return to Bible Probe
Visit the Message Board

Protestant Misunderstanding of Catholics

I am both half Catholic and half Protestant Evangelist. I have the utmost respect and understanding for both the Catholic Church's and Protestant traditions!  But, in these "Later Days", should I see either of them get close to becoming, morphing into, or give into the coming one world religion --I would quickly defect.  Many hard line Christians are mistaken in believing this coming one world religion will consist of only Catholics and Protestants.  I believe it will be much more than that.  Protestants and Catholics have always been the same religion anyways (both Christians adoring Jesus)!  They are merely different denominations; different "departments" of the ship--but with both having the same goal. 

I can tell you one thing I know for certain, Protestants, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Messianic Jews all make up the "Body of Christ".  Those who follow Jesus and His teachings are His "Body". 

Early in Church history we were all one Catholic (meaning universal), apostolic church.  There are good and valid reasons why we are split over positional authority.  But there is no good reason why we should not love and try to understand each other.  Both Catholics and Protestants have added immeasurably to Christianity through different traditions.  See the Church as being one in Romans 12:4-5, 1 Corinthians 10:17 and 12:13.

The Catholic Church has existed since the time of the apostles.  Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from the unity with the pope in 1054 A.D.  Protestant churches came about during the Reformation which began to happen in 1517 A.D.  The popes/bishops of Rome can be traced back in the Catholic Church to Peter.  The bishop of Rome who succeeded Peter was Linus.  Linus is mentioned by 2 Timothy 4:21.  Despite some of the Catholic leaders over the centuries having been unwise, corrupt and some prone to heresy - the Catholic Church itself has existed for almost 2000 years.  Jesus was aware that members of His church would be both good and bad.  The word "Catholic" means Universal.  The Catholic Church has been known by this name since as early as 107 A.D., when Bishop Ignatius (of Antioch) used the word Catholic to describe the church passed from Jesus to the apostles.

A good reason for Apostolic tradition:

The passage by Irenaeus (Adv. haereses, III, iii, 3) reads:

"The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes.

Although for the most part--working separately--we still have together nearly finished the job of spreading the Gospel of Jesus to every dark corner of the world.  Protestant revivals can not be dismissed as anything less than amazing grace poured out by the true shepherd Himself. 

Jesus prayed to the Father for unity in His church.  John 17:11 (KJV) "Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou has given me, that they may be one, as we are".

What makes me write about this misunderstanding of Catholics by Protestants to begin with - is that I have become quite sick of all the Protestant posters at our non-denominational Bible Talk Message Board here, who somehow have come to the conclusion that it is their Christian duty to go about the internet with one and only one purpose in mind --attacking our fellow Christians (Catholics).  I remind these people that to even post these false messages is bearing "false witness against their neighbors". 

All I can say is there must be many Christian "hate sites" where these immature people copy and paste this information from, because none of it hasn't been seen here more than once.  Oddly enough, in over 5 years of monitoring this message board, I have not one time seen even one similar Catholic "attack" on Protestants, or even one bad word said by a Catholic about a Protestant.  What is written below may appear that I am siding only with Catholics; but I am not!  Catholic traditions are presented below simply because these are what most Protestants usually do not understand.

The Body of Christ just has to get used to the fact that we vary in how we worship Jesus and venerate His earthly mother and the saints.  Should we not also try to understand why Messianic Jews remain mostly Jewish and honor their Jewish customs?  To not do this we would find ourselves questioning Paul, the apostles, and the Lord Himself- who all remained somewhat Jewish.  As late as thirty years after the resurrection of Jesus, Paul was still claiming to be observant of Jewish practice. This was Paul's personal preference/tradition.... Acts 23:9, 24:14, 25:8, 28:17

Catholics most certainly do teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ! The Catholic Mass celebrates Jesus at the very center of their alter/worship each day.  Each minute of each day, tens of thousands of Catholic priests, nuns and monks are praying to Jesus from all over the world.  Catholic Charities is the largest in the world.  Catholics know and teach that salvation is by "the Grace of Jesus".  They realize you cannot receive Grace without Faith first. 

Scripture (Bible Alone) is Not Enough for Salvation:
Catholics do differ with Protestants over the Protestant claim that all one needs is the Bible and several other things.  The Catholic Church relies on both Scripture and its 2000 year apostolic traditions.  This idea of Scripture itself is taught nowhere in the Bible itself!  Seek and ye shall find ---does not have to mean within scripture only... Scripture itself seems to hint that scripture alone is NOT enough. If so, the Holy Spirit,  faith, and our love for Jesus, then must bridge the gap in understanding. This idea of scripture itself is taught nowhere in the Bible itself!  The Bible actually seems to hint that this "Bible alone" theory is false. See 2 Peter 1:20-21, 3:15-16. 

Tradition can be both good and bad. Jewish tradition certainly was one thing Jesus spoke out against vis-à-vis the Law versus the Commandments, in regards to the Jewish Sanhedrin and Pharisees.

On the other hand New Testament writers constantly appealed to the scriptures as their base of authority in declaring what was and was not true biblical teaching:  Matt. 21:42; John 2:22; 1 Cor. 15:3-4; 1 Peter 1:10-12; 2:2; 2 Peter 1:17-19, etc.  Then we have Paul saying that those who consult scripture frequently are noble-minded. Paul in Acts 17:11 says, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so."  Paul commends those who examine God's word for the test of truth, not for the traditions of men.  Therefore, we can see that the biblical means of determining spiritual truth is by appealing to scripture, not tradition.  In fact, it is the scriptures that refute the traditions of men in many instances.

For God is not the author of confusion, but of Peace. See: 1 Corinthians 14:33.

What is a Catholic Mass?
The Catholic Mass is a commemoration and celebration of Jesus as God and our Savior!  So isn't a Protestant Service!  Within this celebration, the body and blood of Christ is adored as the high part of each Mass.  Communion is celebrated at every Catholic Mass - just as Jesus asked us to do when He said; "Do this in remembrance of me".   The Catholic Church does not teach that Christ dies again during the Catholic Mass.  They teach that Jesus died once for our redemption.  The Catholic Mass is a mystical celebration, steep in tradition,  dating back to the first century.  In a mystical way, the very same sacrifice that was made by Jesus on Calvary is made present on the altar.  The Eucharist is celebrated at the Mass both in obedience to Jesus, telling us to do this (bread and wine=His body and blood) in remembrance of Him; and to do as Paul reminded us.  Paul and Jesus both told us that the bread and wine really become the actual body and blood of Jesus, by the miracle of God's grace.  See: 1 Corinthians 11:27-30. below:

Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Is Communion Important? Yes! Jesus said so....


John 6:30 begins a colloquy that took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that "our ancestors ate manna in the desert." Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. "Give us this bread always," they said. Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." At this point the Jews mistakenly understood him to be speaking metaphorically.

Again and Again

"I myself am the living bread come down from heaven. If anyone eats this bread he shall live forever; the bread I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world. Let me solemnly assure you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you have no life in you. He who feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has life eternal, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is real food, and my blood real drink. The man who feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the Father who has life sent me and I have life because of the Father, so the man who feed on me will have life because of me" (John 6:51, 53-57)

None of this language (hard saying) is symbolic! Jesus meant what He said.

Moreover, even when there is grumbling and objections, and even after some disciples abandon our Lord because of this teaching, Jesus nowhere says, "Oh, please stop buddies. Don't leave me. I meant this symbolically."

Our Lord stood by His teaching. Most importantly--He repeated this "hard teaching" twice.

I was a "bad teacher". I was once an instructor for a Naval Intelligence course in ocean surveillance, in Norfolk, Virginia. Sometimes I would literally "stomp the floor" with my foot while instructing something that was to appear on a very, very hard exam which was to follow the course. Hoping this point would sink in --and that the students would zoom in on this --BECAUSE they would see it again later. I wanted them to pass their end of course exam.

This is what Jesus did by repeating this. He basically is saying; "don't miss this --it literally is something you MUST get"...

In short you better at least once solemnly receive the Body & Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ (Communion) at least once in your life --in A Christian setting... To receive Holy Communion unworthily is a serious abuse of the sacred body and blood of the Lord, and therefore a sacrilege.

"The nearer to Jesus, the nearer to the perfect calm of heaven; and the further from Jesus, the nearer to that troubled sea which tosses with the continual unrest of the wicked. There is no peace to the man or woman who doth not dwell constantly under the shadow of the cross; for Jesus is our peace, and if he be absent, our peace is absent too."

Paul and Jesus both told us that the bread and wine really become the actual body and blood of Jesus, by the miracle of God's grace. See: 1 Corinthians 11:27-29.

Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

IMPORTANT: Don't ever take the receiving of Holy Communion lightly. Make a serious and heartfelt confession of all your sins to the Lord before ever receiving His blessed body and blood.


Those who preach the false Sabbatarianism (Saturday worship) theology don't want to hear this. But, tradition and History tell us that early Christians met in homes, usually on a Sunday and celebrated the Body and Blood of Christ with bread and wine.

Catholics Honor Mary, but Worship Jesus only!
The Catholic side of me has a hard time understanding the lack of recognition, which itself borders on actual disrespect - that most Protestants show toward Mary the earthly mother of Jesus. Muslims do not understand the word begotten (as Jesus is one with the Father). And Protestants do not understand the words "worship/adore" vs "honor/venerate".  Muslims have carnal thoughts about God and heaven, and they cannot conceive the fact that God is spirit and light--and can do what He wants, and also things we can never understand.

Catholics worship and adore Jesus, but honor and venerate Mary - just as the early church did.  The question really is -- how much veneration is too much?  Can one go overboard with this?  Each person has to answer that themselves.

Was it not God Himself who first honored Mary when He sent Gabriel, who addressed Mary as "Blessed" and full of grace?  The angel Gabriel is a messenger.  So Blessed is God's own words.  The word itself indicates God Himself has elevated her. For us not to also -- disrespects God's own judgment.

As to the Catholics calling Mary, "Queen of Heaven".  Sure there is no biblical reference to this. But, can you think of any other woman in history, full of grace more, or  who deserves this honor more? Didn't Jesus himself show her the ultimate honor Himself, when He looked down from the cross and told John to take care of her?  Whose heart was torn the most seeing Jesus on that cross atop Calvary?

I just have to say--I cannot follow the Protestant lead of "Mary bashing". This disrespects both Jesus and Mary.  Most serious Protestant ministers do not Mary bash.  That is comforting.  But do they actively try and stop it?

As to the Marian appearances we reference here at Bible Probe. If they are not in line with Scripture then they have probably been counterfeited by satan. Many Marian appearances I will not "touch" for that reason. At Bible Probe, we do use many references to the 30 years of the Bayside, New York appearances--because this seems to be very much in line with Scripture--and they are very interesting and revealing.  Most are corroborating. There are also problems with this Marian appearance.  I'll be the first to say this.  I have to question just why it was said that Franklin Delano Roosevelt is in Hell?  There was no explanation given.  So even the Bayside appearances have to be looked at with at least some skepticism.  We know that the Roosevelt State Department severely limited the ability of Jews fleeing Europe to immigrate to the U.S., and flee the Nazi Holocaust in 1941. Is this why????

Catholics pray to Mary for intercession. However, they only pray to Jesus for the remission of their sins and for their salvation.  Catholics do emulate holy Christians they call saints.  They look to these as role models.

When Catholics pray to Mary, they are asking for intercession. If anyone has a problem with intercessory prayer I suggest they ask why is it that Scripture shows Paul asking the churches to pray for him. See: 1 Timothy 2:1-4.

The prayer "Hail Mary" ends with: "Holy Mary mother of God, Pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen"

The Rosary consists of many beads representing when a "Hail Mary" should be said. But it also has beads triggering the "Our Father" prayer. This Our Father is the very same one Jesus taught us to say.  It is the same Protestants say. 

The "biggie" prayers for Catholics are the "Our Father" and the "Act of Contrition". The Act of Contrition is addressed to Jesus, and goes like this: "Oh my God I am heartly sorry for having offending thee, and I detest all my sins -- because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell. But, most of all because they (sins) offend thee my God who art all good and deserving of all my love".

Graven Images? Worshipping statues?  Changing the Commandments?

This is a "bum rap" that seems to be perpetrated against Catholics by the Seventh Day Adventists.  Many Christians, especially Catholics, do use statues as "visual aids" when praying.  But, even Catholics do not pray to the plaster or wood as Seventh Day Adventists claim.  They are are thinking beyond this statue to God, Mary and the Saints.  No one is allowed by the Catholic Church to pray to images since they have no ears to hear or power to help us. The Catholic Church allows for the veneration (respect) of images as long as the honor is directed towards Christ and His saints.  Catholic Reverend M. James Divis writes:

And the LORD said to Moses, "Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live." And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.
... Numbers 21:8-9

Recently we received an 80-page booklet entitled "What's Behind The New World Order?" It can be traced back to the writings of Ellen G. White, foundress of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. According to this booklet, the Catholic Church is behind the New World Order. The booklet claims that this is true, since the Church is the beast of Revelation (Rev. 17). It attempts to prove this claim by exposing the "marks of the beast." Due to limited space, only one charge will be considered. This is a common charge used against the Catholic Church.

Read more about this by Reverend Divis: here

Read about the Seventh Day Adventist (SBA) history, and some more absurd notions by that denomination here:

SBA prophetess, Ellen White once called all other Christian denominations "Babylon", and she contradicted Jesus about the "Greatest" Commandment....

The Assumption of Mary into Heaven.

Belief that Mary has been taken up and is now in heaven with both her body and her soul has been part of the teaching of the Catholic Church since the earliest centuries of Christianity. The strongest evidence for the belief of the early Christians is found in ancient liturgies and in homilies in honor of Mary's passing. A second source, widely spread in the Middle Ages is known as the Transitus writings.

By the end of the Middle Ages, belief in Mary's Assumption into heaven was well established theologically and part of the devotional expressions of the people. The word Assumption comes from the Latin verb assumere, meaning "to take to oneself." Our Lord, Jesus Christ took Mary home to himself where he is.

For the ex-Catholic monk and Protestant Martin Luther, Mary's Assumption was an understood fact, as his homily of 1522 indicates, in spite of the fact that Mary's Assumption is not expressly reported in Sacred scripture. For Protestant reformer, Martin Butzer (1545), there was no reason to doubt about the Assumption of the Virgin into heavenly glory. "Indeed, no Christian doubts that the most worthy Mother of the Lord lives with her beloved Son in heavenly joy." (Marienlexikon, vol l3, 200)

H. Bullinger (1590), also a Protestant reformer, sought for a theological foundation for the Assumption in scripture. He showed that the Old Testament tells of Elias, taken to heaven bodily to teach us about our immortality, and – because of our immortal soul – to respectfully honor the bodies of the saints. Against this backdrop he states, "Because of this, we believe that the pure immaculate chamber of the God-bearer, the Virgin Mary, is a temple of the Holy Spirit, that is her holy body, borne by angels into heaven." (Marienlexikon, vol l3, 200)

In the light of a long history of Christian belief since patristic times, in 1950, Pope Pius XII defined Mary's Assumption into Heaven as a dogma of Roman Catholicism:

"the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heaven."

The proclamation of this dogma is found in the encyclical: Munificentissimus Deus.

READ THIS "Transitus Mariae" Account here:

Catholics have Conceded to Protestants, that Salvation is by Grace (and not by Works):

So there is now no longer a great "dogma gulf" between Catholics and Protestants

Indulgences were removed from the Catholic Church in 1582's Council of Trent

Many Protestants believe that Salvation is by "Faith" alone.  When actually, salvation is by the "Grace" of Jesus.  Faith alone will not get anyone to Heaven.  Jesus' Grace will!  Jesus said it is not enough to have faith in him.  We must also obey the commandments. Jesus said; "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say" See: Luke 6:46, Matthew 7:21-23, and 19:16-21.

He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Matthew 19:18-19

Catholics Never taught Salvation by Good Works as many internet posters lie:
Catholic Dogma, like fundamental Protestant dogma is salvation by the Grace of Jesus alone.  Faith is the first step in receiving the Lord's Grace.  Catholic dogma rightfully adds that the proof of salvation is good works (fruit of the Spirit).   In the Joint "Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" between Lutheran Ministers and the Catholic Church in Augsburg, Germany in October 1999 this was confirmed.  Read here.  In Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 9:16 we are told that we do not earn salvation through good works (as Muslims believe).  Instead, our Faith in Jesus places us in a special Grace-filled relationship with God so that our obedience and love, combined with our Faith, will be rewarded with eternal life. Read: Romans 2:7 and Galatians 6:8-9. The Bible does not teach that Christians have a guarantee of heaven!  The Bible says that salvation will be assured to those who have Faith in Jesus AND are obedient to Him.

The "Fundamentalist Protestant" test of a true Christian has always had 5 points that a Christian must agree with.  It should be noted that all Catholics agree with all these 5 points:

1.  Christ was born of the Virgin Mary (Virgin birth)

2.  Jesus was God in the flesh

3.  Substitutional Atonement for our sins (by Jesus)

4.  Jesus rose from the dead.

5.  Jesus will return to earth.

From early Church history, we have a letter from Clement, who was the 3rd Bishop from Peter to head the Church in Rome.

Note how Irenaeus' passage below gives us an inkling of why we should pay attention to Church Tradition. When he speaks of Clement - he tells us that even Clement who was the 3rd head bishop from the apostles --had listened to and spoken to the apostles.   Clement himself tells us that he was a disciple of the Apostles: here.  According to Tertullian, writing in about 199 A.D., the Roman Church claimed that Clement was ordained by Peter himself (De Praescript., xxxii). Most Catholics think of Clement as the 4th Pope. Clement did leave us a writing of his. It was a letter to the Church at Corinth. See some of this far below... Or, click link to left to read this entire letter.

The passage by Irenaeus (Adv. haereses, III, iii, 3) reads:

"The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes.

From Clement's letter to the Church at Corinth:

A passage on the Holy Trinity is important. Clement uses the Old Testament affirmation "The Lord liveth", substituting the Trinity thus: "As God liveth, and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth and the Holy Spirit -- the faith and hope of the elect, so surely he that performeth", etc. (58). Christ is frequently represented as the High-Priest, and redemption is often referred to. Clement speaks out strongly against justification by works. Clement writes; "And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen".

Read Clement's entire Letter to the Corinthians: here


Catholics DO rightfully teach Infant Baptism in obedience to Jesus:
Catholic doctrine is that because of Original sin, we are all born without grace in our souls--so there is no way to have fellowship with God.  Jesus is God's benevolent way of solving this fellowship problem--as Jesus is the only mediator we have.  His sacrificial death makes our salvation possible.  But Jesus also said that nobody can enter the kingdom of God unless he is first born of "water and Spirit".  Read John 3:5, Titus 3:5, Romans 6:3-7, Acts 2:38, 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21.  This is why I believe that those denominations who teach Baptism at the age of reason only--are not being obedient to Jesus!  Baptism is the gateway to the Lord's Church!  What about those poor infants, children and others who die before Baptism?  The Apostles also practiced infant Baptism.  They baptized entire households.  A Church can surely do baptism for all infants--and then again when they reach the age of reasoning.  If you are in one of these denominations, gather a Christian friend - and solemnly baptize your infant over the sink - in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

Catholics, Protestants and Confession

(both are right - Catholics may be practicing "overkill". That's all.)

Catholics can use this for authority for the Sacrament of Confession:

Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. (John 20:19-23)

In fact, it is not the Catholic Church who is in apostasy right now, it is many of the Protestant churches who are.  The Catholic Church, unlike very many Protestant denominations --is actually standing fast against abortion, and homosexuals in the clergy.  Catholics are removing them from their clergy and nunneries following the recent priest abuse scandals which was due to them having let down their guard; unknowingly allowing homosexuals into their clergy since the 1970's. All the while many Protestant churches are now welcoming homosexuals into their clergy. Catholics also do not allow any of its members into satan's fan club, known as Masonry. Whereas, Protestants and Protestant clergymen fill the ranks of masonry.

Whether Peter handed the keys to the Church he received from Jesus to a successor, or whether indeed Jesus did hand these to Peter at all is somewhat lost in the wording of Scripture.

Catholics think Jesus did, and Protestants think He didn't.  This argument really cannot be solved fully until Jesus returns. Never-the-less, this is one reason Catholics site for their Sacrament of Confession.

Catholics say that the Apostles appointed other apostles -in a undemocratic way.  They believe the Church Jesus established is a theocracy.  Catholics point to the fact that
the 12 Apostles were not chosen by popular election, but rather Jesus picked them Himself. The leader of the 12, Peter, was also picked out by Jesus (Mat..16:19).  So, Catholics say:
"Peter" was chosen by Jesus to be the "leader" of the 12, and of the whole Church of Christ:

- In Matt.16, Jesus promised Peter the primacy
- In John 21, Jesus gave it to him.
- In Acts, Peter exercised it.


And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 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. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Matthew 16:16-19

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. Matthew 18:15-19

Protestants can use this for NOT confessing to a priest/minister:
can Catholics?

In light of the rather recent scandal in the Catholic Church of mostly homosexual priests molesting young boys (It happened in Protestant denominations too) I need to point out what the Catholic Church teaches about the Sacraments--even if given to you by a sinful priest.  First of all, Scripture makes it quite clear that we are ALL sinners.  Priests & Ministers are no exceptions.  The Catholic Church teaches that a Sacrament is no less holy/worthy when administered by a Priest who is living in sin.   Sacraments are received through the grace of the Lord Jesus, and not by the priest.

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. Acts 10:43

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 9-10

Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him. Luke 17:3-4

Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. Colossians 3:13

And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. Ephesians 4:32

Lord's Prayer: And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. Matthew 6:12


The Catholic Church is most likely not the Harlot or
 Babylon the Great!  Not even the Seven Hills!

Quite bluntly, those who have been falsely teaching that Catholicism is now the false Antichrist system are way off from the truth! It probably was during the dark ages when she "warred with the saints" via the Inquisition and indulgences, etc.  Those who first called for the Protestant Reformation (Wycliffe, Huss and Martin Luther) certainly had good reasons to think so!  See more here: Daniel's prophecy

Rome is probably not destroyed in the end time, it is Jerusalem and the temple mount that are destroyed by the battle of Armageddon. The revival of the temple mount and the Talmudic religion (including animal sacrifices) will be the end time work of the antichrist and his false prophet. The whore of Babylon is an evil world system, controlled by the antichrist, during the last days before Jesus’ return.

As to the number 666, I am only speculating here -but could this be a double prophecy, both a population number and the number the beast will require to be worn on either the right hand or forehead? Remember it is Israel, and more specifically Jerusalem that has always been the epicenter/focus of prophecy. Israel's population will soon reach 6.66 million. Also, the world population will also soon reach 6.66 billion.

On October 13th, 2004  - the Jewish Sanhedrin was reestablished in Tiberias by 71 Rabbis after 1600 years of absence.  This Jewish "High Court" of the Talmudic System may prove instrumental in elevating the Antichrist.

Jews have always been very quick to declare someone the Messiah (except the real one, Jesus). Dozens have been hailed as Messiah since the first century. The latest proclaimed to be the Messiah by the Lubavicher Hasidim is Rebbe Menahem Mendel Schneersohn of Crown Heights in New York, even though he died in 1994.  Among the most prominent were Bar Kochba and Shabbetai Zevi. From ancient times to the present, Jewish believers have prayed for the coming of messianic deliverance, a hope that has sustained the Jewish people through centuries of suffering and destruction.

Bar Kochba led a revolt against Rome in the years 132-135 A.D. During this revolt, one of the most famous figures in Jewish history, Rabbi Akiva, proclaimed him to be "King Messiah." Unfortunately, Bar Kochba, Akiva and thousands of Jews were killed in 135 A.D. when the Romans stormed the stronghold of Betar. Shabbetai Zevi, on the other hand, was a self-proclaimed Messiah. Throughout the world, Jews were persuaded that the Messiah had come and flocked to his court.  Flourishing in 17th-century Europe, the Shabbatean movement spread among both the common people and the rabbis. But when Shabbetai Zevi was arrested in 1666 by the Sultan of Turkey, he converted to Islam rather than face death.

For historic indicators that Jews will once again chose a false Messiah, and will willingly follow false teachers is this very germane example from the middle ages.  Prior to the early middle ages rabbis always concurred that the "suffering servant" passage of Isaiah 53 was a prediction of the Messiah.  Anyone who has ever read this knows immediately it speaks of Jesus suffering on the cross.  By the 11th century, pressure from those who applied this prophecy to Jesus was so great that the great, beloved Jewish scholar Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhak (known as Rashi), reinterpreted this chapter and said it referred to the nation of Israel and not the Messiah. Jewish scholars continue to maintain this false teaching today.  Not all rabbis accepted this “new” view.  Rabbi Mosheh Kohen ben Crispin of Cordova & Toledo (14th century), answered Rashi by saying: "The interpretation of Rashi distorts the passage from its natural meaning,” and “it was given of God as a description of the Messiah.  Rabbi Naphtali ben Asher Alltschuler (1500 A.D.) said;  “I will proceed to explain these verses of our own Messiah, may he come soon, I am surprised that Rashi and Kimchi have not with the Targums applied it to Messiah likewise.”  Though the language clearly speaks of one dying for our sins, Rashi's view which differed with the ancient Jewish sages, and Jewish Scripture itself caught on and prevails in Judaism today -- perhaps because it seemed to provide some answer to refute the believer's claims in Yeshua/Jesus. Going way back to the Babylonian Talmud, we find ancient sages disagreeing with Rabbi Rashi, as the Babylonian Talmud speaks of Isaiah 53 as a suffering/stricken messiah:

The Messiah -- what is his name? . . . The Rabbis say, the leprous one; those of the house of Rabbi say, the sick one, as it is said, "Surely he hath borne our sicknesses." (Sanhedrin 98b)

Prior to Rashi, the ancient commentators with one accord noted that the context clearly speaks of God's Anointed One, the Messiah. The Aramaic translation of this chapter, ascribed to Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel, a disciple of Hillel who lived early in the second century A.D:

Behold my servant Messiah shall prosper; he shall be high, and increase, and be exceeding strong: as the house of Israel looked to him through many days, because their countenance was darkened among the peoples, and their complexion beyond the sons of men. (Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 53, ad locum)

The words of Isaiah 53 are among clearest in all the Bible.  Also, it is no accident that it lays in the center of the Bible. The passage tells of an outstanding Servant of the Lord whose visage is marred and is afflicted and stricken. This "Suffering Servant"  has not deserved any pain or wounds, but was wounded through our transgressions, bruised through our iniquities, and with his wounds we are healed. The text presents the suffering Servant of the Lord who dies as a korban, or a recompense for guilt. He is then buried with the rich and wicked, but is gloriously resurrected to life. God permits His afflicted, and this exalted Servant endures this agonizing and painful suffering in order to remove the sins of many.   All of the ancient Jewish writings (Mishnah, Gemara, Talmud, Midrashin) all regard this portion of scripture as relating to the Messiah. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 98) teaches that Isaiah 53 refers to Messiah. The Targum of Jonathan begins it with the words Ha yatslakh avdee Mashikha, "Behold my servant the Messiah shall prosper"... 

The seven hills must have connection with Israel as that is the focus of the Messianic fulfillment.

Jerusalem is the location of the hill where the great whore sitteth. Rome or Catholicism is not the great whore.  Roman Catholicism appears to be presently falling apart from both within, or to be very weakened by satanic attacks from without. The homosexual infiltration, its dollar cost, and loss to its image, is one such attack from without. This may be the significance of Malachay's 12th century prophecy --seeing the last pope fleeing Rome after a great schism. It also is probably what the Second Secret of Fatima referred to.  The last pope (Peter the Roman) may be forced to leave as he may not even believe in God or he dissolves the papacy altogether.  If Roman Catholicism falls apart the beast will most likely fill the void with a "Counterfeit Church", a worldwide federation of religions, churches and denominations, that omit the name of Jesus; like the European Union, has omitted the mention of God. In addition to the Beast there will arise a False Prophet who will attest to the Beast as being God --and who will also probably be instrumental in this One World Religion which the ACLU and Masonry are right now so diligently working for.  That is another point of consideration.  If an occult outfit like world masonry has vowed to destroy the Catholic Church as masonry has -- then it stands to reason the Catholic Church is in the way of satan's final solution/plan.  Read more about Freemasonry here.

For this reason, it is so important that Protestants get their members out of Masonry. As Masonry will be involved with this one world church. Masonry is aligned with satan and Masonry has vowed to destroy the Catholic Church. Once it implodes from within and a huge void exists--Masons will be instrumental in the Antichrist's One World Church. It has to be. They have the same commander.

Mystery Babylon is the witchcraft/occult system/masonic/satanism system, because it came out of Babylon... The seven kings and nations (mountains) are seven Middle Eastern nations in the vicinity of Jerusalem where the beast will set up his tabernacle. These most obviously would include Jordan (Ammon), Syria, Iraq (ancient Syria), Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt, and another--perhaps Turkey. The beast is of the eighth, which seems most obvious to be Israel, for Antichrist must be a Jew to appear to be Christ.

The first person who claims to be the returned Christ to earth that appears to be associated with great miracles IS the false Christ, the Antichrist.

The false Christ will come to Jerusalem (the "City of Seven Hills") and NOT Rome, in order to rule the world! The Anti-Christ will do the seemingly impossible, and unite Jews and Arabs.

The truth is, however, when one looks at the subject of the Book of Revelation carefully, there is only one of those "Cities of Seven Hills" that could possibly be the subject of the End-Time revelation. That is the City of Jerusalem. The "Mystery Babylon" of the Book of Revelation is none other than Jerusalem!

The last world kingdom will be headquartered in Jerusalem, not in Rome, Babylon on the Euphrates or in Byzantium, or anywhere else. In the first verse of Revelation 12, we are told that "a great sign appeared in heaven". Some Bible translations call this a "wonder" and not a sign. However, this Hebrew word, which is transliterated "semeion", clearly means a "sign".

The first character mentioned is a woman. She is clothed with the sun, the moon is under her feet and she is wearing a garland with twelve stars. The text also tells us that she is with child. After considering the future context, this woman must be Israel, or else the Church.  Because she is with child, this is probably not Mary, and the context is wrong.   And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. The “woman” is probably believing Israel, or else God's Church.  The sun clothing the woman may be referring to God and His righteousness. The woman's “child” is definitely Jesus, because he is identified in 12:5 as a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron.

The Antichrist will come to Jerusalem. He will look in all appearances as though he is none other than Jesus Christ himself. Remember, Satan and his angels will be expelled from heaven and come to earth (Revelation 12). This appears to be the second time, as Revelation 12 speaks of a coming event.  This fall is evidenced in Jude 1:6, Daniel 8:10, Job 38:7 and Job 1:6.  However, since Satan still has access to God and Heaven, as seen in Zechariah 3:1-3, we know this verse refers to more than one event.  Right now, Satan is accusing us before God. However, there may come a day when there will be war in Heaven and the Devil will be cast away from God’s presence.  The “stars” Satan sweeps away may also refer to the many angels he led in his primeval rebellion against God. It could alternatively be referring to human rulers he deposes. The world may make a big mistake and think that Satan and his fallen angels are none other than Christ and His angels returning from heaven at the Second Advent. This may be the "great lie" the world will believe that the apostle Paul spoke about in Second Thessalonians 2:8-12.

The ancients symbolically looked on the various capitals of the world as having "Seven Hills."

It was common custom in the centuries before Christ for people in the Roman world to refer to the City of Rome itself as the "City of Seven Hills." The references are numerous and consistent. And indeed, when Romulus and Remus wanted to build a city in the area of the Tibur River they chose an area just inland from the coast to afford a greater protection for the city from sea pirates or from the naval warfare of hostile powers.  It was divinely selected, in Roman parlance, that the city had to be on "seven hills."

But strange as it may seem, the City of Jerusalem as it existed in the time of Christ Jesus was also reckoned to be the "City of Seven Hills." This fact was well recognized in Jewish circles. In the Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer, an eighth century midrashic narrative (section 10), the writer mentioned without commentary (showing that the understanding was well known) that "Jerusalem is situated on seven hills" (recorded in The Book of Legends, edited by Bialik and Ravnitzky, p. 371, paragraph 111).

And, so it was. Those "seven hills" are easy to identify. If one starts with the Mount of Olives just to the east of the main City of Jerusalem (but still reckoned to be located within the environs of Jerusalem), there are three summits to that Mount of Olives. The northern summit (hill) is called Scopus [Hill One], the middle summit (hill) was called Nob [Hill Two], the highest point of Olivet itself, and the southern summit (hill) was called in the Holy scr1ptures the "Mount of Corruption" or "Mount of Offence" [Hill Three] (II Kings 23:13). On the middle ridge between the Kedron and the Tyropoeon Valleys there was (formerly) in the south "Mount Zion" [Hill Four] (the original "Mount Zion" and not the later southwest hill that was later called by that name), then the "Ophel Mount" [Hill Five] and then to the north of that the "Rock" around which "Fort Antonia" was built [Hill Six]. And finally, there was the southwest hill itself [Hill Seven] that finally became known in the time of Simon the Hasmonean as the new "Mount Zion." This makes "Seven Hills" in all.


Read Malachy's 12th Century Prophecy of the Last 10 Popes here



see this DVD/VHS here

This excellent DVD by the great Protestant evangelists, Dr. Jack and Rexell Van Impe is highly recommended for Catholics, Protestants and Jews.  Doctor Van Impe has observed how Protestant and Catholics are really the same now because of Pope John Paul II.  He exposes the lies written about both.  Protestants and Catholics may not be aware, but as of 1998 the Catholic Church made the concession with Luther's dogma that "we are saved by faith alone".  Catholic dogma is now the same as Protestant dogma, and it adds that the fruit of the holy spirit is good works. Read here

All that is left is for Protestants to understand that Catholic "venerate and honor" Mary, but they "adore and worship" Jesus.  Catholics also look only to Jesus for their salvation.  See more on this here.

This DVD is an awesome eye-opener to those who look for the Lord's impending return in the near term.

Some History about what is in our Bible

for both Protestants & Catholics
How and Why...


"What is narrated here [in the story of Susannah] happened at a later time, although it is placed at the front of the book [of Daniel], for it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings. . . . [W]e ought to give heed, beloved, fearing lest anyone be overtaken in any transgression and risk the loss of his soul, knowing as we do that God is the judge of all and the Word himself is the eye which nothing that is done in the world escapes. Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah" (Commentary on Daniel [A.D. 204]; the story of Susannah [Dan. 13] is not in the Protestant Bible).

Cyprian of Carthage

"In Genesis [it says], ‘And God tested Abraham and said to him, "Take your only son whom you love, Isaac, and go to the high land and offer him there as a burnt offering . . ."’ [Gen. 22:1–2]. . . . Of this same thing in the Wisdom of Solomon [it says], ‘Although in the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality . . .’ [Wis. 3:4]. Of this same thing in the Maccabees [it says], ‘Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness’ [1 Macc. 2:52; see Jas. 2:21–23]" (Treatises 7:3:15 [A.D. 248]).

"So Daniel, too, when he was required to worship the idol Bel, which the people and the king then worshipped, in asserting the honor of his God, broke forth with full faith and freedom, saying, ‘I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who created the heaven and the earth’ [Dan. 14:5]" (Letters 55:5 [A.D. 253]; Daniel 14 is not in the Protestant Bible).

Council of Rome

"Now indeed we must treat of the divine scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [that is, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book, Ecclesiastes, one book, [and] Canticle of Canticles [Song of Songs], one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book . . . . Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books" (Decree of Pope Damasus [A.D. 382]).

Council of Hippo

"[It has been decided] that besides the canonical scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical scriptures are
as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and a portion of the Psalms], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . ." (Canon 36 [A.D. 393]).

Council of Carthage III

"[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine scriptures. But the canonical scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees . . ." (Canon 47 [A.D. 397]).


"The whole canon of the scriptures, however, in which we say that consideration is to be applied, is contained in these books: the five of Moses . . . and one book of Joshua [Son of] Nave, one of Judges; one little book which is called Ruth . . . then the four of Kingdoms, and the two of Paralipomenon . . . . [T]here are also others too, of a different order . . . such as Job and Tobit and Esther and Judith and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Esdras . . . . Then there are the prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David, and three of Solomon. . . . But as to those two books, one of which is entitled Wisdom and the other of which is entitled Ecclesiasticus and which are called ‘of Solomon’ because of a certain similarity to his books, it is held most certainly that they were written by Jesus Sirach. They must, however, be accounted among the prophetic books, because of the authority which is deservedly accredited to them" (Christian Instruction 2:8:13
 [A.D. 397]).

"We read in the books of the Maccabees [2 Macc. 12:43] that sacrifice was offered for the dead. But even if it were found nowhere in the Old Testament writings, the authority of the Catholic Church which is clear on this point is of no small weight, where in the prayers of the priest poured forth to the Lord God at his altar the commendation of the dead has its place" (The Care to be Had for the Dead 1:3 [A.D. 421]).

The Apostolic Constitutions

"Now women also prophesied. Of old, Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron [Ex. 15:20], and after her, Deborah [Judges. 4:4], and after these Huldah [2 Kgs. 22:14] and Judith [Judith 8], the former under Josiah and the latter under Darius" (Apostolic Constitutions 8:2 [A.D. 400]).


"What sin have I committed if I follow the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating [in my preface to the book of Daniel] the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susannah [Dan. 13], the Song of the Three Children [Dan. 3:29–68, RSV-CE], and the story of Bel and the Dragon [Dan. 14], which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they are wont to make against us. If I did not reply to their views in my preface, in the interest of brevity, lest it seem that I was composing not a preface, but a book, I believe I added promptly the remark, for I said, ‘This is not the time to discuss such matters’" (Against Rufinius 11:33 [A.D. 401]).

Pope Innocent I

"A brief addition shows what books really are received in the canon. These are the things of which you desired to be informed verbally: of Moses, five books, that is, of Genesis, of Exodus, of Leviticus, of Numbers, of Deuteronomy, and Joshua, of Judges, one book, of Kings, four books, and also Ruth, of the prophets, sixteen books, of Solomon, five books, the Psalms. Likewise of the histories, Job, one book, of Tobit, one book, Esther, one, Judith, one, of the Maccabees, two, of Esdras, two, Paralipomenon, two books . . ." (Letters 7 [A.D. 408]).

The Roman Catholic practice of praying to and for the dead can be traced  in part to the Old Testament apocryphal books (2 Maccabees 12:46 "It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead.") These books, rejected from the canon ("rule," or "standard") of Scripture, contain historical and geographical errors, and many teachings inconsistent with the rest of  scripture:  salvation by almsgiving; suicide; magic; angelic intercession; etc. Definitely nothing sturdy upon which to base one's eternal destiny.

You argue that these books have been rejected from the canon, which is a typical protestant response. The fact is, these books have always been a part of the canon of scripture, and it is only the protestants and some unauthoritative 1st century AD Jews that have rejected these books. Read what the early Church fathers had to say about the scriptural passages contained in these books:


"Those . . . who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts and do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt toward others and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat [Matt. 23:6] and work evil deeds in secret, saying ‘No man sees us,’ shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance, nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words to be found in Daniel the prophet: ‘O you seed of Canaan and not of Judah, beauty has deceived you and lust perverted your heart’ [Dan. 13:56]. You that have grown old in wicked days, now your sins which you have committed before have come to light, for you have pronounced false judgments and have been accustomed to condemn the innocent and to let the guilty go free, although the Lord says, ‘You shall not slay the innocent and the righteous’ [Dan. 13:52, citing Ex. 23:7]" (Against Heresies 4:26:3 [A.D. 189]; Daniel 13 is not in the Protestant Bible).

"Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left on the earth, should both be under the rule of the saints and to minister to this [new] Jerusalem and that [his] kingdom shall be in it, saying, ‘Look around Jerusalem toward the east and behold the joy which comes to you from God himself. Behold, your sons whom you have sent forth shall come: They shall come in a band from the east to the west. . . . God shall go before with you in the light of his splendor, with the mercy and righteousness which proceed from him’ [Bar. 4:36—5:9]" (ibid., 5:35:1; Baruch was often considered part of Jeremiah, as it is here).

Good News for Protestants & Catholics & Messianic Jews
Prophecy fulfilled....

Dome of the Rock is the "Abomination of Desolation"
another supernatural revelation of God

You won't put this book down!

Islam in the end times
Read more: here

see this book: here
Read more: here

1290 & 1335 days of Daniel
(Daniel 12:11-12)

Proof the true God of the Bible and prophecy (Yahweh/Jehovah/I am/Jesus) considers Islam as an evil  pagan religion. He is disgusted with those monstrosity's on the Temple Mount.


The "abomination of desolation" already happened exactly on schedule (Daniel's 1290 day prophecy).  When the pagan Islamic Dome of the Rock and the al-Aksa Mosque were built on the temple mount, it made the temple mount "desolated" or contaminated.  This was built during the 685 to 705 AD period.

The formula for changing 1290 old testament 360 day years into our 365.24 day solar years is: 1290 x .9857. 

1335 - the "double check" number:

Amazingly enough the 2nd figure (1335) the prophet Daniel gave serves much like a double check (CheckSum).  Subtract this figure from 1948 when Israel was reborn after 2500 years and you get another significant year for the Jews, Christians and all of western civilization. This figure plops exactly onto the year Muhammad of Islam, the False Prophet died and was lowered into a grave in Medina in the year 632 A.D. 

A little after midday of 8 June, 632, the 62 year old Muhammad died in the house of his wife A'isha who he married when she was 6 (or 7) years old.  Muslim historians back to the early 800's A.D. tell us that Muhammad consummated his marriage with A'isha when she was only 9  - when he was in his 50's. See the Muslim references for this: here

You may ask about the Lord's Olivet discourse on Daniels' prophecy in Matthew 24.  See Ellis Skolfield's excellent answer here

Read more: here

Read this free ebook by Ellis Skolfield about the above. It's called, "The False Prophet".  Read "Muhammad, Terrorist or Prophet?"


Also of historical interest is the change from Saturday to Sunday Worship here

Also read: "Muhammad, Terrorist or Prophet" here

Read about Freemasonry here

Steve Keohane, USN (Ret)