A sincere question for Catholics

[thessalonian]

Larae,

Thanks. I should have made that point as on these boards it is important to be complete since discernement of truth is a definite problem (for all these non-catholics who try to prove Catholicism wrong to legitimize their own divergent thinking.

 

[LaRae]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Larae,

Thanks. I should have made that point as on these boards it is important to be complete since discernement of truth is a definite problem (for all these non-catholics who try to prove Catholicism wrong to legitimize their own divergent thinking.

Welcome Thess

I have a link, in case you haven't seen this before that shows the status of all the apparitions and their status.....the site looks to be in line with the Church...so it should be accurate.

http://www.apparitions.org/


LaRae

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by LaRae:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by thessalonian:
Larae,

Thanks. I should have made that point as on these boards it is important to be complete since discernement of truth is a definite problem (for all these non-catholics who try to prove Catholicism wrong to legitimize their own divergent thinking.

Welcome Thess

I have a link, in case you haven't seen this before that shows the status of all the apparitions and their status.....the site looks to be in line with the Church...so it should be accurate.

http://www.apparitions.org/


LaRae </font>[/QUOTE]Thanks LaRae, I am familiar with it but I am sure it will help others.

Blessings

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
Check the SDA handbook.

This stuff is too kooky for even the strident anti-Catholic to swallow.

If there were even an ounce of semi half distorted truth to any of it, it would have spread like wildfire through the anti-Catholic bigot grapevine and there would be countless books and Chick tracts on it.

BTW, you claim to be so careful about false witness but your story has changed from "the Pope said" to "Mary said".

Doesn't seem like you are being all that careful to me.

Given, but you should seriously try learning to read before you accuse someone of false witness. I in no way, shape, or form have 'changed' my story from the Pope to Fatima.

They BOTH have said it.

That is CLEARLY not changing my story, but announcing that there is CONCRETE evidence of another source.

Get a hobby.

 

[3AngelsMom]

To the Catholics, who think they know everything:

Firstly,
Ellen White NEVER claimed to hear DEAD people!

These Fatima prophecies are the most laughable thing I have ever read.

You Catholics try to throw stones at SDA's for our reading the literary works of a REAL person, who claimed inspiration from the Holy Spirit through dreams and visions (totally scriptural method of receiving messages from God), all the while, LOW AND BEHOLD, YOU! YOU! YOU!!! have you own little PROPHETESS!

The funny part is that this 'woman' who claimed to be speaking with Mary was sinning a mortal sin by trying to converse with the DEAD.

Worse though, is that it was not Mary at all, it was DEMONS.

How deceived can someone get before they go insane?

Ask the woman who claimed these apparitions.

How did she die?

I 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?

I got this information from CATHOLICS.

Laughable indeed.

 

[thessalonian]

"The funny part is that this 'woman' who claimed to be speaking with Mary was sinning a mortal sin by trying to converse with the DEAD."

Well if that is a sin, then I guess jesus sinned.

Matthew 17:3
And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.


You ask a supposedly sincere question than go about your usual bashings.

Do drop in again sometime.

 

[dianetavegia]

Well if that is a sin, then I guess jesus sinned.

You don't know your Bible very well, Thess...... or you'd know that scripture CLEARLY says:

Necromancer

One who inquires of the dead.
There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a NECROMANCER. (Deuteronomy 18:10-11)

Necromancer: "one who interrogates the dead," as the word literally means, with the view of discovering the secrets of futurity (Compare 1 Samuel 28:7).

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Well if that is a sin, then I guess jesus sinned.

You don't know your Bible very well, Thess...... or you'd know that scripture CLEARLY says:

Necromancer

One who inquires of the dead.
There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a NECROMANCER. (Deuteronomy 18:10-11)

Necromancer: "one who interrogates the dead," as the word literally means, with the view of discovering the secrets of futurity (Compare 1 Samuel 28:7).

</font>[/QUOTE]I am well aware of the definition of necromacy and that verse. In order to know the Bible well however you have to have the proper understanding. Mormons quote it all the time and I think you will agree with me that they do not understand it. Seems like the understanding is much more important than the quoting. You have quoted a verse for me but you have not reconciled it with Jesus speaking to Moses and Elijah and telling me how he was not in violation of necromacy.

Matthew 17:3
And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, TALKING with Him.


Apparently not all contact with someone who used to walk this earth is a violation of the verse you cited. I think there is good reason to believe that the Marian apparitions are of the type of the moses and elijah apparations and the ones below, rather than the necromacy type. After the resurrection many of the relatives of those in Jerusalem appeared.

Matthew 27:52
The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;
and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.

So is that a violation of necromacy also?

Thanks for the input though.


Blessings

 

[dianetavegia]

Elijah died? When was that? News to me!

2 Kings 2:11 NKJV
Then it happened, as they continued on and talked, that suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire, and separated the two of them; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Elijah died? When was that? News to me!

2 Kings 2:11 NKJV
Then it happened, as they continued on and talked, that suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire, and separated the two of them; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

All well and good. So I will grant you elijah is okay even though I don't see where I said he ever died and am well aware of the verse you cite also. You still didn't deal with Moses:

Jude 1:9
But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!"

Sounds like Moses died to me. And as I recall God didn't alow him in to the promised land. He died before the Israelites entered.
Or the apparitions in Jerusalem. By the way, we Catholics don't believe that Mary is dead but is in heaven so she would be in the same category as Elijah. So I guess that is not necromacy then.

Give it your best. Give me a one size answer fits all.

Blessings

BTW - Your elijah quote touches exactly on why these apparitions are not necromacy.

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
"The funny part is that this 'woman' who claimed to be speaking with Mary was sinning a mortal sin by trying to converse with the DEAD."

Well if that is a sin, then I guess jesus sinned.

Matthew 17:3
And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.

Elijah was taken, he did not die, Moses was resurrected, therefore he was no longer dead. Haven't we been through this already? You do OWN a Bible don't you?

You ask a supposedly sincere question than go about your usual bashings.

Give me a break! what? Are we in the third grade now? Who am I bashing? I DID ask a sincere question. NNE has answered it.

WHAT DO YOU THINK about YOUR future "Christ on Earth", "Holy Father" saying that you don't need to accept Jesus to be saved? THAT is what I want to know.

As usual the Catholics here changed the subject to avoid the question.

THAT is what is usual here.

Do drop in again sometime.

You can count on it.

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by Briguy:
Kelly, The next logical question then is why "share the gospel throughout the world" if by sharing we make some accountable and destined for Hell, just by sharing with them. Left alone they will go to Heaven, share Jesus with them and they may not. This has always been troubling to me. The belief that holds closet to the word of God is that only those who are elected by God and given as a gift from the Father to the Son will enter Heaven (John 17). The way the elect are known is by their belief in Christ, their receiving of the Holy Spirit and the working out of their faith.

That said, I am still seeking God on this because children and those who haven't heard going to Hell is a tough concept. I do though understand the thought that says it isn't unfair for someone to get what they deserve and we all enter the world deserving Hell. The point here we have to stay true to scripture and not let our feelings get in the way.

Seeking Truth always,

Brian

Quandry? Should we tell people that the actions they are living in seal their fate? Absolutely! "But why", you ask, "if my witness can make or break their fate?" Well it is simple, if we fail to tell people the truth, then THEIR blood will be required of us. Each man must make a choice. Like you said, each person is 'elected' to Salvation, if they CHOOSE to reject Christ, then the blood is ON THEM. We must, however, continue to tell others about sin, and the CURE. If we don't, then we, ourselves, have failed.

I can see the problem though, if you think that people who have not heard will not be accountable, why take the chance that they will reject Christ. The answer is simple. Each man, woman and child that is of age, will be held accountable for the 'light' that they have been given. If all they know, like African tribesmen, is that they live in a jungle, or plane, and SOMEONE put them there, then THAT is what will be required of them. If they have been visited by Missionaries, and KNOW that Jesus came to the earth, and died for the sins that the missionaries told them about, then THAT is what they are responsible for. American Indians, the subjects chosen here, having never heard of Jesus or Yahweh, will not be held accountable for the things they may have done that was against the Law of Yahweh. Like worshipping more than one god, for instance. They do not know that there is ONE God. Therefore they do, as Paul says, what they know to be right, making a law to themselves. Which, again, as Paul says, EXUSES them.

A quandry indeed.

Keep in mind always that Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE world, making a way for grace to pass on all men. The question is, are they guilty by ignorance, which God winks at, or by choice, in which God is calling them to repent?

God Bless,
Kelly

 

[thessalonian]

Elijah was taken, he did not die, Moses was resurrected, therefore he was no longer dead. Haven't we been through this already?

I handle Elijah already.
Moses resurected before Jesus resurrection? Hmmm, thought Jesus was the first fruits. I guess when your an SDA you can deny any truth and it is fine. Yes, I have a Bible. Once again it is apparent that yours is as good as toilet paper to you because you don't understand what you read.

Your light is darkness. See mt. 6.

By the way, I answered your question but you were unable to understand the answer because of the veil over your eyes in the form of false manmade traditins of Ellen G.

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
[QB] Elijah was taken, he did not die, Moses was resurrected, therefore he was no longer dead. Haven't we been through this already?

I handled Elijah already.
Moses resurected before Jesus resurrection? Hmmm, thought Jesus was the first fruits. I guess when your an SDA you can deny any truth and it is fine. Yes, I have a Bible.

Good! Then perhaps you can tell me where it says that Jesus is the 'firstfruits'? Interesting that you accuse me of denying truth because I am an SDA, when you are pulling stuff out of no where! Jesus is the first BEGOTTEN of the dead. He is ALSO the ONLY Begotten SON of God. Was MOSES 'begotten' of the dead? NOPE. Try again.

Once again it is apparent that yours is as good as toilet paper to you because you don't understand what you read.

That's lovely. So then I should wipe my butt with the Word of God? You are sick.

Your light is darkness. See mt. 6.

My light? It isn't 'my light'. The light that has been given to me is from the Word of God. It is STILL His light.

By the way, I answered your question but you were unable to understand the answer because of the veil over your eyes in the form of false manmade traditins of Ellen G.

You really do look quite foolish when you do that. I don't read EGW. How many times have I said that? You are reminding me of my 5 year old who I have to tell everything to 50 times. Pay attention. I DO NOT READ ELLEN WHITE, THERFORE, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT I GET MY DOCTRINES FROM HER. I READ THE BIBLE. &lt;-----Period.

You answered my question?

"Jesus is the only way. The Cardinal's statement does not contradict that except in the writer's and anti-Catholic minds. Romans 1 and 2:15 is the key but why bother. You will say na na boo boo your interprutation is wrong in my opinion."

THAT was an answer to this?????

"I am sincerely wondering if it is a shock to the Catholic community as well, or if you are singing right along with this man?"

You didn't answer the question Thess, you argued that the writer 'presented' the Cardinal's statements in an 'anticatholic' light and that our interpretation of his statements are wrong.

If I asked you this question:

"Can you get to heaven without accepting Jesus" and YOU said "Expressly YES", that would tell me that you think there is ANOTHER WAY other than Jesus!

So there is a CLEAR contradiction between your statement and his!

God Bless,
Kelly

 

[Kathryn]

From Cardinal Arinze’s originally posted 5/17/2003 speech with his confession of faith in Jesus Christ as the way, the truth and the life:

My Catholic faith puts me in contact with Jesus Christ who is the way, the truth and the life (cf Jn 14:6). God's grace helps me to live on earth in such a way as to attain the purpose of my earthly existence.

Excerpt from Cardinal Arinze’s 10/26/2000 explanation of possibility of salvation for non-Christians through Jesus Christ . :

But there are people who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church. They also are included in God's plan of salvation. There are, however, conditions. They must be sincere in their seeking of God. They must be open to the secret but real action of the Holy Spirit in them. They should follow their conscience in all matters of right and wrong. Because Christ has taken on human nature and somehow united himself with every man and woman, God can in ways known to him put people in link with the saving mysteries of Christ (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 22). He can give them the grace needed for salvation.

But to say that the followers of other religions can attain salvation under some conditions does not mean to ignore the fact that in these religions there ~re limits, errors and shadows. As St Paul says: "Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair" (Rom 1:21,25). This explains why the Catholic Church "painstakingly fosters her missionary work" (Lumen Gentium, 16) so that, becoming full members of the Church, people may have access to the fullness of the means of salvation, a fullness to be found only in the Church which is the ordinary means to salvation. The CCC therefore says: "To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is 'the world reconciled.' She is that bark which 'in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.' According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood" (CCC 845; cf. also CDF, Dominus Jesus, 20-22). Cardinal Arinze Oct 26, 2000

God Bless

P.S.
He confesses His faith and tells people that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life. He also believes strongly in the Church's missionary work so that all will come to know the fullness of the truth in Jesus Christ.

[ June 20, 2003, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

[Ray Berrian]

3AngelsMom,

In response to your initiatory new post, I will go on record as saying that only through the Name and reality of Jesus will any of us be saved. We know His words from His sacred lips. ' . . . no person comes to the Father but by Me.' Those who disagree with Jesus will not even receive a hearing at the Great White Throne Judgment, they will be unceremonially escorted to Hell.[Rev. 20:11]

Just because a person is a cardinal is no assurance that they are born of the Spirit and worthy of Heaven. Jesus said, 'Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not preached in Thy Name . . . ' Oh the tragedy that Jesus could say this to any clergy, 'I never knew you; depart from Me . . . ' [Matthew 7:23]

 

[3AngelsMom]

Kathryn,

I appreciate that this man HAS made statements that confirm to you and others that He believes that Jesus is the 'Way, Truth and Life', but the problem here is that He told the reporter at the Dallas Morning News that YES someone can be saved without excepting Jesus.

His past, present and future statements cannot erase the statement he made to them.

Which is it? Has he changed his mind since that interview?

I'm serious. Did he once believe that Muslims, who believe Jesus is a prophet, but do not recognize Him as the Messiah, and Budhists who, if I am not mistaken deny that He even existed in the first place, can enter into the Glory of the Lord WITHOUT excepting Jesus as the Son of God, who died for them?

And now He doesn't?

What's up?

God Bless,
Kelly

 

[faithcontender]

I don't wonder why the cardinal said these things. He is promoting ecumenical movement - a different type of approach in bringing all people under one church with the pope as the visible head. In the past, the catholic Church use force to bring all people into one ruler. They burned the "heretics", make war with the muslims as their enemies. Now that the civilizations is enlightened, they are now using a different approach. They are now calling the "heretics" as separated brethren, muslims as brothers. What's behind this? Is the Catholic Church changing? Or are they just playing the game: If by force you can not win them, join them. Take note the pope still claim to be the universal pontiff, the vicar of christ, the "king of kings" the 'lord of lords".

 

[3AngelsMom]

Thank you for that insight, contender, so true.

I have a question for you.

Our Sabbath School Teacher asked us this and it requires a great deal of thought, and self reflection.

Read this: Rev 2:17

What will yours say?

God Bless,
Kelly

 

[Kathryn]

Cardinal Arinze can speak for himself. You can read his own speaches to the world. You don't need to have a reporter who may not even be a Christian or may be anti-Catholic interpret what he means.

He confesses Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. He tells the world Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life in his own life. He tells the world about God's grace working in his life. He is witnessing his faith.

My Catholic faith puts me in contact with Jesus Christ who is the way, the truth and the life (cf Jn 14:6). God's grace helps me to live on earth in such a way as to attain the purpose of my earthly existence.

He explains the importance of the missionary activities of the Church to bring people to the truth of Jesus Christ. Remember, he is not preaching there is no need to believe in Jesus. He is preaching Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.

Only when asked by the reporter if he believes any from other religions could be saved, does he say yes. He is not preaching to stay in ignorance and the dark. This is very important. He is not hiding the gospel, he is spreading the gospel.

I will add that Jesus Christ Himself says, those who do the will of His father are His brothers and sisters. How can this be if they have not heard the gospel? Could a Buddhist do the will of the Father and not know Jesus Christ? Jesus Christ will be the judge.

All salvation is through Jesus Christ. Most Christians believe if a baby or small child, or retarded person died, God will make some exception. In any case it is through the merits of Jesus Christ on the cross that anyone can be saved. So, all salvation is not limited to only those taking Jesus Christ as a personal savior. Jesus is not limited by His covenant. He is God and is the judge of all....the baby, the retarded, the ignorant, the person who never met Jesus Christ. This however is not God's plan of salvation for us. Cardinal Arinze is not preaching another way. He is preaching Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life.

God Bless

[ June 21, 2003, 03:16 AM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]