{"id":78562,"date":"2020-11-09T11:55:53","date_gmt":"2020-11-09T18:55:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/?p=78562"},"modified":"2021-01-11T06:15:48","modified_gmt":"2021-01-11T13:15:48","slug":"spam-evangelism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/2020\/11\/09\/spam-evangelism\/","title":{"rendered":"Spam Evangelism"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I just had a loooooong comment added to my article explaining the meaning of “IHS”<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the difference between a Christian and a Protestant. If we are to FULLY lean on God\u2019s Word, we are to be called \u201cChristian\u201d 3 times in the NT. Obviously, we are no Jewish\/Hebrew, and we are the bride, NOT the chosen people of God. I have been called a Protestant and never understood why, as it is a title, NOT a belief. I believe in God\u2019s Word, that Jesus (who is God in the flesh) became man to die for our sins and ONLY through his sacrifice, I am saved, by grace NOT by works \u201clest any man should boast\u201d. So, biblically speaking, there are only 2 kinds of people; believers and non-believers, aka \u201csheep and the goat\u2019s. Not sure if I may have missed it in the Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic of being called a Protestant, but there is that.

Scripture is the authority, as it IS Jesus (John 1:1) and if you do not accept that verse, then you have issues you need to figure out before discussing any scripture or claim (generalization, NOT a finger point). So, if Jesus IS the Word of God, and is God, within his Word (himself) he promises to preserve His Word and never changes. Would we agree on that? Now, if we agree with that, then we can logically conclude, only 1 version of the Word of God that is among men is correct. That meaning; certain versions have pieces added to and others have some taken away. So, then, which ones?!

Now, my next question(s) are as follows, how would a Catholic respond (with scripture and other sources) for the following information:

For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman Empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the \u201cconversion\u201d of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine provided religious toleration with the Edict of Milan in AD 313, effectively lifting the ban on Christianity. Later, in AD 325, Constantine called the Council of Nicea in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine and his successors promoted progressively became a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.

Most Roman Catholic beliefs and practices regarding Mary are completely absent from the Bible. Where did those beliefs come from? The Roman Catholic view of Mary has far more in common with the Isis mother-goddess religion of Egypt than it does with anything taught in the New Testament. Interestingly, the first hints of Catholic Mariology occur in the writings of Origen, who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which happened to be the focal point of Isis worship.

The Lord\u2019s Supper being a consumption of the literal body and blood of Jesus is not taught in the Bible. The idea that bread and wine are miraculously transformed into the literal body and blood of Jesus (transubstantiation) is not biblical. However, several ancient pagan religions, including Mithraism, which was very popular in the Roman Empire, had some form of \u201ctheophagy\u201d (the eating of one\u2019s god) as a ritualistic practice.

Roman Catholicism has \u201csaints\u201d one can pray to in order to gain a particular blessing. For example, Saint Gianna Beretta Molla is the patron saint of fertility. Francis of Assisi is the patron saint of animals. There are multiple patron saints of healing and comfort. Nowhere is even a hint of this taught in Scripture. Just as the Roman pantheon of gods had a god of love, a god of peace, a god of war, a god of strength, a god of wisdom, etc., so the Catholic Church has a saint who is \u201cin charge\u201d over each of these and many other categories. Many Roman cities had a god specific to the city, and the Catholic Church provided \u201cpatron saints\u201d for cities as well.

The idea that the Roman bishop is the vicar of Christ, the supreme leader of the Christian Church, is utterly foreign to the Word of God. The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, again, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. After the western half of the Roman Empire collapsed, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors\u2014Pontifex Maximus.

Many more examples could be given. These four should suffice in demonstrating the origin of the Catholic Church. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church denies the pagan origin of its beliefs and practices. The Catholic Church disguises its pagan beliefs under layers of complicated theology and church tradition. Recognizing that many of its beliefs and practices are utterly foreign to Scripture, the Catholic Church is forced to deny the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.

The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church \u201cChristianized\u201d the pagan religions and \u201cpaganized\u201d Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the idolatrous people of the Roman Empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the Roman world for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God\u2019s Word.

Second Timothy 4:3\u20134 declares, \u201cFor the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.\u201d<\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The comment is what I call “Spam Evangelism”. This is where someone goes around pasting the same text on any website they can find. It usually begins as a simple question but quickly degenerates into a confusing long list of challenges to Catholic doctrine which jump from topic to topic. In this case, it wasn’t even posted on an article which related to Catholic doctrine! When I respond, 99% of the time I never receive a reply…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fortunately for the person who posted this, Heath, I have a policy of always answering questions! Additionally, I want to provide a resource to anyone else who has this posted on their blogs or social media pages…<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Comment Breakdown…<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Topic #1: Christianity and Protestantism<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The commenter began with this question:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the difference between a Christian and a Protestant[?]<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Any dictionary would give a good answer to this question. A Protestant is a kind of Christian whose theology broadly accords with the Fathers of the Reformation. While Protestant theology is not uniform, it is typically characterized by its endorsement of The Five Solas<\/a> and rejection of Catholicism. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If we are to FULLY lean on God\u2019s Word, we are to be called \u201cChristian\u201d 3 times in the NT. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

I wonder if Heath realizes that we were called “Christian” long before it was written down in Scripture and, not only that, the word was probably initially used as a pejorative? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Obviously, we are no Jewish\/Hebrew, and we are the bride, NOT the chosen people of God. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Our friend might want to see what St. Paul (Colossians 3:12<\/a>) and St. Peter (1 Peter 2:9<\/a>) have to say on the matter since they both refer to their Christian recipients in those terms…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have been called a Protestant and never understood why, as it is a title, NOT a belief. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

As with most titles, the title is used as a placeholder which indicates a set of beliefs – Atheist, Arian, Seballanist, Calvinist etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I believe in God\u2019s Word, that Jesus (who is God in the flesh) became man to die for our sins and ONLY through his sacrifice, I am saved, by grace NOT by works \u201clest any man should boast\u201d.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This just makes you a Christian. Any Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant should be able to affirm exactly the same thing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, biblically speaking, there are only 2 kinds of people; believers and non-believers, aka \u201csheep and the goat\u2019s. Not sure if I may have missed it in the Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic of being called a Protestant, but there is that.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Since Protestantism didn’t arise until 1,500 years after Jesus gave the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, using the term “Protestant” would have utterly bewildered his listeners, particularly since they didn’t even know what a “Christian” was at that time. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Topic #2: The Word of God<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Scripture is the authority, as it IS Jesus (John 1:1) and if you do not accept that verse, then you have issues you need to figure out before discussing any scripture or claim (generalization, NOT a finger point). <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This is rather clumsily expressed, but yes, Jesus is the Word of God and we find God’s Word recorded in Sacred Scripture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, if Jesus IS the Word of God, and is God, within his Word (himself) he promises to preserve His Word and never changes. Would we agree on that?<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Another clumsy sentence, but sure, I’d affirm that Jesus is Word of God and the Scripture talks about God’s Word being preserved. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, if we agree with that, then we can logically conclude, only 1 version of the Word of God that is among men is correct. That meaning; certain versions have pieces added to and others have some taken away. So, then, which ones?!<\/em><\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Is he alluding to the fact that the Fathers of the Reformation removed books from the Bible in the 16th Century?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, my next question(s) are as follows, how would a Catholic respond (with scripture and other sources) for the following information:<\/em><\/em><\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

I’m not entirely sure what that preamble was all about, but it seems that we’re now changing subject…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Topic #3: The Early Church<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman Empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This is correct. However, I wonder if Heath has ever read the writings of the Christians during that era? I ask this because when I read them they sound awfully Catholic<\/a>…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This changed after the \u201cconversion\u201d of the Roman Emperor Constantine.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Technically he only completed his conversion with his deathbed baptism, but okay…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Constantine provided religious toleration with the Edict of Milan in AD 313, effectively lifting the ban on Christianity. Later, in AD 325, Constantine called the Council of Nicea in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine and his successors promoted progressively became a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Here our friend makes an unsupported assertion. I’ve already pointed to the evidence that the Early Church was Catholic<\/a>. What evidence does he have? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Topic #4: The Mother of God<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Most Roman Catholic beliefs and practices regarding Mary are completely absent from the Bible. Where did those beliefs come from? The Roman Catholic view of Mary has far more in common with the Isis mother-goddess religion of Egypt than it does with anything taught in the New Testament. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Once again he makes an assertion, but doesn’t actually give any evidence to support the claim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Interestingly, the first hints of Catholic Mariology occur in the writings of Origen, who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which happened to be the focal point of Isis worship.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This is both misleading and demonstrably false.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why do I think it’s misleading? In the previous paragraph he had been contrasting the “good” Church prior to Constantine with the “bad” Church which came afterwards. Someone reading his comment would naturally conclude that Origen was one of those nasty theologians who came after<\/strong> Constantine. However, he didn’t, he died in AD 254. This was before Constantine was even born. As a result, his argument backfires, since he is telling us that devotion to Mary appeared early in Church history, long before the rise of Constantine!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But why did I also say that it’s demonstrably false? Off the top of my head I can think of two sources which speak of Mary in a Catholic manner which both predate Origen. The first The Protoevangelium of James<\/em> which speaks, among other things, of her perpetual virginity. There is also Irenaeus of Lyons who, in his Against Heresies<\/em>, starts to unpack the theology of Mary as “The New Eve”, which is the foundation for all Marian theology. Not only do these sources predate Origen, there are several others which are contemporaneous with Origen, such as Gregory the wonderworker’s homily where he refers to her as Theotokos<\/em> and an early Christian hymn, Sub Tuum Praesidium<\/a><\/em>, which asks for her intercession. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Topic #5: The Eucharist<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Lord\u2019s Supper being a consumption of the literal body and blood of Jesus is not taught in the Bible. The idea that bread and wine are miraculously transformed into the literal body and blood of Jesus (transubstantiation) is not biblical.<\/em><\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Apart from…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Jesus telling us so in plain terms at the last supper (Matthew 26<\/a>, Mark 14<\/a>, Luke 22<\/a>)<\/li>
  2. Jesus repeatedly affirming that His flesh is “real food” and His blood is “real drink” in the Bread of Life Discourse<\/a>. He even says that we need to consume his flesh and blood in order to have eternal life. He couldn’t have used more explicit and emphatic language.<\/li>
  3. St. Paul’s dire warnings (1 Corinthians 10<\/a>)<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    However, several ancient pagan religions, including Mithraism, which was very popular in the Roman Empire, had some form of \u201ctheophagy\u201d (the eating of one\u2019s god) as a ritualistic practice.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Once more we have bad history. The Mithraism of which he is speaking postdates the rise of Christianity. The great Christian apologist and Roman martyr, Justin, mentions the Mithras copycats when he writes a defense of Christianity to the Emperor Antionius Pius around AD 150-155. After describing the Mass in perfect detail, Justin says:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This the wicked devils have imitated, commanding the same thing to be done in the mysteries of Mithras. There, in the mystic rites of initiation, bread and a cup of water are placed amid certain incantations. This you already know or can discover<\/em><\/p>St. Justin Martyr, First Apology (AD 155)<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    I do wonder why this commenter keeps looking to Pagans for explanations rather than to Christians. For example, if he read the writings of Ignatius of Antioch, Bishop and Martyr, he would know how the Early Church viewed the Eucharist:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Let no man deceive himself: if any one be not within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God \u2026He, therefore, that does not assemble with the Church, has even by this manifested his pride, and condemned himself\u2026[see to it] that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but [which means] that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ

    Take heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to [show forth ] the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever you do, you may do it according to [the will of] God

    [The heretics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again\u2026<\/p>St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letters to the Ephesians, Philadelphians, and Smyrnaeans (AD 107)<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Topic #6: Saints<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
    \"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Roman Catholicism has \u201csaints\u201d one can pray to in order to gain a particular blessing. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    What we do is ask for is their intercession, just in the same way that you might ask a friend at your church to pray for you. The Saints have no power in and of themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    For example, Saint Gianna Beretta Molla is the patron saint of fertility.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Note the careful word choice here in an attempt to try and draw a connection between ancient Pagan fertility gods and the 20th Century Christian who is the Patroness of Doctors, Mothers and Unborn children…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Francis of Assisi is the patron saint of animals. There are multiple patron saints of healing and comfort. Nowhere is even a hint of this taught in Scripture.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Hardly surprising since Francis lived in the 13th Century!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Just as the Roman pantheon of gods had a god of love, a god of peace, a god of war, a god of strength, a god of wisdom, etc., so the Catholic Church has a saint who is \u201cin charge\u201d over each of these and many other categories. Many Roman cities had a god specific to the city, and the Catholic Church provided \u201cpatron saints\u201d for cities as well.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Once again our friend goes to unnamed Pagan sources rather than to Christian writings. Aside from the fact that we find saintly intercession in the Book of Revelation<\/a>. We find it also in the Shepherd of Hermas (AD 80), Clement of Alexandria (AD 208), Origen (AD 233), Cyprian of Carthage (AD 253) and Methodius (AD 305). We also find requests for intercession on Christian gravestones of this era. We also find related practices, such as the veneration of relics and saint feast days which are attested to in the martyrdom of Polycarp (AD 155).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Topic #7: The Papacy<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
    \"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    The idea that the Roman bishop is the vicar of Christ, the supreme leader of the Christian Church, is utterly foreign to the Word of God. <\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Our friend doesn’t seem to like the title “vicar of Christ”<\/em>, yet St. Paul says that every Christian is an ambassador for Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20<\/a>, Ephesians 6:10<\/a>), which is essentially the same function as a vicar, just in a more general sense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    I do find it strange though, that he thinks that the idea of having a leader of the Church is “utterly foreign to the Word of God”<\/em> when it is very<\/strong> clear from Scripture that Peter fulfilled this role in the life of the Early Church, an authority given to him by Christ no less (Matthew 16<\/a>)!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, again, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. After the western half of the Roman Empire collapsed, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors\u2014Pontifex Maximus.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Once again Heath seems unaware of Christian history. Does he know that Pope Clement intervened in the dispute in the Corinthian Church over a thousand kilometers away, even while John was at nearby Patmos? He’ll also find more support for the Catholic position in pre-Constantinian writers: Hermas, Ignatius, Dionysius, Ireneaus, Eusebius of Caesaria, and Cyprian of Cathage. I think one example will suffice:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Lord says to Peter: \u201c\u2026upon this rock I will build my Church\u201d . . .On him he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep, and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?<\/p>St. Cyprian, The Unity of the Catholic Church 4 (A.D. 251)<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Concluding Remarks<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Assuming what you’re trying to prove…<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
    \"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Many more examples could be given. These four should suffice in demonstrating the origin of the Catholic Church. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church denies the pagan origin of its beliefs and practices. The Catholic Church disguises its pagan beliefs under layers of complicated theology and church tradition. Recognizing that many of its beliefs and practices are utterly foreign to Scripture, the Catholic Church is forced to deny the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.<\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Notice here that our friend hasn’t actually offered evidence<\/strong> for his claims, simply assertions. Likewise, he assumes<\/strong> Sola Scriptura<\/em> in his approach. He assumes<\/strong> that all Christian doctrine and practice should be explicitly given in Sacred Scripture. However, I can guarantee that he can’t point to a passage in Scripture which affirms this because such a passage does not exist. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Sawing off the branch where you’re sitting…<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
    \"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church \u201cChristianized\u201d the pagan religions and \u201cpaganized\u201d Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the idolatrous people of the Roman Empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the Roman world for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God\u2019s Word.<\/em><\/em><\/p>Blog Comment<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    The concluding paragraph introduces two big problems for this commenter…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. The first problem is that he is effectively saying that “real” Christianity disappeared from the Earth until the Reformation, despite the promises of Christ not to abandon His Church. This is the same belief as the Mormon Church. This means that, for the majority of Christian history, there has not been “real” Christianity. This reflects very poorly on Jesus’ choice of Apostles and their ability to teach the Faith, given that they produced successors who, despite enduring unimaginable persecution by the Roman State, immediately fell into apostasy, with no authentic Christianity to speak against them<\/a>.<\/li>
    2. The second problem is that if Heath truly believes that the Church was compromised with Constantine, how can he trust such a Church with the discernment of the Biblical canon and preservation of the Biblical text? After all, would you trust apostates to discern, assemble and preserve your<\/strong> Scriptures?<\/a><\/li><\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      I just had a loooooong comment added to my article explaining the meaning of “IHS”. Fortunately for the person who posted this, I have a policy of always answering questions! Additionally, I want to provide a resource to anyone else who has this posted on their blogs or social media pages…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":78567,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_crdt_document":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[28,17],"tags":[400,41,2969,432,5747],"class_list":["post-78562","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-apologetics","category-faith","tag-catholicism","tag-christianity","tag-featured","tag-protestantism","tag-spam"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/Spam-1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78562","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=78562"}],"version-history":[{"count":19,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78562\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":79476,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78562\/revisions\/79476"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/78567"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78562"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78562"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78562"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}