Posted on 05/17/2012 4:18:46 PM PDT by Salvation
Exactly! NO ONE who knows the Gospel ever goes to the RC, they leave because they finally found The Truth! Tares, spot on!
That's right...A priest may be able to qualify your first marriages for annulment...You could be home free...
To my shame, I am one of them.
&&&
Oh, my, there is not shame but joy in your coming back. Welcome, FRiend.
Who, having tried the old wine would want the new again?
Who, having tried the old wine would want the new again?
“You’re right, especially when they want to move on to the second husband/wife.”
Guessin’ you don’t know much about the Baptists. They’d have less problem having a serial killer teach a SS class or preach than a divorce-and-remarried person.
I know as many, probably more, divorced-and-remarried Catholics as I do protestants.
All denominations have their ideal standards; few members follow them 100%.
Good question.
And besides, wasn’t the water made wine at the Wedding of Cana BETTER than what the groom have originally supllied?
And the passionate (first against Christians and then for them) Paul’s words justifying Himself - in which he acknowledged it sounded like speaking as a fool, (2Cor. 11:16,23) was driven by his love for this most troublesome of his churches, (2Cor. 12:11-15) imploring the Corinthians to come to their senses, rather than following after shameless self-promoting “false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ,” (2 Corinthians 11:13) who excluded Paul as being part of the class of apostles, and who hijacked the church.
Sometimes parents have to remind their rebellious offspring who birthed them, changed their diapers, and wisely counsel and guided, when in their pride they spurn their counsel and listen to vain philosophers.
The Lord’s own appeal to the Jews to come to its senses and recognize Him as the one true God was also done out of love, not insecurity (as atheists charge), while the charge of “massaged” Bible texts is part of the liberal school of Biblical interpretation, which much or most of RCM subscribes to.
But i think there are many RCs who resent Paul as he seems too much like a Protestant: an evangelistic preacher who emphasized faith as appropriating justification, though a faith that effected obedience, (Rm. 2:13; 4:1-7) and only ordained bishops/elders, (Titus 1:5-7) and did not pray to the departed, etc., and emphasized the body of Christ as being the church. (1Cor. 11:17-33ff)
And who exampled much independence from the other apostles in his preaching, writing and ministry, and was very restrictive in his affirmation of them, and who even rebuked Peter, and while implicitly affirming Peter as having prominence among the apostles, yet he never directed or otherwise reminded the churches under his care to look to Peter as their particular supreme corporate magistrate, and did not even mention him among his many friends in Rome. (Rm. 16)
Moreover, the primary Christian theologian and human author of most of the N.T. never actually mentioned Mary the mother of Jesus - who, in the gospel tradition is quite marginal - is literally emphasized more devotionally by many Catholics than the Lord Jesus.
“Hi stpio- This visions Or prophecies are your own? The visions or prophecies line up with what some of the Catholic Saints have predicted. What I find interesting is that the book of Daniel intrepretation with the future abomination in these prophecies.”
~ ~ ~
john, hi, I have a devotion to prophecy, my “conversion” came about because of private revelation. I am NOT a prophet. I shared the link to the message, the two prophets are Cletus and Vern. Their messages have ended, each year they receive one or two new. See the latest at the link. http://www.godspeakswillyoulisten.org/ These messages are full of Scripture reference as you read along to confirm what is ahead. MO, they help you see the entire picture and answer many questions.
Our brothers and sisters in Christ should look at Daniel,
the repeated about the “continual sacrifice” and the “abomination of desolation” written together. Only in Catholicism, there is no “continual sacrifice” in Protestantism or Judaism. The “continual sacrifice” is the Holy sacrifice of the Mass. The messages from Heaven and the saints of old tell us the “AOD” takes place when the Anti-Christ takes away the Eucharist, the words of consecration changed. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will be offered in secret and later when the persecution gets worse, at the refuges. Remember history, like the first Christians in the catacombs.
“I’ll get my house in order then worry about others” - sadly that is not shared by the opposition which preaches a church, while we preach a faith that we seek to live up to.
See last post. I go by formal surveys, which in time would confirm your anecdotal story, which of course, may have been a years reaping, while an evangelical church elsewhere could have the same or more of former RCs.
Up here where there are many more evang. churches than in my youth, that they would not have grown as they did except by RC converts, while she has closed many churches.
These are not hard to come by, with varied messages, all professing to be of God, yet fail, while i must go by the “more sure of prophecy,” the Scriptures which reprove Rome, and in which the commemoration of the Lord’s supper is shown by how the participants treat the members of His body the church:http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Bible/1Cor._11.html#11
“Moreover, the primary Christian theologian and human author of most of the N.T. never actually mentioned Mary the mother of Jesus - who, in the gospel tradition is quite marginal - is literally emphasized more devotionally by many Catholics than the Lord Jesus.”
~ ~ ~
Daniel,
Mary knew the Gospel writers. It is her humility always
pointing to Our Lord. The Gospel is about Jesus Christ. There are some verses in the Old Testament which speak of Mary but mainly...
God’s revelation about who Mary is and you see even in our time would come LATER. In these 2000 years...via the Church, the saints and prophecy (private revelation).
I keep sharing do not take it personal. The “reformers”
mistakenly follow the evil one Satan, distancing themselves
from Catholicism by rejecting Mary. You didn’t decide it!~
Mary can’t appear to Protestants yet, though God can make exceptions yes, because you all believe HERESIES. Mary will appear, maybe (MO)...I wish...at the Great Warning which is “soon” but for sure after the Great Warning she will appear to you all. Non-Catholic Christians will
have accepted the faith. Sadly, there will be a group
who will still say no.
She is your mother, everyone’s mother...believe in her
love and help now. Speak to her in prayer. It would make Our Lord very happy. There is a Scripture verse, new to me,
from the Book of Ecclesiasticus:
3:5
And he that honoureth his mother is as one that layeth up a treasure.
It applies personally in regards to your earthly mother
and your heavenly mother, Mary. Also, think of the “his” as Jesus. It’s really true.
On the issue of authority, yes. Although the core beliefs and outcomes are dramatically different between secular humanists like Biden and Pelosi and Evangelicals the fact that they both look first to themselves and their individual experiences, educations and reason as chief determiner of what is truth and what is not points to the problem with their shared approach.
I have been over this with you in other threads.
I am not going to bother with anti-Catholic links and it is
foolish to try and use Catholic teaching and writings, the
Bible, a Catholic book to attack the Church.
And on prophecy, Scripture says despise not prophecy.
God would not be silent in this time. Prophecy makes God’s
plan more explicit. You gotta believe. There is one
end time, not one for Protestants and one for Catholics.
All the Protestant prophetic is gently preparing our brothers and sisters in Christ to accept the faith.
You play gotcha games with historical statements. That means you are acting like a lawyer.
When you go around take old 12 th century statements from a Pope you are lawyering it up my brother. Nowhere in the statement does it mean what you are trying to prove.
It is a general statement. It does not specifically say Daniel 1212 or Johngrace is going to hell.
Take for instant today's comparision. Billy Graham states at an event that if you believe in Jesus Christ you will have eternal life. Nowhere is he saying that Daniel1212 or Johngrace is going to Hell. Nor will you find Billy Graham or the Pope use a specific name to say someone went there. It is General statement to learn from in the Holy Spirit.
Both of these great men know it is always up to God.
Praise Jesus! Freeper Cheers!!
You play gotcha games with historical statements. That means you are acting like a lawyer.
When you go around take old 12 th century statements from a Pope you are lawyering it up my brother. Nowhere in the statement does it mean what you are trying to prove.
It is a general statement. It does not specifically say Daniel 1212 or Johngrace is going to hell.
Take for instant today's comparision. Billy Graham states at an event that if you believe in Jesus Christ you will have eternal life. Nowhere is he saying that Daniel1212 or Johngrace is going to Hell. Nor will you find Billy Graham or the Pope use a specific name to say someone went there. It is General statement to learn from in the Holy Spirit.
Both of these great men know it is always up to God.
Praise Jesus! Freeper Cheers!!
What is the color of the robe the Roman Soldiers placed upon Jesus? Was it Scarlet (Matthew), Purple (Mark & John) or White / Brilliant (Luke)? Each color is symbolic, but different in meaning.
“My point is that Paul’s Epistles did not ‘have’ to be massaged, and I never said that.”
I understood that in the light of your statement that “If these were the best (after massaging), then what were the worst?” Meaning (i presumed, sorry if wrongly so) that Paul’s words were in need of redactors to make them acceptable or conformable, and your response was to Kosta’s allegation that “Paul’s writings are clearly “harmonized” in the Nicene Creed in the beginning (where it adds to Paul’s words that the Father and the Son are of the same essence) as well as in the part where it says that Christ raised himself (rather than being raised by God, as Paul says), indicating that Paul was “close” but not on the mark.”
The existence of multiple versions of each NT book does not necessitate that this was due to deficiency in Paul’s writing, and thus needing redactors, but it certainly could be due to poor copying and subsequent attempts to reconcile them, but i reject that this was due to attempts to make each selected NT book to conflate with each other as originally penned.
Thanks for explaining the reason for your response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.