CatholicConvert
New Member
Thank you SheEagle. And may the joy and blessing of the Lord be your part and parcel this coming Christmas.
Ahhhhh, DHK!!!
I can always count upon you for some fun, can't I?
Your link is bogus, the man claims he is a "Deist," and is somewhat of an atheist trying to prove that Christianity is bogus.
Oh, DHK, you are such fun!! Don't you realize that as an atheist he is an UNBIASED SOURCE to prove the point I made?
So What! I am not impressed by such futile attempts to thwart the puposes of God in the redemption of mankind--that which can never be thwarted.
That was not the point of posting this link. The point was to show that paganism came up with these ideas long before the Truth came and put the reality of them in Flesh.
Here is a quoted from your beloved site:
Hahaaaaaaahahahahaha!!! Not a beloved site at all. I just typed in the words crucified saviors and came up with this. I just want to show you some proof from another source.
Let's get this straight. Christianity does not come from paganism. It never did. It comes from the direct revelation of God Almighty.
Did I say it did? I said nothing of the sort. I said that the truth was out there, but since the pagans did not have a full and complete revelation, they were groping in the dark and stumbled upon some things in their darkness which just happened to be the truth. They couldn't even put a proper name to it (i.e., the Blessed Trinity - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), but their definition was correct.
Satan has its counterfeits and always will.
Well sure. That is why the pagans got everything right in substance (the Trinity, for instance) but wrong in name. They were misled, being in darkness. But now the full revelation has come, and all are called to accept that revelation in Christ.
If you want to put things satanically backwards then you are deceiving the people. God came first, not Satan. God always was, and is eternal; not Satan. Satan counterfeits Christianity. Catholicism is a counterfeit of what Biblical Christianity really is.
3 - 2 - 1 Launch Polemic Screed Missle number 1!!!
Naaaaaaaw.
It did not start until the fourth century when Constantine tried to marry Christendom to the state, and in doing so brought in many pagan customs into Christendom.
3 - 2 - 1 Launch Polemic Screed Missle number 2!!!
Naaaaaaaawwww.
So far you are batting zero, my man. Constantine moved the headquarters of the Church from Rome to a sleepy little town on the Adriatic Sea called Byzantium, renamed it Constantinople (so he had an ego, we all do!!) and did that specifically because he was upset that paganism was affecting the Church and he wished the Church to stay pure.
At that time Christianity was paganized, and in part the pagans were Christianized. But there still remained groups of believers, local assemblies true to the Word of God in every age that were outside of this ungodly marriage that was soon to be called the Roman Catholic Church.
I really wish you would tell me these kinds of jokes while I have a mouthful of food. I darn near choked laughing!!!
As I have said before, there is no evidence whatsoever to support your distortion of history and the idea of your little Fundamentalist enclaves as you present it. The historical evidence is that there was only one Church, led by St. Peter and those who succeeded him, and that this Church from day one was Catholic in praxis. The writings of the Early Fathers show that long before the Council of Nicea the Church believed in and practiced baptismal regeneration and taught that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. You have been given numerous posts with quotes from the Early Fathers proving this, therefore, I will not repeat myself to you.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the Early Church was run like a Baptist meeting house. Nothing written which speaks of "accepting Jesus into your heart" (not even in the Bible, which says to be BAPTIZED INTO THE REMISSION OF SINS in Acts). It is all in your imagination.
All means all, and you had better use that word carefully.
That is ALL I need to know. If I have a problem with doctrine or morality, I can go to the Church for the answer. It is not of me or in me to figure things out. Remember that the Bible says that SOME are teachers. Not all. Some. In Protestantism, every man considers himself a teacher, and if he comes up with some sort of theological novelty and others will not accept his position, he just runs off, finds a discarded biscuit factory, and starts a "church".
The Catholic Church in your eyes is the true church; but why try to deceive others.
That's what I wonder about all the Protestant "preachers" and "teachers" who taught me falsehoods about the Church and its history as if these falsehoods were nuggets of gold. Why DO Protestant leaders try to decieve others by refusing to teach the Early Fathers in Sunday School, by teaching that "faith alone" is the original intent of the writings of the Bible, and by twisting and distorting the teachings of the Church to say that which it does not say?
As that site pointed out it is the harlot church. It is a counterfeit church.
Ummmmmm.......I thought you said this guy is a deist. Calling the Catholic Church "harlot" is NOT something deists do. It is something that fans of Jack Chick funny pages do.
It never had the truth to begin with.
Not what Jesus said. He promised that the apostles would be led into ALL (there's that word again) truth (John 13: 16) in the Upper Room. That truth was transmitted faithfully from generation to generation for 400 years before there was even a New Testament extant. You figure it out. How did the Early Church even know how to worship in the first 40 years after Christ died? The first 100? The first 300? They certainly didn't have any blueprints from the Old Testament, for if they had followed that, they would have continued Judaism intact, wouldn't they?
They knew because they were taught ORALLY the TRADITIONS which were handed down from generation to generation.
You speak very boldly and pompously: "ROME HAS SPOKEN" Whopee! So what!
Tell THAT to Jesus when you meet Him:
Mt 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
If a man will NOT hear the Church in disputes....seems that Christ has a much higher opinion of the Church than you do. Same thing with the statement He makes to St. Peter:
Mt 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Mt 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Whooooooweee!! That's power and authority!!!
So has every other cult under the sun. So did Jim Jones speak, and see where it got him! The Catholic Church spoke and many God-fearing Christians were drowned, beheaded, murdered, martyred for their faith; and for one reason only--believing and preaching the gospel. Read Foxes Book of Martyrs.
If I remember correctly, there were numbers of Catholics in Foxes Book of Martyrs. After all, since Protestantism only started in 1517, any martyrs prior to that were either Catholics or heretics like the Albigensians, the Waldenses,
Protestants abhor your false interpretation of John 6:53, and thus the resulting blasphemy.
You continue to amuse me so highly. If you could just put down your prejudice and read the writings of the second century, you would see that those who lived that close to our Lord's being on earth had the same idea -- that it is not wine nor bread, but the true Blood and Body of our Lord.
Christ was once offered for the sins of many. He has never been re-offered, re-sacrificed, re-presenting to God that which is eternal--all unbiblical concepts--all blasphemy to God.
Tell it to John the Beloved. He SAW Heaven (something I sincerely doubt you have done) and saw the Lamb there as it had been slain. John saw the reality which you cannot understand and do not wish to accept -- i.e., that the slain Lamb is STILL THERE TODAY, still slain in the eyes of God the Father for the salvation of the world.
If Jesus Christ is truly in the Eucharist then you are truly a cannibal for eating Him, after all you used the definition of the word as "to injure." I could think of nothing more injurious.
The act of the sacrifice of the mass is gross irreverence to the majesty of the Almighty God who sits on the Throne of God, after shedding His blood once and for all.
It is a mystery. In fact, in the Orthodox Faith, we call the Eucharist "the Holy Mysteries". It is not understandable how this can be, but it is, nonetheless. You are like a Jehovah's Witness who, being unable to understand and define how God exists in the Blessed Trinity, denies it because he cannot wrap his mind around it. God is much bigger than that.
He died once, and only once. A man does not die continuously. When my Grandfather died, he died, and that was it.
Your grandfather, God rest his soul, is not God. Yet God sees his death as if it is happening even now. The difference is that because of the nature of the death of Christ, God takes that death and applies it to our sins.
That is a ridiculous thought even to think of. Christ died once, and once for all.
Not at all. You prove to me that there is time in Heaven and eternity.
When he died, he was dead, and put in the grave for three days and nights. Then he rose from the dead. Do you believe the gospel account. He was dead. He did not continuously die even in the grave. He died once. Thus the need for the resurrection. You do believe in the resurrection don't you? If so, then there is no need for a Mass.
The Mass is the celebration of the Resurrection. If there was no Resurrection, then we have no living sacrifice to offer.
I repeat, mental assent to the facts is NOT the same as experiental union with Him. You need His Blood for your sins, and you need Jesus in the Eucharist to have union with Him. Salvation is our union with Christ, and there is nothing closer to the eternal union we will have with and in Him in all eternity than the Mass. It is the foretaste of Heaven for those who are spiritually tuned in to it.
The Catholic Mass is a lie, when they try to re-offer the flesh and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Heresy and blasphemy is what it is, but it is not a lie, not according to Scripture.
I tried to point out that there are denotative meanings and connotative meanings of words.
"You must eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood". Those listening so connoted and denoted the meaning to be real that they walked away from Him. I guess you didn't catch that.
"This IS my Body. This IS my Blood"
You can connote that all you wish and it will not change the words of our Lord, what He meant by them, and what those listening understood. It is beyond belief that believers only 70 years removed from His death, those who spoke Greek fluently, would come to the understanding that indeed the Body and Blood of the Lord really do appear in the Eucharist.
Brother Ed
Ahhhhh, DHK!!!
I can always count upon you for some fun, can't I?
Your link is bogus, the man claims he is a "Deist," and is somewhat of an atheist trying to prove that Christianity is bogus.
Oh, DHK, you are such fun!! Don't you realize that as an atheist he is an UNBIASED SOURCE to prove the point I made?
So What! I am not impressed by such futile attempts to thwart the puposes of God in the redemption of mankind--that which can never be thwarted.
That was not the point of posting this link. The point was to show that paganism came up with these ideas long before the Truth came and put the reality of them in Flesh.
Here is a quoted from your beloved site:
Hahaaaaaaahahahahaha!!! Not a beloved site at all. I just typed in the words crucified saviors and came up with this. I just want to show you some proof from another source.
Let's get this straight. Christianity does not come from paganism. It never did. It comes from the direct revelation of God Almighty.
Did I say it did? I said nothing of the sort. I said that the truth was out there, but since the pagans did not have a full and complete revelation, they were groping in the dark and stumbled upon some things in their darkness which just happened to be the truth. They couldn't even put a proper name to it (i.e., the Blessed Trinity - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), but their definition was correct.
Satan has its counterfeits and always will.
Well sure. That is why the pagans got everything right in substance (the Trinity, for instance) but wrong in name. They were misled, being in darkness. But now the full revelation has come, and all are called to accept that revelation in Christ.
If you want to put things satanically backwards then you are deceiving the people. God came first, not Satan. God always was, and is eternal; not Satan. Satan counterfeits Christianity. Catholicism is a counterfeit of what Biblical Christianity really is.
3 - 2 - 1 Launch Polemic Screed Missle number 1!!!
Naaaaaaaw.
It did not start until the fourth century when Constantine tried to marry Christendom to the state, and in doing so brought in many pagan customs into Christendom.
3 - 2 - 1 Launch Polemic Screed Missle number 2!!!
Naaaaaaaawwww.
So far you are batting zero, my man. Constantine moved the headquarters of the Church from Rome to a sleepy little town on the Adriatic Sea called Byzantium, renamed it Constantinople (so he had an ego, we all do!!) and did that specifically because he was upset that paganism was affecting the Church and he wished the Church to stay pure.
At that time Christianity was paganized, and in part the pagans were Christianized. But there still remained groups of believers, local assemblies true to the Word of God in every age that were outside of this ungodly marriage that was soon to be called the Roman Catholic Church.
I really wish you would tell me these kinds of jokes while I have a mouthful of food. I darn near choked laughing!!!
As I have said before, there is no evidence whatsoever to support your distortion of history and the idea of your little Fundamentalist enclaves as you present it. The historical evidence is that there was only one Church, led by St. Peter and those who succeeded him, and that this Church from day one was Catholic in praxis. The writings of the Early Fathers show that long before the Council of Nicea the Church believed in and practiced baptismal regeneration and taught that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. You have been given numerous posts with quotes from the Early Fathers proving this, therefore, I will not repeat myself to you.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the Early Church was run like a Baptist meeting house. Nothing written which speaks of "accepting Jesus into your heart" (not even in the Bible, which says to be BAPTIZED INTO THE REMISSION OF SINS in Acts). It is all in your imagination.
All means all, and you had better use that word carefully.
That is ALL I need to know. If I have a problem with doctrine or morality, I can go to the Church for the answer. It is not of me or in me to figure things out. Remember that the Bible says that SOME are teachers. Not all. Some. In Protestantism, every man considers himself a teacher, and if he comes up with some sort of theological novelty and others will not accept his position, he just runs off, finds a discarded biscuit factory, and starts a "church".
The Catholic Church in your eyes is the true church; but why try to deceive others.
That's what I wonder about all the Protestant "preachers" and "teachers" who taught me falsehoods about the Church and its history as if these falsehoods were nuggets of gold. Why DO Protestant leaders try to decieve others by refusing to teach the Early Fathers in Sunday School, by teaching that "faith alone" is the original intent of the writings of the Bible, and by twisting and distorting the teachings of the Church to say that which it does not say?
As that site pointed out it is the harlot church. It is a counterfeit church.
Ummmmmm.......I thought you said this guy is a deist. Calling the Catholic Church "harlot" is NOT something deists do. It is something that fans of Jack Chick funny pages do.
It never had the truth to begin with.
Not what Jesus said. He promised that the apostles would be led into ALL (there's that word again) truth (John 13: 16) in the Upper Room. That truth was transmitted faithfully from generation to generation for 400 years before there was even a New Testament extant. You figure it out. How did the Early Church even know how to worship in the first 40 years after Christ died? The first 100? The first 300? They certainly didn't have any blueprints from the Old Testament, for if they had followed that, they would have continued Judaism intact, wouldn't they?
They knew because they were taught ORALLY the TRADITIONS which were handed down from generation to generation.
You speak very boldly and pompously: "ROME HAS SPOKEN" Whopee! So what!
Tell THAT to Jesus when you meet Him:
Mt 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
If a man will NOT hear the Church in disputes....seems that Christ has a much higher opinion of the Church than you do. Same thing with the statement He makes to St. Peter:
Mt 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Mt 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Whooooooweee!! That's power and authority!!!
So has every other cult under the sun. So did Jim Jones speak, and see where it got him! The Catholic Church spoke and many God-fearing Christians were drowned, beheaded, murdered, martyred for their faith; and for one reason only--believing and preaching the gospel. Read Foxes Book of Martyrs.
If I remember correctly, there were numbers of Catholics in Foxes Book of Martyrs. After all, since Protestantism only started in 1517, any martyrs prior to that were either Catholics or heretics like the Albigensians, the Waldenses,
Protestants abhor your false interpretation of John 6:53, and thus the resulting blasphemy.
You continue to amuse me so highly. If you could just put down your prejudice and read the writings of the second century, you would see that those who lived that close to our Lord's being on earth had the same idea -- that it is not wine nor bread, but the true Blood and Body of our Lord.
Christ was once offered for the sins of many. He has never been re-offered, re-sacrificed, re-presenting to God that which is eternal--all unbiblical concepts--all blasphemy to God.
Tell it to John the Beloved. He SAW Heaven (something I sincerely doubt you have done) and saw the Lamb there as it had been slain. John saw the reality which you cannot understand and do not wish to accept -- i.e., that the slain Lamb is STILL THERE TODAY, still slain in the eyes of God the Father for the salvation of the world.
If Jesus Christ is truly in the Eucharist then you are truly a cannibal for eating Him, after all you used the definition of the word as "to injure." I could think of nothing more injurious.
The act of the sacrifice of the mass is gross irreverence to the majesty of the Almighty God who sits on the Throne of God, after shedding His blood once and for all.
It is a mystery. In fact, in the Orthodox Faith, we call the Eucharist "the Holy Mysteries". It is not understandable how this can be, but it is, nonetheless. You are like a Jehovah's Witness who, being unable to understand and define how God exists in the Blessed Trinity, denies it because he cannot wrap his mind around it. God is much bigger than that.
He died once, and only once. A man does not die continuously. When my Grandfather died, he died, and that was it.
Your grandfather, God rest his soul, is not God. Yet God sees his death as if it is happening even now. The difference is that because of the nature of the death of Christ, God takes that death and applies it to our sins.
That is a ridiculous thought even to think of. Christ died once, and once for all.
Not at all. You prove to me that there is time in Heaven and eternity.
When he died, he was dead, and put in the grave for three days and nights. Then he rose from the dead. Do you believe the gospel account. He was dead. He did not continuously die even in the grave. He died once. Thus the need for the resurrection. You do believe in the resurrection don't you? If so, then there is no need for a Mass.
The Mass is the celebration of the Resurrection. If there was no Resurrection, then we have no living sacrifice to offer.
I repeat, mental assent to the facts is NOT the same as experiental union with Him. You need His Blood for your sins, and you need Jesus in the Eucharist to have union with Him. Salvation is our union with Christ, and there is nothing closer to the eternal union we will have with and in Him in all eternity than the Mass. It is the foretaste of Heaven for those who are spiritually tuned in to it.
The Catholic Mass is a lie, when they try to re-offer the flesh and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Heresy and blasphemy is what it is, but it is not a lie, not according to Scripture.
I tried to point out that there are denotative meanings and connotative meanings of words.
"You must eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood". Those listening so connoted and denoted the meaning to be real that they walked away from Him. I guess you didn't catch that.
"This IS my Body. This IS my Blood"
You can connote that all you wish and it will not change the words of our Lord, what He meant by them, and what those listening understood. It is beyond belief that believers only 70 years removed from His death, those who spoke Greek fluently, would come to the understanding that indeed the Body and Blood of the Lord really do appear in the Eucharist.
Brother Ed