without end down through the ages until our own time, and on and on it goes.

The Catholic Church has no set doctrine.  The best that can be said is that it is set for a time. But, time flies by and new doctrine is added.  What once was is history, is past, and the new replaces the old.  The old Catholic Church is revised with each newly added teaching and thus becomes the newest edition of the church.  In doing so it differs from the old and is therefore not the old.

One can go online and do a search and readily find when various doctrines came to be added to the Catholic Church.  Do not think for a moment that the Catholic Church of the 21st century is the same as the one in earlier centuries; it has been and continues to be a transforming institution compounding doctrines.  God does not change (Malachi 3:6), the Catholic Church does.  This continual addition of new teachings flies in the face of the teaching of scripture.

 

Jude says as clearly as language can make it that “the faith...was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3 NKJV)  When?  Then!  Then in the first century.  Everything needed for salvation from the hand of God was delivered to mankind “then.”  The faith Jude speaks of is that body of doctrine given through Christ and his apostles and prophets in the first century, in Jude’s lifetime.  It was once for all delivered meaning it was complete then and there.  There was nothing to be added to it.  That means that the Catholic Church has nothing to offer to mankind today that is of value as far as salvation goes.  That was all provided for in the first century.  We also must remember Jude wrote by inspiration.  The book of Jude is the Holy Spirit’s writing.

But, Jude is not alone.  Peter says, “His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness.” (2 Peter 1:3 NKJV)  When?  Then!  If so what does Catholicism’s additional doctrines added down through the ages profit us?  Does “all things” mean all things?  Again, we have the Holy Spirit writing through human agency, through the inspired apostle Peter.  If “all” means all then we need no more than what was available in the first century and available to us in scripture.

James says in the first century the implanted word was able to save their souls (James 1:21), in that time.  Are we to believe it is not able to do so in our time?  What weakened it?  They had the implanted word available in James' time.  There was no need to wait for the development of Catholic doctrine.  James’ words were the Spirit’s words.

Paul speaking to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20 commended them “to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.” (Acts 20:32 NKJV)  When?  Then!  They did not need additional doctrines for salvation handed down centuries later.

Writing by inspiration Paul says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for … that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim. 3:16-17 NKJV)  He wrote that in the first century.  Paul said “scripture” made a man complete, not scripture plus church tradition.  Here again, you have the element of time.  You could become complete in the first century.  There was no need to wait for generations to come until you could get the full deposit of Catholic Church doctrine which is impossible anyway for there is no end to its additions.  

Paul told Timothy that “the Holy Scriptures...are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 3:15 NKJV)  Not so if a man must believe any of the added Catholic doctrines down through the ages.  Paul said by inspiration “the Holy Scriptures,” not scripture plus tradition.

Were the people on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 saved when they obeyed Peter’s preaching?  Not if you must believe any of the added Catholic doctrines for salvation. You can say the same thing about all the others who believed and obeyed the gospel recorded in the book of Acts.

How is it that under Catholicism a man or woman can be saved at one time and yet at a later time another individual must believe additional doctrine to achieve the same end? If that is the case then does not that make multiple gospels versus just one?  I use the term gospel in the sense of the body of faith one must believe for salvation.

The Bible teaches there is “one faith” (Eph. 4:5), one body of truth to be believed. Which one is it in Roman Catholicism?  Is it the truth of 800 A.D., 1300 A.D., 1900 A.D., or 2025 A.D.?  Or, set your own dates.  You will readily see things have changed and who can believe we have seen the end of it?

The Bible teaches that the gospel of Christ is the power of God to salvation (Rom. 1:16), that was taught in the first century, but that was before Catholic tradition kicked in during the later centuries.  Did not Paul, the writer of that Roman passage, foresee that later Catholic tradition when translated into doctrine was essential?

In the book of Acts much is written about “the word” of God being preached, heard, believed, and obeyed.  Here is a question for all who have an open mind.  Did that word include any of the Marian dogmas Catholics teach today?  Even one word?  Did it include teaching on Peter being the rock the church was being built upon?  Did it include teaching on the rosary, indulgences, transubstantiation, and the list could go on and on?  An honest person knows the answer.

One might argue the book of Acts only records examples of initial gospel obedience, evangelizing.  I respond, Paul spent 3 years in Ephesus, as an example, did he never preach Christian doctrine during that entire time?  Several of the books he wrote were written to places he had evangelized – Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Colossae, Philippi, and Thessalonica.  Did Paul preach Catholic doctrine in those locations?  Be honest with yourself.

Paul, by inspiration, wrote Second Thessalonians in which he wrote of a future “falling away” (2 Thess. 2:3), other translations use the words “rebellion” or “apostasy.”  The Roman Catholic Church claims to be the one true church.  If so when is it going to fall away or has it already?  If it has or if it will can it be said it is the true church?  One must think long and hard about that.  If I as an individual fall away from a marriage, a team, a business, or an institution of any kind I was involved in then I am no longer a part of it. If the church becomes apostate it is no longer the church. It becomes something entirely different which is exactly where the Roman Catholic Church is today.  Do not claim to be what you once were if you are no longer what you once were.

I believe the Roman Catholic Church grew out of the original church of the New Testament.  That one church in its apostasy evolved into the Catholic Church.  Paul taught that the original church would fall away (2 Thess. 2:3).  If it is not what it once was then it is not the church of the New Testament, not any longer, not in its fallen state.

The Roman Catholic Church of today is no longer similar to the church one reads about on the pages of scripture; it is not that church.  As a result of its innovations, it is as much separate from true Christianity as Islam, Buddhism, or any other non-related religion.  The Catholic Church readily admits scripture is not enough for them.  They have their tradition and it trumps scripture when push comes to shove.  What was good enough for people in the first century is not good enough for them.  They will have more and more but one must always remember that whether having more of a thing is good or bad depends on what that thing is.  More of self-will and less of God’s will is not good.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

  

More Troubling Than Gay Marriage

Today is June 24, 2014.  As everyone knows federal judges all over the country are declaring state bans on gay marriage unconstitutional.  It happened here in Indiana this week and I believe also in the state of Utah.  One other thing happened this week related to this issue that should cause embarrassment and concern to all who believe the scriptures. 

The Presbyterian Church U.S.A., which was in 2011 the largest Presbyterian denomination in the country, voted to redefine marriage and allow its pastors to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.  It now joins the United Church of Christ in its support of same-sex marriage.  

In doing some follow-up reading on this event I ran across an article by a pastor of the denomination, a man by the name of Sheldon Steen.  Let me quote a little of what Mr. Steen had to say about the changes that were made.  He said, "My deepest prayer is that this moment will become for us like Peter’s rooftop experience in Acts 10. That we will all be able to affirm together the words of God to Peter, 'What God has made clean, you must not call profane.'” 

One wonders when and where God made clean homosexual marriage.  Where is the scripture that teaches that? 

But this brings up an issue more troubling than gay marriage—how does one exegete (interpret) scripture correctly?  Listen to what the New Testament says about homosexuality: 

"Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.  For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.  Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due."  (Rom. 1:24-27 NKJV) 

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."  (1 Cor. 6:9-10 NKJV) 

"Knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."  (1 Tim. 1:9-10 NKJV) 

"And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."  (Jude v. 6-7 NKJV) 

(The underlining was done by me for emphasis—DS.) 

Jude speaks of Sodom and Gomorrah saying they were an example.  The "strange flesh" Jude speaks of that the people of those cities went after was without doubt that of a homosexual nature.  When two angels who appeared as men came to Lot in the city of Sodom the men of the city surrounded Lot's house, "And they called to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally.'" (Gen. 19:5 NKJV)  Go back to the OT account in Genesis 18:16-19:29 and read it, then read again also Rom. 1:24-27.  

When you read the words of Jesus in the New Testament you will hear him speak of Sodom and Gomorrah.  Why?  They were as Jude, speaking by the Holy Spirit, says—examples of wrongdoing and God's punishment.  One will note in reading what Jesus had to say that no one questions him about it.  It was a well-known fact among all the Jews what had happened to both Sodom and Gomorrah and why.  They became a sort of standard for evil and God's judgment against it.  No explanation was needed.  All knew about it.  For passages where Jesus mentions either or both Sodom and Gomorrah see Matt. 10:15, 11:23, 11:24, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:12, and Luke 17:29.  

Now how can Mr. Steen in view of these passages say God has made clean homosexual relationships?  How does one exegete scripture to come up with that conclusion?  This is the more troubling side issue of the gay marriage controversy. 

I know the emphasis today in religious circles is on grace and God's love, not on obedience.  Jesus said, however, "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love." (John 15:10 NKJV)  What if one does not keep Jesus' commandments?  What if one willfully and knowingly breaks his commandments and that is his/her practice throughout life?  I am not speaking of occasional lapses into sin for all sin in one way or another from time to time (no human being is perfect) but rather I am speaking of living a life of sin such as is the case in gay marriage. 

If it is possible for a person to read plain unambiguous texts from scripture and yet reject them and declare God has changed his mind (is this not what pastor Steen has done?) then what good at all is the Bible as a guide?  I am as serious as can be.  In such a scenario we cannot know what it is telling us.  It does not mean what it clearly states.  Where does that leave us? 

I suspect the answer to those who would respond would run something like this, "the Spirit leads us."  Leads us to what is my question?  Does it lead us to reject the scripture the Spirit gave us?  If that is the case we have the Spirit in conflict with himself.  Seems to me we need to try the Spirits and see which comes from God.  "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world." (1 John 4:1 NKJV)  The only way I know how to do that is by the word of God.  What does it say? 

One ought to read again 1 Cor. 6:9-10 which I quoted above.  I have a question to ask about it and you might want to give it a shot and try and answer it.  That passage gives a list of those who cannot inherit the kingdom of God.  If homosexuals can now inherit the kingdom of God, I am talking practicing homosexuals, then why not fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, etc., also mentioned in that passage? 

Some think a legal (according to the law of the land) marriage ceremony would make a homosexual relationship holy.  If a homosexual marriage is acceptable to God so is an adulterous one.  "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." (Matt. 19:9 NKJV)  One can live in homosexuality just as much as in adultery and neither is scriptural.  

God never condemned a sexual union between a man and a woman but he did regulate it and make it dependent upon being married with both parties to the marriage being scripturally eligible for such a marriage.  Such cannot be said of a sexual union of two people of the same sex.  In fact, God declared such a union an abomination (Lev. 18:22 and 20:13).  We no longer live under the Law of Moses and no one is advocating putting to death practicing homosexuals but the Leviticus passages do show us how God has felt about homosexual unions in the past.  Combine that with the passages I have quoted from the New Testament above and one sees, who is willing to see, God's view of the matter. 

Those who desire to please God are going to have to make a choice.  Are they going to be guided by the word of God or by the opinions of men?  I would say to Mr. Steen who implies that God has cleansed the homosexual marriage relationship to prove it from the scriptures.  Tell me why the scriptures I have quoted are of no account. 

Every day it is becoming harder for men to stand up for the written word of God.  People no longer hold it in the high esteem they once did.  It is not uncommon to hear not just the word of God but God himself being attacked and Christians are being accused of bigotry, hatred, and intolerance. 

We live in a world where the goal seems to be no boundaries of behavior, no moral judgments.  On judgment day we will not be judged based on society's standards or based on what a federal judge has decided.  The real judge will set on the bench that day.

[To download this article and or print it out click here.]