| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/24/2022 5:40:39 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childishness |
Posted on 03/06/2022 11:16:06 AM PST by CharlesOConnell
A man commits a serious crime, then he gets released. He has "paid his debt to society". But wait a minute, he's only ready for the half-way house. He's unlikely to get a prestigious job in his new prison suit coat, or any job at all; he has civil impediments, he can't vote or hold certain offices. His crime was serious enough that he won't be presumed to have been completely rehabilitated until he performs a notable service to society, or at least spends many years on the straight and narrow, so that his crime can be truly overlooked or forgotten.
In Catholic faith, your "debt to society" is paid by Jesus Christ on Calvary. It's called "eternal punishment", without Christ it keeps you from going to heaven. Supposing that you do take advantage of His sacrifice, you're truly sorry, have a firm purpose of amendment, if you relapse, you go again for forgiveness (to the Sacrament of Confession).
But your sin leaves a strong trace at another layer of impurity called "temporal punishment due to sin", like the civil impediments facing the half-way house prisoner. Because "nothing impure can enter heaven", there is a place or a state, a condition of purification to render you fit for heaven after Christ has finally saved you from hell. The Catholic Church calls it purgatory.
(Where is it in the bible? Where is the word Trinity in the bible? Where does it say that you only need a personal relationship with Jesus Christ? Many valid principles aren't stated explicitly in the bible, but it does say to "hold fast to the traditions you have learned, whether by word or by letter", because much of the Gospel wasn't written down, as Jesus only wrote in the sand, the majority of the Gospel was taught from word to ear to people who couldn't afford expensive books, the exceptions were what tended to get written down. But the implication that there is a purgatory, is contained in the bible--see the comments.)
The ex-con can receive a pardon or commutation of his probation from a Governor, if he performs some heroic deed, saving numerous lives, or, like Chuck Colson, performs a long-lasting, valuable community service helping numerous people who can't help themselves.
In the Catholic Church there are 2 ways for the residual, temporal effects due to sin to be expiated: suffering in this life, or after life, undergoing purifying suffering along with other people who will finally be saved, but have to suffer for long without the vision of God--that is what causes them their pain.
Their suffering isn't meritorious enough to grant their release, the saints in heaven and those on earth suffering and practicing virtue can pray for the suffering souls in purgatory. In no way is their release by slow transfer of suffering or practice of virtue, "buying heaven". It's a long, excruciating process.
How the misunderstanding arose that Catholics think they can buy their way into heaven, is involved with history more than 500 years old. For a millennium of Christendom between roughly 410 and 1410, there was a Medieval civilization with harmony between faith and government.
Many small farmers would cluster around the manor house of a military lord who would protect them, in exchange for a certain fixed obligation of labor and agricultural produce. In most cases, those "serfs" had much more leisure than factory workers of the industrial revolution; there were a large number of holy days without work, and except for planting and harvesting, there were long stretches of idle time.
Another large sector of the economy surrounded monasteries, where the monks developed most of the farming practices that stabilized the serfs and their manorial lords. The monks who worked those monastic lands were sworn to poverty, so that monasteries built up large accumulations of economic value over decades and centuries of labor.
At the beginning, when lands were being cleared and put into production there weren't prominent town fairs ruled by merchants and bankers. Money wasn't used for sustenance, not even much barter occurred, life was mostly agrarian.
Charity was woven into the economy of monasteries. It was estimated that you only need travel 12 miles in medieval England between monasteries, where you could get a meal and minimal lodging for free, based on need. And the charity was also spiritual, including the ancient Catholic principle of prayer for the dead, which is biblical. (See "prayer for the dead" in the original King James Bible in the comment.)
There were foundations and benefices for praying for the dead, that allowed a person of means to support monasteries' charitable works, and in proportional response the monks would pray for the souls of the donors.
It happened at the close of the middle ages, that militarily strong nobles cast their eyes on the labor value accumulated by the poverty-sworn monks of the monasteries, which those nobles perceived as monetary wealth, especially where gold and jewels had been donated by the devout to adorn churches.
(Protestant writer William Cobbett wrote in his 1824 "A History of the Protestant Reformation in England and Ireland", an anecdote, that an incredibly valuable, hand illustrated bible was stripped of it's bejeweled, gold cover, the much more valuable hand-illumined manuscript, thrown in the mud and trampled by horses hooves by raiders suppressing the monasteries in Henry VIII's England.)
A new religion growing up around this seizure of monastic lands and valuables, that sought to discredit the Catholic Church, spread the black legend that the "sale of indulgences" was abusive. But this was very exceptional. Today the stipend of a Mass said for the dead is $10.
No, because your religion was founded by and follows as an authority a false prophet who was a spirit medium.
Because your false religion uses her writings as an authority over the Scriptures…
And because of the heresy it teaches.
YOU say, and also completely untrue. I could sense your frustration in not being able to pin a plagiarism on EGW. It was hilarious to witness. So, you move on to other accusations. Typical of your false religion.
Stumbled on this post and wanted to save it,,,
Seems I stepped in a pile
Of “Pope” with one.
Cheers
Phil, luircin provided documented links to her theft.
You’ve not even scratched the surface.
And already we know the lady was a false prophet and a thief.
In fact you’ve yet to refute a single point, nor to document any of your own.
I’m not surprised you are unable to see it.
—> could sense your frustration
Both false and against religion forum rules to read minds.
Good,,,
—> could sense your frustration
Both false and against religion forum rules to read minds.
Yeah, it would be if I said anything to indicate that I was reading your mind, which I didn’t.
——>In fact you’ve yet to refute a single point, nor to document any of your own.
So sad...
Opinion:
Ramik was given all the allegations of plagiarism from the first raised in 1889 to 1981.
“Based upon our review of the facts and legal precedents, we conclude that Ellen G. White was not a plagiarist and her works did not constitute copyright infringement/piracy.” (Adventist Review, Sept. 17, 1981)
“Considering all factors necessary in reaching a just conclusion on this issue, it is submitted that the writings of Ellen G. White were conclusively unplagiaristic.” (Ibid)
And, I note, won’t even respond directly to me any more, much like the local Catholics refuse to do so.
I guess my points are just irrefutable.
(And blessed am I when people speak evil about me on account of the name of Christ, even behind my back.)
Phil? Posting the ‘opinion’ of someone paid to have that opinion is the opposite of proof.
That's lawyers for ya. They always want to get paid. I haven't met one yet that takes every case for free.
"In 1981 the church hired copyright attorney Vincent L. Ramik of the law firm Diller, Ramik and Wight to examine Ellen White's writings and present them with HIS conclusions".
Nevertheless, after more than 300 hours of researching approximately 1,000 relevant cases in American legal history, Ramik's conclusions were as follows:
"Based upon our review of the facts and legal precedents, we conclude that Ellen G. White was not a plagiarist and her works did not constitute copyright infringement/piracy." (Adventist Review, Sept. 17, 1981)
"Considering all factors necessary in reaching a just conclusion on this issue, it is submitted that the writings of Ellen G. White were conclusively unplagiaristic." (Ibid)
Which post contains the links you provided?
Oh hey, lookit the delaying tactic from ole Phil.
https://nonsda.org/egw/plagiarism.html
Here you go, a nice little index of 33 links proving EGW’s sin. Posted for the second time!
So all I need to do is find a lawyer who sometime in the past said that Ravi is innocent and that makes it true?
Phil World logic at its finest!
I LOVE the logic of Phil World! It means that there really IS a tribe of Native Americans that are actually human/dragon hybrids!
And OJ’s wife really was murdered by another mysterious killer that’s on a golf course somewhere!
And you can remove the brain from a body in mid autopsy and the body will still be alive!
And men can have a uterus!
After all, a lawyer said it, so it must be true!
——>So all I need to do is find a lawyer who sometime in the past said that Ravi is innocent and that makes it true?
Do you know of any? Don’t think you would find any now after the Miller & Martin investigation results. And, try to convince them to do, say 300 hours or so, of their own investigation, and pay them nothing. See how that would go over. Oh, and make sure it’s a top criminal lawyer. Go...
A nice little index of WHAT, EGW haters? Are any of these people EXPERTS in determining plagiarism, such as specialists in patent, trademark, and copyright law? Why don’t you narrow down the list to EXPERTS. Go...
Is 
all you've got left??
STOP IT!!!
All of you.
Playgrounds at recess have better interaction between supposedly rational human beings than the last 100-200 replies in this thread.
Does that include your posts?
STOP IT!!!
All of you... = Philsworld?
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.