A sincere question for Catholics

Hi 3angelsmom,

What exactly is your question. I don't specifically know what you mean.

 

Yep, that is what Jesus prayed for, that His Church would be one.

God Bless

 

#1. God handled the Elijah situation in 2Kings 2:1,11 where we find that Elijah was "taken up to Heaven" by God. Explicitly in the text - no possibility of "changing it".

#2. Jesus raised people himself - see John 11 - before the cross. As did OT prophets.

Jude references the "Assumption of Moses" in Jude 9 - so no possibility of blaming Jude's endorsement on some demonination that you don't approve of.

So back to the point of Matt 17 - Jesus was not "bringing up the dead for a discussion" as you propose. It was the living speaking to the living. As Christ said in Matt 22 "God is NOT the God of the dead" speaking of Abraham's condition at the time of Moses. That can only be true - one way.

In Christ,

Bob

 

For the same reason that Paul said what he did in Acts 17 about the tomb of the unknown God. Readi it. It's in your Bible.

 

Bob Ryan,

I am curious. 3Angels is an SDA. She openly denies the trinity now. How do you feel about that?
She said:

" don't read Ellen White, and neither does my husband. We read the Bible. Also, I have never even SEEN an SDA 'handbook'. We have a 27 fundamental beliefs of the SDA church book, but we have denounced the 2,3, and 4th ones because they support the trinity, so WHERE does that leave you?"

Is there any consequences for denying the trinity in the SDA religion? I would say that it separates her from Christianity. How about you?

 

I DO NOT READ ELLEN WHITE, THERFORE, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT I GET MY DOCTRINES FROM HER. I READ THE BIBLE. <-----Period.

And I haven't read all of the councils' definitions and deliberations over the course of the centuries, yet it is not only certainly possible, but true that I get my doctrines from them.

You read the Bible with the lens of an adherent of White's SDA. To deny the SDA lens is like denying one's own ear in responding to a question one just heard. You need not have to read White to espouse her viewpoints. Her footprints have left deep impressions in those with whom you fellowship every Sabbath.

 

I haven't checked this thread for a couple of days, 'what a shock' to see that it has been turned into an examination of Kelly's faith as opposed to addressing the faith of Arinze the 'Pope in waiting'.

I would have thought the original article would have given catholics more to worry about than Kelly's faith.

Think I'll save myself some time by not bothering to read the last few pages. Call me a cynic but I would imagine the reporter, the newspaper, SDA, and Kelly herself have all been put under the spotlight and I'm pretty certain that nobody has come up with a feasible explanation for the quote.

God Bless

Enda

 

Pope John Paul seems to be balanced at least by Catholic standards, but this cardinal in question has my wife's parents upset. Their question is will this next Pope be as godly as John Paul? They are saying, 'Could this next Pope with non-orthodox views lead the church away from God? Could possibly the next Pope evolve into the feared Antichrist?

 

I resent that. I stopped posted after it got off track, but before I stopped, I offered a fairly detailed examination of it. Please do not make such a sweeping statement when you admit you haven't read the whole thread. You can't be "pretty certain" of anything if you admittedly haven't read it all.

The only thing that shakes me is the fact that the author of the piece equivicated two unequivicable questions, and no one who is not Catholic seems to care about that.

God bless,

Grant

 

What is non-orthodox? This present Pope says the same thing. As far as if this next Pope will be as godly...... I will go by his confession of faith that Jesus Christ guides his life, and his confessing that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. I thought you guys believed in faith alone. Or is it that one has to believe in the doctrine of "faith alone"?


God Bless

[ June 21, 2003, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

Grant,

No offence intended, I read the first 3/4 pages of this thread and I have read just about every other catholic related thread postsed on here for the last 2/3 months.

I am pretty certain that, unless there has been a dramatic change around here in the last couple of days, no-one has come up with a reasonable explanation for the cardinal's statement.

Kathryn points out that he said something different in another article, this proves nothing. Less than 4 years ago I believed in the infallibility of the Pope,that certainly doesn't mean I believe in it now.

My parents and sister are still catholic, I have a lot of respect for the catholic people, but reading this quote and thinking about the implications of it has left me even more worried about their future within the CC.

I appreciate that as catholics you feel the need to defend your faith, thats quite understandable, the problem is that you seem to believe that those people who hold high office in the church should not be held accountable for anything they say. Are all Cardinals infallible, are they all above being challenged about this kind of remark.

I know that if I was still catholic, I wouldn't be happy with that quote, I wouldn't be trying to find excuses for it. My number one concern wouldn't be trying to defend it on a Baptist discussion board, I would be trying to get answers from the man himself. Why did he say it, was he misunderstood, did he mean what he implies in the quote?, these are questions that only he can answer, you won't find the answers on here.

This is a man who may well be the leader of the catholic church in a few years time, are you not concerned at all about that.

I have, since my last post read the posts on P7 of this thread, Kathryn provided a quote which ended with the following remark...

It seems to have gone unnoticed that this quote clearly implies that the Cardinal believes there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. Here is gives the church the honour and glory that belongs to Jesus Christ alone.

Sincerely, if MY ETERNAL LIFE depended on a church that had this man as its leader then I would be seeking to have him clarify his position with regard to Salvation through Christ alone.

I hope this hasn't offended any of the catholic people on here, I and many others are genuinely concerned about where you and millions like you spend eternity, so please don't think that any posts attacking the RCC are in any way personal.

God Bless

Enda

 

Enda, you clearly have not read the thread. The Cardinal is quite consistent is all he has said, and with the teachings of the Church, and with the present Pope. He even said what the reporter said he said. You have chosen to believe what you believe without looking at the facts.

God Bless

P.S. It is a given you guys are going to claim he is the anti-Christ. Pope John Paul II has been the anti-Christ for you guys all these years. You have never accepted his confession of faith in Jesus Christ either. Goes with the territory. So much for faith alone.

[ June 21, 2003, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

Just goes to show how little attention you pay to what people post on here. I have never suggeted that the Pope is the anti-christ, neither have I suggested that a future Pope will be the anti-christ. I dislike the fact that others do suggest this at times. In fact I have gotten into arguments with people on this board who are sometimes less than tactful in their approach to catholics.

Think before you post this kind of remark to me in future or you might find I will be less concerned about offending you.

Honestly Kathryn the more time I spend on here the more I doubt your sincerity. Obviously you disliked my last post but I think you'll find there is nothing really offensive in it. Perhaps it was the fact I picked up on the 'Noahs Ark' reference that you didn't like.

God Bless

Enda

 

As previously posted, Cardinal Arinzi’s statement in his own words consistent with all his other words, consistent with the present Pope's words, and the teachings of the Catholic Church. :

God Bless

 

Originally posted by Kathryn

Here are the facts as I see them..

1. Cardinal Arinze made the statement.

2. Nothing on this thread changes that or explains what he actually meant by it.

3. You are a confessed follower of a church that may have this man as its 'infallible' leader.

4. You appear to be unconcerned about this.

5. You have failed to provide evidence that the quote has been clarified or refuted by the Cardinal.

What conclusion can we arrive at , other than believing that he meant what he said, and that we should take the remark literally.

If we was leader of my church I'd want to know why he was happy to associate himself with an idolotrous Buddhist. What is going on in the Catholic Church, why aren't you people concerned, are you lovers of the truth or lovers of men?

God Bless

Enda

 

Seek and ye shall find.

Next.