TO TITHE OR NOT TO TITHE UNDER THE NEW COVENANT

TO TITHE OR NOT TO TITHE UNDER THE NEW COVENANT

Tithing is mentioned only three or four times in the New Testament. Jesus acknowledged that the Pharisees were very careful about tithing (Luke 18:12), and he said that they should not leave it undone (Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42). Tithing, like other Old Covenant rules and rituals, was a law at the time Jesus spoke. Jesus criticized the Pharisees not for tithing, but for treating tithing as more important than MERCY, LOVE, JUSTICE & FAITHFULNESS. When Jesus was saying this, the Old Covenant was still in place; it was still operational. It ended on the Cross and the New Covenant Began on the Day of Pentecost; when the CHURCH was born.

The only other New Testament mention of tithing is in Hebrews. The fact that Abraham was blessed by and gave tithes to Melchizedek illustrates the superiority of Melchizedek and Jesus Christ over the Levitical priesthood (Hebrews 7:1-10). The passage then goes on to note that “WHEN THE PRIESTHOOD IS CHANGED, THE LAW MUST BE CHANGED ALSO” (verse 12). There was a change of the priesthood from the Levites to Jesus Christ, and this implies a change in the law that assigned the Levites to be priests. How much has been changed? Hebrews says that the old covenant is obsolete. The package of laws that commanded tithes to be given to the Levites is obsolete.

Under the Old Covenant, God DEMANDED TITHES...AND NOT ONLY TITHES, BUT OFFERINGS AS WELL BECAUSE HE SAID THE PRIESTS & THE PEOPLE WERE ROBBING HIM OF TITHES & OFFERINGS. READ IT CAREFULLY.....'' “Will a mere mortal rob God? Yet you rob me. “But you ask, ‘How are we robbing you?’ “In tithes and offerings.'' Malachi 3:8......SO IT WASN'T ONLY ABOUT TITHES, BUT OFFERINGS AS WELL. NOW ASK YOURSELF, WHY HAVE CHURCH LEADERS SINGLED OUT TITHE? WHY DO THEY SAY IT IS ONLY REFUSAL TO PAY TITHE THAT AMOUNTS TO ROBBING GOD, WHICH WOULD LET GOD CURSE HIS PEOPLE? IF GOD WAS GOIN' TO CURSE PEOPLE, THEN IT SHOULDN'T BE THOSE WHO DON'T PAY TITHE ONLY; BUT THOSE WHO DON' PAY OFFERING AS WELL! AGAIN, READ CAREFULLY, IT WAS NOT TITHE (AS IN ONE TITHE) AND OFFERING (AS IN ONE OFFERING...RATHER, TITHES (PLURAL...MORE THAN ONE) & OFFERINGS (PLURAL...MORE THAN ONE). LETTER ''S'' IS ADDED TO BOTH TITHE & OFFERING TO BE TITHES & OFFERINGS. GOD WAS TALKING OF PLURALITY...SOMETHING MORE THAN ONE. WHY? BECAUSE, UNDER THE OLD COVENANT, THERE WASN'T ONLY ONE TITHE OR ONE OFFERING.

They had at least 3types of Tithes, namely

1. The Levitical, or sacred tithe (Num. 18: 21, 24).

2. The tithe of the feasts (Deut. 14:22-27).

3. The tithe for the poor (Deut. 14:28, 29).

And they had 5Types of Offerings, namely

1. The Burnt Offering (Leviticus 1)

2. The Meat Offering (Leviticus 2)

3. The Peace Offering (Leviticus 3)

4. The Sin Offering (Leviticus 4)

5. The Trespass Offering (Leviticus 5)

SO I AM ASKING DEFENDERS OF TITHE THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

1. DO U PAY ALL THE 3 TYPES OF TITHES?

2. DO U PAY ALL THE 5TYPES OF OFFERINGS?

THERE WERE SEVERAL TITHES & OFFERINGS AND GOD EXPECTED THE LEVITICAL PRIESTS & THE NATION OF ISRAEL TO HONOUR ALL, BUT THEY FAILED. NOT ONLY THE PEOPLE, BUT THE PRIESTS AS WELL. THAT WAS WHY GOD SAID HE WOULD CURSE THEM IF THEY KEPT ON ROBBING IN. SO THE NEXT TIME YOUR PASTOR TELLS YOU THAT YOU ARE ROBBING GOD BECAUSE YOU DON'T TITHE, ASKING HIM; ''PASTOR, WHAT ABOUT THE OFFERINGS?'' 

Now, whenever you say we're not supposed to TITHE under the New Covenant, people think you are against GIVING in general. So, let me take this opportunity to address this issue.

HOW DO WE GIVE TO GOD (Supporting His Work, the poor, Widows, orphans, Resident Aliens/Sojourners, etc) UNDER THE NEW COVENANT?

Under the NEW COVENANT, WE ARE COMMANDED TO PRESENT OUR BODIES AS LIVING SACRIFICE, HOLY & ACCEPTABLE BEFORE GOD (Romans 12:1-). After doing this, WE MUST GIVE TOWARDS THE WORK OF GOD BUT IT MUST BE DONE GENEROUSLY WITH A CHEERFUL, UNRELUCTANT HEART; WITHOUT BEING FORCED (pp 2 CORINTHIANS 9:7a). WHY SHOULD GIVING UNDER THE NEW COVENANT BE DONE IN THESE WAYS (WITHOUT ANY COMPULSORY 10%)? THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE: FOR GOD LOVES A CHEERFUL GIVER (2 CORINTHIANS 9:7b). Am I therefore saying we shouldn't give or we should give but something little to God? Not at all. Those who understand New Covenant way of Life, First Give Their Bodies to God. Second, they believe that if their Bodies and for that matter their Temple belongs to God, anything they have belongs to God. Therefore, when the Holy Spirit directs them to GIVE, it si not difficult for them at all. But if they have not given their bodies to God first, they cannot give what they have in terms of material stuffs to God. Churches that understand New Covenant Giving will not force people to Tithe just to buy private jets/airport, mansions etc for the Pastor and the Church leaders at the expense of the Church members, of whom most could be poor. Such Churches will obviously Give generously to the poor (the needy) and NOT GREEDY FALSE PASTORS/APOSTLES/PROPHETS/LEADERS.

In giving, we must discern. THE HOLY SPIRIT MUST BE OUR GUIDE. WE DON'T OFFER THE FIVE OFFERINGS ANYMORE UNDER THE NEW COVENANT BECAUSE THEY WERE POINTING TO CHRIST WHO WAS TO COME. AND WE DON' TITHE UNDER THE NEW COVENANT BECAUSE THERE IS NO LEVITICAL PRIEST BUT CHRIST JESUS, WHO IS OUR HIGH PRIEST, DEMANDS ALL OUR BODIES (100% OF OUR TEMPLE) FIRST, AND THEN DEMANDS THAT WE GIVE ANY MATERIAL THING (BE IT MONEY, CLOTH, FOOD, ETC) TO THE NEEDY/POOR OR TOWARDS HIS WORK AS WE HAVE DECIDED IN OUR HEART TO GIVE, UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, NOT UNDER ANY COMPULSION. NO PERCENTAGE IS REQUIRED. IT COULD BE 1% OR 100%, IF ONLY THE HOLY SPIRITS DIRECTS U AND IT IS FROM A SINCERE/PURE UNRELUCTANT HEART.

The Old Covenant gave us condemnation; the new covenant gives us justification and peace with God. How much more should we be willing to give freely and generously so God’s work can be done in the world — to proclaim the gospel, to declare the new covenant ministry that gives us true life, and gives that message of life to others? People who entrust their lives to Jesus Christ do not worry about whether tithing is commanded in the New Testament. People who are being transformed by Christ to be more like Christ are generous. They want to give as much as possible to support the gospel and to support the poor. Christians should give generously — but giving is a result of their relationship with God, not a way to earn it. We are given grace through faith, not through tithing.

Some people act as if Christ liberates us from the law so that we can keep more physical blessings for ourselves. That is false — Christ liberates us so that we can be free to serve him more, as loving children and not merely as slaves. He frees us so we can have faith instead of selfishness. When it comes to money, the real question is, Is our heart in the gospel of Jesus Christ? Are we putting our money where our heart is? We can tell where our heart is by seeing where we are putting our money. “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also,” Jesus said (Matthew 6:21). In the NEW COVENANT church, there are financial needs — to support the poor, and to support the gospel by supporting those who preach it. Christians are obligated to give financial support for these needs. Let’s see how Paul explained this obligation in his second letter to the Corinthians.

Paul describes himself as a minister of the NEW COVENANT (2 Corinthians 3:6), which has much greater glory than the OLD (verse 8). Because of what Christ did for him in the NEW COVENANT, Christ’s love compelled Paul to preach the gospel, the message of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:11-21). Paul exhorted the Corinthians “not to receive God’s grace in vain” (6:1). How were they in danger of doing this? Paul had gone out of his way to serve them, but they were withholding their affections from him (6:3-12). He asked them for a fair exchange, for them to open their hearts to him (6:13). Paul told the Corinthians that they had a duty to give something in response to what they had been given. This response comes in terms of morality (6:14-7:1), which the Corinthians had done (7:8-13), and in terms of affection, which the Corinthians had also done (7:2-7), and in financial generosity, which Paul addresses in chapter 8. This is the way in which the Corinthians had closed their hearts to Paul and withheld their affections.

Paul cited the example of the Macedonian churches, who had given generously, even to the point of self-sacrifice (8:1-5). The example is powerful; the implications are strong that the Corinthians needed to respond to Paul’s sacrifices by making sacrifices themselves. But Paul DID NOT make a command (8:8). Instead, he asked first for a turning of the heart. He wanted the Corinthians to give themselves to the Lord first, and then to support Paul. He wanted their gift to be done in sincere love, not from compulsion (8:5, 8). Paul reminded them that Christ had become poor for their sakes; the implication is that the Corinthians should make financial sacrifices in return.

But then Paul reminded the Corinthians that they could not give more than they had (8:12). Nor did they have to impoverish themselves to enrich others (as so many money-loving preachers request from the poor church members today); Paul was only aiming for equity (8:13-14). Paul again expressed confidence in their willingness to give, and added the peer pressure of the Macedonian example and the boasting he had done in Macedonia about the generosity of the Corinthians (8:24-9:5).

Paul again noted that the offering must be done willingly, not from compulsion or given grudgingly (9:5, 7). He reminded them that God rewards generosity (9:6-11) and that a good example causes people to praise God and puts the gospel in a favorable setting (9:12-14).

Don't forget, the financial request that Paul made was not to enrich himself; again, it was not to put up huge mansions; IT WAS NOT TITHE; IT WAS A FREEWILL COLLECTION FOR THE POOR IN JUDEA. He said nothing about tithing. Rather, he appealed to the NEW COVENANT environment: Christ had made many sacrifices for them, so they ought to be willing to make a few sacrifices to help one another, especially the needy/poor, widows, orphans, resident aliens (and Not only the Pastor, who is seen as demi-god, as many churches are doing today).

In asking for this free giving, Paul was also making a financial sacrifice. He had a right to receive financial support himself, but instead of that, he was asking that the it be given to others. Paul had not asked for any financial support from Corinth (11:7-11; 12:13-16). Instead, he had been supported by Macedonians (11:9). Could same be said of today preachers/pastors?

Paul had a right to be supported by the Corinthians, but he did not use it (1 Corinthians 9:3-15). This passage tells us more about our Christian duty to give financial support to the gospel. Workers should be able to receive benefits of their work (9:7). The Old Covenant even made provision for oxen to be given benefits of their work (9:9).

Throughout his appeal, Paul does not cite any laws of tithing. He says that priests received benefits from their work in the temple (9:13), but he does not cite any percentage. Their example is cited in the same way as the example of soldiers, vineyard workers, herdsmen, oxen, plowers and threshers. It is simply a general principle. As Jesus said, “The worker deserves his wages” (Luke 10:7). Paul cited the oxen and wages scriptures again in 1 Timothy 5:17-18. Elders, especially those who preach and teach, should be honored financially as well as with respect.

Jesus also commanded, “those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel” (1 Corinthians 9:14). This implies that, UNDER THE NEW COVENANT those who believe should GIVE (FINANCE, SERVICE, TIME, ETC) FROM A PURE AND UNRELUCTANT HEART TO SUPPORT THE WORK OF GOD, THE POOR, THE NEEDY, WIDOWS, ORPHANS, RESIDENT ALIENS/SOJOURNERS, AS LED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT---NOT UNDER ANY COMPULSION OR BY A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE. IT CAN BE LESS OR MORE THAN 10% AS THE HOLY SPIRIT LEADS. EVEN THOUGH GIVING UNDER THE NEW COVENANT COMES WITH REWARD; THE REWARD MAY NOT BE NECESSARILY PHYSICAL (HEALTH) OR FINANCIAL (WEALTH). That is why GIVING under the NEW COVENANT is different from that of the Old Covenant.

MAY GOD TEACH US MORE ON THIS TOPIC. WE GIVE ALL THE GLORY TO GOD. YOU CAN FIND OUT MORE BY VISITING THE FOLLOWING LINKS..........

Samuel Kwasi Forkuo
Warning: Church, Get Prepared - WCGP

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ3gP00_hdM

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Wy0Wv-Aw4U

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLsDNxZcOa8

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JIhCyYIMTU

5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8-V1gvyb_c

6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPJcddnaR8A

7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3zSj6S00UY

8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhJyJ6MoorQ

9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtv4_u_7Vp4

10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfeDi5E16P0

11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3WrfYjZ-RI

12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yxg3YbglHM

DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM Message 4: OTHER PRACTICES

Topic Two: DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM
Message 4: OTHER PRACTICES (Pope's Infallibility, Mary's Perpetual Virginity, Infant Baptism and Sprinkling, Celibacy of Catholic Priests, Sainthood/Priesthood, Rosary etc) 
  By: Samuel Kwasi Forkuo (Admin, Warning: Church, Get Prepared - WCGP)



1. Pope's Infallibility: It is called the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. In brief, it teaches that when the Pope, speaking in his official capacity as the successor to St. Peter (ex cathedra, or from his throne), he cannot be in error; his pronouncements on matters of doctrine and morals are infallible and are binding upon all Roman Catholics, and they are commanded to accept the decrees of the Pope without questioning.

The Pope, it is taught by this doctrine, is as much infallibly inspired in his teaching as the writers of the Scriptures. Previous to the adoption of the doctrine of Infallibility, the church councils added all the innumerable traditions to the Bible, but since the Pope was declared to be the infallible interpreter of the Scriptures and the final authority on doctrine and morals, the Church must now accept whatever new doctrine or "revelation" the Pope as head of the church imposes upon them.

The strange thing about this Papal infallibility is the fact that it was not accepted until in the latter half of the l9th century. During the reign of Pope Pius IX, a Vatican council convened to discuss the subject of Papal infallibility, which had been brewing for some time.

In 1869, less than 100 years ago (and 1800 years after God closed the canon of Scripture - Revelation 22:18), Pope Pius IX called this Council in which the issue was to be debated. Strong opposition was raised by certain prominent bishops, who pointed out the history of errors by past popes. Among those most strongly opposed to this new dogma was Bishop Stossmayer, who traced the history of past Popes, and pointed out how the decrees of past infallible (!) Popes had been rescinded, reversed or set aside by other Popes. The Bishop pointed out the dark and sordid history of murder, incest, adultery and avarice associated with past popes.

In spite of the violent protests of a segment of the council, however, the Vatican Council enacted into dogma the doctrine of Papal Infallibility in July, 1870. Of course, this action raises a lot of questions. How is it that this doctrine was not revealed or adopted till 1800 years after Peter, their so-called first Pope, admitted that he could not even understand some things in the Scriptures written by Paul (II Peter 3:16)?

Was Pope Pius IX the first Pope who was infallible? Were the Popes before him also infallible? How then could they disagree, and one Pope set aside what another Pope had declared as an infallible revelation? How is it that the Assumption of Mary was never revealed until the 20th century? - but then, no one is supposed to ask such questions about an "infallible" Pope. The faithful Roman Catholic is not to ask questions at all: he is obliged to accept what his Church teaches.

2. Mary's Perpetual Virginity: Roman Catholics are taught the virgin Mary never had sex after Jesus was born and that Jesus had no brothers and sisters. The Pope teaches that Mary is the mediator between God and man. Meanwhile, Bible explicitly states that Mary gave birth after Jesus. And as we know only Christ's birth was without Joseph meeting Mary. This means that Mary was not a virgin forever.  "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" Matthew 13:55-56. Aha, Catholics are quick to say that these were half-siblings of Christ. REALLY? If they were half-siblings, the Bible would have said so. 


3. Infant Baptism and Sprinkling: The Catholic church baptizes babies by sprinkling a little water on them. Greek work for baptism literally means immersion. There are separate words in Greek for sprinkling, pouring and immersion. Only the Greek word for immersion is ever used for Baptism in the Bible. The first recorded case of sprinkling was in 257 AD to someone on a sick-bed. It was then an exception to the rule and brought about fierce opposition from the whole church. Not until 757 AD did the church accept sprinkling in such sick-bed cases of necessity. It wasn't until 1311 AD, when the Catholic council of Ravenna, declared that sprinkling was and acceptable substitute for immersion and from that time forward sprinkling replaced immersion in the Roman Catholic church. The Orthodox church refused sprinkling and still immerses to this day. Jesus was baptised by immersion..."After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him" Matthew 3:16. The apostles baptised by immersion.  "And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away." Acts 8:38-39. Babies must not be baptised until they reach age of responsibility, where they can make decisions; know right from wrong and personally can decide to accept Christ Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. Babies can be dedicated to God, as was done to Christ. When they are of age, they can be baptised.


4. Celibacy of Catholic Priests: Most Catholics believe that Apostle Peter was the first Pope and was not married. As one Roman Catholic leader said, "if Peter had a wife when he first met Jesus, he got rid of her quick!" "Now Simon's mother-in-law was lying sick with a fever; and immediately they spoke to Jesus about her." Mark 1:30 "Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?" 1 Corinthians 9:5 

In 1079 AD celibacy was first enforced for priests and bishops by Pope Gregory VII. Before this time, they were permitted to marry. "A bishop, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)" 1 Timothy 3:2-5. Yet the bishop of Rome (the Pope) and his cohorts are under obligation not to marry. 

"But the Holy Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth." 1 Timothy 4:1-3

The truth is, if an individual Decides not marry, that's ok, just as Paul did. But to make it mandatory that anybody who wants to be a priest/bishop must not marry is in sharp contrast with the Word of God.

5. Sainthood/Priesthood: The Pope decided to reserve the title of "priest" to worn by church leaders only. The average pew dwelling Catholic never refer to themselves as "priests". In fact if a lay Catholic started calling himself a "priest", he would be rebuked by "the parish Priest"! "you (all Christians) also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. " 1 Peter 2:5
"But you (all Christians) are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; " 1 Peter 2:9
"Jesus has made us (all Christians) to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father—to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen." Revelation 1:6
"You have made them (all Christians) to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth." Revelation 5:10. And for this reason, any person truly born of God with His name written in the Lamb's Book of Life is considered a Saint by God. We don' need to be a member of the Catholic Church, die and be ushered into sainthood by a Roman priest/pope. It is only God who grants Sainthood and he calls those He has saved and will reign with them Saints.


6. Rosary: The Catholics teach that the rosary should be performed every day.  I'd like to have ANYONE show me that from the Bible.  Where did God tell us to perform a rosary?  The Rosary, or prayer beads, was introduced by Peter the Hermit, in the year 1090...copied from Hindus and Mohammedans.  The counting of prayers is a pagan practice and is expressly condemned by Christ (Matthew 6:5-13).  The rosary should NEVER be performed by anyone, it is sinful.  Jesus condemned chants and recited prayers..."But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking." —Matthew 6:7. Rosary Beads graphically represent how Roman Catholics heap 10 times more praise upon Mary than God himself. Of the 59 total beads of the Rosary, 53 beads are "Hail Marys", but only 6 beads are "Our Father". The Rosary most often ends with a "Hail, Holy Queen" prayer to Mary, not God.


These and many more are the unbiblical practices/teachings/doctrines/traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. And since we've been made aware of these things, Christ's door is always opened. His arms are always opened to receive us...THE CHOICE IS OURS NOW. WE CAN CHOOSE TO RUN TO OR FROM HIM....BUT THE CONSEQUENCE IS ETERNAL. MAY HE GRANT US THE GRACE TO RUN TO HIM BY OBEYING THIS CLARION CALL. AMEN

ALL GLORY TO GOD.

DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM Message 3: Mary/Fatima, Idols, Dead-Catholics, Statue worship

Topic Two: DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM
Message 3: Mary/Fatima, Idols, Dead-Catholics, Statue worship
By: Samuel Kwasi Forkuo (Admin, Warning: Church, Get Prepared - WCGP)

"You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them." Exodus 20:4-5


Catholics regularly bow down to idols, icons and images of Jesus, Mary and the apostles, kissing the feet of the statues and praying to them. Now Catholics get very upset when you tell them of worshipping Mary. They deny they are worshipping Mary, vehemently. What they need to understand, is that the Bible teaches that WE ONLY PRAY TO DEITY and Christians considers it paganism and polytheism to pray to anyone EXCEPT the Father, Son or Holy Spirit. So while Catholics pray to Mary, they fail to comprehend that only deity is to be prayed to, and this is the underlying reason why non-Catholics correctly lay the fact that they (Catholics) worship Mary AND ALL THE SAINT, they pray to. The Bible clearly teaches that all dead humans, though conscious in the spirit world, are unable to know anything, much less hear prayers addressed to them. Bowing down to icons and kissing them etc. so closely resemble idol worship it is actually shocking that any Roman Catholic would attempt to defend the practice. But again, they simply do the practice but deny it is worship. To illustrate the point, Muslim deny they are worshipping the moon god as their "Allah" as moon worship is even condemned in the Koran. But the fact of history is that Muhammad rid the Kaaba in Mecca of the 365 gods inside the cubical building, but retained the one on the roof known as the moon god "Hubal". Muhammad simply took the moon god from the roof, denied it was the moon god and called Hubal "Allah". The historical vestage of this origin is confirmed in that every mosque in the world has a crescent moon on the roof… just like the original Hubal moon god on the roof of the Kaaba. Muslims get mad when you point out that Allah is really the moon god and Catholics get mad when you point out they are worshipping the Mary and the saints when they pray to them. When a child stands in the middle of a room and puts his hand over his eyes and says, "you can't see me", that doesn't mean they are invisible, except in the mind of the child. Roman Catholics put their hands over their eyes and say, "We do no worship idols and we do not consider praying to Mary and act of worship". Saying so doesn't make it so. Roman Catholic apologists who harshly criticize protestants who tell them of worshipping idols and Mary need to take a close look in the mirror and be honest with reality. At the very least, they could tone down their ranting against protestants "misrepresenting Catholic faith" with a bit of self-reflection and a good history lesson.

The Pope deleted the 2nd of the 10 commandments so they could use statues & images in worship. They split the 10th commandment on coveting into two commandments so they could still have 10 in number. Don't believe this? Look at the list of 10 commandments published by the Roman Catholic church! The issue here is not how the Ten Commandments are numbered, rather the issue is that most published lists of the 10 commandments do not include the words, "you shall not for yourself an idol". Open your Catholic Bible and look for yourself!

And have you ever asked yourself why Muslims & Catholics have a lot of things in common? The simple answer is, Vatican, the headquarters of Roman Catholic, created Islam. Mohammed's wife, Khadija and her cousin Waraqqa, who wrote the Quran as Mohammed dictated, were both Ex-Catholics. So a lot of beliefs in Islam were actually copy-cut from Catholic/Catholicism. And Vatican created Islam for one purpose, so that Muslims will conquer Jerusalem from the Jews and hand it over to the bishop of Roman, the Pope, for it to be the headquarters of Roman Catholics. To read more on this, please see our articles here: http://warningchurchgetprepared.blogspot.com/2014/03/ge.html

Now, getting back to the topic under discussion, let's consider how scripture frowns on idolatry

Lev. 26:1, "You shall not make for yourselves idols, nor shall you set up for yourselves an image or a sacred pillar, nor shall you place a figured stone in your land to bow down to it; for I am the Lord your God."  See Joshua 23:7

2 Chron. 33:6-7, He did much evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking Him to anger. 7 Then he put the carved image of the idol which he had made in the house of God, of which God had said to David and to Solomon his son, “In this house and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen from all the tribes of Israel, I will put My name forever;

Ezek. 14:3, "Son of man, these men have set up their idols in their hearts, and have put right before their faces the stumbling block of their iniquity. Should I be consulted by them at all?"

Deut. 4:15, "So watch yourselves carefully, since you did not see any form on the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire, 16 lest you act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female,"

Isaiah 44:17, But the rest of it he makes into a god, his graven image. He falls down before it and worships; he also prays to it and says, “Deliver me, for you are my god."  See also Isaiah 45:20, “Gather yourselves and come; Draw near together, you fugitives of the nations; They have no knowledge, Who carry about their wooden idol, and pray to a god who cannot save.

Deut. 4:19, "And beware, lest you lift up your eyes to heaven and see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, and be drawn away and worship them and serve them, those which the Lord your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven." 

Ex. 20:4-5, "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 5 “You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God . . . "

Acts 10:24-26, "And on the following day he entered Caesarea. Now Cornelius was waiting for them, and had called together his relatives and close friends. 25 And when it came about that Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter raised him up, saying, “Stand up; I too am just a man."   

Rev. 22:8-9, "And I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. 9 And he said to me, “Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book; worship God."

Does the Roman Catholic Church promote idolatry?  According to the scripture and its own practices, yes it does. Now, get this: Anything we value equal to, or more than, God, is actually an idol. If we value food, football/sports, money, a celebrity, pastor, priest, prophet --- You name it--- that person/thing becomes an idol. When someone says someone is his idol, don't underestimate that phrase; the person means it - he loves the person so much so that he has idolized him in his heart. And if someone will not have time for, or fellowship with, God because of his business, it should tell you what/who he pledges his allegiance to. Many people focus on adultery but forget that idolatry is also dangerous. If it is not dangerous, Paul would not have said; "Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry." (1 Cor. 10:14).

May God grant us the grace to head to this clarion call. Amen

DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM: Message 2: Observance of Days, Months, Years etc (Eg., Christmas, Easter, Valentine, Lent, Halloween)

Topic Two: DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM
Message2 : Observance of Days, Months, Years, etc (Eg., Christmas, Easter, Lent, Valentine, Halloween,ETC)
By: Samuel Kwasi Forkuo (Admin, Warning: Church, Get Prepared - WCGP)


Paul, the Apostle of Christ, wrote this to the Christians in Galatia, ''You observe days and months and seasons and years. I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain." Galatians 4:10-11

The Roman Catholic church has invented an entire yearly calendar of non Biblical holy Days like Christmas, Easter, Valentine, Lent, St. Patrick, etc.  No one prior to 335 AD celebrated the birthday of Jesus. The word "Christmas" (Christ + Mass) was first used in 1038 AD. Before 335 AD, the pagan cult of Mithra, the Iranian "god of light", had long celebrated December 25 as Mithra's birthday. December 21, being the winter solace, marked the beginning of days with increasing amount of light, hence December 25 celebrated Mithra's triumph over darkness. Because the pagan festival that celebrated Mithra's birthday was so popular, the Roman Catholic church adopted the day, but changed the meaning from the birthday of Mithra, the "god of light", to Christ's birthday, God the son, "light of the world". The old meaning of December 25 was connected with Mithra's triumph over physical darkness. The new meaning celebrated Jesus triumph over spiritual darkness. Eventually Christmas became dominant, the Mithra cult went extinct and today this origin is not widely known among Roman Catholics. None of the apostles or the early church celebrated the birthday of Jesus.

This is what preacher Charles H. Spurgeon had to say, ''We have no superstitious regard for times and seasons. Certainly we do not believe in the present ecclesiastical arrangement called Christmas. First, because we do not believe in any mass at all, but abhor it whether it be sung in Latin or in English. Secondly, because we find no Scriptural warrant whatever for observing any day as the birthday of the Saviour; and consequently, it's observance is a superstition, because not of divine authority. Superstition has fixed most positively the day of our Saviour's birth, although there is no possibility of discovering when it occurred. It was not till the middle of the third century that any part of the Church celebrated the birth of our Lord; and it was not till long after the western Church had set the example, that the eastern adopted it. Because the day is not known, probably the fact is that the "holy" days were arranged to fit in with the heathen festivals. We venture to assert that if there be any day in the year of which we may be pretty sure that it was not the day on which our Saviour was born, it is the 25th of December. Regarding not the day, let us give God thanks for the gift of His dear Son. How absurd to think we could do it in the spirit of the world, with a Jack Frost clown, a deceptive worldly Santa Claus, and a mixed program of sacred truth with fun, deception and fiction. If it be possible to honor Christ in the giving of gifts, I cannot see how while the gift, giver, and recipient are all in the spirit of the world. The Catholics and high Church Episcopalians may have their Christmas one day in 365, but we have a Christ gift the entire year." (Dec. 24, 1871) "Upright men strove to stem the tide, but in spite of all their efforts, the apostasy went on, till the Church, with the exception of a small remnant, was submerged under pagan superstition. that Christmas is a pagan festival, is beyond all doubt. The time of the year, and the ceremonies with which it is celebrated, prove its origin." "Those who follow the custom of observing Christmas, follow not the Bible but pagan ceremonies."


NO-WHERE in the Bible can you find that Christ commanded His Disciples to remember Him through His Birthday. And NOWHERE in the Bible can you find that the followers of Christ (the Apostles of the early Church) celebrated the Birth of Christ.

The argument that Celebrators of Days/Months/Years (especially Christmas Celebrators/Lovers) put forward o support their stance is; ''What is wrong to choose one day to remember Lord Jesus Christ?' Well, they have a seemingly valid question and a valid point, as it were. But the point is, DO YOU CHOOSE HOW TO WORSHIP GOD OR GOD HAS A LAID DOWN PROCEDURE? DO U CHOOSE HOW TO REMEMBER CHRIST OR YOU FOLLOW WHAT CHRIST HIMSELF HAS ALREADY LAID DOWN?

Christ Himself gave the Disciples, who became Apostles, and any would-be follower, WHAT MUST BE USED IN REMEMBRANCE OF HIM. That is, He clearly stated and actually partook in WHAT WAS TO BE USED TO REMEMBER HIM....AND TO THE SHOCK OF LOVERS OF PLEASURE, IT WAS NOT CHRISTMAS, EASTER, LENT, VALENTINE, ST. PATRICK'S, OR HALLOWEEN. IT WAS NOT ANY OF THESE....IT WAS THE LAST/LORD'S SUPPER.

''And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying,“This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you'' Luke 22:19-20

Indeed, Christ Himself instituted this as the MEANS THROUGH WHICH WE COULD AND WOULD REMEMBER HIM. And because Christ passed it on unto His followers, He commanded them to also teach others to obey everything that He (Christ) has taught them (Matthew 28:20). Now, listen to what Paul, who was a sinner but later became converted and an Apostle of Christ, had to say;

''For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.''' 1 Corinthians 11:23-26

Clearly, Christ Himself Instituted THE LORD'S SUPPER, which, when observed, is a proclamation of the Lord's Death till He Comes. NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE DID CHRIST OR THE APOSTLES OBSERVE CHRISTMAS OR EASTER TO REMEMBER CHRIST'S BIRTH OR DEATH. Yet you will see so many 'Men of God' quoting scriptures anyhow to support their already flawed stance. As for Lent, Halloween and others such as Valentine's & St. Patrick's Days, the least said about the, the better. 

In conclusion, the question I would like to put across for you to ponder on it is this: Which group has Biblical backing when it comes to Christmas and Easter? Is it the people who believe that we SHOULD NOT CELEBRATE or the people who say WE SHOULD? If you are honest, you will know that it is definitely those who say we SHOULDN'T because they can prove from the Bible that 1. Christ didn't celebrate His Birthday 2. Christ Didnt tell His Disciples to remember His birthday 3. NOWHERE did the Disciples/Apostles/Early Church celebrate Christmas or Easter. Christ knew that it is the Lord's Supper that can be adequate/enough to be used remember Him because it talks about the PENALTY HE PAID FOR US ON THE CROSS - THAT SACRIFICE WHICH SUPERSEDES ALL SACRIFICES. And since we don't take the Lord's Supper anyhow (for anyone who wants to take part in it must examine himself first), it helps us to be mind of the way we live. Thus, since we cannot take part in the Lord's Supper if we are practicing sin, we are mindful of our lifestyles; unlike Christmas which is enjoyed by both Christians and Non-Christians, with all vices being done most on that day. DON'T TAKE PART IN CHRISTMAS OR EASTER JUST BECAUSE MANY CHRISTIANS CELEBRATE IT. THEY COULD BE WRONG. AND BIBLE AND/OR HISTORY HAS TAUGHT US THAT IN MOST CASES, MAJORITY ARE WRONG. It took me sometime before coming to terms with this Truth. Though I knew Christmas and Easter were not in the Bible, I loved the celebration so much so that I found it difficult to part ways with them. Thanks be to God that He granted be the grace to wean myself from these and many traditions of men which only have Christ' name attached to them - but in reality, they are not of Christ. It is my prayer He helps you to come to same truth, too. 

If you think NOT CELEBRATING CHRISTMAS or EASTER is anti-God, then you better call Peter, Paul and all the Apostles and Early Church as Anti-God because non of them celebrated Christmas or Easter. May God help us to celebrate Christ and show our love to God and humanity with our lives everyday-- not only on 25th December whilst living the rest of the days in the year cheating people and indulging in all kinds of sin as if we don't know Christ.

NB: U can read further on Christmas & the Lord's Supper from http://warningchurchgetprepared.blogspot.com/2014/03/what-christ-commanded-disciples-to-use.html

ALL GLORY TO GOD.

DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM: Message 1: The Plain Truth about the Roman Catholic Church

Topic Two: DANGERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM
Message 1: The Plain Truth about the Roman Catholic Church
By: Samuel Kwasi Forkuo (Admin, Warning: Church, Get Prepared - WCGP)

Ask any Catholic of the origin of the Church and he will refer you to to Matthew 16:18. In that verse, Jesus said ''And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.'' Jesus, when making that Matthew 16:18 declaration, WAS NOT REFERRING TO THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH; MUCH LESS MAKING PETER THE FIRST POPE. The Roman Catholic Church claims to have started in Matthew 16:18 when Christ supposedly appointed Peter as the first Pope. They say "Outside the Church there is no salvation" (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus) Catholic Dictionary/Encyclopedia. However, the honest and objective student of Scriptures and history soon discovers that the foundation of the Roman church is none other than the pagan mystery religion of ancient Babylon. 

THE CHURCH JESUS CHRIST WAS TALKING ABOUT WAS NOT EVEN BAPTIST, DEEPER LIFE, APOSTOLIC, PRESBYTERIAN, SALVATION ARMY, OR PENTECOST --- MUCH LESS ROMAN CATHOLIC, JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, LATTER-DAY SAINTS OR SDA. 

THE CHURCH THAT HE WOULD BUILD WAS A PEOPLE (NOT A PLACE OF WORSHIP) WHO, THROUGH GENUINE REPENTANCE, WOULD HAVE THEIR SINS WASHED IN CHRIST'S BLOOD AND HAVE THEIR NAMES WRITTEN IN THE LAMB'S BOOK OF LIFE. THAT IS, CHRIST WAS TALKING OF THOSE THAT HE WOULD FORGIVE, ACCEPT, REDEEM/SAVE AND CALL THEM HIS OWN. IN FACT, SUCH A PEOPLE IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS ''THE BRIDE OF CHRIST.'' The Church, by Christ's definition, is not a religious denomination with the largest number or first to be known (for the Catholics to think that they are); is not a place of worship (for the Latter-Day Saints to think that they are, because they think they have ultra-modern worship centers); and is not about tract-sharing (for the Jehovah's Witnesses to claim they are, for they think they share more tracts). The Church, by Christ's definition, is a Group of people, devoid of their local churches, who have been saved by Christ with His Blood, living for Christ, spotless and have their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life.  

From the above description, it is clear that if a person is not truly saved, he can be a member of the Roman Catholic Church or any other local Church and still will not be part of Christ's Church/Bride and go to hell. In fact, if any local Church claims that no one can be saved except the person becomes a member of their church, such a church is a cult. It is not surprising that, not only Roman Catholics, but Latter-Day Saints, Jehovah's Witnesses and so many religious groups, think the same, i.e. anyone outside their religious denomination is lost. Thus, if you are not a member of their churches, you are lost. Well, they can tickle themselves with such falsehood; they will regret later, UNLESS THEY REPENT. Enough said about such cults, let's zero in on the Roman Catholic Church. 

While enduring the early persecutions of the Roman government (65-300 A.D.), most of professing Christianity went through a gradual departure from New Testament doctrine concerning church government, worship and practice. Local churches ceased to be autonomous by giving way to the control of "bishops" ruling over hierarchies. The simple form of worship from the heart was replaced with the rituals and splendor of paganism. Ministers became "priests," and pagans became "Christians" by simply being sprinkled with water (Instead of genuine repentance and baptism by immersion, which the Bible teaches). This tolerance of an unregenerate membership only made things worse. SPRINKLED PAGANISM is about the best definition for Roman Catholicism. This is what I call 'Christianizing paganism and Paganising Christianity' by the Romans.

The Roman Emperor Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313 A.D., which made this new "Christianity" the official religion of the Roman Empire. The first actual Pope in Rome was probably Leo I (440-461 A.D.), although some claim that Gregory I was the first (590-604 A.D.). This ungodly system eventually ushered in the darkest period of history known to man, properly known as the "Dark Ages" (500-1500 A.D.). Through popes, bishops, and priests, Satan ruled Europe, and Biblical Christianity became illegal. Bear this in mind, throughout generations, even when sin reaches its highest peak, there are FEW PEOPLE who stands for God. They are often referred to as THE REMNANT. They don' conform to, and will not compromise with, the pattern of the world. Therefore, throughout all these, there remained individual groups of true Christians, such as the Waldensens and the Anabaptists who would not conform to the Roman system. 

So to sum up Message One, as we delve into the Dangers of Roman Catholicism, let's bear in mind that......

(i) Catholics LIE when they say the Church that Christ said He would build in Matthew 16:18 was their church (the Roman Catholic Church) and that Peter was their first Pope. It's a pure LIE. In any case, Peter married because he and Christ visited his mother-in-Law who was then suffering from fever (Matthew 8:14), and nowhere in the Bible are we told Peter divorced his wife.  

(ii) Catholics LIE when they say all of us who are outside (i.e. not a member of) the Roman Catholic, are lost. IT IS A PURE LIE. Anyone who is genuinely saved, having his name written in the Lamb's Book of Life and living daily for Christ till he dies or Christ comes, is part of Christ's Church/Bride. You need not be a member of the Roman Catholic Church before you can be saved. If Paul, Cornelius, the Ethiopian Eunuch and a host of people were saved when they were not even a member of any local Church, why should we believe Catholics that we need to be members of their Church in order to be saved? Think about it! Pray about it! Don' be deceived!

May God shed His Light on this Word and let His Spirit minister to you. 

All the Glory to God