Tradition

(NIV)Mark 7:6-9,13

He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: "`These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.' You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."

And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."

(NIV) 2 Timothy 3:16-17

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

But Catholics say:

Catechism #82

As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."

Catholics 1, Bible 0

Hail Mary:

(NASB)Matthew 6:7-8

""And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. ""So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.

Ah, but there excuse is: "How many times do you say to someone that you love them in a day?"

Catholics 2, Bible 0

Calling the pope "Holy Father" or a priest "Father" for that matter:

(NIV)Matthew 23:9

And do not call anyone on earth `father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.

To which they answer: "I'd hate to be your father on father's day"

Catholics 3, Bible 0

Interpretation of Scripture:

(NIV)2 Peter 1:20-21

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

Catechism #100

The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.

Catholics 4, Bible 0

Only One Intercessor:

(NIV)1 Timothy 2:5-6

For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men--the testimony given in its proper time.

Catechism #969

"This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect.Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation ....Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."

Catholics 5, Bible 0

(NASB) Colossians 1:18

He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

(NIV) Jude 1:24-25

To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy--to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

(ASV) 1 John 2:1

My little children, these things write I unto you that ye may not sin. And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

(ASV) Isaih 53:3-4,12

He was despised, and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and as one from whom men hide their face he was despised; and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

...he poured out his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors: yet he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Now who's more qualified to be intercessor?

The Virgin Mary:

(NIV)Galatians 1:19

But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother

(NIV)Mark 3:31-35

Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."

"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

Now a Catholic will take that last verse (verse 35) and try to apply it to verse 31, when it's clear what Jesus meant by it. He meant that his brother's were those who do God's will and not those that were standing outside.

Yes, Mary was a virgin when she had her first child, but she had other children after Jesus. However, the reason Catholics hang onto Mary remaining a virgin for the rest of her life is because they are trying to apply the Eastern gate mentioned in Ezekiel 41-45 as a description of her.

(NIV)Ezekiel 44:1-3

Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut.

The LORD said to me, "This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered through it.

The prince himself is the only one who may sit inside the gateway to eat in the presence of the LORD. He is to enter by way of the portico of the gateway and go out the same way."

(NIV)Ezekiel 46:8,12

When the prince enters, he is to go in through the portico of the gateway, and he is to come out the same way.

When the prince provides a freewill offering to the LORD--whether a burnt offering or fellowship offerings--the gate facing east is to be opened for him. He shall offer his burnt offering or his fellowship offerings as he does on the Sabbath day. Then he shall go out, and after he has gone out, the gate will be shut.

Now, this is talking about the Jewish temple. It has detailed measurements and descriptions throughout. But since we're looking for symbolism, the Catholics ask us to symbolize.

They say the gate is a type or shadow of Mary's womb and since it's shut after the prince goes through it, she can't have had any children after him, and thus remained a perpetual virgin.

That doesn't quite fit in with this verse though:

(NAB)Ezekiel 46:1

Thus says the Lord GOD: The gate toward the east of the inner court shall remain closed throughout the six working days, but on the sabbath and on the day of the new moon it shall be open.

Could this verse be speaking about possible multiple rebirths?
One never knows when converting literal passages into figurative ones.

Anyway; what about all those verses showing Jesus clearly had brothers and sisters? What of them?

(NIV)Mark 6:3

Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.

Not a problem. Everywhere in the bible it says "brother" or "sister", it simply means cousin or follower. This only applies to passages about Jesus brothers and sisters. Everywhere else it means what it says. We don't want things getting too complicated.

Catholics 6, Bible 0

Veneration of Mary:

(NAB)John 2:3-4

When the wine ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine." (And) Jesus said to her, "Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come."

(NAB)Mark 3:33-35

But he said to them in reply, "Who are my mother and (my) brothers?" And looking around at those seated in the circle he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. (For) whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother."

Catechism #972

After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own "pilgrimage of faith," and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey. There, "in the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity," "in the communion of all the saints," the Church is awaited by the one she venerates as Mother of her Lord and as her own mother.

(NAB)Luke 11:27-28

While he was speaking, a woman from the crowd called out and said to him, "Blessed is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed." He replied, "Rather, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it."

Catholics 7, Bible 0

Am I missing something here? Are they saying that Mary is supposed to be our example in how we should walk?

(NAB) 1 John 2:6

whoever claims to abide in him ought to live (just) as he lived.

(NIV) Romans 8:29

For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

(NIV) 1 John 3:2

Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

(NIV) 1 Peter 4:13

But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.

Who did the Apostles seek to be like? Who was their example? Did Mary found the church? Did she do any preaching? Is the bible about her?

Think about it.

Mary, mother of the church:

(NAB)John 19:26-27

When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son." Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother."

But they leave off:

(NAB) John 19:28

And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.

That was just Jesus' way of asking his disciple to take care of his mother after he was gone. The disciple wasn't a representative of the whole church. This wasn't some vast doctrinal truth being revealed.

Worship of angels:

(NIV)Colossians 2:18-19

Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind,

and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

Prayers to saints:

(NIV)Revelation 5:8

And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

(NIV)Revelation 8:3-4

And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.

And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.

See how the angels and saints are in possession of prayers? This is yet future but the Catholic Church thinks it's the present. They have tried to apply these verses and everything else in the book of Revelation to the last 2000 years.

It requires much effort: symbolization of literal scriptures and literalization of symbolic scriptures. But after the effort, the verses then describe something going on in the present and it can clearly be seen that saints and angels ARE indeed interceding for us and thus we should be praying to them.

Authority of the Catholic Church:

(NIV)Revelation 20:4

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

They think this verse means the Church is currently reigning with Christ. That being beheaded is just a symbol for putting on the helmet of salvation.

Most of their authority comes from this verse. A clear misinterpretation of scripture. A case of taking prophecy about the future and misapplying it to the present.

For the first thousand years of the Church this worked well. No one could dispute it. But when Jesus didn't return in the year 1000 it should have sent up a red flag. But this orginazation, however, doesn't make mistakes. (It took them over 400 years to "forgive" Galileo).

So in their constant and ever present search for "truth", with an earnest desire to know the "truth", and a mind always open to God and humbly willing to accept any fault that presents itself in light of new evidence; they used some cleaver prooftexting and held on to their Revelation 20:4 power:

They took a reference to the number 1000 in the book of Psalms and used it redefine the "1000" in the book of Revelation.

(NIV)Psalms 50:10

For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

If the lord owns cattle on a thousand hills, why not 1001 hills?

Catholics 8, Bible 0

And now the number 1000 can mean anything they want it to mean. The "Millenium" can go on forever, and they will always have their Revelation 20:4 power.

Notice, they have completely done away with the Millenium. The real Millenium, a sabbath of 1000 years in which Jesus himself will will rule the Earth with a rod of iron.

(NIV)Zechariah 14:4

On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

The Eastern gate has been sealed to this day and Muslims have even put a graveyard in front of it to try to stop the Messiah when he comes. They know the prophecy of Ezekial and they also know that a Rabbi can't go through a graveyard without being made unclean.

But what do you think is going to happen when that mountain splits in two? The gate will be opened, the graveyard will split in two, and a path will be cleared. The Lord will indeed go through that gate!

You'd think the book of Revelation was sealed by how badly they handle it.

But it's not sealed:

(KJV)Revelation 22:10

And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

This book is not "layer upon layer of enigmas wrapped inside mysteries". It only seems that way when trying to apply it to the last 2000 years.

Peter the 1^st Pope:

(ISV)Matthew 16:15-19

He said to them, "But who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God!" Then Jesus said to him, "How blessed are you, Simon, son of John! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven has.

I tell you that you are Peter, and it is on this rock that I will build my church, and the forces of hell will not overpower it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you prohibit on earth will have been prohibited in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth will have been permitted in heaven."

(ISV)Mark 8:29

Then he began to ask them, "But who do you say I am?" Peter answered him, "You are the Christ!"

In the language of the day "Peter" meant rock. And so Jesus was making a play on words here and saying in essence, "Simon, you are indeed a rock". And that on this kind of rock he was going to build his church.

It's not what the Catholics make it out to be. Simon is not being given, by name, all the authority and power in heaven. He is not being made the first Pope. If this were the case then we wouldn't have the following verses:

(ISV)Mark 9:33-35

Then they came to Capernaum. While Jesus was at home, he asked the disciples, "What were you arguing about on the road?" But they kept silent, for on the road they had argued with one another about who was the greatest. So he sat down and called the twelve. He told them, "If anyone wants to be first he must be last of all and servant of all."

Why are they arguing about this if it's already been settled? Jesus had an clear opportunity here to tell them Peter was greatest among them and would in fact be their leader. But Jesus said nothing of the sort.

In Acts we have further confirmation that Peter is still just one of the boys becuase he get's SENT on a mission:

(ISV) Acts 8:14

Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them.

Shouldn't Peter be doing the sending? He's the one in charge...isn't he?

Need further clarification...that Jesus was talking of rocks (believers) and not to just rock (Peter) when he made his speech.

Then just read on:

(ISV)Matthew 18:18-20

"Truly I tell you, whatever you prohibit on earth will have been prohibited in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth will have been permitted in heaven. Furthermore, truly I tell you that if two of you agree on earth about anything you request, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three have come together in my name, I am there among them."

Sounds familiar doesn't it. We must let scripture interpret scripture!

Clergy cannot marry:

(ISV)Mark 1:29-32

After they left the synagogue, they went directly to the house of Simon and Andrew, along with James and John. Now Simon's mother-in-law was lying in bed, sick with a fever, so they promptly told Jesus about her. He went up to her, took her by the hand, and helped her up. The fever left her, and she began serving them.

(ISV)Matthew 8:14-15

When Jesus went into Peter's house, he saw Peter's mother-in-law lying in bed, sick with a fever. He touched her hand, and the fever left her. Then she got up and began serving him.

Peter, the first POPE, had a wife.

Catholic Summary:

Why are their excuses so feeble?

Becuause for 100's of years they kept the Bible from the public, they never thought anyone would ever get to see it and find out how contrary to scripture their doctrines had become. In fact they ordered the execution of the first persons to translate the Bible into English for the masses; and burned 1000's of bibles themselves. (Can you imagine that, a Church burning bibles?)

How did these all these traditions start you ask? Same way they got started in Israel. The result of becoming engulfed in another culture.

(NIV)Jeremiah 7:18

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.

(NIV)Jeremiah 44:8

Why provoke me to anger with what your hands have made, burning incense to other gods in Egypt, where you have come to live? You will destroy yourselves and make yourselves an object of cursing and reproach among all the nations on earth.

The Roman Church became a captive of Rome when it was made the state religion. A great influx of non-believers came in, and not all of them wanted to give up their old traditions, so they Christianized them.

We can see the same thing happening today in Barbados where the natives still pray to their old gods, but have pictures of Catholic saints on the walls representing each one of them.

God delivered Israel out of Egypt, but he couldn't get Egypt out of Israel. And so goes the Roman Church. The Roman empire expired ages ago, but it's impact is still being felt.

And yet, in spite of all this, they declare themselves infallible.

Catechism #889

In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."

Catechism #891

The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful -- who confirms his brethren in the faith -- he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals…

Perhaps this is why instead of being engaged in the pursuit of truth they are more engaged in defense of error.

They seem to wait with baited breadth for every word that comes from the Church and yet:

(KJV)Matthew 4:4

But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Keeping in mind the crafty tricks they use to get around the Bible, and how they insist on defending misinterpretation. I'd say they value tradition MORE then scripture.

Michael being Jesus:

A key verse for JW's is:

(KJV)1 Thessalonians 4:16

For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

They say, "Aha! see, there it is! The Lord is an archangel because he comes with an archangel's voice."

However you don't see them saying he's a trumpet because he comes with a trump.

Nevermind the fact that he's shouting at the same time as the voice of the archangel and the blast of the trumpet.

I quote a verse to them in answer to this:

(NIV)Hebrews 1:3-5

The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father"? Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son"?

Their answer is that God puts on a "Michael" suit. That to us he appears as Jesus, but to the angels he appears as Michael.

Ah, but there's a matter of Michael's authority:

(ISV)Jude 1:9

Even the archangel Michael, when he argued with the devil and fought over the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him but said, "May the Lord rebuke you!"

Here Michael didn't bring an accusation against Satan even though Satan was worthy of one. If Michael's actually God, then he had authority to not only accuse Satan, but to judge him. Instead he just says "may the Lord rebuke you!".

What's there response to this? That God gives up that authority when he's in the "Michael" suit. That when he's an angel, he has all the limitations of an angel.

So following this line of reasoning we would expect Jesus to have given up that kind of authority as well.

But Jesus doesn't seem to have given up that authority:

(ISV)Matthew 16:23

But Jesus turned around and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are an offense to me, for you are not thinking God's thoughts but human thoughts!"

Now there's a phrase even Michael wouldn't utter. All he said was, "May the Lord rebuke you!", and yet here Jesus is rebuking Satan openly (no limitations). Why would he have less authority in angel form then in human form? I don't think they are the same person.

Also we have the scripture:

(NAB)Daniel 10:12-13

"Fear not, Daniel," he continued; "from the first day you made up your mind to acquire understanding and humble yourself before God, your prayer was heard. Because of it I started out,

but the prince of the kingdom of Persia stood in my way for twenty-one days, until finally Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me. I left him there with the prince of the kings of Persia,

Notice how these verses use the name "God" to mean God and the name "Michael" to mean Michael. Also notice how Michael is "one of the chief princes", meaning there are others.

Why all this hard work? Why do they want to push this doctrine? Once again we have to go to the book of Revelation:

(NIV)Revelation 20:1-3

And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

They claim these verses are a reference to the crucifixion, and that Jesus is the Angel that is binding Satan with his chain (the cross). They have much in common with Catholics in trying to misapply Revelation.

They cling to this doctrine despite evidence to the contrary. Satan is not bound as can be cleary be seen by the state of the world.

So they turn to symbolism and claim Satan is currently bound in our hearts.

Satan was cast into our hearts? I thought the Lord was supposed to come into our hearts. Why is the Angel throwing a bound Satan into our hearts and not coming in himself?

Then there's the bit about Satan being loosed for a season? Is Satan going to retake the hearts of believers?