Eitan Bar: "When I was a Messianic, Catholics were pagans who will burn forever in hell"

I've written before about Eitan Bar, the Israeli evangelist who was fired from his role at One for Israel for having a romantic relationship with an employee under him. Since that time, Bar has written books and posts that run against the grain of the Messianic world, particularly against Christian sexuality, Calvinism, the doctrine of hell as eternal torment, and even Messianic Judaism itself.

On Facebook today, Bar wrote about the Messianic movement and its negative view of Catholicism.

It spurred comments from Jews and Christians, including some well-known Israeli Messianic Jewish leaders like Ron Cantor and Dan Juster.

He starts off with,

When I was part of the Messianic movement, a highly fundamentalist form of Evangelicalism, the message about Catholics was clear: they were pagans, God despises them, and they would burn forever in hell. We were discouraged from associating with Catholics, and the few who did often found themselves marginalized or boycotted.

My parents were both part of the Catholic Church and left it before I was born, so this post piqued my interest. Are Messianics too negative on Catholics and other Christian groups?

I grew up in the Messianic movement and can confirm the movement has a general negative feeling towards Catholicism. I haven't personally heard the extremes of Catholics burning in hell forever. But the core is probably true: Messianic believers generally view Catholicism negatively.

There are reasons for that. Catholic faith requires believing in a co-redeemer, Mary, alongside Jesus. It requires the prayer to saints, not just to God. It requires affirming Papal ex cathedra rulings as infallible. Some of that is dangerously close to idolatry. I admire many Catholics and have Catholic friends and consider them brothers in faith. Some significant parts of their theology are foreign to the New Testament and the original Jewish followers of Jesus. I am convinced it will be foreign when Jesus returns to Jerusalem as the Jewish Messiah. But it doesn't preclude salvation or fellowship.

How should we in the Messianic movement look at groups outside of our own? I believe two very important measures for that are salvation and fellowship. I say those two measures because they are two issues addressed in the early church in the New Testament (e.g. Acts 15 and Romans 10). Salvation and fellowship are still relevant for today.

Salvation: when you die, will you be with God?

Fellowship: can we spend time with you in religious settings? Are we family in God?

For Catholics, I answer yes to both questions:

• Salvation: This is up to God, and not me, but the New Testament says, "If you believe in your heart that Jesus is Lord, and that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Catholics believe this; it's a core part of Catholic faith. 
• Fellowship: Since Catholics are part of the family of God, they're fellow Christians and I can (and have!) learned from them. I could fellowship with them in religious settings, despite significant theological differences.

Even early Protestants, including Luther himself, did not advocate for a schism where Protestants could no longer fellowship with Catholics. That wall of division developed later through escalation, war, torture, and all sorts of horrible things committed by both sides in the last 600 years. I think that wall is a mistake.

I've long advocated for a big tent faith: expand your tent to allow many in. Better to have many with varying beliefs, than a tiny few with uniform beliefs. Yes, I think megachurches are superior to tiny, closed sectarian groups. Especially in light of the reality that every religious group is almost certainly wrong about something; no one has theology that perfectly aligns with heaven's reality. Better to love many, as love covers a multitude of sins.

But.

There's a limit to big tent theology.

I couldn't have a big tent with Hindus, for example. Hindus worship Krisna, Ganesh, and a plethora of false gods. The reason I can't welcome them into my tent of faith should be obvious: it would compromise core parts of my own faith. The Torah is jam packed with prohibitions on idolatry, with explicit commandments to destroy idols, to avoid supporting or defending idolaters, even commandments to burn idolatrous cities in Israel. Embracing people who worship other gods is a tent too big. What unity can God's people have with people who reject the one true God or worship other gods?

One commenter on Bar's post said in support of Bar's newfound love for Catholics,

I was taught and believe, "If you love Jesus you are part of the family".

I responded, "That sounds nice, but it would mean we must consider Muslims part of the family. They love Jesus and consider him an important prophet."

I can't take Muslims into my big tent of faith. They fail the salvation test and the fellowship test:

• Salvation: Muslims don't believe Jesus is Lord, they believe him a prophet. They don't believe God raised Jesus from the dead; they believe Jesus wasn't crucified at all.
• Fellowship: Muslims believe Christians and Jews are to be subservient to Muslims and must pay a special tax in any Muslim-controlled land. Those Christians and Jews who resist this were (and still are, in some parts of the world) put to death. 

Dan Juster, a leader in the Messianic Jewish movement, commented on Bar's post, suggesting that allegiance to Jesus is the most important matter:

There is a book by Matthew Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone. A great book argues that it does not matter what denomination one is part of, Catholic, Proestand, Orthodox, Messianic Jew, Pentecostal. In each stream allegiance is the central issue. Then we add, Jews who come to faith are the saved remnant of Israel, the sanctifying first fruits (Rom. 11:5, 11:16)

I replied to Juster, "Allegiance is important, but I wonder to what extent theology matters for salvation and fellowship. For example, Mormons hold allegiance to Jesus, but consider him one of many gods, alongside the Heavenly Mother, Satan and millions of others. Additionally, they are preaching a second gospel, the Book of Mormon."

Are Mormons saved? Can we have fellowship with them?

• Salvation: This is up to God, but I suspect God will save them because they believe Jesus is Lord and God raised him from the dead.
• Fellowship: Much murkier. I personally have no qualms hanging out with Mormons in a non-religious context; they tend to be morally upright and genuine people. But I couldn't fellowship with them in a religious context because of the idolatry in their faith. According to Joseph Smith, only Mormons are Christians. Mormons don't consider Christians to be true Christians. It's difficult to call them part of the family of God when they don't consider you the family of God.

Israeli Messianic leader Ron Cantor also chimed in, saying how he really has fought to maintain good relationships with Catholics and others outside of Messianic Judaism.

But all this newfound love and togetherness strikes me as false and shallow. 

For years, Juster and others have issued papers and spoke at conferences and urged their followers to avoid fellowshipping with Messianics of slightly different stripes. One Law Messianics, Two House Messianics, Hebrew Roots folks and others were blacklisted from Messianic events. Musicians who performed at One Law congregations were blacklisted. I personally had a leading Messianic Jewish congregation in Minnesota tell his congregants not to associate with me because I adhered to a different ecclesiology as he did. I had one Messianic rabbi, who is not Jewish, telling the IAMCS Rabbis forum to avoid associating with me at a Messianic music event because he affiliated me as a Messianic with a different stripe.

Heck, just a few years ago, I wrote about how one Messianic pastor in Israel labeled all forms of Torah observance as heresy. 🤪

I'm not bitter about that, and I forgive them and give it to the Lord. I only raise it to show that Messianic folks have likely been far too small-tent. I would welcome a change for big tent Messianic faith, even if it meant building bridges to Catholics and other Christian groups.

As for Eitan Bar, I don't know him or his situation personally. I've only read about it from him and from people tangential to the situation, so I could be misreading this. But it seems to me he's resentful of the Messianic movement because it called out his sexual sin. This is a game that has played out so many times in the Evangelical world Bar now rejects; there's even memes about it!

When an Evangelical pastor rebukes a member for adultery, pornography, homosexuality or other sexual sin, the member leaves and complains about church hurt. In reality, they're in denial about sin. I kind of wonder if that's playing a role in Bar's own distancing from the Evangelical and Messianic world. From my outside perspective, that's what it looks like. I suppose Bar knows the truth, as does the Lord.

Bar blasts Evangelical fundamentalism, but honestly, they're one of the few groups actually calling out sin. And calling out sin is a very Biblical thing to do.

Bar has one thing right, though: the Messianic movement has been too closed and too sectarian, too quickly condemning other Christians as unsaved and fit for hellfire. But Catholics are not going burn forever in eternal torment. That's just not what the original reformers had in mind, and frankly, contrary to the New Testament.

While Juster and Cantor and other Messianic Jewish leaders seem to agree and desire an more open Messianic Judaism, they need to start in their own camp: an openness to Messianic believers who have ever-so-slightly different ecclesiology, nomology, soteriology. 

Religious Hypocrites Shaming God’s Reputation, Case #18,502

Summary: Religious hypocrites turn people off to God. We see it again this week with shocking revelations from the continuing Catholic pedophile scandal.

Warning: language and disturbing content related to the scandal.

I wrote before how religious hypocrisy continues to heap shame on God’s reputation in the secular world.

It’s happening again: 300 Catholic priests in Pennsylvania were named in court as predators who sexually abused over 1000 children.

Worse, much of the abuse was coordinated among multiple priests and parishes.

Worse still, the hierarchy of the church was aware of the problem, and either did nothing or covered up the crimes.

The court documents details horrific, even demonic, sexual abuse:

In one case, a boy was forced to stand naked, posing like Christ on the cross while priests took pictures and added them to a collection of child pornography that they produced and distributed on the campus of the church.

Priests would mark boys who were being groomed for abuse by giving them gold crosses to wear.

In another case, a priest raped a young girl and arranged for her to get an abortion. His bishop heard about the situation and wrote a letter of condolence — to the priest.

In another case, a priest molested a boy over the course of two years, admitted to church officials that he'd been engaged in naked "horseplay" with the child, and yet was allowed to continue in ministry for seven more years.

In another case, a priest forced a boy to give him oral sex and then washed the boy's mouth with holy water.

In another case, a priest molested a 12-year-old boy, admitted his crime to a church official, but the diocese ruled that the abuse wouldn't "necessarily be a horrendous trauma" to the victim.

Dear God, what destruction these people have done. Lifelong damage to these kids. And yet-to-be-realized damage to the reputation of God and faith in the eyes of the world.

Shaming God’s Name in the Nations

This week my Twitter feed has been filled with stuff like this:

Why the fuck are churches legal in Americahttps://t.co/VmyCtRLP7B

— Paul Betts ️‍ (@paulcbetts) August 15, 2018

Here, Silicon Valley technologist and well-known software developer Paul Betts is so disgusted by these Christians, he’s suggesting the United States ban all churches.

I engaged Paul about this – telling him how churches and synagogues do good consistently and regularly, and that it often goes unnoticed:

My church and I buy meals, cook and serve it to hundreds of homeless, poor, and elderly every month. And our church is one of millions. But that doesn't make the news. pic.twitter.com/TWxo5flewO

— Judah Gabriel (@JudahGabriel) August 15, 2018

But it doesn’t matter.

To secular people like Paul Betts, the damage is so great, all churches should be illegal.

(This has been tried, by the way. Churches were illegal in Mao’s atheist China, and likewise Stalin’s atheist Soviet Union, both of which taught atheism in government schools and persecuted millions of Christians and Jews. These civilizations committed the some of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen. I digress.)

It’s a sad state of affairs when we have to convince secular people why churches and faith are good things. God called Israel to be a light to the nations, and Messiah told his disciples the same.

Instead of being a light, the Catholic Church appears to be a factory for producing gay pedophile priests who turn people off to God, destroy innocent lives, and forfeit their souls in the process. What a darkness.

“It’s a sad state of affairs when we have to convince secular people why churches and faith are good things.”

And we can’t just slough it off on the Catholics. In Torah-observant People Behaving Badly, I documented Israeli Haredim (Ultra-Orthodox Jews) kicking and spitting at a woman in the streets of Jerusalem, shouting slurs and insults and calling her shiksa. Her crime was helping a car navigate safely through Orthodox protestors.

Two years ago, a Protestant youth pastor was sent to prison because he raped a girl in his care, and when she became pregnant, he forced her to get an abortion. And when she felt guilt about the whole thing, she committed suicide.

When my wife was young, a youth pastor at her church impregnated a young girl under his care.

And in the Hebrew Roots and Messianic world, we have cases like the Hebrew Roots pastor Jim Staley defrauding millions of dollars from the elderly.

I suspect many of us have such stories of abuse in our circles. Maybe you’ve experience or witnessed sexual abuse, violence, financial abuse, emotional manipulation, controlling and judgmental behavior. All these things from religious people.

Ugly, ugly religion.

While I could lament that the media reports only the negative things – certainly reporting on 300 pedophile priests, but never on the millions of homeless fed in Jesus’ name – I can’t really blame people like Paul Betts.

Why? Many people in my circle of faith are in favor of restricting or banning Muslim immigration into the US because of a minority of violent Islamists. How can we blame secular people for wanting to ban churches because of a minority of pedophile priests?

And not only are there 300 pedophile priests who are abusing children, but here you have a hierarchy of bishops and church leadership who either turned a blind eye, failed to report, or even covered up the abuse. Over the span of several decades.

My God.

Atheism isn’t the worst enemy of people of faith. It’s we religious people. Religious hypocrites doing evil in the guise of faith. A faith that commands us to do good, and we pretend to do good, but boy, do we doo bad.

There is no stronger way to take God’s name in vain than to do evil in His name. And this is exactly what these pedophile priests have done.

Religious Hypocrisy From of Old

1,940 years ago, Paul wrote a letter to religious people in Rome, a mix of Jews and non-Jews. He warned them of religious hypocrisy,

If you rely upon the Torah and boast in God and know His will and determine what matters because you are instructed from the Torah— and you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Torah the embodiment of knowledge and the truth—

You then who teach another, do you not teach yourself?

You who preach not to steal, do you steal?

You who say not to commit adultery, do you commit adultery?

You who detest idols, do you rob temples?

You who take pride in the Torah, through your violation of the Torah, do you dishonor God?

For as it is written, “the name of God is slandered among the nations because of you.”

Paul’s words couldn’t have been more prescient.

God’s name is slandered in the nations because of you, religious hypocrites.

God’s reputation is shamed in the whole world because of you, religious hypocrites.

I’m at a loss of what more to say.

I’m sickened and grieved that people who claim to follow Jesus did something so unspeakably wicked demonic to innocent kids. All under the guise of Christianity.

God help us.

“I’m well done. Turn me over!”

I came across an amusing Christian tradition while researching material for my post on Luther's 95 Theses.

In his 95 Theses, Luther mentions one St. Lawrence, a 3rd century believer who was responsible for using church funds to feed and clothe the poor.

The hostile Roman government under Emperor Valerian heard about these "treasures of the church", and a local Roman Prefect summoned St. Lawrence to demand tribute.

St. Lawrence appears before the Roman Prefect and promises to return tomorrow to lay before him all the treasures of the church. The Prefect gleefully accepts.

The next day, St. Lawrence returned with the all the Church’s wealth and treasure: He brought out the poor!

He tells the Roman Prefect,

"Behold! In these poor persons the treasures which I promised to show you; to which I will add pearls and precious stones, those widows and consecrated virgins, which are the Church's crown."

The Roman Prefect, angered he won't be confiscating any riches, decrees St. Lawrence be put to death.

The Roman Prefect has a gridiron prepared, placed over hot coals, and ties St. Lawrence to it for a slow, torturous death.

According to tradition, this is the gridiron used to roast St. Lawrence, on display at the Church of St. Lorenzo (Lawrence) in Rome.

Now here's where the story gets...strange.

After St. Lawrence had suffered for many hours over the hot coals, he cheerfully declares,

"I'm well done. Turn me over!"

...and because of this, St. Lawrence is known to this day as the patron saint of cooks, chefs…and comedians. ಠ_ಠ

Oiy!

Pick the Scripture

Both of the quotations below are from early believers in Messiah.

One of them greatly influenced the Roman Church and its Protestant offspring.

The other made it into Scripture.

Can you guess which is which?

1. My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world
   
   We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, "I know him," but does not obey his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.
   
   Everyone who breaks the Law sins; in fact, sin is lawlessness. But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.
   
   I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray.
   
   
2. Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner, nor rejoice in days of idleness; for “he that does not work shall not eat."

   Let every friend of Christ keep the Lord’s Day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days of the week. Looking forward to this, the prophet declared, "To the end, for the eighth day."

   Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, which are unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace. For the divinest prophets lived according to Christ Jesus. On this account also they were persecuted, being inspired by His grace to fully convince the unbelieving that there is one God, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased Him that sent Him.

   Be not deceived with strange doctrines, "nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies," and things in which the Jews boast. "Old things are passed away: all things have become new." For if we live according to the Jewish law, and the circumcision of the flesh, we deny that we have received grace.

   Therefore, having become His disciples, let us learn to live according to the principles of Christianity. For whosoever is called by any other name besides this, is not of God.

   It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity.

   It is absurd to speak of Jesus Christ with the tongue, and to cherish in the mind a Judaism which has now come to an end. For where there is Christianity there cannot be Judaism. [^]

The first quote is from Scripture, in 1 John.

The second quote is from Magnesians, a letter written by Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, around the time of Paul’s death.

Ignatius’ detestable theology had a great impact on the early believers; his writings were a clear forerunner of the Roman Catholic Church’s own doctrines: Ignatius is the first to abolish God’s Sabbath, replacing it with man’s Sun-day. He was also the first to describe the Church as “katholikos” or universal, from which the Catholic Church derives its name.

Armed with these anti-Jewish theologies, the Roman Catholic Church proceeded to persecute Jews and abolish most every form of keeping God’s commandments in the Torah, replacing Passover with Easter, Sabbath with Sunday, to name a few, creating a very distinct religion apart from, and very bitter towards, the original faith in the God of Israel.

The Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church still celebrate Ignatius and even have a special feast day dedicated to this man.

The Catholic Church’s offspring – Protestants and Evangelicals – have inherited much of this ugly theology. Perhaps this is why many gentile Christians today believe or sympathize with these terrible, anti-Jewish doctrines that have led to the deaths of thousands of Jews at the hands of Christians. It has also contributed to modern Christianity's foundation-less theology in which the forgiveness of sin is held high, but the obedience to God's commandments -- sin's adversary -- is largely ignored, leading to lawlessness and empty works.

Upon This Disciple I'll Create My New Religion?

I've recently been debating with a Catholic man, Ariel, in the comments to Catholic Relevance.

Ariel is rather peculiar religious person, in that he went from a child under Catholicism, to agnosticism, to Evangelical Christianity, to Messianic Judaism, then back to Catholicism. (Wow!) He is now a chief contributor to IsraelCatholics.com.

In the little debate, Ariel points to us to his testimony and lays out the span of events that led him to believe that "Messianic Judaism is not biblical enough and [that] Catholicism really is truly Jewish and truly the faith of the Bible."

He further states,

"Messianic Judaism usually uncritically accepts the two pillars of Protestantism: sola scriptura (the Bible as sole source of authority) and sola fide (salvation by faith alone). Yet both of these doctrines are neither Jewish, neither biblical, nor genuinely Christian!"

Ariel and I debate these points and many others in the comments to Kineti Le'Tzion - Catholic Relevance. The points made are so important, however, I feel this debate deserves more visibility than dueling comments in a buried blog post!

To keep things reasonable short and concise, since so many of you [ahem, Gary] refuse to read long posts, I'm going to address only a single issue today:

Should we have a Pope?

Ariel states the Catholic position this way:

The fact that Jesus appointed Peter to be "the rock on which I will build my Church" is quite clear from the NT. See the wealth of other scriptures and quotes from the early church (way before Constantine!) in this presentation.

Ariel is referring to the following Scripture, Matthew's record of the gospel, ch. 16,

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

It is from this Scripture that Catholics claim the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Indeed, Catholics claim Peter was the first Pope in a succession of popes leading up to the current Roman Catholic Church head:

While Catholics claim the Apostle Peter was the first Pope, the current Pope is Joseph Ratzinger, now called Pope Benedict XVI, a former Hitler Youth (though it's claimed he had no choice in the matter), is seen above wearing the Mitre (religious headgear), which some folks speculate is the pagan Dagon fish hat, although that is contested.

So, are the Catholics correct? Was Peter the first Pope? Did Jesus give authority to Peter to be the first Pope? Did Jesus authorize the creation of a church built on Peter in Rome?

Let's examine the evidence and come to a conclusion.

The first matter is the very Scripture itself. A few things strike me about this quotation:

• "You are Peter, and upon this rock..." - This is Greek word play. The Greek "Petras" means rock or stone, so it appears Jesus is playing a word game by saying "You are Petros, and upon this petras..."
  
  
• "I will build my church" - This translation and understanding is based on the faulty assumption that Jesus is starting a new religion. After all, we think of "church" as a big building with a steeple symbolizing organized religion, or perhaps a large religious organization itself like the Catholic Church. However, Jesus did not come to start a new religion, and this is evident in the fact that word "church" here is the very same Greek word "ekklesia", which means an assembly of people. Ekklesia is found elsewhere in the Bible -- even the Old Testament! -- but only in the New Testament is it translated in this way, perhaps intentionally as a way for the Church to validate its existence, sadly.
  
  
• "The gates of Hades will not overcome it" - I always get a kick out of this. Why would Jesus, a Torah-observant Jewish rabbi, talk about the pagan Greek god of the dead, Hades? Given that speaking the name of false gods is a sin according to Torah, if Jesus really did say this, he would not have been sinless - very consequential to Christian doctrine. Interesting! More on this in a moment.
  

So, what's the deal with all this? Is Jesus starting a new religion founded on Peter? Did Jesus break a Torah mitzvot by speaking the name of Greek god of the dead, thus sinning? The answer lies in the original text.

The book of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, a document attested to by the early Church fathers Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Jerome, Papias, and Irenaeous. (Despite this evidence, some modern scholars debate Hebrew Matthew's existence.)

In any case, we no longer have the original Hebrew Matthew, it has since been lost. We do, however, have a Hebrew manuscript of what is believed to be the original Hebrew, in the form of a medieval document written by a Spanish Jewish physician, Shem Tov ben Isaac ben Shaprut. This Hebrew version of Matthew is dubbed Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew.

(It should be noted there is debate among scholars and Christians as to whether Shem Tov's Matthew is a manuscript from Hebrew or a translation from Latin or Greek. In the very least, there exists in Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew some rabbinic Judaic bias, such as writing Messiah's name blasphemously¹.)

I wanted to get my hands on this and see what the Hebrew Matthew had to say about Jesus building a church on Peter. 2 weeks ago, I did just that, and began studying Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew. Unsurprisingly, using the Hebrew names1, it reads much differently than the Greek:

[Y'shua] said to him, "Blessed are you, Shimon ben Yochanan, because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. I say to you: you are a stone and I will build upon you my house of prayer. The gates of Gehenna will not prevail against you because I have given you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Now this is interesting. In the Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew, we see that no longer is Messiah saying he'll build a church, which implies Jesus is creating a new religion. He instead says he will build a house of prayer, which does not imply a new religion or anything foreign to the Jewish faith.

What did Messiah mean when he said he'd build a house of prayer, you ask? Is He talking about building the Catholic Church? No, it seems obvious what he meant: since Messiah later revealed to Peter that the gentiles are to be included in the faith of the God of Israel, Peter was the foundation of what became a massive gentile following of Jesus that we have today. That gentile following of Messiah is the house of prayer. It does not speak to one particular denomination, Catholic or otherwise. Thus, whether Peter visited Rome or founded a church there -- a debatable point Catholics and Protestants have argued over for centuries -- is irrelevant.

Another interesting bit about this Scripture is how the difficult problem of "Hades" goes away in the Hebrew. While Hades was a Greek god of the underworld, Gehenna was a real place outside Jerusalem that became essentially a garbage dump where fires were burned continuously to consume the refuse of the city. Canaanite pagans had previously sacrificed their children to their false god, Santa Clause Molech, in the valley of Gehenna, so there was also a dark evil associated with the place.

Another interesting bit is how the Hebrew says, "the gates of Gehenna will not prevail against you", as opposed to the Greek reading, "the gates of Hades will not prevail against it [the Church]". The Hebrew is saying Gehenna will not prevail against Peter, the Greek is saying the gates of Hades will not prevail against the Church.

Given this understanding, I see no Scriptural evidence supporting the idea of a Pope, who presumes himself to be Jesus Christ on earth, infallible. On the contrary, I see Scriptures that indicate such presumption to be haughty, if not blasphemous.

The final idea we need to address -- because this confronts both Catholic and Protestant Christianity head on -- is the idea that Jesus came to start a new religion.

Some Christians deny this, saying it is the Jews who created the new religion, or that true Christianity is not different than the original faith in the God of Israel.

But these same Christians betray themselves by saying the Torah is passed away, that Jesus' grace replaces God's Law, or that we safely ignore God's Law because Jesus "nailed it to the cross". Indeed, my father-in-law once said to me, paraphrasing here, "Judah, Israel doesn't matter anymore -- everything changed with Jesus."

Do you Christian folks who profess such things understand what you're saying?

• If Jesus did away with the Law, then he is a false prophet who would receive capital punishment for leading people away from God.
  
  
• If Jesus did away with the Law, he started a new religion in which the Law is relegated to the back seat, and the Jews would be correct in rejecting Him.
  
  
• If Jesus did away with the Law, or even diminished it in any way, he contradicted his own words and his own actions.
  
  
• If Jesus made less meaningful even the slightest commandment in Torah, he failed to fulfill the messianic prophecies in the Tenakh (Old Testament), thereby rendering his Messianic status a lie.
  
  
• If Jesus replaced Israel with the Church, then Jesus made God out to be a liar; for Jesus would be revoking something God promised to be irrevocable: the Torah will be an everlasting covenant between Himself and Israel.
  
  
• If Jesus "changed everything" such that Torah is diminished, then He did indeed create a new (false) religion, and a Protestant is merely a lesser, misled form of a Catholic, the highest form of follower in this new religion.
  

Let me spell it out in plain words for you: by claiming Jesus somehow diminished the Law, you are unwittingly stating that Jesus is both a false messiah and a false prophet.

Stop with your foolish claims that Jesus somehow diminished the Torah, you're leading people astray.

Greek Jesus vs Hebrew Yeshua

Let's be frank. If the Greek peacenik adonis Iesous Kristo started a new religion, where we're supposed to have big Churches with steeples, celebrate these new holidays called Easter, Christmas, Lent, and Ash Wednesday, Sunday mass, and all the paraphernalia associated with a new religion, then the Catholic Church is right, and we should all convert to Catholicism.

On the other hand, if the Torah-observant, Jewish rabbi Yeshua HaMoshiach didn't start a new religion, then we need to clean up the mess that was created not 100 years after his death, which culminated in the creation of an official state religion in 325 CE, when the Roman Emperor Constantine declared himself the 'Holy' Roman Emperor and Sol Invictus (invincible sun god) and formalized what is today the Roman Catholic Church, complete with its Sun-day based worship.

So, who do you believe in? The Greek Iesous Kristo? Or the Hebrew Yeshua HaMoshiach? They are not one and the same; one is a perversion of the other. Which is it?

Our English Jesus Christ descends from the Greek understanding of Him, not the Hebrew understanding. We have a Greek mindset in these things -- it's no wonder Jews find Jesus so foreign and repugnant! He's tainted with Greek, pagan undertones in all we say about Him, everything from the western 'Christian' holidays, to his supposed diminishing of Torah, to the very halo we paint around His head.

We need to return to the teachings of this Jewish Messiah -- Sabbath, the Feasts of the Lord, Torah -- and get away from the man-made, Hellenized bastardization of these things that we have now in the Roman Catholic Church and its Protestant offspring.

Do we need a Pope to govern The Church? When one realizes the church in its current form is a religious invention of men, the answer becomes clear. What we do need is a return to our being Israel -- a holy, set apart people for God, different from the world -- grafted in not by race, but by belief in the God of Israel who gave Messiah so that both Jews and gentiles can be clean.




1. Shem Tov, himself a devout Jew being persecuted by the church, unfortunately substituted Yeshua's name in the Hebrew Matthew text with the shorter acronym YSH'W, which is a Hebrew acronym that meant to slam Jesus. The acronym's full form is Yemach Shemo Vezichro (literally meaning 'May his name and memory be obliterated'). It is an ancient rabbinic word play on Jesus' Hebrew name Yeshua, and Shem Tov used this shameful name in his manuscript of Hebrew Matthew.

----------------
Now playing: Steve McConnell - Ki T'Hilati Attah
via FoxyTunes

The Lord is So Good

I know I've been speaking some hard things against Roman Catholicism lately; even Christianity in general.

The point isn't to condemn folks today, however, but simply shine light on the past and bring clarity. We should be informed of our sad past as so-called Christians so that we won't repeat our ancestor's mistakes. The future generation's behavior should be proud reflections of Messiah, not squabbling, idolatrous, murderous religionists like the past has been.

That said, I'm convinced that God is so good that He overlooks our theological problems if we truly love him and try to live for him. I honestly believe that even Roman Catholics, Protestants of all kinds, Messiah-following Jews....God loves 'em all, we're his kids, he's our dad. This is not another bogus "all paths lead to the same destination" pep talk. This is a "God is so good, he overlooks our faults if we love him" reality check.

Our dad is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, with plenty of pity to show to us - the Lord is so good to us. He doesn't chide us; doesn't let his anger or his wrath abide on us - no, the Lord is too good for that. God doesn't reward us according to our sins, nor does he tit-for-tat us when we sin. Instead, he lets us enter into his throne room with boldness when we're hungry for his forgiveness, like a father welcoming home his son. The Lord is -- indeed! -- so good. Even though we often sin and break his righteous Torah, he nonetheless invites us into his throne room out of sheer kindness, and speaking as our intercessor on our behalf is a gentle Messiah who delivers us for our good.

...the Lord is sooooo good. Hallel-lu-Yahweh (Hebrew for "praise to Yahweh!") -- that he, our Master, is so good. (Thanks Marty!)


----------------
Now playing: Marty Goetz - O Holy One
via FoxyTunes

Church, Behold Your Founder

Earlier this week, I covered how Constantine, the Holy Roman Emperor and sun worshiper, converted the Roman Empire to Christianity and founded what became the Roman Catholic Church in the early 4th century.

During this process, Constantine found it no difficult matter to integrate his old ways -- Mithraism, pagan holidays, rituals, and festivals -- into his new state religion. This includes replacing God's Passover with Easter (named after a pagan goddess), replacing God's Sabbath with Constantine's favorite day, the day of the sun, to name just a few. Admittedly, some of these teachings were already infiltrating the body of Messiah by this time; Constantine merely made it official.

On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it often happens that another day is not suitable for grain-sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost.

-Constantine, dies Solis decree, 320CE

Constantine was also fiercely racist; his hatred and contempt for Jews survive in his writings and decrees to this day.

Unfortunately and sadly, Christianity looks to Constantine and his first Nicaean council and resulting Nicaean Creed as a basic doctrine and statement of faith, even to this day.

If more people read some of transcripts from Nicaea, we'd be less accepting of the trademarks of western gentile Christianity -- Easter, Lent, Christmas, Sunday sabbath. Don't take my word for it, below is a Nicaean transcript regarding Passover, and whether to replace that "despicable, ugly Jewish festival" with something more, errmmm, Christian. You know, something on the day of the sun.

Be forewarned: this central Christian doctrine contains racist language directed towards Jews.

When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of immortality, celebrated by all with one accord and in the same manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of festivals, to follow the customs (the calculation) of the Jews who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter; which we have observed from the time of the Saviour’s passion (according to the day of the week).

We ought not therefore to have anything in common with the Jew, for the Saviour has shown us another way; our worship following a more legitimate and more convenient course (the order of the days of the week: And consequently in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jew. For it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Saviour, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them? They do not possess the truth in this Easter question, for in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements they frequently celebrate two Passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error.

How, then, could we follow these Jews who are most certainly blinded by error? For to celebrate a Passover twice in one year, is totally inadmissible.

But even if this were not so it would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communication with such wicked people (the Jews). You should consider not only that the number of churches in these provinces make a majority, but also that it is right to demand what our reason approves, and that we should have nothing in common with the Jews.[1]

Thus, for the last 1700 years, Christians think of Passover as something "Jewish", despite all the apostles, Paul, and Messiah himself keeping God's festival of Passover. We instead celebrate Jesus' resurrection on a day named after a pagan fertility goddess, Easter.

It's no wonder most Jews don't believe in Messiah; these early Christians were so anti-Jewish, they would likely die in horror to find Messiah himself was a Jew.

After the council of Nicaea, Christianity steadily diverted from its Hebrew roots and abandoned most everything the early Messiah-followers were accustomed to: Sabbath keeping, celebrating God's festivals, keeping Torah. It truly became a new religion because of these men, as opposed to "The Way" sect of Judaism it started out as.

To this day, most Christians are still convinced such things are "Jewish" and have no place in the life of a Christian. It is my goal to refute such anti-semitic lies, bring clarity, and restore the Hebrew roots of the modern religion of Christianity.

----------------
Now playing: Meha Shamayim - Shabbat's Coming!
via FoxyTunes


footnotes:
1. Gleaned from Dr. Henry R. Percival’s “The Nicean and post Nicean Fathers”. Vol. XIV Grand Rapid: Erdmans pub. 1979,pgs. 54-55

Forgive Me Father, For I Have Sinned: A Catholic Confession on Sabbath

God knew what he was doing when he made for us a Sabbath: a day of rest for humanity. A break from the daily grind. A time to have some rest and peace -- true shalom -- with God.

The concept of Sabbath is a very old one in Judaism and Christianity. In the first book of the Hebrew and Christian Bibles, in the first few chapters, God lays in place the foundations for an eternal, everlasting holiday made by God himself:

By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

When God revealed his ways to us, he gave us the command explicitly, repeated several times:

Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy.

--

Bear in mind that the LORD has given you the Sabbath; that is why on the sixth day he gives you bread for two days. Everyone is to stay where he is on the seventh day; no one is to go out.

--

Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.

--

The seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates.

--

For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Does Sabbath matter to Christians anymore?

When I tell Christians of the wonderful rest I receive from God every Sabbath -- the special time I can spend in shalom with God, taking a break from the world and spending time resting and worshipping God -- I'm often retorted with a Pauline quip accusing me of being under the Law, not under grace, and a legalist. Ouch!

But what does Scripture really say? Well, the Hebrew Scriptures are quite clear on this, as you can see from the above quotes. The Hebrew Scriptures are part of the Christian bible, however, not all Christians follow Hebrew Scripture. So how about the Christian-specific part of the Christian bible -- the New Testament, the apostolic writings? What does Messiah have to say on the Sabbath?

The answer is that Messiah tells us that the Sabbath was created *for* us,

One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"

He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."

Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Master of the Sabbath."

If Sabbath was created for us, why are we ignoring it now? If Messiah is the Master of the Sabbath, why do we ignore Sabbath?

In the New Testament, the writer of the Christian book of Hebrews speaks of the relevance of Sabbath,

Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it.

His work has been finished since the creation of the world. He has spoken about the seventh day in these words: "And on the seventh day God rested from all his work."

In the New Testament, Paul also tells us not to let anyone judge us in regards to keeping the Sabbath or any of the festivals:

Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

Paul was undoubtedly hitting the same stifling religious spirit of the Pharisees, who rebuked Messiah because he had healed and picked grain to eat on Sabbath.

If Hebrews tells us a Sabbath remains for the people of God, then what happened? Why is there no real Sabbath, no real rest for us today? Instead of rest, most of us do all of our housework, shopping, and yard work on the weekend, we watch some football, maybe go to church, go out to eat, then call it a day. That's not rest.

That's not holy, either. In Scripture, holy comes from the Hebrew kadosh, which means set-apart. The Sabbath is not set apart for God in our western culture, but rather, it's ignored and made like any other day of the week, breaking one of the first commandments God gave to mankind.

If God's rest is so great, why did we lose it?

Well, the Roman Catholic Church -- in a kind of rebellion against the original faith -- broke from the Sabbath, the commandments, God's festivals, and all things "Jewish", replacing it with man-made holidays based around the existing pagan festivals at the time. Such was instituted at the outset of the 'Holy' Roman Catholic Church, starting with the first Pope [update: objections to this assertion, see footnote 1], Constantine, in 325 CE. Constantine, a sun worshiper himself according to his Mithra religion, had previously declared his sun-day the official, state-sanctioned day of rest:

"On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it oftne happens that another day is not suitable for grain-sowing or vine-planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost."

-Constantine, Dies Solis decree, 321

Below is quotes from prominent Catholics regarding why they changed the Sabbath by their own authority.

Catholic Confessions About Sunday

• Confession Number 1: The Catholic Church admits it changed God's Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday.

Q. Which is the Sabbath Day?

A. Saturday is the Sabbath day.

Q. Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?

"A. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday." Peter Guierman, The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (1957 ed.), P. 50. Copyright 1930 by B Herder Book Co., St Louis. Used by permission.

"The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her Divine mission, changed the day (of worship) from Saturday to Sunday. . . . The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church, as Spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant world." Editorial, The Catholic Mirror ( Baltimore ), September 23, 1893

"The Divine institution of a day of rest from ordinary occupations and of religious worship, transferred by the authority of the (Catholic) Church from the Sabbath, the last day, to Sunday the first day of the week, . . . is one of the most patent signs that we are a Christian people." James Cardinal Gibbons, The Cross and the Flag, Our Church and Country (New York: The Catholic Historical League of America, 1899), pp 24, 25.

• Confession 2: Catholic authorities confess there is no Scriptural support for changing God's Sabbath to Sunday.

"Nowhere in the Bible is it stated that worship should be changed from Saturday to Sunday." Martin J. Scott, Things Catholics Are Asked About ( New York : P.J. Ken edy & Sons), p. 136 Copyright 1927 by P.J. Ken eday & Sons. New York . Used by permission.

"You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify." Cardinal Gibbons (for many years head of the Catholic Church in America ). The Faith of Our Fathers (92nd ed.,rev.; Baltimore : John Murphy Company), p. 89.

"Nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the (Catholic ) Church outside the Bible." "To Tell You the Truth." The Catholic Virginian, 22 (October 223 1947),, 9.

"Q. Have you any other way of proving that the (Catholic) Church has power to institute festivals of precept?

"A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her;. . .she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh, day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority." Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism (3d American ed., rev,; New York : T.W. Strong. late Edward Dunigan & Bro. 1876), p. 174.

• Confession 3: Protestants who keep Sunday as a holy day pay homage to the Catholic Church, since it was the Catholic Church that turned Sunday into a holy day.

"But the Protestant says: How can I receive the teachings of an apostate Church? How, we ask, have you managed to receive her teachings all your life, in direct opposition to your recognized teacher, the Bible, on the Sabbath question?". (The Christian Sabbath ) 2nd ed.; Baltimore ; The Catholic Mirror, 1893), p. 29, 30.

"If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church." Albert Smith (Chancellor of the Catholic Archdiocise of Baltimore), replying for the Cardinal in a letter of February 10, 11920.)

"It was the Catholic Church which, by the authority of JESUS CHRIST, has transferred this (Sabbath) rest to the Sunday in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord. Thus the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves to the authority of the (Catholic) Church," Louis Gaston de Segur, Plain Talk About The Protestantism of To-day. (Boston: Patrick Donahoe, 1868), p. 225.

"Protestantism, in discarding the authority of the (Catholic) Church, has no good reason for its Sunday theory, and ought, logically, to keep Saturday as the Sabbath. . . ' John Golmary Shae, "The Observance of Sunday and Civil Laws for Its Enforcement." The American Catholic Quarterly Review, 8 (January, 1883), 152.

• Confession 4: Catholic authorities claim the Seventh Day Adventist Church is the only major Protestant denomination keeping the Scriptural Sabbath.

"The (Catholic) Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her Founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant, claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh Day Adventist is the only consistent protestant." "The Question Box," The Catholic Universe Bulletin, 69 (August 14, 1942). 4.

"The Israelite respects the authority of the Old Testament only, but the (Seventh-day Adventist, who is Christian accepts the New Testament on the same ground as the Old viz: an inspired record also. He finds that the Bible, his teacher, is consistent in both parts that the Redeemer, during His mortal life never kept any other day than Saturday. The Gospels plainly evince to Him this fact: whilst, in the pages of the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles and the Apocallypse, not the vistige of an act cancelling the Saturday arrangement can be found." Editorial, The Catholic Mirror ( Baltimore ), September 2, 1893.

"What Bible authority is there for changing the sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week?

"Who gave the Pope the authority to change a command of God? If one follows Scripture alone, there's no question one is obliged to keep the Scriptural Sabbath, as it is prescribed by God himself to be kept holy.

With such strong-arming of God's commandments by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no surprise that the daughter of the Catholic Church, the Protestant church, inherited these man-made traditions that replace God's commandments. To this day, most Protestants continue in the ways of the old Catholic religion and disregard one of the first commandments in Scripture: to remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy. Nonetheless, it is a terrible shame that the Protestant Reformation, which threw out many of the fallacies of the Catholic Church, failed to go the last mile and restore the Sabbath day. Instead we are left with the inherited lies of our fathers, the religion of man-made rituals that replace the things of God.

Footnotes:

1. *Update: A Catholic commenter asserts Constantine was not the first pope. At most, Constantine was the Roman Emperor, who founded what is now the Roman Catholic Church. I can't find any historical references to him being referred to as a pope; instead he was Holy Roman Emperor, a sun worshiper who, after his conversion to Christianity, mixed his former Mithra religion as well as various pagan religions of the Roman Empire in the creation of the new formal state religion of Rome, which later became Roman Catholic Christianity.


----------------
Now playing: Lamb - Latter Rain
via FoxyTunes

Catholic Relevance

As a way of expanding my religious exposure and knowledge, I've been listening to a national Roman Catholic radio station, broadcast here in the cities as WLOL 1330 Relevant Radio, "Bridging the gap between faith and everyday life", the Twin City's home of Catholic radio.

I've learned a few interesting things about Roman Catholic Christianity that I think you all might find interesting too.

Firstly, they deserve credit for helping the poor and disabled far more than I've known Protestant churches to. They have extra religious services for those with disabilities, extra accommodation and service to widows and orphans. They have seemingly perpetual food drives, shelters, ministering and missions to the poor.

It reminds me of something from the Brit Chadasha (New Testament) book of Ya'akov (James):

Religion that God our Abba accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

They have a strong stand for preservation of life that is not tied to any political party, which differs from much of Protestant Christianity. Whether that stance be on abortion, embryonic stem cell research, the death penalty, or elderly euthanization, they stand almost unbudgingly for preservation of life.

I've also found them to be inundated in ritual religion: Mass, Rosary, Eucharist, Confession, Adoration, and other man-made rituals make up most of the conversational topics, if not lives, of practicing Catholics.

Unlike Protestants, there is a unified theology with little room for budging in the form of the Roman Catholic Catechism. As the Talmud and Oral Law is to some Jews, the Catechism defines what it means to be Catholic. Without it, one may as well be a Protestant.

There are also some negatives I've discovered with Roman Catholicism. The deep ties to ritual religion and ceremony have lead to some ignorance of Scripture. For example, as I listened to "Searching the Word" show yesterday, a caller said he felt his family was being attacked spiritually. I was stunned to hear the guest archdiocese tell us how to ward off spiritual attacks against your family,

"Holy water. Sprinkle it around your house. Also, holy salt will do it too. Place piles of holy salt around the 4 corners of your house. I'd even sprinkle some in your food as you cook it."

Needless to say, this has no foundation in Scripture: there is no such thing as "holy water", nor "holy salt" in Scripture. It's entirely a man-made religious ritual.

So despite the show being called, "Searching the Word", I found it sad that the Word wasn't searched in this instance.

I've also noticed the Roman Catholics have inherited and are proclaiming hand-me-downs from pagan religions, just as they have handed us Tammuz Weeping Day/Lent, Ishtar Day/Easter, Nimrod's Birthday/Christmas, and other goodies. For example, a talk show host was speaking of the wonders of the heavens, when a caller phoned to inform the host of the apparent Roman Catholic background of the recent Perseid Meteor shower,

"Did you know that the Perseid Meteor shower is actually a feast day of St. Lawrence? The meteors are actually the Tears of St. Lawrence."

Did I mention there's much near-deification of saints? :)

Let's realize St. Lawrence is not mentioned in Scripture. His tears don't exist, the guy's dead. It's a little tongue-in-cheek to pass on this rather goofy likening of meteor showers to St. Lawrence, especially when, like many of the Roman Catholic-sponsored holidays, it is rooted in pagan mythology and relabeled as Christian by the Roman Catholic Church.

Finally, I notice a lot of debate over minutia. Much like how the Pharisees would argue over whether it's lawful for a man to eat bread cooked in an oven built with a brick laid on Sabbath (there's a mouthful!), I've heard Roman Catholics debating over minutia in Catechism and Roman Catholic dogma. For example, yesterday I heard a debate over whether is it lawful for a bishop to appoint, without papal approval, a new priest or bishop in the event of an emergency such as a war. Sheesh.

And of course, the major shocking thing is, they believe a certain man is infallible and is, more or less, Jesus Christ on earth. I am speaking of the Holy Father, the Pope, of course.

In all these things, I draw correlations to the ancient Pharisees. I say that with all due respect for Catholics, but there remains correlations between Catholicism and ancient Pharisaical Judaism nonetheless:

• They are devoutly religious.


• They are recognized as ambassadors of God's true religion.


• They are flooded with rituals and man-made religion.


• They make new rulings that are equal to or override Scripture. (The Pope is infallible, Sabbath is Sunday, to name a few.)


• They've added their writings to Scripture.


• Their rituals are taking precedence over Scripture.


• Their devout religion may be mostly outward, as is evidenced by the recent molestation scandals.


• Their own dogma is so important, that without it, one cannot be considered a member of the body of God.

If Messiah came back today -- in all his Hebrew garb, as the triumphant son of David, Torah-observant restorer of Israel -- I am convinced He would appear totally foreign and too radical for Roman Catholics.

It makes me wonder if Roman Catholics will be the Pharisees of the second coming of Messiah. Hopefully all of us will be correctable when He comes; I suspect we all have some theological and general life issues in need of Messiah's correction.