Re: Heresies and Traditions of the Roman Catholic Church
Barry OGrady
>
>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>>That's a side issue. You blame all your bad actions on God.
>>
>> I don't, but believers should.
>
>I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
>existence you deny.
>
>>
>>>But when someone
>>>performs a bad action against you, I doubt you resignedly walk away
>>>thinking, "poor chap; he coulndn't help it."
>>
>> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
>> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
>> determines every thought and every action.
>
>References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets - is
>that your theory?
Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
can't stop themselves?
Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>
>The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes. How can
>one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not the case,
>unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of theWill"
>theory.
An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a way
that there would be no conflict.
>BAM
Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, "bam" wrote:
> >"Barry OGrady" wrote
>
> >I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
> >existence you deny.
>
> >> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
> >> determines every thought and every action.
>
> >References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets - is
> >that your theory?
>
> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
> can't stop themselves?
> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>
on the part of
the brain that has been affected.
> >> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>
It is a matter of life in a world that is less than perfect.
I know what it is to be neurologically impaired through birth and
through experiences
during my life. I could have sat back and complained how cruel God was
to afflict me
in such a way, but that didn't occur to me. In a Christian Healing
Ministry at
St Andrew's Anglican Sydney Cathedral which I prayed that cures and
preventitive
methods would be found.
Psychiatrists, in the bad-pld-days of Psychiatry had given me
nine Electro Convulsive Shock Treatments (ie electrocutions that
knocked me
unconscious) without anaesthetic - yes frightening as the electricity
whirled through my
brain and spiralled up until I became unconscious and on two
subsequent occasions
perhaps another nine such treatments with Pentathal anaesthetic. I had
no memory
recall of those treatments for twenty-five years from the first of
them and lesser times from
the second and third treatments.
Out of the experience I became a/the advocate of reform in respect of
those
treatments in 1975 and after I read a text by a Psychiatric professor
I made out
a KNACK of Living programme. In the subsequent 34 years as I have
recovered
I have not had cause to attend with any Psychitrist.
I recognise the asistance of all who have answered me in these
newsgroups as you
have assisted in helping me to be neurologically alert.
> >The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes. How can
> >one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not the case,
> >unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of theWill"
> >theory.
>
http://www.monergismbooks.com/Bondage-of-the-Will-p76202.html
From that website:-
"Luther's work is fundamental to an understanding of the chief
Reformation doctrines -
our total inability to save ourselves, the sovereignty of divine
grace. justification
by faith and predestination and Divine knowledge."
Gladys Swager
An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a
way
> that there would be no conflict.
>
> >BAM
>
> Barry
> =====
> Home pagehttp://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 3, 9:32�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, "bam" wrote:
>> >"Barry OGrady" wrote
>>
>> >I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
>> >existence you deny.
>>
>> >> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
>> >> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
>> >> determines every thought and every action.
>>
>> >References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets - is
>> >that your theory?
>>
>> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
>> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
>> can't stop themselves?
>> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
>> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>>
>Brain damage can/will affect a person's nature and behaviour depending
>on the part of the brain that has been affected.
Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their nature
and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>> >> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>>
>It is a matter of life in a world that is less than perfect.
But would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>I know what it is to be neurologically impaired through birth and through
>experiences during my life. I could have sat back and complained how
>cruel God was to afflict me in such a way, but that didn't occur to me.
Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
>In a Christian Healing Ministry at St Andrew's Anglican Sydney Cathedral
>which I prayed that cures and preventitive methods would be found.
Don't you think God already knew what he should do?
>Psychiatrists, in the bad-pld-days of Psychiatry had given me
>nine Electro Convulsive Shock Treatments (ie electrocutions that
>knocked me unconscious) without anaesthetic - yes frightening as the
>electricity whirled through my brain and spiralled up until I became
>unconscious and on two subsequent occasions perhaps another nine
>such treatments with Pentathal anaesthetic. I had no memory
>recall of those treatments for twenty-five years from the first of
>them and lesser times from the second and third treatments.
What was the condition they were trying to treat?
>Out of the experience I became a/the advocate of reform in respect of
>those treatments in 1975 and after I read a text by a Psychiatric professor
>I made out a KNACK of Living programme. In the subsequent 34 years as
>I have recovered
>I have not had cause to attend with any Psychitrist.
>I recognise the asistance of all who have answered me in these
>newsgroups as you
>have assisted in helping me to be neurologically alert.
Where is God while these things are happening?
Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or
he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
>Gladys Swager
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >Brain damage can/will affect a person's nature and behaviour depending
> >on the part of the brain that has been affected.
>
> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their nature
> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>
Just think back to revious postings for the answer.
It is a matter of life in a world that is less than perfect.
>
> But would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>
I would take steps to have the person apprehended by the police.
If it had been an accident with no criminal intent, the situation
would be
managed differently.
> >I know what it is to be neurologically impaired through birth and through
> >experiences during my life. I could have sat back and complained how
> >cruel God was to afflict me in such a way, but that didn't occur to me.
>
> Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
>
You are still twisting the information that is given you, Barry.
I used my understandings so that others
would not have to experience the problems I had,.
> >In a Christian Healing Ministry at St Andrew's Anglican Sydney Cathedral
> >which I prayed that cures and preventitive methods would be found.
>
> Don't you think God already knew what he should do?
God is a Spirit. He guides those who are concerned for others in this
world
to work out better ways of responding.
> >Psychiatrists, in the bad-old-days of Psychiatry had given me
> >nine Electro Convulsive Shock Treatments (ie electrocutions that
> >knocked me unconscious) without anaesthetic - yes frightening as the
> >electricity whirled through my brain and spiralled up until I became
> >unconscious and on two subsequent occasions perhaps another nine
> >such treatments with Pentathal anaesthetic. I had no memory
> >recall of those treatments for twenty-five years from the first of
> >them and lesser times from the second and third treatments.
>
> What was the condition they were trying to treat?
>
1. In a state of extreme exhaustion due to illness I have become
distressed
2. In a state of extreme stress I was unable to speak for about two
hours.
was given a medication that produced produced extreme
hallucinations
3. Was very exhausted, given leave, had a sense that I was being
undermined,
on the spur of the moment decided to take extra sleeping
medication to
commit suicide, decided against, but when that was told to
the Psychiatrist
was admitted to a hospital and given Shock Treatments without
my authority
> >Out of the experience I became a/the advocate of reform in respect of
> >those treatments in 1975 and after I read a text by a Psychiatric professor
> >I made out a KNACK of Living programme. In the subsequent 34 years as
> >I have recovered
> >I have not had cause to attend with any Psychitrist.
> >I recognise the asistance of all who have answered me in these
> >newsgroups as you
> >have assisted in helping me to be neurologically alert.
>
> Where is God while these things are happening?
God was/is working His purposes out.
> Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or
> he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
from 1 Kings 18 : 27 There is one thing I can say for you, Barry, and
that is you know some parts of the Bible and you know how to quote
them out of context. Go to your Bible and the reference I have given
you
above to determine what I mean by that statement.
Gladys Swager
bam
"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8avbh5ljhqj6htbse...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:59:54 -0500, "bam" <blahbl...@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>
>>>>That's a side issue. You blame all your bad actions on God.
>>>
>>> I don't, but believers should.
>>
>>I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
>>existence you deny.
>>
>>>
>>>>But when someone
>>>>performs a bad action against you, I doubt you resignedly walk away
>>>>thinking, "poor chap; he coulndn't help it."
>>>
>>> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
>>> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
>>> determines every thought and every action.
>>
>>References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets -
>>is
>>that your theory?
>
> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
I doubt that. But it certainly eases the conscience to believe it.
> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
> can't stop themselves?
Because they're bad. The intellect can control the body if one wills it. But
if you will evil, then you don't even want to stop.
> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
Because it puts everything out of order. Why does water change a computer's
behavior?
> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
Any kind of damage to the body can change a person's nature. That's why you
curse when you stub your toe.
>
>>> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>>
>>The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes. How
>>can
>>one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not the case,
>>unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of theWill"
>>theory.
>
> An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a way
> that there would be no conflict.
There was no conflict originally. Even some angels rebelled. Free will.
You'd prefer robotic perfection - so do all manipulators.
BAM
�R.L.Measures
<blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> ...
� good one.
--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
duke
>On Dec 5, 8:14�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >Brain damage can/will affect a person's nature and behaviour depending
>> >on the part of the brain that has been affected.
>>
>> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their nature
>> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
Wait a minute, gladys. I have consistently corrected you on your foolishness
post AD325 events in the RCC. Yet you constantly repeat the same foolishness.
So don't blame bo for doing the same thing to you.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:33:57 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>
> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >On Dec 5, 8:14 am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>
> >> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their nature
> >> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
> >Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
>
> Wait a minute, gladys. I have consistently corrected you on your foolishness
> post AD325 events in the RCC. Yet you constantly repeat the same foolishness.
> So don't blame bo for doing the same thing to you.
>
indoctrinations
I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you are the
authority,
what you say about Protestantism is correct." Well the truth is that
there are
many Protestants worldwide who disagree with you and who disagree
with your Pope on a number of issues. It was not the reformers,
John Wycliffe and Martin Luther who were. wrong. It was the Popes and
their Cardinals in the Vatican at those times who were wrong.
Protestants generally say there are two sacraments, Communion and
Baptism.
The RC Church has extended those to seven in number, but the extra
five had
existed in Old Testament times, priesthood, marriage, celibacy,
penance
(repaying for wrongs done), confirmation was added when infant
baptism
(christening) was adopted,
From my readings I am of the opinion that from 310AD various ideas
were
added (a) perhaps to signify that God had spoken to the Popes and
therefore had
to be obeyed, (b) to ensure that the laity were completely dependent
on the clergy.
After the Billy Graham Crusades of the 1950's (perhaps you were too
young
or not even born then) the Vatican realised that there was a way
amongst others that it could
impose its will on the world by beatifying more for sainthood than in
all the
previous centuries of Christendom and to organise extensive Papal
tours
in which a face of the Papacy could be presented but not its
substance.
You seem to be part of that process as you deify into truth all the
teachings
you have had within the RC Church. You either have not done enough
study
or if you have done some study it is only of those references that
support
the Vatican.
At the present time you seem to be on an Internet marathon in the hope
that
others will accept your opinions or that the others will tire and drop
out
of posting and by that you can assume that you have won.
The Vatican was not prepared to join the World Council of Churches
(from 1948)
It sent observers - was the reason to spy and then to make its running
in its own
ecumenical movement from 1960?
Gladys Swager
Terry Cross
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:59:54 -0500, "bam" <blahblahb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >"Barry OGrady" <god_free_jo...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> >>>That's a side issue. You blame all your bad actions on God.
>
> >> I don't, but believers should.
>
> >I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
> >existence you deny.
>
> >>>But when someone
> >>>performs a bad action against you, I doubt you resignedly walk away
> >>>thinking, "poor chap; he coulndn't help it."
>
> >> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
> >> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
> >> determines every thought and every action.
>
> >References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets - is
> >that your theory?
>
> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
Then why do you pretend to be a human being?
> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
> can't stop themselves?
Gosh, Barry, can't you stop being profound just for a few minutes?
> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
Why is it that drugs or brain damage can kill a person, changing that
person's "whole nature"?
TCross
duke
<swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>On Dec 6, 12:23锟絘m, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:33:57 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> >On Dec 5, 8:14锟絘m, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>
>> >> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their nature
>> >> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>> >Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
>>
>> Wait a minute, gladys. 锟絀 have consistently corrected you on your foolishness
>> post AD325 events in the RCC. 锟結et you constantly repeat the same foolishness.
>> So don't blame bo for doing the same thing to you.
>And as you give me the information that you accept from your
>indoctrinations I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you are the
>authority, what you say about Protestantism is correct.
Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical (meaning 33AD)
basis for the RCC.
You just keep acting silly and demands post 325AD input which is nonexistent.
>" Well the truth is that
>there are
>many Protestants worldwide who disagree with you and who disagree
>with your Pope on a number of issues. It was not the reformers,
>John Wycliffe and Martin Luther who were. wrong. It was the Popes and
>their Cardinals in the Vatican at those times who were wrong.
That's your problem, not mine. We Catholics follow the bible, you protest_ers
don't.
>Protestants generally say there are two sacraments, Communion and
>Baptism. The RC Church has extended those to seven in number
Correction: There are 7 listed in scripture. You ignore 5.
http://www.biblewheel.com/Topics/Seven.asp
From the Seven days of Creation to the Seven Seals of Revelation, Scripture is
saturated with the Number Seven. Just listing all the occurrences would take
several pages. Essentially all biblical scholars, regardless of their stance
with respect to the meaning of numbers in Scripture, have recognized the special
symbolic use of this Number. It is simply impossible to miss.
>From my readings I am of the opinion that from 310AD
Nothing.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >On Dec 6, 12:23 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> Wait a minute, gladys. I have consistently corrected you on your foolishness
> >> post AD325 events in the RCC.
.
> >And as you give me the information that you accept from your
> >indoctrinations I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you are the
> >authority, what you say about Protestantism is correct.
>
> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical (meaning 33AD)
> basis for the RCC.
Purgatory is dated 593AD in the time of Gregory the Great.- what made
him 'the Great'
I haven't checked. The sale of indulgences was brought in 1190AD. It
was that action
that finally brought about the Protestant Reformation in 1517AD - 327
years later,
but the success of that movement came following John Wycliffe's
criticism of
the doctrine of transubstantiation that had been imposed in 1215AD -
it took time for events to gather momentum in Europe which did not
have any means
of electronic presentation of information.
> >" Well the truth is that there are many Protestants worldwide who disagree
> > with you and who disagree with your Pope on a number of issues.
> > It was not the reformers, John Wycliffe and Martin Luther who were. wrong.
> > It was the Popes and their Cardinals in the Vatican at those times who were wrong.
>
> That's your problem, not mine. We Catholics follow the bible, you <Protestants>
> don't.
>
You should read the Bible to find where the RC hierarchy has deviated
from it.
> >Protestants generally say there are two sacraments, Communion and
> >Baptism. The RC Church has extended those to seven in number
>
> Correction: There are 7 listed in scripture. You ignore 5.
> http://www.biblewheel.com/Topics/Seven.asp
> From the Seven days of Creation to the Seven Seals of Revelation, Scripture is
> saturated with the Number Seven. Just listing all the occurrences would take
> several pages. Essentially all biblical scholars, regardless of their stance
> with respect to the meaning of numbers in Scripture, have recognized the special
> symbolic use of this Number. It is simply impossible to miss.
>
Jesus Christ gave the Lord's Supper (and he wasn't eaten and drunk by
His disciples)
and Baptism (which from the reading of the New Testament could
indicate it was
by immersion and certainly not of Infants - so that confirmation is
not given as one
of the sacraments in the New Testament.
Matrimony and celibacy were not of New Testament origin .
For the Christian who has been saved by grace through faith (Ephesians
2 : 8 - 9)
there is no need for the Last Unction;
and while wrong actions towards another should be resolved with the
other person,
that did not happen in respect of actions of RC members towards me,
but perhaps if dealt with in the Confessional
they can be kept from general knowledge and without discredit
publically of
those involved. - so there is method in that doctrine/dogma.
http://www.kencollins/sacrament-02.htm
So Protestants say there are two sacraments, but Roman Catholics say
there
are seven - evidently from the above of your posting because seven is
considered
to be a sacred number. Yes, it does have some unique qualities in the
numerical
system that even ancient peoples realised. But that does not mean that
it is
transferred over into the Christian faith.
Gladys Swager
dolf
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 13:13:45 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:33:57 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>>>
>>>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their
>>>>>> nature
>>>>>> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>>>>> Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
>>>> foolishness
>>>> post AD325 events in the RCC. Yet you constantly repeat the same
>>>> So don't blame bo for doing the same thing to you.
>>
>>> And as you give me the information that you accept from your
>>> indoctrinations I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you
>>> are the
>>> authority, what you say about Protestantism is correct.
>>
>> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical
>> (meaning 33AD)
>> basis for the RCC.
>> You just keep acting silly and demands post 325AD input which is
>> nonexistent.
>>
>
>
Jesus of Nazareth uses the analogy of 'Malakos' and by ipso facto
'Arsenokoite' within the context of those Jews 'cavorting in luxury'
within the King's Court--Silk as a commodity was no doubt an exquisite
prize amongst the elite within the Roman Imperial court. But Jesus also
conveys it as the antithesis of the Shekinah {ie. Metatron as soul of
the Messiah} being the demiurge within the world [cf: Exodus 23:20-24].
The Dead Sea Scroll fragment concurs, in that it records the historical
reality that "the princes of Judah were those like Boundary Shifters ...
because they did not turn away from traitorous practices; they relished
the customs of fornication and filthy lucre. Each of them vengefully
bore a grudge against his brother, each hating his fellow; each of them
kept away from nearest kin but grew close to indecency; they vaunted
themselves in riches and in ill-gotten gains; each of them did what he
pleased; each chose to follow his own willful heart." [Damascus Document
8:3-12]
Similary the Apostle identifies these same self-serving individuals as
his antagonists, being the 'rulers-KOSMOKRATER of the obscurity-SKOTOS
of this age-AION' who engage in 'spiritual-PNEUMATIKOS
wickedness-PORNEIA' [Ephesians 6:12]. Who as the 'princes-archons of
this world-aion', promulgate an alternate symbolic interpretation given
to number {ie. HETEROS as Unity and Multiplicity to which is ascribed
the First Cause of all things} and taxonomical derived "wisdom-SOPHIA of
this world-AION {ie. perpetuity, eternal, everlasting; specifically
(Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future)} which is
coming-KATARGEO to nothing-KATARGEO {ie. void, abolished, ceasing,
invalidated} ... But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery-MUSTERION,
the hidden-APOKRUPTO wisdom which God ordained-PROORIZO {ie. the
boundary or limit as noumenon} before-PRO {ie. as supernal} the
ages-AIONS for our glory, which none of the rulers of this age knew; for
had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." [1
Corithians 2:6-8]
Ultimately it is a consideration of the UNITARY and AUTONOMIC nature of
Godhead--that within the ELOHIYM there exists androgyny both male and
female in the ONE--the consideration of homosexual marriage and the role
of women comes from the same source, it is therefore an antagonism to
the unsustainable nature of later post-Valentinus (160 CE) Orthodox
claims to be representing such Godhead as TRINITY.
For an analogy to the existence of such esoteric theological conceptions
within early Christian theology, we need look no further than the early
Christian ecclesiastic Valentinus (c. 100-160 CE). He was born in
Carthage, educated in Alexandria and relocated to Rome, where he
achieved a high degree of prominence in the Christian community between
135-160 CE. Tertullian (c.155-222 CE) who was the first to use
trinitarian (three-in-one) formulation for God, wrote that Valentinus
was a candidate for the office of bishop of Rome in 143 CE and that he
lost the election by a rather narrow margin. This same failed orthodox
church father (Tertullian himself joined the heresy of Montanism)
alleges that Valentinus fell into apostasy due to the promulgation of an
esoteric amalgamate of Greek and Oriental speculations related to a
dualistic nature with Christian ideas. From him was derived the parallel
between the impossible or ideal world (the pleroma) and the possible as
the lower world of phenomena (the kenoma)--An interpretation of the
primordial source (as to what sense it is monadic or dyadic), of Limit
(what are its functions) and the passion of Sophia (what motivated it).
[Stephan A. Hoeller, Gnosis: A Journal of Western Inner Traditions (Vol. 1)]
An interesting aspect to Hippolytus (b. 170 CE) claim that Valentinus (c
100-160 CE) teachings represented heresy, is that Valentinus' (c 100-160
CE) principle student, the astrologer Ptolemy (c. 85-160 CE) was
responsible for the promulgation of a geocentric view of the cosmology.
Galilei Galileo (1564-1642 CE) was a contemporary mathematician,
astronomer and physicist to Kepler, who in 1609 CE as a result of study
given to the phases of the planet Venus, asserted that the geocentric
suppositions of the Alexandrian philosopher, astronomer, mathematician
and geographer Claudius Ptolemy (c. 85-160 CE) and therefore those of
Aristotle and the Roman Catholic Church, were false and proved that
Venus goes around the Sun, in conformance with the Copernican System.
Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543 CE) was the one who in his magnum opus
�On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies�, published in the final year
of his life, set out his theory that the Earth and the other planets
orbit the Sun.
duke
>On Dec 7, 1:32�am, duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 6, 12:23�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> >> Wait a minute, gladys. �I have consistently corrected you on your foolishness
>> >> post AD325 events in the RCC.
>.
>> >And as you give me the information that you accept from your
>> >indoctrinations I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you are the
>> >authority, what you say about Protestantism is correct.
>>
>> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical (meaning 33AD)
>> basis for the RCC. �
>
>Purgatory is dated 593AD in the time of Gregory the Great.
Purgatory is found in scripture from 33AD. Not that you're interested in the
truth.
>> >" Well the truth is that there are many Protestants �worldwide who disagree
>> > with you and who disagree with your Pope on a number of issues.
>> > It was not the reformers, John Wycliffe and Martin Luther who were. wrong.
>> > It was the Popes and their Cardinals in the Vatican at those times who were wrong.
>> That's your problem, not mine. We Catholics follow the bible, you <Protestants>
>> don't.
>You should read the Bible to find where the RC hierarchy has deviated
>from it.
I can't find any. But the protest_er deviation is everywhere.
>> >Protestants generally say there are two sacraments, Communion and
>> >Baptism. The RC Church has extended those to seven in number
>>
>> Correction: �There are 7 listed in scripture. �You ignore 5.
>> http://www.biblewheel.com/Topics/Seven.asp
>
>> From the Seven days of Creation to the Seven Seals of Revelation, Scripture is
>> saturated with the Number Seven. Just listing all the occurrences would take
>> several pages. Essentially all biblical scholars, regardless of their stance
>> with respect to the meaning of numbers in Scripture, have recognized the special
>> symbolic use of this Number. It is simply impossible to miss.
>Jesus Christ gave the Lord's Supper (and he wasn't eaten and drunk by
>His disciples) and Baptism (which from the reading of the New Testament could
>indicate it was by immersion and certainly not of Infants
Yet you protest_ers reject the other 5 he gave us:
SACRAMENTS:
Baptism - John 3:5-6, Mat 28:19, Hebrew 2:14-15
Holy Eucharist - Mat 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, 1 Cor 11
Confession - John 20:22-23, Mat 9:2-8
Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13, Acts 8:14-17, 19:5-6,
Holy Orders - Acts 13:3 & 14:23, John 20:22, 1 & 2 Tim
Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14
You protest_ants don't care what Jesus said, so go for it.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> >> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical (meaning 33AD)
> >> basis for the RCC.
>
> >Purgatory is dated 593AD in the time of Gregory the Great.
>
> Purgatory is found in scripture from 33AD. Not that you're interested in the
> truth.
>
scriptures.
> You Protestants don't care what Jesus said, so go for it.
>
You do not know the attitudes of all Protestants.
The Popes through the centuries added teachings in order to control
the laity in the pews. Jesus had not said that those additions were
necessary for salvation and eternal life.
The apostle Paul taught that
'by grace are we saved through faith, and that not of ourselves,
it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.'
Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
and 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15. No purgatory! No indulgences!
Gladys Swager
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 5, 8:14�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >Brain damage can/will affect a person's nature and behaviour depending
>> >on the part of the brain that has been affected.
>>
>> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their nature
>> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>>
>Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
Never in a satisfactory way.
>Just think back to revious postings for the answer.
>It is a matter of life in a world that is less than perfect.
OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>> But would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>>
>If I know the person had deliberately acted to cause harm
>I would take steps to have the person apprehended by the police.
>If it had been an accident with no criminal intent, the situation
>would be managed differently.
You would make a great politician.
How about answering the question:
We were talking about being grateful to God, so
would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>> >I know what it is to be neurologically impaired through birth and through
>> >experiences during my life. I could have sat back and complained how
>> >cruel God was to afflict me in such a way, but that didn't occur to me.
>>
>> Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
>>
>You are still twisting the information that is given you, Barry.
>I used my understandings so that others
>would not have to experience the problems I had,.
Just like I said, it is God's will that you and others experience the problems
you had, and you did your best to fight that.
>> >In a Christian Healing Ministry at St Andrew's Anglican Sydney Cathedral
>> >which I prayed that cures and preventitive methods would be found.
>>
>> Don't you think God already knew what he should do?
>
>God is a Spirit. He guides those who are concerned for others in this
>world to work out better ways of responding.
>> >Psychiatrists, in the bad-old-days of Psychiatry had given me
>> >nine Electro Convulsive Shock Treatments (ie electrocutions that
>> >knocked me unconscious) without anaesthetic - yes frightening as the
>> >electricity whirled through my brain and spiralled up until I became
>> >unconscious and on two subsequent occasions perhaps another nine
>> >such treatments with Pentathal anaesthetic. I had no memory
>> >recall of those treatments for twenty-five years from the first of
>> >them and lesser times from the second and third treatments.
>>
>> What was the condition they were trying to treat?
>>
>1. In a state of extreme exhaustion due to illness I have become distressed
>2. In a state of extreme stress I was unable to speak for about two hours.
> was given a medication that produced produced extreme hallucinations
>3. Was very exhausted, given leave, had a sense that I was being undermined,
> on the spur of the moment decided to take extra sleeping medication to
> commit suicide, decided against, but when that was told to the Psychiatrist
> was admitted to a hospital and given Shock Treatments without my authority
I take no pleasure in seeing people suffer, so if I had the ability nobody
would suffer. Apparently my moral standards far exceed those of God.
Its just possible that because God can't suffer he has no idea what life
is like for us.
>> >Out of the experience I became a/the advocate of reform in respect of
>> >those treatments in 1975 and after I read a text by a Psychiatric professor
>> >I made out a KNACK of Living programme. In the subsequent 34 years as
>> >I have recovered
>> >I have not had cause to attend with any Psychitrist.
>> >I recognise the asistance of all who have answered me in these
>> >newsgroups as you
>> >have assisted in helping me to be neurologically alert.
>>
>> Where is God while these things are happening?
>God was/is working His purposes out.
Are we talking about an almighty God that lives outside of time?
How long did it take God to cause the problems?
>> Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or
>> he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
>
>from 1 Kings 18 : 27 There is one thing I can say for you, Barry, and
>that is you know some parts of the Bible and you know how to quote
>them out of context.
Its not out of context. The followers of God were mocking the followers
of Baal because Baal was not available when called upon.
Here we have God being not available when needed so the passage is
appropriate.
>Go to your Bible and the reference I have given you
>above to determine what I mean by that statement.
I hope my explanation is satisfactory.
Barry OGrady
>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:8avbh5ljhqj6htbse...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:59:54 -0500, "bam" <blahbl...@bellsouth.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>
>>>>>That's a side issue. You blame all your bad actions on God.
>>>>
>>>> I don't, but believers should.
>>>
>>>I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
>>>existence you deny.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>But when someone
>>>>>performs a bad action against you, I doubt you resignedly walk away
>>>>>thinking, "poor chap; he coulndn't help it."
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
>>>> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
>>>> determines every thought and every action.
>>>
>>>References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're
>>> puppets - is that your theory?
>>
>> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
>
>I doubt that. But it certainly eases the conscience to believe it.
Certainly the brain is a machine whose functioning depends on its
physical condition and chemical balance.
>> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
>> can't stop themselves?
>
>Because they're bad.
In what way?
>The intellect can control the body if one wills it. But
>if you will evil, then you don't even want to stop.
What about those who don't have a choice?
>> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
>
>Because it puts everything out of order.
Whose idea was it to construct the brain in such a way it could get out of
order and thus deny free will to its owner?
>Why does water change a computer's behavior?
Probably because the designers are not God.
>> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>
>Any kind of damage to the body can change a person's nature. That's why you
>curse when you stub your toe.
Heraclitus 500 B.C. had observed "A blow to a man's head will confuse his
thinking, a blow to the foot has no such affect."
>>>> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>>>
>>>The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes. How
>>>can
>>>one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not the case,
>>>unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of theWill"
>>>theory.
>>
>> An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a way
>> that there would be no conflict.
>
>There was no conflict originally.
Is there conflict now?
>Even some angels rebelled.
Against what, and why?
>Free will.
How is that working out for us?
>You'd prefer robotic perfection - so do all manipulators.
Even with the robotic perfection in the original creation God found a
way to blame his creations for their troubles.
It would be wonderful if God wasn't locked into a black or white mentality.
Somewhere in the middle where we had choice but only the desire to do
good and with no disease or suffering.
I am aware, however, that God is incapable of learning.
God does not want perfection of any kind. He is having too much fun watching
us fight and suffer.
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 2, 2:32�pm, Barry OGrady <god_free_jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:59:54 -0500, "bam" <blahblahb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> >"Barry OGrady" <god_free_jo...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>
>> >>>That's a side issue. You blame all your bad actions on God.
>>
>> >> I don't, but believers should.
>>
>> >I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
>> >existence you deny.
>>
>> >>>But when someone
>> >>>performs a bad action against you, I doubt you resignedly walk away
>> >>>thinking, "poor chap; he coulndn't help it."
>>
>> >> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
>> >> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
>> >> determines every thought and every action.
>>
>> >References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets - is
>> >that your theory?
>>
>> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
>
>
>Then why do you pretend to be a human being?
Who says I do? Do you pretend to be a human being?
>> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
>> can't stop themselves?
>
>
>Gosh, Barry, can't you stop being profound just for a few minutes?
I ask the questions!
>> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
>> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>
>
>Why is it that drugs or brain damage can kill a person, changing that
>person's "whole nature"?
Why is it you don't have any answers?
>TCross
bam
"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
>>
>>I doubt that. But it certainly eases the conscience to believe it.
>
> Certainly the brain is a machine whose functioning depends on its
> physical condition and chemical balance.
And our will. Can you wiggle your finger? See? It works.
>
>>> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
>>> can't stop themselves?
>>
>>Because they're bad.
>
> In what way?
Because he has willed to act against his intellect to satisfy his passions.
>
>>The intellect can control the body if one wills it. But
>>if you will evil, then you don't even want to stop.
>
> What about those who don't have a choice?
Never met the chap.
>>> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
>>
>>Because it puts everything out of order.
>
> Whose idea was it to construct the brain in such a way it could get out of
> order and thus deny free will to its owner?
Free will has not been impaired. Common sense, maybe. A person may take
drugs and will to drive, but since he's lost his sense, he doesn't know he's
committing evil. But he knew that would happen when he took the drug.
>
>>Why does water change a computer's behavior?
>
> Probably because the designers are not God.
That's not a direct answer.
>>> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>>
>>Any kind of damage to the body can change a person's nature. That's why
>>you
>>curse when you stub your toe.
>
> Heraclitus 500 B.C. had observed "A blow to a man's head will confuse his
> thinking, a blow to the foot has no such affect."
Effect.
You ought to see me when something lands on my toe.
>>>>> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>>>>
>>>>The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes. How
>>>>can
>>>>one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not the case,
>>>>unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of theWill"
>>>>theory.
>>>
>>> An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a way
>>> that there would be no conflict.
>>
>>There was no conflict originally.
>
> Is there conflict now?
Yes, of course. Because of Original Sin we lost our integrity - though we
can get it back.
>
>>Even some angels rebelled.
>
> Against what, and why?
We don't really know. The theory is, that when they found out that God would
become flseh and blood they couldn't handle it, and because of their pride,
rebelled.
>>Free will.
>
> How is that working out for us?
>
>>You'd prefer robotic perfection - so do all manipulators.
>
> Even with the robotic perfection in the original creation God found a
> way to blame his creations for their troubles.
It wasn't "robotic". They still had free will. And being made in God's image
could have tempted man to want to be God Himself.
> It would be wonderful if God wasn't locked into a black or white
> mentality.
> Somewhere in the middle where we had choice but only the desire to do
> good and with no disease or suffering.
That is possible - with grace and sacraments. we must "co-operate". Until
you've received it, you won't believe it though.
> I am aware, however, that God is incapable of learning.
>
> God does not want perfection of any kind. He is having too much fun
> watching
> us fight and suffer.
No. Jesus told us to "Be perfect, as my Father in Heaven."
BAM
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>
brought to a state of imperfection.
>> Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
It was not a matter of using my energy to fight God's will.
God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
> >God is a Spirit. He guides those who are concerned for others in this
> >world to work out better ways of responding.
Gladys Swager
duke
>On Dec 8, 4:59�am, duke wrote:
>> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> >> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical (meaning 33AD)
>> >> basis for the RCC. �
>>
>> >Purgatory is dated 593AD in the time of Gregory the Great.
>>
>> Purgatory is found in scripture from 33AD. �Not that you're interested in the
>> truth.
>The words 'purgatory' and 'indulgences' are not in the Biblical
>scriptures.
Both activities are.
>> You Protestants don't care what Jesus said, so go for it.
>You do not know the attitudes of all Protestants.
I know yours.
>The apostle Paul taught that
>'by grace are we saved through faith, and that not of ourselves,
>it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.'
> Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
>and 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15. No purgatory! No indulgences!
>Gladys Swager
And Jesus said that man has the authority to forgive sin to be so bound in
heaven. John 20:22-23
duke
>On Dec 8, 8:24�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>>
>God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>brought to a state of imperfection.
bo doens't understand.
>>> Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
>It was not a matter of using my energy to fight God's will.
>God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
But you deny works.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
> >brought to a state of imperfection.
>
>
> But you deny works.
>
spend
time at this computer typing messages to you that you have
accepted erroneous teachings from your mentors in the RC Church.
Traditions have been elevated to New Testament teachings and,
as yet, your brain will not allow you to understand that is so.
Further, works do not come first and works do not contribute
to salvation. Martin Luther realised that all the ritauls that he had
been told he had to observe as a monk in the RC system did not
give him peace with God. Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9 released him from
those rituals as he realised that Jesus Christ through His death
and resurrection had done everything that was necessary to give
him salvation as the gift of God to him as He placed his faith in
Jesus Christ.
Your mentors teach you that you must observe many rituals
and believe what is taught in those rituals - for instance,
you can only receive Jesus Christ as you believe that He is
physically present in the wafer and wine of the Mass.
And that despite the fact that at His ascension angels told the
disciples that as they had seen Jesus ascend into heaven so
they would, (physically) see Him when He returns (at the end of this
age).
That is not given in the PR programmes by the Roman Catholic
Church leaders to enable enquirers to make a considered judgement
of the doctrines that are taught as truth in your church.
They do have that opportunity to come to that understanding from
various websites
http://www.gotquestions.org/Catholic
Gladys Swager
swa...@ozemail.com.au
Apologies, the following should give the website
http://www.gotquestions.org/Catholic-questions.html
>
Gladys Swager
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 8, 8:24�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>>
>God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>brought to a state of imperfection.
Can you see how that is not rational? God had no need to downgrade
everything and nothing to stop him restoring it.
Humans work to improve things because there is no God to do it.
Your indoctrination is amazing.
>>> Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
>
>It was not a matter of using my energy to fight God's will.
>God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
The lack of hands did not prevent God from creating a universe and
populating it, nor from downgrading all of creation.
If God is so useless why bother with him?
>> >God is a Spirit. He guides those who are concerned for others in this
>> >world to work out better ways of responding.
Time for a new God me thinks. Perhaps God is pursuing or perchance
he sleepeth and must be awaked.
Barry OGrady
>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>>> Studies of the brain suggest that we are basically robots.
>>>
>>>I doubt that. But it certainly eases the conscience to believe it.
>>
>> Certainly the brain is a machine whose functioning depends on its
>> physical condition and chemical balance.
>
>And our will.
Our will does depend on the condition of the brain.
>Can you wiggle your finger? See? It works.
Would you ask that question of someone whose brain did not allow
them to wiggle their finger?
>>>> Why is it that most men would not molest a child for any reason yet some
>>>> can't stop themselves?
>>>
>>>Because they're bad.
>>
>> In what way?
>
>Because he has willed to act against his intellect to satisfy his passions.
It may be that a part of their brain is enlarged.
A study of people with anger problems showed they had a particular
part of their brain enlarged.
Some wife beaters feel terrible about beating their wife and promise
never again, yet they do it again because they can't help it.
>>>The intellect can control the body if one wills it. But
>>>if you will evil, then you don't even want to stop.
>>
>> What about those who don't have a choice?
>
>Never met the chap.
But you know of them from such as news services and you may even
know someone who drinks and drives or mistreats his wife or children.
>>>> Why is it drugs may change a person's behaviour?
>>>
>>>Because it puts everything out of order.
>>
>> Whose idea was it to construct the brain in such a way it could get out of
>> order and thus deny free will to its owner?
>
>Free will has not been impaired. Common sense, maybe. A person may take
>drugs and will to drive, but since he's lost his sense, he doesn't know he's
>committing evil. But he knew that would happen when he took the drug.
Hence the need to plan not to drive if you plan to drink, because once drunk
the will to choose is impaired.
Whose idea was it to construct the brain in such a way that drugs could make
a person do things they would never do when sober?
Q: Why does a child think and act differently to an adult?
A: Their brain is not fully formed.
Q: Why does a Down's Syndrome affected adult person behave like child?
A; Their brain is not fully formed.
You would have us believe they choose to act like children.
Perhaps they just need a stern talking to, be told to act like adults.
>>>Why does water change a computer's behavior?
>>
>> Probably because the designers are not God.
>
>That's not a direct answer.
If they had the power of God they would design the computer to be
impervious to water.
>>>> Brain damage may cause a person's whole nature to change.
>>>
>>>Any kind of damage to the body can change a person's nature. That's why
>>>you curse when you stub your toe.
>>
>> Heraclitus 500 B.C. had observed "A blow to a man's head will confuse his
>> thinking, a blow to the foot has no such affect."
>
>Effect.
Mea culpa.
I copied that without checking.
>You ought to see me when something lands on my toe.
You get the idea though. As far back as 500 B.C. someone called Heraclitus
recognised the function of the brain.
>>>>>> Would you be grateful to God for such a person?
>>>>>
>>>>>The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes.
>>>>>How can one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not
>>>>>the case, unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of
>>>>>theWill" theory.
>>>>
>>>> An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a way
>>>> that there would be no conflict.
>>>
>>>There was no conflict originally.
>>
>> Is there conflict now?
>
>Yes, of course. Because of Original Sin we lost our integrity - though we
>can get it back.
Thus the fact that God originally gave us a world without conflict means
nothing because he took it away.
"Like taking candy from a baby. You must give the baby candy first, then
you can take it away. God gives us life and love and happiness just so he can
tear it all away and make us cry. Its our tears that give God his great power."
Chef - Southpark
>>>Even some angels rebelled.
>>
>> Against what, and why?
>
>We don't really know. The theory is, that when they found out that God would
>become flseh and blood they couldn't handle it, and because of their pride,
>rebelled.
Do you think God knew that when he created them with pride?
>>>Free will.
How is that working out for us?
>>>You'd prefer robotic perfection - so do all manipulators.
>>
>> Even with the robotic perfection in the original creation God found a
>> way to blame his creations for their troubles.
>
>It wasn't "robotic". They still had free will. And being made in God's image
>could have tempted man to want to be God Himself.
So if God had not set up the sham test in the garden or if God realised he
was in error rather than having a hissy fit we could still be living in paradise?
>> It would be wonderful if God wasn't locked into a black or white
>> mentality.
>> Somewhere in the middle where we had choice but only the desire to do
>> good and with no disease or suffering.
>
>That is possible - with grace and sacraments. we must "co-operate".
By not cooperating with God we have managed to increase our lifespan
somewhat and improve our quality of life.
>Until you've received it, you won't believe it though.
I will believe it when I see all of creation happy and healthy at all times.
I am aware, however, that God is incapable of learning.
>> God does not want perfection of any kind. He is having too much fun
>> watching us fight and suffer.
>
>No. Jesus told us to "Be perfect, as my Father in Heaven."
That doesn't make sense. God is far from perfect so we must spend
much of our life just trying to survive.
Perhaps Jesus was misquoted.
It could be that God does love us but has no power to express that love,
or that God has no way to relate to us and our needs.
Barry OGrady
>On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 18:43:12 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
><swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>On Dec 8, 8:24�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>>>
>>God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>>brought to a state of imperfection.
>
>bo doens't understand.
You got that right.
I do know that both of you are indoctrinated by different creeds, and you
are both wrong.
>>>> Good for you. You used your energy to fight God's will.
>>It was not a matter of using my energy to fight God's will.
>>God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
>
>But you deny works.
Gladys is aware we must help ourselves because God won't.
>The Dukester, American-American
duke
>On Dec 9, 4:59�am, duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>> >brought to a state of imperfection.
>>
>> >God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
>>
>> But you deny works.
>I do not deny 'works' . If I did, one thing for sure, I would not
>spend time at this computer typing messages to you
That's not works. Works of the heart are those things of time, talent and
treasure that one gives to those in need out of their love of God and their
living in the spirit of Christ.
And you have consistently avoided the affirmative on this issue.
> that you have
>accepted erroneous teachings from your mentors in the RC Church.
>Traditions have been elevated to New Testament teachings and,
>as yet, your brain will not allow you to understand that is so.
Lut has definitely yanked your chain. That's sad.
>Further, works do not come first and works do not contribute
>to salvation.
It does for the non-Christian.
duke
Not even a Catholic in the bunch. I suggest you go to newadvent for truth about
the CC.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/
About GotQuestions.org
Mission Statement of Got Questions Ministries:
"Got Questions Ministries seeks to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by providing
biblical, applicable, and timely answers to spiritually-related questions
through an internet presence."
GotQuestions.org is a volunteer ministry of dedicated and trained servants who
have a desire to assist others in their understanding of God, Scripture,
salvation, and other spiritual topics. We are Christian, Protestant,
conservative, evangelical, fundamental, and non-denominational. We view
ourselves as a para-church ministry, coming alongside the church to help people
find answers to their spiritually related questions.
duke
wrote:
>On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:59:18 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 18:43:12 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>><swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 8, 8:24�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>>>
>>>> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>>>>
>>>God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>>>brought to a state of imperfection.
>>
>>bo doens't understand.
>
>You got that right.
>I do know that both of you are indoctrinated by different creeds, and you
>are both wrong.
If per chance one day a dude with horns and a pointed tale tells you
hello...........well, you're definitely in trouble.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >On Dec 9, 4:59 am, duke wrote:
> >> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >> >God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
> >> >brought to a state of imperfection.
> >> >God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
>
> >> But you deny works.
> >I do not deny 'works' . If I did, one thing for sure, I would not
> >spend time at this computer typing messages to you
>
> That's not works. Works of the heart are those things of time, talent and
> treasure that one gives to those in need out of their love of God and their
> living in the spirit of Christ.
>
salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone,
not of works .....lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
Perhaps that verse is never,, or rarely ...given in a RC Church
because the hierarchy could still be aware that it was that verse
that gave Luther peace with God - something he had not gained
from all the RC rituals that he had participted in in his years
in your/that church.
As yet, for all that I have posted to you, you cannot understand
that there has to be a time when a person commits him'herself
to Jesus Christ in faith, and that is not always at the time of
Confirmation as it is a service that can be followed through
without a full realisation of all that it should have signified.
The same can happen in Protestant churches.
> And you have consistently avoided the affirmative on this issue.
>
> > that you have
> >accepted erroneous teachings from your mentors in the RC Church.
> >Traditions have been elevated to New Testament teachings and,
> >as yet, your brain will not allow you to understand that is so.
>
> <Luther> has definitely yanked your chain. That's sad.
>
Luther was not the only one in the RC Church who called for reform.
There were a number before Luther acted; Wycliffe being one of
them in England, but others on the Continent.as well. .
> >Further, works do not come first and works do not contribute
> >to salvation.
>
> It does for the non-Christian.
Nor does it do for the would-be Christian. The hierarchy at the
Vatican
has set up a programme of faith + works and even then there is time
to be sepnt in a (non-existent) purgatory - that's just a way to make
the RC member very punctual in all the demands of the Popes/priests.
Why then bother about preaching to the non-Christians?
It is obvious to me that you are teaching another 'gospel' that is
not a gospel at all.
Are you trying to discredit Protestant missionary efforts so that
the Pope in a World Youth Day or Saint canonisation can obtain
signatures on commitment forms to the Vatican?
Duke, the main contributor to the divisions in the Christian faith
came from the Vatican, and when you can understand that you will
have a more balanced view of Christianity in the world today.
I post that as a person who has had a fairly wide expereince of the
Christain faith - some recounted to me by my parents - of close to
eighty years. In that time I came to desire that Christians could
come
to unity, only to find that the RC Church, with which there were the
most
negative.experiences, had adopted the stance of unity under it -
or not at all. Where is the humulity? There is none.
There is only religious arrogance!
Gladys Swager.
dolf
customs of fornication and filthy lucre" it is not immediately clear
from the text as to whether matrimonial customs or sacred temple
prostitution is implied and whether a statement of fact or allegory to
arsenokoite is being expressed.
In any event asceticism on sexual practices outside the ecclesiastical
act of marriage has an appearance of religion but is only will worship
and self imposed piety--ethelothreskeia [#5, #9, #5, #30, #70, #9, #100,
#8, #200, #20, #5, #10, #1] (G1479) {ie. worship which one prescribes
and devises for himself, contrary to the contents and nature of faith
which ought to be directed to Christ} given to flights of fancy as
reactions to sensualism."
Which cannot of itself be called christian and in this sense can be
implied in the term arsenokoite of the apostle Paul's theology--An
Apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God
the Father who raised him from the dead) [Galatians 1:1
dolf wrote:
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 13:13:45 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 6, 12:23 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:33:57 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>>>
>>>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 5, 8:14 am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>>>> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their
>>>>>> nature
>>>>>> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>>>>> Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
>>>> Wait a minute, gladys. I have consistently corrected you on your
>>>> foolishness
>>>> post AD325 events in the RCC. Yet you constantly repeat the same
>>>> foolishness.
>>>> So don't blame bo for doing the same thing to you.
>>
>>> And as you give me the information that you accept from your
>>> indoctrinations I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you
>>> are the
>>> authority, what you say about Protestantism is correct.
>>
>> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical
>> (meaning 33AD)
>> basis for the RCC.
>> You just keep acting silly and demands post 325AD input which is
>> nonexistent.
>>
>
dolf
customs of fornication and filthy lucre" it is not immediately clear
from the text as to whether matrimonial customs or sacred temple
prostitution is implied and whether a statement of fact or allegory to
arsenokoite is being expressed.
In any event asceticism inclusive of circumcision and sexual practices
outside the ecclesiastical act of marriage has an appearance of religion
but is only will worship and self imposed piety--ethelothreskeia [#5,
#9, #5, #30, #70, #9, #100, #8, #200, #20, #5, #10, #1] (G1479) {ie.
worship which one prescribes and devises for himself, contrary to the
contents and nature of faith which ought to be directed to Christ} given
to flights of fancy as reactions to sensualism."
Which cannot of itself be called christian and in this sense can be
implied in the term arsenokoite of the apostle Paul's theology--An
Apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God
the Father who raised him from the dead) [Galatians 1:1]
dolf wrote:
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 13:13:45 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 6, 12:23 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:33:57 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>>>
>>>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 5, 8:14 am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>>>> Really? Does that mean the individual is not responsible for their
>>>>>> nature
>>>>>> and behaviour? Who or what decided to make our brain that way?
>>>>> Barry, I have answered you on that matter many times.
>>>> Wait a minute, gladys. I have consistently corrected you on your
>>>> foolishness
>>>> post AD325 events in the RCC. Yet you constantly repeat the same
>>>> foolishness.
>>>> So don't blame bo for doing the same thing to you.
>>
>>> And as you give me the information that you accept from your
>>> indoctrinations I am supposed to roll over and say, "Yes, Duke, you
>>> are the
>>> authority, what you say about Protestantism is correct.
>>
>> Nope, the part you are scared to death of is the solid biblical
>> (meaning 33AD)
>> basis for the RCC.
>> You just keep acting silly and demands post 325AD input which is
>> nonexistent.
>>
>
Barry OGrady
>On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:54:30 +1100, Barry OGrady <god_fre...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:59:18 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 18:43:12 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>><swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Dec 8, 8:24�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>>>>>
>>>>God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>>>>brought to a state of imperfection.
>>>
>>>bo doens't understand.
>>
>>You got that right.
>>I do know that both of you are indoctrinated by different creeds, and you
>>are both wrong.
>
>If per chance one day a dude with horns and a pointed tale tells you
>hello...........well, you're definitely in trouble.
If a guy with a pointed tale tells me a tail I know his spelling is
not good.
Duke follows the cartoon version of the bible with illustrations.
>The Dukester, American-American
=-=-=
Barry
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
duke
>On Dec 10, 12:26�am, duke wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 9, 4:59�am, duke �wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >> >God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>> >> >brought to a state of imperfection.
>> >> >God has no hands but our hands to do His will on this earth,
>>
>> >> But you deny works.
>> >I do not deny 'works' . If I did, one thing for sure, I would not
>> >spend time at this computer �typing messages to you
>>
>> That's not works. �Works of the heart are those things of time, talent and
>> treasure that one gives to those in need out of their love of God and their
>> living in the spirit of Christ.
>There is at least one thing you lack - and that is the knowledge of
>salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone
Not your view anyway, which is pure silliness. Scripture does not include the
word "alone" as lute added and you foolishly profess belief in dead faith.
>not of works .....lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
>Perhaps that verse is never,, or rarely ...given in a RC Church
>because the hierarchy could still be aware that it was that verse
>that gave Luther peace with God
Oor eternal fire for misleading the foolish.
>As yet, for all that I have posted to you, you cannot understand
>that there has to be a time when a person commits him'herself
>to Jesus Christ in faith, and that is not always at the time of
>Confirmation
It absolutely does occur at one's Confirmation, because that's when a Christian
makes his own mature adult promise to reject satan and his ways. Those below
the age of about 16 are too immature to understand and appreciated the
ramifications of his/her promises to God.
Besides, you reject most of the teachings of Christ and clearly reject his call
to service to God and mankind and are highly suspect in your understanding of
the call of Christ. You prefer, instead, to follow the heretic lute.
> as it is a service that can be followed through
>without a full realisation of all that it should have signified.
>The same can happen in Protestant churches.
The fallacy of your own words is doing you in. You reject infant baptism
because the infant "does not understand", yet you accept youthful expression
(pre-16 years old) which is just as immature of an expression of faith as an
infant as far as understanding is concerned.
>> And you have consistently avoided the affirmative on this issue.
>> > that you have
>> >accepted erroneous teachings from your mentors in the RC Church.
>> >Traditions have been elevated to New Testament teachings and,
>> >as yet, your brain will not allow you to understand that is so.
>> <Luther> has definitely yanked your chain. �That's sad.
>Luther was not the only one in the RC Church who called for reform.
>There were a number before Luther acted; Wycliffe being one of
>them in England, but others on the Continent.as well. .
All foolish men that turned from the Word of God.
>
>> >Further, works do not come first and works do not contribute
>> >to salvation.
>> It does for the non-Christian.
>Nor does it do for the would-be Christian. The hierarchy at the
>Vatican has set up a programme of faith + works and even then there is time
>to be sepnt in a (non-existent) purgatory
You're just bitter because you can see yourself failing heaven while many
non-Christians make it. Living in the footsteps of Christ does not mandate
Christian baptism.
>Why then bother about preaching to the non-Christians?
I never said "preach to". Many people throughout the world are not Christian,
many never even hearing of Christ thru the past centuries. But Christ is our
judge at the moment we die, and he who lived a life of complete obedience to the
Father to include the cross in obedience. I don't see him smiling at those that
care so little for him that they ignore his teachings yet make a false claim of
faith.
But to answer your question - Mat 28:16-20 is a call to Christians to teach the
world of the love of God and to make them Christians, another way of calling for
a profession of living in the spirit.
NOt something you believe in.
>It is obvious to me that you are teaching another 'gospel' that is
>not a gospel at all.
My words come from scripture. Your words come from your imagination scripture
is wrong as taught to you by lute.
>Are you trying to discredit Protestant missionary efforts so that
>the Pope in a World Youth Day
You're so hung up on WYD that you don't even see yourself turning away form God
thru your rejection of his teachings.
duke
wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 07:30:57 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:54:30 +1100, Barry OGrady <god_fre...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:59:18 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 18:43:12 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>>><swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Dec 8, 8:24�am, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, but why does God want this world less than perfect?
>>>>>>
>>>>>God wants you to do something to improve the world that humans
>>>>>brought to a state of imperfection.
>>>>
>>>>bo doens't understand.
>>>
>>>You got that right.
>>>I do know that both of you are indoctrinated by different creeds, and you
>>>are both wrong.
>>
>>If per chance one day a dude with horns and a pointed tale tells you
>>hello...........well, you're definitely in trouble.
>
>If a guy with a pointed tale tells me a tail I know his spelling is
>not good.
His tale matches his tail. You and Gladys are good examples of making wrong
turns of the tale.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> >> That's not works. Works of the heart are those things of time, talent and
> >> treasure that one gives to those in need out of their love of God and their
> >> living in the spirit of Christ.
> >There is at least one thing you lack - and that is the knowledge of
> >salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone
>
> Not your view anyway, which is pure silliness. Scripture does not include the
> word "alone" as lute added and you foolishly profess belief in dead faith.
>
> >NOT OF WORKS .....lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
> >Perhaps that verse is never,, or rarely ...given in a RC Church
> >because the hierarchy could still be aware that it was that verse
> >that gave Luther peace with God
>
> Or eternal fire for misleading the foolish.
So, Paul was wrong in writing to the Ephesians as he did?
>
> >As yet, for all that I have posted to you, you cannot understand
> >that there has to be a time when a person commits him'herself
> >to Jesus Christ in faith, and that is not always at the time of
> >Confirmation
>
> It absolutely does occur at one's Confirmation, because that's when a Christian
> makes his own mature adult promise to reject satan and his ways. Those below
> the age of about 16 are too immature to understand and appreciated the
> ramifications of his/her promises to God.
>
Confirmation is a time when a person is admitted into full adult
membership
of a church. Because that person has been able to answer a set of
questions
from the teachings given does not always mean that person has a full
knowledge of 'faith through Jesus Christ'. That faith may or may not
come
at a later time.
> Besides, you reject most of the teachings of Christ and clearly reject his call
> to service to God and mankind and are highly suspect in your understanding of
> the call of Christ. You prefer, instead, to follow the heretic <Luther>.
>
Luther did emphasise the teaching of how we become Christians -
ie through faith ALONE for it is not by the deeds that we do by which
we
become Christian. Those deeds follow. What you teach is that through
faith
in Jesus AND by following all the decrees of the leaders of the RC
Church
there can/will be a lessening of punishments in Purgatory that can
be
lessened by the observance of certain beliefs and actions of oneself
and of
others after death. No wonder the Vatican wants to own schools so that
its children
are thoroughly brainwashed in all its additions to the New Testament
teachings.
>
> The fallacy of your own words is doing you in. You reject infant baptism
> because the infant "does not understand", yet you accept youthful expression
> (pre-16 years old) which is just as immature of an expression of faith as an
> infant as far as understanding is concerned.
>
If taught correctly from the scriptures even a pre-teen year old can
understand
Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9.
> >> And you have consistently avoided the affirmative on this issue.
> >> > that you have
> >> >accepted erroneous teachings from your mentors in the RC Church.
> >> >Traditions have been elevated to New Testament teachings and,
> >> >as yet, your brain will not allow you to understand that is so.
> >> <Luther> has definitely yanked your chain. That's sad.
> >Luther was not the only one in the RC Church who called for reform.
> >There were a number before Luther acted; Wycliffe being one of
> >them in England, but others on the Continent.as well. .
>
> All foolish men that turned from the Word of God.
>
Both devout men, who with others realised that the hierarchy at Rome
were adding traditions to the plain/true teachings of the New
Testament.
>
> >> >Further, works do not come first and works do not contribute
> >> >to salvation.
> >> It does for the non-Christian.
Then it wasn't necessary for Jesus to tell His disciples/apostles ' to
go
into all the world and preach the gospel???. It took to the 1400's for
the
Americas to have contact with Europe and until the late 1700's for
Australia to be settled by the English. Many of the early Christian
leaders
had spent long hours in monastries as given in these newsgroups.
> >Nor does it do for the would-be Christian. The hierarchy at the
> >Vatican has set up a programme of faith + works and even then there is time
> >to be spent in a (non-existent) purgatory
>
> You're just bitter because you can see yourself failing heaven while many
> non-Christians make it. Living in the footsteps of Christ does not mandate
> Christian baptism.
>
How you form ideas in your head about me. I have no sense of 'failing
heaven'
because that is through faith in Jesus Christ. I can't tell you what
my reward
will be according to 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15, God will let me know
on that
issue on the Day of Judgement- but I will be saved. In the RC Church
assurance of salvation is not taught because....
is it that their is a fear that the moneys from religious
observances
will not be forthcoming on as a high a level?.
> >Why then bother about preaching to the non-Christians?
>
> I never said "preach to". Many people throughout the world are not Christian,
> many never even hearing of Christ thru the past centuries. But Christ is our
> judge at the moment we die, and he who lived a life of complete obedience to the
> Father to include the cross in obedience. I don't see him smiling at those that
> care so little for him that they ignore his teachings yet make a false claim of
> faith.
> But to answer your question - Mat 28:16-20 is a call to Christians to teach the
> world of the love of God and to make them Christians, another way of calling for
> a profession of living in the spirit.
> NOt something you believe in.
>
You have no idea of what my personal contributuin is to the spreading
of the
Christian faith. You are just on a campaign of denigration in an
effort to
somehow prove that what you have been taught from the Vatican is
correct.
> >It is obvious to me that you are teaching another 'gospel' that is
> >not a gospel at all.
>
> My words come from scripture. Your words come from your imagination scripture
> is wrong as taught to you by <Luther> .
>
Luther is not here today to teach me. However, many have followed in
his footsteps
anf have given the true gospel from the teachings of the New Testament
without
the additions that have come from the Church at Rome.
The Pope rejected the Reformation in the time of Luther. it is still
rejecting the
reformation back to New Testament teachings.
Before the time of Wycliffe and Luther the Church at Rome had brought
in
the inquisition - believe what we say or else execution. I wonder
whether
Benedict will resurrect that punishment as he was the leader of the
unit in
the Vatican that took over from the inquisition with a euphemistic
title that
signified an emphasis on reconciliation.
However, there is still a lot to be worked through.
Will Benedict get off his 'high horse' and admit that Rome made
mistakes
that brought about the Protestant Reformation?
Gladys Swager
Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:59:54 -0500, "bam" <blahblahb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >"Barry OGrady" <god_free_jo...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> >>>That's a side issue. You blame all your bad actions on God.
>
> >> I don't, but believers should.
>
> >I believe you spend way too much time trying to figure out the God whose
> >existence you deny.
>
> >>>But when someone
> >>>performs a bad action against you, I doubt you resignedly walk away
> >>>thinking, "poor chap; he coulndn't help it."
>
> >> Sometimes the law says that. The perp may be locked away for the
> >> protection of society, but if there is a Christian creator God said God
> >> determines every thought and every action.
>
> >References? God said He determines everyone's actions? So we're puppets - is
> >that your theory?
>
> can't stop themselves?
>
>
> >The person would merely be a horse carrying out his master's wishes. How can
> >one blame a horse for charging you in battle? But this is not the case,
> >unless you're a true Lutheran and believe in his "Bondage of theWill"
> >theory.
>
> An almighty creator could have chosen to make our brains in such a way
> that there would be no conflict.
>
>
> Barry
> =====
> Home pagehttp://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Australia Mining Pioneer & Founder of the True Geology
titled :
SCIENTIST's HIMALAYAN MISSION PROVIDES UNWELCOME PROOF : GLACIERS ARE
DYING. from the Times, with appropriate comments from a True Geologist
On Dec 10, 11:01 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 04:02:23 -0600, Tom McDonald
Eric,
The Glaciers in the Himalaya are not only receding but as well losing
in thickness, they are melting faster indeed with Moulins observed
on surface now, with reemergence (or not) of the flow in great
quantity at the head water of the Glacier. This is creating
potentially dangerous glacial lakes locked behind moraines, and which
continually filling on top of communities living below in the
valleys, are certainty omen of coming catastrophes. ( Ladakh,
Bhutan, Nepal)
In case of NO reemergence of the melt water some hidden storage lakes
can form within the Glacier, and as was the case in 1956 in the
Alpes, Chamonix valley, a 200 000 cubic m of water sudden burst
destroyed an entire village.
To both Eric & Tom,
Really your answers demonstrate your ill-founded confidence in a
complete fraudulent Geology, since you are implying that 2350 could be
in fact some IPCC estimate for Himalaya glaciers disappearance. In
fact, your logic processing is working on the assumption of a linear
unfolding of time, with all things here below on this plane EVOLVING
at the present observed rate : atomic element half-life, erosion of
oxydes/carbonates/mudstones, & of course stability of Earth on
present orbital position on Ecliptics with undisguised certitude that
things when are bad will come better anyway. This implying some
certainty of cyclic phases unfolding continuously.
When there are cycles but cycles developing in constant changing &
increasing orbital position within a decreasing anisobaric &
anisothropic environment ( UPL based conclusions)
It means that we are on a end phase of both water & oil resources,
both being abiotic in origin... the initial conditions of life on
Earth with our present biologic hydrogen, oxygen, carbone supported
clocwork ( which we call our body) was made possible by the constant
drift of that very planet passing by the successive positions of the
Genesis of Carbon, the Genesis of Water, the Genesis of Gases then
( of which we are really made) till life as we know it was possible.
Clearly we are going through that life phase at grand pace indeed, and
the destruction of Glaciers the world over is the demonstration that
we are losing more & more moisture in high altitude making
precipitations more & more weaker.
The True Geology, contrarily to the Oxford based present one, is
developing a larger perspective where planets are born in turn from
the Mother star ( a dark body by the way although evidence of the
contrary) , with satellites born too in phase as final parting of a
surface tension breaking point being reached by Star & immediately on
calving, then the continuous drifting away driven by the rotation of
the Star indeed... and for us right to the position where we are now
having past the positions in turn of Earth younger sisters Mercury &
Venus.... This intelligence of Our System & both its past & future is
so diametrically opposite to the accepted views that any chance of
such genial approach being accepted by the Universities clueless
parasites in place is nill indeed ! ( particularly from the ANU,
Monash, Curtin retards) This does not matter in fact since reality is
catching up fast with what people refuse in some cases to even
consider, and the True Geology approach is the only intelligence of
coming events allowing societies the world over to take in full
knowledge the appropriate conservative measures of DOWNRIGHT
SURVIVAL !
... playing as do the medical vermins with vaccines & an alleged
danger of a pandemy, (while Flu in all cases with natural & live food
can be cured overnight) , playing as well as do the warmonger with war
games & conquest plans, playing as do the Islamists with dreams of
conversion of the rest of the world to their clueless dark-ages
Samaritan Jews ' founded sect, playing as do the Pharisees Jews to
submit the rest of the World to their control & whim through
subversive tactics involving terror as the 10 millions French
Holocaust; the 100 millions Russian Holocaust, the Lusitania, Pearl
Harbour, & recent WTC 9/11 psy-ops ETC all of this is too late
indeed ... New paradigms of survival will have to be found with as the
True Geology rightly anticipate ;
1) Turning of Australia into a Great Sandy Desert
2) Immediate sea rises of up to 5 m of sea level next year resulting
from Antarctica ineluctable volcanism under the Inlandsis
3) Then as the Earth continues to drift away, amazing strength of met
vortex reaching reaching 400 km/h for cyclones
4) Loss of moisture at accelerated pace then with disappearance of
oceans then, with fresh water resources being of most vital
importance
5) Cold climate making life in the higher latitudes impossible even in
winter, in desolate expanses of lunar like sceneries, making then
survivors retreat to lower latitude, tropics & equator for survival
Phases 1 & 2 of that scenario could be effective next year & certainly
in all cases before 2012
With best regards
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Exploration Geologist
Founder of the True Geology
Barry OGrady
Does your bible have cartoon illustrations?
duke
>On Dec 11, 4:42�am, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 10, 12:26�am, duke �wrote:
>
>> >> That's not works. �Works of the heart are those things of time, talent and
>> >> treasure that one gives to those in need out of their love of God and their
>> >> living in the spirit of Christ.
>> >There is at least one thing you lack - and that is the knowledge of
>> >salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone
>>
>> Not your view anyway, which is pure silliness. �Scripture does not include the
>> word "alone" as lute added and you foolishly profess belief in dead faith. �
>>
>> >NOT OF WORKS .....lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
>> >Perhaps that verse is never,, or rarely ...given in a RC Church
>> >because the hierarchy could still be aware that it was that verse
>> >that gave Luther peace with God
>>
>> Or eternal fire for misleading the foolish.
>
>So, Paul was wrong in writing to the Ephesians as he did?
Personally I wouldn't know. YOU are the one that demands that it means only one
thing and not and not things, things that are strongly revealed in other parts
of the bible regarding living in the spirit.
>> >As yet, for all that I have posted to you, you cannot understand
>> >that there has to be a time when a person commits him'herself
>> >to Jesus Christ in faith, and that is not always at the time of
>> >Confirmation
>> It absolutely does occur at one's Confirmation, because that's when a Christian
>> makes his own mature adult promise to reject satan and his ways. � Those below
>> the age of about 16 are too immature to understand and appreciated the
>> ramifications of his/her promises to God.
>Confirmation is a time when a person is admitted into full adult
>membership of a church.
That's only your personal profession. In the bible, it's the profession of
belief and faith in Christ and turning away from satan.
>Because that person has been able to answer a set of
>questions from the teachings given does not always mean that person has a full
>knowledge of 'faith through Jesus Christ'. That faith may or may not
>come at a later time.
It's a promise in the Christian Church turn away from satan..
>> Besides, you reject most of the teachings of Christ and clearly reject his call
>> to service to God and mankind and are highly suspect in your understanding of
>> the call of Christ. �You prefer, instead, to follow the heretic <Luther>.
>Luther did emphasise the teaching of how we become Christians -
>ie through faith ALONE for it is not by the deeds that we do by which
>we become Christian.
We become Christians when we are baptized. That can be a personal choice as an
adult or our parents choice if we are infants. But we are not sealed with the
Holy Spirit until our Confirmation where we make our own verbal commitment to
the Lord. WE can follow Christ and be like him, but not be Christian. We follow
Christ when we live in his spirit of giving rather than receiving.
> Those deeds follow. What you teach is that through
>faith in Jesus AND by following all the decrees of the leaders of the RC
>Church there can/will be a lessening of punishments in Purgatory that can
>be lessened by the observance of certain beliefs and actions of oneself
>and of others after death.
Intercessory prayer is clearly scriptural.
Ephesians 6:18 (New International Version)
18And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and
requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the
saints.
> No wonder the Vatican wants to own schools so that
>its children are thoroughly brainwashed in all its additions to the New Testament
>teachings.
Now I see why lut taught you to hate. Name some additions, gladys, or hold your
tongue. It's time for you to back up your false claims.
>> The fallacy of your own words is doing you in. �You reject infant baptism
>> because the infant "does not understand", yet you accept youthful expression
>> (pre-16 years old) which is just as immature of an expression of faith as an
>> infant as far as understanding is concerned. �
>If taught correctly from the scriptures even a pre-teen year old can
>understand Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9.
And most preteens can suggest alternative concepts of understanding other than
the only one that lut sucked you in on. You know, like the one that says that
it is our faith that Christ is the only way to the Father. Or the one that
says that only by living in the spirit can one see the kingdom of God. But,
noooooo, to you, it can only mean one thing, and that the easy, no-effort on
your part interpretation.
>> >> <Luther> has definitely yanked your chain. �That's sad.
>> >Luther was not the only one in the RC Church who called for reform.
>> >There were a number before Luther acted; Wycliffe being one of
>> >them in England, but others on the Continent.as well. �.
>> All foolish men that turned from the Word of God.
>Both devout men, who with others realised that the hierarchy at Rome
>were adding traditions to the plain/true teachings of the New
>Testament.
Time to put up or shut up, gladys. You log into some ignorant garbage
protest_er site and believe anything they say.
>> >> >Further, works do not come first and works do not contribute
>> >> >to salvation.
>> >> It does for the non-Christian.
>Then it wasn't necessary for Jesus to tell His disciples/apostles ' to
>go into all the world and preach the gospel???
"Necessary"???? No, it was not "necessary". But it extraordinarily right for
one to learn of the love of God for his creation and the love of one another as
he loves us. As you can tell, it was to teach love. But people like you don't
even understand that. You think you don't have to learn anything, just admit
that you heard his words, and bingo, you're saved.
>> You're just bitter because you can see yourself failing heaven while many
>> non-Christians make it. �Living in the footsteps of Christ does not mandate
>> Christian baptism. �
>How you form ideas in your head about me. I have no sense of 'failing
>heaven'
>because that is through faith in Jesus Christ.
But to you, the only faith that counts is that you heard his words. For you
clearly, and by your own words, reject the gift of the love of the Lord and
living in his spirit.
>> >Why then bother about preaching to the non-Christians?
>> I never said "preach to". �Many people throughout the world are not Christian,
>> many never even hearing of Christ thru the past centuries. � But Christ is our
>> judge at the moment we die, and he who lived a life of complete obedience to the
>> Father to include the cross in obedience. �I don't see him smiling at those that
>> care so little for him that they ignore his teachings yet make a false claim of
>> faith.
>> But to answer your question - Mat 28:16-20 is a call to Christians to teach the
>> world of the love of God and to make them Christians, another way of calling for
>> a profession of living in the spirit. �
>> NOt something you believe in.
>You have no idea of what my personal contributuin is to the spreading
>of the Christian faith. You are just on a campaign of denigration in an
>effort to somehow prove that what you have been taught from the Vatican is
>correct.
Wrong. I just can't believe that after all this time we've talked, you reflect
no understanding of what it means to live in his spirit as our path to
salvation.
But that's your fault, not mine.
>> >It is obvious to me that you are teaching another 'gospel' that is
>> >not a gospel at all.
>> My words come from scripture. �Your words come from your imagination scripture
>> is wrong as taught to you by <Luther> .
>Luther is not here today to teach me. However, many have followed in
>his footsteps
>anf have given the true gospel from the teachings of the New Testament
>without
>the additions that have come from the Church at Rome.
There are not. In fact, the additions you complain about come from lute.
>The Pope rejected the Reformation in the time of Luther. it is still
>rejecting the reformation back to New Testament teachings.
That's because lute stupidly rejected much of the teaching of Christ after 1600
years, and people like you are still blindly following lute because you don't
know what scripture is and says.
duke
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
The Roman Catholic Church says that salvation (eternal life) =
faith + the many rituals and observances and beliefs that have been
determined by the Popes in council through the centuries,
the latest being (in 1950) the bodily assumption of Mary sometime
after
her death in the First Century into heaven
and for any shortfall in works, observances, penance
there is a time in Purgatory, a place not mentioned in the Bible
with indulgences to lessen the time there.
An Indulgence can be doing an action determined by the priest
such as visiting Lourdes. .
John Wycliffe, Martin Luther and others began a reform movement
which addressed some of the incorrect teachings.
The failure of the RC Church was that it was not willing to accept
its error and imposed other non-New Testament teachings.
Christian Unity can only be achieved by a consensus concerning the
basic concepts of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Gladys Swager
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 12, 4:56�am, duke wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
>Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
>For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
>it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Do you think if you repeat your mantra often enough Duke will give in
and follow you?
>That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>The Roman Catholic Church says that salvation (eternal life) =
>faith + the many rituals and observances and beliefs that have been
>determined by the Popes in council through the centuries,
>the latest being (in 1950) the bodily assumption of Mary sometime
>after her death in the First Century into heaven
>and for any shortfall in works, observances, penance
>there is a time in Purgatory, a place not mentioned in the Bible
>with indulgences to lessen the time there.
>An Indulgence can be doing an action determined by the priest
>such as visiting Lourdes. .
The RCC bought the rights to promote those things from God himself!
They have the money and the power.
>John Wycliffe, Martin Luther and others began a reform movement
>which addressed some of the incorrect teachings.
>The failure of the RC Church was that it was not willing to accept
>its error and imposed other non-New Testament teachings.
>
>Christian Unity can only be achieved by a consensus concerning the
>basic concepts of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Christian unity can only be achieved by everyone becoming Catholic
since the RCC owns God and all the extras.
>Gladys Swager
=-=-=
Barry
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >On Dec 12, 4:56 am, duke wrote:
> >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> >Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
> >For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
> >it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
>
> Do you think if you repeat your mantra often enough Duke will give in
> and follow you?
>
came to give usm and tha tincluses both you and Duke.
> >That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
>
> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>
God will save us from ourselvesm would be the better way to say it.
> >The Roman Catholic Church says that salvation (eternal life) =
> >faith + the many rituals and observances and beliefs that have been
> >determined by the Popes in council through the centuries,
> >the latest being (in 1950) the bodily assumption of Mary sometime
> >after her death in the First Century into heaven
> >and for any shortfall in works, observances, penance
> >there is a time in Purgatory, a place not mentioned in the Bible
> >with indulgences to lessen the time there.
> >An Indulgence can be doing an action determined by the priest
> >such as visiting Lourdes. .
>
> The RCC bought the rights to promote those things from God himself!
> They have the money and the power.
>
Money can't but everything that is available.
That is very true when 'the things' that are available come from
God.
> >John Wycliffe, Martin Luther and others began a reform movement
> >which addressed some of the incorrect teachings.
> >The failure of the RC Church was that it was not willing to accept
> >its error and imposed other non-New Testament teachings.
>
> >Christian Unity can only be achieved by a consensus concerning the
> >basic concepts of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
> Christian unity can only be achieved by everyone becoming Catholic
> since the RCC owns God and all the extras.
>
The hierarchy at the Vatican may think it 'owns God', but God is His
own Being.
"God is woeking His purpose out as year succeeds to year,
God is working His purpose out and the time is drawing near.. when
the earth shall be filled with the glory of God as the waters cover
the sea.
From utmost east to utmost west where'er man's foot has trod,
by the mouth of many messengers goes forth the voice of God.
What can we do to work God's work, to propsper and increase
the brotherhood of all mankind, the reign of the Prince of Peace?
March we forth in the strength of God, with the banner of Christ
unfurl'd
That the light of the glorious gospel of truth may shine throughout
the world.
Fight we the fight with sorrow and sin, to set the saptives free,
That the earth may be filled with the glory of God as the waters cover
the seas."
Author unknown to
me
Gladys Swager
Glen Waverly
"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5kd6i55re140gmool...@4ax.com...
but is not the Catholic Church most holy on this?
They have preserved our path to righteousness
Many centuries they have stood the test of time and we rejoice in what they
have given us.
Especially the KJV bible
BARRY.. please please accept righteousness or go to a church where you will
have fellowship and support in his love
I pray for this
I want to meet you in heaven as you have a questioning mind which lord jesus
gave us and he wants you in his arms forever
Glen Waverly
> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>
NO NO NEVER !!
He will save you from yourself and unrighteousness and he loves you
> Barry
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
gladys swager
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:58:02 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>
> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >On Dec 12, 4:56 am, duke wrote:
> >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> >Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
> >For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
> >it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
>
> Do you think if you repeat your mantra often enough Duke will give in
> and follow you?
>
that Jesus gave His disciples to teach.
Not only Duke, but you also, Barry, not to follow me,
but to follow the truth of the New Testament scriptures.
> >That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
>
> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>
God does not need to save us from Himself.
We need God to save us from ourselves and sinful ways.
That is what the Christian gospel message is about.
> >The Roman Catholic Church says that salvation (eternal life) =
> >faith + the many rituals and observances and beliefs that have been
> >determined by the Popes in council through the centuries,
> >the latest being (in 1950) the bodily assumption of Mary sometime
> >after her death in the First Century into heaven
> >and for any shortfall in works, observances, penance
> >there is a time in Purgatory, a place not mentioned in the Bible
> >with indulgences to lessen the time there.
> >An Indulgence can be doing an action determined by the priest
> >such as visiting Lourdes. .
>
> The RCC bought the rights to promote those things from God himself!
> They have the money and the power.
>
> >John Wycliffe, Martin Luther and others began a reform movement
> >which addressed some of the incorrect teachings.
> >The failure of the RC Church was that it was not willing to accept
> >its error and imposed other non-New Testament teachings.
>
> >Christian Unity can only be achieved by a consensus concerning the
> >basic concepts of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
> Christian unity can only be achieved by everyone becoming Catholic
> since the RCC owns God and all the extras.
>
The Rc Church DOES NOT OWN GOD, although it tries to give the
impression that it does. Nobody 'owns' God.
Only those who are ignorant of the Biblical teachings would accept
what
is taught by the RC Church - as also some modern protestant groups,
such as Mormons, (Latter-Day saints) , Jehovah's Witnesses. and
others.
Gladys Swager
Glen Waverly
"gladys swager" <gsw...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:478f248b-3851-4255...@a10g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
�R.L.Measures
<5504d65f-c230-44da...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
"s...@ozemail.com.au" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> On Dec 12, 4:56=A0am, duke wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
> For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
> it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
>
> That is the start of one's faith in Christ =3D salvation.
>
> The Roman Catholic Church says that salvation (eternal life) =3D
> faith + the many rituals and observances and beliefs that have been
> determined by the Popes in council through the centuries,
> the latest being (in 1950) the bodily assumption of Mary sometime
> after
> her death in the First Century into heaven
> and for any shortfall in works, observances, penance
> there is a time in Purgatory, a place not mentioned in the Bible
> with indulgences to lessen the time there....
� "As soon as the gold in the casket rings; the rescued soul to heaven
springs."
--- Johann Tetzel
--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
Barry OGrady
>
>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5kd6i55re140gmool...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:58:02 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>>
>\
>
>NO NO NEVER !!
>
>He will save you from yourself and unrighteousness and he loves you
I take it God didn't love me when made me unrighteous and in need
of saving.
But now God loves me so he will save me from the problems he caused
me before he loved me.
>> Barry
Barry OGrady
>TRUTH !
What is that in response to?
>"gladys swager" <gsw...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:478f248b-3851-4255...@a10g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>On Dec 12, 5:26 pm, Barry OGrady <god_free_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:58:02 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> >On Dec 12, 4:56 am, duke wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> >Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
>> >For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
>> >it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
>>
>> Do you think if you repeat your mantra often enough Duke will give in
>> and follow you?
>>
>It may sound like a 'mantra' to you, but it is truth of the Gospel
>that Jesus gave His disciples to teach.
>Not only Duke, but you also, Barry, not to follow me,
>but to follow the truth of the New Testament scriptures.
I asked that question of Gladys and she answered in the exact same words.
>> >That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
>>
>> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>>
>God does not need to save us from Himself.
>We need God to save us from ourselves and sinful ways.
>That is what the Christian gospel message is about.
Again my question was to Gladys and again you replied with the
very same words Gladys used.
If you are going to plagiarise someone you should at least remove
their signature, and it is a good idea to change the text a little.
Barry OGrady
>"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5kd6i55re140gmool...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:58:02 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>Christian Unity can only be achieved by a consensus concerning the
>>>basic concepts of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>>
>
>but is not the Catholic Church most holy on this?
>They have preserved our path to righteousness
>
>Many centuries they have stood the test of time and we rejoice in what they
>have given us.
>Especially the KJV bible
>
>BARRY.. please please accept righteousness or go to a church where you will
>have fellowship and support in his love
Is God's love only detectable in church?
>I pray for this
How does that work? Does God not already know what he should be doing?
Does prayer shame God into doing the right thing or does God do it just to
shut you up?
>I want to meet you in heaven as you have a questioning mind which lord jesus
>gave us and he wants you in his arms forever
What makes you think God will allow you to have what you want in heaven?
For that matter what makes you think you will have the same wants?
The way you think and act is determined by a physical machine called the brain.
You won't have your brain with you. Also, to avoid conflict and problems God
will need to give you a new personality, so it won't be you there.
Do you really expect the same God that does nothing to prevent suffering while
we are on earth will give us a good life in heaven?
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 12, 5:26�pm, Barry OGrady <god_free_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:58:02 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>>
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> >On Dec 12, 4:56�am, duke �wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> >Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
>> >For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
>> >it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
>>
>> Do you think if you repeat your mantra often enough Duke will give in
>> and follow you?
>>
>It may sound like a 'mantra' to you, but it is truth of the Gospel
>that Jesus gave His disciples to teach.
>Not only Duke, but you also, Barry, not to follow me,
>but to follow the truth of the New Testament scriptures.
I do follow the truth of the new testament scriptures.
Do you know what a testament is?
In the old days men wore a dress like garment, and to seal a deal the
two men would reach under the other's garment and grasp their testicles.
>> >That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
>>
>> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>>
>God does not need to save us from Himself.
I know that. God can't be forced to do anything, but a good God would
want to save us from himself. Of course, if God was good we would not
need saving.
>We need God to save us from ourselves and sinful ways.
We needed God to make us sinners in need of saving, rather like the
protection racket run by gangsters.
>That is what the Christian gospel message is about.
I thought it was about taking the heat off God and blaming God's victims.
>The Rc Church DOES NOT OWN GOD, although it tries to give the
>impression that it does. Nobody 'owns' God.
I'm just stirring Gladys.
>Only those who are ignorant of the Biblical teachings would accept what
>is taught by the RC Church - as also some modern protestant groups,
>such as Mormons, (Latter-Day saints) , Jehovah's Witnesses. and
>others.
Why doesn't God step in to set everybody right?
>Gladys Swager
Barry OGrady
>On Dec 12, 5:26�pm, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 12, 4:56�am, duke �wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> >Paul wrote to the Ephesians (2 : 8 - 9)
>> >For by grace are we saved through faith and that not of ourselves,
>> >it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast.
>>
>> Do you think if you repeat your mantra often enough Duke will give in
>> and follow you?
>>
>It is my prayer that everyone will accept the salvation that Jesus
>came to give usm and tha tincluses both you and Duke.
I hope usm appreciates be called a tincluse.
>> >That is the start of one's faith in Christ = salvation.
>>
>> Do you expect anyone to believe that God will save us from himself?
>>
>God will save us from ourselvesm would be the better way to say it.
That would be unfair to us so best put responsibility with our creator
where it belongs.
>> >The Roman Catholic Church says that salvation (eternal life) =
>> >faith + the many rituals and observances and beliefs that have been
>> >determined by the Popes in council through the centuries,
>> >the latest being (in 1950) the bodily assumption of Mary sometime
>> >after her death in the First Century into heaven
>> >and for any shortfall in works, observances, �penance
>> >there is a time in Purgatory, a place not mentioned in the Bible
>> >with indulgences to lessen the time there.
>> >An Indulgence can be doing an action determined by the priest
>> >such as visiting Lourdes. .
>>
>> The RCC bought the rights to promote those things from God himself!
>> They have the money and the power.
>>
>Money can't but everything that is available.
>That is very true when 'the things' that are available come from God.
Like death and disease?
>> >John Wycliffe, Martin Luther and others began a reform movement
>> >which addressed some of the incorrect teachings.
>> >The failure of the RC Church was that it was not willing to accept
>> >its error and imposed other non-New Testament teachings.
>>
>> >Christian Unity can only be achieved by a consensus concerning the
>> >basic concepts of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>>
>> Christian unity can only be achieved by everyone becoming Catholic
>> since the RCC owns God and all the extras.
>>
>The hierarchy at the Vatican may think it 'owns God', but God is His
>own Being.
I heard the RCC bought God at a good price because God has really
let himself go.
>"God is woeking His purpose out as year succeeds to year,
>God is working His purpose out and the time is drawing near.. when
>the earth shall be filled with the glory of God as the waters cover
>the sea.
How and why does an almighty God that exists outside of time
"work things out"?
>From utmost east to utmost west where'er man's foot has trod,
>by the mouth of many messengers goes forth the voice of God.
God is too slack to do it himself.
>What can we do to work God's work, to propsper and increase
>the brotherhood of all mankind, the reign of the Prince of Peace?
Jesus was never a prince of peace.
>March we forth in the strength of God, with the banner of Christ unfurl'd
>That the light of the glorious gospel of truth may shine throughout
>the world.
>Fight we the fight with sorrow and sin, to set the saptives free,
What must we fight and why?
>That the earth may be filled with the glory of God as the waters cover
>the seas."
We already have too much of God's "glory".
theo
> >As yet, for all that I have posted to you, you cannot understand
> >that there has to be a time when a person commits him'herself
> >to Jesus Christ in faith, and that is not always at the time of
> >Confirmation
>
> It absolutely does occur at one's Confirmation, because that's when a Christian
> makes his own mature adult promise to reject satan and his ways. Those below
> the age of about 16 are too immature to understand and appreciated the
> ramifications of his/her promises to God.
<snip>
> The fallacy of your own words is doing you in. You reject infant baptism
> because the infant "does not understand", yet you accept youthful expression
> (pre-16 years old) which is just as immature of an expression of faith as an
> infant as far as understanding is concerned.
Hmm. I was 'Confirmed' at age 10, together with my sister who was 11.
I'm pretty sure I was not an adult mature person then. I may not be
now.
Theo
theo
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 20:40:31 +1100, "Glen Waverly" <rshr...@nsnrsth.com> wrote:
> >I pray for this
> How does that work? Does God not already know what he should be doing?
> Does prayer shame God into doing the right thing or does God do it just to
> shut you up?
Prayer is very dangerous, particularly to the God of the Old
Testament. When you pray you are asking God to change his mind. As you
know Barry, it is not possible for God to change his mind, and telling
an omnipotent Deity that is making a mistake and he should do things
the way you suggest is likely to get you struck by lightning or
something.
Do Not Pray.
Theo
�R.L.Measures
<17a439c4-51a6-41d6...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, theo
<theo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 9:05=A0am, Barry OGrady <god_free_jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 20:40:31 +1100, "Glen Waverly" <rshr...@nsnrsth.com> =
> wrote:
>
> > >I pray for this
>
> > How does that work? Does God not already know what he should be doing?
> > Does prayer shame God into doing the right thing or does God do it just t=
> o
> > shut you up?
>
> Prayer is very dangerous, particularly to the God of the Old
> Testament. When you pray you are asking God to change his mind. As you
> know Barry, it is not possible for God to change his mind, and telling
> an omnipotent Deity that is making a mistake and he should do things
> the way you suggest is likely to get you struck by lightning or
> something.
>
> Do Not Pray.
> Theo
� Let us pray that we don't make this mistake.
Barry OGrady
Do not pray. It offends God.
>--
>R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
=-=-=
Barry
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
�R.L.Measures
<god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
� Is he perhaps getting too old Barry O?
Barry OGrady
Heavens no! God has always been like that.
God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
>--
>R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
=-=-=
Barry
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
�R.L.Measures
<god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
� He apparently has many human traits.
bam
"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote
> Heavens no! God has always been like that.
> God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
> It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
Or perhaps, "the guilty flee where no man pursueth".
Last I checked there were 10 Commandments. Which of these are overly
burdensome?
BAM
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> "Barry OGrady" wrote
>
> > Heavens no! God has always been like that.
> > God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
> > It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
>
> Or perhaps, "the guilty flee where no man pursueth".
>
> Last I checked there were 10 Commandments. Which of these are overly
> burdensome?
>
and
the Israelites they were unable to keep all the laws of God.
The RC has omitted the law about images and has divided the former
tenth
commandment into two so that the ten commandments are still there to
those unknowledgeable about that ruling within the RC Church.
The Law brings us to Christ and through Him by God's grace we are
saved
(receive salvation) as a gift of God to us.
The Old Testament shows us 'Paradise lost' by humans through sin .
The New Testament teaches us that 'Paradise can be regained' by faith
in
Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, Who was willing to be sacrificed
Himself.
as perfect Man - (ie, had not sinned at any time), death could not
hold Him
and so He can give us salvation as a gift on His terms.
Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9 For by grace are we saved through faith ,
and that not of ourselves; it is the gift of God. Not of works.
lest anyone should boast. It is then that we go on in good works that
count
towards a reward in Eternity.
Gladys Swager
�R.L.Measures
<blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
� For Pro-lifers / Anti-choicers, Commandment 8 is apparently a sticky wicket.
Glen Waverly
"�R.L.Measures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
news:r-1712090...@10.0.1.7...
Not if you have a good spin bowler
:)
Glen
�R.L.Measures
duke
>On Dec 17, 1:16�pm, "bam" wrote:
>> "Barry OGrady" wrote
>>
>> > Heavens no! God has always been like that.
>> > God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
>> > It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
>>
>> Or perhaps, "the guilty flee where no man pursueth".
>>
>> Last I checked there were 10 Commandments. Which of these are overly
>> burdensome?
>>
>The ten commandments were a measuring 'stick' that showed the Jews
>and
>the Israelites they were unable to keep all the laws of God.
???? The 10 commandments ARE the laws of God, gladys.
>The RC has omitted the law about images and has divided the former
>tenth commandment into two so that the ten commandments are still there to
>those unknowledgeable about that ruling within the RC Church.
Every word of the 10 commandments is covered. If you bothered to look, you're
understand that.
>The Law brings us to Christ and through Him by God's grace we are
>saved (receive salvation) as a gift of God to us.
The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject the word of
God.
>The Old Testament shows us 'Paradise lost' by humans through sin .
>The New Testament teaches us that 'Paradise can be regained' by faith
>in Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God,
Who showed us the way thru obedience to God, not lip service to Jesus.
>Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9 For by grace are we saved through faith ,
>and that not of ourselves; it is the gift of God. Not of works.
>lest anyone should boast. It is then that we go on in good works that
>count towards a reward in Eternity.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> >The RC has omitted the law about images and has divided the former
> >tenth commandment into two so that the ten commandments are still there to
> >those unknowledgeable about that ruling within the RC Church.
> >saved (receive salvation) as a gift of God to us.
>
> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject the word of
> God.
>
Catholic Church.
.
http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/rome.html
Gladys Swager
bam
"s...@ozemail.com.au" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote i
>The ten commandments were a measuring 'stick' that showed the Jews
>and
<the Israelites they were unable to keep all the laws of God.
That's a misinterpretation of St. Paul.
>The RC has omitted the law about images
Idols are forbidden; images are fine - just like they were for the Jews.
>and has divided the former
>tenth
>commandment into two so that the ten commandments are still there to
>those unknowledgeable about that ruling within the RC Church.
So which are the correct 10? The Catholic 10, the Protestant 10 or the
Jewish 10?
>The Law brings us to Christ and through Him by God's grace we are
>saved
You're a damned heretic.
BAM
bam
"s...@ozemail.com.au" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote
>
>You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
>Catholic Church.
.
Whatsoever ye bind on earth is bound in heaven. Jesus said that to His
Church. Stay away from our Bible.
BAM
bam
".R.L.Measures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
news:r-1712090...@10.0.1.7...
> In article <YuydnUnRU8TnCbTW...@giganews.com>, "bam"
> <blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> "Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>
>> > Heavens no! God has always been like that.
>> > God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
>> > It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
>>
>> Or perhaps, "the guilty flee where no man pursueth".
>>
>> Last I checked there were 10 Commandments. Which of these are overly
>> burdensome?
>>
>>
>> BAM
>
> wicket.
Bearing false witness? Is this another half witted response from Mr. Zero?
BAM
v1_0
wrote:
> On Dec 17, 1:16 pm, "bam" wrote:> "Barry OGrady" wrote
>
> > > Heavens no! God has always been like that.
> > > God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
> > > It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
>
> > Or perhaps, "the guilty flee where no man pursueth".
>
> > Last I checked there were 10 Commandments. Which of these are overly
> > burdensome?
>
> The ten commandments were a measuring 'stick' that showed the Jews
> and
> the Israelites they were unable to keep all the laws of God.
> The RC has omitted the law about images and has divided the former
> tenth
> commandment into two so that the ten commandments are still there to
> those unknowledgeable about that ruling within the RC Church.
1 Kings 6:23-24
Joshua 7:6
Numbers 21:6-9
Under a strict interpretation of the 2nd commandment, these things
would be a problem. That interpretation comes from the Muslims.
Further, this is old news: you are repeating something that happened
around 730-790 AD. The subject was explored, sadly sometimes with
violence. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iconoclasm]
Here is a lengthy treatise explaining images and the commandment:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/johndamascus-images.html
I will be more than happy to discuss points or questions about it as
best I can.
-V
Barry OGrady
wrote:
I see the evil spirits God created are having success.
God must be very happy.
>I will be more than happy to discuss points or questions about it as
>best I can.
I have a question. Why do you take any of it seriously?
>-V
=-=-=
Barry
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
�R.L.Measures
<blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
** Correct B___?. An example is is the inane claim that fetuses ("unborn
babies") with no brain feel pain.
>
> BAM
v1_0
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:30:52 -0800 (PST), v1_0 <v...@hotmail.com>
Why do you not?
-V
duke
Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> >> God.
>
> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
> >Catholic Church.
>
> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
>
not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2 :
15
You need to re-read the gospels to find what Jesus actually said,
and what was stated about others in the New Testament account.
and the teachings that were given.
http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/rome.html
Gladys Swager
bam
"Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:erkmi5tsjr353tp8f...@4ax.com...
And once again, anyone who offends you, your mother or your children, must
be adjudged innocent according to your worldview. After all, God created the
defect and therefore He is to blame, not the guy who mugged you and raped
your sister.
BAM
bam
Can you possible be more absurd? Is it humanly possible?
BAM
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> "s...@ozemail.com.au" wrote
>
> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
> >Catholic Church.
>
> Church. Stay away from our Bible.
>
are made. But with continung checking those variations that are erors
should be corrected.
I have just done a partial checking of those beatified by John Paul
II
while Pope from 1978 - 2005 Those beatified died from the 14th Cent,
to 20th Cent, are from most countries of the world with a total of
1342 persons.
How does anyone know that a prayer to any one of those persons
with a miracle some time later that the prayer was answered by that
person???
I would be interested to know how many healings come spontaneously
without any prayers to dead persons and even doctors cannot
explain them. That is an area for checking.
http://www.gcatholic.com/saints/jpii-blesseds01.htm
It does seem to me that the large number of saints-in-waiting is part
of a crusade of Papal visits throughout the world to 'trick' people
into
becoming members of the Roman Catholic Church - and part of the
move towards the One World Government .....by deceit.
Gladys Swager
�R.L.Measures
<blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> ".R.L.Measures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
> news:r-1812090...@10.0.1.7...
> > In article <Io2dnSwjjqozY7fW...@giganews.com>, "bam"
> > <blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >> ".R.L.Measures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
> >> news:r-1712090...@10.0.1.7...
> >> > In article <YuydnUnRU8TnCbTW...@giganews.com>, "bam"
> >> > <blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Barry OGrady" <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote
> >> >>
> >> >> > Heavens no! God has always been like that.
> >> >> > God is constantly on the lookout for things to be offended by.
> >> >> > It makes him feel justified for abusing us.
> >> >>
> >> >> Or perhaps, "the guilty flee where no man pursueth".
> >> >>
> >> >> Last I checked there were 10 Commandments. Which of these are overly
> >> >> burdensome?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> BAM
> >> >
> >> > . For Pro-lifers / Anti-choicers, Commandment 8 is apparently a sticky
> >> > wicket.
> >>
> >> Bearing false witness?
> >
> > ** Correct B___?. An example is is the inane claim that fetuses ("unborn
> > babies") with no brain feel pain.
>
> Can you possible be more absurd?
** I am not one who claims this B____, it's a pro-lifer claim.
> Is it humanly possible?
>
> BAM
** Is it humanly possible to feel pain without a brain?
�R.L.Measures
<133ac3dd-37b5-406a...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"s...@ozemail.com.au" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 3:00=A0pm, "bam" wrote:
> > "s...@ozemail.com.au" wrote
> >
> > >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
> > >Catholic Church.
> >
> > Whatsoever ye bind on earth is bound in heaven. Jesus said that to His
> > Church. Stay away from our Bible.
> >
> There is only one Bible. There can be some vatiations as translations
> are made. But with continung checking those variations that are erors
> should be corrected.
>
> I have just done a partial checking of those beatified by John Paul
> II
> while Pope from 1978 - 2005 Those beatified died from the 14th Cent,
> to 20th Cent, are from most countries of the world with a total of
> 1342 persons.
> How does anyone know that a prayer to any one of those persons
> with a miracle some time later that the prayer was answered by that
> person???...
� Damn good question Gladys. In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus preached
that we don't need go-betweens, however, RCism is replete with
go-betweens.
duke
>On Dec 18, 3:00�pm, "bam" wrote:
>> "s...@ozemail.com.au" wrote
>>
>> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
>> >Catholic Church.
>>
>> Whatsoever ye bind on earth is bound in heaven. Jesus said that to His
>> Church. Stay away from our Bible.
>>
>There is only one Bible. There can be some vatiations as translations
>are made. But with continung checking those variations that are erors
>should be corrected.
>I have just done a partial checking of those beatified by John Paul
>II while Pope from 1978 - 2005 Those beatified died from the 14th Cent,
>to 20th Cent, are from most countries of the world with a total of
>1342 persons.
>How does anyone know that a prayer to any one of those persons
>with a miracle some time later that the prayer was answered by that
>person???
???? God, what confusion she lives with.
1. A canonized saint is already in heaven and does not need purgatory prayers.
2. God answers prayers, gladys. The "petitioned to" person petitions God.
>I would be interested to know how many healings come spontaneously
>without any prayers to dead persons and even doctors cannot
>explain them. That is an area for checking.
Save your breath, gladys. God has known from all time passed if one prayed for
another.
>http://www.gcatholic.com/saints/jpii-blesseds01.htm
>It does seem to me that the large number of saints-in-waiting is part
>of a crusade of Papal visits throughout the world to 'trick' people
>into becoming members of the Roman Catholic Church - and part of the
>move towards the One World Government .....by deceit.
You really are a hate-filled person, aren't you. And there is no room in heaven
for hate. But people like you believe Jesus paid the price for that, so you're
home free - right? Good luck.
>Gladys Swager
duke
>On Dec 19, 4:45�am, duke wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 18, 3:53�am, duke �wrote:
>>
>> >> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject the word of
>> >> God.
>> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
>> >Catholic Church.
>>
>> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
>Study to show yourself approved unto God, a work(wo)man that needs
>not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2 :
>15
And you make a strong effort to reject the words of truth.
bam
Ahhh what webs we weave. You've shifted the topic like an intellectual
snake. You claimed that pro-lifers bear false witness. So let's stick with
YOUR claim, tricky dick.
BAM
�R.L.Measures
<blahbl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
** I said that there are pro-kifers who claim that first trimester
abortees feel pain, Do first trimester "unborn babies" have a brain?
end
> So let's stick with
> YOUR claim, tricky dick.
>
> BAM
--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >Study to show yourself approved unto God, a work(wo)man that needs
> >not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2 :
> >15
>
> And you make a strong effort to reject the words of truth.
>
You are making yourself judge of me. Matthew 7 : 1
Gladys Swager
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> >> Church. Stay away from our Bible.
>
> >There is only one Bible. There can be some vatiations as translations
> >are made. But with continung checking those variations that are erors
> >should be corrected.
> >I have just done a partial checking of those beatified by John Paul
> >II while Pope from 1978 - 2005 Those beatified died from the 14th Cent,
> >to 20th Cent, are from most countries of the world with a total of
> >1342 persons.
> >How does anyone know that a prayer to any one of those persons
> >with a miracle some time later that the prayer was answered by that
> >person???
>
> ???? God, what confusion she lives with.
> 1. A canonized saint is already in heaven and does not need purgatory prayers.
Saints may be canonised in the RC Church church, but there is no New
Testament
teachings that should be. All Christians are named 'saints' by Paul in
his letters
to the Christians except in the 1985 revision - the New Jerusalem
Bible of Roman
Catholic Church where 'hageos' is translated as 'God's own people'
thus leaving the
word 'saints' for those designated for sainthood by the hierarchy of
the RC Church.
No Christian who has died is in Purgatory. Christians who have died
are
awaiting the time at the end of this age when all who have died have
been raised to
life again.
> 2. God answers prayers, gladys. The "petitioned to" person petitions God.
>
I am wll aware of that. Duke. But. from media reports the persons said
to be healed
by prayers were prayed to Mary McKillop. However, if she is 'asleep'
with all the other
departed until the Day of Judgement how could she have heard the
prayers of
the perseons who say they were miraculously healed by prayers to her?
However, Jesus also told His disciples that greater things would they
do than
miracles. (John 14 : 12). What could those greater things be?
One interpretation could be that causes, cures and preventitive
methods would
be found for diseases and afflications that beset humans. So
Christians who
have been involved in that work are 'better' saints than Mary
McKillop, the person
at the centre of yesterday's announcements of her impending
canonistion. .
> >I would be interested to know how many healings come spontaneously
> >without any prayers to dead persons and even doctors cannot
> >explain them. That is an area for checking.
>
> Save your breath, gladys. God has known from all time passed if one prayed for
> another.
>
> >http://www.gcatholic.com/saints/jpii-blesseds01.htm
> >It does seem to me that the large number of saints-in-waiting is part
> >of a crusade of Papal visits throughout the world to 'trick' people
> >into becoming members of the Roman Catholic Church - and part of the
> >move towards the One World Government .....by deceit.
>
> You really are a hate-filled person, aren't you. And there is no room in heaven
> for hate. But people like you believe Jesus paid the price for that, so you're
> home free - right? Good luck.
>
I am seeking truth and I don't do that through hate, although I have
reasons for
hating those who apparently were willing that I take the blame for
problem
behavious I met in the schools system. There were also leading
Psychiatrists
who had not analysed my medical condition correctly and an Italian
doctor (most
likely Roman Catholic) who had withdrawn his support for his own
invention of
ECT Shock Treatment but who was never censured publically bfore his
death
in 1963. A revised version was featured on ABC Sydney television late
1900's
or early 2000's. My proposal from 1975 was that there should be
preventitive means
so that Shock Treatments should never be used again.
Gladys Swager
duke
>On Dec 20, 2:28�am, duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 18, 3:00�pm, "bam" �wrote:
>>
>> >> Whatsoever ye bind on earth is bound in heaven. Jesus said that to His
>> >> Church. Stay away from our Bible.
>>
>> >There is only one Bible. There can be some vatiations as translations
>> >are made. But with continung checking those variations that are erors
>> >should be corrected.
>> >I have just done a partial checking of those beatified by John Paul
>> >II while Pope from 1978 - 2005 Those beatified died from the 14th Cent,
>> >to 20th Cent, are from most countries of the world with a total �of
>> >1342 persons.
>> >How does anyone know that a prayer to any one of those persons
>> >with a miracle some time later that the prayer was answered by that
>> >person???
>> ???? �God, what confusion she lives with.
>> 1. �A canonized saint is already in heaven and does not need purgatory prayers.
>Saints may be canonised in the RC Church church, but there is no New
>Testament teachings that should be. All Christians are named 'saints' by Paul in
>his letters to the Christians except in the 1985 revision
Saints are those that attain the kingdom of heaven. Canonized saints are
revealed by the Holy Spirit to already died fully in the grace of God.
>> 2. �God answers prayers, gladys. �The "petitioned to" person petitions God.
>I am wll aware of that. Duke.
But you suggested exactly the opposite - fully in line with the falsity of
purgatory..
> But. from media reports the persons said
>to be healed
>by prayers were prayed to Mary McKillop.
And MK prayed to God. God healed, not MK.
> However, if she is 'asleep' with all the other departed until the Day of
> Judgement how could she have heard the prayers of
>the perseons who say they were miraculously healed by prayers to her?
Many people were raised to heaven at the moment Jesus died on the cross. See
Matthew. Remember, Jesus said "it is finished".
>However, Jesus also told His disciples that greater things would they
>do than miracles. (John 14 : 12). What could those greater things be?
Jesus, the man, didn't do miracles, and he went to the Father. The Father did
the miracles.
>One interpretation could be that causes, cures and preventitive
>methods would
>be found for diseases and afflications that beset humans. So
>Christians who
>have been involved in that work are 'better' saints than Mary
>McKillop, the person
>at the centre of yesterday's announcements of her impending
>canonistion. .
Sad, gladys, always the practical human answer, never the answer from scripture.
>> >I would be interested to know how many healings come spontaneously
>> >without any prayers to dead persons and even doctors cannot
>> >explain them. That is an area for checking.
>> Save your breath, gladys. �God has known from all time passed if one prayed for
>> another.
>> >http://www.gcatholic.com/saints/jpii-blesseds01.htm
>> >It does seem to me that the large number of saints-in-waiting is part
>> >of a crusade of Papal visits throughout the world to 'trick' people
>> >into becoming members of the Roman Catholic Church - and part of the
>> >move towards the One World Government .....by deceit.
>>
>> You really are a hate-filled person, aren't you. �And there is no room in heaven
>> for hate. �But people like you believe Jesus paid the price for that, so you're
>> home free - right? �Good luck.
>I am seeking truth and I don't do that through hate
No, if you were seeking truth, you'd find better sources.
>, although I have reasons for hating those who apparently were willing that I take the blame for
>problem >behavious I met in the schools system. There were also leading
>Psychiatrists who had not analysed my medical condition correctly and an Italian
>doctor (most likely Roman Catholic) who had withdrawn his support for his own
>invention of
Well, remember, there is no place for hatred in heaven, only love.
duke
No, to judge you is to establish your punishment also. I am admonishing you for
your noted failures.
Ezekiel 33:8-9 (New International Version)
8 When I say to the wicked, 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not
speak out to dissuade him from his ways, that wicked man will die for his sin,
and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked
man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but
you will have saved yourself.
bam
And how is this a violation of a commandment? I said, let's stick with your
claim, but like a roach, you've slipped under the door.
BAM
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >On Dec 20, 2:29 am, duke wrote:
> >> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> >> >Study to show yourself approved unto God, a work(wo)man that needs
> >> >not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
> >> > 2 Timothy 2 : 15
>
> >> And you make a strong effort to reject the words of truth.
> >You are making yourself judge of me. Matthew 7 : 1
>
> No, to judge you is to establish your punishment also. I am admonishing you for
> your noted failures.
> Ezekiel 33:8-9 (New International Version)
> 8 When I say to the wicked, 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not
> speak out to dissuade him from his ways, that wicked man will die for his sin,
> and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked
> man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but
> you will have saved yourself.
>
what you
have posted to me.
But you do not seem to me to have accepted Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
For by grace are we saved through faith, and THAT NOT OF YOURSELF,
***IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD*** Not of works. lest anyone should boast.
Works follow faith; it is not faith PLUS works for salvation.
Then 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15
http://bible.cc/1.thessalonians/4-16.htm
Gladys Swager
duke
>On Dec 21, 3:12�am, duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 20, 2:29�am, duke wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> >> >Study to show yourself approved unto God, a work(wo)man that needs
>> >> >not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. �
>> >> > 2 Timothy 2 : 15
>>
>> >> And you make a strong effort to reject the words of truth.
>> >You are making yourself judge of me. Matthew 7 : 1
>>
>> No, to judge you is to establish your punishment also. �I am admonishing you for
>> your noted failures.
>> Ezekiel 33:8-9 (New International Version)
>> 8 When I say to the wicked, 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not
>> speak out to dissuade him from his ways, that wicked man will die for his sin,
>> and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked
>> man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but
>> you will have saved yourself.
>>
>I would think you are now claiming that you 'have saved yourself' by
>what you have posted to me.
Nope, I will stand before Jesus at the moment of my death to be judged - to be
sent on to my eternal reward - either to the eternal fires of hell if I am in
death-dealing mortal sin, or to purgatory for purification if I am judged saved
so that I may stand face to face with God.
Just like you will be judged. However, I hope you are not carrying a lifetime
of unrepentant mortal sin on your soul as you have apparently never been to
confession.
1 John 5:16-17 (New International Version)
16If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he
should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead
to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should
pray about that. 17All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to
death.
You notice that our prayers will not assist the one in sin that leads to death,
but only to the small sins that do not lead to death.
I hope you reconsider your situation.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> >On Dec 18, 3:53 am, duke wrote:
> >> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject the word of
> >> God.
>
> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
> >Catholic Church.
>
> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
>
The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church are NOT ALL according to
the teachings
of Jesus Christ. There have been additions through the centuries which
according
to the leaders of your church MUST BE BELIEVED to come from the
teachings of
the first Christians.in Jerusalem and Antioch. I am of the opinion
that priests
do not tell their congregations the datings of the changes
that are not in the New Testament.
That is the issue in this discussion.
BUT YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT THE HIERARCHY AT ROME ADDED TO
THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS.
Gladys Swager
Barry OGrady
I'm not into mythology in a big way.
Why do you take it seriously?
>-V
Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Barry OGrady
We should give due credit to God for the way he made our brain.
>BAM
duke
>On Dec 19, 4:45�am, duke wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >On Dec 18, 3:53�am, duke �wrote:
>
>> >> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject the word of
>> >> God.
>>
>> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
>> >Catholic Church.
>>
>> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
>>
>The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church are NOT ALL according to
>the teachings of Jesus Christ.
The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments are.
>That is the issue in this discussion.
>BUT YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT THE HIERARCHY AT ROME ADDED TO
>THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS.
>Gladys Swager
The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments come from Jesus in 33AD.
�R.L.Measures
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:33:44 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 19, 4:45�am, duke wrote:
> >> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >> >On Dec 18, 3:53�am, duke �wrote:
> >
> >> >> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject
the word of
> >> >> God.
> >>
> >> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
> >> >Catholic Church.
> >>
> >> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
> >>
> >The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church are NOT ALL according to
> >the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
> The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments are.
>
> >That is the issue in this discussion.
> >BUT YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT THE HIERARCHY AT ROME ADDED TO
> >THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS.
> >Gladys Swager
>
> The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments come from Jesus in 33AD.
>
� The doctrine of the 7 Sacraments came to be in 1439AD.
duke
>In article <hba2j5d4vjqrbglco...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:33:44 -0800 (PST), "s...@ozemail.com.au"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> >On Dec 19, 4:45�ｿｽam, duke wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 18, 3:53�ｿｽam, duke �ｿｽwrote:
>> >
>> >> >> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject
>the word of
>> >> >> God.
>> >>
>> >> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
>> >> >Catholic Church.
>> >>
>> >> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
>> >>
>> >The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church are NOT ALL according to
>> >the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>>
>> The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments are.
>>
>> >That is the issue in this discussion.
>> >BUT YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT THE HIERARCHY AT ROME ADDED TO
>> >THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS.
>> >Gladys Swager
>>
>> The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments come from Jesus in 33AD.
>>
>�ｿｽ The doctrine of the 7 Sacraments came to be in 1439AD.
The dogma of the 7 sacraments are found in scripture from 33AD.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >On Dec 19, 4:45 am, duke wrote:
> >> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 swa...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >> >On Dec 18, 3:53 am, duke wrote:
>
> >> >> The main question is how much grace remains for those that reject the word of
> >> >> God.
>
> >> >You mean the interpretations given by the hierarchy of the Roman
> >> >Catholic Church.
>
> >> Nope, according to the Lord Jesus.
>
> >The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church are NOT ALL according to
> >the teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
> The Holy Mass and the 7 sacraments are.
>
> >That is the issue in this discussion.
> >BUT YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT THE HIERARCHY AT ROME ADDED TO
> >THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS.
>
>
It came to be used in the Roman Catholic Church
and at one time it was imposed daily on its members.
And much later it was stated that Jesus was actaully (physically) in
the wafer and
the wine. That is so important to the hierarchy of the RC Church but
the angels
immediately after the ascension of Jesus told the disciples that Jesus
'shall so
come in like manner as you have seen Him go into heaven.' (Acts 1 :
11)
Gladys Swager
.