No, he’s not drunk on wine nor on the Holy Spirit, he’s under the influence of demons. Or he’s got mental issues – but either way this isn’t the work of God, for “God is not a God of disorder but of peace” (1 Corinthians 14:33). This is not of God – wake up!

H/T: Museum of Idolatry

Related posts:

1. Let’s Be Young Again… EPIC FAIL
2. False prophet Todd Bentley is back at it again
3. Deception in Lakeland, Florida – False 'Revival'

Revelation 20:1-3 (NIV) says: “And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.” I happen to be amillennial in my eschatological views, but this passage makes it clear that I must then believe that Satan is bound during the millennium and is thus being kept from deceiving the nations. This seems to be cognitively dissonant from what amillenials teach regarding Satan’s activity in the world today, even though this passage makes it clear that Satan is bound in the Abyss during the millennium. How do you reconcile these unscriptural teachings about Satan in light of Revelation 20 from an amillenialist perspective? (I’m not really interested in the premillenialist response, “because you’re end times view is wrong.” I’m just curious to see how someone might explain this from the amillenial perspective). I know it’s not a salvation issue, God will work out the end times in His own way, I’m just curious. . . .

No related posts.

It seems as though a lot of people are talking about the end of the world lately. I posted this in February, but I’m refreshing it for all to see again. Likely many readers have not seen nor heard this. Churches can’t seem to agree on the order of events that will transpire, and entire TV shows are devoted to interpreting modern day headlines into end times prophetic fulfillments. David Jeremiah is even coming out with a new book on the end times that will likely rival Lindsay’s Late Great Planet Earth from the 70′s. It seems a majority of evangelicals are in the camp which teaches a premillennial rapture and a thousand year reign of Christ on earth. I myself do not subscribe to this notion, in fact, I feel that only teaching this notion may be dangerous. It will all get sorted out when Jesus comes back, so I’m not too concerned, but I felt that a little bit of a different perspective might be in order.

Does Jesus say anything about an earthly kingdom?

Consider these passages concerning the kingdom of heaven: “From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it” (Matthew 11:12). The book of Matthew is FULL of Jesus teaching in parables concerning the kingdom of heaven. He continually demonstrated that people needed to act now – and not look for another kingdom to come, such as the man who buried his talent, awaiting the master’s return. Remember, that passage had nothing to do with money or talents, but with the kingdom of heaven! We must interpret Scripture in its proper context. Jesus, when teaching on divorce and marriage, said “Some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it” (Matthew 19:12). Jesus continually taught people to “repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17). I believe that the Bible teaches that when Christ came to earth He ushered us into the kingdom of heaven and through faith in Him we are brought into that same kingdom today. I will expand more on this in a moment. Colossians 1:13 says that He has “brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves.” Revelation 12:9-11 says that “The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: ‘Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ. For the accuser of our brothers, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down. They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death.” I believe that this authority and power is already here. Jesus said that “If I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you” (Matthew 12:27-28). If we truly believe that Jesus drove out demons by the Spirit of God (which is the clear implication of this text), then we must believe that the kingdom of God is already upon us!

However, one of the clearest Scriptures regarding the kingdom of God is found in Luke 17:20-21: “Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, ‘The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you.’” The kingdom of God is within us! In the Greek, this literally translates to “in our midst.”

What does church history have to say about the end times?

Let me offer you a concise church history lesson regarding end times teachings in the church. One of my main sources is David B. Currie, in his book entitled “Rapture: The End Times Error That Leaves The Bible Behind.” I highly recommend that anyone who holds the rapture position reads it and Scripturally addresses his claims. Many are surprised to discover that our modern fascination with the end times is NOT unique to our day and age! In fact, it is very unmodern (if that’s even a real word).

In 156 A.D., a charismatic leader named Montanis convinced many Christians that through a private revelation he had predicted that Christ’s return would come at any moment. He and his followers sought to return the Church to its “original simplicity,” being directly guided by the Holy Spirit (much like many Pentecostal/Charismatic denominations today). Montanis’ followers began to believe that they were the spiritual elite (much like many churches today) of the millennial kingdom that Christ would set up at His return. They taught that Christ would reign on earth for 1,000 years, with Papuza, Turkey as His seat of government. Montanis taught that the ecstatic utterances of their prophets (private revelations thought to be “in tongues”) were more authoritative than the teachings of Scripture. This led to the Montanists’ splitting from the Church. This movement became increasingly heretical before it died out by the sixth century, and it became the blueprint for all future denominations that would break away from the church and teach a Millennial reign of Christ on earth.

Almost all people who teach the rapture quote Irenaeus as the evidence of the rapture being taught in the early church. In 177 A.D., he became a bishop in the Roman Catholic Church, and his life work was to defeat the Gnostics. While doing this, he began teaching that immediately after the second coming there would be a 1,000 year earthly Kingdom of Christ. The early church rejected this as heretical and labeled it “chiliasm.” The title evolved into “millenarianism” and finally into “premillenialism.” The part about Irenaeus that Rapture scholars ignore is that he predicted the world would end 6,000 years after it had begun, based off of 2 Peter 3:8. He taught that the end of the world would occur around 1000 A.D., although some now claim that he meant 2000 A.D. Either way, it is obvious that he was wrong. You are going to begin to see a pattern – that people who teach the rapture tend to predict the end of the world, a practice discouraged and rejected by Christ (Matthew 24:36; 25:13; Mark 13:32).

A student of Irenaeus, Hippolytus, also made this mistake. Around the end of the second century, he predicted that the world would end soon, and he set a specific date. He determined the date to be 500 A.D., based off the size of Noah’s ark. Around the same time, Julius Africanus wrote that the end would come 6,000 years after creation and made his prediction in agreement with Hippolytus, that the end would come by 500 A.D.

Around 200 A.D., Tertullian had an interesting theory about the end times, incorporating nations of his day into his vision that reminds me a lot of the famous book series called Left Behind. St. Martin of Tours (316-397) believed that he was living in the end times and as such he wrote that the antichrist was already alive.

The next six centuries of church history contain very little speculation about end times events, presumably due to the influence of St. Augustine, who clearly explained prophetic texts in understandable and indisputable language.

Toward the end of the tenth century, a bunch of people were saying that end would occur before the year 1000 (much like our Y2K craze). Most of this was based off of Irenaeus’ teaching that a thousand years was literally “as a day” to the Lord. Most churches were anticipating the end by 992 A.D. Many held worship every day in preparation for the Lord’s coming. When Jesus did not come back, however, a new pattern began which has been dubbed the “rolling end of the world” technique. Whenever a false prediction was made, they would simply recalculate the figures and set a new date, “rolling back” the end of the world.

The thirteenth century was a rough time to be a Christian. The Muslim soldier Saladin had conquered Jerusalem and taken it away from Christians. A man named Joachim Fiore arose and popularized what some call the historicist view of the book of Revelation. He was the first to say that the letters to the seven churches were prophetic in nature and are a chronological time map of the end times Church. He was also the first “dispensationalist.” When he discovered the mention of 1,260 days in Revelation 12:6, he simply modified Irenaeus’ theory and said that the end would come no later than 1260 A.D. Fiore died in 1201 so he never lived to witness his error, but his faulty exegesis caused a crisis of faith for many. This began a new pattern, that eventual loss of faith frequently accompanies end times frenzy.

In 1501, Christopher Columbus predicted the end of the world, saying that it would occur by 1656. Shortly after this, the Protestant Reformation broke out in the Church, initially led by Martin Luther and his followers.

The Anabaptists, some of the more radical Protestants, took over Munster, Germany in 1534 and proclaimed that it would be the center of the millennial kingdom. They taught that anyone who was not in Munster when Christ returned would be condemned, claiming that they were the only true church – another common trend held in several Pentecostal churches today. The situation in Munster was far from stable, however. The people began practicing polygamy, and one of the wives of a prominent Protestant leader was publicly executed for resisting the teaching that all property must be shared – including wives! Even Martin Luther bought into the end times frenzy to an extent, predicting that the end of the world would come within 300 years, by the mid 1800’s.

The Protestants quickly picked up from where Fiore left off and decided that 1260 A.D. marked the beginning of the Great Tribulation, not the Second Advent. Thus they reasoned that the antichrist had to be alive, and they finally decided that it had to be the Pope. Unfortunately, much of the Roman Catholic Church’s activities during this period gave credibility to this theory by resembling those of a “beast” and a “harlot.” But the Pope was only one candidate. Many other Protestants felt that Luther was the antichrist. A little later, the Puritans felt that King George III was the antichrist. The list could go on and on. . . .

Entering the 1800’s, we have Joseph Smith predicting the end of the world and forming The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, who we know today as Mormons. In the early nineteenth century, William Miller predicted that Christ would return before March 21, 1844. When that didn’t happen he rolled it back to October 22, 1844. Most Millerites lost their faith after this and the few who did not went on to form what is today called the Seventh Day Adventists. The Jehovah’s Witnesses took “rolling the end of the world” to a whole new level. On different occasions, they have set the end of the world for 1874, 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975, and 1994. The funny part is, they refuse to admit that they were ever mistaken. They simply say that Christ DID return on those days, we just missed it!

Finally enters a man who changed the entire scene of the Protestant movement in America. John Darby was a former Anglican priest who began the Plymouth Brethren movement, and his end times teachings appealed to the young generation just coming out of the wake of the Civil War. Around 1830, Darby met 15-year-old Margaret MacDonald, who claimed to have a private revelation of a secret rapture that would occur shortly. Not all believers would be included in this rapture, however. Only certain especially faithful believers would be rescued. THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF THE TEACHING SAYING THAT THERE WILL BE A SECRET RAPTURE FOR TRUE BELIEVERS AND THAT THIS IS A SEPARATE EVENT FROM THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST WHICH IS THE VIEW HELD BY THE MOST PREMILLENIALISTS TODAY. Most premillenial argue that they have never heard the term “secret” associated with rapture but I will explain this more later.

Now why did Darby’s idea spread so widely in America? Edward Irving introduced these ideas to the Pentecostal churches in the early nineteenth century. In 1883, the Niagara Bible Conference movement aggressively spread his teachings. W.E. Blackstone, Charles Erdman, C.I. Scofield, and J. Hudson Taylor were all involved, and any knowledgeable rapturist will recognize their names. Moody Bible Institute, Dallas Theological Seminary, and Talbot Seminary all trained new pastors and supplied Bible study materials that promoted the belief that this imminent rapture was at the very core of the gospel message. Also during this time, the Scofield Reference Bible was becoming the most influential study Bible in America, which always explained passages from a rapturist perspective. Scofield claimed World War I was the beginning of the Armageddon, Oswald J. Smith predicted that the battle of Armageddon would occur before 1933, and Blackstone predicted that the rapture could likely be in 1934 or 1935. Despite these false predictions, their rapturist teachings spread like wildfire in America and today are found in almost every major Protestant denomination.

The 1940’s brought about many end times predictions during World War II. Even Billy Graham predicted in 1950 that the end was only two years away (U.S. News and World Report). In 1970, Hal Lindsey’s book The Late Great Planet Earth broke out in America. The entire premise of the book was that the rapture would occur before the end of the 1980’s. Many churches jumped on this bandwagon. Chuck Smith, the founder of Calvary Chapel, wrote that “The Lord is coming for His church before the end of 1981” (Smith, Chuck; 1978. Future Survival).

In a 1978 edition of Christianity Today, Gary Wilburn wrote that “The world must end within one generation from the birth of the state of Israel. Any opinion that does not dovetail with this prophecy is dismissed.” Rapturists began to claim that the rapture would occur within forty years of the founding of Israel in 1948. 1988 came and went. Edgar C. Whisenant published and distributed his pamphlet 88 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Be in 1988. The pamphlet sold almost 4.5 million copies! Guess what? When the rapture didn’t happen in 1988, He wrote 89 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Be in 1989 (although he sold considerably fewer copies).

In 1989, Jerry Falwell sent out a mass mailing requesting financial support from the generation living in the final decade before Christ’s return. In 1993, David Koresh formed his Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas. He taught that the final worldwide battle would take place at their compound in Waco which they called “Ranch Apocalypse.” A battle DID occur: 76 people were killed on April 10, 1993 in a fire that suddenly engulfed their buildings during a federal raid.

Televangelists such as Paul Crouch, Pat Robertson, and Jack Van Impe have made plenty of false predictions, followed by recommendations for viewers to send in money to support their ministries in these last days.

Then the Left Behind book series came on scene, written by Tim LaHaye, claiming that we are the last generation on earth before Christ comes. John Hagee has written that we are the last generation before the return of Christ. Michael Drosmin, who wrote The Bible Code, predicted Armageddon to occur in the year 2000. Now he has revised that statement to say that a comet will wipe out the earth in 2012. Need I give any more examples?

Today people have found new ways to “roll the end of the world.” Some say the start of the last generation was 1967 when Israel was reunified, which would have made the end sometime last year in 2007. Undoubtedly the end was not this year, so another theory will emerge, as has occurred since the beginning of the New Testament Church.

This concludes the concise history – trust me that was a short history. I could have made it twice as long! John Walvoord was the long-standing president of the Dallas Theological Seminary. In the first edition of his 1957 book, The Rapture Question, he wrote, “The rapture question is determined more by ecclesiology [theology of the Church] than eschatology [theology of end times]. Neither posttribulationalism nor pretribulationism is an explicit teaching of Scripture. The Bible does not in so many words state it.” Remember this guy was a leading theologian and a former president of a major U.S. Seminary! This admission was so controversial that it was deleted from all future editions of the book.

What does Scripture teach?

Thanks to Rev. Dr. Mark Press for this amillenial perspective (he wrote this in a personal letter to me on May 9, 2007; in response to some materials I had sent him advocating premillenialism):

“No one in the church (that I know of) denies the Second Coming of Jesus. (It would be hard to do that without eliminating the New Testament from consideration.) Where differences arise, it usually revolves around the issues of the teaching about the millennium and the events surrounding that concept. The teaching of the rapture is perhaps the point at greatest issue. So let’s start there.

As I read it, every place in the New Testament where the Second Coming is addressed, it is spoken of as a single event, not two (or more) distant and separate occurrences, as is suggested in the pre- or post-millennial teaching. Now that is not to say we know everything about it, any more than the apostles and their peers knew everything there was to know about Jesus’ two comings. For example, John the Baptizer seemed to be telescoping the two comings into one when he asked about whether Jesus really was the Messiah. He seemed to be anticipating the “power/judgment coming” (or Second Coming) and identifying it with the “grace/humility coming” that Jesus was demonstrating during His earthly life and ministry. But everything that we read seems again to point to two comings of Christ, not more than that. The first is complete; the second is “coming.”

The . . . material you sent speaks of the rapture as the “first phase of the Second Coming.” We come to 1 Thess. 4, which seems to be the most quoted passage relative to the rapture. However, this quotation is true only with regard to part of the passage, that which speaks of being “caught up together” with all the saints to meet the Lord in the air. The other parts of the passage are often forgotten and surely not quoted by rapture enthusiasts, for these parts clearly identify this event (and I take 4:13-17 to be speaking of one event, not more than one) with the Second Coming of Christ. There is a “loud command,” the “voice of the archangel,” and the “trumpet call of God,” as well as the resurrection. There is nothing silent or subdued or secret about this coming, it seems to me. To suggest that Christ silently and secretly removes the believers from the earth at this point seems necessarily to leave out key portions of the text.

[This] interpretation also mentions 1 Corinthians 15:51-52, which speaks clearly of the final assize, when we are changed “in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound. . .” There is that crazy trumpet again, hardly a sign identified with the secretive rapture removal that seems to be implied by bringing in this reference. Clearly, here in the resurrection chapter, Paul is speaking about the resurrection that takes place at Christ’s Second Coming – but to find some sort of rapture crammed in here seems to be pretty tortuous.

Given this understanding, it naturally flows that [my] understanding of the end-times is rather simple (and hermeneutics generally suggests that the simpler the solution, the better). . . . Theologians have said that we are living (ever since the Pentecost event) in the last days. These are the end-times. We believe that the Second Coming of Christ is imminent (not from a time perspective, but theologically), and thus anything that smacks of delaying that return or suggesting a return that is “off in the distance” is not consonant with the New Testament. “Today is the day of salvation” (2 Cor. 6:2). “I am coming soon” (Rev. 22:20). “This generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” (Matt. 24:34).

Thus while it seems that the whole New Testament perspective is that Christ could come today, the premillennial advocate must insist that His coming is at least seven years out. Granted, the rapture could be today, but the Second (Third?) Coming is at least seven years away, since there needs to be time allowed for the tribulation. Again, in my simplistic Lutheran way I would suggest that the tribulation is equivalent to the experience of the Church throughout the end-times (equally fulfilled in and for every generation).

This last point raises another issue, namely the application of Scripture. If certain of these signs of the end are intended for only the final seven years, that section of the Word has no application to the lives of the original hearers (or of any other readers, at least until the rapture takes place, or just shortly before). But if the “final signs” spoken of by Jesus (the sun being darkened, stars falling from the skies and heavenly bodies being shaken, as well as the sign of the Son of Man appearing in the sky) are seen only at the Last Day, then we have remarkable harmony in the end-times predictions.

It is true, of course, that some of Jesus’ words in the end-times prophecies seem to apply more aptly to the people who faced the destruction of Jerusalem. In that sense, it is sometimes difficult to sort out which words (e.g., in Matt. 24, Mark 13 & Luke 21) Jesus intended to apply to the Last Day and which were speaking in a shorter term, namely about the destruction of the Holy City. However, there seems to be no third category of those which apply to some rapture experience. (The one “exception” which seems to be lifted out of context again seems to be the “one is taken, the other left” language which appears in the gospels. This is easily and simply understood in the context to be speaking of the judgment on the Last Day, when one will be “taken” into heaven’s glory and the other will be “left” to continue to taste of earth’s corruption forever.)

It was interesting to me (to say the least) that the only verses quoted in the [premillenialists'] materials for the Second Coming were from the book of Revelation. Out of all the passages in the gospels and the epistles, why none were quoted seems strange (except from the fear of relating the Second Coming to the rapture, as seems to happen in most places).

In my mind, the whole idea of a seven-year period of tribulation, followed by a thousand-year period of relative peace and harmony, at the end of which Satan is “loosed” for a little while, seems to make the entire end-times teaching unnecessa
rily (and unbiblically) complex and difficult.”

I hope this has expanded your mind a little bit and given you a different perspective to consider. My point is not to create more controversy about an already contentious issue, but simply to provide alternative viewpoints for open-minded and light-hearted discussion. God bless!

Related posts:

1. Where is Jesus on Election Day?
2. Internal Dissonance
3. Advent

This sounds innocent enough, right? Well, let’s look again to Scripture.

John 1:1, 14

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God….And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”

Revelation 1:8

“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, says the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.”

You see, Jesus was God before Mary was even born. Mary is the vessel that produced the Messiah from the line of David, she is not the mother of God.

Now, assuming that you disagree with me and you do feel that Mary was the mother of God, how far are you willing to take it? In 1954, Mary was elevated to Queen of Heaven. In 1965, she was named Mother of the Church. Quite a promotion, eh? (You can see the other dates when titles were attributed to Mary in part 1.)

Pope Pius XII proclaimed Mary to be the Queen of Heaven on October 11, 1954. The full text of the Encyclical on Proclaiming the Queenship of Mary can be found here. I will only cite two of his comments in this post:

35. But the Blessed Virgin Mary should be called Queen, not only because of her Divine Motherhood, but also because God has willed her to have an exceptional role in the work of our eternal salvation.

36. Now, in the accomplishing of this work of redemption, the Blessed Virgin Mary was most closely associated with Christ; and so it is fitting to sing in the sacred liturgy: “Near the cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ there stood, sorrowful, the Blessed Mary, Queen of Heaven and Queen of the World.”

Does Scripture address this? The 7th and 44th chapters of the Book of Jeremiah are dedicated to the subject of there being a “Queen of Heaven,” past or present, and the Lord’s opinion of that particular classification.

Jeremiah 7:16-19

“So do not pray for this people nor offer any plea or petition for them; do not plead with me, for I will not listen to you. Do you not see what they are doing in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to provoke me to anger. But am I the one they are provoking? declares the LORD. Are they not rather harming themselves, to their own shame?

According to Scripture, the Queen of Heaven is a pagan goddess! A demon! Surely God would not take a title condemned in His Word, nor assign it to one of His faithful servants!

Peter confirmed that Jesus is the rock on which the Church should be built, not himself and not the Catholic (or any other) Church. Matthew, Mark and Luke confirmed that Mary was not only the mother of Jesus, but of several other children as well. Mary confirmed that she herself was a sinner in need of a Savior.

Friend, Mary did not ask for this attention. Better yet, I feel quite comfortable in saying that Mary would be saddened and ashamed that people are placing so much undue importance on her role in this day and age. Mary had a role to fill and she obeyed the Lord and filled that role. Her job is now done. Let her rest in peace.

To read the rest of this series, read all four parts. I hope you have enjoyed this teaching series!

Related posts:

1. Was Mary Sinless? Part 2
2. Mary, Mother of the Church? Part 1
3. What about praying to Mary and the saints? Part 3

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and in the hour of our death. Amen.

Catholicism teaches that Christ is a stern, wrathful judge who cannot be approached by sinners (not believed by all Catholics, but this is closer to the official church’s teaching). It teaches that Mary, on the other hand, is a tender, understanding, merciful intercessor who is more sympathetic and compassionate than the Lord and will plead our case to Him with the forceful persuasion of a loving mother.

The practice of petitioning Marian intercession is to pray to Mary, asking her to intercede as the mediatrix between man and God. Where does this teaching come from? Let’s begin again with the Word of God:

1 Timothy 2:5

“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus.”

Scripture tells us that there is but ONE mediator between God and Man: Jesus. The Church of Rome maintains that Mary and the saints are mediators as well, based on 1 Timothy 2:1, which says “therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men….”

The Roman Catholic Church makes no distinction between intercession and mediation. Intercession is praying to the Father for another, just as one would pray for the healing of a friend. Mediation on the other hand, is the practice of believing your prayers are heard only through another – a mediator, or mediatrix.

Additionally, no distinction is made between the living and the dead. The Roman Catholic Church claims that the dead are in Heaven with the Lord and therefore can hear our prayers and intercede with the Father on our behalf.

What does Scripture tell us about communicating with the dead?

Deuteronomy 18:10-12

“There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to the Lord, and because of these abominations the Lord your God drives them out from before you.”

Wow. These are harsh words from the Lord. Communicating with the dead is an abomination!

Let’s turn back to Scripture and see what Jesus says on the subject of prayer:

Matthew 6:7-8

“And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words. Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.”

Apparently, the message that Jesus was trying to get across is that we don’t have to chant things over and over as if the Lord is not listening to us. I guess you could say that not only is it an issue of quantity vs. quality, but additionally it is written that the Lord knows our needs, meaning that we don’t need for anyone who died before us to petition the Lord on our behalf.

Nowhere in the Lord ‘s Prayer do we see Jesus instructing us to pray to any entity other than the Father. Nowhere. If we were to ask for intercession from those who went before us to petition the Father, then why wouldn’t Jesus Himself have told us about it? Why did it take until the 7th century for the Roman Catholic Church to tell us about it? Just something to think about. You can see the other dates when titles were attributed to Mary in part 1.

God is omnipotent. Mary is not. She was a mere mortal, just as the rest of us today. Our God is a jealous God.

Exodus 34:14

“For you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.”

The Roman Catholic Church maintains that its members do not worship Mary. But isn’t praying for her help giving her preference over praying to the Father to ask for His help?

Even more so than this, God is a loving God. He desires a relationship with us. He wants to be first in our lives, not to be relegated to second place. He longs to hear from us, so why shut Him out?

On the clear basis of Scripture, I must conclude that we should not pray to anyone except God Himself. Look for part 4 tomorrow, which will be entitled, “Is Mary the Queen of Heaven?”

Related posts:

1. Mary, Mother of the Church? Part 1
2. Was Mary Sinless? Part 2
3. Is Mary the Queen of Heaven? Part 4

What does Scripture say about this?

Romans 3:23

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God”

Friends, there is no “out” clause there. The word “all” in this reference is translated from the Greek word, pas, which means: “all, all things, every, all men, whosoever, everyone, whole, all manner of, and/or every man.” There is no wiggle room for assumption here. When the Lord said “all,” he meant “all.”

Additionally, Mary confirmed her own sinful nature and need of a Savior as recorded in Luke 1:47. Scripture is clear on this one as well. She says, “. . . my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” Why would a sinless woman rejoice in her Savior? Clearly Mary herself made no claim to be sinless- but rather she recognized her need for a Savior!

Hebrews 7:26

“For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens.”

Jesus was the only Person to have ever lived a sinless life. To claim that Mary did as well is to say that Christ is one of the sinless, not THE sinless one. Without Christ’s unique, sin-free life, where does that leave His sacrifice? Where does that leave the promise of salvation?

Was Mary blessed? YES!! Mary was chosen among women to be the vessel who bore the Messiah. The Bible honors Mary as the mother of Jesus and calls her “blessed…among women,” (Luke 1:28) but not above women. What does this mean to us today? Nothing. No offense intended, but Mary’s job is done. She faithfully fulfilled her role in life and now she is with her Son in eternity.

Matthew 12:46-50 tells the story of Jesus speaking to the multitudes. In the middle of His sermon, He is interrupted and informed that His mother and brothers are outside of the building and that they wish to talk with Him. Does He stop speaking and go to them? No. His response was, “Who is my mother and who are my brothers?” Indicating the crowd He was addressing, He continued, “Here are my mother and my brothers, for whoever does the will of the Father in heaven is my brother, my sister and my mother.”

Jesus made it clear to those He was teaching that Mary was no more or less a sinner in need of a Savior than anyone else in that room. Was He being disrespectful? No. He was making a point: We all have the responsibility of doing the will of the Father, no matter how great or small.

Mary was a great and blessed woman, but she was not sinless. She didn’t make that claim herself nor is it implied in the text. The doctrine teaching that didn’t even exist until 1854! See part 1 to see when all of the doctrines of Mary came into existence — you’ll be surprised at how recently several titles have been added!

Look for part 3 tomorrow, entitled “What about praying to Mary and the saints?”

Related posts:

1. Mary, Mother of the Church? Part 1
2. Is Mary the Queen of Heaven? Part 4
3. What about praying to Mary and the saints? Part 3

“I’M MOVING HER TO YOUR HOUSE
Please keep the Blessed Mother moving from house to house
Our Mother Walked Through My House,
And Took My Troubles Away.
I Am Sending Her To You,
To Take Your Troubles Away.”

Now, before I begin, lest you think that I am Catholic bashing, I assure you that I am not. Nor am I suggesting that those who follow the Catholic faith are, by definition, not saved. Luke tells us in the Book of Acts, verse 17:11, that we are to be like the Bereans, testing every teaching against Scripture. Paul writes, “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16). My point is to merely take an intellectual look at the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church regarding Mary (The Blessed Mother) and compare them to Scripture, which has all authority as the Word of God. I understand that this may be a somewhat controversial post, but Jesus and His Word have a tendency to offend at times. It is not my intention to be divisive, rather it is to simply show what the Bible says about Mary.

I am going to note the progress made by the Roman Catholic Church to take Mary from her human state to the state of being Mother of the Church, the Blessed Mother:

• 431 A.D. – Mary Worship began
• 600 – prayers directed to Mary (Ave Maria added in 1508)
• 995 – canonization of saints
• 1854 – immaculate conception of Mary (her sinlessness)
• 1950 – assumption of Mary (she never died)
• 1954 – Mary proclaimed Queen of Heaven
• 1965 – Mary proclaimed Mother of the Church
• 1980 – Mary proclaimed Spouse of the Holy Spirit

You see, these titles and roles were added over the years (and more recent years at that). This is not who she was! Over the next couple of days we will look at some of these roles that have been attributed to Mary throughout church history.

Look for Part 2 tomorrow, which is entitled, “Was Mary Sinless?” I’d love to hear some feedback on all of this!

Related posts:

1. Was Mary Sinless? Part 2
2. Is Mary the Queen of Heaven? Part 4
3. What about praying to Mary and the saints? Part 3

From WorldNetDaily:

A Canadian human rights tribunal ordered a Christian pastor to renounce his faith and never again express moral opposition to homosexuality, according to a new report.

In a decision dated May 30 in the penalty phase of the quasi-judicial proceedings run by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal, evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson was banned from expressing his biblical perspective of homosexuality and ordered to pay $5,000 for “damages for pain and suffering” as well as apologize to the activist who complained of being hurt….

… Boisson wrote a letter to the editor of his local Red Deer, Alberta, newspaper in 2002 denouncing the advance of homosexual activism as “wicked” and stating: “Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.”

Wow. Guess what? This “hate crime” legislation is coming to America soon! Believers need to be prepared for gay activists to sue them over “hate speech.”

This is ridiculous, but it is the world we live in today. If you don’t like what I have to say, ignore it and move on! I am offended by Brokeback Mountain, but I’m not suing the producer! Tolerance is a two way street, why does no one seem to understand that? What do you think about this?

Related posts:

1. Couple fined $6,000 for refusing to take photos
2. Homosexual Files Lawsuit Against Bible Publishers
3. Pastors asked to give sermons defying IRS ban