Satan HATES the Catholic Church
William
Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
If you are among the Ron Burdette's, the Falcons, the Peter Terry's,
the Dr. Watson's, or anyone else spewing lies and hatred toward
Catholics and the Catholic Church then you are doing the same thing as
Satan.
And if you are acting just as Satan does, and if you feel the same way
about God's church as Satan does. Then you and satan are on the same
side.
So if you attack and LIE about Catholics and the Catholic Church, you
are a servant of Satan and an agent of evil.
May you repent of your evil ways now.
mark bassett
"William" <m...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:534d25fe.01092...@posting.google.com...
Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths of
tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its grasp
on earthly power and wealth.
Huldah
And not only that, but Mark's research has revealed many of 'em are
not even Anglo-Saxons...
---
Huldah
Mystery Babylon Escort Service
For the Bible truth about 'Oneness' Pentecostalism, see:
http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/op.html
For the Bible truth about the Jehovah's Witnesses, see:
http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/jw.html
Heresy of the Day:
"Are you saying God did die, and there was no living God
at that time? Since when can a God die?"
(Raymond Knapp, 'Oneness' Pentecostal 'missionary')
----------------------------------
> Ask your Oneness brethren. They're the ones claiming that God himself
> left his throne to walk the Earth as a mortal.
"There have been those in Oneness that have said that. That is not the
position of the UPCI nor is it published in any Word Aflame doctrinal
publication.
(Randall Johnson, UPCI 'Minister')
mark bassett
"Huldah" <hul...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3bb36426...@news.psouth.net...
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:16:00 GMT, "Mark Anglo-Saxon Bassett"
> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >> Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> >> Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> >>
> >> If you are among the Ron Burdette's, the Falcons, the Peter Terry's,
> >> the Dr. Watson's, or anyone else spewing lies and hatred toward
> >> Catholics and the Catholic Church then you are doing the same thing as
> >> Satan.
> >>
> >> And if you are acting just as Satan does, and if you feel the same way
> >> about God's church as Satan does. Then you and satan are on the same
> >> side.
> >>
> >> So if you attack and LIE about Catholics and the Catholic Church, you
> >> are a servant of Satan and an agent of evil.
> >
> >Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
of
> >tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> >thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
> >various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
grasp
> >on earthly power and wealth.
>
> And not only that, but Mark's research has revealed many of 'em are
> not even Anglo-Saxons...
I'm sorry ... many of whom?
:-)
Trey
> May you repent of your evil ways now.
He forced oneness believers into trinitarian baptism by force, under the
Zwangtaufe.
He killed millions The Theodosian Code and Justinian Code and the Papal
Inquisition.
He forced the trinity and catholic system on millions upon millions of more
numerous times through popes and emperors via "Decrees of Genocide" and
Imperial Edict.
He had his prophet Pope Innocent III make Jewish ghettos, this was recreated
by another catholic in Germany by the name of A. Hittler.
He gave papal permission for slavery to Prince Henry
Bari Stepanovich
<mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths of
>tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
>thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
>various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its grasp
>on earthly power and wealth.
Let's not forget there's the blood of martyrs on the hands of your
forebears too, Mark.
There was far too much murder comitted by all sides in the reformation
for anyone to be pointing fingers hypocritically.
In XC,
Bari Stepanovich
*****************************************************************************
IC XC
--+-- "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."
NI KA
Pentecostal
>
> The Catholic Church...
RCC = Revelation 17.
--
The Early Church was a Pentecostal church, and we are Pentecostal.
Regarding intentionality, Paul asked the believers at Ephesus, "Have
you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?" For Paul, the next
step in their relationship with God was being filled with the Holy
Spirit. The Scripture says, "I will pour out my Spirit upon all
flesh." It is God's intent to fill His people with the Holy Spirit.
William, have YOU received the Holy Ghost since you believed ? (See:
Acts 19:2)
mark bassett
"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
news:3bb3a8fe...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:16:00 GMT, "mark bassett"
> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
of
> >tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> >thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
> >various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
grasp
> >on earthly power and wealth.
>
> Let's not forget there's the blood of martyrs on the hands of your
> forebears too, Mark.
Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in condemnation,
it is stated that we have no forbearers.
> There was far too much murder comitted by all sides in the reformation
> for anyone to be pointing fingers hypocritically.
In your mind, Bari, the world of Christendom is divided into Catholicism
East, Catholicism West, Protestants, and the middle ground Lutherans and
Anglicans which, for all practical purposes are about to reunite with the
West, as the "Nestorians" were recently reunited with the East. IN point of
fact, Christendom is considerably more complex than that.
Otto Lathum
1 Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats,
which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which
believe and know the truth.
The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an apostate
church.
They even forbit their clergy to marry, and they have commanded to abstain
from meats (on Fridays). Thay have even fulfilled these little practices of
the apostate church.
And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to Mary.
The Bible teaches no such thing. The Bible teaches that "there is one God,
and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5),
not Mary or a bunch of "saints."
Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like say
'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.' But the bible says "But when ye
pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they
shall be heard for their much
speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests "Father"
when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles "call
no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
heaven." Matthew 23:9
Now the pope says that there are many ways that lead to God. That is not
apostasy, it is heresy. It is not bad enough that the RCC is apostate, now
the pope is a heritic. the bible says "Jesus saith unto him, 'I am the way,
the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.'" John
14:6.
There is no evidence that Satan hates the RCC. But he does hate the people
in the RCC. He hates all people because they are "created in the likeness
of God." It would also not be correct to say that Satan loves the apostate
RC church, because Satan 'loves' only himself.
Otto Lathum
news:4hIs7.20606$w7.39...@news02.optonline.net...
I have heard it said that BEFORE the Spanish Inquisitions that the RCC
killed about 50,000 Christians because they would not give allegence to the
apostate RCC.
I hope William will take each tridition of the RCC and research the Bible
for himself and prove to himself what the truth is.
mark bassett
"Otto Lathum" <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fGQs7.26311$kf1.9...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com...
The RCC apologist revisionists sometimes even say that, not only is this
greatly exagerated, but that there were really no deaths at all. Others
declare that it was just the normal sin of faulted people. The fact that
they still parade up and down in purple and scarlet and gold is a testimony
to the bondage of humanity.
bam
"mark bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote
> Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
of
> tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
> various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
grasp
> on earthly power and wealth.
References please? Or did you inherit this knowledge through genetic
transmission.
BAM
mark bassett
"bam" <b...@digital.net> wrote in message
news:VsRs7.700738$ai2.54...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Historians, pal.
Pastor Steve Winter
>Satan hates the Catholic Church.
>Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
Silly devil, Satan RUNS the Roman Catholic Church!
The RCC is the "Great Whore"
The "harlot daughters" are the denominations that worship the same
false gods as the "Great Whore" (the Catholic trinity).
Most of the false christian churches are daughters of the RCC.
That is another reason that no one can be saved in a trinity church.
Revelation 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the
seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will
shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many
waters:
The RCC "sitteth on many waters", she is international.
Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed
fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk
with the wine of her fornication.
Catholic "indulgences" and false religion have made many "drunk" with
her false religion.
Revelation 17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the
wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full
of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
The "beast" is the economic community that the "Whore" (the RCC)
rides on. The nations support the Vatican.
Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet
colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a
golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her
fornication:
The pomp and jewelry and scarlet robes of the RCC.
Revelation 17:5 And upon her forehead [was] a name written, MYSTERY,
BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE
EARTH.
The RCC is the mother of all of the trinity denomintations.
Revelation 17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the
saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw
her, I wondered with great admiration.
No organization has murdered (as "heretics") so many real Apostolic
Christians as the Roman Catholic Church! History knows no other
possible organization than the RCC to fit verse Rev 17:6.
Pastor sTeve Winter
--
Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
http://www.onenesschristian.org for Bible studies (text and audio)
Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
Lee Malatesta
> Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths of
> tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
> various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its grasp
> on earthly power and wealth.
Methinks that someone is getting his information from propagand pieces
such as Fox's Book of Martyrs that tend to overlook the equally
atrocious massacres brought to Catholic at the hands of Protestants.
Read any good history, the Crusades and most of the Inquisitions
(including the notorious Spanish Inquisition) were the work of the
assorted kings and princes of Europe. In most cases there was little
that the Church of Rome could do and in some cases the Church of Rome
tried its hardest to prevent what was happening. There are exceptions
to this. The Roman Inquisition is directly responsible for the deaths
of about 2,000 people tried as heretics and then handed over to the
state to meat the criminal penalty for heresy (death in most cases).
Pope Innocent III did beat a very loud drum for the Crusade that ended
up sacking the Christian city of Constantinople instead of taking back
the Holy Land from the Muslims.
BUT this needs to be taken in the context of the bloodthirsty society
that consisted of medieval Europe. Going out in sackcloth and ashes to
beg the barbarian invaders not to sack Rome like Pope Leo the Great
did only works so many times.
And one needs to be fair and give the Catholic Church (which is not
restricted to the Church of Rome) credit for peacably bringing
Christianity to most of Europe in the first millenia of Christianity,
inventing the Hospital, deciding the canon of the Holy Scriptures,
deciding Orthodox dogma such as the Doctrines of the Trinity and the
dual natures of Jesus Christ and more.
It's easy to villify one's enemies. But we are called to love them.
This means seeking out the face of Jesus in the visage of those we are
against. This means looking honestly at history to see both the faults
and holiness of the Church throughout the ages.
Regards,
Lee Irenaeus Malatesta
mark bassett
"Lee Malatesta" <lee_ma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7df25a06.01092...@posting.google.com...
> Mark Bassett wrote:
> > Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
of
> > tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> > thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in
the
> > various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
grasp
> > on earthly power and wealth.
>
> Methinks that someone is getting his information from propagand pieces
> such as Fox's Book of Martyrs that tend to overlook the equally
> atrocious massacres brought to Catholic at the hands of Protestants.
I see a revisionist cheching in. Thanks for registering with the
receptionist. There is a line, for you folks.
> Read any good history, the Crusades and most of the Inquisitions
> (including the notorious Spanish Inquisition) were the work of the
> assorted kings and princes of Europe.
Assorted CATHOLIC Kings, working to purify the religion of their country.
> In most cases there was little that the Church of Rome could do
Poor, helpless little power that it was. Why, friend, would these popes (and
really READ their words, when you get a honest breath of truth) ever get in
the way of the destruction of the infidels (read NON CATHOLICS) that they
had long worked to encourage?
> and in some cases the Church of Rome tried its hardest to prevent what was
happening.
Oh, I am sure you have most modern version of the Vatican's role in Hitler's
Germany too :-)
> There are exceptions
> to this. The Roman Inquisition is directly responsible for the deaths
> of about 2,000 people tried as heretics and then handed over to the
> state to meat the criminal penalty for heresy (death in most cases).
> Pope Innocent III did beat a very loud drum for the Crusade that ended
> up sacking the Christian city of Constantinople instead of taking back
> the Holy Land from the Muslims.
> BUT this needs to be taken in the context of the bloodthirsty society
> that consisted of medieval Europe.
How often we hear this! I usually perceive the desire to return to earlier,
simpler methods. Not so in you, but hey...
> Going out in sackcloth and ashes to
> beg the barbarian invaders not to sack Rome like Pope Leo the Great
> did only works so many times.
But the Kingdom of God is not "of this earth", and the "church" has no
business making war. Thats one of the main ways we know the Vatican is not
representative of the Church which we have testimony of through scripture.
> And one needs to be fair and give the Catholic Church (which is not
> restricted to the Church of Rome) credit for peacably bringing
> Christianity to most of Europe in the first millenia of Christianity,
> inventing the Hospital, deciding the canon of the Holy Scriptures,
> deciding Orthodox dogma such as the Doctrines of the Trinity and the
> dual natures of Jesus Christ and more.
You are very optimistic, if not overly loyal.
I Am a sockpupet
Bari Stepanovich
<mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
>news:3bb3a8fe...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:16:00 GMT, "mark bassett"
>> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >
>> >Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
>of
>> >tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
>> >thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
>> >various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
>grasp
>> >on earthly power and wealth.
>>
>> Let's not forget there's the blood of martyrs on the hands of your
>> forebears too, Mark.
>
>Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in condemnation,
>it is stated that we have no forbearers.
What....was it just <POOF!> and here's the pentecostals?
Come on, Mark.
>
>> There was far too much murder comitted by all sides in the reformation
>> for anyone to be pointing fingers hypocritically.
>
>In your mind, Bari, the world of Christendom is divided into Catholicism
>East, Catholicism West, Protestants, and the middle ground Lutherans and
>Anglicans which, for all practical purposes are about to reunite with the
>West, as the "Nestorians" were recently reunited with the East. IN point of
>fact, Christendom is considerably more complex than that.
You're a mind reader, too?
I understand the history of Christendom much more than you think,
Mark.
Bari Stepanovich
<mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>I see a revisionist cheching in.
Kettle??
Kettle??
The Pot is calling......
>> Read any good history, the Crusades and most of the Inquisitions
>> (including the notorious Spanish Inquisition) were the work of the
>> assorted kings and princes of Europe.
>
>Assorted CATHOLIC Kings, working to purify the religion of their country.
>
Do you need a refresher on the Orwellian police state that was
Calvin's Geneva, Mark?
Need we recall the orgy of theft, destruction, debauchery and murder
wrought by the Anabaptists in Germany?
I seem to recall you identifying your historical connection with them
recently in another thread awhile back, Mark.
mark bassett
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 05:24:12 GMT, "mark bassett"
> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >I see a revisionist cheching in.
>
> Kettle??
>
> Kettle??
>
> The Pot is calling......
>
>
>
>
> >> Read any good history, the Crusades and most of the Inquisitions
> >> (including the notorious Spanish Inquisition) were the work of the
> >> assorted kings and princes of Europe.
> >
> >Assorted CATHOLIC Kings, working to purify the religion of their country.
> >
>
> Do you need a refresher on the Orwellian police state that was
> Calvin's Geneva, Mark?
Nope. Calvin did what came natural.
> Need we recall the orgy of theft, destruction, debauchery and murder
> wrought by the Anabaptists in Germany?
... Including orchestrating the slander of opposing religious powers, as
other had done.
> I seem to recall you identifying your historical connection with them
> recently in another thread awhile back, Mark.
I thought you said you were astute.
Will Nordmeyer
>
> "Lee Malatesta" <lee_ma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7df25a06.01092...@posting.google.com...
> > Mark Bassett wrote:
> Oh, I am sure you have most modern version of the Vatican's role in
Hitler's
> Germany too :-)
>
of Rome during WWII became Catholic after WWII, taking the Pope's given
name as his Christian name. Seeing the thanks given to the Vatican by
Golda Mier, 800,000+ Jews, Israel, Albert Einstein, etc...
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With NINE Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Will Nordmeyer
> "William" <m...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
> news:534d25fe.01092...@posting.google.com...
> > Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> >
> > If you are among the Ron Burdette's, the Falcons, the Peter Terry's,
> > the Dr. Watson's, or anyone else spewing lies and hatred toward
> > Catholics and the Catholic Church then you are doing the same thing
as
> > Satan.
> >
> > And if you are acting just as Satan does, and if you feel the same
way
> > about God's church as Satan does. Then you and satan are on the same
> > side.
> >
> > So if you attack and LIE about Catholics and the Catholic Church,
you
> > are a servant of Satan and an agent of evil.
> >
> > May you repent of your evil ways now.
>
> 1 Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from
meats,
> which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which
> believe and know the truth.
>
> The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an
apostate church.
> They even forbit their clergy to marry,
> and they have commanded to abstain from meats (on Fridays).
I'll consider that incorrect statement as I have my Hamburger today at
lunch. With some other Catholics probably.
> Thay have even fulfilled these little practices of the apostate
church.
>
> And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to
Mary.
> The Bible teaches no such thing. The Bible teaches that "there is one
God,
> and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy
2:5),
> not Mary or a bunch of "saints."
>
James 5:14-16
14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and
let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise
him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye
may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth
much.
Are there any more righteous men than the saints in Heaven?
Hebrews 12 - the great cloud of witnesses... somoe names in verse 11.
Clearly that book doesn't think them to be dead.
II Mac - oh wait... you guys cut that book out because it teaches things
you don't like. Despite it being divinely inspired & in the Bible for
1100 years.
> Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like
say
> 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.' But the bible says "But
when ye
> pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that
they
> shall be heard for their much
> speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
>
AH yes... stuck in the 1500s... I don't have to pay 5 bucks... Never
have... been a Catholic all my life. NEVER required to pay money as a
penance.
> Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests
"Father"
> when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles
"call
> no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
> heaven." Matthew 23:9
>
Yet, He also said not to call people Teacher or Rabbi, but he was
regularly called Teacher and Rabbi. He never corrected them. Perhaps
you misunderstand what Jesus is teaching there.
What do you call the man who married your mother & begot you? Is he
your... FATHER?
Tim Thomas
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 00:18:26 GMT, "mark bassett"
> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
> >news:3bb3a8fe...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
> >> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:16:00 GMT, "mark bassett"
> >> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution
deaths
> >of
> >> >tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last
two
> >> >thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in
the
> >> >various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
> >grasp
> >> >on earthly power and wealth.
> >>
> >> Let's not forget there's the blood of martyrs on the hands of your
> >> forebears too, Mark.
> >
> >Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in
condemnation,
> >it is stated that we have no forbearers.
>
> What....was it just <POOF!> and here's the pentecostals?
I assumed that what Mark was talking about, and now maybe this needs
clarification, that the Christian is no longer of the world but has been
grafted into the Body of Christ, and calls out to the Father in Heaven,
"Abba, Father."
Tim Thomas
John Fraser
In fairness to Bari, he wasn't responsible and the history of the
Catholic faith goes back some 1600 years whereas the UPC or UPCI faith
became established less than 90 years ago. However, a fellow I once
worked with made this comment to me one day. His mother once remarked
to him that Catholicism seems to thrive main in poor or fundamentally
corrupt countries. In fairness, so do other religions, but the former
has had little positive effect to change things for the better.
During the era which you refer to, many of the conflicts centered on
two basic items - the Sacraments and the authority of the Pope. The
Catholic faith considered the bread and wine to become actual flesh and
blood of Jesus Christ. They also considered the Pope to be infallible.
Needless to say, many people disagreed with the concepts. While these
acts of rebellion may have been considered a crime by the Church, it
wasn't a civil problem similar to Pilate vs. Jesus. However, the RCC
wielded much influence and it influenced authorities to make heresy a
punishable crime through civil means which could range from flogging to
execution or warring if they felt inclined. When you have the power,
nearly anything is achievable.
Did this have a negative effect? You bet. When Cardinal Edmund Bonner
passed away, the Church didn't publicly announce his death for several
years and kept his place of burial a secret for many more. While what
I've said is true of some, there were priests & bishops whom I'm sure
felt quite differently and vengeance was never an issue, just a peaceful
departure. Still, the image of the violence will never go away for it
consumed a sizeable chunk of manning resources and a lengthy span of
time. And for what?
Cheers,
John
William
> >Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> >Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
>
> Silly devil, Satan RUNS the Roman Catholic Church!
WRONG DUDE! Tha Catholic Church is run by God, through the sucessors
of Peter and the Apostles.
Stop LYING about the church.
[canned drivel trashed]
William
> Satan IS THE LEADER/FOUNDER of the catholic system
Christ is the Leader/Founder of the Catholic Church. YOU are serving
Satan with your LIES.
William
> The Early Church was a Pentecostal church, and we are Pentecostal.
Pentecostals are a johnny-come lately sect. Many which deny the
Trinity and Christ command on how to baptize and those would be
classified as a CULT.
William
> The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an apostate
> church.
LIES!
> And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to Mary.
> The Bible teaches no such thing.
The Bible is not the only part of the faith. You must have Sacred
Scripture AND Sacred Traditions AND the teaching authority of the
church. If you don't you don't have the fullness of faith as the tens
of thousands of Protestant sects attest to.
> and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5),
> not Mary or a bunch of "saints."
Then I can assume that you don't pray for others? I can assume that
your church doesn't have a prayer list?
> There is no evidence that Satan hates the RCC.
HAH! Just look no further than yourself and the others on USENET Satan
is using to attack the church. Satan hates the Catholic Church all
right.
mark bassett
"John Fraser" <jfr...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3BB47E5C...@ns.sympatico.ca...
> Good morning Mark;
>
> In fairness to Bari, he wasn't responsible and the history of the
> Catholic faith goes back some 1600 years whereas the UPC or UPCI faith
> became established less than 90 years ago.
Actually John, you will find the fundimental doctrine of the UPCI and other
Oneness groups in scripture written about 50-90A.D. Even so, I know why you
are saying this, and I wouldn't want to interrupt your interesting story.
> However, a fellow I once worked with made this comment to me one day. His
mother once remarked
> to him that Catholicism seems to thrive main in poor or fundamentally
> corrupt countries.
It has had an engrossing effect on certain areas. Consider the country of
Paraguay for example. As corrupt a nation as exists anywhere on earth, save
for perhaps Nigeria, and 97% Catholic. The priests are an interesting
people, indeed. Likewise, elsewhere throughout that continent that was
several hundred years without serious protestant influence.
> In fairness, so do other religions, but the former
> has had little positive effect to change things for the better.
Thats not fairness - thats muddiness or blindness, as you prefer.
> During the era which you refer to, many of the conflicts centered on
> two basic items - the Sacraments and the authority of the Pope. The
> Catholic faith considered the bread and wine to become actual flesh and
> blood of Jesus Christ. They also considered the Pope to be infallible.
Papal infalibility was not actually a significant component of Catholicism
until the 19th Century, John. Transubstantiation, however, did figure
centrally in the latter, active part of the Inquisition in Europe.
> Needless to say, many people disagreed with the concepts. While these
> acts of rebellion may have been considered a crime by the Church, it
> wasn't a civil problem similar to Pilate vs. Jesus. However, the RCC
> wielded much influence and it influenced authorities to make heresy a
> punishable crime through civil means which could range from flogging to
> execution or warring if they felt inclined. When you have the power,
> nearly anything is achievable.
What you are trying to say is what others deny, that is, states had their
power by dispensation of the Vatican, except where rebellion or
insignificance allowed someone to be free. There never would have been a US
or Canada had Henry not found a reason (his own selfish reasons partly) to
pull the country happily separatated by the English Channel away from Papal
influence.
> Did this have a negative effect? You bet. When Cardinal Edmund Bonner
> passed away, the Church didn't publicly announce his death for several
> years and kept his place of burial a secret for many more. While what
> I've said is true of some, there were priests & bishops whom I'm sure
> felt quite differently and vengeance was never an issue, just a peaceful
> departure. Still, the image of the violence will never go away for it
> consumed a sizeable chunk of manning resources and a lengthy span of
> time. And for what?
Everyone might reason the answer to that question differently.
ishka bibble
was the catholic church being run by god during the crusades?
>
>[canned drivel trashed]
Tim Thomas
Churches
"William" <m...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:534d25fe.0109...@posting.google.com...
Tim Thomas
>
> "John Fraser" <jfr...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:3BB47E5C...@ns.sympatico.ca...
> > Good morning Mark;
> >
> > In fairness to Bari, he wasn't responsible and the history of the
> > Catholic faith goes back some 1600 years whereas the UPC or UPCI faith
> > became established less than 90 years ago.
>
> Actually John, you will find the fundimental doctrine of the UPCI and
other
> Oneness groups in scripture written about 50-90A.D. Even so, I know why
you
> are saying this, and I wouldn't want to interrupt your interesting story.
Mark has never proven this statement and can be accounted as mere
commentary. (an opinion) Because the OP religion is definitely NOT
Apostolic, not even close. They came OUT of the Trinity Faith and made up a
NEW doctrine.
Tim Thomas
mark bassett
"Tim Thomas" <timth...@home.com> wrote in message
news:ok2t7.6979$My2.3...@news1.mntp1.il.home.com...
> Don't group ALL Pentecostals together. The MAJORITY are Trinity based
> Churches
Exactly the same way that the MAJORITY of Christendom are Roman Catholic.
mark bassett
>
> "mark bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:oE1t7.29523$w7.55...@news02.optonline.net...
> >
> > "John Fraser" <jfr...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:3BB47E5C...@ns.sympatico.ca...
> > > Good morning Mark;
> > >
> > > In fairness to Bari, he wasn't responsible and the history of the
> > > Catholic faith goes back some 1600 years whereas the UPC or UPCI faith
> > > became established less than 90 years ago.
> >
> > Actually John, you will find the fundimental doctrine of the UPCI and
> other
> > Oneness groups in scripture written about 50-90A.D. Even so, I know why
> you
> > are saying this, and I wouldn't want to interrupt your interesting
story.
>
> Mark has never proven this statement and can be accounted as mere
> commentary. (an opinion)
Here's proof of my statement:
UPCI Fundimental Doctrine (quoted from IBC website)
"The basic and fundamental doctrine of this organization shall be the Bible
standard of full salvation, which is repentance, baptism in water by
immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,
and the baptism of the Holy Ghost(1) with the initial sign of speaking with
other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance (2).
We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the
unity of the faith (3), at the same time admonishing all brethren that they
shall not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body
(4)."
Bible:
(1) Acts 2:38; John 3:5; Acts 19:1-6; Acts 10:44-48; Acts 8:12,16
(2) Acts 2:4; Acts 10:44-46; Acts 19:6; John 3:8; Isa 28:11-12
(3) Eph 4:3,13
(4) Rom 15:6; 1 Cor 1:10; 2 Cor 13:11; Php 1:27, 2:2; 1Peter 3:8; 1 Tim
4:16; 2Tim 3:14
Bari Stepanovich
<mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
>news:3bb420c8...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 05:24:12 GMT, "mark bassett"
>> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >
>> >I see a revisionist cheching in.
>>
>> Kettle??
>>
>> Kettle??
>>
>> The Pot is calling......
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Read any good history, the Crusades and most of the Inquisitions
>> >> (including the notorious Spanish Inquisition) were the work of the
>> >> assorted kings and princes of Europe.
>> >
>> >Assorted CATHOLIC Kings, working to purify the religion of their country.
>> >
>>
>> Do you need a refresher on the Orwellian police state that was
>> Calvin's Geneva, Mark?
>
>Nope. Calvin did what came natural.
Yes, the works of the flesh.
>
>> Need we recall the orgy of theft, destruction, debauchery and murder
>> wrought by the Anabaptists in Germany?
>
>... Including orchestrating the slander of opposing religious powers, as
>other had done.
The events in Germany were fabricated?
Is that what you are saying?
>
>> I seem to recall you identifying your historical connection with them
>> recently in another thread awhile back, Mark.
>
>I thought you said you were astute.
You have never identified yourself with the Anabaptists or their
beliefs?
Tim Thomas
This has been proven to be a heretical statement and not part of the
fundamental teachings of the Bible. Not ALL spoke with tongues. And in 1
Corinthians 12 there is clear evidence that any REQUIREMENT to prove
salvation by ONE specific gift of the Spirit is wrong.
1 Corinthians 12:28-31
28: And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily
prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings,
helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29: Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of
miracles?
30: Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all
interpret?
31: But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more
excellent way.
> (2).
> We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into
the
> unity of the faith (3), at the same time admonishing all brethren that
they
> shall not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body
There is so much contention and disunity right here in this NG from
various Oneness Believers. This precept must have been thrown out the
window.
Huldah
Bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
<snip>
>> However, a fellow I once worked with made this comment to me one day. His
>> mother once remarked
>> to him that Catholicism seems to thrive main in poor or fundamentally
>> corrupt countries.
>
>It has had an engrossing effect on certain areas. Consider the country of
>Paraguay for example. As corrupt a nation as exists anywhere on earth, save
>for perhaps Nigeria, and 97% Catholic. The priests are an interesting
>people, indeed.
And not only that, but I hear those people are not even Anglo-Saxon...
> Likewise, elsewhere throughout that continent that was
>several hundred years without serious protestant influence.
---
Huldah
Mystery Babylon Escort Service
For the Bible truth about 'Oneness' Pentecostalism, see:
http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/op.html
For the Bible truth about the Jehovah's Witnesses, see:
http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/jw.html
Heresy of the Day:
-------------------------------------
> Ask your Oneness brethren. They're the ones claiming that God himself
> left his throne to walk the Earth as a mortal.
"[Randall Johnson] There have been those in Oneness that have said that. That is not the
position of the UPCI nor is it published in any Word Aflame doctrinal
publication.
(Randall Johnson, UPCI 'Minister')
-----------------------------------
"As a matter of fact the Old Testament Word of God, that is the "impersonal
Jesus", made it plain that judgment came to Israel many times because of the
sin of the nation, including idolaters and immoral citizens."
(Mark Bassett, UPCI 'Minister').
mark bassett
I understad that you feel that this passage states that there are people in
the church who have not spoken with other tongues. Many minstakenly reach
for this passage in order to refute the belief that Peter and the elders
were led by in Acts 10:44-46, but it really is an error.
Following find a portion of Fred Kinzie's article on the subject of speaking
with other tongues:
"A third reason why God chose other tongues as the evidence is that it is a
uniform evidence. Many who
oppose this statement will quote I Cor. 12:30 as the basis of their
opposition, "Do all speak with
tongues?" However, this is speaking of the gift of tongues, which one may
receive at the time of, or
subsequent to, the infilling of- the Spirit. Though both the speaking in
tongues as the evidence of the
baptism of the Holy Ghost, and as a gift, are the same in essence, they
are different in administration and operation. This might seem hair-
splitting, but the same thing is also true of faith.
To be saved, everyone must have a certain degree of faith (Eph. 2:8; John
3:16; Romans 10:9), yet in I Cor. 12:9 we are instructed that there is a
special gift of faith, operational over and beyond that which is
neces-sary for salvation. they are the same in essence but differ-ent in
administration and operation. In speaking about being born of the Spirit,
Jesus states in John 3:8, ". . .so is everyone that is born of the Spirit."
Certainly this is uniformity. By carefully analyzing this verse, you will
see that Jesus places emphasis upon the word "sound." You hear the sound
of the wind blowing, and this is evidence of its
presence. It is not seeing nor feeling that is important, though these
evidences may be present, but hearing the sound. Some may conclude that
this means the experience at Pentecost where they heard the sound as of a
rushing mighty wind. However, this rushing mighty wind was not spoken of in
Acts 10:46 or in 19:6, but speaking in tongues was. Hence, we must conclude
that the important phase of the Spirit's evidence at Pentecost was the
speaking in other tongues. The WIND WAS IMPERSONAL; the SPEAKING WAS
PERSONAL. At Caesarea all who heard the Word were filled (Acts 10:4e48),
and all who heard the Word spoke in tongues. The "them" in verse 46 is the
same "them" in verse 44. All twelve men
mentioned in Acts 19:6 had a uniform ex-perience. Do you think that if ten
of the twelve had spoken in tongues, and the other two had not, Paul would
have believed the two had received the Holy Ghost the same as the ten?
Certainly not! Paul would never have accepted the credence of their
experience if they had failed to exhibit this same uniform evidence."
------------------
Now, here is one of my own articles:
QUESTION:
A few days ago I remembered this encounter, and decided to check up on it.
I located the following:
Mk 16.17 - "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall
they cast out devils; They shall speak with new
tongues; "
Even if one could say this doesn't pertain to the Holy Ghost, doesn't it
provide evidence of Christ telling us we shall
speak in tongues?
ANSWER:
Yes, it certainly does. Knowing the constituency of this echo, I expect at
least some disagreement of the basis of a supposed "ingenuineness" of Mk 16
which the underhanded critics of scripture have launched in the last few
decades.
Here are a few comments on Mk 16 though, hoping that it will be of help in
getting a good perspective. Look at Mk 16 in terms of being the parting
words of Jesus Christ to his soon-to-be-born Church. In this light, compare
Luke 24:45-51 through Acts 1:8, Matthew 28:16-19, John 20:21-23.
Now, if you accept the scripture as having any authority, these passages are
in harmony. Clearly at this time, Jesus was fortelling of the great
importance of what was about to happen. As in Luke 24:49, the focus of this
anticipation was to take place soon. It was the events scheduled from
eternity past, to occur on the feast of Pentecost, after the sacrifice of
the Lamb of God (on passover preceeding). Acts 2:1-4 records these events.
In the fulfillment we see that the Holy Ghost was given with the occasion of
tongues, as described in Mark 16. Your association of tongues with the
promised infilling of the Holy Ghost shows
inspiration. You have taken the scriptures for what they plainly say, and
not as cryptic or arcane.
It is true that the nine gifts of the Spirit include a gift of tongues with
which God will communicate to the Church, through interpretation, but the
purpose of the special phenomenon of tongues which occured on the day of
Pentecost was as a sign to unbelievers (Acts 2:12, 1 Cor 14:22).
Incidentally, considering 1Cor 14:22, you may be led to understand that Paul
spoke of two "types" (or two distinct operations of tongues) in that letter.
In 1 Cor 14:21 he references Isaiah 28:11-12. The reference makes it clear
that tongues (in this reference) is a sign. You may like to associate Mark
16:17 with this OT cross-reference as I beleive the author of Mark did.
In 1 Cor 14:4 shows an administration of the Spirit in blessing the Church
with comfort and edification through unknown tongues (unknown to the
speaker, and interpretted by another spiritual gift in operation for the
same purpose).
Arguments against the universal operation of tongues as a sign, consider
only this function when citing 1 Cor 12:30 - which references the
edification purpose of tongues.
Most arguments against the consideration of tongues as a sign of the
presence of the Holy Ghost exclude some of this detail.
In summary:
1. The phenomenon of speaking in an unknown tongues is Biblical evidence
of the indwelling presence of the Holy Ghost as in Acts 2:1-4, and 1 Cor
14:28 (refereceing Isa 28:11).
2. The gift of tounges is present in the manifold nine unique gifts
which operate in the Church as in 1 Cor 14:4.
-------------------
And, part of an article by Eddie Jones,
GIFT OF TONGUES IN THE CHURCH
"For by ONE SPIRIT are we ALL BAPTIZED into one body." I
Cor. 12:13. "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same
Spirit." I Cor. 12:4. The gifts of the Spirit are as follows:
the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, faith, the gifts of
healing, the working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of
spirits, divers kinds of tongues and the interpretation of tongues.
But by one and the selfsame Spirit, God divides these gifts severally
to every man as He will. I Cor. 12:8-11.
Since the gift of tongues is a manifestation of the Spirit (I
Cor. 12:7,11), a cannot operate in a person without the Holy Ghost
being resident within him. Therefore this gift is only given to
believers who have been baptized into the body of Christ by the Holy
Spirit evidenced by tongue-speaking.
The gift of tongues is different from the tongues as the initial
evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism. Compare the following:
1. These tongues differ in purpose. The gift of tongues
along with the gift of interpretation of tongues has been give unto
some in the church to convey a message from God to the congregation as
the need requires. I Cor. 12:7, 27, 28. But the tongues as evidence
of receiving the Holy Ghost, is the believers personal experience with
God, and is not designed to convey a message to the church.
2. Also these tongues differ in operation. The gift of tongues
in the church is limited to two or three messages and that by course:
and one must interpret I Cor. 14:27. But the tongues as evidence of
the Holy Spirit baptism is an unlimited manifestation and requires no
interpretation.
Paul said, "He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth
himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church I would that ye
all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is
he
that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues EXCEPT
he interpret that the church may receive edifying." I Cor. 14:4,5.
Certainly the apostle did not try to discredit or do away with the
importance of tongues. Because, in comparison, he illustrated that
the less honorable members of the body are necessary, and receive
more abundant honor. I Cor. 12:22,23. Each gift of the Spirit has
as its proper time and place in the church, and when tongues is
interpreted they become as important as prophecy! So Paul emphasized,
"...Let all things be done unto edifying." I Cor. 14:26. To edify the
church, the gift of tongues must be coupled with the gift
of interpretation of tongues. To avoid confusion, Paul gave
instructions to follow for the use of tongues and interpretation
of tongues in the church. (See I Cor. 14:27.) He said, "If there be
no interpretation let him keep silence in the church: and let him
speak to himself, and to o God." I Cor. 14:28. Also he said, "IN THE
CHURCH I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my
voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown
tongue." I Cor. 14:19. It is better for the edification of the church
to speak five words of understanding than ten thousand words in an
unknown tongue without a divinely inspired interpretation. However,
lest anyone misunderstand the importance of tongues, Paul concluded,
"Wherefore brethren, covet to prophesy, and FORBID NOT TO SPEAK
WITH TONGUES." I Cor. 14:19.
"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that
believe, but to them that believe not..." I Cor. 14:22. This
Scripture deals with God's speaking to man. (See I Cor. 14:21.)
Of course, the believer should know when the Lord speaks,
whether by tongues or not. But as a proof to the unbeliever, or
anyone who doubts the Word of God, tongues are manifested for a
miraculous sign of His presence.
Paul asked the question, "Do all speak with tongues?..."
I Cor. 12:30. The context of this Scripture requires a
negative answer, because Paul is discussing Tongues as a gift of
the Spirit only, and not as the evidence of the Holy Spirit
baptism. (See I Cor. 12:28.) The gift of tongues is in addition
to the tongues experienced with the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
(By the same rule, the gift of faith is in addition to the
measure of faith given a person to be saved, Compare Rom. 12:3,
I Cor. 12:9.) So everyone may not receive the gift of tongues.
But in every case, where the initial evidence of the Holy Spirit
baptism is recorded, "ALL" spoke in tongues. (For examples see
Acts 2:4, 10:44, 19:7.)
-------------------------
> > (2).
> > We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into
> the
> > unity of the faith (3), at the same time admonishing all brethren that
> they
> > shall not contend for their different views to the disunity of the body
> > (4)."
> There is so much contention and disunity right here in this NG from
> various Oneness Believers. This precept must have been thrown out the
> window.
Actually, believers have profound spiritual and doctrinal unity, which I
pray you will one day find yourself. Oneness believes most certainly DO have
disunity with trinitarians, much the same way light and darkness are
disunified.
Even so, I recall that I was responding to your statement that these
doctrines were not proven to be part of the early church. My response was
that they are present in the scripture, and showed this. Beyond that, you
are simply doing what you do, that is criticizing.
mark bassett
"Huldah 'Daddy Said I Was Smart' Lohr" <hul...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3bb4dd3f...@news.psouth.net...
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 16:34:28 GMT, "Mark 'Anglo-Saxon and Proud of It'
> Bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >> However, a fellow I once worked with made this comment to me one day.
His
> >> mother once remarked
> >> to him that Catholicism seems to thrive main in poor or fundamentally
> >> corrupt countries.
> >
> >It has had an engrossing effect on certain areas. Consider the country of
> >Paraguay for example. As corrupt a nation as exists anywhere on earth,
save
> >for perhaps Nigeria, and 97% Catholic. The priests are an interesting
> >people, indeed.
>
> And not only that, but I hear those people are not even Anglo-Saxon...
Possibly we can hope that she will have an early bedtime tonight.
JimH
> The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an apostate
> church.
I always thought that priests freely chose to take the vow of
celibacy. FYI - there are some married priests.
> And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to Mary.
> The Bible teaches no such thing.
James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each
other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is
powerful and effective.
Are you saying that we can pray for one another but the saints can't
pray for us? Can I ask you to pray for me but I can't ask a saint?
> The Bible teaches that "there is one God,
> and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5)
So does the Catholic church. From the catechism
480. "Jesus Christ is true God and true man, in the unity of his
divine person; for this reason he is the one and only MEDIATOR between
God and men. "
>
> Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like say
> 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.'
If this actually happened to you then you should report it to the
Bishop. I don't think that they are allowed charge a fee. It's never
happend to me.
> But the bible says "But when ye
> pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they
> shall be heard for their much
> speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
You mean like Rev 4:8 "Each of the four living creatures had six wings
and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and
night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God
Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come."
You could still be right. Maybe the devotion of the rosary and
penance after reconciliation is "vain".
>
> Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests "Father"
> when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles "call
> no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
> heaven." Matthew 23:9
I don't think I've seen it put quite that way before. Did the Jews
call rabis "father"? Is there a historical basis for having the
"referring to religious titles" limitation?
St Paul says "...as a son [Timothy] with the FATHER [Paul], he hath
served with me in the gospel" (Phil 2:22). Is that religious enough
to work as an argument in this case?
>
> Now the pope says that there are many ways that lead to God. That is not
> apostasy, it is heresy. It is not bad enough that the RCC is apostate, now
> the pope is a heritic. the bible says "Jesus saith unto him, 'I am the way,
> the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.'" John
> 14:6.
You got us there. Our Christian charity and belief that God is just
and merciful wants everyone to be in heaven even if they don't know
the truth of the Gospel. Some of the early Christian writers also
said the Holy Spirit guided all men toward God (sorry I don't have the
reference handy, and yes there were plenty on the other side too).
This isn't exactly new.
Maybe the binding and loosing from Mat 16:19 kicks in when scripture
seems to present a problem like how can God be just and merciful while
sending some really good people to eternal punishment because they
were never taught about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
A similar problem exists in Mat 22:36-39 "Teacher, which is the
greatest commandment in the Law?"
Jesus replied: "`Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
all your soul and with all your mind.'
This is the first and greatest commandment.
And the second is like it: `Love your neighbor as yourself.'
Obeying number 2 seems to be breaking number 1. Maybe we are supposed
to be smart enough to figure it out. As for me, I'm dumb. I'll stick
with the pope and pray that God has mercy on all people everywhere.
Tim Thomas
I've heard this argument before and I don't want articles. Scripture
verses will do quite nicely. In one post, James argued that everyone in that
instance spoke with tongues. Prophecy was mentioned as well. Then I asked
him if all were prophets then. He answered something to the effect that it
was one of the gifts given. It is my contention that tongues was also one of
the gifts given to select individuals as 1 Cor.12 dictates, that the Spirit
not only decides who gets which gifts but also HOW those gifts will operate
with the individual. The OP religion has turned a GIFT into a mandate
requirement as PROOF of receiving the Holy Spirit. Totally uninspired and
UN-Biblical.
17: And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they
cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18: They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it
shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall
recover.
This is the empowerment of the Collective Church. Again, lets refer to
1Cor. 12.
29: Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of
miracles?
30: Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all
interpret?
Does EVERYONE who has received the Holy Spirit, heal the sick? No!
Mark 16:18 should have been included in your statement. This is clear that
you will ignore the Word unless you can PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt
that the answer to ALL of the rhetorical questions are, "Yes."
> Even if one could say this doesn't pertain to the Holy Ghost, doesn't it
> provide evidence of Christ telling us we shall
> speak in tongues?
>
> ANSWER:
>
> Yes, it certainly does. Knowing the constituency of this echo, I expect at
> least some disagreement of the basis of a supposed "ingenuineness" of Mk
16
> which the underhanded critics of scripture have launched in the last few
> decades.
>
> Here are a few comments on Mk 16 though, hoping that it will be of help in
> getting a good perspective. Look at Mk 16 in terms of being the parting
> words of Jesus Christ to his soon-to-be-born Church.
Right. To the Church, the Body of Christ, a GROUP of people who believe,
not individuals.
> In this light, compare
> Luke 24:45-51 through Acts 1:8, Matthew 28:16-19, John 20:21-23.
>
> Now, if you accept the scripture as having any authority, these passages
are
> in harmony. Clearly at this time, Jesus was fortelling of the great
> importance of what was about to happen. As in Luke 24:49, the focus of
this
> anticipation was to take place soon. It was the events scheduled from
> eternity past, to occur on the feast of Pentecost, after the sacrifice of
> the Lamb of God (on passover preceeding). Acts 2:1-4 records these events.
> In the fulfillment we see that the Holy Ghost was given with the occasion
of
> tongues, as described in Mark 16. Your association of tongues with the
> promised infilling of the Holy Ghost shows
> inspiration. You have taken the scriptures for what they plainly say, and
> not as cryptic or arcane.
>
> It is true that the nine gifts of the Spirit include a gift of tongues
with
> which God will communicate to the Church, through interpretation, but the
> purpose of the special phenomenon of tongues which occured on the day of
> Pentecost was as a sign to unbelievers (Acts 2:12, 1 Cor 14:22).
>
Then the Believer who receives the Holy Spirit, doesn't HAVE TO speak in
tongues. The Holy Spirit could choose ANY gift or gifts to complement the
Body.
> Incidentally, considering 1Cor 14:22, you may be led to understand that
Paul
> spoke of two "types" (or two distinct operations of tongues) in that
letter.
>
1 Corinthians 12 clearly indicates that there are different,
4: Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
5: And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
6: And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which
worketh all in all.
7: But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit
withal.
Otto Lathum
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 00:18:26 GMT, "mark bassett"
> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
> >news:3bb3a8fe...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
> >> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:16:00 GMT, "mark bassett"
> >> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution
deaths
> >of
> >> >tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last
two
> >> >thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in
the
> >> >various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
> >grasp
> >> >on earthly power and wealth.
> >>
> >> Let's not forget there's the blood of martyrs on the hands of your
> >> forebears too, Mark.
> >
> >Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in
condemnation,
> >it is stated that we have no forbearers.
>
> What....was it just <POOF!> and here's the pentecostals?
>
> Come on, Mark.
It wasn't "<POOF!> and here's the pentecostals." The "Oneness Pentacostals"
are different from "Pentacostals." The doctrine of the "Oneness
Pentacostals was invented in 1913.
Otto Lathum
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
news:3bb46359$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
Sweet sounding reasons, but 1 Timothy 4 tells the real reason.
> > and they have commanded to abstain from meats (on Fridays).
>
> I'll consider that incorrect statement as I have my Hamburger today at
> lunch. With some other Catholics probably.
Yep, I said it in the past tense. It is difficult to keep going all at once
all of those things that scripture gives us to help identify the apostate
church. So the RCC has just gone from one to another like checking them off
of a list.
> > Thay have even fulfilled these little practices of the apostate
> church.
> >
> > And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to
> Mary.
> > The Bible teaches no such thing. The Bible teaches that "there is one
> God,
> > and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy
> 2:5),
> > not Mary or a bunch of "saints."
> >
> James 5:14-16
> 14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and
> let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
> 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise
> him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
> 16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye
> may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth
> much.
>
> Are there any more righteous men than the saints in Heaven?
You have got to be kidding. You are suggesting on calling on the dead to
affect your healing. That is pure unadulterated necromancy.
You will find in that in Deuteronomy 18, Leviticus 19, Leviticus 19, 1
Samuel 28,
2 Kings 21, 2 Kings 23 ..., it is forbidden to consult familiar spirits.
Now, I know you will say that they are not familiar spirits. But they are
spirits aren't they? And you do pick fimiliar ones don't you? And
catholics do specialize in just one or a few that they keep going to don't
they? And you do consult them to effect some future change don't you? Yes,
yes, yes, yes and yes.
Deuteronomy 18:12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the
LORD.
Then after you read that, read 1 Timothy 2:5. Why do you seek these dead
people as mediators If they did indeed die in the Lord, they will not be
the ones responding to you. It will be a servant of the deceiver.
> Hebrews 12 - the great cloud of witnesses... somoe names in verse 11.
> Clearly that book doesn't think them to be dead.
No one is denying that there are souls in heavan, because for Christians, to
be separate from the body is to be present with the Lord.
> II Mac - oh wait... you guys cut that book out because it teaches things
> you don't like. Despite it being divinely inspired & in the Bible for
> 1100 years.
Well there is a thought that went nowhere.
> > Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like
> say
> > 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.' But the bible says "But
> when ye
> > pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that
> they
> > shall be heard for their much
> > speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
> >
> AH yes... stuck in the 1500s... I don't have to pay 5 bucks... Never
> have... been a Catholic all my life. NEVER required to pay money as a
> penance.
From the Council of Trent - And affirmed by Vatican II:
CANON I.--If any one saith, that in the Catholic Church Penance is not truly
and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord for reconciling the
faithful unto
God, as often as they fall into sin after baptism; let him be anathema.
What, no comment on Matthew 6:7 "But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions,
as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much
speaking." Stop all of those "hail marys"
> > Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests
> "Father"
> > when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles
> "call
> > no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
> > heaven." Matthew 23:9
> >
> Yet, He also said not to call people Teacher or Rabbi, but he was
> regularly called Teacher and Rabbi. He never corrected them. Perhaps
> you misunderstand what Jesus is teaching there.
>
> What do you call the man who married your mother & begot you? Is he
> your... FATHER?
First, as for Jesus being called Rabbi, he is God.
Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The context of
Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not familiar
relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is speaking
directly against the RCC practice.
Bari Stepanovich
<OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>It wasn't "<POOF!> and here's the pentecostals." The "Oneness Pentacostals"
>are different from "Pentacostals." The doctrine of the "Oneness
>Pentacostals was invented in 1913.
>
I realize this. Arguably the "oneness" crowd were a branch off of the
trinity-confessing pentecostals after someone's "revelation" of the
oneness doctrine in 1913.
I was just wondering why Mark was hypoctitically "flinging a stink" on
the RCC when those that are his ecclesiastical forbears were doing the
exact same thing; killing the innocent in the name of God.
Of course he denied any connection and claimed it was a a "catholic
plot" and a lie.
In XC,
Bari Stepanovich
*****************************************************************************
IC XC
Otto Lathum
news:<hCQs7.26309$kf1.9...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
>
> > The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an apostate
> > church.
>
> LIES!
>
> > And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to Mary.
> > The Bible teaches no such thing.
>
> The Bible is not the only part of the faith. You must have Sacred
> Scripture AND Sacred Traditions AND the teaching authority of the
> church. If you don't you don't have the fullness of faith as the tens
> of thousands of Protestant sects attest to.
Thank you for explaining that William. I would agree that the RCC is 'rich
in tradition' and the commands of men of the RCC. As you are aware by now,
sometimes those traditions and commands are in conflict with the Bible. No
problem, the Bible recognizes that that will happen and covers that
eventuality:
Mark 7
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the
commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as
the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye
may keep your own tradition.
> > and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy
2:5),
> > not Mary or a bunch of "saints."
>
> Then I can assume that you don't pray for others? I can assume that
> your church doesn't have a prayer list?
We pray directly to God because he alone and soveriegnly is our Holy Father.
In him being our Father, we obey him when his word says: "Confess your
faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The
effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." (James 5:16)
Notice that it doesn't say to confess to a priest, but one to another.
We do not pray to the dead, but to the Father. Jesus told us how to pray in
Matthew 6. He didn't tell us to pray to "saints" or "Mary" or anyone else
except "Our Father."
You might try just following his command as your model for prayer William.
> > There is no evidence that Satan hates the RCC.
>
> HAH! Just look no further than yourself and the others on USENET Satan
> is using to attack the church. Satan hates the Catholic Church all
> right.
You are a silly guy William. No evedence presented of anything you say
except just to spout your own tradition of man.
There is no reason to think that Satan either loves nor hates the RCC, but
there is a lot of evidence that he uses the RCC to promote his agenda. As
for his hate or love, he hates mankind who is the image of the eternal God,
and he loves himself if that can be called love.
mark bassett
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2001 00:21:07 GMT, "Otto Lathum"
> <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >It wasn't "<POOF!> and here's the pentecostals." The "Oneness
Pentacostals"
> >are different from "Pentacostals." The doctrine of the "Oneness
> >Pentacostals was invented in 1913.
> >
>
>
> I realize this. Arguably the "oneness" crowd were a branch off of the
> trinity-confessing pentecostals after someone's "revelation" of the
> oneness doctrine in 1913.
>
> I was just wondering why Mark was hypoctitically "flinging a stink" on
> the RCC when those that are his ecclesiastical forbears were doing the
> exact same thing; killing the innocent in the name of God.
>
> Of course he denied any connection and claimed it was a a "catholic
> plot" and a lie.
Excuse me? I did what?
Otto Lathum
news:94d74c.010928...@posting.google.com...
> "Otto Lathum" <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<hCQs7.26309$kf1.9...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
> > The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an apostate
> > church.
> > They even forbit their clergy to marry
>
> I always thought that priests freely chose to take the vow of
> celibacy. FYI - there are some married priests.
Really, tell the RCC God has called you to be a priest, but you are married
like Peter was.
> > And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to Mary.
> > The Bible teaches no such thing.
>
> James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each
> other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is
> powerful and effective.
>
> Are you saying that we can pray for one another but the saints can't
> pray for us? Can I ask you to pray for me but I can't ask a saint?
We are absolutely commanded to pray for one another. I am alive and I
follow this command of God as I encourage you to do.
As for asking dead people to pray for you or do anything else for you,
you have got to be kidding. You are suggesting on calling on the dead to
affect your healing. That is pure unadulterated necromancy.
You will find in that in Deuteronomy 18, Leviticus 19, Leviticus 19, 1
Samuel 28, 2 Kings 21, 2 Kings 23 ..., it is forbidden to consult familiar
spirits.
Now, I know you will say that they are not familiar spirits. But they are
spirits aren't they? And you do pick fimiliar ones don't you? And
catholics do specialize in just one or a few that they keep going to don't
they? And you do consult them to effect some future change don't you? Yes,
yes, yes, yes and yes.
Deuteronomy 18:12 "For all that do these things are an abomination unto the
LORD."
Then after you read that, read 1 Timothy 2:5. Why do you seek these dead
people as mediators If they did indeed die in the Lord, they will not be
the ones responding to you. It will be a servant of the deceiver.
> > The Bible teaches that "there is one God,
> > and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy
2:5)
>
> So does the Catholic church. From the catechism
> 480. "Jesus Christ is true God and true man, in the unity of his
> divine person; for this reason he is the one and only MEDIATOR between
> God and men. "
>
> >
> > Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like
say
> > 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.'
>
> If this actually happened to you then you should report it to the
> Bishop. I don't think that they are allowed charge a fee. It's never
> happend to me.
From the Council of Trent - And affirmed by Vatican II:
CANON I.--If any one saith, that in the Catholic Church Penance is not truly
and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord for reconciling the
faithful unto God, as often as they fall into sin after baptism; let him be
ANATHEMA.
(all caps added by me on the word "ANATHEMA")
> > But the bible says "But when ye
> > pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that
they
> > shall be heard for their much
> > speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
>
> You mean like Rev 4:8 "Each of the four living creatures had six wings
> and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and
> night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God
> Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come."
The command is given to men, not to other creatures. The concept is that
man was not created for vain repetition, but for real relationship to God.
Other creatures were created for other purposes.
> You could still be right. Maybe the devotion of the rosary and
> penance after reconciliation is "vain".
I once went to a Mass, as a courtesy to a friend. There were several people
there messing with their beads. I researched the issue and found that Mass
is not an appropriate time for rosemarys. I even went to a Basilica and had
a discussion with several monks about this and several other things and they
said that Mass is not the time for the beads. Even in the RCC tradition,
the people doing rosemarys during mass were going at it in vain.
> > Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests
"Father"
> > when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles
"call
> > no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
> > heaven." Matthew 23:9
>
> I don't think I've seen it put quite that way before. Did the Jews
> call rabis "father"? Is there a historical basis for having the
> "referring to religious titles" limitation?
The basis is contextual, and it is clear. That is the only basis that
counts - the whold council of what God said. Read it for yourself. Never
just take my word or anyone else's word for anything about the Bible, but
study it for yourself.
If someone tells you anything that is not consistant with the Word of God,
then he sins. If he persists, treat him as a heathen. I treat RC's like
heathens which means that I try to treat them as honored guests in my house
and win them to the Lord.
> St Paul says "...as a son [Timothy] with the FATHER [Paul], he hath
> served with me in the gospel" (Phil 2:22). Is that religious enough
> to work as an argument in this case?
But he was not using it as a suggested title, he was using it to describe a
relationship in which he had mentored Tim. Your priest use it purely as a
title. Read something the publish, or a business card, even the youngest
priest uses the "fr." title. And any RC when talking to any priest he
doesn't even know will call him "Father."
> > Now the pope says that there are many ways that lead to God. That is
not
> > apostasy, it is heresy. It is not bad enough that the RCC is apostate,
now
> > the pope is a heritic. the bible says "Jesus saith unto him, 'I am the
way,
> > the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.'"
John
> > 14:6.
>
> You got us there. Our Christian charity and belief that God is just
> and merciful wants everyone to be in heaven even if they don't know
> the truth of the Gospel. Some of the early Christian writers also
> said the Holy Spirit guided all men toward God (sorry I don't have the
> reference handy, and yes there were plenty on the other side too).
> This isn't exactly new.
Nope, it is as old as Genesis 3:5 where Satan told the woman that here were
other ways for her besides God's way.
But Jesus said: "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the
life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6.)
> Maybe the binding and loosing from Mat 16:19 kicks in when scripture
> seems to present a problem like how can God be just and merciful while
> sending some really good people to eternal punishment because they
> were never taught about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Thank you for using scriptural reference. I do not understand your theory
here, but I appreciate that you are thinking in scriptural terms.
As for Gos being just, he is. I hope never, ever to be the recipient of his
justice. All of mankind is under a sentence of death and eternal damnation.
Justice demands that the maximum price for the crimes of mankind be paid.
And I don't want to pay. Fortunately, the maximum price was paid for me by
Jesus Christ on the cross, and I am now a recipient of God's grace, Jesus
satisfied God's justice.
As for merciful, God is. In brief: Would a merciful God force a person to
spend eternity with him if he had chosen in life not to do so?
As for "really good people" See: Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, and Luke 18:19.
As for people who never heard about Jesus, God is soveriegn, he can see to
it that whoever he wants to hear will hear. I am however convinced that he
is just even as he allows some to hear and other not to hear. What God will
hold me responsible for is what light I have been given and not what they
have been given, so people unknown to me are not within my understanding or
speculation. But if they are known to me, then I must share the gospel.
That is my concern.
> A similar problem exists in Mat 22:36-39 "Teacher, which is the
> greatest commandment in the Law?"
> Jesus replied: "`Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
> all your soul and with all your mind.'
> This is the first and greatest commandment.
> And the second is like it: `Love your neighbor as yourself.'
>
> Obeying number 2 seems to be breaking number 1. Maybe we are supposed
> to be smart enough to figure it out. As for me, I'm dumb. I'll stick
> with the pope and pray that God has mercy on all people everywhere.
Absolutely no conflict between Number 1 and Number 2. If you truly love God
"with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind' then you
will love what he loves. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten Son..." (John 3:16). What love indeed he has for our neighbors.
The only way to really accomplish Number 2 is to do Number 1. That is why
Jesus says "the second is like it."
Good comments JimH!
Otto Lathum
> > >
> > > "William" <m...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:534d25fe.01092...@posting.google.com...
> > > > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> > > >
> > > > If you are among the Ron Burdette's, the Falcons, the Peter Terry's,
> > > > the Dr. Watson's, or anyone else spewing lies and hatred toward
> > > > Catholics and the Catholic Church then you are doing the same thing
as
> > > > Satan.
> > > >
> > > > And if you are acting just as Satan does, and if you feel the same
way
> > > > about God's church as Satan does. Then you and satan are on the same
> > > > side.
> > > >
> > > > So if you attack and LIE about Catholics and the Catholic Church,
you
> > > > are a servant of Satan and an agent of evil.
> > >
deaths
> > of
> > > tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last
two
> > > thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in
> the
> > > various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
> > grasp
> > > on earthly power and wealth.
> >
> > killed about 50,000 Christians because they would not give allegence to
> the
> > apostate RCC.
> > I hope William will take each tridition of the RCC and research the
Bible
> > for himself and prove to himself what the truth is.
>
> The RCC apologist revisionists sometimes even say that, not only is this
> greatly exagerated, but that there were really no deaths at all. Others
> declare that it was just the normal sin of faulted people. The fact that
> they still parade up and down in purple and scarlet and gold is a
testimony
> to the bondage of humanity.
And you have been kind in your comments. No ring kissin' for me. No
telling where that thing has been.
I am not totally against appropriately done pageantry though because I do
look forward to that crown throwing at the big celebration in the future.
How 'bout you?8^)
Otto Lathum
"bam" <b...@digital.net> wrote in message
news:VsRs7.700738$ai2.54...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
>
> "mark bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote
>
> > Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
> of
> > tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> > thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in
the
> > various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
> grasp
> > on earthly power and wealth.
>
> transmission.
>
http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=repented
http://www.findarticles.com/m1058/27_117/66355934/p1/article.jhtml
http://www.alleanzacattolica.org/idis_dpf/english/i_medieval_inquisition.htm
http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/Things/inquisition.html
Just a amall start of a long list.
Otto Lathum
news:Td2t7.8498$ev2....@www.newsranger.com...
In an absolute sense, the answer is yes. God is absolute soveriegn. Even
over the apostate RCC.
> >
> >[canned drivel trashed]
>
>
Otto Lathum
>
> >Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> >Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
>
> Silly devil, Satan RUNS the Roman Catholic Church!
I don't know about Satan, but they certainly so depend on a lot of satin.
Otto Lathum
"Lee Malatesta" <lee_ma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7df25a06.01092...@posting.google.com...
> Mark Bassett wrote:
> > Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
of
> > tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> > thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in
the
> > various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
grasp
> > on earthly power and wealth.
>
> such as Fox's Book of Martyrs that tend to overlook the equally
> atrocious massacres brought to Catholic at the hands of Protestants.
>
> Read any good history, the Crusades and most of the Inquisitions
> (including the notorious Spanish Inquisition) were the work of the
> that the Church of Rome could do and in some cases the Church of Rome
> tried its hardest to prevent what was happening. There are exceptions
> to this. The Roman Inquisition is directly responsible for the deaths
> of about 2,000 people tried as heretics and then handed over to the
> state to meat the criminal penalty for heresy (death in most cases).
> Pope Innocent III did beat a very loud drum for the Crusade that ended
> up sacking the Christian city of Constantinople instead of taking back
> the Holy Land from the Muslims.
Nice fantasy, but one of the titles that the pope holds is "Prefect of the
Inquisition."
And in case you don't know it, the Inquisition is a permanent committee of
the RCC even now.
You are correct in that in most cases the secular authorities were the ones
who were given the victims for execution. The pope and his henchmen didn't
want to get their hands dirty (or bloody). So the reprobates were also
cowards.
> BUT this needs to be taken in the context of the bloodthirsty society
> that consisted of medieval Europe. Going out in sackcloth and ashes to
> beg the barbarian invaders not to sack Rome like Pope Leo the Great
> did only works so many times.
Yep, the RCC was as secular as anything in medieval Europe.
> And one needs to be fair and give the Catholic Church (which is not
> restricted to the Church of Rome) credit for peacably bringing
> Christianity to most of Europe in the first millenia of Christianity,
> inventing the Hospital, deciding the canon of the Holy Scriptures,
> deciding Orthodox dogma such as the Doctrines of the Trinity and the
> dual natures of Jesus Christ and more.
Except that in the first century, the church had not formed the apostate
RCC.
> It's easy to villify one's enemies. But we are called to love them.
> This means seeking out the face of Jesus in the visage of those we are
> against. This means looking honestly at history to see both the faults
> and holiness of the Church throughout the ages.
We are called to love people, not the powers and principalities of the
apostate church.
Trey
of course not becasue you can't. history bears my statements to be true.
"William" x...@xxx.xxx wrote in message
> Christ is the Leader/Founder of the Catholic Church. YOU are serving
> Satan with your LIES.
Pastor Steve Winter
>Pastor Steve Winter <steve...@prime.org> wrote in message news:<kru7rt43vimr2cqdt...@4ax.com>...
>
>> >Satan hates the Catholic Church.
>> >Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
>>
>> Silly devil, Satan RUNS the Roman Catholic Church!
>
>WRONG DUDE! Tha Catholic Church is run by God, through the sucessors
>of Peter and the Apostles.
Silly silly false-christian dirt William. The RCC doesn't
even obey the Acts 2:38 message that Peter preached so don't
try to blame Peter for the RCC cult.
Pastor Winter
--
Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
http://www.onenesschristian.org for Bible studies (text and audio)
Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
Bari Stepanovich
<mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> I realize this. Arguably the "oneness" crowd were a branch off of the
>> trinity-confessing pentecostals after someone's "revelation" of the
>> oneness doctrine in 1913.
>>
>> I was just wondering why Mark was hypoctitically "flinging a stink" on
>> the RCC when those that are his ecclesiastical forbears were doing the
>> exact same thing; killing the innocent in the name of God.
>>
>> Of course he denied any connection and claimed it was a a "catholic
>> plot" and a lie.
>
>Excuse me? I did what?
Just a little good-natured hyperbole.....
Don't get excited. ;-)
However, I did't quite get the point of:
"Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in
condemnation,
it is stated that we have no forbearers."
I just figured you had the same proofreader that I occasionally have.
mark bassett
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2001 02:27:20 GMT, "mark bassett"
> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
> >> I realize this. Arguably the "oneness" crowd were a branch off of the
> >> trinity-confessing pentecostals after someone's "revelation" of the
> >> oneness doctrine in 1913.
> >>
> >> I was just wondering why Mark was hypoctitically "flinging a stink" on
> >> the RCC when those that are his ecclesiastical forbears were doing the
> >> exact same thing; killing the innocent in the name of God.
> >>
> >> Of course he denied any connection and claimed it was a a "catholic
> >> plot" and a lie.
> >
> >Excuse me? I did what?
>
> Just a little good-natured hyperbole.....
>
> Don't get excited. ;-)
I just didn;t understand what you meant.
> However, I did't quite get the point of:
>
> "Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in
> condemnation,
> it is stated that we have no forbearers."
Oh - they say that we have no spiritual forbearers and invented our
religion. Its hard to have it both ways, responsible for Calvin's
attrocities and yet have no heritage in that movement. :-)
Bari Stepanovich
<OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The context of
>Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not familiar
>relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is speaking
>directly against the RCC practice.
I think the point he was trying to make is that a literal
interpretation of "call no man father" makes no sense.
As I understand it, something has been lost in the translation; Jesus
was not talking about a title, but the Rabbinical "cults of
personality" around some men. It still exists to this day among some
Jewish groups, i.e the Lubavitch Chasidim, who are completely
convinced that one of their deceased rabbis (Menachem Schneerson) is
returning as the Messiah.
I suppose it's similar to the Greek schools of thought around men like
Aristotle.
In XC,
Bari Stepanovich
*****************************************************************************
IC XC
Bari Stepanovich
<mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
>news:3bb567e8...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2001 02:27:20 GMT, "mark bassett"
>> <mba...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> I realize this. Arguably the "oneness" crowd were a branch off of the
>> >> trinity-confessing pentecostals after someone's "revelation" of the
>> >> oneness doctrine in 1913.
>> >>
>> >> I was just wondering why Mark was hypoctitically "flinging a stink" on
>> >> the RCC when those that are his ecclesiastical forbears were doing the
>> >> exact same thing; killing the innocent in the name of God.
>> >>
>> >> Of course he denied any connection and claimed it was a a "catholic
>> >> plot" and a lie.
>> >
>> >Excuse me? I did what?
>>
>> Just a little good-natured hyperbole.....
>>
>> Don't get excited. ;-)
>
>I just didn;t understand what you meant.
>
>> However, I did't quite get the point of:
>>
>> "Don't forget that, when the other side of these mouths open in
>> condemnation,
>> it is stated that we have no forbearers."
>
>Oh - they say that we have no spiritual forbearers and invented our
>religion. Its hard to have it both ways, responsible for Calvin's
>attrocities and yet have no heritage in that movement. :-)
I don't believe you just materialized out of thin air in 1913.
Nobody is blaming you or your church personally for the atrocities of
reformation Europe, of course.
But by the same token you can't blame the modern-day RCC for their
ancestors' misdeeds either. Murder in the "name of God" was committed
by all sides is the poit I was making.
Believe me, the Orthodox could have an axe to grine, too. The
Crusaders were not particularly kind to the people of the middle east
during the Crusades; Islamic or Christian didn't much matter to them
when they were sacking a city and killing it's inhabitants.
What really matters is that it never occurs again.
In XC,
Bari Stepanovich
*****************************************************************************
IC XC
bam
BAM
"Pastor Steve Winter" <steve...@prime.org> wrote in message
news:kru7rt43vimr2cqdt...@4ax.com...
> m...@volcanomail.com (William) spake thusly and wrote:
>
> >Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> >Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
>
> Silly devil, Satan RUNS the Roman Catholic Church!
>
> The RCC is the "Great Whore"
>
> The "harlot daughters" are the denominations that worship the same
> false gods as the "Great Whore" (the Catholic trinity).
>
> Most of the false christian churches are daughters of the RCC.
> That is another reason that no one can be saved in a trinity church.
>
> Revelation 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the
> seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will
> shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many
> waters:
>
> The RCC "sitteth on many waters", she is international.
>
> Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed
> fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk
> with the wine of her fornication.
>
> Catholic "indulgences" and false religion have made many "drunk" with
> her false religion.
>
> Revelation 17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the
> wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full
> of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
>
> The "beast" is the economic community that the "Whore" (the RCC)
> rides on. The nations support the Vatican.
>
> Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet
> colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a
> golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her
> fornication:
>
> The pomp and jewelry and scarlet robes of the RCC.
>
> Revelation 17:5 And upon her forehead [was] a name written, MYSTERY,
> BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE
> EARTH.
>
> The RCC is the mother of all of the trinity denomintations.
>
> Revelation 17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the
> saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw
> her, I wondered with great admiration.
>
> No organization has murdered (as "heretics") so many real Apostolic
> Christians as the Roman Catholic Church! History knows no other
> possible organization than the RCC to fit verse Rev 17:6.
>
> Pastor sTeve Winter
bam
bam
"Otto Lathum" <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote
> http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=repented
> http://www.findarticles.com/m1058/27_117/66355934/p1/article.jhtml
>
http://www.alleanzacattolica.org/idis_dpf/english/i_medieval_inquisition.htm
> http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/Things/inquisition.html
> Just a amall start of a long list.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry - couldn't get past Ian Paisley. If you want to answer the question,
answer it - don't throw web sites at me dumkopf.
BAM
William
> Thank you for explaining that William. I would agree that the RCC is 'rich
> in tradition' and the commands of men of the RCC. As you are aware by now,
> sometimes those traditions and commands are in conflict with the Bible.
No they are not. You are LYING.
> You are a silly guy William. No evedence presented of anything you say
> except just to spout your own tradition of man.
>
> There is no reason to think that Satan either loves nor hates the RCC, but
> there is a lot of evidence that he uses the RCC to promote his agenda. As
> for his hate or love, he hates mankind who is the image of the eternal God,
> and he loves himself if that can be called love.
You're the silly one. Satan's agenda has been foiled time and time
again by the prayers and devotions of the Roman Catholic Church. Satan
cannot use a church that is his worst enemy.
Satan can however use people like yourself who are willing to LIE and
LIE to further the cause of evil by attacking the Church.
Remember what Paul was told. When you attack the church, you are
attacking Christ. Are you enjoying attacking Christ?
digimortal
Bari Stepanovich wrote in message
<3bb569fa...@tornado.usenetplanet.com>...
Will Nordmeyer
> > > and they have commanded to abstain from meats (on Fridays).
> >
> > I'll consider that incorrect statement as I have my Hamburger today at
> > lunch. With some other Catholics probably.
>
> Yep, I said it in the past tense. It is difficult to keep going all at
once
> all of those things that scripture gives us to help identify the apostate
> church. So the RCC has just gone from one to another like checking them
off
> of a list.
>
Let's consider the abstaining from meat part of Timothy 4:3, for a moment...
When you put verse 4 back in...
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be
received with thanksgiving
Did the Catholic Church teach that meat is bad, or evil? Nope... Abstaining
from meat, or other fasts, just as the Jews fast... they abstain from food
almost all together - is a teaching of demons? Nope... it's a sacrifice to
God...
> > > Thay have even fulfilled these little practices of the apostate
church.
> > >
> > > And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to
Mary.
> > > The Bible teaches no such thing. The Bible teaches that "there is one
God,
> > > and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy
2:5),
> > > not Mary or a bunch of "saints."
> > >
> > James 5:14-16
> > 14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and
> > let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
> > 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise
> > him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
> > 16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye
> > may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth
> > much.
> >
> > Are there any more righteous men than the saints in Heaven?
>
> You have got to be kidding. You are suggesting on calling on the dead to
> affect your healing. That is pure unadulterated necromancy.
Nope.. I"m suggesting asking the saints in Heaven, who are alive in Christ
to pray for me. They cannot affect the healing... GOD can... and God can
hear their prayers. Because they are alive with Him... in Heaven.
> You will find in that in Deuteronomy 18, Leviticus 19, Leviticus 19, 1
Samuel 28,
> 2 Kings 21, 2 Kings 23 ..., it is forbidden to consult familiar spirits.
Yep... we aren't consulting with them, however. We are asking them to pray
for us...
> Now, I know you will say that they are not familiar spirits. But they are
> spirits aren't they? And you do pick fimiliar ones don't you? And
> catholics do specialize in just one or a few that they keep going to don't
> they? And you do consult them to effect some future change don't you?
Yes,
> yes, yes, yes and yes.
> Deuteronomy 18:12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto
the LORD.
>
> Then after you read that, read 1 Timothy 2:5. Why do you seek these dead
> people as mediators If they did indeed die in the Lord, they will not be
> the ones responding to you. It will be a servant of the deceiver.
>
Nope - it'll be GOD.. we don't expect the saints to respond... we pray that
GOD will hear their prayers, and ours and respond.
> > Hebrews 12 - the great cloud of witnesses... somoe names in verse 11.
> > Clearly that book doesn't think them to be dead.
>
> No one is denying that there are souls in heavan, because for Christians,
to
> be separate from the body is to be present with the Lord.
>
And right there in Heaven, they are witnesses... witnesses to the race.
And what do witnesses to a race do? They cheer... root for their champion.
And what form would those cheers & rooting take, from saints in Heaven -
PRAYERS TO GOD... Bingo!
> > II Mac - oh wait... you guys cut that book out because it teaches things
> > you don't like. Despite it being divinely inspired & in the Bible for
> > 1100 years.
>
> Well there is a thought that went nowhere.
>
It was a directed point about non-Catholics removing books that were
divinely inspired from their Bible because they didn't like what they
taught. Luther wanted to remove Hebrews too...
> > > Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like
say
> > > 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.' But the bible says "But
when ye
> > > pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that
they
> > > shall be heard for their much speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
> > >
> > AH yes... stuck in the 1500s... I don't have to pay 5 bucks... Never
> > have... been a Catholic all my life. NEVER required to pay money as a
> > penance.
>
> From the Council of Trent - And affirmed by Vatican II:
> CANON I.--If any one saith, that in the Catholic Church Penance is not
truly
> and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord for reconciling
the
> faithful unto God, as often as they fall into sin after baptism; let him
be anathema.
>
What's the point there? I still haven't been required to pay 5 bucks... or
any money.
> What, no comment on Matthew 6:7 "But when ye pray, use not vain
repetitions,
> as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much
> speaking." Stop all of those "hail marys"
>
VAIN as in self-righteous or self-indulgent... Look at all that's written
above it... specifically pointing out the self-righteous, or self-indulgent
prayer by the hypocrites on street corners, or in synagogues...
> > > Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests
"Father"
> > > when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles
"call
> > > no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
> > > heaven." Matthew 23:9
> > >
> > Yet, He also said not to call people Teacher or Rabbi, but he was
> > regularly called Teacher and Rabbi. He never corrected them. Perhaps
> > you misunderstand what Jesus is teaching there.
> >
> > What do you call the man who married your mother & begot you? Is he
> > your... FATHER?
>
> First, as for Jesus being called Rabbi, he is God.
>
But Jesus clearly said call no man Rabbi, for you have only one Master.
(Jesus referred to God the Father, as Master)... but he didn't correct
others who called him Rabbi, even though HE is not the Master.
> Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The context
of
> Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not familiar
> relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is speaking
> directly against the RCC practice.
>
No... he is speaking directly against the practices of the Pharisees... who
love to be the place of honor in banquets, love to be greeted in the
Marketplaces & to have men call them Rabbi.
Once again, Jesus is preaching against VANITY... the Vanity of the
Pharisees, who loved the honors people bestowed on them.
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With NINE Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Otto Lathum
news:<tN9t7.29664$kf1.10...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
>
> > Thank you for explaining that William. I would agree that the RCC is
'rich
> > in tradition' and the commands of men of the RCC. As you are aware by
now,
> > sometimes those traditions and commands are in conflict with the Bible.
>
> No they are not. You are LYING.
>
> > You are a silly guy William. No evedence presented of anything you say
> > except just to spout your own tradition of man.
> >
> > There is no reason to think that Satan either loves nor hates the RCC,
but
> > there is a lot of evidence that he uses the RCC to promote his agenda.
As
> > for his hate or love, he hates mankind who is the image of the eternal
God,
> > and he loves himself if that can be called love.
>
> You're the silly one. Satan's agenda has been foiled time and time
> again by the prayers and devotions of the Roman Catholic Church. Satan
> cannot use a church that is his worst enemy.
William, you post nothing but you own opinion and you give it no foundation.
That sounds a lot like wining.
> Satan can however use people like yourself who are willing to LIE and
> LIE to further the cause of evil by attacking the Church.
Thank you William for giving you own unfounded opinion. I know you don't
like what I say, but is that reason for you adhominum remarks.
> Remember what Paul was told. When you attack the church, you are
> attacking Christ. Are you enjoying attacking Christ?
Would you like to give a reference for that William?
Otto Lathum
I apoligize BAM, I thought you were sincere when you said: "References
please?"
Now lets see here are the rules you have set up:
1. If one makes a statement you don't like, you will ask for references.
2. If one posts reverences you ask for a statement and go adhominum.
And you call me "dumkoph" (sic)?
You are not only the dumb-head here, but you have displayed your decisioin
to remain so.
JimH
> "JimH" <big...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:94d74c.010928...@posting.google.com...
> > "Otto Lathum" <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<hCQs7.26309$kf1.9...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
> > > The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an apostate
> > > church.
> > > They even forbit their clergy to marry
> >
> > I always thought that priests freely chose to take the vow of
> > celibacy. FYI - there are some married priests.
>
> Really, tell the RCC God has called you to be a priest, but you are married
> like Peter was.
They will say they you have already committed to care for a wife and a
family. There are plenty of other ministries in the church that you
can participate in.
A priest goes a long way towards fulfilling (Mat 19:21). They give up
alot to minister to their congregations.
> > > And their doctrines are as un-biblical as can be. Like praying to Mary.
> > > The Bible teaches no such thing.
> >
> > James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each
> > other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is
> > powerful and effective.
> >
> > Are you saying that we can pray for one another but the saints can't
> > pray for us? Can I ask you to pray for me but I can't ask a saint?
>
> We are absolutely commanded to pray for one another. I am alive and I
> follow this command of God as I encourage you to do.
> As for asking dead people to pray for you or do anything else for you,
> you have got to be kidding. You are suggesting on calling on the dead to
> affect your healing. That is pure unadulterated necromancy.
> You will find in that in Deuteronomy 18, Leviticus 19, Leviticus 19, 1
> Samuel 28, 2 Kings 21, 2 Kings 23 ..., it is forbidden to consult familiar
> spirits.
> Now, I know you will say that they are not familiar spirits. But they are
> spirits aren't they? And you do pick fimiliar ones don't you? And
> catholics do specialize in just one or a few that they keep going to don't
> they? And you do consult them to effect some future change don't you? Yes,
> yes, yes, yes and yes.
> Deuteronomy 18:12 "For all that do these things are an abomination unto the
> LORD."
Maybe the problem is that you think that they are dead.
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life..."(John 3:36)
"He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly
mistaken!"(Luke 20:38)
> Then after you read that, read 1 Timothy 2:5. Why do you seek these dead
> people as mediators If they did indeed die in the Lord, they will not be
> the ones responding to you. It will be a servant of the deceiver.
We believe that all Christians that have gone on to eternal life are
still part of the body of Christ (the church) (see 1 Cor 12:27). If I
can ask you to pray for me and if you have faith the size of a mustard
seed (Mat 17:20) then God can help you help me move the mountain. No
creature can do anything on his own but how much more perfect is the
faith of a saint?
> > > Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do. Like
> say
> > > 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.'
> >
> > If this actually happened to you then you should report it to the
> > Bishop. I don't think that they are allowed charge a fee. It's never
> > happend to me.
>
> From the Council of Trent - And affirmed by Vatican II:
> CANON I.--If any one saith, that in the Catholic Church Penance is not truly
> and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord for reconciling the
> faithful unto God, as often as they fall into sin after baptism; let him be
> ANATHEMA.
> (all caps added by me on the word "ANATHEMA")
I agree with every word of it. It doesn't say anything about charging
a fee. Maybe I'm missing your point.
> > > But the bible says "But when ye
> > > pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that
> they
> > > shall be heard for their much
> > > speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
> >
> > You mean like Rev 4:8 "Each of the four living creatures had six wings
> > and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and
> > night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God
> > Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come."
>
> The command is given to men, not to other creatures. The concept is that
> man was not created for vain repetition, but for real relationship to God.
> Other creatures were created for other purposes.
Do you have a scriptural refrence for that?
I bet that we can agree that heartfelt prayers should be part of
everyones daily life.
> > You could still be right. Maybe the devotion of the rosary and
> > penance after reconciliation is "vain".
>
> I once went to a Mass, as a courtesy to a friend. There were several people
> there messing with their beads. I researched the issue and found that Mass
> is not an appropriate time for rosemarys. I even went to a Basilica and had
> a discussion with several monks about this and several other things and they
> said that Mass is not the time for the beads. Even in the RCC tradition,
> the people doing rosemarys during mass were going at it in vain.
I have seen people praying the rosary before and after mass but never
during. But you are right, mass is not the time for the rosary.
>
> > > Then there is their everday traditions. Like calling their priests
> "Father"
> > > when the Bible teaches in Matthew when referring to religious titles
> "call
> > > no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
> > > heaven." Matthew 23:9
> >
> > I don't think I've seen it put quite that way before. Did the Jews
> > call rabis "father"? Is there a historical basis for having the
> > "referring to religious titles" limitation?
>
> The basis is contextual, and it is clear. That is the only basis that
> counts - the whold council of what God said. Read it for yourself.
I did read it and on the basis of context you would seem to be right
but it is not the only basis that counts. We could be misinterpreting
the passage if the Jews never called Rabis "father". It would mean
something else.
> Never
> just take my word or anyone else's word for anything about the Bible, but
> study it for yourself.
You don't need to worry about me. I suffer from the sin of pride. I
check out everything.
> If someone tells you anything that is not consistant with the Word of God,
> then he sins.
I agree. The difference is I accept sacred tradition and sacred
scripture as being inspired by God.
>If he persists, treat him as a heathen. I treat RC's like
> heathens which means that I try to treat them as honored guests in my house
> and win them to the Lord.
Ditto brother:)
I understand everything you are saying. My faith hope and love will
never allow me to stop loving my neighor, hoping that he will spend
eternity in heaven and having faith that God will be merciful to those
that have not recieved the good news. That being said, I also know
that only God himself will make those judgements. I won't be
questioning Him when my turn comes.
> > A similar problem exists in Mat 22:36-39 "Teacher, which is the
> > greatest commandment in the Law?"
> > Jesus replied: "`Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
> > all your soul and with all your mind.'
> > This is the first and greatest commandment.
> > And the second is like it: `Love your neighbor as yourself.'
> >
> > Obeying number 2 seems to be breaking number 1. Maybe we are supposed
> > to be smart enough to figure it out. As for me, I'm dumb. I'll stick
> > with the pope and pray that God has mercy on all people everywhere.
>
> Absolutely no conflict between Number 1 and Number 2. If you truly love God
> "with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind' then you
> will love what he loves. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
> begotten Son..." (John 3:16). What love indeed he has for our neighbors.
> The only way to really accomplish Number 2 is to do Number 1. That is why
> Jesus says "the second is like it."
I think you are making my point for me. You have to go beyond the
words to make it work. If your mind is on God 100% of the time then
you won't be thinking of your neighbor or eating or sleeping. But you
also have to do number 2 to accomplish number 1.
If scripture was crystal clear there would only be one church. In
matters that God has not blessed me to understand (the whole
discussion above) I will continue to rely on the teachings of the
Catholic church to guide me.
> Good comments JimH!
thank you.
patrick burke
I will be more polite about this than the last poster. I recall some
years ago reading a history written by a French historian who happened to be
Catholic. Although his work (on the middle ages and renaissance) was often
very good, on the subject of the Church and Reformation he had a very real
blind spot. He excused the Inquisition as entirely reasonable and needed,
while giving graphic details about Protestant tortures and persecutions. The
moral? Don't get your history from people who have so obvious an ax to
grind. Good history is best done by seeking out histories that at least try
to be objective and balanced. So if you come here touting the atrocities of
the Church and give as your proof a militant Protestant web page, don't
expect to be taken seriously. Find me a reputable historian who agrees then
we can talk.
>
>
>
>
mark bassett
And have no need of answering this level of response.
patrick burke
"digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:9p4df9$436$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> Or the pope...
>
Or Billy Graham... Fact is this particular problem occures on all
sides of the religion war. We cannot always blame the recipient.
CB
William wrote:
> Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
>
>
Why would satan hate his own church?
--
Psalm 51:16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it:
thou delightest not in burnt offering.
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite
heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
CB
bam wrote:
> "mark bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote
>
> > Which of course is the reasoning behind the torture and execution deaths
> of
> > tens of thousands in the various "Inquisitions" throughout the last two
> > thousand years, not to mention the many hundreds of thousands lost in the
> > various wars inspired and funded by a Vatican seeking to propogate its
> grasp
> > on earthly power and wealth.
>
> References please? Or did you inherit this knowledge through genetic
> transmission.
LOL!!!!
You??
Asking for references???
How about some references for your heresy??
>
>
> BAM
Will Nordmeyer
"CB" <thewaythetru...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:F3BBD3C12902CE64.A3CA62B0...@lp.airnews.net...
>
>
> William wrote:
>
> > Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> >
> >
>
> Why would satan hate his own church?
>
you continue to spew hatred & lies though...
Huldah
Stepanovich) wrote:
>>Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The context of
>>Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not familiar
>>relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is speaking
>>directly against the RCC practice.
>
>I think the point he was trying to make is that a literal
>interpretation of "call no man father" makes no sense.
>
>As I understand it, something has been lost in the translation; Jesus
>was not talking about a title, but the Rabbinical "cults of
>personality" around some men. It still exists to this day among some
>Jewish groups, i.e the Lubavitch Chasidim, who are completely
>convinced that one of their deceased rabbis (Menachem Schneerson) is
>returning as the Messiah.
>
>I suppose it's similar to the Greek schools of thought around men like
>Aristotle.
It was customary amongst the pagans to call priests 'Father,' which is
probably how the habit infiltrated the church. Livy records that the
fetial priests were called 'Father': "The envoy then returns to Rome.
It was customary for the king immediately to address the senate in
approximately these words: 'Concerning the demands, the disputes, and
the claims which the 'pater patratus' (the fetial priest) of Rome has
announced to the 'pater patratus' of the Ancient Latins, which demands
they have not fulfilled as it was fitting for them to do, say (he
addresses the man whose opinion he asks first) what you think should
be done.'" (Livy, History of Rome, Book I, 32).
---
Huldah
Mystery Babylon Escort Service
For the Bible truth about 'Oneness' Pentecostalism, see:
http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/op.html
Heresy of the Day:
-------------------------------------
> Ask your Oneness brethren. They're the ones claiming that God himself
> left his throne to walk the Earth as a mortal.
"[Randall Johnson] There have been those in Oneness that have said that. That is not the
position of the UPCI nor is it published in any Word Aflame doctrinal
publication.
-----------------------------------
[Randall Johnson] "I claim the Son came into being at 4.B.C. but
of course, you are setting up a straw man to knock down."
(Randall Johnson, UPCI 'Minister')
Otto Lathum
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2001 01:24:18 GMT, "Otto Lathum"
> <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The context
of
> >Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not
familiar
> >relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is speaking
> >directly against the RCC practice.
>
> I think the point he was trying to make is that a literal
> interpretation of "call no man father" makes no sense.
>
> As I understand it, something has been lost in the translation; Jesus
> was not talking about a title, but the Rabbinical "cults of
> personality" around some men. It still exists to this day among some
> Jewish groups, i.e the Lubavitch Chasidim, who are completely
> convinced that one of their deceased rabbis (Menachem Schneerson) is
> returning as the Messiah.
So your opinion would be that the Biblical text is out of date and doesn't
apply?
It is quite clear. The context is religious titles and Jesus says don't
call a man "father."
So when you do it, you disobey Jesus.
The issue here is that any number of titles could have been chosen, but no
matter
how you try to scrub it, the RCC chose one title that is forbidden.
Otto Lathum
"patrick burke" <pbur...@home.com> wrote in message
news:YFmt7.12659$c8.15...@news1.rdc1.nj.home.com...
>
> "digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
> news:9p4df9$436$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > Or the pope...
> >
>
> Or Billy Graham... Fact is this particular problem occures on all
> sides of the religion war. We cannot always blame the recipient.
I have never heard Billy Graham called "father" except by one
of his own children using the word in the familial sense.
Otto Lathum
It was a made up "sin" created by man. The point is William that out of all
of
sins that the RCC could have made up, they chose two that are expressly
forbidden to make up.
The RCC looks for ways to be disobedient, then does it and teaches some
justification for it. Verse 4 only tells a practical reason for not doing
what the
RCC did. I fail to see what a personal choice to fast has to do with
forbidding
others to eat meat like the RCC did in disobedience to the command of Jesus.
Will, they are dead. Dead as dead can be. Attempting to contact them
to do your bidding is necromancy.
Yes, that is what you do all right, you ask them to mediate between you and
God.
It is unbiblical per 1 Timothy 2:5 "For there is one God and one mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" Not "saints."
> > > Hebrews 12 - the great cloud of witnesses... somoe names in verse 11.
> > > Clearly that book doesn't think them to be dead.
> >
> > No one is denying that there are souls in heavan, because for
Christians,
> to
> > be separate from the body is to be present with the Lord.
> >
> And right there in Heaven, they are witnesses... witnesses to the race.
> And what do witnesses to a race do? They cheer... root for their
champion.
> And what form would those cheers & rooting take, from saints in Heaven -
> PRAYERS TO GOD... Bingo!
What is this "Bingo" stuff, are you writing from your church basement.
Perhaps you have a reverence on the "race" thing. But the "saints" are
doing
something in heaven and it is not listening to you. See Revelation 6:9-10
> > > II Mac - oh wait... you guys cut that book out because it teaches
things
> > > you don't like. Despite it being divinely inspired & in the Bible for
> > > 1100 years.
> >
> > Well there is a thought that went nowhere.
> >
> It was a directed point about non-Catholics removing books that were
> divinely inspired from their Bible because they didn't like what they
> taught. Luther wanted to remove Hebrews too...
What ever.
> > > > Then there is what the RCC clergy tell their parishaners to do.
Like
> say
> > > > 'give me 5 bucks and say 100 hail Marys.' But the bible says "But
> when ye
> > > > pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think
that
> they
> > > > shall be heard for their much speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
> > > >
> > > AH yes... stuck in the 1500s... I don't have to pay 5 bucks... Never
> > > have... been a Catholic all my life. NEVER required to pay money as
a
> > > penance.
> >
> > From the Council of Trent - And affirmed by Vatican II:
> > CANON I.--If any one saith, that in the Catholic Church Penance is not
> truly
> > and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord for reconciling
> the
> > faithful unto God, as often as they fall into sin after baptism; let him
> be anathema.
> >
> What's the point there? I still haven't been required to pay 5 bucks...
or
> any money.
Or do penance in order to be forgiven of ou sins?
Thank you for you honesty William. I agree that Jesus is not the Master
of the RCC.
> > Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The
context
> of
> > Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not
familiar
> > relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is speaking
> > directly against the RCC practice.
> >
> No... he is speaking directly against the practices of the Pharisees...
who
> love to be the place of honor in banquets, love to be greeted in the
> Marketplaces & to have men call them Rabbi.
Like priests who love to be called "father." I once had business dealings
with
a couple of Jesuits. They tried to use the "father" title obtain advantage
in
negoiations. It was pathetic.
Will Nordmeyer
premise fails...
> The point is William that out of all of
> sins that the RCC could have made up, they chose two that are expressly
> forbidden to make up.
> The RCC looks for ways to be disobedient, then does it and teaches some
> justification for it. Verse 4 only tells a practical reason for not doing
what the
> RCC did. I fail to see what a personal choice to fast has to do with
forbidding
> others to eat meat like the RCC did in disobedience to the command of
Jesus.
>
Once again... your initial premise fails... it is not a sin, therefore your
conclusions fail as well.
ALIVE in Christ... or did you not pay attention to Jesus' promise of eternal
life?
We are doing nothing more than asking them to pray for us...
Yep... RIght... the saints aren't mediators... they are others we ask to
pray for us... as I might ask my friends to pray for me... or others in my
Church. Does your church have a prayer list? Do they pray for each other?
Better stop that, otherwise you are being a mediator to God in place of
Christ for someone.
> > > > Hebrews 12 - the great cloud of witnesses... somoe names in verse
11.
> > > > Clearly that book doesn't think them to be dead.
> > >
> > > No one is denying that there are souls in heavan, because for
> Christians,
> > to
> > > be separate from the body is to be present with the Lord.
> > >
> > And right there in Heaven, they are witnesses... witnesses to the race.
> > And what do witnesses to a race do? They cheer... root for their
> champion.
> > And what form would those cheers & rooting take, from saints in Heaven -
> > PRAYERS TO GOD... Bingo!
>
> What is this "Bingo" stuff, are you writing from your church basement.
> Perhaps you have a reverence on the "race" thing. But the "saints" are
doing
> something in heaven and it is not listening to you. See Revelation 6:9-10
>
No... see Hebrews 12... they are witnesses... praying to God that we win the
race... quite clear...
Revelations 6:9-10. That'd be good, if we were in the end times... and if
the first 4 seals had been broken. But, since we don't appear to be... your
reference fails.
Yeah... Hebrews 12... Discipline... we are disciplined for our
disobedience. discipline is penance...
GOD the Father is... because GOD the Father is the Master... Jesus was quite
clear on that... Jesus is the Son... The Father & Master is greater than
He. Jesus was quite specific.
(for the record, while my given name IS William, the poster "William" is
not the same as I...) :-)
> > > Second, as for my sire, I call him dad, but he is my father. The
context
> > of
> > > Matthew 23 is clear, Jesus is talking about religious titles, not
> familiar
> > > relationships. So when he says "call no man father...," he is
speaking
> > > directly against the RCC practice.
> > >
> > No... he is speaking directly against the practices of the Pharisees...
who
> > love to be the place of honor in banquets, love to be greeted in the
> > Marketplaces & to have men call them Rabbi.
>
> Like priests who love to be called "father." I once had business dealings
with
> a couple of Jesuits. They tried to use the "father" title obtain
advantage in
> negoiations. It was pathetic.
>
That'd be your perception... not necessarily their actions. Your perception
which is already biased by your incorrect conclusions of the Catholic
Church.
> > Once again, Jesus is preaching against VANITY... the Vanity of the
> > Pharisees, who loved the honors people bestowed on them.
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
Otto Lathum
> "Otto Lathum" <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<aMat7.29677$kf1.10...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
> > "JimH" <big...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:94d74c.010928...@posting.google.com...
> > > "Otto Lathum" <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:<hCQs7.26309$kf1.9...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
> > > > The RCC has made it a practice to fulfill ever part of being an
apostate
> > > > church.
> > > > They even forbit their clergy to marry
> > >
> > > I always thought that priests freely chose to take the vow of
> > > celibacy. FYI - there are some married priests.
> >
> > Really, tell the RCC God has called you to be a priest, but you are
married
> > like Peter was.
>
> They will say they you have already committed to care for a wife and a
> family. There are plenty of other ministries in the church that you
> can participate in.
That's right, the RCC 'forbids even to marry.'
Then using your crazy logic, Jesus was not really dead. That would mean
that
he was not raised from the dead. Even the RCC calls that heresy. Are you a
heritic?
Jesus was dead as dead could be was raised. Your "saints" are dead as dead
can be and await resurection. It seems to me that the RCC requires that
a person be dead before they are dubbed a "saint."
Those folks are dead. They are separated from the body and present with
God.
That's dead. And Catholics practice necromancy in clear disobedience to the
word of God.
> > Then after you read that, read 1 Timothy 2:5. Why do you seek these
dead
> > people as mediators If they did indeed die in the Lord, they will not
be
> > the ones responding to you. It will be a servant of the deceiver.
>
> We believe that all Christians that have gone on to eternal life are
> still part of the body of Christ (the church) (see 1 Cor 12:27).
Okay by me.
>If I
> can ask you to pray for me and if you have faith the size of a mustard
> seed (Mat 17:20) then God can help you help me move the mountain. No
> creature can do anything on his own but how much more perfect is the
> faith of a saint?
They are dead. Necromancy is forbidden, and Catholics do it. You can
try to justify it any way you want, but it is still communication with the
dead in order to effect the future.
As for reference, read the creation story in Genesis. God walked
with man before the fall.
Heartfelt prayers are to be a part of the Christian life. Vain repetitions
made
just so you feel better about yourself are not.
Thank you, your credibility with me just went increased significantly.
Of course I ould opine that Jesus could see the future and warned us
against the practice.
> > Never
> > just take my word or anyone else's word for anything about the Bible,
but
> > study it for yourself.
>
> You don't need to worry about me. I suffer from the sin of pride. I
> check out everything.
>
> > If someone tells you anything that is not consistant with the Word of
God,
> > then he sins.
>
> I agree. The difference is I accept sacred tradition and sacred
> scripture as being inspired by God.
So would you believe that when the pope speaks and says it is from
God, then it carrys the same weight as scripture.
No, you have cause and effect backwards, you have to do number 1 in order
to truly do number 2. And if you truly do number 1, the effect will be
that you do number 2.
Otto Lathum
"Scout Lady" <scou...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:G_tt7.1508$QD7.27...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...> news:o6st7.30505$kf1.10...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com...
> >
> > It is quite clear. The context is religious titles and Jesus says don't
> > call a man "father."
> > So when you do it, you disobey Jesus.
> > The issue here is that any number of titles could have been chosen, but
no
> > matter
> > how you try to scrub it, the RCC chose one title that is forbidden.
> >
I assume you mean the Apostle. He referred to Tim has his spiritual son.
He did not use the term "father" as a title, but as a relational term just
as I
call my dad "father" because it describes our relatioinship. The RCC uses
it as a title for everyone who turns his collar backwards.
Otto Lathum
Not now.
> > The point is William that out of all of
> > sins that the RCC could have made up, they chose two that are expressly
> > forbidden to make up.
> > The RCC looks for ways to be disobedient, then does it and teaches some
> > justification for it. Verse 4 only tells a practical reason for not
doing
> what the
> > RCC did. I fail to see what a personal choice to fast has to do with
> forbidding
> > others to eat meat like the RCC did in disobedience to the command of
> Jesus.
> >
> Once again... your initial premise fails... it is not a sin, therefore
your
> conclusions fail as well.
And since when ahs disobedience to the instructions of the pope not been a
sin
to RCs
Necromancy
Using your logic, Jesus was not dead after the crucifiction because his
spirit was
with the Father ("into your hands...").
Saying that Jesus was not dead for those three days is considered a heresy
even
in the RCC. Of course not Jesus has been resurrected, but the saints await
resurrection.
So which is it, Jesus was dead and the Saints are dead, or Jesus wasn't dead
and
the Saints are not dead and you are a heritic?
mediator n : a negotiator who acts as a link between parties [syn:
go-between,
intermediator, intermediary]
Sounds like your (false) practice of trying to use these dead people as a
go-between between you and God fits the definition. So how is your
practice
different than claiming another mediator besides Jesus Christ?
You may not like to hear it, but it is necromancy. Contacting the dead in
order
to effect or know the future.
Pastor Steve Winter
>
>"CB" <thewaythetru...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:F3BBD3C12902CE64.A3CA62B0...@lp.airnews.net...
>>
>>
>> William wrote:
>>
>> > Satan hates the Catholic Church.
>> > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Why would satan hate his own church?
>>
>Catholic Church isn't satan's church. We've told you that numerous times...
>you continue to spew hatred & lies though...
Remember any believer in the trinity is really just
"catholic lite"<tm>
I have a few catholic questions.
1. Which one of the statues has more power, and are they
specialized? IE Would you bother the Mary statue for a minor
car repair problem, or would a lesser idol work?
2. Do they kiss on the other bigger idols, like they do the
little cross idol? And does the "call no man father" guy wipe
the bigger idols between kisses like the cross idol?
3. Can the priests turn other food items into god, or does it
just work on cookies? ie "snack food only"?
4. When the priests turn cookies into god, does it act as a
preservative? (possible uses in the food industry, much money
could be made for the poor)....
5. If a shrine has more than one Mary idol, will they function
simultaneously?
6. If the Mary idol is more powerful, and they will function
simultaneously, why not just use bunches of Mary idols?
7. Do bigger idols have more power than the little bitty ones?
8. Do the ceramic idols have more "oomph" than little plastic ones?
Thanks for sharing with us regarding the intimate details of
your devout faith and worship of little thingies.
Pastor Winter
Bari Stepanovich
<OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> Did the Catholic Church teach that meat is bad, or evil? Nope...
>Abstaining
>> from meat, or other fasts, just as the Jews fast... they abstain from food
>> almost all together - is a teaching of demons? Nope... it's a sacrifice
>to
>> God...
>
>It was a made up "sin" created by man.
Speaking from an Orthodox perspective, if one does not observe a
fast(s) is not a "sin", but rather a missed opportunity.
I don't think you understand the reason one fasts, Otto.
Did Jesus and his apostles fast?
In XC,
Bari Stepanovich
*****************************************************************************
bam
"CB" <thewaythetru...@yahoo.com> wrote
> LOL!!!!
> You??
> Asking for references???
> How about some references for your heresy??
Mat 7:6
BAM
bam
William
> > Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> >
> >
>
> Why would satan hate his own church?
The Catholic Church is NOT satan's, in fact it is the worst enemy on
earth Satan has.
Why do you keep on repeating LIES like this CB? You have been
corrected numerpus times. Are you that dense or just that deceived?
Will Nordmeyer
teaching... therefore it was not disobedient to Scripture. So... your
premise still fails.
> > > The point is William that out of all of
> > > sins that the RCC could have made up, they chose two that are
expressly
> > > forbidden to make up.
> > > The RCC looks for ways to be disobedient, then does it and teaches
some
> > > justification for it. Verse 4 only tells a practical reason for not
doing what the
> > > RCC did. I fail to see what a personal choice to fast has to do with
forbidding
> > > others to eat meat like the RCC did in disobedience to the command of
> > Jesus.
> > >
> > Once again... your initial premise fails... it is not a sin, therefore
your
> > conclusions fail as well.
>
> And since when ahs disobedience to the instructions of the pope not been a
sin to RCs
>
Not all the instructions of the Pope are mandatory to follow. So, the
answer would be since the time of Peter.
> > > > > > Are there any more righteous men than the saints in Heaven?
> > > > >
> > > > > You have got to be kidding. You are suggesting on calling on the
dead to
> > > > > affect your healing. That is pure unadulterated necromancy.
> > > > Nope.. I"m suggesting asking the saints in Heaven, who are alive in
Christ
> > > > to pray for me. They cannot affect the healing... GOD can... and
God can
> > > > hear their prayers. Because they are alive with Him... in Heaven.
> > >
> > > Will, they are dead. Dead as dead can be. Attempting to contact them
> > > to do your bidding is necromancy.
> > >
> > ALIVE in Christ... or did you not pay attention to Jesus' promise of
eternal
> > life?
> >
> > We are doing nothing more than asking them to pray for us...
>
> Necromancy
> Using your logic, Jesus was not dead after the crucifiction because his
> spirit was with the Father ("into your hands...").
> Saying that Jesus was not dead for those three days is considered a heresy
even
> in the RCC. Of course not Jesus has been resurrected, but the saints
await
> resurrection.
Correct. The Saints await the resurrection
> So which is it, Jesus was dead and the Saints are dead, or Jesus wasn't
dead and
> the Saints are not dead and you are a heritic?
>
You still ignore the FACT that Jesus promised eternal life... and Jesus
spoke to the "dead" - Moses & Elijah...
> > > > Nope - it'll be GOD.. we don't expect the saints to respond... we
pray that
> > > > GOD will hear their prayers, and ours and respond.
> > >
> > > Yes, that is what you do all right, you ask them to mediate between
you and God.
> > > It is unbiblical per 1 Timothy 2:5 "For there is one God and one
mediator
> > > between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" Not "saints."
> > >
> > Yep... RIght... the saints aren't mediators... they are others we ask
to
> > pray for us... as I might ask my friends to pray for me... or others in
my
> > Church. Does your church have a prayer list? Do they pray for each
other?
> > Better stop that, otherwise you are being a mediator to God in place of
> > Christ for someone.
>
> mediator n : a negotiator who acts as a link between parties [syn:
> go-between, intermediator, intermediary]
>
> Sounds like your (false) practice of trying to use these dead people as a
> go-between between you and God fits the definition. So how is your
> practice different than claiming another mediator besides Jesus Christ?
Because we aren't asking them to be a mediator any more than if I were to
ask anyone else to pray for me. I don't think they are equal with Jesus.
I'm not asking them to be a mediator. I am asking them to pray for me, as I
ask the Saints to pray for me.
Just as Paul & the Apostles did...
Romans 1:9
Romans 10:1
Romans 15:30
1 Corinthians 7:5 (fasting also mentioned there)...
2 Corinthians 13:7
1 Thess 1:2
Ephesians 1:16
Philippians 1:9
1 Timothy 2:1, 3
Philemon 1:4
James 5:13
Rev 8:3,4
And more...
In all those places... asking others to pray for them. Or telling others
that they are praying for them. Does that mean that Paul thought the others
were mediators between him & God? replacing Jesus? No... I think not...
Therefore, your conclusion about what Catholics do, is also incorrect.
> You may not like to hear it, but it is necromancy. Contacting the dead in
> order to effect or know the future.
>
You avoided my question - do you pray for others. then by your own
definition of mediator, then you are a mediator between God and that
person... so you are raising yourself to the level of Jesus.
You do not understand what Catholics do...we do not ask the saints to pray
for us for us to know the future. We also do not pray to them to affect the
future... we ask that they pray for us.
Will Nordmeyer
"Pastor Steve Winter" <steve...@prime.org> wrote in message
news:6u5drtoppflh03dlh...@4ax.com...
> "Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> spake thusly and wrote:
>
> >
> >"CB" <thewaythetru...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:F3BBD3C12902CE64.A3CA62B0...@lp.airnews.net...
> >>
> >>
> >> William wrote:
> >>
> >> > Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> >> > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why would satan hate his own church?
> >>
> >Catholic Church isn't satan's church. We've told you that numerous
times...
> >you continue to spew hatred & lies though...
>
> Remember any believer in the trinity is really just
> "catholic lite"<tm>
>
> I have a few catholic questions.
>
> 1. Which one of the statues has more power, and are they
> specialized? IE Would you bother the Mary statue for a minor
> car repair problem, or would a lesser idol work?
>
power.
> 2. Do they kiss on the other bigger idols, like they do the
> little cross idol? And does the "call no man father" guy wipe
> the bigger idols between kisses like the cross idol?
>
What are you babbling about? I've never kissed an idol. We have no idols
in the Catholic Church...
"call no man father"... Jesus also said call no one Rabbi or Teacher,
because the FATHER is the only Master... yet never corrected anyone who
called Him (Jesus) Rabbi or Teacher. Could be you misunderstand that
statement, as you clearly misunderstand many other things.
> 3. Can the priests turn other food items into god, or does it
> just work on cookies? ie "snack food only"?
>
1) It's bread... It was bread in Jesus' time...it was bread in Pauls time
(1 Corinthians 11:21-28)... It is not a cookie.
2) The PRIEST doesn't do the change... the priest prays and ASKS God to
make the change. GOD is the one with the power...
> 4. When the priests turn cookies into god, does it act as a
> preservative? (possible uses in the food industry, much money
> could be made for the poor)....
>
Once again... BREAD not cookies... priests don't do it... GOD does it...
See Luke 22:19, Matthew 26:26, John 6:53-56 for Scriptural reference.
> 5. If a shrine has more than one Mary idol, will they function
simultaneously?
>
The statues don't function at all... GOD functions.
> 6. If the Mary idol is more powerful, and they will function
> simultaneously, why not just use bunches of Mary idols?
>
The statues don't function at all... GOD functions.
> 7. Do bigger idols have more power than the little bitty ones?
>
The statues don't have any power at all... GOD has the power.
> 8. Do the ceramic idols have more "oomph" than little plastic ones?
>
The statues don't have any power at all... GOD has the power.
> Thanks for sharing with us regarding the intimate details of
> your devout faith and worship of little thingies.
>
Thanks for sharing with us your complete ignorance of Catholicism and
rejection of God... it's quite clear throughout your post...
> Pastor Winter
> --
> Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
> http://www.onenesschristian.org for Bible studies (text and audio)
> Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
Have you obeyed John 6:53-56 as JESUS taught in Luke 22:19, & Matthew 26:26.
As Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 11:21-28?
Have you obeyed Matthew 16:18-20? As Jesus taught?
William
I'm going to reply to this ONE TIME and one time only for the sole
reason of demonstrating your lack of knowledge about the Catholic
Church and proving that you are NOT qualified to comment on it.
In exchange for these answers, you will NEVER post these STUPID
questions again. This is not up for discussion.
> I have a few catholic questions.
>
> 1. Which one of the statues has more power, and are they
> specialized? IE Would you bother the Mary statue for a minor
> car repair problem, or would a lesser idol work?
We do not have idols, and the statues have no power. We have never
claimed that they did. Only you anti-catholics have made such a claim.
> 2. Do they kiss on the other bigger idols, like they do the
> little cross idol? And does the "call no man father" guy wipe
> the bigger idols between kisses like the cross idol?
I've never kissed an idol, and since there are none in the Catholic
Church I never will.
> 3. Can the priests turn other food items into god, or does it
> just work on cookies? ie "snack food only"?
The bread (flour and water) is changed into the body and blood of
Jesus Christ by GOD. The priest does not have that power. All he has
is the apostolic authority to consecrate the bread and wine so that
GOD causes this change to happen.
> 4. When the priests turn cookies into god, does it act as a
> preservative? (possible uses in the food industry, much money
> could be made for the poor)....
See above. And God only causes this change only within the Mass.
> 5. If a shrine has more than one Mary idol, will they function
> simultaneously?
Since the staues have no power, your question is STUPID. And they are
NOT idols.
> 6. If the Mary idol is more powerful, and they will function
> simultaneously, why not just use bunches of Mary idols?
See answer to your stupid question #5
> 7. Do bigger idols have more power than the little bitty ones?
See #5
> 8. Do the ceramic idols have more "oomph" than little plastic ones?
See #5
> Thanks for sharing with us regarding the intimate details of
> your devout faith and worship of little thingies.
We worship GOD, not little thingies. And now that you have had your
answers, DO NOT, I repeat do NOT ever post these stupid questions
again.
Will Nordmeyer
>
> >
> >"CB" <thewaythetru...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:F3BBD3C12902CE64.A3CA62B0...@lp.airnews.net...
> >>
> >>
> >> William wrote:
> >>
> >> > Satan hates the Catholic Church.
> >> > Satan LIES about the Catholic Church.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why would satan hate his own church?
> >>
> >Catholic Church isn't satan's church. We've told you that numerous
times...
> >you continue to spew hatred & lies though...
>
> Remember any believer in the trinity is really just
> "catholic lite"<tm>
>
> I have a few catholic questions.
>
> 1. Which one of the statues has more power, and are they
> specialized? IE Would you bother the Mary statue for a minor
> car repair problem, or would a lesser idol work?
>
None of them have power... GOD has the power. The statues are just that...
STATUES... works of art... Haven't seen an IDOL in the Catholic Church.
> 2. Do they kiss on the other bigger idols, like they do the
> little cross idol? And does the "call no man father" guy wipe
> the bigger idols between kisses like the cross idol?
>
Never kissed an idol. Never even seen an idol in the Catholic Church...
Seen statues, crosses, works of art, etc. but never an idol.
> 3. Can the priests turn other food items into god, or does it
> just work on cookies? ie "snack food only"?
>
Nope... We don't use cookies we use bread. As Jesus instructed. Priest's
can't do it. GOD can do it though... See Luke 22:19, Matthew 26:26...
John 6:53-56 too. Quite clear. many turned away when Jesus said it then...
just as you turn away from it now... It's a hard teaching. Jesus even
turned and asked if the Disciples were going to turn away.
> 4. When the priests turn cookies into god, does it act as a
> preservative? (possible uses in the food industry, much money
> could be made for the poor)....
>
See 3... Still not cookies... Yes, it is a preservative... It provides
ETERNAL life... See John 6:53-56.
> 5. If a shrine has more than one Mary idol, will they function
> simultaneously?
>
No idols... The Statues would function simultaneously though, because their
sole function is as a work of art. You can see two works of art
simultaneously... There is no other function for the statues.
> 6. If the Mary idol is more powerful, and they will function
> simultaneously, why not just use bunches of Mary idols?
>
How can one statue be more powerful than another... They are simply works of
art?
> 7. Do bigger idols have more power than the little bitty ones?
>
How can one statue be more powerful than another... They are simply works of
art?
> 8. Do the ceramic idols have more "oomph" than little plastic ones?
>
How can one statue be more powerful than another... They are simply works of
art?
> Thanks for sharing with us regarding the intimate details of
> your devout faith and worship of little thingies.
>
> Pastor Winter
Thanks for sharing your complete ignorance of Catholicism... and your
complete willingness to accept any thing said against Catholicism without a
bit of intelligent research on your own part.
> --
> Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
> http://www.onenesschristian.org for Bible studies (text and audio)
> Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
Have you obeyed John 6:53-56, as Jesus taught in Luke 22:19, and Matthew
26:26? And Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 11:20-28?
Scout Lady
You actually get it! Now let's work on the last part. Why is it a title in
the RCC rather than denoting the relationship between a priest and his
spiritual children? Methinks you understand but can't bare to admit that the
RCC (and the Orthodox, Anglicans) etc. are not out of line with referring to
their spiritual fathers as Father. The only way it would be a sin is if one
was claiming to be "God the Father" which I assure you no Catholic has ever
mistaken their priest as God the Father. Do you see how silly it sounds when
such ridiculous claims are made? Make the tiny mental leap needed to resolve
this issue in your own mind. You will feel better and be able to move on to
more important matters.
Otto Lathum
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2001 23:25:57 GMT, "Otto Lathum"
> <OttoL...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Did the Catholic Church teach that meat is bad, or evil? Nope...
> >Abstaining
> >> from meat, or other fasts, just as the Jews fast... they abstain from
food
> >> almost all together - is a teaching of demons? Nope... it's a
sacrifice
> >to
> >> God...
> >
> >It was a made up "sin" created by man.
>
> Speaking from an Orthodox perspective, if one does not observe a
> fast(s) is not a "sin", but rather a missed opportunity.
>
> I don't think you understand the reason one fasts, Otto.
I think you got lost in the conversation Bari. There is nothing wrong with
choosing to fast. I would encourage it at certain times. The issue was
the practice that the RCC used to have of commanding to abstain from
meat on Friday. See 1 Timothy 4:3.
> Did Jesus and his apostles fast?
Yes, and I hope you do on occasion too.
Otto Lathum
Let me try to explain it to you William. I want to do this with kindness
and respect. You just give your statements with nothing to support them.
Now I am sure you are a fine fellow, but the syntex of your statements don't
make you sound very bright. Then combine that with the apparent fact that
you just expect us to believe what you say above the Bible when you offer
no evidence. That actually makes you sound much less than not very bright,
with all due respect William, you even sound rather dumb.
Now here comes this dumb person who tells us to believe what he believes
even though it is contrary to the the Bible. Do you really expect to be
taken
seriously? And do you really belong on UseNet? Mind you it is okay by
me if you stay, not that you need my permission. But you ask the "why'
question so I answered it. If you stay, you will continue to be mad and
upset and what ever your prevailing bad behavior is now will just become
worse as you stay around. Since you are a name caller, you will just do
it more as you stay.
Otto Lathum
>
> > > > It was a made up "sin" created by man.
> > > It's not a sin... So, you entire conclusion fails because your first
> > > premise fails...
> >
> > Not now.
> >
> Which means, even then, it was not a divine law... it was not an
infallible
> teaching... therefore it was not disobedient to Scripture. So... your
> premise still fails.
So why did those who ate meat feel it necessary to spill the beans (or
hamburger
as it were) in confession and ask the priest for forgiveness?
How old were you when the meatless Fridays were abandoned?
Why would they need resurrection if they are not dead people?
No, he was not asking dead people to go to God because they had more
influence with God than he did. That is why you all pray to your saints,
because
you think they have more influence than you. More on that later.
The reason that Paul ask these living people to pray for him is because of
the
teaching of Jesus in Matthew 18:19 and of the real leader of the first
Church
James in James 5:16.
> > You may not like to hear it, but it is necromancy. Contacting the dead
in
> > order to effect or know the future.
> >
> You avoided my question - do you pray for others. then by your own
> definition of mediator, then you are a mediator between God and that
> person... so you are raising yourself to the level of Jesus.
No I have not avoided your question. I do pray for others. I do not
mediate
for them. You ask your saints to go to God because you believe they have
better influence with him than you. That is unbiblical. I do not pray for
people
on the premise that I have special influence. But only because it is my
privlege
to go before the father directly just as any other believer.
Look at what Jesus taught. In Matthew 12:46ff Jesus' mother tries to
approach
him through the crowd. In your doctrine she would have the big time
influence.
But when Jesus was told she wanted to see him, Jesus made no provision for
that. Instead he said: "whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my
brother and sister and mother." He also told us what that will is. "And
this is
the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given
me,
but raise them up at the last day." John 6:39
It doesn't sound to me that Jesus was teaching to go to special saints, or
his
mother. It sounds like his specific teaching was that they are no more
significant
than anyone else who is a believer.
> You do not understand what Catholics do...we do not ask the saints to pray
> for us for us to know the future. We also do not pray to them to affect
the
> future... we ask that they pray for us.
So you don't pray to them to ask God to heal you sick mother? That is
attempting to effect the future through contacting the dead. We can go
directly
to the Father with our prayers because that is what Jesus taught us to do--
you
call it the "Our Father," I call it the "Lord's Prayer" or the "Model
Prayer."
The disciples ask Jesus how to pray and he said - well you conjure up this
dead
saint or you talk to my mom - NO absolutely not! He said "This, then,
is how you should pray: "`Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name,..."
(Matthew 6:9). Directly to the Father is how Jesus commanded us to pray,
not to some dead person. "For there is one God and one mediator between
God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). And that mediator sits
at the right hand of the Father.
So when you pray to your saints, you:
1. Defy what Jesus told you to do.
2. Pray to a counterfeit mediator - so it is Satan's minions who you really
contact.
3. Commit necromancy.
Now why would you even risk that when you have direct access to the very
throne of the Father with your mediator and high priest sitting at his
right hand to commend you to the Father?
Otto Lathum
"Scout Lady" <no69dx...@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:FnNt7.49391$Qw4.375...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...
Because RC's do it to priests they don't even know so there is no
relationship.
Methinks you think me stupid for falling for that arguement.
>Methinks you understand but can't bare to admit that the
> RCC (and the Orthodox, Anglicans) etc. are not out of line with referring
to
> their spiritual fathers as Father.
Wrongo, these reprobates use the "fr." title even on their publications to
the general public. They are trying to make themselves seem religiously
important and are in violation of Jesus clear command.
>The only way it would be a sin is if one
> was claiming to be "God the Father" which I assure you no Catholic has
ever
> mistaken their priest as God the Father.
That is not what Jesus said.
>Do you see how silly it sounds when
> such ridiculous claims are made? Make the tiny mental leap needed to
resolve
> this issue in your own mind. You will feel better and be able to move on
to
> more important matters.
I know that RCs think the Bible sounds silly, but I don't. Argue your silly
points with Jesus, the one to whom you are in disobedience.
Will Nordmeyer
>
> "Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
> news:3bb70...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
> >
> > > > > It was a made up "sin" created by man.
> > > > It's not a sin... So, you entire conclusion fails because your
first
> > > > premise fails...
> > >
> > > Not now.
> > >
> > Which means, even then, it was not a divine law... it was not an
> infallible
> > teaching... therefore it was not disobedient to Scripture. So...
your
> > premise still fails.
>
> So why did those who ate meat feel it necessary to spill the beans (or
> hamburger as it were) in confession and ask the priest for
forgiveness?
Were you in the confessional to hear it? How do you know they confessed
to eating hamburger? Did you bug the confessional? Or are you just
making it up?
> How old were you when the meatless Fridays were abandoned?
>
They never existed in my lifetime. There are still the Fridays in
Lent... but when I have eaten meat on a Friday in Lent, I have not felt
the need to go to confession over it. Nor have others I know.
To celebrate fully in the Lord's kingdom after the Last Day. Why does
the author of Hebrews refer to the great cloud of witnesses in Hebrews
12:1, if they aren't really able to see & cheer (pray) for us?
NO... That is incorrect. We ask the saints to pray just as Paul asked
others to pray. And they are not dead. ETERNAL LIFE Otto... Jesus
promised ETERNAL LIFE... They are alive. And they do not have more
influence with God than us. Catholics ask saints to pray for us just as
Paul asked others to pray for him. Just as you ask others to pray for
you. Do you ask your Pastor to pray for you? Does that mean you
believe he has more influence with God than you?
> The reason that Paul ask these living people to pray for him is
because of the
> teaching of Jesus in Matthew 18:19 and of the real leader of the first
Church
> James in James 5:16.
>
Peter's the first real leader of the Church - Matthew 16:16-20. John
21:14-17. Luke 22:32. Or are you denying Christ's clear mission given
directly to Peter? Or are you one of those who twist Jesus' clear words
into something barely recognizable. Some vague self-referencing
statement, or referencing Peter's statement. Read Jesus, Peter & the
Keys. Many protestant scholars are quoted in there agreeing that Peter
WAS the first leader.
Look at the Wedding at Cana. Clearly Jesus' mother DID have special
influence. Otherwise Jesus would not have done the miracle... because
it wasn't His time yet. Are you suggesting that Jesus broke a
commandment by not honoring His mother??? Look at John 19... Jesus
makes a specific special provision to care for his Mother. It would
appear you misunderstand Jesus in Matthew.
> > You do not understand what Catholics do...we do not ask the saints
to pray
> > for us for us to know the future. We also do not pray to them to
affect the
> > future... we ask that they pray for us.
>
> So you don't pray to them to ask God to heal you sick mother? That is
> attempting to effect the future through contacting the dead. We can
go directly
> to the Father with our prayers because that is what Jesus taught us to
do-- you
> call it the "Our Father," I call it the "Lord's Prayer" or the "Model
> Prayer."
>
And we say the Lord's Prayer at every Mass.
Yes... we ask the saints to pray to God to heal a sick person. Just as
you might pray to God to heal a sick person.
> The disciples ask Jesus how to pray and he said - well you conjure up
this dead
> saint or you talk to my mom - NO absolutely not! He said "This,
then,
> is how you should pray: "`Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your
name,..."
> (Matthew 6:9). Directly to the Father is how Jesus commanded us to
pray,
> not to some dead person. "For there is one God and one mediator
between
> God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). And that
mediator sits
> at the right hand of the Father.
>
> So when you pray to your saints, you:
> 1. Defy what Jesus told you to do.
Nope... Hebrews 12. All the Epistles quotes I showed above...
Revelations references to the prayers of the saints...
> 2. Pray to a counterfeit mediator - so it is Satan's minions who you
really contact.
No more than you do when you ask someone to pray for you.
> 3. Commit necromancy.
>
Nope...
> Now why would you even risk that when you have direct access to the
very
> throne of the Father with your mediator and high priest sitting at his
> right hand to commend you to the Father?
>
I pray to the Father & Jesus regularly. As do the saints.... SO... in
fact... There is no necromancy... there is no satan's minions involved.
Those that died in Christ and are Saints are clearly NOT satan's
minions. They are alive in Christ.
William
> Now I am sure you are a fine fellow, but the syntex of your statements don't
> make you sound very bright.
How eloquently do you expect someone to write who is so frustreated
and fed up with the LIES we see out here?
> Now here comes this dumb person who tells us to believe what he believes
> even though it is contrary to the the Bible.
See you're LYING again. I do not beleive anything contrary to the
Bible. Onyl contrary to your incorrect INTERPRETATIONS
> worse as you stay around. Since you are a name caller, you will just do
> it more as you stay.
I am not a name caller. But I will call a LIAR a LIAR, if that upsets
you then STOP LYING.
Will Nordmeyer
"Dr. G. Watson -- ŠCopyrighted 2000... All Rights Reserved Ž"
<Dr.G...@son.net> wrote in message
news:8eogrtg72788beldk0kb2sqqou0em3nllh@watsnet...
> On Mon, 01 Oct 2001 11:46:09 GMT, "Scout Lady"
> <no69dx...@sneakemail.com> spake these words as Gospel truth on
> Usenet newsgroups:
>
> > A Protestant who runs into a
> >minister can not be certain if that man preaches the same gospel as
their
> >own minister or they themselves do. I know whenever I run into a
priest that
> >there are core beliefs that we share and I can ask him for guidance
whether
> >I knew him before or not. This is the result of being One Holy
Apostolic
> >Church. Just like the Apostles before, you would receive the same
Gospel
> >from Peter that you would from Jude.
>
> Interesting--- especially considering Peter wasn't even IN
> Rome.............. as for your biased opinion, you're entitled to it,
> but-----------------
Explain his execution in Rome...