Religious Deceit! :: Part I of III :: By Denis Bowden

Hi Folks,

It’s very sad that, even in this quickly passing (fallen) world, the level of religious deceit has become so very high. Both Jesus, and later His Apostles, spoke out about the ‘leavening of the Pharisees.’ And so we see that Christendom and Judaism have long been infiltrated by Satan. I know I’m not alone in my assumption that it is getting worse by the day.


How can we be sure? Listen closely to the leaders/priests/pastors of our respective denominations. Watch their faces, their eyes and carefully dissect their words.

Does it appear that they are increasingly serving up doctrinal pap that, even if your own knowledge of scripture be limited, still rings the alarm bells in your mind as it tests both your belief system and your credulity?


Every denomination has developed ‘church’ doctrine to create the ethos of how they, as a group in common, understand the gospels of Christ and teach it to their congregations.

We should accept that a church will always be contained within the envelope of its doctrine, so we must come immediately to the question, “Does the doctrine fail to adhere to a literal understanding of Scripture? Moreover, does it attempt by allegory, by act or omission, to alter the words or their intent? Or conversely, does the doctrine facilitate a literal understanding and constantly true teaching of prophecy (past, present and to come)?

And where does this denomination stand in relation to the question of restored/reconciled Israel and the ‘ownership’ of the land itself?

 I’m sure you get the drift.

For instance, does this church denomination endeavor (in each teaching) to tell you how bad things have gotten? Or does it appear that its pastors/priests specifically appear to avoid even the slightest mention of such ‘controversy’ in their sermons?

Have you ever heard any of them offer that something may have prophetic significance?

With the deepest respect and humility, I urge you that, when you get home, take their utterances to the Holy Word of Scripture yourself. And check not simply the validity of the sermon and its relationship to Scripture, but ask yourself: Has it helped to prepare you in any way for what you know or suspect is coming?

As I commenced to edit these three commentaries this morning, there came a knock on the door. It was two ladies representing the ethos of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. We had a brief discussion during which I declared my own faith ethos, particularly in relation to unfulfilled prophecy. Interestingly, they became increasingly enthused as it became apparent that we shared a similar understanding of prophecy.

Daily, I see confirmed from many diverse sources, many of them secular, that as sick as it is, this world is becoming increasingly aware that it lies in deep, deep, trouble.  Of course, there is little common agreement (except for Climate Change enthusiasm) as to the cause.

‘PAP’ – (The Constancy of Sameness)

I know from close association with my former denomination, that if you picked any particular Sunday, then came back on the same Sunday the following year, chances are you could almost nearly recite the sermon content from memory, given a few anecdotes and attempts at levity to make the ‘dish’ palatable.

Some shattering event may have occurred which absolutely begged explanation as to whether it might possibly have such prophetic significance. You thought to yourself, “Surely, he’ll touch on this today? People are saying that this is really important!”

But ‘NO!’ The set sermon never deviated from stock-stand doctrine one little bit. It appears we live in a spiritual vacuum. So, what was it that was being served up to the congregation?


Porridge friends – a large bowl of porridge, but – with some additives to make it more palatable, just as we tend to do before eating it. For instance, I don’t ever recall seeing anyone eating their porridge without changing it precisely to their liking by additions. Many like it well-sugared whilst our Scottish brethren prefer it heavily salted. I like it with honey and a pat of butter.

Doctrine remains, the porridge of denominationalism: ‘the Word’ is invariably preached according to Catholicism, Anglicanism or maybe even a Calvinist view of Scripture. There are many persuasions.

Of the many varieties of the denominations claiming Jesus, you will (make no mistake) search in vain these days for literal purity.

And so, this type of porridge of which I write is served with the sugar of allegory, sprinkled with some muesli granules of pure essence of doctrine and, in common, covered with a creamy layer of farm-fresh cow juice to ensure, at all costs, the avoidance of the subject of prophetic judgement. In particular, it avoids the unfinished ‘business’ in the prophetic pipeline. All simply awaiting the raising of the hand of God, according to His prepared timing.

We should remember that we are dealing with highly educated academics, and they get around this pretty well, showing a well-defended wall of ‘ivory towered’ agreement to facilitate their doctrine.

One common denominator within the ethos of the fallen church is its concerted view that virtually all prophecy, if not all, was concluded with and by the ascension of the Paschal Lamb. According to the prevailing teachings of this doctrine, ‘most was accomplished with the crucifixion/ascension of Jesus. As a result, little or nothing is left undone.’

There can be little doubt that both Catholicism and the many multi-colored hues of reformed Protestantism do know differently. However, the subject of prophecy is taboo. We are left then, with the word you receive when you are not being fed ‘the Word.’


And, of course, the ‘other biggie’ that, because of their rejection of Jesus, the judgment of the Jew is complete. Because of ‘completeness,’ the Jews have no further portion whether they be of Orthodox or Reformed belief or even secular. They are not entitled to a further ‘helping.’  And what they had has now been given the Gentiles and thus Christianity (those of the ‘church’) who have become the ‘real’ Jews. The ethos teaches that the Gentile church is, therefore, by almost default, the New Israel because of the rejection of Jesus by Orthodox Jewry.


Catholicism has tried for many centuries to ‘convert’ the Jews. In past times, it used the power of the Catholic nation states to enforce such conversions.

The Spanish Inquisition of torture was long utilized to extract heretic ‘confessions.’ Public executions including ‘burning at the stake’ were also tried and accepted tools.

Any Catholic wishing to test me on these historical antecedents might be interested to know that the high office of The Inquisition is still alive and well within the Vatican as, of course, are the Jesuits, the traditional foot soldiers of previous papacies who performed these awful, Godless works. And, of course, I do not forget that the present holder of the Office of Pontifex Maximus is himself a Jesuit.

The Jesuit Oath, from


Jews could freely convert. In fact, such conversion was welcomed, but only if the conversion took place within the framework of ‘Mother Church.

This presumption is based on the centuries-taught belief that the Christ Killers must ceremoniously atone for their heresy. That ‘atonement,’ of course, to be conducted under the august auspices of ‘the one true church.’

Out of this assumption also is created the basis for the view that the Jews, therefore, have no legal right of return to the land God gave them to husband on his behalf. To this day, most of the sacred sites in Jerusalem and the relevant real estate is owned by the Roman Catholic Church.

There seems little doubt that the weighty presence of ‘Mother Church’ in the Holy City has got a lot to do with the Catholic view that they will represent mankind to the returning King of Kings and thus be His representative to the nations. This is not a new doctrine.


The papacy has produced many, many, encyclicals and held great councils of State to confirm the incumbent pope in the role of being the lineal successor of Jesus on Earth. Through this belief, confirmed in doctrine, the pope ‘speaks’ for Jesus Christ. And no, I did not make this up. An easy internet search will reveal the relevant encyclicals.

Allegedly (though rejected by the evangelical church), the papacy speaks with the authority given to Peter through its claim that Peter established the church at the direction of Jesus. And Catholicism is, thereby, the legacy inheritor/beneficiary of both the legal ownership and ‘rightful’ spiritual guide to which all believing Christians must submit.

You might well ponder long and hard over the word submit!

Papal claims of spiritual authority have been increasingly firmly expressed over time, culminating in 1870 with the proclamation of the dogma of papal infallibility for rare occasions when the pope speaks ex cathedra—literally “from the chair (of Saint Peter)“—to issue a formal definition of faith or morals.[9

Pope, Wikipedia

There are many:

Papal Infallibility, Catholic Answers

This also is an excellent reference, and I have set out a relevant excerpt below:

Papal Infallibility, EWTN

INFALLIBILITY ITSELF (directly quoted):

QUOTE: Now we come to the specific question of infallibility, by which the successors of Peter continue to confirm the brethren. Since the successors of Peter have the same Petrine authority, which comes ultimately from Christ, to bind and loose, they have the authority to bind the faithful in matters pertaining to salvation – that is, in faith or morals. Now, if a pope could bind the faithful to error, it would be a clear triumph of the powers of Hell, because the entire Church would be bound to follow the error under Christ’s own authority. Obviously, this cannot happen.

Therefore, the logic of the situation demands that the Petrine power of confirming the brethren must be an infallible power. When the pope intends by virtue of his supreme authority to teach on a matter of faith and morals to the entire Church, he MUST be protected by the Holy Spirit from error – else the powers of hell would prevail.

This is the logic behind infallibility. But, of course, it is not based solely on logic, since it is attested in Scripture and was held by the earliest Christians and the Fathers and, indeed, by the vast majority of Christians from the beginning.

Further, it is not a new thing. It was precisely defined at Vatican I in order to clarify what was at that time a confusing issue, but this was by way of stating clearly what Christ’s teaching was, not by way of adding anything new. Vatican I, therefore, carefully enumerated the conditions under which the pope was in fact infallible – the same conditions which logic demands, which Scripture suggests, and which tradition shows us in action down through the centuries.

When the Pope (1) intends to teach (2) by virtue of his supreme authority (3) on a matter of faith and morals (4) to the whole Church, he is preserved by the Holy Spirit from error. His teaching act is therefore called “infallible” and the teaching which he articulates is termed “irreformable.” – END QUOTE


In modern terms, using this yardstick of complicity in terms of doctrinal ethos, is the ultimate act of evil served upon Jesus. This is because the ethos says that there are no legitimate Jewish claimants to the land of Israel. Rather, it is the so-called ‘Palestinians’ alone who possess the legal and rightful ownership of the land claimed by the Jews.

It was, in fact, this latter view that finally led me to remove my posterior from my usual position in the pew and OUT of my former denomination completely.


In contemplating whether you have reached a point whereby you might consider a similar decision ‘to walk,’ I urge you; use the litmus test of ‘church’ doctrine and measure it against the teaching of both fulfilled and unfulfilled prophecy – Particularly, in relation to judgments still to feature within restored and soon to be reconciled, Israel (speaking to both the nation and the twelve tribes).

Doctrine (the glue that binds the denomination to itself) is full of the leavening heresy of the unspoken, the un-taught and in many instances, the ‘never to be of mentioned.’

I accept that Martin Luther’s attack on the doctrinal ethos of Catholicism created the momentum to bring us back to the gospel of Jesus Christ as the pre-cursor to Protestantism and its ‘reforms’ that have since evolved. And yet, Luther remained, until his death, implacably opposed to the Jews.

This was not so initially. He believed that they could be converted en masse. When he saw that Orthodox Jewry had no intention of doing so, he began calling for their systematic extermination: a policy much later enthusiastically endorsed by Adolf Hitler.

And so, I maintain that much of the doctrine of the denominations that evolved out of the schism brought about by Luther and the later reformers came to be developed because certain of the so-called venerated ‘saints’ or venerated teachers decided to ‘re-interpret’ the gospels. This enabled them to reflect a songbook more to their own liking and/or to those of their evolving denominational masters.

In the latter case, the allegiance of the growing church was, initially, first to the last of the Roman Emperors and then through Clement, Bishop of Rome, through the emergent papacy, as the time of the Caesars finally ended.

All of the last of the imperial house of the then ruling ‘Caesars’ took upon themselves the title, Pontifex Maximus (Supreme High Priest). And later, when the Christian Byzantium empire came under increasing pressure from the sons of Allah and ultimately fell, the papacy finally assumed the mantle of ‘High Priest’ itself.

Catholicism has kept this (the jewel in their crown and from which they derive, at first face, the ‘right’ of the papacy to rule Christendom) ever since. Rome has claimed this highly contentious connection to the Apostle Cephas (Peter) to validate their claim (ownership) of the worship of Christ Jesus.

Rome believes we have fundamentally erred in our interpretation of the relevant passage of Scripture, wherein we say that Jesus was speaking as the Christ to Peter’s confirmation of the Christ’s deity, affirming, ‘thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God!”

Matthew 16:16-18, King James Version (KJV):

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.”

We of the Reformed church adhere to this contrary interpretation, and it sets us on a collision course with Rome. Our understanding interprets this as the clear indication by Jesus that He accepted Peter’s affirmation that He was the Christ, and that, as such (as He claimed), no one could come to the Father except through Him.

This alone was the rock of ‘faith’ upon which Christianity would rise or fall.

It had nothing whatsoever to do with making Peter the ‘rock on which the church was to be built.’ It is definitively that Jesus is the Christ of God.

You must believe this implicitly, or else what is the point?  We are left with just another cult built on just another myth.

Peter is then told that, upon the ‘rock’ of this claim (of His deity), Jesus will build His church and Hell shall not prevail against it.

Congregations that are fed the ‘belief’ that the passage is all about establishing the legitimacy of Rome are unknowingly being confirmed (both individually and corporately) in denial of God.

Why, you ask?

Because it is giving glory to a man-made institution and not to Jesus as the Son of the living God.

It is also taking them far, far, away from the true, saving Grace of Jesus (Yeshua).

The basis of these changes has to do with the performance of ‘works’ as a pre-requisite to receiving Grace – a Grace not granted by Jesus, but by ‘Mother Church.’

It was on this doctrine that the purchase of indulgences crept in as a pus-filled canker of deception.

Luther rightly condemned it.

The reason being that it forces ‘submission’ and grants the right of King/Emperor Eternal to the papacy. For you see, Rome then and now maintains that the rest of us, who refuse to submit to ‘Mother Church, go to Hell as heretics.

Even following the Reformation – though much that was of Rome was thrown out – much still remained, and in doing so, successfully made the transition into mainstream Protestantism.

Anglicanism is a prime example. Go and worship in their ‘High Church,’ and you will see little difference in the liturgy taught ‘down the road’ in the Roman Basilica.


If you are a regular reader of God’s holy Word, then by now you should be able to sort out falsity in doctrine because you know exactly what to look for.

The teaching church of your choice must possess the characteristics of faithfulness to the literal truth contained in God’s holy Word. 

My advice would be to forget where you were baptized because you owe nothing to any denomination. Hopefully, diligent research (on your part) will show you that the latter is not a particularly ‘good’ place to start to find God through Jesus, who is and remains the only way ‘home.’

That great hymn, “To God Be the Glory; Great Things He Hath Done,” says it all.

“O perfect redemption, the purchase of blood, To every believer the promise of God; The vilest offender who truly believes That moment from Jesus a pardon receives. Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, Let the earth hear His voice! Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, Let the people rejoice! O come to the Father, through Jesus the Son, And give Him the glory, great things He hath done.”

(Words: Fanny Crosby 1875. “To God Be the Glory,” William Howard Doane, 1875 copyright: public domain).


Personally, I subscribe to the belief that when the iron shackles of your ‘heart’ begin to buckle and snap from the weight of sin-filled denial within you, then and only then, at your lowest, will you (now open and vulnerable) be found by God as you find Jesus.

He was there all the time but you were, hitherto, not open to the Holy Spirit, the shackles of your denial being too tight.

And oh, that sublime moment of exhilarating joy when, at last, those shackles break and fall off and you ‘see’ the Master at last.

This is how I see it, accepting as I do that Jesus Christ is all things to all men who have come to belief at last.

Many are called; many decline and implacably march on.

Some are called as wee children (how wonderful is that)!

Some come in their teens,

Some in the midst of a busy life in which, at last, they discover only emptiness, a façade of nothingness; and then, when all seems hopeless and they are bereft of hope and lost, He suddenly, through the Holy Spirit, is there.

And some of us on our death-bed. Hallelujah!

Again I say, that neither your baptism or confirmation binds you. For example, neither Catholicism, Anglicanism, Methodism or the liberalism of the Uniting Church can guarantee your entry to Heaven.

Unfortunately, each claim the religious ‘high ground,’ and some go further, having invented several quite peculiar ways through which you just might make it into Heaven.

Within such church dictums is the belief that your ascent to Heaven can be helpfully aided by continued prayer from those closest you. And throwing a heap of dollars at the situation is also alleged to be a great way to go.

It has a familiar ring. Politicians often attempt to stifle their critics by throwing a heap of dollars at the ‘noise’ in the hope it will ‘all go away!’


The true teaching church is simply that. It is and remains a faithful guide because it helps you to understand the Word of God with the hindsight of its full, literal impact.

It shows you the past, the present and the future as the Bible actually presents it. And it always speaks to the truth of those great prophetic events that God has already wrought.

It also clearly shows you (as far as we can yet understand) the best view we can reach (through prayer and study) of that which is yet to come.

The true teaching church emphatically, implacably, without falter teaches ‘Christ crucified,’ the Son of God. It speaks to our fallen nature, the suffering to come for those who will shortly be left behind.  It never takes a step backward from the fact that you will not/you cannot be ‘saved’ unless you have in faith, made your verbal utterance to claim Jesus as your Messiah-Savior, humbling self and along with a broken, repentant heart, marching to the beat of the true, heavenly ‘drum.’

In a true teaching church, you will see no grand edifice.

Its congregation will more than likely be very small; its pastor a humble, unassuming guy with a big, big smile and a bigger heart. His little church struggles to exist. His own stipend is probably (no certainly) very small, and he may even have had to have taken secondary employment to feed himself and his family. I have at least one such guy in mind as I type this up.

Nevertheless, you will know within minutes of entering the church he pastors, then being introduced to the members of his congregation of fellow worshiping souls, that God may be found here. It is a conducive environment. For this is a gathering of believers where God is sought actively and His Word taught with humble purity.

And yes, as you would find in many denominations, ‘good works’ are to be found here. But they are works rendered as gifts of love to God (after the fact). Because there is first the knowledge that they did not reach God in the first instance by rendering them as some sort of ‘well-priming’ bribe.  Rather, this congregation came to the Savior through Grace alone, broken on the Cross as was our Master Himself for us.

“Oh, praise God….that the whole world was filled with such synagogues of faithfulness, wherein the hymns of praise and loving prayer, rise to the foot of Your throne My God, as a divine incense!”

This truly is the church beloved!


In confirmation of my point is the increasing move to simply not mention Jesus or, if mentioned, not specifically in relation to Him as the major instrument of the Grace necessary to make us acceptable to God.

Grace has been steadily and systematically replaced with the ‘Church Environmental.’

At one time, years ago, they would claim the ‘Church Triumphant.’

That was in the days when I think many pastors actually did truly believe that our greater congregations would win the world for Jesus.

Oh, how we have fallen!


Specifically, those new to the gospel of Jesus Christ must quickly be taught to understand the importance and the impact upon your immortal soul of His cleansing.

We come to Jesus to be made presentable to God.

Jesus (He alone) is the essential precursor.

Anything else is less than. So less that it doesn’t figure at all in the Father’s plan for the means through which reconciliation of the truly faithful remnant is to take place.

It is Jesus, Jesus and only Jesus. Claim otherwise and you deny. This denial makes you a heretic.

Without the full sanctification granted by the Grace of Jesus (as the Christ of God), our portion is deemed insufficient. Our redemption has not taken place as ordained by God. Nothing has been gain-stayed sufficient for our Father to have us included in the Book of Life.

We will not then, be able to avoid the ‘Second Death’ of eternal separation from Him.

I speak particularly of the doctrine of ‘works’ as a pre-requisite of Grace. I speak of allegorically interpreted scripture (not literally interpreted and understood Scripture). I speak of the deliberate misinterpretation of the Scriptures to facilitate divers ends that confirms denial and that will, consequently, earn the wrath of God.

Such denial is confirmed by the de-emphasis of ‘Saving Grace’ and thus, Jesus Himself.

Jesus remains the only way to reach God behind the rent curtain of the Holy of Holies. That curtain was torn at the moment His sacrifice was complete and He exclaimed, “It is finished!”


Once shriven, we are permitted to approach our Heavenly Father, devoid of sin because of the shed blood of the Paschal Lamb. His sacrifice (as real today as the day He gave up his humanity upon Golgotha) has been painted upon the lintel of our previously wicked hearts by the Holy Spirit.

We have become ‘immersed’ (figuratively) in His blood. And as the Holy Spirit comes upon us, we are washed clean of all that represented the ‘filth’ of our previous spirit of denial.

This spiritual cleansing, given through our verbally affirmed declaration that Jesus is truly the Christ of God, the Messiah, is the only legal basis through which our broken and repentant hearts can finally be accepted. And that clearly, because no denial of faith can now be found within us.

Through the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus has washed us clean so that our Creator Father sees us but sees no sin within us. How could He? It has been washed away by His son’s precious blood once and for all, and we are His.

FALSITY – Its Basis:

Be they encyclicals, the result of debate by inter-denominational prelates, or utterances from the Talmud, if they are not true to the Bible and its true Torah roots as given Moses through the Ten Commandments, they are falsities.

No one has a mandate to either extend or prune the Scriptures. They stand, inviolate. They must not be corrupted.

Whosoever is guilty of these sins, denying as they do the Saving Grace offered by Yeshua, instantly places themselves outside ‘the Pale.’

They have, by their action/s, exposed themselves to judgment. And it will be the worse for those judged guilty of conspiring to deny the true basis of Saving Grace by deliberate act of omission or manipulation of the Word.

These overt acts/actions lead directly to denial because they create a false view of God’s Holy Word.  And the result of this is that it invariably leads to the damage of the true harvest (the ‘wheat’) that should have been gathered in by the reapers through faith in Yeshua. It should have been given to God, unsullied, with all restraining doubt removed.

It has turned the ‘wheat’ that God has always wished to harvest (through Jesus) into ‘tares.’ When we become ‘tares,’ we become useless. We are choking weeds. And as a result, we are certainly dangerous to the unsullied nature of the ‘wheat,’ making it almost impossible to harvest.

God alone knows how much harder it has become. When the ‘wheat’ is threatened by ‘tares,’ each and every day is a trial, as the World collectively conspires to pollute us. And yes, of course, it is we, given of our own volition to Jesus (in faith), who are described as ‘wheat.’

‘Tares’ are weeds that have to be removed to save the harvest. Jesus has made it perfectly clear that they are those of denial who will be pulled, removed and burned in the Second Death.

Brothers and sisters, these are hard truths.

Many millions have gazed in awe upon the Cross but, finally, were unable to pick up their own cross as it was offered by Jesus to each of them. Though many have tried, within the constraints of their personal, ongoing denial, they were finally unable to overcome the World and the chortling minions of Satan.

The idea of a God who won’t be manipulated but, rather, rules over them is the basis of their denial.  And a God who then expects, following repentance, a changed ‘heart’ is simply (in their eyes) asking/expecting far more than they are prepared to give. To the denier/rejecter, the score is ‘1’ for themselves. For God, the score is ‘Zero.’

What they search for in vain is the ‘man from Galilee,’ the Nazarene who cured the sick, fed the hungry, walked on water and turned the water into wine at Cana. This is the kind of Jesus the deniers would tolerate: Jesus the “miracle worker.”

However, the denier is, by nature, ‘a taker – not a giver of self.’ The world, by its very nature, ‘takes.’  Through Satan, it gives only in return, a false reflection of true reality.

The world does all that it can to indulge ‘self’ in its every whim and fancy and exploitation of all that is vile and evil. This is why the world will not/cannot corporately be a ‘giver.’ And it is why, individually, whilst denial exists within us, it is almost impossible to create a space of openness, a moment of clarity in which you see Jesus revealed in His glory as Lord of Lords and King of Kings.

Yet Jesus was always much, much more than this and flatly denied He was preaching tolerance and ‘joy’ to the world. Instead, He made it perfectly clear that He came to turn the world upside down, seeking out the truly repentant.

Jesus told us that, in the coming days, the time would come when families would begin to turn upon each other as the deniers tried to thwart and drive God out of the lives of any family member professing true belief.

Truly, these are the foundations of deceit.

Selah (pause and carefully think on this).


Denis Bowden