Bible Only Christian or Bible Believing Christian?

50 Unbiblical Practices and Doctrines Believed to be Biblical

But Aren't





“Test everything. Hold on to the good, avoid every kind of evil.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22

Please email me with your questions, objections or comments. INRI33AD@aol.com

"Return to Homepage"

Click here: "16 SOBERING QUESTIONS FOR THE ERNEST BELIEVER":

Discover the verses not underlined in your Bible and often overlooked in the modern Christian churches and seminaries

Fellow Christian:

What follows is a partial list of 50 unbiblical doctrines and practices embraced by the modern Christian communities collectively.*

-12+ examples of unbiblical ideas/doctrines practiced in modern Christian churches.

-15+ Unbiblical components of the modern church service

-13 Unbiblical words used in Christian theology

-10 Unbiblical/Anti-biblical statements/concepts used in the modern Christian communities.

The purpose of this article is aid the devout Christian in his/her understanding of what is and what is not "Biblical." If we are to call ourselves Christians, which implies an allegiance to the teachings of Jesus Christ, it is incumbent upon us to acknowledge what is and what is not a Biblical teaching. This article is not meant to defame or disparage other faiths (although at times it may appear to do so). It is solely meant to fulfill the commandment of Our Lord in His Great Commission, to preach to all nations the Good News (Matt 28:19-20) in as He commands “complete unity” (John 17:22-23). I would assume that any devout Christian or follower of Christ would want to follow what the Bible says, and at the same time acknowledge what the Bible does not say. It is in this that we are true, not only to ourselves, but also to God Incarnate.

"If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." John 8: 31-32

The following list of 50 ideas demonstrates that unless the Christian "tests" a concept for Biblicism, one can mistakenly believe an idea to be contained within Holy Writ when in fact it is not. (“Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22) It should be noted that just because an idea/doctrine is absent from the Holy Scriptures, AKA"unbiblical," this in itself does not make the idea "anti-biblical." An idea is only "anti-biblical" (at least where the New Testament is concerned), if it contradicts the teachings of the Apostles as they wrote the New Testament.

Upon realization of the extra-biblical origins of the following 50 ideas, to be true to Our Lord Jesus Christ and our title "Christian," we must have courage to accept what is Biblical and courage to acknowledge what is not Biblical. And given the sheer volume of unbiblical ideas in modern Christianity, one must logically conclude, (as the Bible itself tells us repeatedly), that not everything is in the Bible. The Holy Bible and Apostolic Tradition (i.e., the Teachings of the Apostles) make up the Word of God, for the Apostles taught and wrote this very thought into the Holy Bible and we are told this explicitly many times.

(Ref #3 below).

The very fact that such an overwhelming list can be compiled, is proof positive that even those who would like to believe that they are “Bible Only" Christians are in fact, not. For much of their theology comes from either Apostolic Tradition (the teachings of the Apostles) or the traditions of man from various recent centuries. The traditions of man would be unbiblical ideas invented mostly in the last few hundred years. Some are good and some are not, but all are Unbiblical.

Many Christian pastors have taught their churches that the Bible teaches against Tradition. Yet Our Lord did not condemn *all* Traditions, only those that are contrary to the Word of God.

"Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: " The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them." Matthew 23:1-2

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The label "Bible Only" Christian as this article demonstrates, is a misnomer. A more appropriate title to be embraced is "Bible Believing Christian," but that presupposes the Christian acknowledges what is and what is not in the Holy Bible. Most modern Christians have been taught the following 50 ideas are Biblical. But they aren't, for not one verse can be found to support any of these ideas either explicitly or implicitly. I must reiterate, that not all of the following ideas/words are wrong, yet all are outside the Holy Bible, and that is the point of this paper, that as the Bible tells us (and contrary to what your pastor might have told you), *not everything is in the Bible*.

"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book" (John 20:30) "But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John 21:25). *The term non-Catholic in this article excludes the Eastern Orthodox churches. Numerous Examples of Unbiblical ideas/doctrines practiced by the

modern Christian churches. Where did the modern and often unbiblical ideas in your pastor's Statement of Faith originate? Search the origins of your denomination. Research the author’s and origins of your pastor's theology. History will reveal that they all are of recent origin and impossible for the Apostles to have taught 2000 years ago. How could the Apostles have taught said theology, when it didn't even exist in the first thousand years of Christianity?

See: The origins and authors of the Protestant theologies

http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/dates.html Unbiblical Ideas and Doctrines

#1.

Praying to Jesus i.e., the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

Praying to Jesus is good, healthy and wise, but it’s not Biblical. In fact Jesus himself tells us in Matt 6:9-15 that we should pray to His Father (the First Person of the Blessed Trinity) and he tells us how. That is how we got the “Our Father” or the "Lord’s Prayer," it was given to us to pray from Jesus Christ Himself. Jesus does ask that we "pray in His name" (John 14:13-14). But we are commanded to pray in His name not to Him, but to His Father.

Modern Christians follow the Apostolic Tradition of praying to Jesus because that is what the Apostles taught Christ's early Church. This Apostolic Tradition of praying to Jesus is not in the NT Bible. (For the NT books of the Bible did not even exist yet and would not for decades to come. It was 20+ years before the first epistle was written and at least 50 years until the last Gospel was written). Is it then a "tradition of man" because it is not in the Bible? No, it’s a Tradition/Teaching of the Apostles, or an "Apostolic Tradition" with a Capitol T, verses a tradition of man with a lower case "t."



Apostolic Tradition (Capitol T), along with the Holy Bible is God’s way of speaking to us. Together they give us the Gospel of Christ or the Word of God. This is what the Apostles taught and what the Holy Bible tells us this in many places. Here are but two examples of many from the Holy Bible that Christ's Gospel is found in both his written Word, and the oral teachings of his Apostles to his early Church:

"Hold fast to the traditions whether they come in oral or written form." 2 Thess 2:15

"The things which you have heard from me through many witnesses you must hand on to trustworthy men who will be able to teach others." (2 Tim, 2:2)



Praying to God the Father, the First Person of the Trinity IS Biblical and our Lord Jesus Christ tells us how in Matt 6:9-15 and he again tells us in Luke 4:8 that it is God the Father alone that should be worshiped. "Jesus answered, It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only'" Luke 4:8.

We are never commanded to pray to or worship Jesus (the Second Person of the Trinity) or even pray to the Holy Spirit (the Third Person of the Trinity). Both of these ideas are unbiblical. It is good, healthy and wise to pray to Jesus, but the origin of this idea comes from Apostolic Tradition or the Teachings of the Apostles, (Capitol T) to Christ's early Church, not the Holy Bible. Apostolic Tradition/Teachings (Capitol T), along with the Holy Bible is God’s way of speaking to us, they both give us the Word of God, just as the Apostles and the Holy Bible tell us.

#2.

The definition of the Holy Trinity: One God, three persons, all eternally coexistent with each other. That the Holy Spirit is Divine and the 3rd person of the Blessed Trinity, and that it proceeded from the Father and the Son as most Christian churches profess. In fact the very word "Trinity" is unbiblical.

We know this definition and this term, not because it is in the Holy Bible, but because Christ's Church, which embraced the only Christian Faith for the first 1000+ years of Christianity taught us this. Just as the Holy Bible commands its Church to do: "Hold fast to the traditions whether they come in oral or written form." 2 Thess 2:15 The definition of the Trinity (and the very word itself), the most fundamental concept in all of Christianity, is a teaching of the Apostles outside of Holy Writ embraced by "most" modern Christian churches today.

While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2 and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when [ a] you believed?"

They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit." Acts 19: 1-2

#3.

The "Bible Only" idea. AKA Sola Scriptura

The notion that the one's personal interpretation of the Bible is all one needs and the Teachings of the Apostles and Christ's Church can be rejected, or the idea that the Bible is the *SOLE* infallible rule of faith, or the notion that God’s infallible Word is *ONLY* contained in the Bible. All of these ideas are unbiblical. Nowhere do the Holy Scriptures say or even imply these ideas. Nowhere do the Holy Scriptures teach the SOLA or the ONLY in this renaissance era idea. The Bible says many good things about Scripture (2 Tim 3:16 for example), but nowhere does it make the claim or even “imply” that the Bible and *Only* the Bible is God’s Word. This renaissance era idea is unbiblical. Yet modern Christians have been told it's a Biblical truth without even questioning or "testing" its Biblicism. Yet if it were a Biblical truth,,, shouldn't it be in the Bible? It isn't. And the Bible tells us this many times. Here are but two examples:

"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book" (John 20:30)

"But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John 21:25).



In fact this whole paper with 50 examples demonstrates the impracticability of the "Bible Only" theory. For if one really wanted to embrace this Bible Only idea, one would have to reject every practice in this paper for what they are… unbiblical. Not only is the ”Bible Only" idea a "tradition of man" from the renaissance era, but it is also Anti-Biblical for it contradicts the very Bible it claims to be contained in. "Test this" as the Holy Scriptures command:

“Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.”

1 Thessalonians 5:21-22

#4.

The whole of the modern Christian belief systems, that condone and embrace multiple faiths or gospels/salvation messages within their communities.

In contrast to the Holy Bible which commands "complete unity"( John 17:22:23, 1 Cor 1:10 ) and "One Faith" ( "There is One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God." Eph 4:4 ), the modern Christian churches accept, condone and perpetuate a plurality of contradicting faiths/gospels, resulting in complete disunity within these churches. This blatantly unbiblical practice is evidenced by the plethora of "Statements of Faith" possessed by each of these churches. Search the "Yellow Pages" under "church" for a graphic demonstration of this unbiblical example, (and that is just your city).

“I have given them [believers] the glory that you gave me, that they may be as one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.” (John 17:22,23)

“Now I beseech you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all say the same thing, and that there be no dissension among you, but that you be perfectly united in one mind and in one judgment.” (1 Cor 1:10)

"There is One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God." (Eph 4:4)

Reason #4 above, is a result of the "Bible Only" idea or Sola Scriptura which allows any and every church to believe anything it wants about the Gospel of Christ, for there is no one to stop them. For the Church Christ started is rejected and the authority He gave it is rejected: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16). The plethora of gospels embraced by the modern churches is the result of an unbiblical idea, concept and application of what the very word "church" in the Christian context means and implies.

See: Seven Reasons Christians go to church. Which one is yours?

http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/forchurch7reasons.html

#5.

Modern Christian pastors standard practice of REmarrying divorced Christians previously joined by God in a Christian ceremony.

This is unbiblical. It is a tradition of man (lower case t) and even anti-biblical. Nowhere in the Holy Scriptures do we read of divorced Christians being REmarried by the clergy. Even the Protestant reformers from the 16th century condemned this idea as a grave sin. In fact the Holy Bible quotes Our Lord Jesus Christ commanding the direct opposite:

Mark 10:9 "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.' 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery" (cf. Luke 16:17-18).



Nowhere in the Holy Bible or the early Church do we read of this and nowhere in all of Christian history was this allowed or condoned. All, again all Protestant denominations used to be against this to include Protestantism's own reformers in the 16th century, (except of course King Henry the 8th of England who broke from the Catholic Church over this very issue to start the Church of England and eventually marry six times). Today, 99.9999% of all non-Catholic organizations condone and practice this anti-biblical abomination that mocks the Words of Our Savior (Mark 10:9, Luke 16:17-18). Does your church practice this apostasy? Did Christ's teachings change? Did Christ change? Do not the Holy Scriptures tell us Christ's Gospel can't change?

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings." Hebrews 13:8-9

How did it change for your current church? The Protestant reformers aligned themselves with the Catholic position: divorce and REmarriage is a sin by those who knowingly do it and by the pastors who openly perform it. In fact, rather than capitulate to divorce, the Catholic Church lost an entire country (England) when Henry the 8th demanded that Christ's Church compromise on this doctrine. The Church of God didn't and King Henry broke from Christ's Church and started his own church and made himself its head. (The Church of England-the Anglicans/American counterpart: the Episcopalians).

Click here: The Permanence of Matrimony. Our Apostolic Fathers, some the students of the Apostles, teaching Scripture on marriage"

http://www.catholic.com/library/Permanence_of_Matrimony.asp

#6. The belief that the Old Testament and the New Testament are "Inspired."

They ARE inspired,

but nowhere does the Bible itself tell us *which books* are inspired. The Bible gives us no such list. Take the Gospel of Mark. It’s inspired, but how do you know it is? Who told you this and why do you believe them? Mark wasn't even an apostle and the Gospel of Mark doesn't even claim its inspired so why believe it is? You believe it is inspired because Christ's early Church declared it inspired. The Catholic Church officially did this in the 4th century and defined the list of inspired books we know now as the Holy Bible at the "Council of Carthage." And at the same time it proclaimed that the "Gospel of Thomas" who was an Apostle to be NOT inspired, and rightly so. We know the Bible has the correct canon, (or list of inspired books) because the Catholic Church was infallible in this decision. Just as the Holy Bible tells us it is. The same Holy Spirit that protects the Bible from error protects Christ's Holy Church from error, just as the Holy Bible tells us. This is a concept not taught in the modern Christian churches. Christ said he would send:

"the spirit of truth to guide you into all the truth" John 16:13. (Either He did or He didn't? Either we believe Scripture or we don't? Of course Christ did this and that is why Christ's Church is infallible on such matters, i.e., matters pertaining to faith or morals.)

All Christians have to believe the Catholic Church was infallible in this decision because the original letters/Gospels of the Apostles were lost or destroyed. The Catholic Church, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit infallibly copied the NT letters and Gospels into what we know today as the New Testament Bible. For if the Catholic Church was not infallible and was not "guided by the Holy Spirit" in the endeavor, the NT Bible you embrace today is flawed, corrupt or even apostate and not the inspired and infallible written Word of God.

Christ also said of his Church:

“ I will build my church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it, I give you the keys to kingdom of Heaven, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven and what ever you loosen on earth will be loosened in Heaven." Matt 16:16-19.



Did the Gates of Hell prevail against it as your current pastor may have taught you and this verse is in error? Has this verse ever been taught in your current church? " Click here: Have you been taught the Catholic Church became corrupt in its theology? Don't the Holy Scriptures say this is impossible?"

http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/gatesofhell.html

Christians believe the OT and NT are inspired with the number of books that they possess because someone told you this and you believed them. That is why you believe in the Bible as you do, and believe it is inspired. Not because the Bible tells you this, but because the Catholic Church, the Church Christ started, the only Christian Faith for the 1st 1000+ years of Christianity proclaimed this for all Christendom 1500+ years ago. The same Church the Holy Scriptures call:

"The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim 3:15.



To believe otherwise is to believe that the Catholic Church got the canon of Scripture wrong, and that perhaps the Gospel of Thomas SHOULD be in the Bible. What do you believe? Was the Church infallible in this decision? Apostolic Tradition gave the Church the “Litmus Test” to determine what should be in the Bible and what should not. If you disagree, perhaps the "Gospel of Thomas" or the "Gospel of Peter" or many other early works really should be in the Bible. Your belief in the inspiration and exclusivity of the NT canon is an "Apostolic Tradition" not found in the Holy Bible. (Capitol T).

#7. “The Sinners Prayer." (Found on the back of most Protestant tracks)

This prayer is unbiblical, and a tradition of man, lower case t. Nowhere in the Holy Scriptures does it contain this prayer or even imply it, and this prayer was totally unheard of by Protestantism's own reformers in the 16th century. It’s a good prayer but it’s unbiblical. It is ironic though, that most modern churches will say the “Sinner’s Prayer” in their churches (which is unbiblical), yet refrain from saying the “Lord’s Prayer” or the "Our Father" which IS Biblical and was commanded of us to pray from the very lips of our Lord and Savior. When’s the last time you recited the Lord’s Prayer in your current church? Did not Christ command you to pray to his Father in this manner? Read Matt 6:9-13 again. Matthew 6:9-13.

#8. The "adding to" and "taking away from" from Scripture as seen in John 3:16.

Modern Christians have morphed and distorted John 3:16 into something their own reformers would roll their eyes at. Modern Christians have changed the meaning and context of the words in John 3:16 to connote that all one must do for salvation is "Believe in Jesus." Where historically, to include their own reformers, the original texts did not say this. Most modern Bibles mistranslate the passage to read:

John 3:16 (New International Version)

16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16 (Contemporary English Version)

16God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have eternal life and never really die.

Giving the uninformed reader the impression that Christ taught that all one has to do for eternal life is to "believe in Him." Conversely and most surprisingly to some, the original translation which is found in early Protestant Bibles such as the KJV and all non-Protestant Bibles reads:

John 3:16 (King James Version)

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 3:16 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition.)

16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish , but may have life everlasting.

Thus correctly edifying the reader to the belief that "Believing in Christ" is part of the salvation process, and "may or should " bring eternal life if one actually "follows" Christ and does the will of His Father.

"and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me." (Matt 10:38).

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."

(Matt 7:21)

Just "believing in Christ," as the Holy Bible says, is no more of an accomplishment than the demons achieve.

"You believe that God is one You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?" James 2:19-20

Why then was John 3:16 changed in the Bible of the modern Christian? Because it conforms to the new theology that salvation is a one time event, and all one needs to do is just "believe in Christ." One has to admit, this is a quick sell and is very appealing to prospective members. If Christianity was just that easy. If salvation was just that easy. But unfortunately it is not what Christ said or taught. It's not even what the first reformers taught! And the Apostle Paul (who unequivocally "believed" in Christ) concurs for he stated 2000 years ago:

Philippians 2:12 (New American Standard Bible)

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence,

work out your salvation with fear and trembling;

#9. The Church of England's unscriptural addition to the Lord's Prayer from the KJV.

The Lord's Prayer is Biblical (Matthew 6:9-13), yet nowhere in the most ancient and trusted writings of Scripture does it contain the end-phrase the 16th century English Protestants have attached to it: "For is the Kingdom and the Power and the Glory for now and forever and ever. Amen"



This end-phrase appears in only a few Protestant Bibles such as the KJV and the NASB. Yet in both the KJV and the NASB, there is a footnote telling the reader that this end phrase was not in the original or even the most ancient manuscripts.

This end phrase is absent from all other Bibles (Catholic and Protestant alike) to include the following Protestant Bibles:

NIV, the New Living Translation (NLT), New Life Version (NLV), English Standard Version (ESV), Contemporary English Version (CEV), American Standard Version (ASV), Darby Translation (DARBY),Wycliffe New Testament (WYC), New International Reader's Version (NIRV), New International Version - UK (NIV-UK) as well as all the Catholic Bibles to include the Latin Vulgate of the 4th century: the first translation from the Greek into Latin-the vernacular of the people.

The addition of this end-phrase, just like the Sinner's Prayer is a tradition of modern man. (lower case t.) It is not the Words our Savior gave His Apostles (who subsequently wrote them into the Holy Bible). It is a tradition of modern man from King James' court. See Matthew 6:9-13. It might also be argued that this end-phrase is an addition to Scripture and in violation of Rev. 22:18-19:

"I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book." This in turn would invalidate many pastor's Statement of Faith which states that the Bible is true only as it is presented in the original manuscripts. This end phrase is not in the original or most early manuscripts.

#10. “Infant Dedications” (in lieu of Infant Baptism?)

& #11. Denying infants Baptism. Both Unbiblical.

The former is totally unbiblical. Nowhere do the Holy Scriptures speak of "infant dedications" as practiced in many modern Christian churches. Conversely infant Baptism is described in the Holy Scriptures and has been practiced by Christians for 2000 years, to include Protestantism's own reformers. The reformers would wince at such a notion as "infant dedications" and wince again at the thought of not baptizing infants. What more proof of Biblicism and Apostolicity does one need unless one rejects the faith of his own reformers and the Apostles as well?

Apostle Peter declared:

"Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children " (Acts 2:38–39).

& "Baptism...now saves you" (1 Pet. 3:20–21)

Never in the Holy Bible do we read of infant dedications, they are a tradition of man, lower case t. And nowhere in the Holy Bible do we read of Christians denying infants Baptism until the age of reason as the Anabaptist sect first espoused in the 17th century. This is the origin of this idea that is embraced by the non-denominational and Baptist churches. To withhold Baptism from our children is an idea invented by latter day Christians who rejected the faith of their own Protestant reformers, the same reformers who practiced the Baptism of infants by immersion, sprinkling or pouring. Infant Baptism is an Apostolic Tradition/Teaching, (Capitol T.) Infant dedications are a tradition of man from the last few hundred years. (Lowercase t.)

" Click here: Baptizing Infants, what the Bible says"

http://www.catholic.com/library/Infant_Baptism.asp







#12.

Modern “Bible Studies”



Bible Studies are a wonderful thing. But nowhere do the Holy Scriptures speak of or teach Bible Studies. Whenever "the Scriptures" are discussed in the Holy Bible, they are in the form of teaching or edification, not a "This is what it means to me, what do you think?" approach.



“ Philip ran up and heard him [an Ethiopian eunuch] reading Isaiah the prophet, and said, "Do you understand what you are reading?"

31And he said, "Well, how could I, unless someone guides me?" And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.” Acts 8: 30-31

Modern Bible studies are a good and profitable endeavor as long as NEW ideas or doctrines about Christ's Gospel are not embraced as the teachings of the Apostles. E.g., all 50 unbiblical and anti-biblical ideas contained in this document. Bible Studies are very profitable for as St. Jerome, (who was the first Christian to translate the Holy Bible from the Greek in Latin, the vernacular of the people) stated over 1500 years ago: "Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ." But Bible studies in themselves and as practiced today in modern Christian churches, as good as they are, remain absent from the Holy Scriptures and hence a recent tradition of man, (lowercase t).

#13.

Some modern Christian church's objections to dancing and alcohol.

These objections have *zero* Biblical support. Nowhere in the Holy Bible do we read that dancing is wrong or should be avoided. And nowhere do we read that alcohol should be avoided at all cost. In fact Our Savior's first miracle at Cana was changing water into wine. And wine (not grape juice [unbiblical]) was used at the Last Supper. In fact Our Lord himself stated:

"But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."Matthew 26:29

Both of these ideas are "traditions of man" from the last few hundred years that even Protestantism's own reformers did not embrace. What does that tell you? It tells you the Apostles did not teach these ideas and subsequently write them into the Holy Bible. So logically the idea is impossible to be Biblical.

Numerous Unbiblical Components of the modern Christian service

What follows are numerous examples of how the modern Christian service has been morphed into something inherently unbiblical and in many cases anti-biblical and in the first case, unChristian. Since each modern Christian church gets to decide for itself (via Sola Scriptura) what is "biblical" and what is not, every modern Christian church will not fit this mold exactly, but all of them collectively embrace the unbiblical ideas and practices exemplified below.

#14.

Tithing.- Scripture tells us that one should not give under compulsion or coercion.

"Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." 2 Corinthians 9:7



Surprisingly to some, this is an unChristian principal. And much to the chagrin of the modern Christian pastor who funds his church and lively hood on this Jewish idea, preaching tithing in a Christian church, is ironically unChristian. It is part of the Mosaic Law and Jewish rather than Christian in nature and origin. Christ by his sacrifice on the Cross-is the New Covenant that abolished the Old Covenant of Judaism. Luke 22: 20 "And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." Calvary is the ultimate sacrifice that did away with the Old Covenant from which tithing resides.

“God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.” Col 2:13-14

There is no difference in your pastor preaching tithing then there is for burnt offerings. He might as well sacrifice an ox every Sunday for he is preaching the OLD Covenant from which Christ by His Blood on Calvary freed us.

Deuteronomy 12:6-7

6" There you shall bring your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the contribution of your hand, your votive offerings, your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock. 7"There also you and your households shall eat before the LORD your God, and rejoice in all your undertakings in which the LORD your God has blessed you.

Giving to the poor and supporting one's parish is very Christian as Our Lord commands us to do. But putting an exact number on giving (10%), or for a modern Christian Pastor to preach tithing is inherently unchristian and it makes a mockery of Calvary and the ultimate sacrifice of Our Savior. All this to simply maximize financial gain by his church. This is not good news to modern pastors who use 10% of their parishioner's income to (among other things) provide for his family, buy his wife's jewelry and clothes and fund his children's college educations. Christ's historic Church, the only Christian Faith of the first millennium does not preach tithing because Christ did not. Christ's ultimate sacrifice did away with this relic of the Mosaic Law. It is an unchristian Protestant only tradition of man, (lower case t).

#15.

Not praying the "Lord's Prayer, or the Our Father"

When is the last time (again if ever) your church followed the commandment of Our Lord Jesus Christ to pray in the words He gave us in Matt 6:9-13? Those words would be the "Lord's Prayer" or the "Our Father". Did not Our Savor tell us to "Pray then [to His Father] in this way "? See Matthew 6:9-13.

9"Pray, then, in this way:

'Our Father who is in heaven,

Hallowed be Your name.

10'Your kingdom come

Your will be done,

On earth as it is in heaven.

11'Give us this day our daily bread.

12'And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

13'And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Matt 6:9-13

Again the end phrase [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.]' is unbiblical as demonstrated by unbiblical addition # 8 above.

Click here for #8



A Bible Believing Christian must ask himself: "Where in the Holy Bible are modern Christians excused from praying to the Father in the Words and manner Our Savior gave us? Why don't we pray the Words of Our Lord in our churches as He commanded?"



#16.

“The Altar Call.”

Unbiblical. Nowhere in the Holy Scriptures does it describe or speak of an “Altar Call." It is a misnomer to call this event an "Altar call," for ironically most modern churches, (in contrast to every Christian Church in the first 1500+ years of Christianity), do not even have an "altar" in their churches. It’s a good tradition of man, but it’s unbiblical, (lower case t). This modern idea was unheard of by Protestantism's own reformers who actually had altars in their churches. This is an unbiblical tradition of the modern Christian man and totally unheard of in historic Christianity to include the Apostles and the NT Church.

#17.

The modern Christian idea and practice that Christian children should be separated from the adults during church services.

Not only is this idea unbiblical, but it is without precedent. For nowhere do we read that the NT Christians segregated their youth to do crafts and play games while the adults worshiped God. Early Christians to include the Protestant reformers worshiped as families. Segregating the children is not only unbiblical, but also a bad idea that denigrates and undermines the family unit and turns the time set aside to worship God, into a social hour for the teens and a fun filled playschool time for the children. This is an unbiblical tradition of the modern Christian man and totally unheard of in historic Christianity to include the Protestant reformers and the NT Church. Either we want to mimic the NT Church or we don’t.

#18.

The common practice among most every modern Christian service to serve shots of "grape juice" for communion rather than wine as the Bible speaks of.

This practice is unbiblical and even anti-biblical. Where did this come from? Does not the Holy Bible and Our Lord Himself tell us that wine is to be used? Again even the first Protestants used wine. In Cana, did Christ make "grape juice" for his first miracle or wine? Was the Holy Grail at the Last Supper full of juice, or water as the Mormons use? This is absurd, blatantly unbiblical and vehemently anti-biblical. It is an apostate tradition of the modern man and totally unheard of in historic Christianity to include the Protestant reformers and the NT Church. It violates a direct commandment of God Incarnate.

"And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, "Take this and share it among yourselves; 18for (C)I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes." 19And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 20And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." Luke 22:17-20

#19.

The unbiblical idea that the Eucharist, i.e. Holy Communion is just a mere symbol and not the actual presence of Jesus Christ.

Where in the Holy Bible does it say or even imply it is just a symbol? The answer is nowhere. On the contrary and in accordance to what Apostolic Christianity has always believed (to include again the first Protestants), Holy Communion IS Jesus Christ, just as he literally said it was.

Holy Communion, the Blessed Eucharist, is the actual Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ, because that is what Christ said It was: ``This is my body... This is my blood'' ( Matt. 26:26-28; see also Luke 22:19-20 and Mark 14:22-24); because that is what Christ said they must receive in order to have eternal life: ``. . . Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you...'' ( John 6:48-52; 54-56); and because that is what the Apostles believed: ``The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?'' ( 1 Cor. 10:16). ``Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.'' ( 1 Cor. 11:27-29).

From: FAQ about the Catholic Faith from Columbia University http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html#q22

Christians believe that Holy Communion is the actual Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ (under the appearance of bread and wine) because that is what all Christians believed to include the first Protestants. It was only latter day Protestants, specifically the Ana-Baptist sect that denied the “Real Presence” of Christ in the Eucharist. To believe it is merely symbolic is to embrace the gospel of the Ana-Baptists vs. the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the whole of orthodox Christianity to include the first Protestants.

#20

Another direct commandment of Our Lord which is rejected in most modern Christian churches, is Christ's commandment to reenact the Last Supper. He commanded that Christians "Do this in remembrance of me." But do what in remembrance of Him? Pass out shots of grape juice and chili crackers? No Blessing? No proclamation of the sacred Words of Our Lord on Holy Thursday? No consecration of the Bread and Wine? Our Lord commands us in Luke 22:17-20 to reenact the Last Supper/the events of Holy Thursday as He prescribed. Holy Thursday (evening) was the start of the Jewish Passover, where "unleavened" bread was used. This is what the NT Christians did when they "broke bread" on the Lord's Day (Saturday evening to Sunday evening, see: Acts 20:7-12).

Yet many modern Christian churches never have communion or do so infrequently, and when they do there is no "breaking of the bread." Nothing is done that Our Lord commanded. Christ's Words to us after blessing the unleavened bread and "wine" and proclaiming it literally to be His very Body and Blood were: "Do this in remembrance of me." Most of the modern Christian communities disobey the Words of our Lord in His command, and simply pass out "grape juice" and "communion niblets/chili crackers," as if this fulfils the commandment of our Lord and Savior. Conversely, the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches (and some Lutheran/Anglican churches) are true to Our Lord and actually "Do this in remembrance of [Him]." Even the first Protestants were faithful to Our Lord in doing this "in remembrance of Him." Why are the modern Christian churches exempt from this Divine command? This is an unbiblical and anti-biblical tradition of man embraced by the modern Christian and totally unheard of in historic Christianity to include the reformers and the NT Church.

What follows are the sacred words of Our Lord spoken at the moment of consecration in every Catholic Mass, just as our Lord commanded. It's called the liturgy-something unheard of in most modern Christian churches. Taken from the Gospel of Luke, the liturgy is professed:



On the night he was betrayed he took bread in his sacred hands and looking up to heaven,

to you, his almighty Father, he gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said:

"Take this, all of you, and eat it:

this is my body which will be given up for you."

When supper was ended,

he took the cup. Again he gave you thanks and praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said:

"Take this all of you and drink from it:

this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant.

It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven.

Do this in memory of me. "

Have these sacred words of Our Savior ever been uttered in your church as Christ has commanded? And if not, why not? Where does your pastor find his exemption to the commands of Jesus Christ?

Luke 22:17-20 "And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, "Take this and share it among yourselves; 18 for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes." 19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood."



And from the Apostle Paul's 1st letter to the Corinthians on the Lord Supper:

For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." 1 Corinthians 11:23-25

#21.

Modern Christian pastors who refuse to give any honor to the Blessed Mother of Our Lord as commanded in the Holy Scriptures.

Does not the Holy Bible tell us that the Virgin Mary is the "the handmaid of the Lord" (Luke 1:38) and that "All nations shall call [her] Blessed?" (Luke 1:48) And Elizabeth "filled with the Holy Spirit" proclaims: " Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!" (Luke 1:42) Yet most modern Christians maintain that the Blessed Virgin was just an ordinary Jewish girl and nothing more and they treat her/ignore her as such. Where in the modern Christian service has your pastor ever called the Virgin Mary " Blessed " as the Holy Bible and the Holy Spirit instructs? When has your pastor ever referred to her as the "Mother of God" as the Holy Bible tells us? (Luke 1:43) Again, why are the modern Christian communities exempt from obeying the Holy Bible or giving proper respect and honor to the Mother of Our Savior? Why do they refuse the honor due to her as dictated in the Holy Bible? How would you feel if someone who "claimed to be your friend" refused to honor your mother in the most basic sense?... Our Lord who was fully human and fully God probably feels the same way, who wouldn't?

See: Is the "Hail Mary" Prayer Biblical? Read the verses not underlined in your pastor's Bible at:

http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/saints.html

#22.

“Bowing your heads and closing your eyes when you pray" as you have been taught since childhood. Not a bad tradition, but again unbiblical. Quite similar to how Catholics make the "Sign of the Cross" to profess their Baptism (ref: Matt 28:19-20) when they pray to and worship the Blessed Trinity. Both good practices, yet both explicitly unbiblical traditions of men (lower case t’s). Not all "traditions of man" are bad. But all are unbiblical. And it is difficult to call oneself a "Bible Only" Christian in the strictest sense when one adheres to and practices so many unbiblical behaviors/beliefs. Again, a more appropriate name should be "Bible Believing" Christian. But even that assumes one acknowledges what is and what is not in the Holy Bible.

#23.

Refusing to kneel for Our Lord as the Holy Bible commands.

We read in Philippians 2:10-11

"so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow , of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,"

and

Isaiah 45:23

"I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness

And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow , every tongue will swear allegiance." Did not Our Lord Himself pray on his knees on the night He was betrayed? See Mark 14:35. Where in the Holy Bible do we read that modern Christians are exempt from these Biblical commands? When is the last time, (if ever), your pastor instructed the congregation to kneel in church as you worshiped Our Savior and uttered His Holy Name? Why do these verses not apply to the modern Christian churches? This also is an unbiblical and anti-biblical tradition of man embraced by the modern Christian and totally unheard of in historic Christianity to include the NT Church.

#24.

The practice of most every modern Christian pastor of wearing a "Golf Shirt" or a suit and tie during worship services

rather than the garb of the clergy in the Holy Bible. Moses, the prophets, the Apostles and even Our Lord Jesus Christ himself, wore a Robe. And as the book of Revelation tells us, this is the garb of those in Heaven. (See Rev 1:13; 6:11; 7:9; 7:13; 19:13). Either we want our churches to mimic the clergy of the NT Church and Our Lord Jesus Christ or we don't. This also is an unbiblical tradition man embraced by the modern Christian and totally unheard of in historic Christianity to include the first Protestants and the NT Church. (Rev 19:13)

#25.

The Complete Absence of "Bishops, Priests and Deacons" in most Modern Christian Churches

Why do most modern Christian churches reject the 3 ordinations of the clergy as delineated in the Holy Bible of the New Testament Church? If your current church does not have Bishops, Priests or Deacons, one must ask, why not? Either we want to mimic the NT Church or we don't. The Holy Bible gives us the 3 offices of the clergy as taught and embraced by Christ's Apostles. Why do the modern Christian churches reject this Biblical guidance?



The sacrament of holy orders is conferred in three ranks of clergy: bishops, priests, and deacons.



Bishops (episcopoi) have the care of multiple congregations and appoint, ordain, and discipline priests and deacons. They sometimes appear to be called "evangelists" in the New Testament. Examples of first-century bishops include Timothy and Titus (1 Tim. 5:19–22; 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5).



Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as "presbyters" or "elders." In fact, the English term "priest" is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14–15).



Deacons (diakonoi) are the assistants of the bishops and are responsible for teaching and administering certain Church tasks, such as the distribution of food (Acts 6:1–6).

#26. "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them" John 20:23

Does your church have confession or the sacrament of reconciliation? Did not Christ himself commission the leaders of His Holy Church to forgive sins? 21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." John 20:21-23 Does not the Apostles Paul speak of this sacrament of reconciliation? "All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation" (2 Cor. 5:18). When is the last time your Pastor heard your confession and forgave you your sins with the power that Christ commanded ? Or does he not have the power to do this because he is not ordained in the Apostolic ministry? (See Unbiblical practice #25 above?)

#27

So called "Devotional Bibles" filled with quips, stories, and jokes. Modern Christian churches and publishers have defiled the Holy Bible (with good intentions BTW) by contradicting the words of Revelation 22:18-19 and adding to the Holy Scriptures.

This may seem like a trivial point, but can you imagine the ancient Jews filling the sacred pages of their Holy Torah with quips, jokes, and personal stories? Can you imagine the Protestant reformers, Martin Luther even, adding the same to his translation of the Holy Bible? What about the New Testament writers, did they fill their pages with feel good anecdotes? Has anyone defiled the Holy Scriptures in the past 2000 years as modern Protestant publishers do today? The Sacred Scriptures are called Sacred for a reason. They are the written Word of God. How dare one contaminate its Holy pages with such modern touchy-feely commentary as the "Devotional Bible" possesses. It is a defilement of the Word of God and presumptuous to put ones spurious comments alongside the words of Holy Writ.

As Rev. 22:18-19 says: "I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in the prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book."

This may have been done with good intentions, but it is wrong and blasphemous to God's Holy Word. Just as it was wrong 2000 years ago for the solders to defile and crucify the Logo's, the Word, the Lamb of God, while Our Lord prayed, "Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing" Luke 23:34, it is just as wrong today to defile and add to God's Word.

#27.

The total absence of the "consequences of Sin" to the congregation of a modern Christian parish.

"The wages of Sin is death." Romans 6:23

Either it is or it isn't. When is the last time your Pastor spoke of the consequences of Sin as they applied to his congregation? Or are there no consequences of Sin to his congregation because everyone in his congregation is told they are "saved," no matter what sin they commit? And the "consequences of Sin" only apply to those outside his church or those not saved as he defines it? Ask yourself: Is an unrepentant sinner really "walking with God." Has your pastor every preached the words of the Apostle Paul or Our Lord who states:

1 Cor 6:9,10 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God .

Gal 5:19-21 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God .

Eph 5:5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person-- such a man is an idolater-- has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God .

Matthew 5:20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

It is not enough to just be a believer or just "Believe" in Christ, for even the demons do this:

"You believe that God is one You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?" James 2:19-20

We must also "Follow" Christ.

``If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.'' (Matt. 16:24).

Many desire a Savior but not a Lord. To embrace the Lord requires as our God tells us to: ``Keep the commandments.'' ( Matt . 19:17). Our Faith must be a working faith or as the Apostle Paul tells us a: ``faith that worketh by charity .'' ( Gal . 5 :6). Our works do not "Save" us, our faith in Jesus Christ does. But this faith must be a working faith, for "faith without works is dead" James 2:26. And bad works, or grievous sin separates us from God and as Our Lord tells us, without repentance those who do commit such sins will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, not without repentance.

Does your pastor even allude to the fact that if one in his church sins without repenting, if one turns his back to God through serious sin and refuses to repent, he will not inherit the kingdom of God ? Or is everyone in the church going to Heaven no matter what heinous crime they commit against God, and the "wages of Sin," at least for his church, is not death?

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23

Eternal life for those who repent and "follow" Him.

Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

How is an unrepentant sinner who continues in sin walking with God or "saved"?

#28. The preoccupation and emphasis on "entertainment" in the modern Christian church.

Most modern churches today are more concerned with entertaining their parishioners than focusing on the preaching of the Word. Most modern pastors feel they have to keep everyone entertained, or the flock will leave this church for a more entertaining one. Jumbo-trons, expensive sound systems, skits, plays, refreshments (during the service even), elaborate kids programs, constant entertainment, all of these are the norm in the modern service and are in stark contrast to the Church of the first century and the Holy Bible.

The NT Church was not about entertainment and they did not operate in the fear of losing members to more entertaining churches. Because there was but One Christian faith in the first millennium, all Christian parishes taught the same Gospel, all had the same beliefs, it was truly a Universal Church. ("Catholic" is the Greek word for "universal." Katholikos.) There was no "church shopping" for a more entertaining church to "feel fed," for all Christian parishes in the first millennium were basically identical in liturgy and message. The emphasis was not on keeping everyone entertained, it was on preaching the Word of God.

If your church decided to abandon all entertainment and operate in a warehouse with a wooden podium and a singe microphone, if it cut out all the amenities, the kids programs, the refreshments, the sound systems, the jumbo-trons, all the fancy bands and the notebooks/paraphernalia, if it did all this would you still attend this church? Or would you "church shop" for a more entertaining one? The emphasis put on entertainment in the modern churches is not only unbiblical, but it is a detriment to the cause of Christianity. For it takes the emphasis away from worshiping Christ to placing it on the gratification of oneself or one's family. It is often times more about entertaining and retaining the individual and less about worshiping God. If you don't believe this, would you really attend your present church with your children in that bare warehouse stripped of all amenities?

Unbiblical Words/Phrases

None of the following words are in the Holy Bible:

(Not that everything has to be in the Bible as the Bible tells us, but here are many words that aren't.)

Unbiblical words/phrases #29-42



“Rapture”,

"Body of Believers",

"invisible church",

“Incarnation” (God becomes Man),

“Trinity”,

“Communion” (as in Holy Communion),

“Lord's Supper”,

“Lord’s Prayer”,

“Dedication”, (infant)

“Sinner's Prayer”,

“Altar Call”,

“Sin Nature”

"Bible"



Some of these terms/words are from Apostolic Tradition (T), and some are from men, (t). And one is from modern man and contrary to the Bible. (The Rapture concept: as in the "Left Behind" idea. See: The 19th century origin of the Rapture idea). But all of these words are not found in the Holy Scriptures. All are unbiblical. That doesn't mean they are wrong or contrary to the Sacred Scriptures (except for Rapture), it just means that they came from another source not of the Holy Bible.

UNBIBLICAL STATEMENTS/CONCEPTS

Common in the modern Christian churches





#43. "Asking Jesus into your Heart" and the

"Faith Alone" idea of Salvation

Asking Jesus into your Heart is explicitly unbiblical, yet at the same time it is wise and profitable if it is actually put into practice. But Scripture tells us that faith by itself with no fruit of that faith is dead.

"What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?... 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself." James 2: 14-17

As for the phrase “Faith Alone,” it is only mentioned once in the Holy Bible in James where it states:

”You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”James 2:24

We are justified by Faith alone but not “mere” faith alone, i.e. just “knowing” that Christ is God, or just “believing” that Christ died for our sins in the same light as we “know” the sun will rise tomorrow. For even the demons have “mere” faith in Christ. Even they “believe” in Him.

“You believe that God is one You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.” James 2:19

Faith as the Holy Bible speaks of it and how it saves must be a “working faith.” Christians believe that faith and good works are both necessary for salvation, because such is the teaching of Jesus Christ. What Our Lord demands is ``faith that worketh by charity.'' (Gal. 5: 6). Read Matthew 25:31-46, which describes the Last Judgment as being based on works of charity. Do our works save us? No, but they are evidence of our faith. Scripture tells us explicitly, “Faith without works is dead” (James 2: 14-17) and likewise, works without faith do not save. As the Holy Bible tells us, both are necessary for our salvation. In essence: “we are NOT born by good works, we are born TO good works; once justified, we should act as justified Christians, which includes good works.”

Salvation by “Faith Alone” is only correct if the term Faith is defined as a working faith. (Gal. 5: 6)

Salvation by mere “Faith Alone” does not save as Scripture affirms. (James 2:24)

As for “Asking Jesus into your heart,” this is profitable, but it is just the beginning! For nowhere in the Holy Bible do the Apostles do this or teach this, nor do we read that God commands us to do this. God commands us to Love one another. "Love your neighbor as yourself." Matt 22:37-39 and to follow him: ``If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me'' (Matt. 16:24), not “ask Jesus into your Heart” per se. This is unbiblical; yet at the same time a good tradition of man if it leads to Faith, Repentance and actually "following" Our Lord Jesus Christ. (Matt 16:24).

#44. Desiring a "Personal relationship with Jesus Christ."

This also is a worthy endeavor, but it is not the end all of the Christian experience. It is the beginning. For again, nowhere in the New (or Old) Testament Bible do we read explicitly that this is all that God desires of us. What we do read of is His desire that we:

"Shall love the LORD your GOD with all your heart, and all your soul, and with all your mind,"

and "Love your neighbor as yourself." Matt 22:37-39 and he commands us to *follow him*: ``If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me'' (Matt. 16:24) and to do *His will*: "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." (Matt 7:21)



Having a "personal relationship" with the Creator of the Universe is a good thing, but it is not the consummation of the Christian experience. It is only the beginning. Jesus Christ must not only be our "Savior" but also our "Lord" whom we "follow." This requires a life changing conversion and perseverance to the end.

#45. Another unbiblical idea practiced by modern Christian churches is the idea of treating Our Lord Jesus Christ as if he is our "fishing buddy," or best friend.

Jesus Christ is God Incarnate, the King and Creator of the Universe, the LOGO's, the Almighty and Eternal God. Nowhere do we read in the Holy Bible that the Apostles or anyone else treated Jesus Christ as their buddy or best friend. He is always referred to as "Our Lord," or "Master." We are created to serve and glorify God, not to delude ourselves with enough foolish pride to presume Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is "our budster" or "best friend."

#46. The unbiblical idea that "The Church is not needed" or the Church is "invisible" or "the Church is not an institution it's the "Body of Believers" , (which is an unbiblical phrase all by itself).

(See "Body of Believers? Read Who or What is the Bride of Christ" http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/bride.html)

These are unbiblical and dangerous ideas. They contradict the Holy Scriptures and are groundless in Holy Writ. These ideas are but a few hundred years old and are impossible for the Apostles to have taught. Jesus Himself said his Church would be "the light of the world." He then noted that "a city set on a hill cannot be hid" (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other organizations. Jesus promised, "I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return. It is the Church the Holy Bible calls: "The church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim 3:15. And the Church Our Lord promised to be with "until the end of the world" Matt 28:20.



Of the all the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Christ. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began with Martin Luther in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots, or offshoots of offshoots.)



Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. (Search any encyclopedia under Pope and see this unbroken succession back to St Peter Or click here: http://www.britannia.com/history/resource/popes.html). This is unequaled by any institution in history. (From: Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth by Catholic Answers)

For a better understanding of how the Holy Bible describes the Church of God see:

3 Fundamental ways the modern Christian communities depart from the Church of the Holy Bible http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/#church

#47. "Scripture interprets Scripture."

An unbiblical phrase and concept. Scripture does not interpret Scripture, "people" interpret Scripture. Not one verse supports this novel idea modern Christian pastors use to abandon the Oral teachings and interpretations of Scripture by the Apostles in favor of their own modern interpretation of the Bible. Not only is this idea unbiblical, but it is also false. A car does not drive itself, nor does a book interpret itself. People do. People interpret Scripture. Many modern Christians rationalize their arguments and claim Biblicism for their positions with zero historical support (even from their own reformers) using this mantra. They do this by saying essentially that "Scripture interprets Scripture and therefore I am correct in anything I glean from Scripture, even if I am 2000 years, 3 languages and a host of cultures removed..." This is an illogical, unsupportable and unbiblical position.

#48. "As long as we agree on the "essentials" we can disagree on the "nonessentials. "

Nowhere in the Holy Bible do we read that parts of Christ's Gospel are "essential" and the other parts are "nonessential." This is confirmed by the words of the Apostle Paul who told us there was but ONE Gospel, not the 10s of 1000s of gospels that exist in modern Christianity today. St. Paul repeats twice in Gal 1:8-9

"As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed."

None of Christ's Gospel is nonessential or up for spurious opinions of a contradictory nature. That is why it is a logical fallacy to view the Protestant belief system as a "reformation" of Christ's Church." For it teaches 1000s and 1000s of contradictory "Statements of Faith," all under the guise of "Nonessentials." Supposed non essentials like the Holy Eucharist/communion, Baptism, divorce, salvation, Sin, etc, etc. This is just another idea modern Christians use to justify the ten's of 1000s of contradictory gospels/statements of faith within the modern Protestant belief system of anything goes. It is unbiblical and even anti-Biblical.

#49. The erroneous idea that discussing or identifying these Biblical truths (contained in this chapter) is "being divisive" or is "tearing down the body of Christ."

This line of thinking is inherently unbiblical. When the Apostles left on their missions to spread the Gospel and encountered those who disagreed with them or were ignorant of the One Universal Faith, did the Apostles avoid confrontation because it was tearing down the Body of Christ or because they were being "divisive?" Absolutely not. Nowhere in the Holy Bible do we read of any Apostle or follower of Christ refraining from preaching the Gospel or refraining from discussing the Faith because of fears this would tear each other down. The Apostle Paul in the first chapter to the Galatians is a perfect example of boldly professing the one Truth of Jesus Christ without fear of being “divisive.” Gal 1:8-9 "As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed." On the contrary, what we do read of is their quest for complete unity as Our Lord Jesus Christ commanded.

“I have given them [believers] the glory that you gave me, that they may be as one as we are one: I in them and you in me.

May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.” (John 17:22,23) And the Apostle Paul who preached the same on unity wrote: “Now I beseech you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all say the same thing, and that there be no dissension among you, but that you be perfectly united in one mind and in one judgment.” (1 Cor 1:10) The early followers of Christ were called "Christians" at Antioch and the One Faith they embraced was called the "Universal Faith" in the same city. (Catholic in Greek means universal: Katholikos.) "And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch." Acts 11:26 Ignatius of Antioch, second Bishop of Antioch and disciple of John the Apostle wrote in 110 AD:

"Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains [i.e., a presbyter]. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]). From: What Catholic means at http://www.catholic.com/library/What_Catholic_Means.asp It was the ONE Universal faith.

"There is One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God." (Eph 4:5-6)

The Church in Corinth did not differ in beliefs from the Church in Ephesus or the Church in Rome. It was truly the One Universal Faith and remained the only Christian Faith for the next 1000+ years. It is the Great Commission (Matt 28:19-20) to preach the Gospel. Even if it is not what one currently believes, it still must be preached. For as Our Lord has told us: "If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." John 8: 31-32 #50. The last unbiblical idea is the belief that any distinctly Protestant idea was taught by any Christian in the first millennium. This is just history 101.

Protestantism, Protestants, or any Protestant in concept did not exist in the first millennium. Test this. All distinctively Protestant ideas were invented in the middle ages at the earliest and the last few decades/years at the latest. Please test this as the Holy Bible commands (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22). History demonstrates that not one distinctly Protestant belief was embraced by any Christian in the first millennium. And since the Apostles lived in the first millennium, simply logic precludes their knowledge of any distinctly Protestant idea for it didn't exist yet. Unless an idea was taught by the Apostles and subsequently written into the Holy Bible, it is by definition, not Biblical. If the Apostles did not teach it, and it was totally unknown in the first 1000 years of Christianity, it is not biblical. How can it be? On a linear and sequential timeline it's impossible. There was but One Christian Faith in the first millennium, not 2 and not 20,000, One. And that faith was the Catholic Faith. And since the Apostles lived in the first millennium, this was the Faith of the Apostles for there was no other Christian Faith. Please test this logic as the Holy Bible commands:

“Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 Where did the modern ideas in your pastor's Statement of Faith originate? Search the origins of your denomination. Research the author’s and origins of your theology. History will reveal that they all are of recent origin and impossible for the Apostles to have taught 2000 years ago.

See: The origins and authors of the Protestant theologies

http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/dates.html

In Summary.

If you still claim to be a “Bible Only" Christian and adhere to Sola Scriptura or the “Bible Only” idea, then to embrace any of the above ideas (whether they come from Apostolic Tradition or from the traditions of man), to embrace ANY of them is to go against the "Bible Only" principle. Either you are “Bible Only” or you're not. One would guess that unless you are willing to “stop praying to Jesus” and willing to repudiate the other 50 ideas, doctrines and statements, you will concede that you are truly not a "Bible Only" Christian but a “Bible Believing Christian.” The next time someone advocates the “Bible Only” idea, consider what you believe and profess that is not in the Bible. Consider what you believe and profess that is unbiblical and what you now repudiate as anti-Biblical. We should all embrace the label "Bible Believing Christian," but again this presupposes that we acknowledge what is and what is not in the Holy Bible. It is only through Faith in Our Lord and courage that we are able to stay true to His Word. "If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." John 8: 31-32

“Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.”

1 Thessalonians 5:21-22

16 SOBERING BIBLICAL QUESTIONS

FOR THE DEVOUT CHRISTIAN

The Catholic Faith comprises the verses not underlined in your personal Bible nor taught in

Modern Christian seminaries or churches.



Read the Bible verses not underlined in your Bible.

“Test everything. Hold on to the good.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21

Suggested reading:

Intro to the Catholic Faith for Evangelicals http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/index2.htm

Catholic Answers: "Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth" A compendium of basic Catholic beliefs and the Biblicism behind these beliefs. http://www.catholic.com/library/pillar.asp

FAQ about the Catholic Faith from Columbia University

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html

1. "BIBLE ONLY" CHRISTIAN or "BIBLE BELIEVING" CHRISTIAN?

50 Practices and Doctrines not found in the Holy Bible. http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/unbiblical.html

2. JUST THE TRUTH: 2 Dozen Logic and Historical Facts Refuting the Apostolicity and Biblicism of the Modern Christian Belief Systems "Test Everything." 1 Thess 5:21 http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/justfacts.html

3. An Exercise in Logic, Two Logic Proofs from History 101 demonstrating how the modern Christian theologies did not even exist in the first millennium, making it impossible for Christ and His Apostles to have taught to His early Church.

http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/logic.html



4. Three uneasy questions for your pastor concerning his personal theology. http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/formypastor.html

5. Seven Reasons Christians Go To Church, Which One Is Yours? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/7stages.html

6. "The 7 Stages of Christian Spiritual Development" What stage are you? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/7stages.html

7. The Historical Origins & Authors of the Modern Christian Theologies. http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/dates.html

8. Is Sola Scriptura or the "Bible Only" idea even Biblical? Where does the Bible teach the "SOLA" or the "ONLY" in Sola Scriptura? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/ss.html

9. Modern Christians often ask: "WHAT ELSE IS THERE? What else has Christ's infallible authority besides the Holy Bible?" Featuring the verses not underlined in most Bibles nor taught in modern Christian seminaries or churches. http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/whatelse.html

10. FAITH ALONE (SOLA FIDE): It is a Catholic Position. Have you been taught that Catholics "work their way to Heaven?" http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/faithalone.html

11. "Who is the Bride of Christ?" What does the Holy Bible say? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/bride.html

12. Did the BEREANS "Search the Scriptures" and therefore follow the BIBLE ONLY idea?

Or did the THESSALONIANS, who also "Searched the Scriptures? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/bereans.html

13. The 3rd Unanswered Challenge for the Non-Catholic Theologies:

Is the Catholic Faith Apostolic? Name just one Catholic doctrine that isn't. Name one doctrine the early Church believed,,,, that the Catholic Faith today *no longer does*. Why can't the modern Christian theologies make the same bold claim? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/3challenge.html

14. Biblically, did the "Official Teachings or Doctrines of the Catholic Faith" become corrupt or Apostate as your Pastor might teach? Are there verses in the Holy Scriptures that forbid the "Gates of Hell" from overcoming His Church? What does the Holy Bible really say about: "The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim :15? http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/gatesofhell.html

15. Is Praying to Saints Biblical? Is the "HAIL MARY" Prayer Biblical? Read the verses not underlined in your pastors Bible nor taught in his church. http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/saints.html

16. How Modern Christian are compelled to use and embrace an unbiblical and anti-biblical definition and concept of a Christian Church. http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges/onchurch.html

Return to Homepage "A Biblical Case for the Catholic Faith"

at: http://www.angelfire.com/home/protestantchallenges"