![](/uploads/1/2/5/7/125758076/711621472.jpg)
On 'Simon Magus: The First Gnostic?' By Stephen Haar. This book attempts to answer the question, Was Simon Magus really the first gnostic? To answer the question, Haar looks at different accounts of Magus, the different meanings of the words associated with him, and the critical views with regard to the various accounts about him.
This will talk about the first Pope of the Roman Catholic Church.Upon reading the title one might assume that this is a study of the First and Second Epistles of Peter from the New Testament. As edifying as that would be the scene we set here is much different, one of mistaken identity, secret agendas and deception.The Roman Catholic Church claims that it was founded upon Simon Peter, the Apostle, and that this Peter was the first Pope or “Father” of “Christianity”.We offer evidence to challenge that claim and to orate the tale of “another Peter” who was the Head of the religion practiced by this “Mother Church”.Simon PeterThe claim of the Catholic Church, per Jerome circa 240 AD, is that Peter went to Rome in the second year of the reign of Claudius or about 42 A.D. Of course they say he was first bishop at Antioch, and then ministered in Pontus, Galatia, Asia, Cappadocia, and Bithynia, before coming to Rome (to oppose Simon Magus), and was bishop of that church for 25 years, who was martyred by being crucified upside-down in the last year of Nero’s reign (67 A.D.) and was buried on the Vatican hill. They say that Peter’s entombed bones are under the high altar of “St. Peter’s” church in Rome.The Roman Catholic Church bases their position concerning Peter being the First Father or “cornerstone” of the church on these verses: Matthew 16:18-29 “ 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.”They seem to think that when Jesus said “ upon this rock” that He meant on Peter. A quick trip back to the original Greek text on a couple of these words gives us a little more insight on what Jesus is saying here.Matthew 16:18-19 “ And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (Greek is “Petros” or little, movable stone), and upon this rock (Greek word “Petra” or unmovable stone/rock -is Christ speaking of Himself.) I will build my church; and the gates of hell (Greek = “Hades” meaning “the grave”) 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.”Peter is the little stone while Christ is the Rock, the difference is distinguished in the Greek wording.Christ had surnamed this Simon BarJona in John 1:42 “ And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.”In this verse Christ had used the Aramaic form of the Greek Petros or Peter.
Christ is clearly the subject of the latter half of the first verse (18) shown. It is He who holds the keys to the gates of hell for it is only He who conquered death’s hold by His resurrection.Revelation 1:18 “ I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. “Peter and the other disciples, inclusively, were given the keys to the kingdom of heaven and thusly are the subject of verse 19. They, like Christ, would not bind or loose anything contrary to God’s holy spirit or His commandments.Peter himself understood what Christ meant.
He knew that Christ was the only foundation stone and that he himself, and the rest of God’s Chosen Ones, were little building blocks upon that foundation.I Peter 2:5-8 “ Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Good research.
I heard this message in our church 40 years ago, and you should’ve seen the division in a conservative, protestant, anti-roman denomination! I started studying myself at the library. Yeshua (jesus) came to divide, not unite. Not one jot or tittle of the Law shall pass ’til heaven and earth pass. He didn’t nail any Torah to the cross, rather broke to pieces the ‘oral law’ of the Pharisee.
The faith once delivered at Sinai wasn’t given a second time secretly. The scariest words in all of scripture for any professing Christian – “Depart from me, I never knew you.”. I have a copy of Hislop’s ‘The Two Babylons ‘, and you are correct, sir.David. Not by PeterNot by MaryNot by worksNot by the Eucharist massNot by sprinklingNot by church attendanceNot by tithingNot by penanceNot by confessionNot by last ritesNot by purgatoryNot by a rosaryNot by pilgrimagesNot by lawNot by povertyNot by meditationNot by cathechismsNot by candlesNot by holy waterNot by incenseNot by devotion to iconsNot by the Pope' Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved.'
Acts 16:30-31. secure your salvation.
![Simon sorcerer bible Simon sorcerer bible](http://fc04.deviantart.net/images3/i/2004/108/0/4/Azathoth_Family_Values.jpg)
Secure your salvation with a direct relationship with Christ Jesus,instead of through men.Ask Jesus to forgive you for your former beliefs and sins against Him. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.Profess your belief in His sacrifice on the cross of Calvary, and his shed blood which confirmed His covenant with you.Declare that you desire to have a real relationship with Him.Ask Jesus to come into your heart to be your Lord and Savior.
Amen!Turn from your former beliefs and rest in Jesus alone for your salvation.Jesus has lovingly called you to, “ Come out of her (the Catholic Church) my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.“ Revelation 18:4. contact us.
What were the origins of Catholic-Babylonian Christianity?What was Simon Magus' religion before he met the apostlePeter? Where did that religion originate?
Read in this articlethe detailed and documented account of Simon Magus andhis great COUNTERFEIT CHRISTIANITY!by Ernest L. Martin and John D. KeyserTHE FALSE religious system began very early - almost with Pentecost in 31 A.D.Even in the earliest of Paul’s epistles, he informs us that 'the mystery ofiniquity DOTH ALREADY WORK' (II Thess.
Paul wrote this in 50 or 51 ADThe plot to supplant the Truth had already begun. In the later epistles of Pauland in those of the other apostles, we find it gaining considerable momentum.However, even though the apostles discuss the diabolical system which was arising,THEY NOWHERE MENTION HOW IT STARTED. They had no need in mentioning its beginning- that had already been done!The book of Acts is the KEY to the understanding of Christian beginnings.Not only does it show the commencement of the TRUE Church, but it equally revealsthe origins of the False Church masquerading as Christianity.
Indeed, you wouldthink it odd if the book of Acts did not discuss this vital subject.The Book of Acts - the KeyFirst, let us recall two points of necessary understanding:1) The book of Acts was written by Luke about 62 AD some 31 years afterthe True Church began. Acts recalls ALL events which affected, in a major way,the True Church.
It especially tells us about the beginnings of matters relatingto Church history.2) Acts does NOT record every single event relative to the Church, importantas one might think them to be.For example, Luke doesn't mention a single thing about the activities of theoriginal twelve apostles of the Messiah. Yet are we to assume that they didnothing important in the history of the Church? Absolutely NOT! They must havedone many mighty works. But we can see from this omission that Luke recordedONLY THOSE EVENTS WHICH WERE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for YEHOVAH’s Church of thefuture to know.Notice that Luke’s geography leads him towards the Northwest and West of Palestine.He discusses Church history in Asia Minor, Greece and ROME. He wanted to leaveus with the truth of what was going on in the West and North because the propheciesshowed the false system arising in these localities.All other activities of YEHOVAH’s Church - all about the other ten apostles,etc. fall into relative unimportance because the trouble wasn't going tocome from Palestine itself.
It was to come from ROME and adjacent areas. Itis no wonder that Luke spares no pains to tell us the truth of what was reallygoing on in these critical areas, and that is the reason Acts concerns itselfprimarily with Paul.These are well-known principles that help us understand the overall viewpointof Acts.With the foregoing in mind, read the incident recorded by Luke, of the firstencounter of YEHOVAH’s apostles with a heretic. This encounter was not withan ordinary run-of-the-mill individual, but with one of the greatest men inthe East at that time - Simon the Magus!The reason Luke describes the intentions of this man so thoroughly is theprofound effect this man, and his followers, had on YEHOVAH’s Church in AsiaMinor, Greece, and ESPECIALLY ROME. Actually, this man by 62 AD, (when Lukecomposed the book of Acts) had caused the True Church so much trouble that Lukehad to show the people that he was NOT, as he claimed to be, a part of the ChristianChurch.All scholars realize that Luke tells about Simon’s beginning because of hislater notoriety and danger to the Church.In this regard, notice the comment of Hasting’s Dictionary of the ApostolicChurch, Vol. 496: 'It seems beyond question that Luke KNEW THEREPUTATION which Simon acquired, and that he regarded the subsequent historyof Simon as the natural result of what occurred in the beginning of his connectionwith the Christians.' If we assume that Luke recorded this encounter of the apostles with Simon Magussimply to show that 'simony' was wrong, we miss the point completely.
Thereis a score of places in other parts of the Bible to show the error of buyingecclesiastical gifts.Luke was exposing SIMON MAGUS HIMSELF. This IS the important point!! Lukewas clearly showing that Simon was NEVER a part of YEHOVAH’s Church, even thoughby 62 AD, many people were being taught that Simon was truly a Christian -taught that he was the HEAD of the only TRUE Christians; the apostle to theGentiles!What Luke Tells Us About Simon MagusNotice the points Luke places clearly before us -1) Simon was a Samaritan, not a Jew - (Acts 8:9). Remember that theBible tells us salvation was of the Jews - not of the Samaritans (John 4:22).2) Simon Magus greatly used demonistic powers to do miracles and wonders(Acts 8:9).3) The whole population of Samaria (both small and great) gave heedto him (Verse 10).
He was looked on as the greatest prophet - all Samaria BELIEVEDIN HIM!4) The Samaritans WORSHIPPED him as 'the Great One' - a god. 'Thisman is that power of God called Great that is the Almighty' (RSV.
Verse 10).Imagine it!
![](/uploads/1/2/5/7/125758076/711621472.jpg)