Cephas Ministry has been experiencing over one million hits a month from participants and that makes for a busy schedule of activity with email inquiries and responses. In addition, as with other emails, some of the letters that I am given to reply to require time for prayer and careful consideration with regards to what and how the beloved Word of our Lord judges. Please know that everyone gets the same care and attention as any brother that wishes to exchange information with us here at Cephas Ministry. I'd like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation for those of you who exhibit a gentle character and manner in your communications with me. Some of you who are still members of various "churches" appear to me to be of reasonable and good character and I hope that we can continue to dialogue with one another. Please keep in mind that in addition to my duties and responsibilities within the context of the Ministry to which I am called, I must also work to earn a reasonable income to fulfill my obligations of supporting and raising my children who are still at home with me. My current occupation is as a licensed Captain and I get called out as a first responder to marine vessel emergencies periodically. My deep historical studies on Church history and my years of marriage to a Roman Catholic are what qualify me to write the following exhortation. I separated from the Roman Catholic Church after my wife's suicide June 9, 1993. Indeed, through great trial and testing, the sons of God are sanctified and led home.

In response to the recent question, "By what authority do I speak?" I say only that nothing I commit in writing or exhortation is without a great deal of prior testing and searching out the Word for the purposes of remaining a faithful witness to my Lord and Savior. "Test all things by the Spirit." I treat what I hear or discern by the Spirit in the same manner. That is, I test all things by the Word, which is given us for our reproof, training, discipline and instruction. My faith in Christ Jesus is strong but in no way do I proclaim to be anything other than a simple, God fearing man who is called to witness to the Gentiles and Jews not the least among which are contemporary Christians of various denomination and faith. I am a scribe and a messenger and my knowledge and faith continues to grow each day. You will see if you have not already observed that the authority by which I speak is the same authority we lend in Scripture and it is by that which all men are judged and measured. Where deficiency exists, therein is opportunity for man to make an effort in conforming to the pattern, image, likeness and example of Christ Jesus and His appointed Apostles as it is so described in the unchanging Word of God.

Some of you may have difficulty in accepting what I offer you by way of faithful testimony if you are judging my understanding or me by some other doctrine or precept not of the example and teachings of Christ and His Apostles. You should know that my experience with various religions is broad and it was not I who first rejected them, men of supposed faith, but it has always been they who rejected me and Christ in me. If there were ever a "Universal Faith" made available to all mankind, it is the faith which I have in Christ Jesus and do humbly express in all my daily affairs with everyone and everywhere I go. Unlike the Catholic Churches example and the examples of so many Protestant Churches being "partial" excluding others from the faith, which was once delivered to the saints, I make every effort to reach out and show by example what it means to be a disciple of Jesus. Though each man's calling may be different in some respect, our faith in Christ crucified should always be the same as it was thus exhibited by the Apostles and we SHOULD recognize one another and LOVE one another just as the beloved John so prescribed.

Now having said this, I will move on towards preparing what evidence I have to prove that there is indeed a problem with the Roman Catholic Church. I recently made request of a devout Catholic to provide me with the answer to the following question according to his understanding and knowledge. My question was, "According to your Catholic belief, who were the first three immediate successors to the Apostle Peter after he was crucified by Agrippa under Nero, the fifth Emperor of Rome? Now, keep in mind that your belief prescribes all Catholic Popes to be the immediate successors and so I am looking for these successors to be named from 78AD, the time when Peter was crucified. It is only fair that I ask you for your evidence since I am more than willing to provide you with my evidence based on well-documented history. I hope that you'll accept my challenge and provide the necessary reasoning of your belief."

Remember how Jesus so passionately rebuked the Pharisees for their partiality and selfish exultation of their supposed self-righteousness? They too, had "readings" from the Old Testament scrolls at regular weekly intervals designed to teach those who gathered but they also had traditions handed down over the centuries that are referred to as "oral teachings." It is noteworthy to mention that scripture confirms it was the "oral teachings" handed down by the Pharisees over centuries that was the main point of contention and rebuke coming from Jesus. Be cautious then of oral tradition that is passed down by men for many generations. It was recorded that Jesus attended one of these gatherings and do you remember what He did and what the response was from the attendees? Were they not going to kill him then for blasphemy after He stated that He was the fulfillment of that particular passage from which He read? Please keep that in mind throughout our discourse as I intend to prove to you what fulfillment looks like in living flesh. I will again address oral teachings in a moment.

I am well familiar with the arguments presented for and against "Sola Scriptura." Many believe and are right in their understanding that the authority of Scripture must be administered in the context of the Church. Where so many differ from my understanding is that I believe that the "Church" (gathering of believers of Christ Jesus) is quite different than the mainstream from how it is actually represented in the historical text of Scripture. Many people, especially Catholics, see a great institution with all-encompassing power and authority over the whole earth. I see the scattered pockets of believing Christians huddled together in various places and homes throughout the earth seeking to fellowship, praise and minister to the communities in which they are located. What many call the "Church" I call the "Temple." What Catholics call the "Universal Church (meaning Catholic)" I call the "Catholic Religion." The gatherings I speak of are in the context of what scripture identifies as churches. Throughout the whole of New Testament, the churches were identified by their location and not by their separate doctrines, faith or teachings save one, the teachings and admonitions of Jesus the Christ.

The Catholic Church, though identifying itself as Christian, has always maintained its own agenda, precepts and doctrines separate from but mixed in with the fundamental teachings and examples afforded us in scripture. Note that the epistles were always written to the Churches at Corinth or Ephesus or Galatia etc. It is also noteworthy to offer that in John's Book of Revelation, there were "seven churches" identified by location, not separate in faith, that were ministered to by "seven angels" sent from GOD. These were not super sized institutions but were many smaller gatherings scattered throughout the cities being identified as churches within the locale of that city. Remember that the believers and followers of Christ Jesus were under constant persecution and needed to be discrete and somewhat hidden. They're numbers were always small. Even the upper room described for us in Acts where the Baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred had only 120 persons gathered. When larger crowds assembled, it was necessary for them to assemble outside the city as we're the crowds and multitudes who "came out" to hear Jesus preach. The early Church was always looking over its shoulder for fear of further persecution. There is absolutely no evidence that exists that the Catholic Church was neither formed out of these smaller gatherings nor granted the power as successor to Peter. That is a ridiculous notion! Apostle Peter was not a Pope!

Regarding oral teachings… I am well aware that there was no "New Testament" in existence when the Apostles were planting and ministering various gatherings. It therefore stands to reason that the Apostles became oral teachers but letters were also written to those churches that were a distance away and it was expected that these letters be shared among the churches. The letters (epistles) which were scribed, copied and distributed became for us a series of historical recordings, some of which were later canonized and became the New Testament. The 27 books (gospels & epistles) were but a smattering of the volume of scrolls, which were actually used in ministering to the early churches. These that were canonized centuries later were written between 52AD and 96AD.

In my years of study of these other gospels and epistles not included in the Canon, I am often grieved that many were dismissed as being authentic in doctrine and authorship. When I allow the known Canon of scripture (KJV) to judge these other writings often determined to be apocryphal, I am compelled to ask, "Who were we to determine that these other books don't also serve as edifying witness and testimony to the greater glory of Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior?" Therefore, I must confess that I have a problem in the way that Canon was determined. To me, it is an example of men picking and choosing what is convenient and desirable over what the fuller measure of potential existed in allowing for all the scrolls to bear witness of Christ in the early days of Christendom. You have to admit that a great deal of context is left out when we neglect these other precious writings which were copied, handed down and preserved through the ages for our benefit and edification. I am referring to those documents, which were written in the first and second century AD.

Paul, writing to Timothy in 2 Timothy says, "You, then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:1-2). As with all scripture, I steadfastly cling to and apply myself accordingly, not to religious institutional dogma but to the example, pattern and historical teachings afforded us in the Bible. My faith is not at all contradictory with the Word or Faith in Christ but is an example and testimony to a living faith in a living God who desires to dwell still in the flesh of man to this day. In answering the question, "By what authority do I speak?" There would be no shame by my admission that the authority by which I speak is not my own but by the authority of Christ dwelling in me through His eternal Spirit. Is that not the example and pattern shown us in scripture? Christ's Word is my judge just as He also confessed. It is perfect and blameless all by itself without the erroneous judgements of men.

Regarding accepted authority… Someone recently wrote, "The fact that you accept these books means you accept the authority of the Catholic Church." Actually, I accept the purity of the canonized gospels and epistles that make up our New Testament and employ them as a measuring rod to judge, test and measure all other manuscripts which I study that were written in the early days of Christianity. I find no contradiction in the canonized script but only affirmation. When I compare or contrast other writings not part of the accepted Canon, I either find edification of Christ's gospel or discontinuity. In the same way, when I compare or contrast the model of our contemporary churches of today with the aforementioned accepted cannon, I see much discord and discontinuity in both Catholic and Protestant applications. Because I highly regard the authority of the writings from the early Church, I also allow the Word of God to judge, test and measure my person and my own application of faith. In the process, I am conformed to that which was thus prescribed and am able to grow in good measure and application of my faith. What I am saying here in simple terms is that where there is contradiction or discontinuity evidenced, I embrace the fundamental doctrines of scripture over and above the examples of man's religious institutions. Regarding my person, where my heart and mind is convicted by an apparent contrast existing between my application and what the Word prescribes, I am led towards repentance when in error or my faith is further solidified by my proper application and demonstration of scriptural doctrine. This is the power of the written Word and the effect it has on me as a disciple of Jesus. I have more poetically described this in prior writings by stating, "When I accepted the Word and began applying it to my life, these words on paper literally leaped off the pages and took hold of me, both, convicting and comforting me at the same time."

"Apostasy Revealed," published 2003 by Mountainview Publishing ISBN: 1-928602-92-4.

Reading and interpreting and subjecting myself to the Word does not make me more Catholic as one person suggested but in fact has made me more an obedient disciple of Christ Jesus, a man who is under authority and command to remain faithful to the Word. I submit that his reference to the epistle of Paul to Timothy, "And that the Church, and not the Bible alone, is the "pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15)" is in-fact what I am describing to you as my application of faith and my understanding of the true example of Christ's Church, His body of believers and disciples. The differing opinions of many who will argue with me exists only because of our differing view and definition of the word, "Church."

When I mentioned in a reply to this man, "The Word of God defines and interprets itself!" He said, "Again, this assertion is un-Biblical. In Acts 8:30-31, Phillip instructs the Ethiopian in the faith. If Scripture was easy to understand and "interpreted itself", the Ethiopian would have converted on his own, without need of a teacher. ("How can I, unless someone instructs me?")." "First of all, I replied, "You fail to acknowledge that the Hebrew scriptures were in a different language than what the Ethiopian spoke. You also fail to acknowledge that the Holy Spirit of fire is what confirms, convicts or judges." The Word from which I feed daily is my sustenance and is what sustains my faith and allows for me to maintain communion and companionship with Him who is in me. Did Jesus not say, "the Word is the Spirit, the Spirit of truth?" Paul confirms for us that the Word can and does dwell in us as I also confirm to you. Colossians 3:16 "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; in all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts unto God." Therefore I have shown you that the Word does indeed confirm itself. Anyone would be in error when they declare it to be unbiblical for I tell you all truly that what is written shall be fulfilled and what was intended by God and prescribed to us is revealed in the Book of John.

John 14:10-21 "Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I say unto you I speak not from myself: but the Father abiding in me doeth his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto the Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do. If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive; for it beholdeth him not, neither knoweth him: ye know him; for he abideth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you desolate: I come unto you. Yet a little while and the world beholdeth me no more; but ye behold me: because I live, ye shall live also. In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself unto him." As hard as it might be for many to accept, I believe whole heartedly and deny Him not for I know what becomes of those who only partially accept what was left for us and all future generations unto the final appearance and coming of our Lord when He shall put an end to all that holds us back and keeps us held captive on earth. I have no shame in my faith but a strong resolve to make a difference in an otherwise indifferent world. It is not I but Christ in me doing a work that becomes the evidence of a powerful faith and acceptance of His universal truth made available to all mankind. My expression of love is impartial.

The devout Catholic wrote, "Scripture testifies that Christ left a Church with divine authority to teach in His name (Mt.16: 13-20, 18:18; Lk. 10:16), and that the Church will last until the end of time, and the Holy Spirit protects the Church's teaching from corruption (Mt. 16:18, 28:19-20; Jn. 14:16)." What he wrote is true but it also becomes that which serves as evidence against man's weaker religious institutions. Again the disparity between us exists only because of our fundamental difference and understanding in how the true Church is actually represented through all time. Cephas, by the way means "stone" and it is by that name that we who are least in God's Kingdom are called to serve in humble submission and capacity. I make no claim as the Pope does to being a successor to Peter and neither will I engage in blasphemy by claiming that I am of the eternal order of Melchizedek as the Popes do. Just so you understand, the eternal order of Melchizedek is God's Priesthood that only Christ Jesus received after He was glorified, because the Melchizedek Priesthood grants eternal life. Now, lets look more closely at Peter and who he was.

Peter possessed and exhibited the greatest gift of supernatural power by faith in Christ known to man next to Jesus after the crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord. Peter confessed that the power that was in him was not his own but was that of Christ in him, that very Spirit we call Holy. Peter never sat upon a throne nor did Peter build any temples of worship. In fact, Peter, James and John his brother were warned by God not to build such. Scripture records for our understanding:

Matthew 17:1-8 "And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart: and he was transfigured before them; and his face did shine as the sun, and his garments became white as the light. And behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him. And Peter answered, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah. While he was yet speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold, a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. And Jesus came and touched them and said, 'Arise, and be not afraid.' And lifting up their eyes, they saw no one, save Jesus only."

Clearly, it was not the will of our Father in heaven that we continue to worship in temples practicing various traditions, precepts and commandments of men. My understanding may sound foolish to you but Jesus said that what the Father desires is to be "worshipped in Spirit and truth." Scripture further testifies to this in the following:

1 Corinthians 3:17-18 "If any man destroys the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, and such are ye. Let no man deceive himself. If any man thinks that he is wise among you in this world, let him become a fool, that he may become wise."

2 Corinthians 6:15-18 "And what concord hath Christ with Belial or what portion hath a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? For we are a temple of the living God; even as God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore Come ye out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, And touch no unclean thing; And I will receive you, And will be to you a Father, And ye shall be to me sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty."

The above testifies and judges most accurately the error of man's religious ways and works. It is vainglory to suppose that we were to continue with what God had destroyed. God chose to dwell in a new and better temple for scripture further confirms the will and purpose of our Lord's sacrifice.

Hebrews 9:8-14 "The Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holy place hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle is yet standing; which is a figure for the time present; according to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot, as touching the conscience, make the worshipper perfect, being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation. But Christ having come a high priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?"

Hebrews 9:24-28 "For Christ entered not into a holy place made with hands, like in pattern to the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us: nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place year by year with blood not his own; else must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the ages hath he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment; so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation."

The above testifies to a new and living way by which man is redeemed. As Christ offered Himself through the eternal Spirit without blemish to God, so also are we. Does Scripture not declare the same? Romans 12:1-2 "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service. And be not fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, and ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God."

The point then is that we are called to follow the very pattern that Christ Jesus established for us and forsake that which consisted of cardinal ordinances and traditions. You might well say that the above refers to the Jews and their system of temple worships but this Word was also passed down to the Gentiles as evidenced in the book of Romans. Why should the author of a new and better way have a different set of instructions for the Gentiles of whom we are referring in regards to the Catholic Church of which so many are fond of? Does it not stand to reason that what was being offered to the Jews who largely rejected the salvation would also be offered to the Gentiles as prophesied in the Old Testament? Does the New Testament not reveal that we were allowed to enter in the new and better way apart from the laws and traditions of men? If you allowed the accepted Word of God to judge these matters without an erroneous Catholic interpretation of it then you would be compelled to admit that the Gentiles have made for themselves an utter debauchery of divisive faith and have done no better with the gift of salvation than the Jews did with all their various regulations and rituals. I stated before, "Scripture defines itself and does not require special interpretation of men." Scripture defines and validates itself. The evidence is clear and compelling. How can anyone not see this? The golden verse for me that opened wide this revelation which came to me was Hebrews 9:8 "the Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holy place hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle is yet standing;"

It is the will of the Lord GOD our Father that we walk in the foot steps of His Son Jesus the Christ in the same selfless pattern so that we may be approved before God as sons and daughters to Him! This then is how we offer ourselves as living and holy sacrifices unto God; again, following the same pattern which Jesus authored. For scripture says it very plainly in black and white; Hebrews 10:9-10 "then hath he said, Lo, I am come to do thy will. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

The evidence I offer you is irrefutable and there can exist no reasonable argument for the contemporary Churches existence and their memberships of partiality to exist save one. That being, they still exist because man has not yet matured to the fuller understanding as he ought but instead has preferred an easier path with less strife and difficulty than the one Jesus leads us into. The popular Roman Catholic Church has kept millions of parishioners weak and defiled for centuries by feeding them seeds of heresy and blasphemy and for much of their history, kept the large collection of precious scrolls and manuscripts from the public thereby fostering ignorance in the people. Though Martin Luther made a good effort to protest the error of Catholicism, he carried with him much of the same that was role modeled for him in the Catholic teachings under which he was thus tutored. The result has been that though some appear to have escaped the Synagogue (Church) of Satan, failure to truly turn away (repent) from all the error has allowed Satan to maintain his dominion and authority where man's divisive religion is concerned. Scripture further testifies where Satan went and what he purposed to do after he could not bring down the Son of Man we call Jesus or His brethren. In the proper context, I'm sure that you would agree the woman is representative of the Church (the faithful in Christ). Revelation 12:17 "And the dragon waxed wroth with the woman, and went away to make war with the rest of her seed, that keep the commandments of God, and hold the testimony of Jesus," (speaking of all the redeemed who build and make up the true Church).

I would agree that the Catholic Church is the oldest, largest and longest running contemporary religious institution in New Covenant times and I would also agree that she is indicated in the end times and definitely has a role to play but she is an agency and institution of man. Like the Jewish institutions of faith became corrupted by Satan's influence, so too has the very visible Catholic Church. The true church described for us in the New Testament is all that believe upon Christ Jesus alone as Lord, Savior and only redeemer of mankind and they are what make up the "body of Christ" on earth during the "time of reformation." We who are a part of that body are still very much scattered and the size of our gatherings (churches) has not changed much over the centuries since the apostolic ministries. The method and faith and resulting works is still much the same as it was then. We still do not worship in temples nor allow ourselves to be in subjection to various cardinal ordinances, doctrines and precepts of men. Why? Because Jesus is our Lord to whom we are submitted and obey and we are free to move about the planet and continue the on going witness of Christ Jesus having come the in flesh. To this day, though we are few, we are still examples of His pattern and the Holy Spirit dwells in us as promised by Jesus to effectually pattern and demonstrate the very same example that Christ and His Apostles patterned. We do not recognize any real distinction of color or flesh but know that our witness must be carried out the same way as was told to us. For those of us who live, we have died and that is why we live. It no longer is I but it is Christ in me that is able to speak and work through me because I continue to offer myself up as a willing vessel of service and sacrifice for my Lord's sake. "I die daily," Paul says. All who live this way and remain surrendered and submitted unto Christ Jesus our Lord are the Church of the "living God," the redeemed.

The list of disciples that the Roman Catholic Church claims to be successors to Peter and are acknowledged as Popes is terribly flawed. I will point out one large error and hope that it will be enough for you to further investigate this claim. St Clement I (88-97) was a co-laborer with Apostle Paul and carried on the same ministry after Paul had died. There would have been solid evidence of a paradigm shift in application and administration of the gospel if this claim that he was Pope were true. Some of the others indicated were indeed disciples but of the early Christian Church. Other than the claim made by the Catholic Church, I see no evidence that any of these men were installed as Popes because history records that the familiar image of the early Catholic Church did not first appear until about the middle of the second century. My records indicate clearly that by the middle of the third century, the Catholic Church was making its presence well known. An interesting note: in 252AD, Novatian was elected Pope even though the council at Rome condemned his schism in 251AD. He refused to re-admit apostates to the Church and gained the reputation of being a "puritan." Where the RC really got a boost was when "Constantine the Great" became 44th Emperor of Rome. He is noted as being the first Christian Emperor Rome had after seeing a vision of a Cross in the sky in the year 313AD. In 325AD, Constantine ordered the first Ecumenical Council in an attempt to bring about unity in the Christian faith. The council was held at Nice in Bithynia. In attendance were 318 Bishops and 2048 Ecclesiastics (preachers). They were from varied backgrounds of faith. Not all were Christian or Catholic and some occults were also in attendance. It was at this time that the Catholic Church really started becoming the "Universal Church" it is named for today. For the first time in history, secular government, legalized and embraced by a Christian ruler of Rome accepted a branch of Christianity. To this day, the Catholic Church is still very much an Ecumenical governing body.

Please consider this. The time we are now in is a time where God is checking in on His servants in the field. Some are working, many are sleeping and still more are dead, engaging in deader works. "Judgment begins with the household of God." Since the Word declares this, don't you think it more important to apply ourselves only to Christ's doctrine and faith without intermixing it with contrasting religious dogma and things that were not sanctified by Christ's redeeming work on the cross? And what about all the graven images that adorn every Catholic Church I've ever attended? You have to admit that there are some real large contrasts here between what Jesus commands and sanctifies versus what the Catholic Church establishes and considers Holy.

In an attempt to stay more centrally focused on the issue being discussed, that is, the argument of Church authority, I will expose the actual source of anti-Semitism and where it had its beginnings. Before I divulge the results of my extensive study, let me express what the Spirit in me indicates regarding "given authority." The Spirit explicitly says, "Authority is given until authority is brought into question." This utterance led me to ask, by what means is authority taken away Lord? The Spirit responding says, "Those who remain faithful and do not stray far are given to protect and defend the eternal truth of My given Word. Those who stray too far are taken out because they succumb to deceitful precepts and are led into delusional reasoning. The authority, which they may once have been given, is taken away and administered to those who remain faithful with My Word and testimony. By this, My Word is protected and by this will it endure."

The Catholic Church argues that she was handed the ultimate authority that was granted to Peter and they further teach that they still are the Mother Church who wields that same authority today. In general, Catholics believe that the Protestant Reformation (Rebellion) was a destructive division of the Church and all subsequent divisions of religion since have further weakened the power of the early Church. The Catholics declare that in order for unity to be restored the whole of divided Christianity must make a return to the Catholic Church. The vehicle, which they employ to achieve this goal, is the concept of ecumenism, which later evolved into ecumenicalism. By uncovering historical records of fact, I will prove that the authority which the Catholic church may have had at one time no longer is relevant because of her own internal rebellion and transgression against Christ's command, pattern and example. This in no way is to add insult or accusation to the Catholic Church but is intended to offer facts in the hope that you will understand man's religious institutions are in error and their respective adherents are in terrible danger of loosing their reward. The Word does testify. "Listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches."

In a 1992 article written by Clarence H Wagner Jr. for the Jerusalem Courier, he writes: "In the first century AD the Church was well-connected to its Jewish roots, and Jesus did not intend for it to be any other way. After all, Jesus is Jewish and the basis of His teaching is consistent with the Hebrew Scriptures. In Matthew 5:17, 18 He states: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
It is also known that the writers of the New Testament were Jewish, and the apostles and early disciples were Jewish. They worshipped on Shabbat (Sabbath), celebrated the feasts, and attended Synagogue. Even the membership of the early Church in Jerusalem and surrounding Judea, Samaria, and Galilee was predominately Jewish, as we know that no non-Jewish names appeared in leadership of the Jerusalem church until after 135 AD when a Greek name appears. We will see why this happened in a moment.
Congregations in other parts of the Roman Empire also had relatively strong Jewish or Hebraic roots, as they responded to guidance from the Jerusalem School of Thought, so illustrated by the names of many of the New Testament epistles... The Letters to the Corinthians, Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Also, the writers of the other Epistles were connected to the Jewish congregation.
So, what happened to cause such a split between the Christian and Jewish communities? Initially it began as a result of religious and social differences."

Before the Temple was destroyed, and Jerusalem razed by the Romans in 70 AD, there was room for debate within Judaism in the bustling, cosmopolitan city of Jerusalem. However, 1) according to David Rausch in his new book, A Legacy of Hatred, the Roman intrusion into Judea, and the widespread acceptance of Christianity by the Gentiles complicated the history of Jewish Christianity. 2) The Roman wars against the Jews not only destroyed the Temple and Jerusalem, but also resulted in Jerusalem's relinquishing her position as a center of Christian faith in the Roman world. In addition, 3) the rapid acceptance of Christianity among the Gentiles led to an early conflict between the church and synagogue. The Gentile Christians interpreted the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem as a sign that God had abandoned Judaism, and that He had provided the Gentiles freedom to develop their own Christian theology in a setting free from Jerusalem's influence.

Now, when we look at what Scripture actually foretold and records, we see that "Salvation" would be offered to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. This was prophesied and well documented in the Old Testament's books of the Prophets. Some time after Jesus was crucified, a certain man named Saul from Tarsus was converted while on his way to the city of Damascus by the Lord Himself. "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" After a few more years of growth and development, Saul, who became Paul, had sought out the blessing of his Jewish brethren (the Apostles), namely Peter, to be accepted by them as a brother and fellow disciple. It was not long afterwards that Paul contended with his Jewish brethren that the Gentiles would also receive the ministry of the Gospel and Paul was to travel to Rome, the seat of power in the Roman Government, to pursuade Romans to convert to a Christian faith. This did not at first set well with the Apostles but Paul was convinced that he was being led to do this by Christ Jesus. We know by Paul's epistles that he was given to minister to the Greeks, Gentiles and Jews and was fully convinced that the Spirit of GOD was leading him.

In about 50AD, the first council was called at Jerusalem bringing together both Jews and Gentiles to encourage fellowship and recognition as brothers of the same faith. At no point in the outcome of the decisions made in this council can it be ascertained that the Christian Jews and the Christian Gentiles were to develop separately from one another in the faith and the subsequent building of the true Church. Yet, history records that there was indeed a division and split between the two after Jerusalem was sacked and destroyed by the Roman legions in 70AD.

Clarence Wagner Jr. continues… "The Jewish sages who managed to survive the revolt assembled in Jabneh (Yavneh), a city in the Sharon Plains near Joppa, and decided that the Bet Hillel School, most closely linked to the Pharisaic sect of Judaism, would be adopted and practiced as halacha or Law. (The Pharisaic teachings were most interested in the relationship of each individual to God, and encouraged the masses to holiness based on a scrupulous observance of the Torah.) Even though Pharisaic Judaism had shown tolerance to Judeo-Christians or Nazarenes prior to the destruction, the assembly at Jabneh concluded a separation between Christianity and Judaism. Unfortunately, the Judeo-Christians had disassociated themselves from the war against the Romans and from the tragedy that had come upon the nation. Believing that the repression of the revolt by the Romans was a sign of the end, they ran off to Pella, east of the Jordan River, leaving their fellow Jews to fend for themselves.

Later, in 132 AD, when Bar Kochba orchestrated the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome, the Judeo-Christians had another reason to not participate. Bar Kochba was named the Messiah by Rabbi Akiva. Since the Christians saw Jesus as Messiah, to participate in the revolt under the leadership of Bar Kochba would be a denial of their beliefs. When the revolt was crushed by the Emperor Hadrian in 135 AD, Hadrian expelled all Jews from Jerusalem, allowing them only to return one day each year, on Tisha B'Av, to mourn the destruction of the Temple. Thus, the recording of the first Greek name in leadership of the Jerusalem Church, as the Romans allowed no Jews to enter the city. Hadrian also rebuilt Jerusalem into a Roman city and changed its name to Aelia Capitolina, and Judea to Syria Palestina (Palestine). This was done to erase any Jewish connection with the city of Jerusalem and the land of Israel.

By this time, the Church had effectively separated itself from Judaism. Theological and political power moved from Jewish Christian leaders to centers of Gentile Christian leadership such as Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch. It is important to understand this change, because it influenced the early Church Fathers to make anti-Jewish statements."

The above is confirmed by the unfolding history of anti-Semitism. The Roman Catholic Church, which began to flourish after Constantine, played a major role in support of anti-Semitism beliefs both, directly and indirectly. Clearly, the face of religion began to change and metamorph itself into something distinctively different than what the early Apostles helped to establish. Herein is where the departure from the apostolic faith began to pick up momentum costing the lives and bloodshed of millions of people over the centuries, both Jew and Gentile Christians. History also tells of the marriage between secular governments and these new sects of Christianity. Religion has since made great efforts to "change the world" through dominion theologies rather than to make a separation from them as was patterned for us in the earlier apostolic ministries. Though some historians may be biased or hide certain critical elements and events, history itself is a confirmation of what actually took place and some are able to discern truth when they look to different sources for verification. We can trust the witness of the gospels because though different authors from slightly different perspectives wrote them, the main jest of the story being told is the same and the books written confirm one another.

Think of it like this, If a number of spectators were all gathered in a stadium surrounding a playing field, some on the 50 yard line are going to see the game being played, a little differently than those who are at the far end of the stadium. If the spectators are sports reporters, each one will have had certain advantages and disadvantages on viewing the game and will only be able to report from their own perspectives. Though they all saw the same game and all witnessed the same results on the scoreboard, each one is going to come away from that game with slightly different perspectives. If one was to read all these sports reporters stories in the paper, then one will gain a better understanding of what plays were made and what contributed most to the outcome of that game. The gospels provide us with this same advantage and by reading all of them as they are, from different perspectives, we can then gain a better appreciation and understanding for the minor differences that exist in each of them. The net result for us in the case of studying the gospels should be as if we studied it in "surround sound stereo." We should also then be willing to search out different sources of any recorded history to better ascertain the fuller measure of truth rather than trusting only in the biased witness provided by one religion. Therefore, from the perspective of the Catholic encyclopedias, if you were to read history only from the Catholic perspective without testing it against the written and canonized perspective of scripture and the recordings of other historians who were also witnesses, you might come away with a Catholic only perspective. To read only from one perspective promotes paradox and often times when compared to scripture, will result in contradiction and sharp contrast.

Having said that, the relationship of the Christian community to the world may seem differently depending upon one's historical, sociological and theological perspectives because the diverse Christian community is both a creation in the world and an influence upon it. It is a true statement as quoted in the Encyclopedia Britannica, "For the Christian community, the death and resurrection of Jesus call into question all structures, systems and values that claim ultimacy." Following are some other noteworthy quotations from the Encyclopedia Britannica on the history of Christianity.

"Radical medieval Franciscans proclaimed that true Christians should divest themselves of money at the same time that the papacy expended great sums to manipulate the political landscape of Europe."

"Endorsement of the world emerged in the fourth century with the imperial legal recognition of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine."

"The church, like the state, has been exposed to the temptation of power. The attempt to establish a kingdom of peace resulted in the transformation of the church into an ecclesiastical state. This first took place in the development of the Roman Papal States, but it also occurred to a lesser degree in several theocratic churches and was attempted in Calvin's ecclesiastical state in Geneva in the 16th century."
I add here that, the later outgrowths of both Catholic and Protestant Churches began to declare itself a governing authority and executor of the spiritual, political and social commission of the church and as ultimate representatives of the Kingdom of God. "The struggle between the church, understanding itself as representative of the church, not only dominated the middle ages but also continued into the Reformation period."

In the Byzantine Empire the Emperor Constantine granted himself, as "Bishop of Foreign affairs," certain rights to church leadership, as was demonstrated by his calling of the first ecumenical council to settle doctrinal disputes and formulate "so-called" fundamental Christian doctrines and ratify its decisions. This was referred to in the Byzantine era as "caesaropapism." It was this development which led the Popes to justify their authority by declaring themselves as the rightful heir and Vicar of Christ and successor of Apostle Peter.

Encyclopedia Britannica states; "In its administration of justice the church largely depended upon the old imperial law and - in a period of legal and administrative chaos - was viewed as the only guarantor of order. The Roman Popes used this power, which was in fact allotted, to them by circumstances, to develop a specific ecclesiastical state and to base this state upon a new theocratic ideology - the idea that the Pope was the representative of Christ and the successor of Peter." The Popes saw rulers as members of the church and therefore subject to the rule of GOD through Apostle Peter's successors. It was this view held by the Roman Catholic Church that was ultimately the cause of many struggles between Popes and Rulers throughout the Middle Ages resulting in centuries of mass warfare and genocide. Though history may exist in multiple paradigms, it does not consist in multiple dimensions or parallel universes. Therefore, what history records for us should be sufficient to form a larger more complete picture of what actually took place versus what certain religious authorities claim took place.

As I said before, in order to understand what I am trying to convey, Catholics and other religious minded people must be willing to step out of their "Catholic only" or "Protestant only "paradigms as I have. Only then can any gain a better appreciation for and understanding of what errors man has made as judged by the fundamental teachings of Christ and the Word of God. The real true test and measure will in the end only be the Word of God and will not be levied by the many opinions and divisive interpretations of men in religious orders. Are you a son of the Catholic Church or man's religion or are you one of the sons of God who are called out to make disciples of all nations of peoples in all the inhabited earth? It boils down to what I've been saying all along. The contest is between man's faith in religion and man's faith (trust) in God. I stand for Jesus and all that He patterned, not the papacy and all they have corrupted. As the Word has judged me, so I also allow it to judge all things else, weather created by God or man.

To further dissect and reveal the errors of man's maligned religious pathway, lets look more closely at how the legalized form of Christianity became a suppressive force against Jews whom God loved and sought to save. Referring back to the article written by Clarence H. Wagner, Jr., he states the following understanding:

"As the church spread far and wide within the Roman Empire, and its membership was increasingly non-Jewish, Greek and Roman thought began to creep in and completely change the orientation of Biblical interpretation through a Greek mindset and not a Jewish or Hebraic mindset. This would later result in many heresies, some of which the Church is still practicing.
Once Christianity and Judaism began to take separate paths, the void became greater and greater. The Romans had effectively suppressed the Jews; however, Christianity was spreading quickly. This became a major concern to Rome and ultimate political pressure became a third factor in the widening rift between Christians and Jews. Under Roman law, Judaism was considered a religio licita, a legal religion, as it postdated Rome. To unify the Roman Empires, everyone was to worship the Roman gods and sacrificed to the Emperor as a god. Obviously, the Christians could not succumb to this pagan worship and refused. It was during this period that we find the Christians being used for sport in the Roman coliseums and circuses, as gladiators, or thrown to the lions. The Emperor Nero even used them as human torches to light up his gardens at night, setting Christians afire after dipping them in pitch. The symbol of the fish, not the cross, and crossing one's finger was used by Christians between one another as an identification sign during this period.
In order to try to alleviate this persecution, Christian apologists tried in vain to convince Rome that Christianity was an extension of Judaism. However, Rome was not convinced. The resulting persecutions and frustrations of the Christians bred an animosity towards the Jewish community who was free to worship without persecution.
This animosity was reflected in the writings of the Church Fathers. For example, Eusebius wrote that the promises of the Hebrew Scriptures were for Christians and not the Jews, and the curses were for the Jews. He argued that the Church was the continuation of the Old Testament and thus superseded Judaism. The young Church declared itself to be the true Israel, or "Israel according to the Spirit" heir to the divine promises and found it essential to discredit the "Israel according to the flesh" to prove that God had cast away His people and transferred His love to the Christians."

He continues in saying, "In this, we find the beginnings of a "Replacement Theology" which placed the Church triumphant over the vanquished Judaism and Israel. This replacement theory became one of the main foundations on which Christian anti-Semitism was based, even to this day. Incidentally, the N.T. speaks of the Church being grafted in, adopted sons of Abraham and spiritual Israel, NOT usurpers of the covenant and a replacer of physical Israel."

Mr. Wagner reveals as affirmed by other historical recordings that in 313 AD, the Edict of Mila outlawed synagogues, and in 315 another edict allowed the burning of Jews if convicted of breaking the law.
· the ancient privileges granted to the Jews were withdrawn
· rabbinical jurisdiction was abolished or severely curtailed
· proselytism was prohibited and made punishable by death
· Jews were excluded from holding high office or a military career
In 321 AD, Constantine decreed all business should cease on "the honored day of the sun" and so by substituting another day for worship, he further advanced the split.
Overnight, Christianity was given the power of the state. Instead of the Church taking this opportunity to spread its Gospel message in love, it truly became the Church triumphant, ready to vanquish its foes. After 312, the writings of the Church Fathers changed in character. No longer were they on the defensive and apologetic, but aggressive, and directed its venom at everyone "outside of the flock," in particular the Jewish people.

From this time forward the Roman Empire became known as the Holy Roman Empire. Using the Catholic Church as a vehicle of expansion in their newfound Christian faith, they sought to expand into pagan cultures and other countries taking territory as a prize adding to it the sizable Roman Empire and forced the conversions of millions of people to their new brand (sect) of what I call, "so-called" Christianity. Hatred for Jews grew stronger in the advancing centuries as evidenced in some of the writings of these early Church fathers. Clarence Wagner Jr. sites an example of this while speaking of the Middle Ages. He states, "Early in this period, we find examples of anti-Jewish bias in Church literature. At the end of the 4th century, the Bishop of Antioch, Chrysostom, a great orator, wrote a series of eight sermons against the Jews. He had seen Christian talking with Jewish people, taking oaths in front of the Ark, and some were keeping the Jewish feasts. He wanted this to stop in an effort to bring his people back to what he called "the true faith," and the Jews became the whipping boy for his sermon series. To quote him, "The synagogue is not only a brothel and a theater; it is also a den of robbers and a lodging for wild beasts. No Jew adores God."

I whole-heartedly agree with his summary of the development of anti-Semitism springing from the Catholic Church. He summarizes this in the following, "The monarchs of the Holy Roman Empire thus regarded the Jews as serfs of the chamber (servi camerae), and utilized them as slave librarians to maintain Hebrew writings. They also utilized the services of Jews in another enterprise - usury, or money lending. The loaning of money was necessary to a growing economy. However, usury was considered as endangering to the eternal salvation of the Christian, and thus forbidden. So, the Church endorsed the practice of lending by Jews, for, according to their reasoning, their souls were lost in any case. Much later, the Jewish people were utilized by the Western countries as trade agents in commerce, and thus we see how the Jewish people found their way into the fields of banking and commerce.
So, by the Middle Ages, the ideological arsenal of Christian anti-Semitism was completely established. From a social standpoint, the deterioration of the Jewish position in society was only beginning its decline. During this early period, the virulent judeophobia was primarily limited to the clergy who were always trying to keep their flocks away from the Jews. However, later, the rank and file growing middle class would be the main source of anti-Semitic activity."

History records that during the crusades, the Catholic Church really started taking on an uglier image of religion thus further defiling itself in the mass murder and persecution of Jews and Muslims. At Mayence, the Archbishop invited 1,300 Jews into his palace for refuge. This became an invitation to slaughter, for under his supervision, they were all killed, and he even shared in the spoils confiscated from the corpses. Incidentally, Emperor Henry IV heard of this massacre, confiscated the property of the Archbishop, and permitted the Jews who had been forcibly baptized to return to Judaism.
When the Crusaders finally arrived in Jerusalem, they were 600,000 strong. They besieged the city and on July 15, 1099 broke through the walls. They killed the Moslems in the city and herded the Jews into the synagogue. Crusaders with shields decorated with large crosses placed wood around the synagogue and burned alive all inside as they sang, "Christ, We adore thee!" This is the popular and beloved Catholic Church we are speaking about and I cannot stomach the thought of her centuries of rebellion against Christ. To this day, she has never repented from such but goes out of her way to justify the murderous acts and abominations of which she was at times instigator of or almost always in support of such genocide! It is as I have said and written in agreement with others outside the Church, "that religion is largely responsible for all the horrific mass murders and war-time conflicts we've experienced on earth since the time of Christ. Didn't Jesus say, "love your enemies?" How has the Catholic Church exhibited love over the centuries? I don't see love but a vile hatred for the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. And that is what has become the rotten fruit of man's religion.

Moving forward through time, the Catholic Church through its governing authority, which was upheld by Canon Law, precipitated more mass genocide in the Spanish Inquisitions. Clarence Wagner Jr. writes; "According to Canon Law, the Inquisition was not authorized to interfere in the internal affairs of the Jews, but to seek out Christian heretics who had backslidden. However, this law was rescinded on the ground that the presence of Jews causes heresy to develop in the Christian communities.
In the mid-1400s, the Spanish Inquisition had its beginnings. In Spain, tens of thousands of Jews were forced into baptism. Because of this, they were considered Christians and expected to behave as Christians. These baptized Jews were known as Converos or New Christians. If a mouse is caught in a cookie jar, this does not make him a cookie. So, too, force-baptizing anyone does not make him a Christian.
These Converos were thus still practicing many Jewish customs, such as lighting candles on Friday evening, changing the linen on the Sabbath, abstaining from pork and scaleless fish, observing the Feast Days, etc. To be caught practicing any one of 37 customs was grounds to be brought before the Inquisition court. Christians were to watch for these signs and report any such backsliders. Once before the court, there was no way out of punishment:
· If you confessed and did not repent, you were burned alive.
· If you confessed and repented, you were publicly humiliated. Any subsequent slip-ups resulted in certain death.
· If you did not confess, even if you were innocent, you were tortured until you confessed and then burned.
The Church was not allowed to execute the victim, so they passed them to a secular arm of the Inquisition Court. Blood was not allowed to be shed, thus the burning. This they justified by a text from John 15:6, "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered, and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
Incidentally, all property was confiscated, enriching the Inquisition Court. Practicing Jews (not Converos) were ultimately brought to the Inquisition Courts, as it was believed that they were Judaisers, and a bad influence on the Converos. They too were tried and burned. The Inquisition in Spain lasted from 1481 - 1820. Over 350,000 Jews suffered punishment."

The Christian centuries largely influenced by Catholicism, had persecuted Jews for theological reasons, but this errant "teaching of contempt" is what set the course for all anti-Semitic themes in future generations. Ultimately, the Catholic Church believed the Jews were a uniquely rejected people within human society and are to be regarded as "unworthy" in God's New Covenant with mankind. This again sharply contrasts with the apostolic examples immediately following the ministry of Jesus. As I pointed out earlier, there was a coming together between Christian Jews and Gentile Jews when Apostle Paul came on the scene but this rapidly deteriorated after the sacking of Jerusalem and the death of the last Apostle. How many centuries does it take for a people to forget that Jesus was a Jew and the original twelve disciples were also of Jewish background, symbolically chosen to be representative of the twelve lost tribes of Israel? Much of the Canonized New Testament are epistles written by Paul, the thirteenth Apostle, given to witness also to the Gentiles. Where does history record that the Gentile Church age followed Paul's teachings? I don't see it. I don't see it because it largely does not exist. What does become clear though is that the Catholic Church adopted the secular world and all its secular ways rather than making, keeping and maintaining a separation from it. Let's jump forward to the twentieth century and see if the Catholic Church ever repented of her long history of genocide and anti-Semitism. What does history record for us here?

As outlined in the above, there developed a mutual relationship between Church and State. It began of course with Constantine legalizing Christianity. Encyclopedia Britannica states in reference to this in the following excerpt.

"The religious interpretation of the Christian Emperor reinterpreted in the Christian sense the ancient Roman institution of the god-emperor who played the role of pontifex maximus (high priest) in the state cult - took the central position within the church as well. He summoned the Synods of Bishops, "as though he had been appointed Bishop by GOD," presided over the synods and granted judicial power for the empire to their decisions. He was the "protector" of the church of the Christian faith and who fought not only as a warrior but also as an intercessor, as a second Moses during the battle against God's enemies, "holy and purely praying to God, sending his prayers up to Him." The Christian Emperor entered not only the political but also the sacred succession of the Roman god-emperor. Next to such a figure, an independent leadership of the church could hardly develop."

We see a similar manifestation of this paradox occur in Germany. Encyclopedia Britannica records,
"National Socialism in Germany showed paradoxical contradictions to the separation of Church and State. On the one hand, Nazi propaganda pursued a consciously anti-Christian polemic against the Church; it proceeded to arrest those clergy opposed to the Nazi worldview and policies. On the other hand, Hitler placed the greatest value upon concluding with the Vatican in 1934 a concordant that granted the Roman Catholic Church more special rights in the German Reich than had ever been granted in any earlier concordant. The concordant with the Vatican represented the first recognition of the Hitler regime by a European government and was viewed by Hitler as a method of entrance into the circle of internationally recognized powers." We don't need to discuss at length, what resulted by this alliance between Hitler's regime and the Catholic Church because it is well known that the Holocaust was a reality and it again cost the lives of millions of innocent Jews and some Christians who were viewed as Jewish sympathizers.

This letter would become another book if I extrapolated the founding views of the relationship between church and state from its earliest authors: Eusebius of Caesarea and Augustine. So lets be content and agree that what I provided you thus far will be sufficient in supporting my earlier argument that the Catholic Church is not the supreme power and authority of Christ's Church but is in fact, as history proves, an abomination and perversion of fundamental Christianity as demonstrated by the early Apostles. Clearly, mankind has been led astray from the will and divine revelations of God's purpose and intent of the Christian Church. Since you cannot find evidence of the one who has been behind this perversion from secular sources, we must be content on allowing the Word of God to tell the whole story and accept that it has always been Satan as the undermining source of corrupted religion. I will further submit, if man's propensity for lust of power and wealth were not so strong in his nature, Satan would not have such a grasp on man's works, ideology and religion. But scripture reveals he has always been the source and man's weakness and unbelief is what caused him to be duped and led so far astray. Ultimately, the churches today are under judgment and God's Word confirms it, "Judgment begins with the household of God."

Hebrews 4:1-6 "Let us fear therefore, lest haply, a promise being left of entering into his rest, any one of you should seem to have come short of it. For indeed we have had good tidings preached unto us, even as also they: but the word of hearing did not profit them, because it was not united by faith with them that heard. For we who have believed do enter into that rest; even as he hath said, As I swore in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he hath said somewhere of the seventh day on this wise, And God rested on the seventh day from all his works; and in this place again, They shall not enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some should enter there into, and they to whom the good tidings were before preached failed to enter in because of disobedience,"

Hebrews 4:11-12 "Let us therefore give diligence to enter into that rest, that no man fall after the same example of disobedience. For the word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart."

Hebrews 10:26-30 "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a fierceness of fire which shall devour the adversaries. A man that hath set at nought Moses law dies without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that said, Vengeance belongs unto me, I will recompense. And again, The Lord shall judge his people."

Hebrews 2:1-4 "Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest haply we drift away from them. For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation? Which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard; God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will."

"If it is with great difficulty that the righteous are saved, what then of the godless man and the sinner?"

Take heed brethren lest we bleed and be found guilty of the same errors of our forefathers before us. Remember that Jesus told his disciples they would not know sin if He had not come but now that He has come, there no longer remains for us an excuse for willful sin! Take heed all sons of men! The Lord has spoken!

Delivered with all God fearing sincerity and love for the truth,

Nicholas A. Stivers, humbled man, scribe and messenger.

Author; Apostasy Revealed published 2003 by Mountainview Publishing ISBN: 1-928602-92-4
http://nicholasscrolls.cephasministry.com
http://abide-in-truth-events.cephasministry.com/
http://cephasministry.com