Catholic Heresy (for the record)
- Thread starter RoboOp
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
you're just proving you're sticking your head in the sand, or worse. >>
"The Church of Rome says that she has a right to punish with the confiscation of their goods, or the penalty of death, those who differ in faith from the Pope. — ibid, p. 376.
America simply has no idea of the terrible trouble and persecution that is coming soon at the hands of the papacy. The people of America have forgotten the wanton cruelty and unrestrained butchery this unholy power demonstrated during the Dark Ages when it slaughtered over 150 million Christians because they wanted to worship God according to the Bible. Hitler’s holocaust against the Jews was tiny compared to the papal holocaust against Christians during the Dark Ages, "
"The Church of Rome says that she has a right to punish with the confiscation of their goods, or the penalty of death, those who differ in faith from the Pope. — ibid, p. 376.
America simply has no idea of the terrible trouble and persecution that is coming soon at the hands of the papacy. The people of America have forgotten the wanton cruelty and unrestrained butchery this unholy power demonstrated during the Dark Ages when it slaughtered over 150 million Christians because they wanted to worship God according to the Bible. Hitler’s holocaust against the Jews was tiny compared to the papal holocaust against Christians during the Dark Ages, "
That was I read from a lots of credible source like Avro Manhattan, the three best seller books and lecturer for some big american and European university, Eric jhon Phelps etc.
ISIS not kill 10 millions people, yet United State consider to sending a troops to protect so call innocent victim.
Why not do some thing for Vatican? It is weir.
ISIS not kill 10 millions people, yet United State consider to sending a troops to protect so call innocent victim.
Why not do some thing for Vatican? It is weir.
A
Because you've included yet another personal attack in this thread Jeff, as is your habit, I'm reporting you for that one too. And, I'm going to keep reporting you for the personal attacks until you're either banned or cease making them.
Now Jeff, posting a quote isn't the same thing as verifying the quote to see if it's true and, if so, what it's origin is. I can't find an original source for this quote you posted.
Ibid is simply a term used to reference a previously cited source. But you never provided an original source to begin with.
Please provide the original source for the quote you've posted so we can verify firstly if it's even a genuine quote and secondly who made it and the context surrounding it.
And in the future, if you're still here, please stop posting completely unsubstantiated material as it adds nothing to the discussion but only detracts from it.
If you can't verify a thing's authenticity, then don't assert it. If you can't provide the legitimate source of something, when asked for it, then don't post it because it's nothing but hearsay.
Presently, the Roman Catholic Church's position is in the Dignitatis humanae. Note the following:
"All persons have a right to religious liberty, a right with its foundation in the essential dignity of each human being. All persons must be free to seek the truth without coercion. The highest norm of human life is the divine law and truth, but it can only be sought after in the proper and free manner, with the aid of teaching or instruction, communication and dialogue, and it must be adhered to by personal assent. This freedom from coercion in religious affairs must also be recognized as a right when persons act in community. As such a community, and in fact a society in its own original right, has the right to live its own domestic religious life in freedom, in particular the freedom to choose religious education...
The government is to protect the rights and equality of all citizens as part of its essential role in promoting the public good, and a wrong is done when a government imposes profession or repudiation of any religion. Religious freedom is exercised in society, therefore is subject to certain regulatory norms, again to ensure the common welfare. Freedom and responsibility must balance and religious freedom must have as its aim to promote persons acting with greater responsibility..."
The declaration has its foundation in the dignity of the person as understood through human reason, having its roots in divine revelation, Therefore Christians are called to an even more conscientious respect for religious freedom. Man’s response to God in faith must be free – no person is to be forced to embrace Christianity. This is a major tenet of the Catholic faith, contained in Scripture and proclaimed by the Fathers. Religious freedom contributes to the environment where such free response is possible. God’s own call to serve him binds persons in conscience but is not compulsion. God has regard for the dignity of all human beings as shown in the actions of Christ himself. Jesus did acknowledge the legitimacy of governments, but refused to impose his teachings by force. The Apostles followed His word and example. The Church is therefore following Christ and the Apostles when she recognized the principle of religious freedom, based both on the dignity of human persons and divine revelation. The Church herself does require a full measure of freedom, a sacred freedom, to carry out her mission."
^ I'd say this is quite a step forward for the RCC. For further information, I recommend reading 'Catholicism and Religious Freedom: Contemporary Reflections on Vatican II's Declaration on Religious Liberty' edited by Kenneth L. Grasso, Robert P. Hunt.
Now if the RCC would be nice enough to retire the anathema's they invoked on Protestants during the period of the Protestant Reformation I think we'd finally be able to put that to rest.
And as for Christians killing Christians, it may surprise you to learn there's enough blame to go around. Both Catholics and Protestants engaged in genocide and democide on each other and did so for a long time.
While we're on the topic, please source your 150 million assertion so we can properly qualify it. I have accurate estimates here of the number of Protestants that Catholics killed from historians such as Dr. Rodney Stark and Dr. Thomas Madden and it is a small fraction of what you're asserting.
Now Jeff, posting a quote isn't the same thing as verifying the quote to see if it's true and, if so, what it's origin is. I can't find an original source for this quote you posted.
Ibid is simply a term used to reference a previously cited source. But you never provided an original source to begin with.
Please provide the original source for the quote you've posted so we can verify firstly if it's even a genuine quote and secondly who made it and the context surrounding it.
And in the future, if you're still here, please stop posting completely unsubstantiated material as it adds nothing to the discussion but only detracts from it.
If you can't verify a thing's authenticity, then don't assert it. If you can't provide the legitimate source of something, when asked for it, then don't post it because it's nothing but hearsay.
Presently, the Roman Catholic Church's position is in the Dignitatis humanae. Note the following:
"All persons have a right to religious liberty, a right with its foundation in the essential dignity of each human being. All persons must be free to seek the truth without coercion. The highest norm of human life is the divine law and truth, but it can only be sought after in the proper and free manner, with the aid of teaching or instruction, communication and dialogue, and it must be adhered to by personal assent. This freedom from coercion in religious affairs must also be recognized as a right when persons act in community. As such a community, and in fact a society in its own original right, has the right to live its own domestic religious life in freedom, in particular the freedom to choose religious education...
The government is to protect the rights and equality of all citizens as part of its essential role in promoting the public good, and a wrong is done when a government imposes profession or repudiation of any religion. Religious freedom is exercised in society, therefore is subject to certain regulatory norms, again to ensure the common welfare. Freedom and responsibility must balance and religious freedom must have as its aim to promote persons acting with greater responsibility..."
The declaration has its foundation in the dignity of the person as understood through human reason, having its roots in divine revelation, Therefore Christians are called to an even more conscientious respect for religious freedom. Man’s response to God in faith must be free – no person is to be forced to embrace Christianity. This is a major tenet of the Catholic faith, contained in Scripture and proclaimed by the Fathers. Religious freedom contributes to the environment where such free response is possible. God’s own call to serve him binds persons in conscience but is not compulsion. God has regard for the dignity of all human beings as shown in the actions of Christ himself. Jesus did acknowledge the legitimacy of governments, but refused to impose his teachings by force. The Apostles followed His word and example. The Church is therefore following Christ and the Apostles when she recognized the principle of religious freedom, based both on the dignity of human persons and divine revelation. The Church herself does require a full measure of freedom, a sacred freedom, to carry out her mission."
^ I'd say this is quite a step forward for the RCC. For further information, I recommend reading 'Catholicism and Religious Freedom: Contemporary Reflections on Vatican II's Declaration on Religious Liberty' edited by Kenneth L. Grasso, Robert P. Hunt.
Now if the RCC would be nice enough to retire the anathema's they invoked on Protestants during the period of the Protestant Reformation I think we'd finally be able to put that to rest.
And as for Christians killing Christians, it may surprise you to learn there's enough blame to go around. Both Catholics and Protestants engaged in genocide and democide on each other and did so for a long time.
While we're on the topic, please source your 150 million assertion so we can properly qualify it. I have accurate estimates here of the number of Protestants that Catholics killed from historians such as Dr. Rodney Stark and Dr. Thomas Madden and it is a small fraction of what you're asserting.
A
People, you must learn to engage in a discussion as adults without repeated blatant overt personal attacks.
Furthermore, you need to be able to support what you're asserting. If you can't do so, then just be honest and say you can't prove it but that it's your belief or feeling that such and such is true.
And, if you omit a source (which is OK on an informal forum like this one), be able to provide it when asked for it.
Thank you.
Furthermore, you need to be able to support what you're asserting. If you can't do so, then just be honest and say you can't prove it but that it's your belief or feeling that such and such is true.
And, if you omit a source (which is OK on an informal forum like this one), be able to provide it when asked for it.
Thank you.
M
With respect AOK I do not need a friend in my case, I was a practising scientist with direct involvement both in the very small - quantum device physics and interaction of radiation with matter - and the very large : astrophysics. Your comments on time using the word " parallel" suggest a limited view of time. Indeed all those experiences were part of what formed my increasing distrust in science as other than what it really is - a very useful tool, rather than fundamental underpinning of the universe.
The physics of the very small is so screwed up it cannot rationalise the maths without resorting to subjective views of reality, or multiverses, causality even objective existence no longer a given. The physics of the very large cannot account for more than a tiny percentage of mass or energy needed for the present cosmological model, the thing on which the understanding of age and development of the universe is based, indeed the dark energy studies of supernovae hint that even that age is way wrong! Sagan and Dawkins nonsense "extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof" is the antithesis of science in which correlation repeats or it does not, how ever extraordinary which leads us to a crazy world which regards cold particulate dark matter and gravitational waves as real science for which there is not a shred of evidence, where telepathy is proven 100 times over as a real effect lacking explanation in scientific model, just because the " elders" of the science world like Dawkins impose their own world belief on what is good science.
But as for Mary, I make the point for the last time, you are constraining what is possible for God and science by what your experience and logic makes you believe a human soul is capable, so putting your own limits on both. It is off topic here but as a scientist I find some of the apparation evidence compelling which adds to the mix for me that Mary was special, as indeed the bible portrays her. Full of grace. lord with her. Honored as "Mother of lord" , mother of a davidic king so entitled to the title of " queen", the crowned heavenly woman of revelations 18, whose ( -assume spiritual) offspring are those who " follow the commandments" . In disagreeing with the special role of Mary you line up against a huge number of heavyweight church fathers - even Luther revered her.
Believe what you will, suffice to say in catholic mass Mary gets 2 mentions in context " pray for us", The Lord, Jesus, Lamb of God 100 mentions or more, so why do you over emphasise the significance of her to the Catholic Church? When I enter the church there are always at least a dozen images or statues and crucifixes of Jesus, with generally only one or two of Mary.
It seems to me there are more important problems to discuss, such as the myriad of post reformationist denominations and people who no longer believe in real presence when from the earliest times the church clearly did and there are scriptural references backing that up, Only if you ignore church history ,is it possible to go back to memorialism, and that is a far more fundamental heresy in the sense of challenge to orthodoxy, that is seemingly embraced in this forum as " optional"
The physics of the very small is so screwed up it cannot rationalise the maths without resorting to subjective views of reality, or multiverses, causality even objective existence no longer a given. The physics of the very large cannot account for more than a tiny percentage of mass or energy needed for the present cosmological model, the thing on which the understanding of age and development of the universe is based, indeed the dark energy studies of supernovae hint that even that age is way wrong! Sagan and Dawkins nonsense "extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof" is the antithesis of science in which correlation repeats or it does not, how ever extraordinary which leads us to a crazy world which regards cold particulate dark matter and gravitational waves as real science for which there is not a shred of evidence, where telepathy is proven 100 times over as a real effect lacking explanation in scientific model, just because the " elders" of the science world like Dawkins impose their own world belief on what is good science.
But as for Mary, I make the point for the last time, you are constraining what is possible for God and science by what your experience and logic makes you believe a human soul is capable, so putting your own limits on both. It is off topic here but as a scientist I find some of the apparation evidence compelling which adds to the mix for me that Mary was special, as indeed the bible portrays her. Full of grace. lord with her. Honored as "Mother of lord" , mother of a davidic king so entitled to the title of " queen", the crowned heavenly woman of revelations 18, whose ( -assume spiritual) offspring are those who " follow the commandments" . In disagreeing with the special role of Mary you line up against a huge number of heavyweight church fathers - even Luther revered her.
Believe what you will, suffice to say in catholic mass Mary gets 2 mentions in context " pray for us", The Lord, Jesus, Lamb of God 100 mentions or more, so why do you over emphasise the significance of her to the Catholic Church? When I enter the church there are always at least a dozen images or statues and crucifixes of Jesus, with generally only one or two of Mary.
It seems to me there are more important problems to discuss, such as the myriad of post reformationist denominations and people who no longer believe in real presence when from the earliest times the church clearly did and there are scriptural references backing that up, Only if you ignore church history ,is it possible to go back to memorialism, and that is a far more fundamental heresy in the sense of challenge to orthodoxy, that is seemingly embraced in this forum as " optional"
The aggregate of biblical and scientific evidence refutes the assertion. It's not an absence of evidence. It IS the evidence. And I understand time and quantum mechanics fine. But you're making comments which suggest to me that you do not understand how they work in our universe much less in extra-dimensionality.
My PhD scientist friends and I are competent to qualify your assertion scientifically. So please submit to us your scientific evidence that quantum mechanics is presently enabling Mary (e.g. a created finite spirit being) to field millions of prayers for biological humans (e.g. created finite biological/spirit beings constrained by our universe's dimension of time) each day for omniscient God. *cricket* *cricket*.
That aside, my statement on Catholic drift is a fact not just an opinion. Present Catholic dogma wildly diverges from that of the early apostolic church. I'm sorry this offends you but it is, in fact, a fact.
Certainly the Catholic Church formally denies this has occurred but every mainstream secular historian asserts that it has as well as every Protestant historian and a good many Catholic historians too for the simple fact: it did.
Which, isn't surprising given that Catholicism does not claim to rest upon the Bible alone but also upon "tradition" allegedly passed down from the apostles. However, there is absolutely no Catholic tradition which can be traced back to the apostles.
Catholic traditions arose much later than that era and most of them are historically well documented. And many of these traditions passed through many changes even diametrically opposing what Christ taught. Some were modified repeatedly and some simply discarded when they became a political liability.
This idea that the Bible does not have all the truth we need for salvation but must be supplemented by tradition and interpreted by the "Magisterium of the Church" is a purely human fabrication.
Neither the Roman Catholic Church with its magisterium nor its tradition existed during the 2000 years of Old Testament times, and obviously God's Word of that era (which continues today and is larger in volume than the New Testament) had no need of either. We have seen how thoroughly this Catholic idea that the Bible is "insufficient" contradicts what the Bible itself says throughout church history.
Obviously, there's a great deal more to say about this subject and I'm sure that we will in time
.
My PhD scientist friends and I are competent to qualify your assertion scientifically. So please submit to us your scientific evidence that quantum mechanics is presently enabling Mary (e.g. a created finite spirit being) to field millions of prayers for biological humans (e.g. created finite biological/spirit beings constrained by our universe's dimension of time) each day for omniscient God. *cricket* *cricket*.
That aside, my statement on Catholic drift is a fact not just an opinion. Present Catholic dogma wildly diverges from that of the early apostolic church. I'm sorry this offends you but it is, in fact, a fact.
Certainly the Catholic Church formally denies this has occurred but every mainstream secular historian asserts that it has as well as every Protestant historian and a good many Catholic historians too for the simple fact: it did.
Which, isn't surprising given that Catholicism does not claim to rest upon the Bible alone but also upon "tradition" allegedly passed down from the apostles. However, there is absolutely no Catholic tradition which can be traced back to the apostles.
Catholic traditions arose much later than that era and most of them are historically well documented. And many of these traditions passed through many changes even diametrically opposing what Christ taught. Some were modified repeatedly and some simply discarded when they became a political liability.
This idea that the Bible does not have all the truth we need for salvation but must be supplemented by tradition and interpreted by the "Magisterium of the Church" is a purely human fabrication.
Neither the Roman Catholic Church with its magisterium nor its tradition existed during the 2000 years of Old Testament times, and obviously God's Word of that era (which continues today and is larger in volume than the New Testament) had no need of either. We have seen how thoroughly this Catholic idea that the Bible is "insufficient" contradicts what the Bible itself says throughout church history.
Obviously, there's a great deal more to say about this subject and I'm sure that we will in time
.
there is nothing good coming from it. the rcc has never taken any steps toward christ jesus, or for anyone's salvation.
see further down "WHY" no one does anything.... (no country is able to, all are already controlled)...
it is not innocuous in any way. it is not peaceful at all. it is completely deadly to soull and body.
it is antichrist through and through, with no redemption, no atonement, no salvation in it.
it is utterly condemned by Christ Jesus.
from quikwebsearch> original publicized antichrist nature of rcc >>>
--------------------------------------------
Martin Luther - PBS
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/.../martinluther.html
the antichrist ... Martin Luther's criticism of the Church initially was that the Church
was ... But thanks to the printing press, Martin Luther became the bestseller ...
Forefathers reveal ANTICHRIST - presents of God ministry
Forefathers reveal ANTICHRIST
-Ibid Martin Luther (Lutheran) "We here are of the conviction that the papacy is
the seat of the true and real Antichrist..
--------------------------------------------
What was Luther's message?
Luther had many messages. When Luther wrote, he wrote about specific issues or problems. But he had one over-arching message. And that one message, he put in his pamphlets, he put in his longer treatises, he put in his hymns. And that was: Christ died for you. If you can believe and have faith, you are saved. There's nothing that you can do on your own to be saved. In fact, even believing is a gift of the Holy Spirit. But if you believe, you are saved. And all the paraphernalia of the Catholic Church of the time, where you could help and cooperate in your salvation, made no sense any more. ...
Martin Luther's criticism of the Church initially was that the Church was sending the wrong message, that the Church was ... giving to people the sense that they could save themselves by using the various things the Church offered, including indulgences. And the proper message was: No, you couldn't do that. In order to be saved, you had to leave it to Christ, and you had to simply cling to what Christ had done for you. That was his original complaint with the Church. But when the Church did not listen, he came reluctantly to the conclusion that the Church, especially the office of the papacy, was the Antichrist, and that what it was doing was deliberate. It was the devil's attempt to subvert, to submerge the good news, the gospel. The devil was working within the Church. And once he was convinced that that was happening, the papal office was the office of the Antichrist, and he saw the end time near. ...
=====================================================
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (url-link / page/ )
"Today, the United States is run and controlled by its most dedicated enemies. If you wonder at the things the government and the people in control of the government do that are so damaging to the United States, it is because they are our enemies and are determined to destroy the United States. Treason is running rampant throughout all levels and branches of the U.S. government today.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. — Marcus Cicero, speaking to Caesar, Crassus, Pompey and the Roman Senate."
see further down "WHY" no one does anything.... (no country is able to, all are already controlled)...
it is not innocuous in any way. it is not peaceful at all. it is completely deadly to soull and body.
it is antichrist through and through, with no redemption, no atonement, no salvation in it.
it is utterly condemned by Christ Jesus.
from quikwebsearch> original publicized antichrist nature of rcc >>>
--------------------------------------------
Martin Luther - PBS
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/.../martinluther.html
the antichrist ... Martin Luther's criticism of the Church initially was that the Church
was ... But thanks to the printing press, Martin Luther became the bestseller ...
Forefathers reveal ANTICHRIST - presents of God ministry
Forefathers reveal ANTICHRIST
-Ibid Martin Luther (Lutheran) "We here are of the conviction that the papacy is
the seat of the true and real Antichrist..
--------------------------------------------
What was Luther's message?
Luther had many messages. When Luther wrote, he wrote about specific issues or problems. But he had one over-arching message. And that one message, he put in his pamphlets, he put in his longer treatises, he put in his hymns. And that was: Christ died for you. If you can believe and have faith, you are saved. There's nothing that you can do on your own to be saved. In fact, even believing is a gift of the Holy Spirit. But if you believe, you are saved. And all the paraphernalia of the Catholic Church of the time, where you could help and cooperate in your salvation, made no sense any more. ...
Martin Luther's criticism of the Church initially was that the Church was sending the wrong message, that the Church was ... giving to people the sense that they could save themselves by using the various things the Church offered, including indulgences. And the proper message was: No, you couldn't do that. In order to be saved, you had to leave it to Christ, and you had to simply cling to what Christ had done for you. That was his original complaint with the Church. But when the Church did not listen, he came reluctantly to the conclusion that the Church, especially the office of the papacy, was the Antichrist, and that what it was doing was deliberate. It was the devil's attempt to subvert, to submerge the good news, the gospel. The devil was working within the Church. And once he was convinced that that was happening, the papal office was the office of the Antichrist, and he saw the end time near. ...
=====================================================
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (url-link / page/ )
"Today, the United States is run and controlled by its most dedicated enemies. If you wonder at the things the government and the people in control of the government do that are so damaging to the United States, it is because they are our enemies and are determined to destroy the United States. Treason is running rampant throughout all levels and branches of the U.S. government today.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. — Marcus Cicero, speaking to Caesar, Crassus, Pompey and the Roman Senate."
Maybe it's not my place to speculate, but it seems to me that religious bigots get a pass on this site for quite some time - whereas anyone who is not Christian who come on the site seems reprimanded/banned for causing not even half the trouble, argument, and noise. More disturbing is how their reputation will climb, in some cases.
Last edited:
[
.
It is one thing to respect Mary (I do not like using the word revere of any human) because she was chosen to be the bearer of the Messiah, (even though for a while she failed the test later (Luke 2.48; Mark 3.21, 31-35). it is quite another to claim for her spectacular powers based on extreme pseudo-scientific views. Naturally as a Roman Catholic you would accept any fantasy that would support your case. But do not try to pretend that it is scientific. It is totally unproven. Many people (including women) are full of grace. God is gracious to His people. But Joseph was never king, and so his wife could not be queen. Another fantasy.
I presume the crowned heavenly woman of which you speak is the one found in Rev 12. (You don't even get that right). There are no solid grounds for seeing her as Mary. Her crown of 12 stars clearly has in mind the 12 patriarchs as depicted in Gen 36.9 (with Joseph the twelfth). The woman is therefore Israel whose birthpangs are regularly described in the Old Testament. Mary is not involved. Mary only had five male offspring (Jesus and His younger brothers), There is no reason for seeing the large number of believers as offspring of Mary, whereas they were of Israel. So your whole scenario collapses.
The early fathers did not teach the real presence. Any more than Jesus was teaching the real presence in John 6.35, 51-57. They simply spoke vividly about the meal instituted by Jesus Christ, in language which I could also use, and I do not believe in the real presence. And Jesus Himself could NOT have meant His real body when He instituted the meal for HE WAS STILL LIVING IN IT. You clearly do not understand metaphor. In Scripture 'drinking someone's blood' meant either killing them (Isa 49.26; Zech 9.15 LXX) or benefiting by something for which men risked their lives (2 Sam 23.17; 1 Chron 11.19). David was not really refusing t drink his men's blood!!!
Wrong again. There is not a single early church father who tries to emphasise 'the real presence'. They all simply use metaphorical language like Jesus' used. Was the Passover a memorial? Scripture says so. If so we would expect the meal instituted by Jesus to replace the Passover as 'a memorial', however you interpret the latter word. The Orthodox churches revere the early father but they do not teach the real presence. As we partake of the Lord's Supper we are being carried back in time to the original Lord's Supper, and participating in it with the disciples. And there the bread and wine were not in any real sense His body and blood, for He was still living in His body and utilising His blood to maintain the body
It is one thing to respect Mary (I do not like using the word revere of any human) because she was chosen to be the bearer of the Messiah, (even though for a while she failed the test later (Luke 2.48; Mark 3.21, 31-35). it is quite another to claim for her spectacular powers based on extreme pseudo-scientific views. Naturally as a Roman Catholic you would accept any fantasy that would support your case. But do not try to pretend that it is scientific. It is totally unproven. Many people (including women) are full of grace. God is gracious to His people. But Joseph was never king, and so his wife could not be queen. Another fantasy.
I presume the crowned heavenly woman of which you speak is the one found in Rev 12. (You don't even get that right). There are no solid grounds for seeing her as Mary. Her crown of 12 stars clearly has in mind the 12 patriarchs as depicted in Gen 36.9 (with Joseph the twelfth). The woman is therefore Israel whose birthpangs are regularly described in the Old Testament. Mary is not involved. Mary only had five male offspring (Jesus and His younger brothers), There is no reason for seeing the large number of believers as offspring of Mary, whereas they were of Israel. So your whole scenario collapses.
The early fathers did not teach the real presence. Any more than Jesus was teaching the real presence in John 6.35, 51-57. They simply spoke vividly about the meal instituted by Jesus Christ, in language which I could also use, and I do not believe in the real presence. And Jesus Himself could NOT have meant His real body when He instituted the meal for HE WAS STILL LIVING IN IT. You clearly do not understand metaphor. In Scripture 'drinking someone's blood' meant either killing them (Isa 49.26; Zech 9.15 LXX) or benefiting by something for which men risked their lives (2 Sam 23.17; 1 Chron 11.19). David was not really refusing t drink his men's blood!!!
Wrong again. There is not a single early church father who tries to emphasise 'the real presence'. They all simply use metaphorical language like Jesus' used. Was the Passover a memorial? Scripture says so. If so we would expect the meal instituted by Jesus to replace the Passover as 'a memorial', however you interpret the latter word. The Orthodox churches revere the early father but they do not teach the real presence. As we partake of the Lord's Supper we are being carried back in time to the original Lord's Supper, and participating in it with the disciples. And there the bread and wine were not in any real sense His body and blood, for He was still living in His body and utilising His blood to maintain the body
M
Simply wrong. Period.
From pauls respect for the Eucharist - how can a mere symbol " eat judgement" to ignatius to the smyrneans, and all of them including augustine whose references are inescapable to Luther. You need to read it all again.
As for the woman of revelations I could ask 100 kids who it is almost all would all say Mary. Jesus notes he reveals things to children kept hidden from wise men - or those like you trying to over analyze to come to any conclusion than the obvious because you do not like it! It is obviously mary the reference to "rod of iron" is a clear and deliberate reference to Christ in the first psalms. It amazes me just how contrived Protestants are willing to be to avoid the obvious conclusion!
From pauls respect for the Eucharist - how can a mere symbol " eat judgement" to ignatius to the smyrneans, and all of them including augustine whose references are inescapable to Luther. You need to read it all again.
As for the woman of revelations I could ask 100 kids who it is almost all would all say Mary. Jesus notes he reveals things to children kept hidden from wise men - or those like you trying to over analyze to come to any conclusion than the obvious because you do not like it! It is obviously mary the reference to "rod of iron" is a clear and deliberate reference to Christ in the first psalms. It amazes me just how contrived Protestants are willing to be to avoid the obvious conclusion!
Last edited:
But I have an equal respect for the Lord's Supper. I consider it to be extremely important. Its symbolic meaning is of huge importance. Spiritually we are 'eating Christ and drinking His blood', in other words acknowledging participation in His death for us and acknowledging its benefit, whilst at the same time revealing our participation in the covenant in His blood. It is very sacred.
We believe that to participate in it lightly is to bring judgment on oneself. It is insulting God and the cross. So how is that different from Paul?
But we certainly do not engage in the blasphemy of calling it the physical body and blood of Christ and hanging it up in a casket for people to bow down to and worship. It is typical of man made religion to think that it can manipulate God ad make use of Him for it own purposes. That indeed is worthy of judgment.!!!!
I really do not see what Luther has to do with it. He was only slowly coming out from under the heresies of the Roman Catholic church. Our authority is the Scriptures which are quite clear on the subject to the unbiased observer. And I have studied the early church fathers in depth. Their comments are NOT 'inescapable'. None of them emphasise a real presence. They simply speak forcibly about the symbolism. It is you who read into what they say what you want to find there. If they had really taught the real presence the Orthodox church would believe it too.
LOL I accept that the RC church in their beliefs are infantile. I will give you that. But I would hardly think that a child could be expected to correctly interpret the Book of Revelation. In fact it would depend how you introduced the subject what they said. Leading questions would obtain whatever answer you wanted. Does your church accept the teaching of the Book of Revelation on the basis of what children think it means? I suspect not. I am sorry but you are simply being ridiculous.
The symbols in the Book of Revelation are solidly based on the Old Testament throughout. So unless the child was steeped in knowledge of the Old Testament they would be in no position to comment. But if the knew the history of the Roman Catholic church I do not think that they would have any problem in identifying the Beast. There are so many similarities.
Well my knowledge of Scripture makes it absolutely clear that it is Israel. The early church were not the offspring of Mary. That would be a ridiculous claim (typically RC in fact). The sun moon and twelve stars (Jacob, his wife, and his twelve sons per Gen 37) crowning the head of a woman reveal her as Israel, regularly spoken of as a woman ('virgin Israel', daughters of Jerusalem, etc). And the woman in travail was always Israel in the OT. And the Jewish church was the offspring of Israel, not of Mary. Given the facts any kid would recognise this.
I am not doubting that the man child is Jesus Christ, but as the offspring of Israel as she produced the Messiah as the OT makes clear.
But the rod of iron is not quite as clear as you suggest. The overcomers in the church (who escape the clutch of Roman Catholicism) will 'shepherd the nations with a rod of iron AS WELL.' Indeed the reader coming to chapter 12 has read that in 2.27 and might well therefore assume that the manchild is the church. It is only later in ch 19 that he might correct his thinking.
It seems to me that you ignore the obvious. But in your ridiculous infatuation with Mary your eyes are closed and your spirit slumbers.
We believe that to participate in it lightly is to bring judgment on oneself. It is insulting God and the cross. So how is that different from Paul?
But we certainly do not engage in the blasphemy of calling it the physical body and blood of Christ and hanging it up in a casket for people to bow down to and worship. It is typical of man made religion to think that it can manipulate God ad make use of Him for it own purposes. That indeed is worthy of judgment.!!!!
I really do not see what Luther has to do with it. He was only slowly coming out from under the heresies of the Roman Catholic church. Our authority is the Scriptures which are quite clear on the subject to the unbiased observer. And I have studied the early church fathers in depth. Their comments are NOT 'inescapable'. None of them emphasise a real presence. They simply speak forcibly about the symbolism. It is you who read into what they say what you want to find there. If they had really taught the real presence the Orthodox church would believe it too.
LOL I accept that the RC church in their beliefs are infantile. I will give you that. But I would hardly think that a child could be expected to correctly interpret the Book of Revelation. In fact it would depend how you introduced the subject what they said. Leading questions would obtain whatever answer you wanted. Does your church accept the teaching of the Book of Revelation on the basis of what children think it means? I suspect not. I am sorry but you are simply being ridiculous.
The symbols in the Book of Revelation are solidly based on the Old Testament throughout. So unless the child was steeped in knowledge of the Old Testament they would be in no position to comment. But if the knew the history of the Roman Catholic church I do not think that they would have any problem in identifying the Beast. There are so many similarities.
Well my knowledge of Scripture makes it absolutely clear that it is Israel. The early church were not the offspring of Mary. That would be a ridiculous claim (typically RC in fact). The sun moon and twelve stars (Jacob, his wife, and his twelve sons per Gen 37) crowning the head of a woman reveal her as Israel, regularly spoken of as a woman ('virgin Israel', daughters of Jerusalem, etc). And the woman in travail was always Israel in the OT. And the Jewish church was the offspring of Israel, not of Mary. Given the facts any kid would recognise this.
I am not doubting that the man child is Jesus Christ, but as the offspring of Israel as she produced the Messiah as the OT makes clear.
But the rod of iron is not quite as clear as you suggest. The overcomers in the church (who escape the clutch of Roman Catholicism) will 'shepherd the nations with a rod of iron AS WELL.' Indeed the reader coming to chapter 12 has read that in 2.27 and might well therefore assume that the manchild is the church. It is only later in ch 19 that he might correct his thinking.
It seems to me that you ignore the obvious. But in your ridiculous infatuation with Mary your eyes are closed and your spirit slumbers.
Last edited:
M
I despair of this forum!
You cannot believe that about the church fathers! NOWHERE do they say symbol.
Indeed ignatius said of heretics " they do not confess the Eucharist to be the flesh" and so " incur death". Excommunication for failing to believe it
Justin Martyr said " and changed.,, the flesh and blood of our lord"
And all the others since,
Indeed our lord allowed many of his disciples to leave, if they refused to accept he did mean his flesh in John 6, which they clearly assumed.
Sparevme the insults.
You cannot believe that about the church fathers! NOWHERE do they say symbol.
Indeed ignatius said of heretics " they do not confess the Eucharist to be the flesh" and so " incur death". Excommunication for failing to believe it
Justin Martyr said " and changed.,, the flesh and blood of our lord"
And all the others since,
Indeed our lord allowed many of his disciples to leave, if they refused to accept he did mean his flesh in John 6, which they clearly assumed.
Sparevme the insults.
A
Simply produce the scientific evidence showing that the created finite spirit being Mary is fielding millions of prayers a day for God, in contradiction to what the Bible says and how the universe actually works, so that my PhD astronomer/astrophysics friends at Caltech, my theologian friends at the International Society of Christian Apologetics and myself can qualify it or take your ball and go home with respect to those false assertions.
In this universe, it's observable and scientifically proven that human beings are limited by the constraints of this universe's dimensions. Invoking quantum mechanics (the science of the very small) doesn't change this fact.
Human beings are not exercising god-like power over time, length, width, or height via quantum mechanics or any other means. They can't stop time or make it go faster or slower (so they can squeeze more prayers to Mary in).
A day will come when the limitations of the space-time manifold of this universe are lifted in the new creation. But we're not there yet. In the meanwhile, the "physics of sin" (as astronomer/astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross coined them) that God created continue to operate fulfilling His purposes.
And, understand that your assertions about what I said are false. I never constrained what is possible for God but rather related the constraints that God Himself, in His wisdom, implemented.
God said what He did and did what He said. God's Word and the universe harmonize. You're speculating about God's capabilities but you missed the obvious. Just because God can do something doesn't mean that He has or that He will. In fact, He hasn't. God set constraints on the universe and life within the universe. God set constraints on spirit beings outside of the universe. The latter point is crystal clear in God's Word.
Furthermore, in His wisdom, though omnipotent; God set constraints on Himself. The Scriptures affirm that God cannot contradict His nature (Heb. 6:18; 2 Tim. 2:13; Titus 1:2). He cannot sin or lie (Hebrews 6:18; Titus 1:2). He cannot stop being God. He cannot deny Himself (2 Tim. 2:13). God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone with evil (James 1:13). He cannot force freedom, for example (Matt. 23:37). He's made promises He's kept and future promises He intends to keep. Etc...
Omnipotence does not mean that God must do all that He can do: It simply means that He has the power to do whatever is possible, even if He chooses not to do some things. God is free not to use His omnipotence whenever He desires; that is, God is free to limit the use of His power, but He is not free to limit the extent of His power. God must know all that He knows, but God does not have to do all He can do.
And both the Bible and our universe clearly reveal that God doesn't do all that He can do. He does, in His wisdom, what is best from an eternal omniscient perspective (not to be confused with our finite non-omniscient one).
God's created spirit and biological beings are finite and operate under the constraints of laws He has instituted both inside and outside this universe. That's what God's Word says. That's what the scientific evidence clearly shows. Quantum mechanics does not invalidate God's Word nor the scientific evidence with respect to physical laws which govern the capabilities of human beings on this planet. Nor does it invalidate whatever laws of physics that God has instituted in dimensions outside of it which God's Word clearly reveals exist. Mary is a finite created being that operates within those constraints just like every other finite created being that ever existed.
Appealing to her selection to be the natural human mother of Jesus Christ does not supersede God's Word nor laws governing finite created beings that God created. One can honor Mary and respect her character without violating God's Word and misappropriating science to fabricate fanciful human inventions about her.
And if you want to move the discussion on to the various non-Catholic denominations, that's fine with me. I'll be happy to educate you with respect to that as well mike.
In this universe, it's observable and scientifically proven that human beings are limited by the constraints of this universe's dimensions. Invoking quantum mechanics (the science of the very small) doesn't change this fact.
Human beings are not exercising god-like power over time, length, width, or height via quantum mechanics or any other means. They can't stop time or make it go faster or slower (so they can squeeze more prayers to Mary in).
A day will come when the limitations of the space-time manifold of this universe are lifted in the new creation. But we're not there yet. In the meanwhile, the "physics of sin" (as astronomer/astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross coined them) that God created continue to operate fulfilling His purposes.
And, understand that your assertions about what I said are false. I never constrained what is possible for God but rather related the constraints that God Himself, in His wisdom, implemented.
God said what He did and did what He said. God's Word and the universe harmonize. You're speculating about God's capabilities but you missed the obvious. Just because God can do something doesn't mean that He has or that He will. In fact, He hasn't. God set constraints on the universe and life within the universe. God set constraints on spirit beings outside of the universe. The latter point is crystal clear in God's Word.
Furthermore, in His wisdom, though omnipotent; God set constraints on Himself. The Scriptures affirm that God cannot contradict His nature (Heb. 6:18; 2 Tim. 2:13; Titus 1:2). He cannot sin or lie (Hebrews 6:18; Titus 1:2). He cannot stop being God. He cannot deny Himself (2 Tim. 2:13). God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone with evil (James 1:13). He cannot force freedom, for example (Matt. 23:37). He's made promises He's kept and future promises He intends to keep. Etc...
Omnipotence does not mean that God must do all that He can do: It simply means that He has the power to do whatever is possible, even if He chooses not to do some things. God is free not to use His omnipotence whenever He desires; that is, God is free to limit the use of His power, but He is not free to limit the extent of His power. God must know all that He knows, but God does not have to do all He can do.
And both the Bible and our universe clearly reveal that God doesn't do all that He can do. He does, in His wisdom, what is best from an eternal omniscient perspective (not to be confused with our finite non-omniscient one).
God's created spirit and biological beings are finite and operate under the constraints of laws He has instituted both inside and outside this universe. That's what God's Word says. That's what the scientific evidence clearly shows. Quantum mechanics does not invalidate God's Word nor the scientific evidence with respect to physical laws which govern the capabilities of human beings on this planet. Nor does it invalidate whatever laws of physics that God has instituted in dimensions outside of it which God's Word clearly reveals exist. Mary is a finite created being that operates within those constraints just like every other finite created being that ever existed.
Appealing to her selection to be the natural human mother of Jesus Christ does not supersede God's Word nor laws governing finite created beings that God created. One can honor Mary and respect her character without violating God's Word and misappropriating science to fabricate fanciful human inventions about her.
And if you want to move the discussion on to the various non-Catholic denominations, that's fine with me. I'll be happy to educate you with respect to that as well mike.
A
I just want him to stop firing off personal attacks like a machine gun, start citing his sources (at least when asked for them), and most importantly: start listening.
A soliloquy isn't a discussion.
Every source he's quoted that I've looked up is a dead end that mysteriously seems to be repeated by raving characters on the Internet who put up websites that use either pure black or fluorescent backgrounds and huge colored fonts... lol.
A soliloquy isn't a discussion.
Every source he's quoted that I've looked up is a dead end that mysteriously seems to be repeated by raving characters on the Internet who put up websites that use either pure black or fluorescent backgrounds and huge colored fonts... lol.
Perhaps you would be so kind as to produce some testimonies of the ECF's where they testify to their salvation experience. Any of them ever write how they got saved? I hear about all this weighty doctrinal stuff but never just the sincere simple truth of when they personally accepted Christ as Savior and how their life was changed.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
For the cause of Christ
Roger