Catholics

[bbyrd009]

I guess you're right, but being with Christ, one has a deep desire to connect with others in a loving way, but at times the way some respond, it's kind of like having a bucket of ice water thrown in ones face, not the most pleasant of things

i'm sure that is a sign, and also taken by other readers that you have made your point better, even if it does not feel like that in the moment?

 

[Helen]

I guess you're right, ( bbyrd009 ) but being with Christ, one has a deep desire to connect with others in a loving way, but at times the way some respond, it's kind of like having a bucket of ice water thrown in ones face, not the most pleasant of things

I so agree with you...I often wonder why people can't just lay out their disagreement in a polite way ....I am so thankful for those on here that can and do just that. When thatbis done , THEN we have the opportunity to weigh what is bringing presented, as different opinions...rather than, as you say...having to shrink back from the buckets of ice water ( or scalding water in others cases!! ) ..and have go and dry off ' somewhere' warmer and more pleasant!!
But I don't know too many leopards which have actually changed their spots ( or habits)ha!!

 

[pia]

i'm sure that is a sign, and also taken by other readers that you have made your point better, even if it does not feel like that in the moment?

I am aware that I have a different way of saying things at times, which is probably because English is not my first language, nor am I a very learned person...Things kind of just 'spill' out of my heart at times, but like everyone else I still have a ton to learn......Little by little, day by day we each get a little closer ( hopefully )........

 

[pia]

I so agree with you...I often wonder why people can't just lay out their disagreement in a polite way ....I am so thankful for those on here that can and do just that. When thatbis done , THEN we have the opportunity to weigh what is bringing presented, as different opinions...rather than, as you say...having to shrink back from the buckets of ice water ( or scalding water in others cases!! ) ..and have go and dry off ' somewhere' warmer and more pleasant!!
But I don't know too many leopards which have actually changed their spots ( or habits)ha!!

You ALWAYS put a big smile on my face....I for one am grateful that you are one of those who is able to do what you just wrote there. There is one other person here, where this scripture came to mind , which certainly also applies to you in a big way :" Blessed are the peacemakers." Thank you for being here

 

[Stranger]

Hmmmmm . . . let's walk you through it again, sparky.

Acts 15:6-13
The apostles and elders met to consider this question. After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.
No "racket" Only Peter is speaking . . .
God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.
STILL only Peter speaking here. No sign of "racket" . . .
Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. When they finished, James spoke up.

STILL no "racket".
Peter spoke and apparently there was some discussion afterward - until it was Paul's and Barnabas's turn.
Look - you can hate the Church all you want - but there's really no need to add to Scripture what is NOT there . . .

If there was no racket, they why the need to mention 'silence' when Paul and Barnabas spoke? The racket would be due to the much disputing in (15:7).

No, I don't hate the Church. I am part of the Church. Just not part of the Roman Church. I haven't added anything. This Scripture was brought up by kepha31 who spoke of all being silent when Peter rose up to speak. Which is false.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

discussing the morality of slave ownership with plantation owners is equally pointless lol

i'm guessing k has found something utterly fascinating somewhere else at this point snarf

 

[BreadOfLife]

If there was no racket, they why the need to mention 'silence' when Paul and Barnabas spoke? The racket would be due to the much disputing in (15:7).

No, I don't hate the Church. I am part of the Church. Just not part of the Roman Church. I haven't added anything. This Scripture was brought up by kepha31 who spoke of all being silent when Peter rose up to speak. Which is false.

Stranger

Because anybody reading this passage with half a brain an see that they all listened to Peter.
It appears that there was discussion AFTER Peter spoke.

Nowhere does it say that Peter was not being heard or listened to because there was too much "racket".
YOU are adding this to the text - and frankly, it's stupid.

 

[Stranger]

Because anybody reading this passage with half a brain an see that they all listened to Peter.
It appears that there was discussion AFTER Peter spoke.

Nowhere does it say that Peter was not being heard or listened to because there was too much "racket".
YOU are adding this to the text - and frankly, it's stupid.

Peter was heard. But all got silent when Paul and Barnabas spoke. Maybe yall chose the wrong pope.

Stranger

 

[aspen]

This thread has inspired me to start a topic on bullying. I think I'll put it in the ethics and morality section, although it could easily fit in politics

 

[BreadOfLife]

Peter was heard. But all got silent when Paul and Barnabas spoke. Maybe yall chose the wrong pope.

Stranger

Suuuurrrrre, Stranger.
You can never just admit when you're wrong . . .

 

[Truth]

Oh...now I see. You always knew this was so but just didn't want to say anything. Sure.

So, yes you belong to the Roman Church. It likes to be called the Roman Catholic Church, but that is wrong, because that is an oxymoron. All believers belong to the Catholic Church of Jesus Christ. But not to the Roman Church.

I'm sure you will label yourself properly now. You can thank me later.

Stranger

Well I was Ignorant of the Fact that there was so many Rite's within the Catholic Denomination, it seams that it is about the same as the Modern Christian Churches, some are of Paul, I am of Peter, I am of James, of Luther, of Zwingli, Paul says I did not die for You, CHRIST died for all. And yes all Churches are a offshoot of the Catholic Church, Protesting Catholic's. In the beginning of the Catholic Church, it was established by Rome, then filtered into other places. Constantine the Emperor of Rome, after many Emperor's before Him unable to stop the conflict's between the Pagan Cults, and the early believers in Jesus, He melded all of them together, thus the Roman Universal Church, which became the First Religion of an Empire. Constantine was the First Pontiffs Maximus, A Roman Emperor, in 324 to 326 of the common era!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Well I was Ignorant of the Fact that there was so many Rite's within the Catholic Denomination, it seams that it is about the same as the Modern Christian Churches, some are of Paul, I am of Peter, I am of James, of Luther, of Zwingli, Paul says I did not die for You, CHRIST died for all. And yes all Churches are a offshoot of the Catholic Church, Protesting Catholic's. In the beginning of the Catholic Church, it was established by Rome, then filtered into other places. Constantine the Emperor of Rome, after many Emperor's before Him unable to stop the conflict's between the Pagan Cults, and the early believers in Jesus, He melded all of them together, thus the Roman Universal Church, which became the First Religion of an Empire. Constantine was the First Pontiffs Maximus, A Roman Emperor, in 324 to 326 of the common era!

Where do you get this garbage??

Because you made such an asinine claim - I am challenging you to present documented historical evidence that:
1. That the Catholic Church was established by Rome and not Jesus and the Apostles
2. Constantine was the first Catholic Pontiff.
2. Constantine "melded" paganism with Christianity.

Finally - neither you nor Stranger nor any other anti-Catholic on this forum understands what a "Rite" of the Catholic Church is - so allow me to educate you.
The different Rites of the Church are basically regional differences based on custom and language - NOT doctrine.
There are no doctrinal differences and they are ALL in communion with the Pope. We are ONE Church.

This is NOTHING like the tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually-splintering sects of Protestantism that ALL teach different doctrines based on the personal interpretations of the leader of that particular sect.

 

[Stranger]

Suuuurrrrre, Stranger.
You can never just admit when you're wrong . . .

Well, you have to be wrong first. Otherwise, I would just be another liar....

Stranger

 

[aspen]

Where do you get this garbage??

Because you made such an asinine claim - I am challenging you to present documented historical evidence that:
1. That the Catholic Church was established by Rome and not Jesus and the Apostles
2. Constantine was the first Catholic Pontiff.
2. Constantine "melded" paganism with Christianity.

Finally - neither you nor Stranger nor any other anti-Catholic on this forum understands what a "Rite" of the Catholic Church is - so allow me to educate you.
The different Rites of the Church are basically regional differences based on custom and language - NOT doctrine.
There are no doctrinal differences and they are ALL in communion with the Pope. We are ONE Church.

This is NOTHING like the tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually-splintering sects of Protestantism that ALL teach different doctrines based on the personal interpretations of the leader of that particular sect.

Pure flaming and reported

 

[Marymog]

Did you miss this bit,

Mar_7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

That is what religion is all about.

Dear Sir,

Could that be you? Honoring with your lips but your heart is far from Him?

Who are you to judge where a mans heart is?

Did you miss this bit?

James 4:11-12, Matthew 7:1

Curious Mary

 

[BreadOfLife]

Pure flaming and reported

And you have no problem with the lies spewed by "Truth"?
Your defense of this kind of rubbish is precisely what exposes your anti-Catholicism.

Shame on you.

 

[Marymog]

oh, my apologies. I guess Constantine popularized putting off "accepting Christ" with all of the standard ritual accoutrements, baptism, etc, until one's deathbed, maybe to avoid the "purgatory" heresy that was then getting popular or something? I guess "life, more abundantly" went out the window pretty quick iow. Pretty much everyone--dunno about the Apostles though, prolly not--started "standing there, looking up into the sky" at least figuratively speaking?

But i would get a Catholic's side here for a closer approach to the truth, which is prolly somewhere in the middle.

Dear Sir,

You have me completely confused. I thought we were talking about Augustine and now you are saying Constantine!!!

I am going to assume it was a typo and you mean AUGUSTINE.

With that said I can not find anything about Augustine teaching deathbed acceptance of Christ being OK. Could you provide a link to a LEGITIMATE website backing up your statement? Please!!

Mary

 

[Marymog]

yes, certainly

that is not for me to say, but my opinion is that someone doing that deliberately is certainly missing the point, "life, more abundantly," for one, plus i do not believe that "saved" is like some switch that gets thrown when one speaks the correct code words, the vv you have quoted notwithstanding, as "Many will cry 'Lord, Lord'" prolly is telling us.

Iow it is easy to "confess with your mouth" that Christ is Lord, but then if you go on and "confess" something different when you are not thinking about it--i have used the example of gun ownership in the past, in contrast to trusting God--say, "i need money to survive," or whatever, anything that might indicate one has not left the world, well then how true is the first statement you have made, especially if you act upon the second one, and dwell there more than the first one?

God judges the heart, and you have a much better chance of fooling your mother than God.

I agree.

Doing it "deliberately" (INTENTIONALLY waiting until you are on your death bed to profess your belief/faith in Jesus) will probably not SAVE you.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

well, after i followed my parents through the traditional route, the fear route, i started reading the Book and found "he who holds out to the end will be saved," so imo i am still working on that, but i cannot find anywhere in the Book where the program is meant to be about "going to heaven" when i die.

When did "I came that you might have life, more abundantly" turn into "i can't wait to die, and go to heaven?"

Dear sir,

I believe you were trying to use or quote Matthew 10:22 as your proof text on what you believe and why you believe it. You do realize it takes a lot more than 'holding out to the end' to be saved?

Your parents taught you to fear God? If so, they did the right thing. Matthew 10:28 is one example and if you read scripture you will see many more references about fearing God.

You said you got "saved" in the accepted manner". What does that mean? We're you all alone? In a Church? Did anyone have an influence on you getting saved?

Also, your out of context quote of John 10:10 makes absolutely no sense to me therefor I don't feel comfortable commenting on it.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

this is the most dangerous perspective one could have imo; what about the First Son of the Vineyard Owner? What about Islam, which commands a Muslim to "follow Christ or be doomed?"

so "Jesus" is being worshipped as a person here, and Christ is not understood as Spirit, imo

If a person says they know Christ and that they are a true Christian YOU get to decide if they really know Christ and are a true Christian?

Curious Mary