The False Christ of Roman Catholicism

Chris

Administrator
Staff member
The False Christ of Roman Catholicism
By Mike Gendron

We know from God’s inspired Word that false teachers will come and preach another Jesus that the apostles never preached (2 Cor. 11:3-4). So it should not surprise us that there are many counterfeit Christs in false religions masquerading as the true Christ. By far, the most deceptive false Christ is the Eucharist of the Roman Catholic Church.

The Blasphemous Hoax That Deceives Catholics​

In The Faith of Millions, a book certified by the Catholic Church to be “free of doctrinal errors”, Catholic priest John O’Brien explains how the Eucharist becomes Jesus during the Mass: “When the priest pronounces the words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of saints and angels. The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.”

The Outrageous Lie and its Implications​

As preposterous and unthinkable as this may sound, the Catholic priest is said to have the power to call almighty God down from heaven and continue on an altar what the Lord Jesus finished on the cross (John 19:30). It is unfathomable that Catholics would believe a sinful priest can command our holy God to do anything and that God would actually obey him. Yet, over 200,000 times each day, throughout the world, priests believe they can re-present Jesus as a sacrificial victim for sins. Our Lord Jesus was immersed in the wrath of God and endured excruciating pain once for all time for all sin (Heb. 10:10,12). It is unconscionable that Catholics would want to continue His suffering on their altars. It is also dishonoring to refer to Jesus as a “victim.” He laid His life down on His own initiative as an act of sacrificial love for His sheep (John 10:18). He was a “victor” who defeated death, not a “victim.”

The Cunning Deception of Transubstantiation​

The Catechism of the Catholic Church declares that through the miracle of transubstantiation, “Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: His Body and His Blood, with His soul and His divinity.” Catholics are threatened with anathema if they do not believe this nonsense. “If any one shall deny, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are verily, really, and substantially contained the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but shall say that He is only therein as in a sign, let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Chapter 8, Canon 1). During the Catholic Mass, before the Eucharistic Christ is offered as a propitiatory sacrifice, Catholics believe they eat His body and drink His blood in Holy Communion.

Figurative Speech Must Not Be Taken Literally​

You might be wondering how Catholics can possibly believe this bizarre teaching. It comes from twisting the meaning of John 6:54. Jesus said, “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” Catholic Bishops declared Jesus was speaking literally and therefore He must be eaten during Holy Communion. Yet, the Jewish audience would not have understood this because the Lord’s table had not yet been instituted by Christ. Also, If this were a reference to the Lord’s Table, it would mean that eternal life could be gained by taking Communion, which would distort the Gospel. Salvation is by grace through faith apart from anything man does (Eph. 2:8-9). Catholics do not realize how inconsistent they are to take the “eating and drinking” literally, but not “eternal life.” Their eternal destiny is conditional because it is based on what they DO rather than what Christ has DONE

The Eucharist Is a Counterfeit Christ​

By the supreme authority of God’s inspired Word we know that the Eucharist is a false Christ. The Lord Jesus Christ is not physically present in a wafer.

• He does not return everyday. He “will appear a second time, not to deal with sin” (Heb. 9:28).
• He “must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything” (Acts 3:21).
• He will return “Immediately after the tribulation” (Mat. 24:29-30).
• He will return to the same place He ascended: “on the Mount of Olives” (Zech. 14:4).
• He will return in the sky “with power and great glory” (Mat. 24:30).
• He will return in a body, not a wafer. “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

Worshiping the Eucharist Is Idolatry​

Catholics who worship the Eucharist can be compared to the Israelites who worshiped the golden calf as their true God (Exodus 32:4). The punishment imposed by God for their most serious sin of idolatry was death (Exodus 32:27-28). The same sin of idolatry is committed by Catholics who worship the Eucharist as the true Christ. Catholics must be warned that the resurrected and exalted Christ is too awesome and glorious to be captured in any image, let alone a wafer (Exodus 20:4-6). They need to know that God seeks worshipers in spirit and truth (John 4:24).

What Must We Instruct Catholics To Do?​

If we truly love Catholics we must warn them of their pending peril. They must repent and “flee from idolatry” (1 Cor. 10:14). Paul warned that those who practice idolatry will not inherit the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21). They need to become true disciples of Christ by abiding in God’s Word. Then they will know the truth and the truth will set them free from religious bondage and deception (John 8:31-32).

https://www.raptureforums.com/roman-catholicism/the-false-christ-of-roman-catholicism/
 

SkyRider

Well-Known Member
Everyone is tickled by the old fable of the Emperor's new clothes. The guy is not wearing a stitch of clothing but he has the people deluded into thinking by his proclamations that what in fact he has on is nothing but the finest apparel and the crowd, going along with the deception and wanting to prove that they are loyal to the Emperor, go along with hoax and start believing the same thing. It is not until a child bellows out that the Emperor is naked that they start to realize that they were beguiled into a mass deception that was blatantly false.

The same goes for the Eucharist. Clearly, it does not look like Jesus, it is not the Creator of the Universe disguised as a wafer, and given the opportunity to examine the elements after the supposed “Transubstantiation”, a chemist would conclude that it is nothing more than a gluten wafer or a bit of wine or grape juice. It is a hoax, a bit of hocus-pocus from the papacy and their priests who perform this ruse, which is really another lie from Satan to deceive the followers of Romanism - nothing more. Sadly, this deception occurs daily in Catholicism masses and over a billion Roman Catholics have bought into this farce. Satan and his Roman church don't waste an opportunity to discredit what the real Christ has accomplished for us. Most of these people won't realize or see the truth until it is way too late.
 

paul289

Well-Known Member
As Christians, we are commanded to not eat meat that we know was sacrificed to idols. Basically, do not knowingly participate in sin. But we are commanded to partake in the Lord's Supper. Many Christians might say "Well, my friend is Catholic, so I went to Mass with him and partook in Communion, and I took it as symbolic of Christ's body and blood, not literal, so it's OK." I've been there myself. But is that right? I say no, because it is a counterfeit and it is a form of worship of a false christ. In fact, I'd be disinclined from going to a Catholic church at all, as going to church/temple/mosque/synagogue/wherever is a form of worship of the deity being worshipped within the building. If ever you are invited, politely decline and offer instead to sit down and discuss beliefs, pointing consistently to the Truth of the Bible, that is, Jesus Christ.
 

paul289

Well-Known Member
Additionally, when Jesus said "This is my body, broken for you. take it and eat," he wasn't just picking up some random piece of bread from the table and turning it into his own flesh. He was taking one of the pieces of unleavened bread related to the Passover, the Afikomen. He was explaining the symbolism behind that particular piece of matzah. It was widely known at the time that the Afikomen was messianic in nature. In breaking the Afikomen and passing it out, Jesus explained that the Afikomen is a representation of him. The Afikomen represented the breaking of the body of the Messiah, that finding him and bringing him to the Father grants you a prize of salvation and eternal life.

There is so much rich symbolism behind the Passover meal that all points to Jesus. And yet, the Catholic Church jumps right over it and says "Symbolism? What symbolism? He said it's his body, so it IS his body!" Jesus explained the true meaning of the Passover meal to his disciples, and then after his resurrection, revealed himself to his disciples in the breaking of the found Afikomen. What the Catholic Church does is weaken the symbolic meaning behind Communion, thus weakening people's faith in the True Messiah, the only begotten son of God the Father who takes away the sins of the world at no cost, and forever.
 

Xenosjeff

Well-Known Member
Not only is transubstantiation a cruel hoax, it is a barrier to any Jew. Even false imaginary cannibalism would be a non-starter for a Jew.

Jeff
 

Jaybird

Well-Known Member
Wow, these priests sure are something. They command God. I think it is the other way around. And they say the "Protestants" are the blasphemers!
 

SkyRider

Well-Known Member
Wow, these priests sure are something. They command God. I think it is the other way around. And they say the "Protestants" are the blasphemers!
I was listening to a program yesterday on the Berean Beacon website by Richard Bennett, the former Irish Roman Catholic priest who became a believer and then left the false teachings of the RCC. He was talking about Rome's priesthood and their supposed power to command Christ to come down from Heaven and appear on their altars for another sacrifice. It is a ludicrous notion to begin with for so many unbiblical reasons. But he also goes on to say that their priesthood is unbiblical to begin with; there are no priests mentioned in the New Testament other than Jesus Christ who is our High Priest. When Christ died on the cross, God the Father ripped apart the Temple veil from top to bottom, signifying that we now had access to God through Christ's atonement. The need for priest's to perform sacrifices to appease God's wrath for sin was no longer needed, hence their role was done away with. Christ's one time sacrifice on the cross was more than sufficient to the Father that no more sacrificing was ever needed nor called for. It is unbiblical to suggest otherwise.

Bennett goes on to say how sinful the whole priesthood of Rome is anyway. They are forbidden to marry (doctrines of demons as Paul called it) which sets them up for any number of sexual sins: the raping of children, having sexual intercourse with the nuns, having children out of wedlock as a result, and having sex with other priests. He said the number of homosexual men entering their priesthood is extremely high. He said it is almost encouraged in their seminaries. A lot of these men join their ranks just for the power they get in ruling their parishes and having the aforementioned power to command Christ on to their altars. He paints a very sordid picture of what it is to be a part of Rome's priesthood.
 

Andy C

Well-Known Member
I have attended one Mass with my cousins when I was a young boy, and have never been inside a catholic church since.

I pray that not every Catholic believes all that is taught by their Priests. From every church some will be saved, but I imagine it will be slim pickings from the RCC.
 

Xenosjeff

Well-Known Member
I have attended one Mass with my cousins when I was a young boy, and have never been inside a catholic church since.

I pray that not every Catholic believes all that is taught by their Priests. From every church some will be saved, but I imagine it will be slim pickings from the RCC.
Not even some priests believe it. I've had a very clear discussion with a Monsignor who stated " not all of these things in dispute are essential to the faith". I'd been questioning the obvious shortcomings of the Roman Catholic claims of authority to continue adding to essential doctrines and the marion dogmas. He felt that the truth of the gospel could still be expressed within Catholicism. I eventually felt that they could not. But that's another story.

Jeff
 

Jaybird

Well-Known Member
It's a tough road for Catholics to see the truth because of all the RCC dogmas that they follow that obscures the true Gospel. No doubt some may come to a knowledge of the truth. My grandmother was Catholic, but she actually read her Bible every day. This is unusual for a Catholic. My uncle still has her Bible and you can see all of the passages she underlined and highlighted. All we can do is pray that they see the truth.

Matthew 19: 25-26: When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?” But Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
 

lightofmylife

Blessed Hope-Prepare To Fly!
There is a lady that works at Save-A-Lot a store where we pick up certain items that we like. We don't do a lot of grocery shopping there. This lady I know as a fact is a Catholic so I gave her 1 of my Rapture Forums gospel tract. There is a prayer on there to believe and receive :fish the gift of salvation. I planted the seed now I :pray she realizes she has to personally accept :fish.
 

Seashell

Well-Known Member
Additionally, when Jesus said "This is my body, broken for you. take it and eat," he wasn't just picking up some random piece of bread from the table and turning it into his own flesh. He was taking one of the pieces of unleavened bread related to the Passover, the Afikomen. He was explaining the symbolism behind that particular piece of matzah. It was widely known at the time that the Afikomen was messianic in nature. In breaking the Afikomen and passing it out, Jesus explained that the Afikomen is a representation of him. The Afikomen represented the breaking of the body of the Messiah, that finding him and bringing him to the Father grants you a prize of salvation and eternal life.

There is so much rich symbolism behind the Passover meal that all points to Jesus. And yet, the Catholic Church jumps right over it and says "Symbolism? What symbolism? He said it's his body, so it IS his body!" Jesus explained the true meaning of the Passover meal to his disciples, and then after his resurrection, revealed himself to his disciples in the breaking of the found Afikomen. What the Catholic Church does is weaken the symbolic meaning behind Communion, thus weakening people's faith in the True Messiah, the only begotten son of God the Father who takes away the sins of the world at no cost, and forever.
What is your explanation for this verse in 1 Corinthians? Not trying to argue, I just want to understand.

11:27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 11:28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 11:29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

Or this verse Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56).

It’s also a known fact that because the early Christians celebrated the Eucharist they were accused of Cannibalism by Rome among other crimes and that is one of the reason early Christians were persecuted. https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/curiosities/romans-accused-christians-of-many-crimes/
 
Last edited:

SkyRider

Well-Known Member
You left out this verse:


"It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." John 6:63

Jesus is speaking in spiritual terms. He says Himself that the flesh profits nothing. If you don't invite Him into your life Spiritually, then you will not inherit eternal life. The wafers do not turn into Jesus Christ; it is a lie of the enemy and sadly many Roman Catholics have fallen for this ruse. True Christians are not cannibals; we don't eat human or supposedly Godly flesh. Jews are even forbidden in the OT to drink blood; it is no wonder they turned away from Jesus' words. They heard in physical terms and were repelled by such a thought. Roman Catholicism, however, has no problem with it and have turned the whole communion memorial into an idolatrous, blasphemous rite of eating their God. The Eucharist then is a false Christ. Eating a wafer, even a "consecrated host", does not equate to being born again or becoming spiritually alive. Christ does not enter into us physically, but spiritually. Eating a steady diet of gluten wafers for the rest of your life does not get anyone saved. If you fail to ingest Christ into your life Spiritually, by believing in Him and trusting in Him solely for your salvation, then one becomes eternally lost.

Don't be deceived by Rome's and the enemy's lies.
 

SkyRider

Well-Known Member
What is the Catholic sacrament of the Holy Eucharist? https://www.gotquestions.org/Holy-Eucharist.html


For Catholics, the Holy Eucharist / Catholic Mass is considered the most important and highest form of prayer. In fact, attending Mass is an obligation, under penalty of mortal sin, each Sunday and on certain other Holy Days of Obligation. The Mass is divided into two sections, the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. The Liturgy of the Word consists of two readings (one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament), the Responsorial Psalm, the Gospel reading, the homily (or sermon), and general intercessions (also called petitions).

The center of the Mass is its second part, the Liturgy of the Holy Eucharist. During this time, Catholics share in the body and blood of Jesus in the form of the bread and wine passed out to the congregation. According to the Bible, this is done in remembrance of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:23-25; cf. Luke 22:18-20 and Matthew 26:26-28). However, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1366, "The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit." The catechism continues in paragraph 1367:

The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner . . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."

In the book of Malachi, the prophet predicts elimination of the old sacrificial system and the institution of a new sacrifice: "I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts" (Malachi 1:10-11). This means that God will one day be glorified among the Gentiles, who will make pure offerings to Him in all places. The Catholics see this as the Eucharist. However, the apostle Paul seems to have a different slant on it: "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1). The Eucharist can only be offered in select places: churches consecrated and blessed according to Catholic canon law. The idea of offering our bodies as living sacrifices fits better with the language of the prediction, which says that the sacrifices will be offered "in every place."

The Roman Catholic Church believes that the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist become the actual body and blood of Jesus. They attempt to support their system of thought with passages such as John 6:32-58; Matthew 26:26; Luke 22:17-23; and 1 Corinthians 11:24-25. In A.D. 1551, the Counsel of Trent officially stated, "By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation" (Session XIII, chapter IV; cf. canon II). By sharing in the Eucharistic meal, the Church teaches that Catholics are fulfilling John 6:53: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."

What does that really mean? Jesus goes on to say that "it is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63-64). So, if "the flesh is of no avail," why would we have to eat Jesus’ flesh in order to have eternal life? It does not make sense, until Jesus tells us that the words He speaks are "spirit." Jesus is saying that this is not a literal teaching, but a spiritual one. The language ties in perfectly with the aforementioned statement of the apostle Paul: "Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1).

In Jewish thought, bread was equated with the Torah, and "eating of it" was reading and understanding the covenant of God (cf. Deuteronomy 8:3). For example, the apocryphal book of Sirach states, "'He who eats of me will hunger still, he who drinks of me will thirst for more; he who obeys me will not be put to shame, he who serves me will never fail.' All this is true of the book of Most High’s covenant, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the community of Jacob" (Sirach 24:20-22). Quoting from Sirach here is not endorsing it as Scripture; it only serves to illustrate how the Jewish people thought of Mosaic Law. It is important to understand the equating of bread with the Torah to appreciate Jesus’ real point.

In John 6, Jesus is actually telling the crowd that He is superior to the Torah (cf. John 6:49-51) and the entire Mosaic system of Law. The passage from Sirach states that those who eat of the Law will "hunger still" and "thirst for more"; this language is mirrored by Jesus when He says, "He who comes to Me will never be hungry, he who believes in Me will never be thirsty" (John 6:35). Jesus is not commanding people to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood. He is telling them the core of all Christian doctrine: belief in Jesus Himself ("The work of God is this: to believe in the One He has sent," John 6:29, emphasis added). Therefore, the Catholic interpretation of John 6 is unbiblical.

Second, there is a very clear analogy in John 6 to the days of Moses and the eating of manna. In the days of Moses, manna was God’s provision for food for the Israelites as they wandered in the wilderness. In John 6, however, Jesus claimed to be the true manna, the bread of heaven. With this statement Jesus claimed to be God’s full provision for salvation. Manna was God’s provision of deliverance from starvation. Jesus is God’s provision of deliverance from damnation. Just as the manna had to be consumed to preserve the lives of the Israelites, so Jesus has to be consumed (fully received by faith) for salvation to be received.

It is very clear that Jesus referred to Himself as the Bread of Life and encouraged His followers to eat of His flesh in John 6. But we do not need to conclude that Jesus was teaching what the Catholics have referred to as transubstantiation. The Lord’s Supper / Christian communion / Holy Eucharist had not been instituted yet. Jesus did not institute the Holy Eucharist / Mass / Lord’s Supper until John chapter 13. Therefore, to read the Lord’s Supper into John 6 is unwarranted. As suggested above, it is best to understand this passage in light of coming to Jesus, in faith, for salvation. When we receive Him as Savior, placing our full trust in Him, we are “consuming His flesh” and “drinking His blood.” His body was broken (at His death) and His blood was shed to provide for our salvation. 1 Corinthians 11:26, “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.”

Whether the Catholic definition of Holy Eucharist is a "re-sacrifice" of Christ, or a "re-offering" of Christ’s sacrifice, or a “re-presentation” of Christ’s sacrifice, the concept is unbiblical. Christ does not need to be re-sacrificed. Christ’s sacrifice does not need to be re-offered or re-presented. Hebrews 7:27 declares, "Unlike the other high priests, He (Jesus) does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins ONCE for all when He offered Himself." Similarly, 1 Peter 3:18 exclaims, "For Christ died for sins ONCE for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God..." Christ’s once-for-all death on the cross was sufficient to atone for all of our sins (1 John 2:2). Therefore, Christ’s sacrifice does not need to be re-offered. Instead, Christ’s sacrifice is to be received by faith (John 1:12; 3:16). Eating Christ’s flesh and drinking His blood are symbols of fully receiving His sacrifice on our behalf, by grace through faith.
 

Wally

Do You Believe ?
On another thread there was some discussion about literal and figurative Bible reading. This verse is a good one to explore context as Skyrider has done above.

Right after talking about the eating of flesh which many took literally,

Jesus tells us to pay attention, He is speaking spiritually.

Often people take scripture and cookie cut it and claim revelation or dogma, when the very next verses explains what has just been said.
 

SkyRider

Well-Known Member
Exactly. The whole discourse in John 6 is a back and forth between the physical versus spiritual. Jesus had just fed the masses with the loaves and fishes, so the people were interested in physical nourishment. Jesus starts speaking in spiritual terms; just as He did with the Samaritan woman at the well. She was drawing physical water out of the well to sustain her. Christ turns the conversation into a spiritual lesson by offering Himself as Living Water. She would never thirst again spiritually if she invited Christ into her life, but of course she would physically still require water to sustain her physical being. Nicodemus, in John 3:3 was listening to Jesus talk of being born again in a physical sense and questioned it. Jesus, though, was speaking in spiritual terms of being born again.

Jesus even refuted Satan in the wilderness by telling him that Man does not live on bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God - Matthew 4:4. There are plenty of examples in the Word where Jesus is speaking in spiritual terms versus relying on purely physical needs.

The Jews rejected Jesus' words in John 6 again because they were hearing only in a physical sense; not in the spiritual. Christ finally concludes the discussion to those still listening that He is speaking in a purely spiritual sense: the flesh profits nothing, it is His spirit joining our spirit that gives us life.
 
Top