Posted on 11/13/2025 4:29:40 AM PST by vespa300
But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth, and now that Our advanced age and the bitterness of anxious cares urge Us on towards the end common to every mortal, We feel drawn to follow the example of Our Redeemer and Master, Jesus Christ, Who, when about to return to Heaven, implored of God, His Father, in earnest Prayer, that His Disciples and followers should be of one mind and of one heart: I pray . . . that they all may be one, as Thou Father in Me, and I in Thee: that they also may be one in Us. And as this Divine Prayer and Supplication does not include only the souls who then believed in Jesus Christ, but also every one of those who were henceforth to believe in Him, this Prayer holds out to Us no indifferent reason for confidently expressing Our hopes, and for making all possible endeavors in order that the men of every race and clime should be called and moved to embrace the Unity of Divine Faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at papalencyclicals.net ...
Protestants, the world, celebrities like Robert De Niro, world leaders, all seem to be reaching out to her.
Her claim in this encyclical is that she is "Holds upon this earth the place of God almighty."
The Sabbath day seems to be an utter rebuke to this claim. Her law is not God's law. Interesting how the Sabbath day rebukes both a counterfeit religion and Darwinism that rejects creation. God essentially kills 2 birds, foul birds....with one stone. In the very heart of his law....the holy 7th day Sabbath.
bmk
>> An encyclical from another Pope named Leo issued in 1894 calling for religious unity. <<
Ah, but Pope Leo XIII did it the CORRECT way: unity through universal recognition of correct moral doctrine, aided by recognizing the infallibility through properly asserted papal authority recognizing the universal, eternal teachings of the Church as known by those in faithful union with the church.
>> Her claim in this encyclical is that she is “ [...h]old upon this earth the place of God almighty [...]” <<
You’re so trying to make this into something it’s not (self-deification) that you have to insert a grammatically nonsensical “is” to make that identification. Completing that sentence absolves it of the slanderous intent you suggest: “But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth.”
Do you deny that anyone, let alone the Church, who acts towards the goal that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the Truth does so acting as Christ? I think the only problem any Christian could reasonably have with the claim is the modern, contextually invalid connotation that “in the place of” means “instead of,” as if the place were usurped, rather than authorized as it explicitly was.
>> An encyclical from another Pope named Leo issued in 1894 calling for religious unity. <<
Ah, but Pope Leo XIII did it the CORRECT way: unity through universal recognition of correct moral doctrine, aided by recognizing the infallibility through properly asserted papal authority recognizing the universal, eternal teachings of the Church as known by those in faithful union with the church.
>> Her claim in this encyclical is that she is “ [...h]old upon this earth the place of God almighty [...]” <<
You’re so trying to make this into something it’s not (self-deification) that you have to insert a grammatically nonsensical “is” to make that identification. Completing that sentence absolves it of the slanderous intent you suggest: “But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth.”
Do you deny that anyone, let alone the Church, who acts towards the goal that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the Truth does so acting as Christ? I think the only problem any Christian could reasonably have with the claim is the modern, contextually invalid connotation that “in the place of” means “instead of,” as if the place were usurped, rather than authorized as it explicitly was.
____Do you deny that anyone, let alone the Church, who acts towards the goal that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the Truth does so acting as Christ?___
That’s some serious spin and denial . Congrats. Of course the fact she believes she can absolve sin, grant sainthood, change the Sabbath, allow people to bow down and kiss her hand, claim infallibility when she speaks ex cathedra, etc. etc.......is irrelevant right?.......riiiight.....
Nice spin job though. Better than my maytag dryer spins.
Oh, look...ANOTHER SDA thread attacking other faiths.
Predictable
___Oh, look...ANOTHER SDA thread attacking other faiths.
Predictable___
Oh look, another Catholic appealing to other faiths. Unity!!
Yes, it's a pathetic religion that can't be practiced without attacking other religions.
I’m confused here as I didn’t think anyone held the place of God on earth. Guess somebody has a little higher opinion of himself than I do.
The Sabbath day seems to be an utter rebuke to this claim. Her law is not God’s law. Interesting how the Sabbath day rebukes both a counterfeit religion and Darwinism that rejects creation. God essentially kills 2 birds, foul birds....with one stone. In the very heart of his law....the holy 7th day Sabbath.
......
Oh Vespa.
The very first Sabbath Old Covenant Israel kept was the 22nd Day of His 2nd month, in Exodus 16.
You know who didn’t ‘Remember’ that weekly Sabbath in His 2nd month this year?
Muslims,Jews,Christians, and you.
And what’s remarkable about that weekly Sabbath, is it came before Sinai.
Old Covenant Israel needed to be taught after years of slavery.
And was taught how to tell time without Rome or the Pope.
What day is today if you don’t have your mother Rome or the Pope to tell you?
Good luck leaving your mother’s bosom.
/s
Despite your snarkiness and accusations, I never denied any of those issues are relevant in any context or would be relevant if they were true. (No, the church doesn’t “grant sainthood”; and you’re mixing senses of words so badly to make them seem salacious that I don’t even know how to respond to “kiss her ring.”) There have been hundreds of issues about those. The issue is in this threat is whether there is anything wrong with the claim,:
“But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth, and now that Our advanced age and the bitterness of anxious cares urge Us on towards the end common to every mortal, We feel drawn to follow the example of Our Redeemer and Master, Jesus Christ, Who, when about to return to Heaven, implored of God, His Father, in earnest Prayer, that His Disciples and followers should be of one mind and of one heart, I pray that they [HIS FOLLOWERS] may be one...”
(No, the church doesn’t “grant sainthood”)
C’mon man. Who do you think you are fooling anyways. And please......no spin.
And once again, you deserve to, and the God who loves you wants you to, follow a faith that is about loving Jesus and your fellow man, not about hating Catholics.
Really, snark and lies about Catholicism is all the SDA church has. That and teaching Gentiles to follow a truncated, bowdlerized version of Jewish law.
Really, I can’t believe you need this explained to you:
If the Church “granted” sainthood, that would mean it could make a saint of whoever it wanted to, no matter how notorious the sinner. Rather, the Church “discerns” sainthood. To do this, it has chosen a process by which it discerns that the deceased is intervening on behalf of petitioners in God’s name. The ability to intervene establishes that a soul is not in purgatory, and that it does so in God’s name establishes that it is Heaven, and not Hell. The discernment of sainthood does not affect in any way the disposition of the soul of the departed, but is merely a way to assure the petitioner that if the soul of the departed does intervene, it does so in accordance with God’s will, for it would be sinful to ask the intervention of any soul, if one were not confident that doing so was in accordance with God’s will.
Are you willing to be more noble than the Thessalonikans? Have you an open mind to consider another position than that of EGW and her minions?
Are you willing to be more noble than the Thessalonikans? Have you an open mind to consider another position than that of EGW and her minions?
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.