Christians are pagan worshipers

While it is true that many groups did break away from the Catholic Church, true follower of Jesus who truly represent Christianity were being persecuted by the Catholics long before the 11th century. Why doesn"t Pro talk about them? He mentions the fact that denominations are divided into Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant denominations, all claiming to be "real" Christianity, but this does absolutely nothing to prove that the doctrine which he highlighted regarding the soul, the cross, politics and warfare, are unbiblical or pagan. What"s more, the Bible doesn"t teach that to be a Christian means one has to agree on every single point of doctrine. For example some believe in holydays and others do not, but God accepts them both; some believe in eating certain foods, other teach it"s a sin, but God accept them both. (Rom 14:1-9) Both those who believed in keeping the law of Moses and those who knew it was abolished were accepted as "believers. " (Acts 21:20-26; 15:5) So folks may disagree on minor issues not connected to one"s salvation and still be legitimately called Christian. Not even the apostles of Jesus were correct in ever detail of what they believed. (John 21:21-23; Matt 16:21-23; Luke 24:17-21) So citing division among churches isn"t going to prove Pro"s case that they aren"t true Christians. He needs to first identify what a Christian is, then show us that the teachings or practices of all these denominations he talks about do not meet this standard. Bashing Constantine and the Catholics for their dismal record hardly proves that Adventists, Baptists, Methodists, Weslyans, Pentecostals, Evangelicals, Apostolic, and other churches are not Christian. Nor does it show the central beliefs of all these denominations to be in error. Pro says that the early Church didn"t use the cross as a symbol, only mentioning it in reference to an event, but even if that is true, I have already shown that the Bible has nothing in its official doctrine against the use of symbols, and in fact we have examples of God commanding images to be used in rituals. Pro"s argument is also flawed, because he is trying to say that if the first Christians didn"t have something that neither should Christians today. He uses Christmas and Easter as examples. But again, to be consistent with this position, he must also say that Christians should not celebrate wedding anniversaries, use wedding rings, and women should not wear pants, because the earliest Christians also didn"t do these things. By his logic, we Christians would have to throw away our Julian Calendars and anything else early Christians didn"t possess. Such a view is very extreme, and goes against the teaching of Scripture, for the Bible teaches that we should not burden anyone with commands not found in God"s word. (Gal 1:8-9; Prov 30:5-6; 1 Cor 4:6) The Bible contains no command against celebrating the birth of our Savior, so if Pro thinks this is incompatible with Christianity, he needs to show it to us from Scripture. So where does it in the Bible does it say that Christmas or Easter should be recognized? Tell me where the Bible says wedding anniversaries should be recognized and you"ll have your answer. Also, where in the Bible are these things prohibited? Unless Pro can find the prohibition against celebrating the resurrection and birth of Jesus, he can"t prove these holidays are contrary to Scripture. The Bible doesn"t tell us to watch TV or read the newspaper, so should we abandon these to, Pro? Pro again: "So in the Protestant view the scriptures are true. But Christmas is not of the scriptures. " Answer: The Scriptures being true doesn"t mean that once something isn"t in the Bible that it is wrong. Do you think its wrong to have a minister or priest marry couples just because no minister is mentioned in the Bible as performing marriage ceremonies? Do you think it"s wrong to wear a wedding ring just because it isn"t in the Bible? Pro again: So as long as scripture is not contradicted then it's okay to worship on Sundays. .. Sundays? ? Answer: Yes. It"s ok to worship on Sundays because it doesn"t contradict Scripture, and I challenge you to show me where it does! Pro again: "Sundays are also not biblical. " Answer: Yes, they are: Pentecost is a name used in the New Testament to denote the Festival of Harvest (Ex 23:16) or Festival of Weeks (Ex 34:22), called also "the day of the first ripe fruits. " (Nu 28:26) Instructions for this festival are found at Leviticus 23:15-21; Numbers 28:26-31; Deuteronomy 16:9-12. It was to be celebrated on the 50th day (Pentecost means "Fiftieth [Day]") from Nisan 16, the day that the barley sheaf was offered. (Le 23:15,"16) Since this day came after the Saturday Sabbath, it would have fallen on Sunday (assuming Pro is using our current calendar). On this day, Sunday, Christians met for worship in Acts 2:1-11. The also met for worship on the 1st day of the week in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:1-2. What"s more, according to Acts 2:46, 47 and Acts 5:42, Christians met for worship every day. I assume every day would include Sunday, would it not? So it is Biblical to meet for worship on Sundays. Pro stands refuted. As for the Sabbath, it is pointless debating if the Sabbath is Saturday or Sunday, because the Sabbath was abolished. Exodus 34:27-28; Deuteronomy 4:13; 9:9; 1 Kings 8:9, 21 and 2 Chronicles 6:11 all identify the covenant God made with Israel as the law which included the Sabbath. Hebrews 8:13 makes it clear that this covenant has been removed. Colossians 2:14, 16-17 also acknowledges the passing away of the Sabbath command, therefore none can judge us regarding such holydays. If the Sabbath were binding, elders in the church could judge us for Sabbath breaking, but Paul makes it clear we no longer have to observe such days. (Rom 14:4-9) The law of Moses with its Sabbath has been done away with (Eph 2:15). Under the New Covenant we have laws to obey, but the Sabbath isn"t one of them, and I challenge Pro to show me one verse in the New Testament that commands Christians to keep the Sabbath. Please carefully review the following evidence: A. God blessed the Sabbath, but it was a shadow pointing to Christ (Col 2:16-17), now that Christ has come we no longer need the shadows, we have the reality. (Heb 10:1) B. Matthew 24:20 doesn"t say to keep the Sabbath, rather, it say we should pray that their flight wouldn"t occur in winter or on the Sabbath. Does praying that you won"t have flight in winter make winter a holyday to be observed? Of course not! The same is true of the Sabbath. Jesus wasn"t teaching anyone to observe winter or the Sabbath as holydays, but rather, pray not to have to travel at these times because it would be difficult to flee in winter because of the snow, and the gates would be closed on the Sabbath, because the Jews who still observed holydays of the law of Moses had restrictions on how far one could travel on the Sabbath. Christians would have a hard time escaping the city at this time because the Jews would persecute them for Sabbath-breaking. Daniel 7:25 doesn"t say that the law being mentioned there is God"s law, and in fact, only God can change God"s law, no one else, so this couldn"t be God"s law being changed by this political power. God ended his law to Israel it at the cross. (Heb 7:12, 18) Summary 1) Pro dropped three of his four original arguments regarding the soul, and Christian participation in politics and warfare. 2) He was unable to show that the Bible forbids the use of the cross or any other symbol. 3) He was unable to find any Biblical law or principal against observing Christmas, and only made an argument from silence which I overcame 4) I refuted his claims about the day of worship. Worship of God is not restricted to a day. Christians worshipped everyday, so they had no day of worship. (Acts 5:42) And everything Jesus did on the Sabbath he also did on the first day. (Mark 1:21, 32-42.