Biblical Case For Schism

[Pleural]

[quote name='Pleural' post='1398729' date='Oct 7 2007, 02:38 AM']Keep in mind that my response here is not one of doctrine, but merely an answer to this thread and the question posed -- based on situations which can and perhaps have arisen throughout history.[/quote]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1399692' date='Oct 8 2007, 11:31 PM']A lot of your verses here could easily be used in turn by Catholics. It's sort of arrogant to say that Luther, and even modern protestants, tested the Catholic Church and found her to be corrupt. Could we not say that of Luther? Seriously, we could easily cop-out and say that we tested him, and he didnt measure up. Anywho, I'll respond more later. It's late, and I'm bugging people with the clicking of my keyboard. (11:30 here)

God bless...[/quote]

Please keep in mind, like I said, my post was not about doctrine or theology [i]per se[/i], neither was I attempting to argue, as you seem to be implying, that Luther or anyone in particular has tested the catholic church or another church in this way. I'd be happy to discuss such doctrinal issues in another thread or another time, but I was attempting to remain on the topic of the thread, the Biblical case for schism *in general*, by discussing some of the Biblical passages which may be applicable to the decision of when to leave a church which is plagued with false teachers and incorrect doctrine. As I said, I'm not trying to claim here that the catholic church is such a church; we can discuss that elsewhere in a more relevant thread.

As a side note, no, it wouldn't be arrogant to say that Luther or others have tested the catholic church, or some other church, and found it to be corrupt. It's arrogant to say either that they did or did not, *without* examining the Scripture and other evidence, history, etc..

Thanks for your reply. I look forward to your response when it comes.

Take care, God bless

[jeffpugh]

Well, with that said, then, I don't know what to say. I guess we could discuss more if you want, or we can jump on the tail end of Rev's argument or something.

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='Pleural' post='1400946' date='Oct 11 2007, 08:09 PM']Wow. That was one of the most riduculous attempts at analogy I've ever read. Congratulations.
Thanks for playing, try again later.[/quote]

I am sorry, but who are you? I do not take kind to personal attacks. As a matter of fact I am usually bitter. How about you explain whats wrong with it instead of being a jerk?

[GodChaser]

[quote name='Lord Philip' post='1389125' date='Sep 20 2007, 12:32 PM']Step 1. Protestants believe in the tradition "sola scriptura", so every ecclesiastical action must be based in Scripture.

Step 2. Protestants hold firmly to the right to schism (as the very name "Protestant" suggests) and feel it is a necessary thing in order to preserve right doctrine from corruption. Not only is Martin Luther's schism praised and celebrated, but Protestants continue to make schisms all the time.

Step 3. Schism is an ecclesiastical action.

Step 4. Therefore the act of making a schism must be a "bible-based" practice with the full support of Scripture.

It is simple mathematics, folks. Where does the Bible not only condone but encourage schism?

As a Catholic, I read St. Paul exhorting Christians not to make schism and I read in John 17 concerning the will of God that all Christians should be one. That is my biblical case: clear and straightforward.

As the above syllogism suggests, Protestants [i]must[/i] have a biblical basis for making their schisms. I am listening!

God bless,

Philip[/quote]

Here's the bible command for schism

[quote]And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.

2And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.

3For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.

[b]4And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.[/b]

5For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.[/quote]

The Bible says, if we can see the corruption of the Babylon system in our churches, we are to come out from her. It's that, or partake of her sins. Are you ready to face the sins of your religion?

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1402122' date='Oct 14 2007, 01:47 AM']Here's the bible command for schism
The Bible says, if we can see the corruption of the Babylon system in our churches, we are to come out from her. It's that, or partake of her sins. Are you ready to face the sins of your religion?[/quote]I don't know why, but in the middle of the night, this comment just makes me chuckle.

In any event, if you're making the case that schism is caused by "Babylon systems," then wouldn't one have to logically conclude that Protestantism, with its endless cycle of dividing people among themselves, would have to be the quintessential Babylon Religion? If Protestantism wasn't a "Babylon System," then it couldn't produce so much schism, right?

As a random side note, it's interesting to look back to the story of the Tower of Babel (i.e. the Hebrew name for the city of Babylon). According to Genesis, the Tower of Babel angered God (because of the pride of the people), which resulted in Him making everyone speak different languages.

It seems to me a striking parallel that the pride of Protestants to invent their doctrines as freelance theologians has resulted in a similar multiplication of doctrines and divisions. They disagree with eachother to the point that they don't even speak the same language (e.g. holding conflicting beliefs about concepts like "faith", "born-again", "Trinity", "Communion", etc). The diversity of beliefs ranges from Episcopalianism to Baptist, 7th day Adventist to Methodist, Presbyterian to Evangelical. For me, this constant subdividing caused by new doctrines is reminiscent of the immediate aftermath of Babel.

Well, that's what I think of your "Babylonian System" theory, anyway...

[GodChaser]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='1402159' date='Oct 14 2007, 12:34 AM']I don't know why, but in the middle of the night, this comment just makes me chuckle.

In any event, if you're making the case that schism is caused by "Babylon systems," then wouldn't one have to logically conclude that Protestantism, with its endless cycle of dividing people among themselves, would have to be the quintessential Babylon Religion? If Protestantism wasn't a "Babylon System," then it couldn't produce so much schism, right?

As a random side note, it's interesting to look back to the story of the Tower of Babel (i.e. the Hebrew name for the city of Babylon). According to Genesis, the Tower of Babel angered God (because of the pride of the people), which resulted in Him making everyone speak different languages.

It seems to me a striking parallel that the pride of Protestants to invent their doctrines as freelance theologians has resulted in a similar multiplication of doctrines and divisions. They disagree with eachother to the point that they don't even speak the same language (e.g. holding conflicting beliefs about concepts like "faith", "born-again", "Trinity", "Communion", etc). The diversity of beliefs ranges from Episcopalianism to Baptist, 7th day Adventist to Methodist, Presbyterian to Evangelical. For me, this constant subdividing caused by new doctrines is reminiscent of the immediate aftermath of Babel.

Well, that's what I think of your "Babylonian System" theory, anyway...[/quote]
I agree.

I don't go to any church anymore, because I see the Babylonian system in all of them.

I won't honour Halloween, Christmas, or Easter as biblical holidays.

That's my choice, and since every church does, it goes to show, you can't organize something without the Babylonian world system affecting it.

Edited October 14, 2007 by GodChaser

[Deo Iuvente]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1402122' date='Oct 13 2007, 11:47 PM']Here's the bible command for schism
The Bible says, if we can see the corruption of the Babylon system in our churches, we are to come out from her. It's that, or partake of her sins. Are you ready to face the sins of your religion?[/quote]
First,You're assuming that Catholicism is a sinful religion. You can't base a claim on an already assumed claim, that's a bit of a logical fallacy.(Actually, it's a terrible one). It should start:
1) Prove that catholicism is babylon
2)Prove that making a schism and dividing the body of Christ is God's will.
Second, if One assumes that Catholicism is Babylon (Therefore sinful) One would as a logical consequence have to admit firstly,that the gates of hell prevailed against the Church of Christ. (Which is a direct contradiction of the bible)
Secondly,since the Church is the body of Christ, one would have to admit that Christ's body is sinful(Which is heresy).
Thirdly, one would have to admit that Since the Church is the bride of Christ, that she's been sullied, dirtied,taken from Christ and made into something abominable in his eyes.
(Which goes against Biblical reasoning.)
Jesus founded one church which is the pillar and foundation of truth,if it's good enough for Jesus,it should be good enough for all.

[GodChaser]

[quote name='Deo Iuvente' post='1402427' date='Oct 14 2007, 04:16 PM']First,You're assuming that Catholicism is a sinful religion. You can't base a claim on an already assumed claim, that's a bit of a logical fallacy.(Actually, it's a terrible one). It should start:
1) Prove that catholicism is babylon
2)Prove that making a schism and dividing the body of Christ is God's will.
Second, if One assumes that Catholicism is Babylon (Therefore sinful) One would as a logical consequence have to admit firstly,that the gates of hell prevailed against the Church of Christ. (Which is a direct contradiction of the bible)
Secondly,since the Church is the body of Christ, one would have to admit that Christ's body is sinful(Which is heresy).
Thirdly, one would have to admit that Since the Church is the bride of Christ, that she's been sullied, dirtied,taken from Christ and made into something abominable in his eyes.
(Which goes against Biblical reasoning.)
Jesus founded one church which is the pillar and foundation of truth,if it's good enough for Jesus,it should be good enough for all.[/quote]
1.) Pope Benedict supports the lie of man-made global warming, and saying it is bad, and by making it a heaven or hell issue by saying every catholic has a moral obligation to fight it, he is saying, we must fight against something that doesn't exist! That makes him blind, and the fact most of you are scientifically and historically blinded to actual geological time periods, you are blind too. If the blind are leading the blind, both go into a pit. In that Pope has engaged into the Babylonian system of control of the world. For that sin, he is going to suffer the wrath of God. If you support him, then the same fate is going to happen to you.

I haven't really schismed from the body, because I love spending time with real believers in Jesus Christ, who stand for Christ, and stand against evil. I hate evil, and evil always manifests itself in making people puppets under its control.

And, yes, the church which celebrates Easter (which celebrates Ishtar, a Babylonian Goddess), Halloween (which celebrates Satan), and Christmas (which is the yuletide season, which is dervived from the Yule log, which we still use today, which was used by Pagans, way before the Catholic church initiated this in the 800s, as a way to sacrifice animals and human beings), and says every person who is a member must reduce their so-called green house gas emissions or they are going to hell, by saying man-made global warming is real (and that hasn't been proven yet) and it is a moral obligation of every catholic to do something about it, and it also believes and promotes Evolution, of course it is theistic evolution, than I can say, yeah, your organization isn't the church, and the church is the believers in Jesus Christ, who have repented of their sins because they believe in his life, death and ressurection, who don't let vain teachings of men to make me go to and throw in deciding what my doctrine is!

200 years ago, Catholics didn't believe in Evoultion, but now they do. . .

1800 years ago, Catholics didn't celebrate Christmas, but now they do.

100 years ago, Catholics didn't believe in man-made global warming, but now if they don't fight it they're going to go to hell!

LOL!

Your church changes daily. I'm surprised Catholics haven't overloaded with the amount of things they have to do to make it to heaven!

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1402508' date='Oct 14 2007, 09:58 PM']1.) Pope Benedict supports the lie of man-made global warming, and saying it is bad, and by making it a heaven or hell issue by saying every catholic has a moral obligation to fight it, he is saying, we must fight against something that doesn't exist! That makes him blind...[/quote]I already asked you on the other thread: provide a quote or stop spouting unsubstantiated lies.

[Deo Iuvente]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1402508' date='Oct 14 2007, 07:58 PM']1.) Pope Benedict supports the lie of man-made global warming, Saying every catholic has a moral obligation to fight it. he is saying, we must fight against something that doesn't exist!
That makes him blind, and the fact most of you are scientifically and historically blinded to actual geological time periods,
you are blind too. If the blind are leading the blind, both go into a pit. In that Pope has engaged into the Babylonian system of control of the world. For that sin, he is going to suffer the wrath of God. If you support him, then the same fate is going to happen to you.[/quote] Please prove that he supports it, and that he said it's a matter of heaven or hell, and that Catholics are shriveling idiots who don't' know anything about science or history, and that God said anything about a Babylonian system of control as a sin.

[quote]I haven't really schismed from the body, because I love spending time with real believers in Jesus Christ, who stand for Christ, and stand against evil. I hate evil, and evil always manifests itself in making people puppets under its control.[/quote] you're making an excuse. the catholic church is the body of christ, the church.
You left it. that's schism.Period.

[quote]And, yes, the church which celebrates Easter (which celebrates Ishtar, a Babylonian Goddess)
, Halloween (which celebrates Satan),
and Christmas (which is the yuletide season, which is dervived from the Yule log, which we still use today, which was used by Pagans, way before the Catholic church initiated this in the 800s,as a way to sacrifice animals and human beings)[/quote] 1) all with unsubstantiated claims.
1)Christians were celebrating Christmas as early as the second century, only in February.
2) prove christmas began in the 800s.
3)you are aware that Christians were celebrating easter in the first century, right?you seem to be a historian, you should know of the Quartodeciman controversy. we have polycarp and eusebius to substantiate that claim.Halloween is on the roman martyrology?
4)where?and how does Halloween celebrate Satan? do you know it's origins? Historical documentation,please.
[quote]than I can say, yeah, your organization isn't the church, and the church is the believers in Jesus Christ, who have repented of their sins because they believe in his life, death and ressurection, who don't let vain teachings of men to make me go to and throw in deciding what my doctrine is![/quote] Good, then by you're definition,catholics are christian.
(Catechism :1005-1014,1019,599-605,619,606-609,620) And how do you figure that the catholic church isn't the church? Catholics are believers. the catholic church is the oldest Christian church, being the only founded directly by Christ.We don't let vain men decide, we let the church decided since it's the pillar and foundation of Truth.

[quote]200 years ago, Catholics didn't believe in Evoultion, but now they do. . .[/quote] Please prove that evolution is a dogma of the church. it should be found in the catechism.

[quote]1800 years ago, Catholics didn't celebrate Christmas, but now they do.[/quote] Yes they were. Please see ephraim the syrian, hymns of the epiphany,nisibene hymns,Hegesippus;memoirs.

[quote]00 years ago, Catholics didn't believe in man-made global warming, but now if they don't fight it they're going to go to hell![/quote] Please prove that also. I have yet to see a citation.

[quote]LOL![/quote] Yeah LOL XDDD! you just keep claiming without citing anything that can be used to support what you assert

[quote]Your church changes daily.[/quote] Uhh...what now?! it does not change in dogma, not over 2,000 has it.it stays the same, it prevails amid heresies and adversities,
[quote]I'm surprised Catholics haven't overloaded with the amount of things they have to do to make it to heaven![/quote]Baptism and perseverance in faith in Jesus Christ our lord until death? That's not a lot.I'm surprised that you have'nt realized that no one believed in sola fide until the reformation.Employing dicto simpliciter as an ad hominem is a logical fallacy. In fact, it's two. I can't believe you.

[GodChaser]

[quote name='Deo Iuvente' post='1402588' date='Oct 14 2007, 09:05 PM']Please prove that he supports it, and that he said it's a matter of heaven or hell, and that Catholics are shriveling idiots who don't' know anything about science or history, and that God said anything about a Babylonian system of control as a sin.

you're making an excuse. the catholic church is the body of christ, the church.
You left it. that's schism.Period.

1) all with unsubstantiated claims.
1)Christians were celebrating Christmas as early as the second century, only in February.
2) prove christmas began in the 800s.
3)you are aware that Christians were celebrating easter in the first century, right?you seem to be a historian, you should know of the Quartodeciman controversy. we have polycarp and eusebius to substantiate that claim.Halloween is on the roman martyrology?
4)where?and how does Halloween celebrate Satan? do you know it's origins? Historical documentation,please.
Good, then by you're definition,catholics are christian.
(Catechism :1005-1014,1019,599-605,619,606-609,620) And how do you figure that the catholic church isn't the church? Catholics are believers. the catholic church is the oldest Christian church, being the only founded directly by Christ.We don't let vain men decide, we let the church decided since it's the pillar and foundation of Truth.

Please prove that evolution is a dogma of the church. it should be found in the catechism.

Yes they were. Please see ephraim the syrian, hymns of the epiphany,nisibene hymns,Hegesippus;memoirs.

Please prove that also. I have yet to see a citation.

Yeah LOL XDDD! you just keep claiming without citing anything that can be used to support what you assert

Uhh...what now?! it does not change in dogma, not over 2,000 has it.it stays the same, it prevails amid heresies and adversities,
Baptism and perseverance in faith in Jesus Christ our lord until death? That's not a lot.I'm surprised that you have'nt realized that no one believed in sola fide until the reformation.Employing dicto simpliciter as an ad hominem is a logical fallacy. In fact, it's two. I can't believe you.[/quote]

The Pope's view on Evoultion article -
http://www.catholic.net/Catholic Church/Periodicals/Do...7/Article3.html
http://www.catholic.net/Catholic Church/Issues/Pope-an...-evolution.html

Seems, the catholics are to believe that evolution happened, despite.

[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-8463129851563631666&q=Hovind+%2B+Part&total=404&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-84...h&plindex=9[/url]
[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7815613109692636650&q=Dr.+Kent+Hovind+%2B+Part+2&total=24&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-78...h&plindex=0[/url]
[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=6833722951687298593&q=Dr.+Kent+Hovind+%2B+Part+3&total=19&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=683...h&plindex=0[/url]
[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-5665691163985573518&q=Dr.+Kent+Hovind+%2B+Part+4&total=18&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-56...h&plindex=0[/url]
[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5240112600444883198&q=Dr.+Kent+Hovind+%2B+Part+5&total=22&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=524...h&plindex=0[/url]
[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7151934276297772786&q=Dr.+Kent+Hovind+%2B+Part+6&total=30&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-71...h&plindex=0[/url]
[url="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-24125197328580007&q=Dr.+Kent+Hovind+%2B+Part+7&total=19&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0"]http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-24...h&plindex=0[/url]

Since Dr. Hovind's videos don't give me a knot in my stomach listening too, and Pope's who say that evolution is how things happened does, I have to give Dr. Hovind's vidoes a thumbs up and the Pope a thumbs down. He is wrong on this science, as the new pope's view on global warming is. He wants us to be good stewards. He's totally wrong on it, and soon, you will have to hear it from his own lips.

Now, if the Pope can be that far off on doctrine of the creation, how can I trust a church who blindly follows him. It's almost like you are all brainwashed. Are you willingly going to follow him blindly?

[Deo Iuvente]

The first two links are broken
1) I will say it again, even if you have to copy.paste and leave a source quoted at the end DIRECT CITATION PLEASE.
2) Again, assuming your premise is a logical fallacy.
You don't mind if I quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church,do you?

290 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth":128 three things are affirmed in these first words of Scripture: the eternal God gave a beginning to all that exists outside of himself; he alone is Creator (the verb "create" - Hebrew bara - always has God for its subject). The totality of what exists (expressed by the formula "the heavens and the earth") depends on the One who gives it being.

295 We believe that God created the world according to his wisdom.141 It is not the product of any necessity whatever, nor of blind fate or chance. We believe that it proceeds from God's free will; he wanted to make his creatures share in his being, wisdom and goodness: "For you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created."142 Therefore the Psalmist exclaims: "O LORD, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all"; and "The LORD is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made."143

296 We believe that God needs no pre-existent thing or any help in order to create, nor is creation any sort of necessary emanation from the divine substance.144 God creates freely "out of nothing":145

If God had drawn the world from pre-existent matter, what would be so extraordinary in that? A human artisan makes from a given material whatever he wants, while God shows his power by starting from nothing to make all he wants.146

297 Scripture bears witness to faith in creation "out of nothing" as a truth full of promise and hope. Thus the mother of seven sons encourages them for martyrdom:

I do not know how you came into being in my womb. It was not I who gave you life and breath, nor I who set in order the elements within each of you. Therefore the Creator of the world, who shaped the beginning of man and devised the origin of all things, will in his mercy give life and breath back to you again, since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his laws. . . Look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. Thus also mankind comes into being.

Catholics do not teach evolution, It's obvious to see. You've yet to provide a text that says otherwise, you've yet to prove that the pope proclaimed if definitively as a dogma-you haven't even provided documentation that he even SAID ANYTHING about it. Please, I ask you humbly to do so.

[BG45]

Coming a bit late to this, but thought I'd give it a shot.
[quote name='Lord Philip' post='1392902' date='Sep 25 2007, 02:33 PM']Now to any Protestants out there: I know you do not need help from your Catholic bretheren to make your arguments for you. What do you think? Didn't Luther divide himself from the Church that was there from the beginning (whether it became corrupt is not an issue: it was still the Church)? What do you make of that? What Scriptural support is there for such an action and a continuation of that action?

God bless,

Philip[/quote]

The issue of Martin Luther. He was an advocate of change in the Church at first, from the corrupt practices of the time period. I sincerely doubt, and this is just my opinion, not something I can back up with facts, that he would have done what he did, if he knew the results that would stretch to the present day.

I've seen 'evidence' presented in the (in)famous Chick tract, [u]The Death Cookie[/u]. "Then one day, one of the children found the sacred scriptures." A character implied to be Martin Luther (a boy) says, "What's this? It looks interesting. Let's see what it says..." And paraphrases Romans 5:1 saying "we are justified by faith", and in every church I've been to, the attitude is "faith alone".

Which, technically, is correct, given that Romans 5:1 states:
[quote]Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,[/quote]

However, Chick, and most who cite this verse as evidence, tend to overlook the very next verse, Romans 5:2:
[quote]through whom we have gained access (by faith) to this grace in which we stand, and we boast in hope of the glory of God.[/quote]

We are not saved by faith alone (Sola Fide), but by Grace.

Granted, I've not hit Sola Scriptura yet, but my approach to it, is something I see as more of a common sense thing, broken down into two basic problems.

1) The Roman Catholic Church assembled the Bible.

2) The Apocrypha/Deuterocanon. The act of taking these from the Scriptures just seems wrong to my sensibilities. Whenever a group tries to censor an existing work, there must be a reason for it, and I doubt that it was because God told someone to.

I've never seen anything in Scripture that I would think would suggest that schism is appropriate. In fact, much advice, is to confront a brother who has wronged you, and to cast out as only a last resort. (Matthew 18:15-17 being a good example of this.) But I ramble, and apologize for doing so while half asleep.

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1402390' date='Oct 14 2007, 01:55 PM']I agree.

I don't go to any church anymore, because I see the Babylonian system in all of them.

I won't honour Halloween, Christmas, or Easter as biblical holidays.

That's my choice, and since every church does, it goes to show, you can't organize something without the Babylonian world system affecting it.[/quote]

I don't have time to answer you as you deserve (I do hope to get that time soon), but to me it sounds like the gates of hell have overcome the Church in your mind. How is that Scriptural?

[GodChaser]

[quote name='Lord Philip' post='1403044' date='Oct 15 2007, 01:15 PM']I don't have time to answer you as you deserve (I do hope to get that time soon), but to me it sounds like the gates of hell have overcome the Church in your mind. How is that Scriptural?[/quote]
It hasn't overcome me. I'm fine, and no matter what the gates of hell sends my way, I overcome it.

I could tell you guys stories of the battles I fight against occultists, no matter what they do, I remain alive, and I bind their power with the blood of the lamb and the word of my testimony, that I am a sheep lead to the slaughter, but yea, I am more than a conqueror through him that loved me, Jesus Christ!

So, I don't think the Gates of Hell have overcome the church.

But you got to wonder, how hundreds of satanists posing as Catholics were able to abuse so many children. They do it in other denominations, but you have to agree, if Satanists can get into your organization to destroy young children, then your leadership is pretty much asleep at the wheel, and the people who allowed them into the priesthood were obviously not intune with the spirit of God, because God would have never allowed that.

I feel sorry for all of you, that the enemy can invade your organization and destroy children like that.

Edited October 16, 2007 by GodChaser