and this is from last year -- Vatican set to indirectly recognize annexation of East Jerusalem
Posted on 01/31/2013 6:58:05 AM PST by marshmallow
In an interview with “Jerusalem Post” Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon, announced Jerusalem is on verge of signing a diplomatic agreement with the Holy See. But the Vatican is exercising caution
“We have overcome most if not all the outstanding issues that have prevented signing of this agreement for so long,” said Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon in an interview with Jerusalem Post on the progress of Israeli-Vatican diplomatic relations. Ayalon said he was sure the new Israeli government would “sign soon”: the reason it has not already been signed is that it would have been inappropriate for a caretaker government to sign the agreement and that this should be left to the next government. The agreement, he assured, is a “real upgrade in relations between Israel and the Holy See, and between the Jewish people and one billion Catholics around the world, to the benefit of both sides.” After a long fourteen-year effort to reach an agreement, the Deputy Foreign Minister’s words are a sign there is some light at the end of a tunnel and relations could be formalised soon.
But despite its positive tone, the official statement published by the Vatican Press Office this morning, does not seem one hundred per cent certain, especially in terms of when the agreement would be formalised. The Bilateral Permanent Working Commission between the Holy See and the State of Israel held a plenary session in Jerusalem yesterday “to continue negotiations pursuant to the Fundamental Agreement Art 10 paragraph 2,” the statement reads. The Commission discussed the life, activities and tax regime of the Catholic Church. The text being studied does not touch on thorny issues such as territorial questions: the Vatican’s stance with regard to East Jerusalem and the occupied territories remains unchanged and the problems regarding ecclesiastical properties in.......
(Excerpt) Read more at vaticaninsider.lastampa.it ...
Not to offend any Catholics on the forum, but if the Pope is to believe in the Bible as the Word of God, then Israel is God’s land that He swore to the Jews from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates. PERIOD. The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable and without repentance. Jerusalem is the City of God and is not to be divided. The Pope should read his Bible at least one time in his life.
Why in the world does Israel so want the Vatican's blessing? The Vatican believes Israel shouldn't exist!
The Catholic Church goes by church teaching, not the Bible. And one of the number one beliefs of all the ancient churches (and of the Protestant churches until recently) is that the chrstian church is the "new Israel."
We will know the holy Church has finally found Christ when it purges the remainder of its anti-semitism and fully grafted itself, as God intends, to the House of Israel. A good sign of this will be when it ceases to use false or satanicly-inspired phraseology like “east Jerusalem and the occupied territories.” May God bless!
Meanwhile, on another area of the world stage:
Israel must remove all Jewish settlers from occupied West Bank
Digital Journal ^ | 1-31-2013 | Anne Sewell
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2983809/posts
Tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock......................................
Pope Benedict is on Twitter. Really.
So folks are certainly welcome and able to “tweet” him their private, fallible theological opinions, and their own personal, fallible interpretations of Scripture.
I’m sure he’ll give such tweets all the consideration that they’re due.
Bully for him. I'm not.
So folks are certainly welcome and able to “tweet” him their private, fallible theological opinions, and their own personal, fallible interpretations of Scripture.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you're Catholic, apparently, everything sounds like Protestantism and "private interpretation."
What you conveniently forget is that there was an official, authoritative oral interpretation of Scripture for three thousand years before the proto-Lutheran revolt that gave birth to chrstianity ever occurred. And the first thing chrstianity did was throw out the authentic oral interpretation of Scripture that had been around since Moses.
Care to repeat the parrot-call of "private interpetation" again, AB?
I’m sure he’ll give such tweets all the consideration that they’re due.
Since admitting that his religion is built on moonbeams would cost him his job, I don't doubt you in the least.
How any person (regardless of religion) can quote a Hebrew Bible while twisting it beyond recognition and still keep a straight face is beyond me.
I know . . . don't tell me . . . "private interpretation . . . BAWK!"
Little surprises me, any more ...
Certainly, this forum lacks surprises.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Anti-Catholic folks certainly do a good job of demonstrating this phenomenon with their own musings.
proto-Lutheran revolt that gave birth to chrstianity
That's certainly an ... inventive ... interpretation of history.
Have a lovely day!
and this is from last year -- Vatican set to indirectly recognize annexation of East Jerusalem
proto-Lutheran revolt that gave birth to chrstianity
That's certainly an ... inventive ... interpretation of history.
No, just simple forumlaic truth: Judaism is to chrstianity as Catholicism is to Protestantism.
Judaism and Protestantism make (relatively, in the case of Protestantism) consistent arguments: law or no law. Catholicism, on the other hand, makes a Protestant argument to Jews and a Jewish argument to Protestants.
And you know? I guess that really is "inventive."
But "truth".
No. It is not truth.
You may continue to believe it, if you like. That's your problem.
I agree. Any kind of agreement with the Vatican will not work out for Israel. And if you believe the reports of the Catholic church being the Whore of Revelation, then this news is even more disturbing.
... then you need to learn to actually read the Bible, instead of listening to "reports" from phonies like Dave Hunt who can't exegete their way out of a wet paper bag. Scripture tells you exactly who the Whore of Babylon is, or rather was. Rev 17 borrows its language directly from Jer 25, Ez 16, and Ez 23. Read those passages, and tell me what they're talking about. And then, for those extremely slow on the uptake, Rev itself tells you who the Whore is. It calls the Whore the "great city" (NB it never says "church", always "city") and then in Rev 11:8 you can read for yourself exactly what city is the "great city" the author had in mind.
Thanks for the backup, but the "Whore of Revelation" has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with my position.
G-d gave the Land to the Jews--period.
The passages in Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Rev 11 are talking a different place entirely.
David Hunt hmmm? Then I guess people like Calvin, Luther, Tyndale, Coverdale, Wesley, Whitefield, Bunyan, Wycliffe, Rogers, many Reformation age PROtestants and many others were wrong about the identity of the personage talked about in Rev 17 & 18 were all wrong as well? The fact that the Bible doesn't say "church" is irrelevant.
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.