Embedded Files
Download this Study to read OFFLINE!
WHY Catholicism is NOT the One TRUE Church!
The short answer of why I left the Roman Catholic Church is that I became a TRUE born-again Christian in a Protestant Church called the Assemblies of God.
In other words, while I was in the Roman Catholic Church, I only knew things ABOUT God and His Son, but I never KNEW Almighty God and His Son, Jesus, as having a personal relationship with them, until after I was saved at the age of 23 in the Assemblies of God Pentecostal Church.
And after I learned from the Bible ITSELF about the TRUE Jesus, I then left the Assemblies of God Church around 15 years later, because they would NOT allow me to teach the TRUE Jesus of the Bible that the Bible ITSELF clearly teaches in SIMPLICITY.
I am presently a Biblical Unitarian Christian concerning the subject of teaching One True God in ONE person, who ALONE is the Father.
The Holy Spirit revealed this truth to me that Almighty God the Father is the ONLY truthful God, according to John 17:1-3 and Jesus RECEIVED power from the Father, long before I ever heard that there were Biblical Unitarian Christians.
And when I heard that they believe what God revealed to me from the Scriptures, my heart rejoiced with thanksgiving.
Biblical Unitarians also believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, whom Almighty God the Father MADE to BECOME both Lord and Christ AFTER the cross and the Resurrection, according to Acts 2:36.
And I believe that the early first century church up to the time of the death of the Apostle John believed and taught that Jesus BECAME a King, a Lord, and a God under and subject to be God and Father AFTER the cross and resurrection.
In other words, the vast majority of Christians who truly knew and understood that the Scriptures clearly teach that the Son of God was SUBORDINATE to his God and Father, would NOT accept the CREEDS that were being drawn up by the Romanized Bishops to try to restore UNITY in the church.
So then, the very fact that there was the DIVISION in the church that was trying to be reconciled by all of the church councils proves that the creeds being presented were not 100% sound Biblical statements of faith that agreed with what the first Apostles of Jesus taught.
So, what statements in those creeds caused the division?
Well, to summarize, this is what happened. Little by little “Romanism” crept into the CATHOLIC Church.
The word “catholic” simply means UNIVERSAL or the faith that was agreed upon in the first century by the WHOLE body of believers called the Church.
Hence, catholic church means the whole church and PART of the Catholic Church became what is called today as the ROMAN Catholic Church.
Now, the WHOLE church has ALWAYS believed the statement of fact found in the Scriptures in, which teaches that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
However, the “WHOLE” church was NOT always in agreement on every other church doctrine even in the first century.
So, in truth, the first century church may have been “CATHOLIC” in every doctrine, called the doctrine of the Apostles for the first few years, but then Satan began to DECEIVE Christians to follow false teachers very early on in the history of the church.
In other words, there began to be DIVISIONS in the one true church just a few years after it began on the Day of Pentecost.
But most Christians seemed to be in agreement on the CORE STATEMENT found in Matthew 16:16, which again teaches that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
However, what happened is the CHANGE in the WAY the Bible ITSELF teaches that Jesus is the Son of God to the ROMANIZED way that Jesus is believed to be the Son of God.
To say this another way, by the third and fourth century, many PAGAN beliefs began to merge into the INTERPRETING of the Scriptures.
And thus, the UNDERSTANDING of what the phrase, “the Son of God” meant to the EYEWITNESSES of Jesus CHANGED to what the ROMAN Catholic Church teaches today.
Let me explain what I mean by this by taking a few quotes from an article on another website.
But before we get into those quotes, I want to share a question from one of my readers.
He asked me the following question regarding a video that I will share at the end of this study. The emphasis is mine.
“How can a scholar that can decipher correctly the un-biblical belief of another church, but is NOT able to comprehend the twisted teaching of his own denomination?”
Now, I myself had that same thought while watching that video explaining the ERRORS of the Roman Catholic Church.
So, I wrote back to my dear brother in our Lord Jesus Christ a response to the above question.
Here is my response, which then led to me writing this study.
How could JB, the abbreviation for Dr, John Barnett, dismiss all of the historical evidence of the origin of the doctrine of the Trinity as being Pagan?
I mean, he had to have come across the Pagan origin of the man-made doctrine of the Trinity that took centuries to develop during his research on the RCC.
Now, I am not positive on this, but if memory serves me correctly, I think that what tradition calls the Apostles’ Creed came before the council at Chalcedon where it was decided that Jesus had two natures at the same time during the days of his flesh, on Divine and one human
Let me look it up to be sure. Yes!
“The Apostles’ Creed is older than the Nicene Creed, as it was drawn up and adopted by the early church before the middle of the 2nd century. The Nicene Creed was created in 325 by the Council of Nicaea12.”
I am glad I looked it up, because I came across an article that asks the same question that I have been wondering about myself.
In other words, some of the earlier creeds before the church council at Chalcedon have the statement God from God.
Some of the creeds added the word true to say true God from true God.
Now, when I read that phrase, I understand that Almighty God the Father ALWAYS existed as the ONLY God and the Son of God BECAME a God under and subject to his God who alone is the Father.
And I get that understanding from the Bible ITSELF! For you see, John 5:26,27 clearly teaches us that the Son of God was GIVEN eternal life to be having in himself even as the Father has always had life in Himself.
And the REASON that the Father COMMITTED all judgment to the Son was BECAUSE he was the Son of MAN!
John 5:26,27.
“For as the Father has life in Himself; so has He GIVEN to the Son to have life in himself; (The LITERAL translation says, He GIVES also to the Son to be HAVING in himself.
In other words, it was AFTER the cross and resurrection that the God of Jesus GAVE the Son of MAN the Divine NATURE of immortality to be having in himself even as the Father has always had immortality in Himself.
Hence, a God came FROM the God who alone is the Father, is what the eyewitnesses of Jesus teaches us in the Scriptures)
John 5:27. And has GIVEN him (Or He GIVES to him) authority to execute judgment also, BECAUSE he is the Son of MAN.”
In other words, the very Apostle of Jesus believed and taught that Jesus was FIRST the HUMAN Son of God who was GIVEN the Divine nature to BECOME the Eternal Son of God after the cross and resurrection.
And thus, my question is, was the God intended meaning of the phrase in these early creeds that say, “God FROM God” actually mean “a god FROM the God”?
Here is the same question that I phrase slightly different, in order to be closer to the question asked in that article that I mentioned earlier.
“Is it possible that ALL of the Christians believed the GREEK phrase “theos from theos”, but UNDERSTOOD it differently?”
History PROVES that this is exactly what happened and is still happening in our day.
Let me explain what I mean by showing the exact same WORDS in the exact same ORDER, but they mean TOTALLY different things.
#1. “True god from True God.” Sound Biblical belief.
#2. “True God from True God.” Roman Catholic AntiChrist belief.
In other words, a better more correct statement of faith that cannot be BLURRED or twisted is as follows.
#3. “A Truthful god under his God and Father from the Only Truthful God, who alone is the Father.”
Here is the article that I mentioned earlier without all of the advertisements that are on the website. The emphasis is mine.
“Should the phrase “God from God” in the Nicene Creed be translated as “god from god”?
“Should the phrase “God from God” in the Nicene Creed be translated as “god from god”?
I previously posted the question:
I understand the word theos may be translated as “God” or as “god.”
Bible writers added words (the, true, only, or one) to indicate the Almighty.
The Nicene Creed describes the Father as “one theos” and the Son as “true theos from true theos.”
Is there anything in the Greek of this phrase to indicate whether this should read “God” or “god?”
But the moderator closed the question and indicated:
Add details and clarify the problem you’re solving.
So, let me try to explain why I ask such a question:
The ancient Greek word theos is the standard word used by the Greeks for their gods.
The modern English word “God” has a very different meaning, for it is used only for one Being, namely the Ultimate Reality; the Almighty.
Since no other word was available, the New Testament writers used the same word theos for the God of the Bible, when the context indicates that it refers to the Ultimate Reality, theos is translated as “God.”
The New Testament also uses theos for other beings. In such instances, theos is translated as “god.” (e.g., 1 Cor 8:5-6)
The Nicene Creed refers to Jesus as theos in the phrase “theos from theos.” On the assumption of the Trinity doctrine, in which the Son is God Almighty, this is translated as “God from God.”
However, the authors of the 325 Nicene Creed did not think of the Son as God Almighty. This is indicated by the following:
(1) The Creed itself makes a distinction between the “one God, the Father almighty” and “one Lord, Jesus Christ.”
(2) Most of the delegates to the council were followers of Origen Frend WHC (The Rise of Christianity) (Millard J. Erickson) and Origen, like all pre-Nicene Fathers, regarded the Son as subordinate to the Father (Hanson).
They did refer to Jesus as theos because they did regard Him as divine but, in their theology, there were many different types and grades of deity.
(3) The concept or phrase “theos from theos” was used by pre-Nicene fathers (Irenaeus - Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 47, Tertullian - Against Praxeas 13) but, as said, they regarded the Son as subordinate to the Father.
(4) Eusebius, who was the leader of the eastern (Greek) delegation at Nicaea, who were the majority at Nicaea (Millard J. Erickson), wrote after the Council at Nicaea in AD 325 that the Nicene Creed refers to Jesus as theos because He is “the perfect resemblance” of the Father [Against Marcellus. As cited by The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus. II:21].
In other words, the creed did not refer to the Son because the council thought that He is the Almighty God Himself.
(5) The Creed of Sirmium from the year 358 also refers to the Son as “God from God, light from light,” but that creed presents the Son as subordinate to the Father.
In defense against indications of subordination, the Council of Chalcedon formulated the concept that the Son, during His incarnation, had two natures; a divine and a human nature.
And, when He said that He is subordinate to the Father, He was speaking from His human nature.
But there are also many indications that the Son is subordinate to the Father before His incarnation and in His existence after His resurrection and ascension.
To defend against these indications of subordination, defenders of the Trinity doctrine postulates that the three ontologically equal Persons have a voluntary arrangement amongst themselves – a division of duties, so to speak - in which the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father.
However:
(1) An eternal voluntary arrangement between three ontologically equal Persons, in which the Son is subordinated to the Father, remains real subordination. (Kevin Giles)
(2) The Pre-Nicene fathers regarded the Son to be ontologically subordinate to the Father. According to their Logos-theory, the Logos (Word) of God was always part of God but became separated from (begotten from) God when it became time to create.
At that time, the Logos became the only Begotten Son of God and later became Jesus Christ through His incarnation. (See Hanson) The pre-Nicene fathers, therefore, regarded the Son as subordinate to the Father in all respects.
They did not regard the Son to be “the supreme or ultimate reality,” namely God Almighty.
Conclusion and Question.
Conclusion and Question.
Therefore, when Irenaeus said that “the Father is God and the Son is God” (Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 47), I understand that Irenaeus simply meant that both the Father and the Son are immortal beings with supernatural powers.
And, therefore, when Irenaeus added that “that which is begotten of God is God,” he simply meant that, since the Father is an immortal being with supernatural powers, and since Jesus Christ is the only begotten of God, He is also an immortal being with supernatural powers.
So, the question remains, on the basis of the conclusion that the Nicene Council regarded the Son as subordinate to the Father, how should “theos from theos” in the Nicene Creed be translated? This may be compared to the following quote from Irenaeus:
There is none other called God by the Scriptures except the Father of all, and the Son, and those who possess the adoption. (IV, Preface).
This quote classifies the Father, the Son, and believers under the category theos, showing the general meaning of the word theos. How should theos in this quote be translated?”
Now, I want to point out that even BEFORE the council at Nicaea, SOME of the pre-nicene Christians were ALSO deceived by Satan to wrongly believe that the Son of God was BEGOTTEN by God in the eternity past.
But that is NOT what the Apostles of Jesus teach us in the Bible ITSELF.
For you see, when Christians TRULY consider the FACT that the FULNESS of the Godhead was NOT yet given to the Son of MAN, Jesus, until AFTER the cross and resurrection, then they can understand that it was the HUMAN Son of God who was made to BECOME Deity by his God and Father who CREATED him in the WOMB of the Virgin Mary.
In the ending of this study, I have many LINKS on the subject of the TRUE Jesus of the Bible.
But for now, the subject of this study is WHY the ROMAN Catholic Church is NOT the TRUE Church.
Here is the video that I mentioned at the beginning of this study.
And even if you are not a Roman Catholic, I still urge you to watch the video so that you can see how Catholicism has merged so many PAGAN rituals and beliefs into what THEY sincerely but WRONGLY believe is the true Christian faith.
Satan Uses Paganism in Roman Catholicism!
Now, while I agree that this Baptist preacher does and excellent job explaining the ERRORS in the Roman Catholic Church, I have to point out the ERROR made by all Trinitarian church denominations, which is REMAIN partly in the ROMANIZED believe that Jesus was God INCARNATE.
For you see, even before Jesus was born, the Roman Caesars believed that THEY were God INCARNATE.
So, you can see how the Romanistic Pagan belief that a man could be God incarnate was merged into Christianity.
The Romans also considered Christians to be ATHEISTS because they would not worship the MANY gods of the Romans.
Thus, when Constantine decreed that all of the Roman Empire be made “Christian” that is when the TRUE Church was converted to the FALSE Roman Catholic Church.
And Christians have been REFORMING back to the TRUE church in the first century all through the history of the church after the death of the Apostle John.
Little by little, Satan the Devil has deceived the WHOLE world, according to Revelation 12:9.
Here is a quote from a Biblical Unitarian website that uses a quote from a TRINITARIAN website.
That article is called So what is this “truth” of the Nicene Creed? - BiblicalUnitarian.com.
And here is a quote summarizing the many church councils. Again, the emphasis is mine.
“A Brief History of the Church after Nicaea
325 AD – Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea in order to develop a statement of faith that can unify the church. The Nicene Creed is written, declaring that “the Father and the Son are of the same substance” (homoousios). Emperor Constantine who was also the high priest of the pagan religion of the Unconquered Sun presided over this council.
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:
“Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions and personally proposed the crucial formula expressing the relationship of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, of one substance with the Father.”
The American Academic Encyclopedia states:
“Although this was not Constantine’s first attempt to reconcile factions in Christianity, it was the first time he had used the imperial office to IMPOSE a settlement.”
At the end of this council, Constantine sided with Athanasius over Arius and exiled Arius to Illyria.
328 AD – Athanasius becomes bishop of Alexandria.
328 AD – Constantine recalls Arius from Illyria.
335 AD – Constantine now sides with Arius and exiles Athanasius to Trier.
337 AD – A new emperor, Contantius, orders the return of Athanasius to Alexandria.
339 AD – Athanasius flees Alexandria in anticipation of being expelled.
341 AD – Two councils are held in Antioch this year. During this council, the First, Second, and Third Arian Confessions are written, thereby beginning the attempt to produce a formal doctrine of faith to oppose the Nicene Creed.
343 AD – At the Council of Sardica, Eastern Bishops demand the removal of Athanasius.
346 AD – Athanasius is restored to Alexandria.
351 AD – A second anti – Nicene council was held in Sirmium.
353 AD – A council is held at Aries during Autumn that is directed against Athanasius.
355 AD – A council is held in Milan. Athanasius is again condemned.
356 AD – Athanasius is deposed on February 8th, beginning his third exile.
357 AD – Third Council of Sirmium is convened. Both homoousios and homoiousios are avoided as unbiblical, and it is agreed that the Father is greater than His subordinate Son.
359 AD – The Synod of Seleucia is held which affirms that Christ is “like the Father,” It does not however, specify how the Son is like the Father.
361 AD – A council is held in Antioch to affirm Arius’ positions.
380 AD – Emperor Theodosius the Great declares Christianity the official state religion of the empire.
381 AD – The First Council of Constantinople is held to review the controversy since Nicaea.
Emperor Theodosius the Great establishes the creed of Nicaea as the standard for his realm.
The Nicene Creed is re-evaluated and accepted with the addition of clauses on the Holy Spirit and other matters.
If you believe that Nicaea just formalized the prevalent teaching of the church, then there really should not have been any conflicts.
Why should there be? If it were the established teaching of the church, then you would expect people to either accept it, or not be Christians.
It was not the established teaching, and when some faction of the church tried to make it official, the result was major conflict.”
Here is an UNBIASED quote from the Encyclopedia of History explaining the REASON for why that council was called, NOT by the church itself, but by the Roman Emperor Marcian.
Again, the emphasis is mine.
“The Council of Chalcedon was called in 451 CE by the Roman Emperor Marcian (r. 450-457) to settle debates regarding the nature (hypostases, "reality") of Christ that had begun at two earlier meetings in Ephesus (431 CE and 439 CE).
The question was whether Christ was human or divine, a man who became God (through the resurrection and ascension) or God who became a man (through the incarnation, “taking on flesh”), and how his humanity and divinity affected his essence and being, if at all.”
Again, the ROMAN mindset was the INCARNATION belief that God becomes flesh.
And the Bible ITSELF clearly teaches us that the Son of MAN, Jesus, BECAME Deity AFTER the cross and resurrection,
Thus, so-called “ORTHODOX” Christianity is based on the ROMAN church TRADITION that took literally CENTURIES to be formed into the PAGAN belief of the Christian God being a TRINITY Godhead.
So, a compromise was made by SOME Christians who formed the ROMAN Catholic Church to merge the beliefs of the Pagans with Christianity, but still have ONE God.
Hence, the confusing man-made doctrine of the Trinity that there is but ONE God made up of three separate persons, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
But, in TRUTH, the Bible ITSELF actually teaches us that the Holy Spirit is NOT a separate person from the Father.
Rather, the Eternal Spirit who is Holy, is ONE and the self-same BEING as Almighty God the Father Himself.
Please read the study M-5. WHY the Holy Spirit is the FATHER Himself!
Now, if you remember at the beginning of this study, the question was asked,
“How can a scholar that can decipher correctly the un-biblical belief of another church, but is NOT able to comprehend the twisted teaching of his own denomination?”
In other words, how can Trinitarian Bible Scholars who know full well the HISTORY of how the doctrine of the Trinity DEVELOPED over many centuries, are NOT able to understand that the doctrine of the Trinity is a perversion of what the Bible ITSELF teaches us in SIMPLICITY with no need to call the Christians faith a MYSTERY that cannot be comprehended by the human mind?
Thanks for reading, and may God bless you richly as you continue to seek the TRUTH of the WHOLE word of Almighty God.
And to me, the truth concerning who Jesus TRULY is, according to the Bible ITSELF, is the Biblical Unitarian view of Jesus.
Once Christians, Jews, Muslims, and even atheists understand the REASON that Yahweh CREATED the Son of MAN, Jesus, was to have DOMINION over the work of Yahweh’s hands.
And after you understand that the REASON that Yahweh did that is to STILL His ENEMIES, Satan and the fallen angels.
Then you can understand that God made His human Son to become “a” Lord, “a” King, and “a” God, under and subject to his God and Father in order to JUDGE Satan and the fallen angels.
For a deeper understanding of this WAR that Lucifer and one third of the angels waged against the throne of Almighty God, please read the studies under the subject category called ** Q-0 Why Are We Here? Is God at WAR? **.
More studies are coming in this SHORTER Biblical Unitarian view of who Jesus is according to the WHOLE word of God.
If you have a PARTICULAR verse of Scripture that you would like to know the sound Biblical Unitarian meaning, then please email me at MarkatAMatterOfTruth@Gmail.com and let me know.
For further and more in-depth studies on this subject of Jesus being created to STILL the enemies of Yahweh, please read the studies called D-25. A NEW LOOK at JOHN 1:1-In the BEGINNING, and D-28. The PRE-ADAMIC LUCIFERIAN FLOOD!
At the top of my homepage, there are subjects or categories which contain compiled lists of ** ALL Studies! ** I have written on that particular subject. So, if a link within a study is broken, then click on ** ALL Studies! ** to find the suggested study.
Or you can scroll down to the MORE dropdown menu list to find those studies as well.
Thanks again for reading, and may God bless you richly as you continue to seek the TRUTH of the WHOLE word of Almighty God.
And to me, the truth concerning who Jesus TRULY is, according to the Bible ITSELF, is the Biblical Unitarian view of Jesus.
And again, for ALL of the studies on the Biblical Unitarian view of Jesus, please click on the subject heading ** D-0 The BIBLICAL UNITARIAN VIEW of Jesus! **
And for the SUBJECT on the true foundation of the church, please click on the subject heading ** C-0 The TRUE FOUNDATION of the Church! **
This way you can just send ONE link to those who you want to share the TRUE sound Biblical FOUNDATIONAL teachings of the church that Jesus and his Apostles taught in the first century church.
Your brother in our Lord Jesus Christ,
Brother Mark.
My heartfelt prayer is that all Christians RETURN to the TRUE FOUNDATION of the church that is taught by the very Apostles of Jesus in the first century.
So let us all come into the UNITY of the faith and return to what Jesus and his Apostles taught us in SIMPLICITY in the New Testament.
To learn more TRUTH, then please return to:
My HOMEPAGE at
Or
Type in the SEARCH bar
Or
Go to my NEW Website at
Also, here the MASTER Menu List of my 8 NEW BOOKS with LINKS to all of the chapters in those eight new books.
Always be faithful to share, to preach, and to teach the whole gospel of Jesus Christ!
Report abuse