FAKE FATHER, FAKE SON, FAKE HOLY SPIRIT, FAKE PETER, FAKE PURCHASE, FAKE APOSTLES, FAKE BAPTISM, FAKE PRIESTS, FAKE SAINTS
VS. SCRIPTURE
BY JAMES SUNDQUIST http://www.eaglemasterworksproductions.com
Dear Founder Dominick Pepito Alpha International,
My father was a WWII U.S. Army Veteran physician in charge of all of the medical supplies in North Africa, and later stationed in Naples, Italy helped liberate your country of Italy from Nazi tyranny.
In response to your unsolicited email to sell coins to rebuild Notre Dame Cathedral:
First let me say, that If you are going to name a building, name it after Christ, not Mary as Notre Dame is French for Our Lady.
A more accurate title and name of this building your are trying to rebuild and restore:
“SHRINE OF THE INQUISITION TORTURE CHAMBER”
Your solicitation reads:
“DIVINE PROVIDENCE CUSTOM DESIGNED COINS
HELP THE RESTORATION EFFORTS OF NOTRE-DAMECATHEDRAL THROUGH OUR “HEART OF PARIS COIN”
Our “Hearts of Paris” Notre-Dame Cathedral coin is trademarked and was minted to help raise money for the rebuilding and restoration efforts of Notre dame Cathedral”, with the front of the coin stating ”Liberté, égalité, fraternité, and the the back of the coin stating “We will rebuild Notre-Dame Together”. Source:
https://www.alphainternationalenterprises.com/custom-creations–notre-dame-cathedral-coins.html
There at least six very striking critical biblical problems with these slogans and promises:
First, Divine Providence is the domain of God alone, who had nothing to do with designing these coins. And God would never design such a coin, as you will will see in the rest of this report.
Secondly, ”Liberté, égalité, fraternité, was the slogan that launched the French Revolution in which 17,000 were beheaded by the infamous guillotine in what is called The Reign of Terror. Today it is the national motto of France. But this is a political cry and ideology, certainly not even remotely a Christian religion mandate or command even remotely resembling the Great Commission of the Gospel.
Thirdly, it makes a promise for the future, in defiance of the Lord’s own command and warning to not make pledges and promises about the future, for tomorrow is known to no man. So this whole campaign is fatally flawed at its premise.
Fourthly, the ad is very misleading and deceptive because it implies that the entire cathedral burned to the ground and/or is going to be completely rebuilt and restored. But the fact is, only a small portion fo the cathedral burned at the top which was its spire and part of the roof, and therefore, only a small percentage of the entire building complex. In fact, here is proof of precisely what burned in the fire:
SOURCE: https://www.vox.com/2019/4/16/18312072/notre-dame-cathedral-fire
Fifthly, the ad also gives the impression that Alpha International Enterprises is the primary channel for funding the rebuilding and restoration of the cathedral, when in fact, the government of France and many other billionaires are donating hundreds of millions of dollars in and outside of France for its reconstruction. Proof:
https://abcnews.go.com/International/339-million-pledged-rebuild-notre-dame-fire-destroys/story?id=62424888
And even in the ad, only a portion of the sale of the coins is even going to its restoration.
Sixthly, by integrating church and state into the campaign and coin, the promoters defy Christ’s warning of the Leaven of Herod. And why would this organization sell coins in the U.S., whose very raison d’etre is separation of church and state? *****A host of Catholics and even Evangelicals are grieving. I am grieving too, but not for the same reasons. I grieve for the host of true Christians and their families of the martyrs tortured during the Inquisition by what that building symbolizes as well as for the hundreds of millions of Catholics who have been victims of RC extortion and threat of Purgatory, and the Fraud that RC committed with Indulgences. Roman Catholics are so shaken by fire that caused the partial burning down off this building. But where is the outcry for the fire of saints being burned at the stake during the Roman Catholic Inquisition which began in France, where Notre Dame Roman Catholic Cathedral still stands. You name a building after Mary the Mother of Jesus. How would think she would feel about her name being invoked for a building responsible for much of the torture and martyrdom of saints. And even if they were heretics, is that what Jesus or the New Testament taught as the technique for evangelism and restoring a person to the faith or the church of Christ?
That is what I see.
And didn’t Christ judge another building in 70 AD that was the nerve center for another religion that Paul said was eternally damned? Therefore, I submit the following which is not new, but we need reminding:
1. Roman Catholicism is a religion of terrorism, extortion, and necromancy. Roman Catholicism is a false religion in which you co-pay for your salvation vs. Christ’s last words on the Cross were “FULLY PAID!”. That means Mary (Notre Dame) can’t be a co-redemptrix (i.e., a sinner who co-pays with Christ for our salvation). This also means that we would have to at least partly pay back Christ for his most expensive gift (present) in history. And have you ever heard of telling someone who gave you a gift “Please let me pay you back at least part of the cost). What an insult to the giver! And as though paying back in this life weren’t bad enough, you might have to go to Purgatory to pay off the balance of what you owe God, contradicting Isaiah 53 and Christ and his own Apostles. The Apostle Paul eternally damned the religion that taught that works and the law are necessary for salvation, precisely what Roman Catholicism teaches, meaning it is no longer a gift. Paul made it clear that Salvation is by Grace alone that you are saved, not by works, lest any man boast. The gifts of God are irrevocable according to Scripture, therefore, we have assurance of our salvation, not maybe we get to Heaven.
2. This is what their Pope just did:
Source: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/05/vatican-issues-a-happy-ramadan-to-all-muslim-brothers-and-sisters
In another photo Roman Catholic previous Pope John Paul II is shown kissing the Koran:
And here is Pope Francis stating:
“We are all God’s children” at:
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/in-first-video-message-pope-francis-stresses-unity-we-are-all-children-of-god-39381
There are a number of Catholic scholars and journalists who state that “We are NOT all children of God”, such as Rachel Lu and Brian Kelly:
https://catholicism.org/only-in-baptism-does-one-become-a-child-of-god.htmlAs you know there a a number of Scriptures that define who is truly a child of God. But If I could also submit some Scriptures and Jesus Christ’s own words of who is NOT a child of God. Doesn’t this all should seal the deal? For example, Jesus saying “depart from me you wicked and accursed, I never knew you”, Matthew 7:23. How are the wicked and accursed that Jesus never knew “all children of God”? Jesus also said “your father the Devil” John 8:44-45. (Can you be both children of God and children of the Devil at the same time?). Jesus also called some of the Judaizer’s twice the sons of Hell”:
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” Matthew 23:15
So are sons of Hell children of God?
The Apostle John stated:
“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” John 3:36
And again John states:
“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life” I John 5:12
So if the wrath of God is on many children, how are all of these children, children of God?
John also defined “antichrist” as anyone who does not believe the Word (God) was made flesh and dwelt among us. This is Islam in a nutshell. So are all of these antichrists “all children of God”. Is the Antichrist yet to come a child of God? Was Judas? Was Haman, Sanballat, Tobiah, Bhudda, Mohammad (Islam), Ananias and Sapphire, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, The False Prophet “all children of God”?
Jesus also said, “he who does the will of my father which is in Heaven, he is my brother, he is my sister”. Therefore, those who don’t are brothers and sisters of a different Father, and could not be all children of God. Paul eternally damning the Judaizers in Galations. If they are children of God how can they be eternally damned? Revelation makes a list of who will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. If they are children of God, how can you exclude them?
So my most critical question for you is if the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, would he and Jesus Christ be in agreement?
I look forward to reading where any Roman Catholic can reconcile this question and the others I posed above.
And add to these quotes from Roman Catholic Mother Teresa, exalting Islam and other religions:
MOTHER TERESA stated that she wanted to make Muslims better Muslims, Hindus better Hindus, and Buddhists better Buddhists. When “Mother” Teresa died, her longtime friend and biographerNaveen Chawla said that he once asked her bluntly, “Do you convert?”She replied, “Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you’’vefound God, it’s up to you to decide how to worship him” (“MotherTeresa Touched Other Faiths,” Associated Press, 9/7/97).The April 7–13, 1990, issue of Radio Times tells the story of “Mother”Teresa sheltering an old Hindu priest. “She nursed him with herown hands and helped him to die reconciled with his own gods.”—www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/teresa/general.htm
And regarding the promotion of Mother Teresa:
To laud Mother Teresa without mentioning her stand on the Gospel is a denial of the Gospel. Here is what Mother Teresa thought of the Gospel: “”I love all religions. . . . If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there”.” She upheld that there are many ways to God: “All is God— (That sounds a whole lot like Roma Downey seeing the Face of God in everyone.). Buddhists, Hindus, Christians,betc., all have access to the same God” (12/4/89 Time, pp. 11, 13).
Mother Teresa told everyone no matter what their religion: “If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are. . . . What God is in your mind you must accept” (from Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work, by Desmond Doig, [Harper & Row, 1976], p. 156).—www.deceptioninthechurch.com/ditc11-4.html3. Notre Dame Cathedral was the Roman Catholicism headquarters in France responsible for torturing and killing myriads of true saints and we should contribute money to rebuild this shrine of abomination to the Lord?
4. Rick Warren thinks Roman Catholicism and Pope are also our brothers in Christ and wants to include Muslims in his Global Peace Plan even though Christ’s Global Peace Plan will not have a single Muslim or Muslim nation in his Global Peace Plan. Islam is also a false religion because it teaches that Christ was not crucified and did not die, but was taken up into Heaven, the antithesis of what the Apostle Paul taught if Christ be not risen (which he couldn’t do unless he died), then our faith is in vain and we are dead in our trespasses!
WARN EVERYONE!!!!!!
I personally can’t warn everyone, but I can warn my extensive two thousand plus media database, and the Christian radio networks I have been a guest on and the publications and Christian journals I write for about your unholy alliance and promotion of the Prince of Darkness who is not the heart of Paris, rather the heart of darkness!
I solemnly entreat you to read my documentary: Islamic Jesus vs. Biblical Jesus at:
https://www.arabicbible.com/for-christians/1316-jesus-christian-vs-islam.html
I also note that you wrote a book exalting Augustine. On your website re Augustine you state:
“I TRULY BELIEVE IT WAS MARY OUR QUEEN OF HEAVEN, WHO GUIDED MY HANDS THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT, TO CREATE THESE WORKS IN HONOR FOR HER & OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.” Dominick
I wrote a documentary on Augustine I entreat you to read. I was shocked that he was your initial inspiration as he was the one who weaponized Christianity.
Proof:
https://procinwarn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Augustinewasnotasaint.pdf
Finally, from your website, your first obligation is not to serve, but preach the Gospel, not another Gospel and another Jesus or Queen of Heaven! And if you want to serve which indeed is what a Christian does as a New Creation, why not raise money to pay the families of all of the victims of sexual abuse by millions of Roman Catholic priests instead of raising money to pay for rebuilding a shrine that historically tortured true saints, and make restitution as John the Baptist commanded? And while you are at it, why don’t you (the Roman Catholic Church) who defrauded tens of millions Catholics for the Indulgences you took to deceive Catholics into believing they could shorten their sentence in a non-existent place of Purgatory, in the spirit of Zacchaeus pay back four times what you defrauded? Selling forgiveness could not be a more accurate description of still one more warning by the Apostle Peter who described religious leaders in Judaism as “experts in greed”. But Peter’s warning was virtually prophetic in describing Roman Catholicism. Peter condemned this practice called Simony (selling or buying spiritual pardons spiritual powers) in Acts 8:18. And Peter verified the authority of all of Paul’s Scripture which means he concurred with Paul’s warning in I Timothy 6:10 that “money is the root of all kinds of evil”. Indulgences also would qualify as one the six things God hates: “ a heart that devises wicked plans” (Proverbs 6:18). Selling Indulgences could rank as one of the greatest scam and financial swindle and scandal exponential dishonesty in history. But even worse, they usurped Christ having FULLY paid for the remission of sins, denying Christ’s last words on the Cross and Isaiah 53 which clearly states the God “laid on Christ the iniquity of us all” and not by our stripes are we healed, but by Christ’s alone. Jesus actually gave us a picture of the worth of one soul that all of the wealth of all of the kingdoms would not add up to be sufficient for even one soul, in Matthew 16:26 and Mark 8:36. But imagine it did equate in an accounting sense to one soul? Then the rest of all Catholics and all of mankind would have no money or ability to commute their sentence in Purgatory. And if Indulgences are so holy, noble, valuable, and financially secure, then why did Pope Pius V abolish them in 1567? Think of the billions of Roman Catholics who have lived since 1567, who could have had their punishment sentence reduced or commuted but now have to serve out their full sentence of potentially millions of years in Purgatory. Why aren’t they protesting this injustice, if God is not a respecter of persons as it says in Romans 2:11-16? Why don’t Roman Catholics initiate a petition to the Pope to reinstate Indulgences so they can get the same deal Catholics were offered before 1567? For certain, I am not advocating this because it goes against Scripture, I am simply using their own reasoning to refute them. And if the Roman Catholic Church needed a new building, why didn’t the Pope simply do what Solomon did to raise money for a new Temple, and simply send out a fund raising campaign to raise the necessary funds required to fully fund the building where all of the collections were voluntary contributions without bribery or extortion?
I invite you to read this comparison chart between Biblical Christianity and Roman Catholicism by Richard Bennett, former Roman Catholic Priest:
https://www.the-highway.com/Roman Catholicismsummary_Bennett.html
Here is a video documentary I produced with former Roman Catholic priest Richard Bennett entitled:Experiencing God Through Deceitful Mysticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50geMDUvZnM
I exhort you to repent before it is too late.*******
PART II
Dear Founder Dominick Pepito Alpha International and Staff of AIE,
I trust that you received and read my response letter to your solicitation? Will you be responding?
There are two more critical comments and document you should receive.
1. WHO IS BIBLICALLY A SAINT VS. ROMAN CATHOLIC SAINT
Why won’t you call everyone a saint the Scripture states is a saint? And why don’t you address every true Christian as a saint, if Peter himself whom you revere said that every single person who was purchased by Christ’s shed blood is a saint. So by singling out and canonizing saints it not only insults every true saint that the Roman Catholic Church and Pope does not canonize, but it presumes and redefines the definition of saint with different criteria than Peter and Paul define one. Secondly, it presumes that those whom the Pope canonizes even meet the biblical criteria to be a saint in the first place, e.g., Augustine. Thirdly, the Apostle Peter calls all born again Christians who repented unto salvation priests. So by calling only Roman Catholic priests as priest defrauds every Christian of this title, who will also rule and reign with Christ as kings…yes every single one of them. If only whom the Pope canonizes are saints, this effectively is saying that only the prayers of Roman Catholic saints availeth much, and non Catholic prayers does not availeth much, in fact would avail nothing, since Roman Catholic Doctrine anathematizes all (curses) all non Catholics according to the still binding Council of Trent. I should also point out that Roman Catholic definition of “anathematize” is not the same meaning that the Apostle Paul gives to this word in Galatians. Paul’s definition of “anathematize” was to eternally damn, Roman Catholic definition means a curse that is reversible. Finally, the Apostle Peter, the supposed rock and first Pope of the Catholic church, demolishes this stronghold of who is really a saint, in I Peter Chapter 2, verses 5,9:
“you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For it stands in Scripture:
“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
and
“But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” I Peter 2:5,9
Notice how Peter is forensically precise in defining who “you” is…every single saint that purified themselves by taking the action of belief and faith in Christ. They are the royal priesthood! Go back and read all of Chapter 2 as well as I and II Peter and see how Peter fully instructs who are truly priests according to Scripture. In so doing, just like defrauding all of the Christians who are truly already saints, Roman Catholicism defraud every born again Christian who is already a priest. Counterfeit Vicar of Christ (Popes), Counterfeit surrogate Apostolic Succession (i.e., Popes), Counterfeit Priests, and Counterfeit saints. So the bottom line is that Roman Catholicism has born false witness against the Apostle Peter’s own testimony, which is an abomination to the Lord to bear false witness against a brother in Christ. In this regard, I entreat you to read former Roman Catholic Rebecca Sexton’s article:
THE BIBLICAL APOSTLE PETER VS THE PETER OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM By Rebecca Sexton
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n2042.cfm
It is almost as though Peter knew in advance prophetically what Roman Catholicism was going to with his name, title, and doctrine and metastasize it into the Spiritual Cancer of the Ages.
2. INFANT BAPTISM (PRACTICED BY BOTH ROMAN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS) VS. BELIEVERS BIBLICAL BAPTISM
Peter demolished this stronghold of Roman Catholicism by comparing baptism to Noah’s Flood in which the entire earth was submerged (deluged). (I Peter 3:20-21, II Peter 5:6-7). But if infants are baptized as infants it can not be an act of the infant doing so as an act of faith or believe, which Peter says is necessary to purify oneself”
“Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth” I Peter 1:22
How does an infant exercise an act of obedience in which they had no voice or free will to exercise? Impossible!
DECALOGUE OF TEN REASONS
TO RECONSIDER IF INFANT BAPTISM IS BIBLICAL
- CIRCUMCISION OF THE HEART commanded by Apostle Paul, is what counts, not circumcision of the foreskin (Romans:2:29). Defenders use literal circumcision of infants and the ceremonial cleansing with water to justify baptism of infants. But literal circumcision was instituted by God as a sign to visually separate and mark Jews from Gentiles, and only by biological genealogy, under the Old Covenant Law, and that only to males. And literal circumcision accomplished nothing for the souls of these infants. And many Jews who were circumcised remained in unbelief, so, spiritually speaking it didn’t even help them. Biblical circumcision purpose is to separate Non-Christians from Christians. So if this is a direct equivalent, then how could females be saved? Answer: circumcision of the heart occurs for both sexes, and Jew or Gentile, as the Apostle Paul makes clear. Paul does equate spiritual circumcision to new birth, but he does not equate literal circumcision to literal baptism. Name one child in the history of the church whose heart was circumcised when they were an infant when they were baptized. So Paul would say this kind of baptism does not count. And if you think infant baptism was bad when it was just in the church, it really became globally destructive, when the church and state were merged, even making failure to baptize infants a crime, in defiance of Christ’s warning to beware of the Leaven of Herod.
- CITIZEN OF THE KINGDOM at the time of infant baptism? This is tantamount to giving U.S. Citizenship to illegal aliens, who haven’t even applied for it. But a true Citizen of the Kingdom must be a Christian. A child is a citizen of the Kingdom of Darkness until he or she becomes a new creation and a new man or woman in Christ, not before. Who is a CHILD OF THE NEW COVENANT OR THE JOINT HEIRS TO THE KINGDOM? Protestant defenders say that infant baptism doesn’t save, but turn right around and call the infant a child of the New Covenant and grafted into the Body of Christ. But all children are children of darkness and enemies of Christ until they become children of light, which can’t happen until they are born again, which can’t happen when they are an infant. Collective baptism for entire households collides with individual decision, as Christ declare that only “he who does the will of my Father, which is in Heaven, are my brother and my sister”. Where is the “will” in an infant? Even if you knew which children would become Christians, you shouldn’t baptize them until they profess their faith publicly. Another religion of billions of adherents has forced conversion to their faith for fifteen hundred years. So we want to force conversion upon infants? And this action is Liberty in Christ? Freedom in Christ? And if the infant grows up to later reject the faith, are they still considered a child of the New Covenant? To whom did Christ even give the power to become sons of God, or Child of the New Covenant? Only those that received him! Those are Christ’s own words in John. What infant in the history of the church ever received him? Answer: NONE. Therefore, it is impossible that they become sons of God during infant baptism.
- ARRANGED MARRIAGE. Would you be OK with being forced by your parents to marry whomever they choose? The pastor or priest even blesses the parents for presenting their child for this compulsory engagement and presumption of eventual marriage. A forced literal marriage results in forced relations (renting the veil) without consent. So wouldn’t a forced spiritual marriage. which the infant is incapable of preventing, defile the spiritual wedding bed? Well that is precisely what is happening when you force infant baptism upon a child because you are forcing the spiritual betrothal of Christ the Groom to the Infant Bride of Christ, effectively placing a spiritual engagement ring on the child’s finger. But the engagement is not consummated until the circumcision of the heart as the first prerequisite, the spiritual marriage between Christ the Groom and the Collective Bride of Christ, will not take place until Christ returns in glory to set up his kingdom. CHOOSE TODAY WHOM YOU WILL SERVE? So how are infants able to choose to serve and follow Christ? They don’t choose to be baptized, i.e, whom they would spiritually marry, their parents do the choosing. Paul’s answer was that you have to BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. How does an infant believe? But you can’t get to Heaven on your parents apron strings. No surrogates allowed. Infant baptism presumes it is an invitation to the Marriage Wedding Supper of the Lamb. Every communion is a preview of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb between His Bride the Church, and himself as the Groom, when we literally see Christ face to face.
- CONFIRMATION & COMMUNION. When a baptized infant grows up he or she must then confirm what was done to them in infant baptism. But what are they confirming? They can’t be confirming their salvation at infancy, because they had not yet repented and were not saved yet. Therefore, then, what is the purpose? And what happens if they reject the infant baptism and reject the faith? Or reject infant baptism because they want to be baptized by immersion because they are NOW making their profession of faith and want to do this publicly as as Scripture commands. A person will be entitled and commanded to take communion once they become a Child of the New Covenant. An infant can’t take Communion (The Lord’s Supper), who does not even know what Communion means yet. Paul also said that a Christian should not take Communion unworthily. So wouldn’t the taking of Communion at Confirmation be unworthy if they were taught and still believe that they are already a child of the New Covenant because they were baptized as an infant? Roman Catholic Confirmation also bestows seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, five of which are not listed in Scripture, therefore, they are counterfeit gifts, not Gifts of the Holy Spirit. They also exclude many of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, and administer the same seven Gifts to every person, even though Scripture does not give the same Gifts to ever Christian. Plus it is the priest who must administer these gifts, usurping the Office of the Holy Spirit, who alone gives these gifts, adding and replacing what Scripture teaches and commands.
- GLOBAL FLOOD (Total Immersion) or LOCAL FLOOD (Sprinkling). The Apostle Peter compares conversion to Christ to the Global Flood where the entire earth was submerged in water, in which a person is totally buried symbolically to the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Peter even said this pledge symbolizes a good conscience. How does an infant make a pledge? How does an infant obtain a clean conscience? But a person must believe all three of these to be in union with Christ to be truly redeemed, in which Christ is not sprinkled with dirt, otherwise, there would have been no tombstone to roll away.
- SOLA SCRIPTURA. Scripture never once describes infant baptism. This act is going beyond what is written, prohibited in Scripture, and it collides with sound doctrine on several fronts. God cannot bless what he has not commanded in Scripture. In fact, adding unto Scripture, or being an enabler or participant in this fake sacrament, bringing in this doctrine, what is not in it actually receives a curse from God. And the Apostle John warns that welcoming a doctrine that they did not teach, would share in their guilt. Adding infant baptism doctrine, and going beyond Scripture by adding gifts of the Holy Spirt, in the Church is Satan’s masterpiece, the author of confusion and this lie, as to who is really saved, which was given birth, when Replacement Theology took root to usurp everything that belonged to Israel and transferred it to the Church. How ironic, that the parents must renounce Satan and all his works, while simultaneously doing his very work and bidding, by creating the illusion and delusion that infant baptism accomplishes salvation and rebirth for their child.
- SOLA FIDE. Where is faith in an infant to baptize them? We are saved through faith. Faith is unconditional, meaning faith alone, and it must precede baptism, which infants do not possess yet. And it is not just faith on its own, but the OBJECT of faith, Christ himself that is required. So they can’t become Members of the Body of Christ without faith. Without faith it is impossible to please God. So where is the faith in the infant?
- SOLUS CHRISTUS. Where and when did Christ or any Apostle ever perform or authorize infant baptism? There is no precedent. The thief on the Cross was not baptized, but was saved. Therefore, literal baptism is not required for salvation, whether infant or adult. A host of saints died in the faith because they were martyred first, or died before they had an opportunity, or were simply unable to be baptized, even as adults. Rather they were baptized into the faith through their faith in Christ alone, at the nanosecond of their conversion. All of these saints at the beginning of the Church Age would have been baptized by immersion in water after their conversion, as a public testimony and witness, but only if and when they were able.
- SOLA GRATIA. By grace alone are you saved. The grace of God (alone) draws a man to repentance. Where is the repentance during infant baptism? Paul said if you are literally circumcised, it is NO LONGER grace. Therefore, if infant baptism is the equivalent of circumcision, then infant baptism is no longer grace, because literal circumcision is a work, and that not even by the infant. Yet Reformer giant, John Calvin’s heir was Heinrich Bullinger, who taught that a second baptism or re-baptism (anabaptist) at conversion was profane (as did even most of the Reformation teach), that he ordered a third baptism, aka execution by drowning. And this is by grace alone? You get executed simply for refusing a free gift?
- SOLI DEO GLORIA. How is God glorified when Christians do something they have no authority biblically to do? Remember what the Lord did to Uzziah, the perhaps well-meaning but disobedient Israelite, who laid hands on the Ark to rescue it from falling? Aren’t you touching what God has NOT yet anointed until they are truly born again? Aren’t you defrauding the child by taking and usurping from him or her a glorious experience that should belong only to him or her to choose, but only after the Holy Spirit has drawn this person to repentance long after they are infants? Aren’t you stealing and robbing this child of their New Birth birthright to choose to obey Christ and his Apostle’s to be baptized as a believer, not by the obedience or disobedience of a surrogate, their parents? Aren’t you defiling and desecrating and robbing the temple (potential temple) of the Holy Spirit? The infant is not yet SAVED or BORN AGAIN. Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Anglican, and most Protestant Denominations declare the infant reborn or New Creation who has been purified, justified, and sanctified by this bath. Not one single sin has been washed away for even one infant in the history of the church. And when this child reaches age of reason and accountability, does, or has the priest or pastor ever repented or made restitution to someone they baptized as an infant, who confronts him for doing so before the proper time? Or even repent if the child rejects the faith? The pastor or priest asks the congregation to be WITNESSES to a conversion to Christ by calling the infant a CHILD of the New COVENANT that never happened, having born false witness, deceiving the people, and later as well, when the infant discovers he or she too was deceived, when he or she has come to majority. These pastors and priests who administer infant baptism are actually derelict watchman on the wall for shirking their responsibility to tell the congregation and potential converts the truth. Infant Baptism is not one of the only two Sacraments commanded in Scripture. Infant Baptism is a Rite that is not Right!
***So all we need is Peter’s own words to refute and demolish Roman Catholicism Principality and their audacity to steal the Apostle Peter’s true identity totally misrepresenting him committing false advertising, fake news, false claims, and marketing fraud, a crime!
Sincerely in Christ,
James Sundquist
*****
PART III
If Apostolic Succession of Popes were biblical, there would always be 12 Popes all serving simultaneously to this day. All 12 Apostles were directly selected by Christ alone, and were eyewitnesses to Christ, and given the power to perform signs and wonders and cast out demons (no Pope every performed and signs and wonders or cast out demons, except Peter who was not a Pope), with no successors. The Apostle Paul verified the criteria for the mark of an Apostle in 2 Cor. 12:12. The Office of Apostle ended when the last Apostle John died. Elders and deacons were appointed by the Apostles and brothers in Christ appointed them too, but elders and deacons had no Scriptural authority to elect or appoint Apostles in the Church. And note that until Roman Catholicism was established not even the Apostles kept replacing the Apostles, with one exception, Matthias to replace Judas, but none after that. In reality is was the Apostle Paul who became the 12th Apostle, as he was chosen by Christ. As the Apostles died off one by one, note there was no Council in Jerusalem or anywhere else to replace them, after the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., and the church dispersed, so that right before John died on the Isle of Patmos, there was only one, then when he died there were zero, and henceforth zero. The Apostle Paul confirms in Ephesians 2:20 that Apostles are part of the foundation of the church (not the floors, walls, ceiling, or roof):
“built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.” Ephesians 2:20
This further confirmed by the Apostle John in Rev 21:14
“The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” Rev. 21:14
So there were and are not 13 or 266 (i.e, Popes). Therefore, the rest of the Church was build UPON this foundation of 12 Apostles, all members, including elders and deacons. There is no foundation above the foundation. The Apostles were not the super-structure. So once the last Apostle died, so ended Apostolic Authority in the form of a man, so even discussing Apostolic Succession becomes a moot point. Though we still have their final authority of any New Testament Scripture they penned, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It was even Peter who declared in Scripture that no Scripture is subject to private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20), meaning no Pope could privately interpret Scripture to mean that the Apostolic Succession is available. It was not just terminated. It never existed in the first place.
Roman Catholicism uses the term Apostolic Succession, but that is really a misnomer when they really mean Christ Succession. Furthermore, Roman Catholicism calls the Pope the Vicar of Christ. But this could not have been Peter as the First Vicar in Succession of Christ, because Christ himself already told us in Scripture who the true Vicar of Christ would be, and that is the Holy Spirit he would send at Pentecost after he had ascended into Heaven. Besides this the Office of Christ and the Office of Apostle are separate and mutually exclusive offices. Any other Vicar is an imposter, an Apostle becoming a Christ is an oxymoron. The office of Christ on earth (though Christ himself is “the same yesterday, today, and forever”), and office of Apostle were each created after their own kind, so they can’t become the other. And Christ even warned that many would come in his name saying they are the Christ (or substitute) deceiving many. The Apostle John describes and defines these fake vicars as antichrists, which in the Greek doesn’t just mean against Christ, but also means “in place of” or “substitute” for Christ. Attributing authority in the Trinity to someone other than to whom the title belongs is blasphemy. In fact, so serious is this sin, that Scripture says attributing works of the Holy Spirit to Satan, called Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, is the one unforgivable sin. And Jesus said only those “who do the will of my Father which is in Heaven, he is my brother and my sister, and my mother”. So if you call someone the Vicar of Christ, who is not, that is disobeying the will the Father. But Roman Catholicism does not just prevaricate and usurp the Office of the Holy Spirit, they usurp the name Father in complete defiance of still another command by Jesus Christ to call NO man Father, by calling the Pope Holy Father, and every priest Father:”And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” Matthew 23:9
Remember the whole context of Matthew Chapter 23 is in the framework of religious leaders. Then let’s look forward to the First Council in Jerusalem to see who was actually present in Acts 15 (50 A.D.). The passage in Acts 15 makes it clear that ALL of the Apostles were present. That means Matthew who authored Matthew 23:9 was present. Now imagine Peter or any Apostle present were to postulate at the Council in Jerusalem in 50 A.D. that Peter (the so-called First Pope) be addressed as “Holy Father” as all Popes are still currently being called? Tragically, even the world and many Protestants even call the Pope “Holy Father.” And remember there were a host of other witnesses present when Jesus said those words, many of whom would also be present as elders at the First Council of Jerusalem. There would surely have been an uproar or even a riot as there was in Ephesus were this to have been even suggested. Twenty years later in 70 A.D., Matthew, one of the Apostles penned the Book of Matthew confirms by the authority of Scripture that there was no one you could call “Father.” So by then, Peter still wasn’t a singular authority over the entire church of the whole earth, i.e. “Holy Father Pope.” The bottom line is that no one would have dared propose such a model of Church government and authority in light of the commands of the Lord Jesus himself….that is until the launch of Roman Catholic religion replete with revisionist history and NO evidence. And further note that there was no Apostle that outranked any other Apostle. Paul even rebuked the church in I Corinthians Chapter 3, for putting a single man (even an Apostle) as their singular spiritual authority, underscoring that even an Apostle is just a fellow servant. Paul hammers home this strong rebuke even more to shame them by telling them in Chapter 4: 6-8 to not go beyond what is written. But that is precisely what Roman Catholicism has done with their hierarchy of authority and single man over them all. But because they didn’t listen to Paul’s warning, they took pride in one man over another (vs.6). Paul said imitate him as a servant, not try to imitate him by becoming an other Apostle, let alone a Pope with absolute global authority over the entire church.
And why do they call the Pope Holy Father instead of Holy Son since they believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, not the Vicar of the Father? So in reality Roman Catholicism has usurped and denigrated all three persons of the Trinity: The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit, without the slightest qualm. So in believing and promoting this triune axis of evil, then all Roman Catholics are not doing the will of the Father in Heaven, therefore they, by Scriptural definition can’t be brothers or sisters as Jesus Christ defines them.
Former Roman Catholic Priest Richard Bennett proves that it is the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity, alone, who is the Vicar of Christ.
Here is the link:
https://bereanbeacon.org/who-is-the-true-vicar-of-christ/
It would appear that the Roman Catholic church has also usurped and stolen another dimension of vicarious (vicar), and that is Christ’s vicarious atonement via Indulgences, usurping who has the authority to forgive sins, and priests misappropriating the title of priests that belongs only to all true Christians, none of whom have the power to forgive sins, as this power belongs only to Christ. So in truth, they may think they possess authority to forgive sins, but this is a myth and a tradition of man. The money a bank robber steals from a bank he can still use to purchase goods. But the currency of purchasing forgiveness (Christ’s shed blood) was never stolen and can not be stolen, as it remains with Christ alone.
One more thing on the Pope being the Vicar Fake Surrogate. How does Roman Catholicism deal with Colossians that says Christ’s power and authority holds EVERYTHING together, every electron, otherwise, the entire Universe would fly apart? (Col 1:17 and Heb 1:3a)
…
Even Steven 