As God wills.
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/27/2009 12:40:43 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior. |
Posted on 07/25/2009 2:40:04 AM PDT by Quix
The Bible says we cannot know the time of the Lord's return (Matthew 25:13). But the Scriptures make it equally clear that we can know the season of the Lord's return (1 Thessalonians 5:2-6):
"You yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night... But you brethren, are not in darkness, that the day should overtake you like a thief; for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night or darkness; so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober."
This passage asserts that Jesus is coming like "a thief in the night." But then it proceeds to make it clear that this will be true only for the pagan world and not for believers. His return should be no surprise to those who know Him and His Word, for they have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to give them understanding of the nature of the times.
Furthermore, the Scriptures give us signs to watch for — signs that will signal that Jesus is ready to return. The writer of the Hebrew letter referred to these signs when he proclaimed that believers should encourage one another when they see the day of judgment drawing near (Hebrews 10:25-27). Jesus also referred to the end time signs in His Olivet Discourse, given during the last week of His life (Matthew 24 and Luke 21). Speaking of a whole series of signs which He had given to His disciples, He said, "When you see all these things, recognize that He [the Son of Man — that is, Jesus] is near, right at the door" (Matthew 24:33).
A Personal Experience
Every time I think of "Signs of the Times," I am reminded of a great man of God named Elbert Peak. I had the privilege of participating with him in a Bible prophecy conference held in Orlando, Florida in the early 1990's. Mr. Peak was about 80 years old at the time.
He had been assigned the topic, "The Signs of the Times." He began his presentation by observing, "Sixty years ago when I first started preaching, you had to scratch around like a chicken to find one sign of the Lord's soon return."
He paused for a moment, and then added, "But today there are so many signs I'm no longer looking for them. Instead, I'm listening for a sound — the sound of a trumpet!"
The First Sign
One hundred years ago in 1907 there was not one single, tangible, measurable sign that indicated we were living in the season of the Lord's return. The first to appear was the Balfour Declaration which was issued by the British government on November 2, 1917.
This Declaration was prompted by the fact that during World War I the Turks sided with the Germans. Thus, when Germany lost the war, so did the Turks, and the victorious Allies decided to divide up both the German and Turkish empires.
The Turkish territories, called the Ottoman Empire, contained the ancient homeland of the Jewish people — an area the Romans had named Palestine after the last Jewish revolt in 132-135 AD.
In 1917 Palestine included all of modern day Israel and Jordan. In the scheme the Allies concocted for dividing up the German and Turkish territories, Britain was allotted Palestine, and this is what prompted the Balfour Declaration. In that document, Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, declared that it was the intention of the British government to establish in Palestine "a national home for the Jewish people."
The leading Evangelical in England at the time was F. B. Meyer. He immediately recognized the prophetic significance of the Declaration, for he was well aware that the Scriptures prophesy that the Jewish people will be regathered to their homeland in unbelief right before the return of the Messiah (Isaiah 11:11-12).
Meyer sent out a letter to the Evangelical leaders of England asking them to gather in London in December to discuss the prophetic implications of the Balfour Declaration. In that letter, he stated, "The signs of the times point toward the close of the time of the Gentiles... and the return of Jesus can be expected any moment."
Before Meyer's meeting could be convened, another momentous event occurred. On December 11, 1917 General Edmund Allenby liberated the city of Jerusalem from 400 years of Turkish rule.
There is no doubt that these events in 1917 marked the beginning of the end times because they led to the worldwide regathering of the Jewish people to their homeland and the reestablishment of their state.
Since 1917
Since the time of the Balfour Declaration, we have witnessed throughout the 20th Century the appearance of sign after sign pointing to the Lord's soon return. There are so many of these signs today, in fact, that one would have to be either biblically illiterate or spiritually blind not to realize that we are living on borrowed time.
I have personally been searching the Bible for years in an effort to identify all the signs, and it has not been an easy task to get a hold on them. That's because there are so many of them, both in the Old and New Testaments.
I have found that the best way to deal with them is to put them in categories, and in doing that, I have come up with six categories of end time signs. We will explore these catetories beginning in Part 2 of this series.
And check this out.
The whole quote about the “worship of the image” is supposed to have come from Chapel of the Virgin of the Grace at Saints Vincent and Anastasius Church in Rome.
Well, I did a little Bing search on that chapel. Hmmm, no chapel to be found but a whole lot of Anti-Catholic sites are quoting it!!!!!
***>>It would be something like the Dean of the Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York, who had a crucifix on show for a while with a female Jesus on it, carved by some feminist.<<
It’s not the facts, only the accusation that counts.***
Or like the self identified Christian who derides and sneers at the Eucharist?
LOLOL. I doubt a Protestant carved those statues. And it's pretty clear what the artist's intent was - to put Mary on the cross with Jesus as she helps Him redeem His flock...just as pope John Paul II said.
So who was wrong? JPII or Ratzinger? Or were both popes correct? Neither? From the following website
in 1985, in Guayaquil, Ecuador, John Paul II said: "Mary goes before us and accompanies us. The silent journey that begins with her Immaculate Conception and passes through the ‘yes’ of Nazareth, which makes her the Mother of God, finds on Calvary a particularly important moment. … In fact, at Calvary she united herself with the sacrifice of her Son that led to the foundation of the Church; her maternal heart shared to the very depths the will of Christ ‘to gather into one all the dispersed children of God’ (Jn. 11:52). Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity. … In fact Mary’s role as Coredemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son" (Inside the Vatican, July 1997, p. 23). In his general audience address of April 9, 1997, the pope said: "Mary … co-operated during the event itself [the crucifixion] and in the role of mother; thus her co-operation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and submission to Him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity… In God’s plan, Mary is the ‘woman’ (Gen.3:15, Jn 2:4; 19:26), the New Eve, united to the New Adam in restoring humanity to its original dignity. Her cooperation with her Son continues for all time in the universal motherhood which she enjoys in the order of grace. Trusting in this maternal cooperation, let us turn to Mary, imploring her help in all our needs (Vatican Information Service). In his general audience for July 30, JPII said: "As the Mother of all the Lord’s disciples (cf. Jn 19:26), Mary offers her intercession and aid to all who journey towards the fullness of the Lord's Kingdom. As the Bride and Temple of the Holy Spirit, she encourages us to imitate her openness to the workings of the Spirit and to live in constant, loving communion with the Blessed Trinity." At least five times Pope Paul II has referred to Mary by the title "Co-redemptrix" in his papal teachings:
Mary is the "bride of the Holy Spirit???" What in the world is he talking about? The church is the bride of Christ. If the Holy Spirit and Christ are one, then is Mary the bride of her own son? Roman Catholic theology is confused, to put it charitably.
Pope John Paul II has exalted Mary even in his most official documents. In his encyclical Redemptoris Mater (Mother of the Redeemer), published March 25, 1987, the pope referred to Mary as "Mediatrix" three times, and as "Advocate" twice. The entire third section is dedicated to the theme of "Maternal Mediation."
>>been gargling mixture of honey, raw apple cider vinegar & garlic<<
You’re pretty brave, my FRiend!
Make sure you get some extra D-3 into you.
If you can’t swallow the pills right now, Walmart has them in a gummy vitamin.
Ping to 503.
One would sure hope your assertion is true!
LOL.
I have been there . . . IIRC, I did see that cross the pic is of. I don’t recall specifically where. Saw a lot of such in a short time. I just remember our whole two bus load of folks being rather incredulous.
Some of us seek His check, monitoring and correction on that issue daily.
***The poster Dr. E. states in the post that the statue is from “the main Mary basilica in Rome” — well I’ve looked and looked and can’t find anything like that anywhere.
Main Mary Basilica? Which one is that?***
The good Dr. E. is not well known for her adherence to facts and when a juicy Oprah-like source appears, well, can you blame her for going all gooey and wiggly? It is not the facts that are important, as was just mentioned. It is the fact that it is anti Catholic.
Many of the strong antiCatholics that I have been privileged to know admit privately that if it wasn’t for the antiCatholicism, they’d be a lot more indifferent. The advantage of having the Jews in Nazi Germany, or the Democratic Party having the blacks in the south, or the NEA having students captive in the schools. Same thing.
Quite a number of rabidly hostile RC’s are past masters at
unwarranted false accusations.
So, you don’t actually know where that statue is supposedly standing?
***Some of us seek His check, monitoring and correction on that issue daily.***
Our point is that the seeking is often in vain, the monitoring is ignored and the correction repudiated without listening to His Word and the teaching institution that He left for us. If you don’t know what you are looking for, how will you find it?
Let’s start again.
WHO is the artist of that work?
What year was it done?
WHERE is that in the Vatican?
JPII had a huge devotion to Mary but DID NOT proclaim it to be dogma. A Pope is only “infallable” in matters of dogma. He is dead now, in case you didn’t hear, and the current Pope said this...
The Pope on Co-redemptrix
“Yet when asked, in a 2000 interview by Peter Seewald contained in the book God and the World, whether the Church would go along with the desire to solemnly define Mary as Co-redemptrix, Ratzinger’s response doesn’t look good. He says that the title Co-redemptrix “departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings” (53). He also says that “for matters of faith, continuity of terminology with the language of Scripture and that of the Fathers is itself an essential element; it is improper simply to manipulate language” (54). “
Wish you people could get the whole dogma thing straight.
B16 could say that Burger King fries are the best in the world, that’s not dogma, you silly!!!!!!
So, I guess you don’t know where the statue is either?
Publishing from religion-cults.com is supposed to convince the world? Try publishing from the Vatican. Then we’ll have sound grounds.
Flying off to the Protestant wonderland where nothing and everything is true and everything is multicoloured and multifonted and blinking does not support any claim. Except for the harpies, I suppose.
From the RCC catechism...
973 By pronouncing her "fiat" at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body.
Your church has been littered with this heresy for centuries...
"Mary suffered and, as it were, nearly died with her suffering Son; for the salvation of mankind she renounced her mother's rights and, as far as it depended on her, offered her Son to placate divine justice; so we may well say that she with Christ redeemed mankind." - - Inter Sodalicia - pope Benedict XV, Inter Sodalicia.
RIGHT.
Been taking extra D3 but I should do some more. Forgot some today.
Bless you for your thoughtfulness.
***I have read it. Thank you. It confirms that Rome teaches Mary aids in the salvation of Christ’s flock. Blasphemy.***
In case there are any lurkers out there who don’t know; Mary’s queenship is modeled on the times of Jesus in the Middle East. The Queen was not the wife; she was the mother of the monarch and actively assisted him in governing. Dr. E. is wrong about many things in a rather flamboyant fashion.
And you would be
THOROUGHLY WRONG
yet again.
As God wills.
Oh my goodness, you’re sources are the best!!!!!!!!
That quotes is from this website
http://www.religion-cults.com/
LOLOL! You truly expect us to give any credence to a site that calls the Catholic Church a religious cult? Who knows what they made up?
Don’t believe everything you read on the interwebs.
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.