Scripture and history unambiguously hold that Christ established the Roman Catholic Church. By Roman Catholic, I mean the original Church headed by the Bishop of Rome (later known as the Pope), beginning with St. Peter, with apostolic succession, and still in existence to this day. Local churches in Jerusalem, Rome, Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Galatia, etc., were one church in communion with the church in Rome. In the earliest days, this Church was not referred to as “Roman” Catholic because no other existed. However, after the Great Schism in A.D. 1054, and especially after the Protestant Revolution began in 1517, the term Roman Catholic became increasingly common.
Protestant Rebuttals
One might respond by saying the Church was founded in Jerusalem, not Rome. Though the Church was founded in Jerusalem, this rebuttal ignores the fact that Jerusalem, and all of Israel at that time, was a territory of the Roman Empire. It was Roman! Another important point to remember is that the New Testament was written by early members of the Catholic Church and the canon of Scripture (the official list of biblical books) was decided by the Catholic Church.
Conversely, Protestant churches took the Bible out of its native church, illicitly removed seven books, and have rendered erroneous interpretations ever since. Now, by demonstrating that the Catholic Church is the original Church containing Christ’s preeminent authority, we can prove that all other churches are counterfeit.
All counterfeit churches have a few things in common. They reject and usurp the Catholic Church’s Christ-given authority. They exist is in a state of division due to contradictory teachings. They are not the Church that wrote, preserved, and passed down the Bible, and they are not the Church founded by Jesus Christ. They are not promised guidance by the Holy Spirit and, therefore, interpret Scripture based on their own opinions, which has resulted in their perpetually divisive existence. Therefore, their brands of Christianity water down and devalue truth in exchange for self-appropriated authority, an authority that was not given to them by our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. These churches’ leaders expect you to listen to them and reject the Church Christ founded. Consequently, counterfeit churches devalue infallible truths by mixing false, contradictory doctrines into the salvation enterprise, thereby propagating division and confusion.
By the way, St. Paul wrote about this very problem in Acts 20:29-30. He warned, “I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things to draw the disciples after them.” In Titus 3:10-11, St. Paul instructs Titus on how to handle these factious men: “As for a man who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful, he is self-condemned.” Remember, the Protestant forefathers were Catholics who were sent out of the Church because of their factious teachings. They rejected the Church’s authority and desired to make themselves the sole arbiters on matters of faith and morality. Essentially, they wanted to be their own and everyone else’s popes.
Inevitably, faced with these facts some Protestants will respond with their usual axiom, “The true church is not a physical church but is a spiritual church comprised of those who have faith in Christ.” Though there is some truth to this adage in that people outside of the Catholic Church can be saved due to an unintentional lack of knowledge, also known as invincible ignorance, intentionally rejecting the Church Christ physically founded on Peter and the other Apostles jeopardizes their salvation. Why?
First, this adage implies that Jesus established a spiritual church commissioned to teach contradictions and, therefore, lies; one designed to perpetually fracture and confuse. Regrettably, this belief turns Jesus into the father of lies and division rather than the Truth of God. Moreover, it suggests that the Holy Spirit has multiple personality disorder and guides varying churches to teach contradictory doctrines. Consequently, Jesus’ promise that the Holy Spirit “will guide you into to all truth” (John 16:13), becomes meaningless.
Second, this adage means that every time a new “Christian” church is founded by some random person, Christ would be marrying a new bride and committing polygamy, or divorcing his old bride, remarrying, and committing adultery. As it is, however, Christ has one bride (see Ephesians 5:21-33), the Holy Catholic Church, whose chief steward is St. Peter’s successor, the Pope.
Finally, if we accept this axiom, Protestants must admit that Catholics have the same claim to salvation they have. Catholics believe in and love God the Son, Jesus Christ, who assumed a human nature 2000 years ago, was crucified for our sins, died, resurrected, and ascended into heaven where he sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. These are truths Catholics profess every Sunday when we recite the Nicene Creed and truths we try to lovingly live every day.
Still, others would respond to this argument by saying the Bible is their sole rule of faith (aka Sola Scriptura) and they do not need a church. This argument, however, cannot be found in Scripture and is, therefore, unbiblical. The Bible nowhere states, implicitly or explicitly, that it is the sole rule of faith or that all Christian teachings are found within its pages. Therefore, this argument is completely untenable and self-refuting. In fact, it proves the exact opposite. For instance, when certain Protestant churches feebly attempt to bolster their Sola Scriptura argument by rendering erroneous interpretations of certain passages, they prove that the Bible needs an interpretational authority outside of itself. Additionally, using the Bible as the sole rule of faith has resulted in innumerable contradictory doctrines throughout Protestantism. Protestant churches, as hard as they try, cannot justify their own existence. They disagree with the Catholic Church and with each other while simultaneously claiming that they have the infallible truth.
For example, Protestant churches teach at least three sets of contradictions on baptism and they all use the Bible to support their positions: 1) Baptism washes away sin/baptism does not wash away sin; 2) true baptism requires a full-body immersion/it does not require full immersion; 3) only those who have reached the age of reason can be legitimately baptized/baptism can occur at any age. Additionally, five teachings on Communion/The Lord’s Supper exist in Protestantism: 1) The bread and wine at Communion become Jesus’ body and blood (transubstantiation); 2) the bread and wine at Communion are both bread and wine and Jesus’ body and blood (consubstantiation); 3) Jesus is spiritually present in a special way but the bread and wine/grape juice remain intact; 4) Communion is completely symbolic of the Last Supper and has no sacramental value; 5) Communion is either bread and wine/grape juice or Jesus is somehow present, whichever the member believes. Unfortunately, these teachings are just a fraction of the contradictions taught in Protestantism. How do these churches not see their contradictions? How do they not recognize their perpetually divisive state? How do they not understand their counterfeit nature?
Please conduct internet searches and/or ask Protestant preachers for logically coherent rebuttals to my assertions. I guarantee you with 100% certainty that there are no such arguments. Some try to blame divisions on sin. I completely agree, which is why Jesus, knowing human nature perfectly, established one Church with the mission to teach and preach. I would like to challenge the reader to seriously consider the person from whom lies and division ultimately proceed and to honestly ponder Jesus’ solution.
A Call to Our Separated Brothers and Sisters
At this point, I should mention something most of us take for granted: God brings good out of evil situations. Although the Protestant forefathers separated from Christ’s Church and the divisions continue, God has been able to raise up holy people from this chasm of chaos, contradiction, and confusion. Many Protestant Christians truly adore God (Father, Son, And Holy Spirit) and try to do his will with faith, hope, and love. Therefore, Catholics must not do anything to discourage, disrupt, or destroy the love these folks have for God. Rather, because of our Christ-given mandate to evangelize and everyone’s Christ-given mandate to be one as he and the Heavenly Father are one, we must edify them with the full truth that God has given his Church, which includes historical, biblical, and theological truths.
Additionally, we must not berate Protestants for not being Catholic or we will create a sense of hostility in them. This hostility could ultimately drive them away from the Catholic Church rather than toward her. Conversely, if we lovingly explain Catholic teachings, even though this can sometimes be difficult, and pray for our Protestant brothers and sisters, we can plant a seed. If they open themselves to God’s watering, that seed will flourish. To all our Protestant brothers and sisters, you are always invited to come home to the Catholic Church. Simply ask the Holy Spirit for his help and guidance and, when you are ready, contact your local Catholic parish.
I should briefly note that the Eastern Orthodox Churches have Apostolic origin and are, thus, authentic. However, when they separated from the Roman Church by rejecting papal authority during the Great Schism 1000 years ago, they separated themselves from Christ’s preeminent authority. Nevertheless, the Catholic Church shares apostolic succession, the Sacraments, and a host of teachings with the Orthodox Churches. Therefore, we pray for reunification with our Eastern brothers and sisters. If you are Eastern Orthodox, there are many Eastern Catholic churches in communion with Rome that will welcome you with arms wide open.
We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God…. (St. Paul).
17 thoughts on “How Counterfeit Churches Devalue Christianity- Part II”
Didn’t Jesus give us an example regarding baptism?
See Matthew 3:13-17 and Mark 1:9-11.
Wasn’t Jesus an adult? Wasn’t he immersed in the Jordan River?
https://news.yahoo.com/pope-netanyahu-spar-over-jesus-native-language-140042705.html
Hi Nate. Enjoyed the article, but I would like to hear your opinion on this:
You say that the counterfeit religions are picking and choosing parts of the bible to justify their faith, even using contradictory teachings to do so (which in itself seems fine since there are so many factions within protestantism). However, the issue you have seems to be that they can pick and choose from the bible, even removing entire books from the bible.
I seem to recall, and I may be mistaken that there are a number of “books” which were excluded from the bible by the Catholics also. So, in effect, we picked and choose too, until we found the things we liked best too way back when. Doesn’t it just make sennse that they would do the same?
Other than the fact that according to your arguements here that the Catholics had God given authority over the church and therefore probably were allowed to pick and choose, it seems like everyone was doing it….Just look at the bible and use what works for you.
Hello, Nancy! Thanks for the question! Regarding the first segment of your question, the central issue is one of authority. In other words, which entity has the authority to determine which books belong in the Bible. The Catholic Church by virtue of its origin in Christ, his giving of the keys to Peter, its authority to loose and bind rules, and its apostolic succession, has this authority. Additionally, “picking and choosing” makes the canon of Scripture determination seem random, but it was not. It was actually rather tedious. The Catholic canon was chosen based on a few factors: 1) the majority of New Testament books were written in Greek because most Jews and Gentiles spoke Greek in the first few centuries of the Church; 2) accordingly, the Septuagint (Greek language Old Testament containing 46 books) would have been more easily accessible to the Greek speaking majority; 3) local churches used New Testament scriptural writings as they became available (due to not having a printing press, making copies and getting them to local churches took decades); 4) the Church used only first century writings due to their chronological closeness to Christ and his apostles. Since local churches did not simultaneously receive all the books of what we know as the Bible, the Catholic Church developed a canon of Scripture in the 4th century in an effort to make sure all churches understood which writings were scriptural and which were not.
There were books that were unanimously accepted (see Bishop Eusebius’ of Caesarea “Church History”) as authentic, such as the four Gospels, Acts, the Letters of Paul, 1 John, and 1 Peter. There were books that were unanimously rejected due to their non-use as Scripture by local churches. These included the Revelation of Peter, the Letter of Barnabas, the Didache, and the Gospels of Peter, Thomas and Matthias. And there were books that were disputed, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews, Shepherd of Hermas and even James, Jude, Second and Third John. Ultimately, the Church Jesus founded, guided by the Holy Spirit, rendered decisions as to which books were inspired by God. Councils at Rome (A.D. 382), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397 and 419) listed the same books we use today, and in 405, Pope Innocent I affirmed this list. Moreover, if Christ is God, and Christ founded one Church infused with his authority, then we must accept that this Church alone has the correct canon of Scripture.
Regarding the Protestant canon, they didn’t pick and choose either. They accept only the Masoretic (Hebrew version) of the Old Testament and their New Testament canon is simply a tradition they received from the Catholic Church, from which they broke 500 years ago. The problem, as you correctly pointed out, is that Protestant churches do not have Christ-given authority to create a canon of Scripture or to reject the Catholic canon. By the way, the authority issue lies at the heart of almost, if not every, disagreement between Catholics and Protestants. For example, the Bible does not say how one is to be baptized. Jesus commissioned his disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but he did not say how water is to be applied. Similarly, he gave his apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins, but he did not give them the formula for doing so. He wasn’t a micromanager. He gave the Church an outline for how to grow the faith, but he did not provide detailed instructions on how to do so. This is where the Holy Spirit comes in, and the Church’s cooperation with Him.
Pingback: Is Carlo Acutis Body Incorrupt, Hedonism Is More Than You Think, The Francis Option, and More Links! – christian-99.com
Nate:
Your silence is deafening.
To Nate:
Since you continuously accuse me of being a liar, I have a few questions for you.
In what year were you born?
When did you work for the Secret Service?
Did you secure written approval from the Secret Service to launch Guyear Investigative Services in 2007?
I’m a retired federal employee, who spent 42 years in government service. We were required to obtain agency approval for any outside business activities.
So glad that you were not my RCIA teacher.
Wow!
Is that what you call lovingly explaining Catholic teachings?
Paul wrote something for you to consider in 1 Corinthians 13.
For people like you who intentionally lie and dodge arguments…yes.
To Nate:
Can’t thank you for your response.
Find your comments to be very snarky, especially when you ask if I’m lying.
But a response is necessary to correct the record.
Your comments about Israel being Roman is not quite truthful. The Jews were conquered by the Romans in 63 BCE, yet they were not happy about it. In fact, Barabbas was an insurrectionist (John 18: 40). There was an uprising by the Jews in 66 AD, which was eventually followed by the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and the relocation of Jews from the area. Jesus was killed by the Romans. And the Church contends that Peter and Paul were executed by the Romans. Should you really try to argue that the Church is Roman?
If Peter was given the keys to the kingdom, does that imply that he is in control?
Is the Catholic Church protected from error? The history of the Catholic Church is littered by mistakes and wrongful actions.
With respect to Mary and the Archangel Michael, I said that our church is being more devoted. We now end the mass with the prayer to St. Michael. The church has holy days of obligation to Mary. The Pope just gave three more titles to Mary. Our parish now has Fatima devotions.
Section 846 of the CCC has a heading: “Outside the Church there is no salvation.” Read it again.
Muslims do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God. There is statement placed in the Dome of the Rock that states Allah has no son. The followers of Mohammed’s religion do not have salvation according to the Gospel of Jesus.
Hello, Robert! Again, my answers will begin with asterisks.
Can’t thank you for your response. Find your comments to be very snarky, especially when you ask if I’m lying. But a response is necessary to correct the record.
***First, I presume you’re correcting your record. Second, are you lying?? It seems from your criticisms of the Church that you are either a Catholic in name only or a non-Catholic. Either way, calling yourself a Catholic while simultaneously rejecting one of the Church’s central tenets (i.e. papal authority) is disingenuous.
Your comments about Israel being Roman is not quite truthful. The Jews were conquered by the Romans in 63 BCE, yet they were not happy about it. In fact, Barabbas was an insurrectionist (John 18: 40). There was an uprising by the Jews in 66 AD, which was eventually followed by the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and the relocation of Jews from the area. Jesus was killed by the Romans. And the Church contends that Peter and Paul were executed by the Romans. Should you really try to argue that the Church is Roman?
***Your arguments fail to address the central argument that the Church is in fact Roman. First, by stating that the Jews were conquered by the Romans, you proved my point about Jerusalem being a Roman territory. Thank you! Second, their happiness, sadness, joy, disdain, insurrections, uprisings, disagreements, crucifixions, executions, beatings, evil wishes, frowny faces, etc., have nothing to do with the fact that they were a conquered Roman territory. Straw man arguments are easily destroyed, Robert. Nice try. By the way, why is the Church’s Roman origin a problem for you?
If Peter was given the keys to the kingdom, does that imply that he is in control?
***In yesterday’s comment, you stated, “Peter did not have sole authority.” I showed, both in my paper and in my response to you, that Peter does not have “sole” authority. You are now asking if he has “control.” There is a big difference between sole authority and control. Sole authority means no one else has authority. But as I stated in my response, Peter does not have sole authority. He has prime authority and the other apostles share in this authority via Jesus’ command to loose and bind. Peters’ primacy, or “control,” governs the way loosing and binding are discussed and executed (e.g. calling councils, seeking advice, pastoral considerations, whether or not a teaching should be applied to the universal Church via the keys to the kingdom, etc.). He is the steward of the household during the Kings earthly absence. He is not a king or a dictator. Why do you reject Peter’s authority?
Is the Catholic Church protected from error? The history of the Catholic Church is littered by mistakes and wrongful actions.
***Straw man, again. The Church can make mistakes and individuals in the Church can and do sin. This has nothing to do with the Church’s official teachings on faith and morality. The Church cannot teach error when it teaches a dogma or doctrine to the universal Church. If the Church Jesus founded could teach error, Jesus’ statement, “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven,” would be meaningless. Why do you think that the Church, Christ’s body and bride, is not protected from error?
With respect to Mary and the Archangel Michael, I said that our church is being more devoted. We now end the mass with the prayer to St. Michael. The church has holy days of obligation to Mary. The Pope just gave three more titles to Mary. Our parish now has Fatima devotions.
***Please learn the difference between devotion and worship. Furthermore, the entire Mass is a participation in Christ’s sacrifice to the Father and our consumption of the Sacrifice. We WORSHIP God at the Mass; no one else! Finally, all kinds of people have all kinds of titles. Titles don’t detract from God’s divinity. Why are you against devotions? I’m devoted to helping the poor. By devoting myself to these folks, I show my love for God and God’s love for them. Also, by honoring someone, which is part of devotion, we honor the entire body of Christ (see Romans 12:10, 13:7, and especially 1 Cor 12:26). Additionally, St. Paul commands us to honor Mary in 1 Timothy 5:3, which states, “Honor widows who are real widows.” We know from Scripture that Mary was a widow, which is why Jesus put her in John’s care. Therefore, we honor Mary.
Section 846 of the CCC has a heading: “Outside the Church there is no salvation.” Read it again. Muslims do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God. There is statement placed in the Dome of the Rock that states Allah has no son. The followers of Mohammed’s religion do not have salvation according to the Gospel of Jesus.
***Maybe English is your second language, Robert, or maybe it is difficult for you to understand. Either way, you need to re-read CCC paragraph 846 again and use Saint Paul’s statements that I quoted yesterday to assist you in elucidating it. You can also use the context provided in 846, which clearly states, “Hence they could not be saved who, KNOWING THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WAS FOUNED AS NECESSARY by God through Christ, WOULD REFUSE EITHER TO ENTER IT OR REMAIN IN IT.” Thus, if a Muslim knows that the Catholic Church was founded by God through Christ and refuses to enter it, they will NOT enter the Beatific Vision. However, if they are ignorant of Christ and his Church and live by the law written on their heart, they may be “excused” (Romans 2).
***Think of it like this, if Jesus says we must believe in him in order to be saved (which he does) and countless people have never heard of him or have heard misrepresentations of him, according to you, they would not be saved. This would make Jesus the Great Condemnor rather than the Great Savior. His assumption of human nature 2000 years ago would have caused countless ignorant people to go to hell simply because they did not know about Jesus.
***(By the way, Mohammed was a false prophet. He put his own aspirations for personal power and authority over the truth of Jesus Christ. Although I can never judge his eternal state, I feel fairly certain that he stands condemned before God. Only God knows, though. Regardless, his actions have directly resulted in Muslims’ skewed understanding of who Jesus is.)
***Finally, if you’re so worried about Muslims, and it seems that you are, go evangelize them! Get out of your basement and out from behind your computer, and evangelize. Otherwise, knock of the ridiculous comments!
Pingback: VVEDNESDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
Thanks, Nate.
Well written and argued. And excellent ripostes to the claims of the usual suspects.
Thanks, Rich! I appreciate it. God bless!
As a fellow Catholic and Christian, I have some questions about your recent 2-part article.
Since the church started with several Jews in Jerusalem (who recognized Jesus as the Messiah) after the ascension of Christ, why is it that you proclaim the Roman Catholic Church as the one true church? In the beginning, it was the Jerusalem Church. Peter did not have sole authority. In fact, he was corrected by Paul on an issue. Check out the Book of Acts.
You contend that Protestants have deviated from the Truth. But haven’t the Catholics done the same? Our church is being more devoted to Mary and praying to the Archangel Michael.
Let me ask another question. The CCC states in section 846 that there is no salvation outside of the Church. Yet, section 841 of the CCC states that Muslims share in our salvation, but they don’t recognize Jesus as the Son of God, who sacrificed his life for us. How can that be acceptable to you?
Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, not to change it. He didn’t start a new religion. He was the fulfillment of the Word.
He gave us a commission- to preach the Gospel.
Hello, Robert! Thanks for your reply! My responses will begin with asterisks.
As a fellow Catholic and Christian, I have some questions about your recent 2-part article.
Since the church started with several Jews in Jerusalem (who recognized Jesus as the Messiah) after the ascension of Christ, why is it that you proclaim the Roman Catholic Church as the one true church? In the beginning, it was the Jerusalem Church.
*** You’re correct in saying that Jesus founded the Church in Jerusalem, but you should know that Jerusalem was a territory of Rome. It was, in fact, Roman. I made this clear in my article. Additionally, the Jews, and soon thereafter the Gentiles, used Roman roads within the relative security provided by the Roman military to spread the gospel. Furthermore, the Church, which by way of Jesus’ actions, fulfilled Old Covenant Israel, was commissioned to bring in the Gentiles, which is why Peter, Paul and others traveled to Rome and other Gentile towns. Finally, I’m from Tennessee, but I’m an American. Similarly, the Church was born in Jerusalem, but due to historical circumstances resulting in Roman occupation, the Church is Roman. Therefore, we can correctly say that the original Church was and is both Jewish and Roman; Jewish by way of fulfillment in Christ and Roman by way of location, culture, and the commission to evangelize gentiles.
Peter did not have sole authority.
*** I never said Peter had/has sole authority. I said Peter alone was given the keys to the kingdom. Following this statement, I said the other apostles were given a subordinate authority via Jesus’ instruction to them to loose and bind. Peter and the others had loosing and binding authority.
In fact, he was corrected by Paul on an issue. Check out the Book of Acts.
*** Peter was in fact confronted by Paul about his behavior toward Gentile converts, and popes are sometimes confronted by bishops (see https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/these-four-cardinals-asked-pope-francis-to-clarify-amoris-laetitia-43614). People make mistakes and should be confronted by those who are in a position to do so.
You contend that Protestants have deviated from the Truth. But haven’t the Catholics done the same?
*** My argument is not about individual Catholics and Protestants deviating from the truth. Please re-read my article. My argument is that Jesus founded the Catholic Church and that this Church is protected from TEACHING error. Protestant churches, by contrast, are founded on erroneous, contradictory teachings. It’s part of their essence. They teach truths mixed with lies, while the Catholic Church teaches unadulterated truths.
Our church is being more devoted to Mary and praying to the Archangel Michael.
*** Please prove this. I’ve been to at least a dozen Catholic churches in the U.S. during my travels, not to mention Catholic churches in Germany, South Africa, and Mexico. I have also read the Catechism cover-to-cover twice and nowhere/no place does the Catholic Church teach that we are to have a stronger devotion to Mary or Archangel Michael than Jesus. In fact, it teaches the opposite (see Catechism paragraphs 2096 and 2097). Furthermore, Catholics do not offer sacrifices to Mary; we do not worship her! Rather, Catholics offer Christ to the Father at every Mass as a perpetual and perfect offering for our sins. The effects of his once and for all sacrifice on the cross is perpetually received by everyone who turns to him.
Let me ask another question. The CCC states in section 846 that there is no salvation outside of the Church. Yet, section 841 of the CCC states that Muslims share in our salvation, but they don’t recognize Jesus as the Son of God, who sacrificed his life for us. How can that be acceptable to you?
*** How can it be acceptable to you? You said you’re a Catholic. Are you lying? Please understand that folks outside the Catholic Church can be saved. How? St. Paul gives us this principle in Romans 2:14-16 (RSV-CE), which states, “When Gentiles (non-Jews) who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their consciences also bear witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day (Judgement Day) when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.” This passage shows that a person who is ignorant of Christ but acts according to the law written on his/her heart can still be saved or “excused” when God judges them by Christ. Thus, Muslims and anyone else who believe in God and live by the law written on their hearts can be saved.
Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, not to change it. He didn’t start a new religion. He was the fulfillment of the Word.
*** This is correct. I never said that he started a new religion. Again, please re-read my article.
He gave us a commission- to preach the Gospel.
*** This is also correct, but we are commissioned to preach the true Gospel, not the gospel according to the opinions of men. Rather, as I pointed out in my article, Christ founded ONE Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, to teach and preach to ALL nations. He did not create a multitude of churches designed to fracture and teach heresies, which is what Protestant churches do. My article gives you nine examples of how they do this.