Challenge Questions of Truth-Seeking CATHOLICS

The ten commandments as are written at :
http://www.catholicity.com/catechism/the_ten_commandments.html,
are :
1: "I am the Lord your God you shall not have strange Gods before me"
(Ex 20:2-6, Deut 5:6-10)
2: "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain" (Ex 20:7-8,
Deut 5:11-12)
3: "Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day" (Ex 20:8-11, Deut 5:12-15)
4: "Honor your father and your mother" (Ex 20:12, Deut 5:16)
5: "You shall not kill" (Ex 20:13, Deut 5:17)
6: "You shall not commit adultery" (Ex 20:14, Deut 5:18)
7: "You shall not steal" (Ex 20:15, Deut 5:19)
8: "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor" (Ex 20:16, Deut 5:20)
9: "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife" (Ex 20:17, Deut 5:21)
10:"You shall not covet your neighbor's goods" (Ex 20:17, Deut 5:21)

When we check Exod 20:2-6 in the Jerusalem Bible, (The Catholic Bible), it reads :

Exo 20:2 I am YAHWEH your God, who has brought you out from the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery.
Exo 20:3 You shall not have any other gods except me.
Exo 20:4 You shall not make a carved image or any likeness of anything in heaven or on earth beneath or in the waters under the earth;
Exo 20:5 you shall not bow to them, and you shall not serve them; for I am YAHWEH your God, am a jealous God, and I will punish the father's faults in the sons, the grandsons, and the great-grandsons,
Exo 20:6 to those that hate Me; but I show kindness to thousands of those who love me, and keep My commandments.

I understand that the first Catholic commandment is a combination of Exod 20:1 & Exod 20:2, & that that Exod 20:17 has been divided into two separate commandments.

Q: Why has the Catholic Church, as is written in catholicity.com, left Exod 20:4
out of its Ten Commandments ?
A: It seems to us, that verse 4 has been omitted, because the Catholic Church actually breaks this commandment by having statues of their various "saints" in most, if not all of their church buildings.

Q: Isn't this a violation of Deut 4:2 & Deut 12:32, which tell us we are not to add to, nor take way from, what is written in Yahweh's Word ?

In doing this, removing some of Yahweh's Word, isn't the Catholic Church deceiving its members, & in fact, has lied to them about what Yahweh's ten commandments are ?

The website, http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=22329, tells us that :
"Dec. 25 offered a date with a good theological basis that also would counter several pagan holidays. Although we don't know the final steps, in 336 A.D., the church at Rome officially observed the "birth day of Christ" Dec. 25."

Have you ever really examined this teaching ? Yahushua could not possibly have been born on December 25, since that is the middle of winter in Israel. The shepherds would not be in the fields then. Also back-tracking through Luke 1, the story of Elizabeth & Zachariah tells us that, Yahushua was most likely born around the biblical feast of Sukkot (September-ish, based on Lev 23:24-25).

Q: Why would the Catholic Church arrive at such a conclusion, when clearly, they had (and have), the ability to determine more accurately when Yahushua was born ?

Q: Are you aware, that December 25, was at the time of Constantine, a major pagan feast to "Sol Invictus", the sun god ?

Q: Isn't this a violation of Deut 4:2 and 12:32 - adding to the Word of Yahweh ? Despite what "catholic.org" writes, there doesn’t seem to be any theological basis for this conclusion !

Isn’t the above information about Yahushua’s birthday, as quoted by the Catholic Church, a LIE ?

While we appreciate that in the past, the laity of the Catholic Church had almost no access to the Scriptures, to Yahweh's Word, we cannot make that statement today. With the invention of the printing press, and the today's Internet's resources, people have  easy access to many different versions of the Bible, including Hebrew & Greek Interlinears and dictionaries, in free software programs such as e-Sword.

To answer the question as to whether this teaching of the Catholic Church is biblical, there are at least three Renewed Covenant (NT) scriptures that explain what individuals are to do.

Acts 17:10-15 tells us about Paul's visit to Berea. In verse 11, it reads :

Acts 17:11   Here the Jews were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they welcomed the word very readily; every day they (the Bereans) studied the scriptures (the Tanach OT) to check whether it was true.

1 Thes 5:21 tells us to "test or prove all things" (We notice this verse is not in the Jersualem (Catholic) Bible - I wonder why it has been removed. It is in the New Jerusalem Bible though).

1 Thessalonians 5:21   test everything and hold on to what is good.

2 Tim 2:15, in the King James Version reads :

And study to present yourself approved to YAHWEH, a workman unashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

The Jerusalem Bible does not tell us this. It reads :

Do all you can to present yourself in front of God as a man who has come through his trials, and a man who has no cause to be ashamed.

This translation is NOT rendered from the Greek manuscript. We wonder why
not ?

Phil 2:12-13 & Matt 24:13 tell us that our salvation is a personal endeavour. Each person is responsible for his or her own salvation. Yes, the Catholic Church can assist, but it is each  individual who must work for their salvation.

Phil 2:12-13 tells us :

12 So, my dear friends, you have always been obedient; your obedience must not be limited to times when I am present. Now that I am absent it must be more in evidence, so work out your salvation in fear and trembling.  
13 It is God who, for his own generous purpose, gives you the intention and the powers to act.

Matt 24:13 tells us :

... the man who stands firm to the end will be saved

Isn't it true that, based on the above Scripture verses, this Catholic teaching is not based on biblical principles ? I wonder if you can explain why not ?

https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6099 makes the following statement about "Infallibility" :

"In general , exemption or immunity from liability to error or failure; in particular in theological usage, the supernatural prerogative by which the Church of Christ is, by a special Divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in her definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals".

In doing this, doesn't the Catholic Church, ignore and/or contradict Scripture, which clearly states in Ps 89:34, that "Yahweh will not alter the thing that is gone out of His lips", & in Mal 3:6, that "Yahweh does not change".


Psa 89:34  My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. 

Mal 3:6  For I am the LORD, I change not; 

Here is a direct quote from a book written by the Catholic Cardinal, John Henry Newman. In chapter 8 of his "Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine", published in 1878, Newman writes :
"The rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion  arise, to adopt, to imitate, or to sanctify the existing rites and customs of the population, as well as the philosophy of the educated class. The use of temples and those dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasion with branches of trees (wreaths), incense, lamps, candles, votive offerings on recovery from illness, holy water, holy days and seasons (the entire Church calendar), use of calendars, processions, blessings on the field, sacerdotal vestments, the ring in marriage, chants, the Kyrie Eleison - are all of Pagan origin, and sanctified by adoption into the Church".  (emphasis added)

Clearly, the Catholic Church is well aware of its pagan origins.

Even a cursory reading of Scripture will tell us that Yahweh "hates" unauthorized mixtures. On many occasions in His Word, He elects, divides and then separates. Examples include Gen 1:4, when He separated light and darkness, Lev 11:47 where He separates the clean from the unclean, and Gen 25:23 where Yahweh chose Jacob as His first-born, even though Esua was the first to be born of Jacob.

In Deut 8, Moses tells Israel what Yahweh requires of them. In Deut 8:11 Moses reminds Israel to keep Yahweh's commandments, judgments and statutes. In Deut 8:19, Moses tells the Israelites the consequences for "walking after other gods", namely, "you shall utterly perish". Deut 12:8 and Deut 12:30-31 tell us not to get involved with another's god in any way. As well, Deut 4:2 & 12:32 tell us we are not to add to, nor take away from the Word of Yahweh.

So, why has the Catholic Church adopted such scripturally forbidden practices ?
Could it be that the Catholic Church has "strayed" from the original teachings of the Bible, & of the Messiah, they claim to follow ? Is it possible that the Catholic Church bases its doctrines & beliefs on man-determined ideas, & not Yahweh's Word ? Doesn't this practice require urgent examination & questioning ?

Clearly, Messiah Yahushua guarded the whole of the "Old Law", the Torah, & kept all of it, that He was able to keep (He couldn't keep the priestly commands, nor the commands for women, for example).

In Matt 5:17-19, Messiah Yahushua explains His position on "the Law & the Prophets", where He says :

Mat 5:17 Do not imagine that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to complete them.
Mat 5:18 I tell you solemnly, til heaven and earth disappear, not one dot or one little stroke, shall disappear from the Law until its purpose is achieved.
Mat 5:19 Therefore, the man who infringes even one of the least of these  commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be considered least in the kingdom of Heaven, but the man who keeps them and teaches them, will be considered great in the kingdom of Heaven.

Further Comment
In Mat 5:17, the Greek word translated as "complete them" is pleroo. It means to fully teach, to verify, to fully preach or to cram full of meaning, to fill up, or to make full. It does not mean to "complete". The Hebrew word from which this comes is mala (see Gen 1:22), which clearly cannot mean "complete".

Mat 5:18 makes a very serious statement - "til heaven & earth pass away or disappear, not one dot (yod) or one little stroke shall disappear" ! The last time we looked, the earth was still here - it hasn't disappeared ! So doesn't that mean that ALL the Law (Yahweh's Torah) must still be here, & must still be kept. Clearly, the Catholic Church has been deceptive about this Scripture.

The Catholic Church, from, http://www.catholicity.com/catechism/the_lord's_day.html, writes the following :
"The First and the Eighth 

Jesus rose "on the first day of the week" (Mk 16:2). This "first day" recalls the first creation. As an "eighth day," it symbolizes the new creation begun by Christ's Resurrection. For Christians, Sunday has become the first of all days, the Lord's Day. "We gather on the day of the sun, for it is the first day when God made the world; on this same day Jesus Christ our Savior rose from the dead" (St. Justin).

A New Hope - A New Day

Sunday replaces the Sabbath for Christians because Christ's Passover fulfills the truth of the Jewish Sabbath. The Old Law worship prepared for the mystery of Christ. "We have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord's Day" (St. Ignatius of Antioch).

Observing Sunday fulfills the moral command inscribed in man's heart to render public and regular worship to God "as a sign of his universal beneficence to all" (St. Thomas Aquinas). Sunday worship fulfills the Old Law by a weekly celebration of the Creator and Redeemer."

Some of the information provided in this quote IS NOT scripturally correct.

1) Mark 16:2 does not tell us that Yahushua rose "on the first day of the week", in fact, it doesn't even mention Yahushua.

Mark 16:1-2 When the sabbath (the 7th day Sabbath) was over, Mary of Magdala,             Mary the mother of James and Salome, bought spices with which to go and anoint             him. And very early in the morning on the first day of the week they went to the tomb,         just as the sun was rising.

Matt 28:1 gives us similar information.

Matt 28:1 After the Sabbath (the 7th day Sabbath), and towards dawn on the first day       of the week, Mary of Magdala and the other Mary, went to visit the sepulchre.

If we read each of these chapters further, in context, we notice that Yahushua was not seen until He is mentioned in Matt 28:9 and John 20:14-17.

Clearly, there is no scriptural evidence that Yahushua rose on the first day of the week.

2) The 7th day Sabbath is definitely not a Jewish Sabbath. Gen 2:2-3 refers to the 7th day of creation, while Exod 20:10 specifically calls the 7th day Sabbath, the Sabbath for Yahweh. Remember, we are told that in Deut 4:13 that Yahuah Himself, inscribed the ten sayings on the two tablets of stone. Changing something Yahuah has personally written
is a very serious thing.

Exod 20:10   but the seventh day is a sabbath for Yahweh your God.

If you examine much of Catholic doctrine & teaching, it has attempted to remove anything "Jewish", or more correctly, Hebraic.

3) The Catholic Church has "speculated" that Yahushua rose on the first day of the week. The Greek phrase used in Matt 28:1 and Mark 16:2 is "mia sabbaton" - it is correctly translated as "one of the sabbaths", not the first day of the week.

4) I won't go into it in detail here, but "the day of the sun" or pagan "SUN WORSHIP" is seen in many places in the Catholic Church (Justin quotes the day of the sun, the sun shaped halos, the shape of the communion host, the construction of the monstrance with its sunrays & a crescent moon, the solar wheel & the very large phallic tower in the Vatican.

The Catholic Church states in, http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6099, that :                                  
"the Church is infallible in her objective definitive teaching regarding faith and morals, not that believers are infallible in their subjective interpretation of her teaching".

How can this be so if during my lifetime, some 70 years, the Catholic Church has CHANGED its teaching on "indulgences, the Latin Mass, eating meat during Lent,
pre-Communion fasting, Limbo, purgatory, and no salvation outside the Catholic Church).

Prior to my lifetime, the Catholic Church has changed several practices, including "allowing married men to be priests, the releasing of religious from their vows, the current sign of the cross, 53 Catholic Doctrines not found in the Bible (http://www.bible.ca/catholic-flip-flops.htm), marriage to a non-Catholic was invalid until 1818 AD, withholding the communion cup from the laity from 1416 AD until the late 20th Century, the frequency of receiving communion changed from weekly to daily in about 500 AD, baptism by immersion was practised until 1311 AD, no infant baptism until the 4th Century, and no Pope was considered infallible until 1870 AD.

http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=8605 tells us that

"Religious obedience is that general submission which religious vow to God, and voluntarily promise to their superiors, in order to be directed by them in the ways of perfection according to the purpose and constitutions of their order."

While we are sure that the principle involved here is quite noble, and that it can lead to an individual becoming a better person, our experience of around 60 years as devout, practising Catholics tells us that, many Catholic clergy were far short of perfection. In fact, many were tyrannical bullies.

In terms of the vow of obedience, we have asked ourselves these questions :

Q1: Could this vow be a way to control those within the order ?

Q2: Could this vow be a way of controlling individuals who may disagree with various aspects of the Catholic Church, and/or the religious order to which they belong ?

Q3: Could this vow be a way of silencing individuals who may disagree with various aspects of the Catholic Church, and/or the religious order to which they belong ?