Catholic Heresy (for the record)

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
Of course they weren't canonized, they attacked Thomas More. Also, Thomas More was a strict man when it came to law. Even St. Thomas Aquinas believed in the death penalty for those charged with heresy who would not recant.

I find it interesting that you are willing to vilify a man wrong fully charged and claim "just desserts" at the same time claiming that an argument to the contrary is obviously devious.
Are you unable to read? I am not referring to his own trial, but the mockery of trials that he gave to others. I never mentioned 'just desserts'. That is your invention. You are certainly like your church, devious and dishonest. The question is not how he should be seen in the light of his own times, but how he should be seen in God's pure light.

He was a judicial murderer of children of God who sought to give the Bible to England in its own tongue.Do you really think that God looks on such behavior with approval? He may be sanctified on earth, he is certainly not specially sanctified in Heaven. Indeed I doubt that he is in Heaven. And the fact that the Roman Catholic church sanctified him on earth in the recent past indicates the lack of true morality in the RC church. It goes along with its paedophilia. Will they be sainted too?
 
Nov 30, 2012
2,396
26
0
I am not vilifying him. I am pointing out what he was. But what I am doing is pointing out the blasphemy of declaring a man like that a saint. And now you mention it the sainting of Thomas Aquinas was equally blasphemous in the light of your words. Have you no concept of what Christ's message is? Does your church justify anything?
Was he now? Tell me...what did King Henry VIII and Tyndale's supporters do to the Catholic priests, nuns, and monks after they took power as Protestants? You ever read about priest holes in England? You ever read about how St. Thomas More is recognized by Anglicans, Lutherans, and some Calvinists as reformation martyrs?

Both sides have blood on their hands in this. And it wasn't non-Christians doing these things, it was Christians. Normal everyday Christians.

Yes, I believe St. Thomas More is a saint. As do I believe that St. Thomas Aquinas is a saint.

You want to judge them based on your 21st century Christian beliefs? Go ahead and show yourself a fool. Both sides dealt fatally with what they considered heresy. Because they believed it. Because possibly, they were flawed as are we all. The saints were flawed. So get off your high horse and stop drudging up the past and treating these people as if they are characters in a novel to be scoffed at. They were human and really lived. They were and are loved by their and our Eternal God.

Stop this chronological snobbery. Because guess what...five hundred years from now, it will be a different world, possibly one closer to the Middle Ages than today, where hanging a criminal was done because it was the ONLY choice possible. Where heretics could literally throw an entire nation or city into chaos, and where the freedom of speech was sincerely not a viable option. Not because Kings are corrupt and evil but because LIFE WAS HARD. Where child death rates were astronomical, where death from disease was probable, and living to see old age was a blessing from God Himself. THIS WAS THE WORLD OF ST. THOMAS MORE! And what did he see, he saw threats to the throne of his liege, and when he himself was considered a threat, he stayed silent. He stayed loyal to the king of England. Even though it eventually meant that that throne sought his death through an unfair trial.

So judge history at your own peril, because posterity will judge you too.
 
Nov 30, 2012
2,396
26
0
And the fact that the Roman Catholic church sanctified him on earth in the recent past indicates the lack of true morality in the RC church. It goes along with its paedophilia. Will they be sainted too?
Thus you are a fool. Willing to judge the lot?

Are we all supporters of pedophilia? Because it is what you are implying. Go ahead, join yourself to bigots and prejudice. How much you are willing to cry anti-semitism should someone say that all Jews are greedy, but willing to stand up and point fingers at me and insinuate support of pedophilia. Truly, as AgeofKnowledge put up, anti-Catholicism is one of the last acceptable prejudices.
 

Jackson123

Senior Member
Feb 6, 2014
11,769
1,371
113
The Church decided to call her Theotokos not Theopherus.

Also, Jesus was fully man and fully God. You cannot separate the two...
The church can call anything. it isn't what the church said, but what the bible said.

Base on the bible, Jesus was Mary creator, and was exist before Mary.

Mary is only humanly mother of Jesus when He did his mission on earth for about 34 years.

Jesus not human anymore, and Mary not His mother anymore.

John was my High school teacher for 3 years.

I am not high school anymore,mean John not my teacher anymore.


His obligation to teach me stop as soon as I graduate from high school,
 
T

Tintin

Guest
The church can call anything. it isn't what the church said, but what the bible said.

Base on the bible, Jesus was Mary creator, and was exist before Mary.

Mary is only humanly mother of Jesus when He did his mission on earth for about 34 years.

Jesus not human anymore, and Mary not His mother anymore.

John was my High school teacher for 3 years.

I am not high school anymore,mean John not my teacher anymore.


His obligation to teach me stop as soon as I graduate from high school,
Uh... Jesus is still God/man.
 
Sep 6, 2014
7,034
5,435
113
Thus you are a fool. Willing to judge the lot?

Are we all supporters of pedophilia? Because it is what you are implying. Go ahead, join yourself to bigots and prejudice. How much you are willing to cry anti-semitism should someone say that all Jews are greedy, but willing to stand up and point fingers at me and insinuate support of pedophilia. Truly, as AgeofKnowledge put up, anti-Catholicism is one of the last acceptable prejudices.
Matthew 5:22 NASB
"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.


Mortal Sins: Sex, Crime, and the Era of Catholic Scandal, by Michael D'Antonio (St. Martin's/Dunne 2013). ISBN 978-0-312-59489-3. Read review

Pulitzer Prize–winning journo D’Antonio (Atomic Harvest) pens what will be widely regarded as the definitive history of the Catholic Church’s “most severe crisis since the Reformation”: the revelations of endemic sexual abuse of minors by priests in the United States and Europe. Employing his considerable gift for sifting through mountains of facts, the author carves out a coherent and enthralling narrative, and brings the long-running tragedy to life by focusing on the handful of individuals responsible for bravely exposing the pain and horror of the abused children. In 1984, American priest Thomas Doyle learned of a lawsuit brought by parents of a victim, and was deeply troubled by his superiors’ callous nonchalance toward the suit, and more alarmingly, toward the suffering child. (When Doyle asked a monsignor, “What are you doing for the boys?,” he responded, “As far as I know, nothing.”) Along with plaintiffs’ attorney Jeffrey Anderson, Doyle and a few others worked tirelessly to get the church, the media, and the public to pay attention; their persistence eventually paid off. D’Antonio peoples his reportage with fully realized individuals, and their plight—not to mention the stakes—makes for feverish reading.
www.michaeldantonio.net


Crosses: Portraits of Clergy Abuse, by Carmine Galasso, ISBN: 978-1-904563-59-4.
Accompanying the words are black and white portraits of the survivors today, in places that for them echo where they are now, or where they were then. Each has a different story to tell, a unique pattern of abuse, though they all share certain similarities. A certain grooming by the perpetrator, a blind trust of the parents in this person to look after their child both spiritually and in all ways their welfare, all systematically overruled by the one person who a community put their faith in.

Sin, Shame, And Secrets: The Murder of a Nun, the Arrest of a Priest, And Cover-up in the Catholic Church, by David Yonke. (Continuum International Publishing Group 2006) ISBN: 0826417558.
Our Fathers: The Secret Life of the Catholic Church in an Age of Scandal, by David France. (New York, Broadway Books, January 2004) ISBN: 0767914309.
France, who covered the Catholic Church sex scandal as an investigative editor at Newsweek, delivers a huge volume that offers reasons for the scandal and humanizes those involved--victims, perpetrators and hierarchy.
Lead Us Not Into Temptation: Catholic Priests and the Sexual Abuse of Children, by Jason Berry. (Originally Published late 1992; Paperback edition: Univ. of Illinois Press, April 2000), ISBN: 0252068122.
Berry, a New Orleans journalist, tips over a religious rock and finds a nest of corruption, deceit, and despair. This proves to be a temperate, detailed investigation of a religious tragedy: pedophilia among Roman Catholic priests.

Betrayal: The Crisis in the Catholic Church, by Boston Globe Investigative Team. (Originally Published June 2002; Paperback edition: Back Bay Press, April 2003), ISBN: 0316776750.
Focusing on abuse in the Boston Archdiocese, BETRAYAL provides a detailed, devastating account of the Catholic Church's decades-long cover-up that has left millions of American Catholics shocked, angry, and confused. BETRAYAL brings into focus the scores of abusive priests who preyed upon innocent children, and the cabal of senior Church officials who covered up their crimes.
A Gospel of Shame: Children, Sexual Abuse and the Catholic Church, by Frank Bruni and Eleanor Burkett. (Originally published 1993; Paperback edition: Perennial, June 2002) ISBN: 00605223

Clergy Sex Abuse Litigation: Survivors Seeking Justice, by Jennifer M. Balboni, (First Forum Press, 2011), ISBN: 978-1-935049-37-1
Why did victims of Catholic clergy sexual abuse wait so long to come forward, and what did their recourse to the courts finally achieve? Jennifer Balboni explores the experiences of clergy sex abuse survivors who sought justice through the court system, highlighting the promise and shortfalls of civil litigation in providing justice. Additional information.


and the list goes on and on.......
There are volumes of evidence that prove the RCC is the biggest perpetrator of criminal sexual child abuse in the history of humanity. Trying to deflect and call those who expose the disgusting sexual crimes of the RCC's priests against the children of humanity bigoted and prejudiced is very telling of their lack of remorse and responsibility to bring the pedophiles within it's walls to justice and shows that they not only support pedophiles but that they will attack all who expose their disgusting deeds.

Perhaps the protectors and supporters of pedophiles will also label the global Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests as being bigoted and prejudice as well.......This will not be swept under the rug and will never go away and no matter how much suggestive disassociation the Roman Catholic Church attempts to deploy against men who expose their attempt to cover up the evidence it will not go away.......ever!
Source:

Matthew 18:6
NASB
but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
 
Dec 26, 2014
3,757
19
0
yahweh is anti-catholic, anti-satan, anti-pedophiles, anti-gaydom, anti-sin, anti-antichrist, anti-mar..logy,
yahweh is anti-idolatry, anti-doctrinesOFdemons, anti-traditionsOFman

so

whatever yahweh hates, whatever yahshua hates, i hate. evil so bad, it is incomprehensible , the rcc, is hated --- it is deadly, fatal, and destructive to everyone on earth. it fulfills prophecy as such, as an anti-christ beast. and it has always been appraised by GOD as such.


if only a catholic wanted to be saved, they might be.... but if they don't want to be, they won't be.

this is not prejudiced at all. it is the same for the whole world. catholics are just worse off than most, being
more
fully deceived by demons, by hasatan , and by their detestable leaders and doctrines. (so they have compared their totally demonic doctrines with others (protestants especially) that admittedly aren't perfect,

but comparing the complete wickedness of the heresy of the rcc with something not as bad,

does not in any way improve the status of the rcc.

God has always decreed it has always been condemned. always.

so , like all the rest of the world, all the other religions, either repent, or die in sin.
 
Mar 20, 2015
768
13
0
But she only gave birth to Jesus.
Yes that's how i read it but if someone believes that Jesus is God Himself then mary gave birth to God, i don't see how anyone could see it any different?, did God place Himself into the womb of His mother mary?, going by that logic then yeah God did place Himself into the womb of mary. If anyone says that Jesus is God then you have to admit that mary is the mother of God, of course, i don't believe that, it's not logical even from a miracle perspective. Maybe it's just me but it sounds all out of whack, sorry, no offence and all that, i arrive in love and peace.
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
Was he now? Tell me...what did King Henry VIII and Tyndale's supporters do to the Catholic priests, nuns, and monks after they took power as Protestants? You ever read about priest holes in England? You ever read about how St. Thomas More is recognized by Anglicans, Lutherans, and some Calvinists as reformation martyrs?

Both sides have blood on their hands in this. And it wasn't non-Christians doing these things, it was Christians. Normal everyday Christians.

Yes, I believe St. Thomas More is a saint. As do I believe that St. Thomas Aquinas is a saint.

You want to judge them based on your 21st century Christian beliefs? Go ahead and show yourself a fool. Both sides dealt fatally with what they considered heresy. Because they believed it. Because possibly, they were flawed as are we all. The saints were flawed. So get off your high horse and stop drudging up the past and treating these people as if they are characters in a novel to be scoffed at. They were human and really lived. They were and are loved by their and our Eternal God.

Stop this chronological snobbery. Because guess what...five hundred years from now, it will be a different world, possibly one closer to the Middle Ages than today, where hanging a criminal was done because it was the ONLY choice possible. Where heretics could literally throw an entire nation or city into chaos, and where the freedom of speech was sincerely not a viable option. Not because Kings are corrupt and evil but because LIFE WAS HARD. Where child death rates were astronomical, where death from disease was probable, and living to see old age was a blessing from God Himself. THIS WAS THE WORLD OF ST. THOMAS MORE! And what did he see, he saw threats to the throne of his liege, and when he himself was considered a threat, he stayed silent. He stayed loyal to the king of England. Even though it eventually meant that that throne sought his death through an unfair trial.

So judge history at your own peril, because posterity will judge you too.
you still don't get it do you? No one canonised Henry VIII. No one canonised any of the others you mentioned. We are ashamed of what they did. If Thomas More was a saint I am the king of England. Your claim that he was demonstrates the standards of your church. There was nothing saintly about him at all. He was hard, cruel, a manipulator, and an appeaser when it suited his own cause. He would do anything to maintain his position as you basically admit. Sounds like a church I know of. LOL

I had the feeling that I was judging him on 1st century Christian beliefs. The standards of the Bible were there to be read. But then your church never did like the Bible, did they?. Chronology doesn't come into it. There have been truly good men and right standards in all centuries. Thomas More was not one of them.

Of course we will all be judged. But that is not the question at issue. The question is how a supposedly Christian church could exalt an evil man to sainthood because of the evil things he did for the church. The Roman Catholic church just demonstrates that it has no scruples.
 
Nov 30, 2012
2,396
26
0
Thank you for reminding me about the depths of man's evil. You have reminded me that anti-Catholic does not belong upon the shelf of anti-communists, but within the categories of anti-semitism and white supremacy.
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
Thus you are a fool. Willing to judge the lot?

Are we all supporters of pedophilia? Because it is what you are implying. Go ahead, join yourself to bigots and prejudice. How much you are willing to cry anti-semitism should someone say that all Jews are greedy, but willing to stand up and point fingers at me and insinuate support of pedophilia. Truly, as AgeofKnowledge put up, anti-Catholicism is one of the last acceptable prejudices.
Over the last forty years or more your church covered up paedophilia and indeed has admitted it. But only because it became so obvious that they could not deny it. So you have no leg to stand on there. I insinuated nothing except the cover up by your church. . If you want to apply what I say about your church to yourself that is up to you.

You bring anti-catholicism on yourselves. It is not prejudice. It is seeing your church as it is. If you had all admitted it and expressed regret there would have been none. We do not blame repentant people for the past. It is your attempts to justify your church's past that arouses contempt against you, and your attempts deceitfully to make history say what it does not say. I specialised in the first five hundred years of church history so I know the facts as they really are not as the Roman Caholic church tries to paint them
 
Nov 30, 2012
2,396
26
0
It is your attempts to justify your church's past that arouses contempt against you, and your attempts deceitfully to make history say what it does not say. I specialised in the first five hundred years of church history so I know the facts as they really are not as the Roman Caholic church tries to paint them
No, it is the bile with which you speak. The same as Allin, who accused the Pope of eating children with Queen Elizabeth II, the same as Jackson123, whose understanding of Catholicism was hand fed to him by Putin and the KGB, the same as Jeff, who is constantly commenting after every post I make anywhere else on this site to the point that its starting to feel like stalking and harassment, the same as notuptome, who constantly tries to show up anyone and everyone who disagrees with him on the tiniest of issues. Its the same hate. The same venom. The saddest part is that it is inciting us to anger and you are swallowing it.

Have you come to talk, no. You came to proclaim us heretics, evil, devious, supporters of pedophilia, and you've done it under the guise of "I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your church, don't take this personally." Except you do realize that it is a personal attack that insinuates that either we are stupid or evil.

You continue and continue and where is RoboOp who started this thread...no where. He hasn't posted in pages upon pages. This thread has gone over the same information over and over and over again. Never stopping to the point we've hit 158 pages. After a while you get tired, but then someone insults someone or new blood on the website keeps it going and going and going.

Honestly, it's time for the mods to lock this thread, declaring no one the winner, except the CC community at large.

Valiant, look at people like AgeofKnowledge, WashedbythebloodofJesus, Tintin, etc. None of them are Catholic, all of them like you don't like the Catholic Church and Catholic doctrine, but they show love and kindness. They aren't speaking out of anger or hate or rage. They've never once accused us or insinuated our support of pedophiles or homosexuals. Instead, they've argued on facts. And look...they post maybe once every twenty pages or so...the rest is just monotonous constant repeating of arguments over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over.

Have I gotten my point across. I damn well hope so. Time to lock this thread, I'm done.
 
Sep 16, 2014
1,278
23
0
ThomistColin, 500 years from now Jesus Christ will be in charge of ruling this World! There will be NO Catholic Church at that time! Everything you have fought for will be gone, destroyed by Jesus Christ!

Revelation 20:1-10
[SUP]1 [/SUP] Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
[SUP]2 [/SUP] He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;
[SUP]3 [/SUP] and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while.
[SUP]4 [/SUP] And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
[SUP]5 [/SUP] But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
[SUP]7 [/SUP] Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison
[SUP]8 [/SUP] and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
[SUP]9 [/SUP] They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.
[SUP]10 [/SUP] The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Jesus Christ WILL rule the World for 1000 years! The Catholic Church will no longer exist! There will be NO Popes to deceive the people anymore! Everything you Catholics have worked for will be destroyed by God!

ThomistColin, you have to understand that when Jesus Christ comes back He will destroy the Catholic Church, He will dethrone the Pope, and He will rule the World by Himself WITHOUT the help of your god Mary!

You and your Church the Catholic Church will be on the losing end of the stick. No longer will the World have to put up with your false teachings!
 
Nov 30, 2012
2,396
26
0
Why would we have need of a Pope when Jesus is here to rule in person? Plus, I'm not sure the 1000 year reign is literal to the 1000 year part, and that's not Catholic teaching that's a lot of Christians not sure.

Also, when Christ returns, I agree there will be no Catholic Church, there will only be the Kingdom.

Also, how do you know Jesus will have returned in the next 500 years. I agree that a lot of the signs are now present, but...that's happened before. I don't try to predict the return of our King and God. I simply await His return, knowing it could be at any moment, but doing today what He has commanded done.
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
ThomistColin, 500 years from now Jesus Christ will be in charge of ruling this World! There will be NO Catholic Church at that time! Everything you have fought for will be gone, destroyed by Jesus Christ!

Revelation 20:1-10
[SUP]1 [/SUP] Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
[SUP]2 [/SUP] He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;
[SUP]3 [/SUP] and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while.
[SUP]4 [/SUP] And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
[SUP]5 [/SUP] But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
[SUP]7 [/SUP] Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison
[SUP]8 [/SUP] and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
[SUP]9 [/SUP] They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.
[SUP]10 [/SUP] The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Jesus Christ WILL rule the World for 1000 years! The Catholic Church will no longer exist! There will be NO Popes to deceive the people anymore! Everything you Catholics have worked for will be destroyed by God!

ThomistColin, you have to understand that when Jesus Christ comes back He will destroy the Catholic Church, He will dethrone the Pope, and He will rule the World by Himself WITHOUT the help of your god Mary!

You and your Church the Catholic Church will be on the losing end of the stick. No longer will the World have to put up with your false teachings!

I do agree with the 1,000 year reign of Christ here on earth as all Christians should, because even when prophecies use symbolism they still stand for a literal event to happen. To take the literal away from prophecy is to take away from the word of God.
However were do you get that Jesus coming back 500 years from now. How do you come by that ?
We are not to try and put a date or timeline on His return as He said clearly no man will know..................
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
I do agree with the 1,000 year reign of Christ here on earth as all Christians should, because
even when prophecies use symbolism they still stand for a literal event to happen.
But it may well bear no resemblance to what you think the event is.

Our private interpretations of prophetic riddles is uncertain at best and
enjoy no guarantee of truth.

To take the literal away from prophecy is to take away from the word of God.
However were do you get that Jesus coming back 500 years from now. How do you come by that ?
We are not to try and put a date or timeline on His return as He said clearly no man will know..................
 
Feb 6, 2015
381
2
0
We call a woman the mother of what she conceives. Mary did not conceive Jesus, the Holy Spirit produced Jesus through her. She simply conceived the manhood of Jesus. So she was the mother of Jesus but not the mother of God. In the early church controversies (before the Roman Catholic church existed) the Catholic church decreed that she should be called theopherus - 'God-bearer' and NOT the mother of God.
Lol!!! I alwasy find this ironic when todays Protestants bring up this subject. You never seem to do your homework before posting such doltish remarks such as this. You are so blinded by anti-Marianism within your Protestant circles to what you perceive as an "excessive Mariology" in the Catholic Church. These Protestant circles have become downright irrational in their opposition to "Mother of God." This opposition, however, is not intrinsic to Protestantism, since early Protestant leaders Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and Bullinger all used the term "Mother of God". I mean talk about confusion. when did the time come that Protestantism decided to "Toss Out" what their forefathers believed?
Martin Luther:
A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph, and had more children after that.
(That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew, 1523, Luther's Works [LW], Vol. 45, 199)
She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man's understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.
(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; LW, Vol. XXI, 326)
I would venture to wager my neck that none of those very liars who allege such great things in honor of the mother of God believes in his heart a single one of these articles.
(That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew, 1523, LW, Vol. 45, 199)
he is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God. . . . it is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God.
(Sermon on John 14:16, 1539, LW, Vol. XXIV, 107)
We, too, know very well that Christ did not derive his deity from Mary; but it does not follow that it must, therefore, be false to say, “God was born of Mary” and “God is Mary's Son” and “Mary is God's mother.”
(On the Councils and the Church, 1539; Works of Martin Luther [PE], edited and translated by C.M. Jacobs and A. T. W. Steinhaeuser et al; Philadelphia: A.J. Holman Co. and the Castle Press, 1930, six volumes; also reprinted by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982; Vol. V, 218)
He [Nestorius] admits that Christ is God and man in one Person; but since His deity does not come from His mother, Mary, she ought not to be called the mother of God. This was rightly condemned in the council, and ought to be condemned.
(Ibid., PE, Vol. V, 219)
Mary is the true, natural mother of the child called Jesus Christ, and the true mother and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God, made broth and soup for God. For God and man are one Person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two persons . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, -- body from you, soul from God alone.
(Ibid., PE, Vol. V, 220)
Luther wasn't the only early Protestant who used the term. Huldreich Zwingli had printed in 1524 a sermon on "Mary, ever virgin, mother of God."
I have never thought, still less taught, or declared publicly, anything concerning the subject of the ever Virgin Mary, Mother of our salvation, which could be considered dishonourable, impious, unworthy or evil . . . I believe with all my heart according to the word of holy gospel that this pure virgin bore for us the Son of God and that she remained, in the birth and after it, a pure and unsullied virgin, for eternity.
(from: Max Thurian, Mary: Mother of all Christians, translated by Neville B. Cryer, New York: Herder & Herder, 1963, 76 / primary source: Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424)
Heinrich Bullinger, Zwingli's successor in Zurich, agreed:
The Virgin Mary . . . completely sanctified by the grace and blood of her only Son and abundantly endowed by the gift of the Holy Spirit and preferred to all . . . now lives happily with Christ in heaven and is called and remains ever-Virgin and Mother of God.
(from: Hilda Graef, Mary: A History of Doctrine and Devotion, combined edition of volumes 1 and 2, London: Sheed & Ward, 1965, vol. 2: 14-15)
Even John Calvin concurred:
It cannot even be denied that God conferred the highest honour on Mary, by choosing and appointing her to be the Mother of his Son.
(from: Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels, comment under Luke 11:27; primary source: Calvini Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Braunschweig-Berlin, 1863-1900, v. 45, p. 348, 35.
She [Elizabeth] calls Mary the mother of her Lord This denotes a unity of person in the two natures of Christ; as if she had said, that he who was begotten a mortal man in the womb of Mary is, at the same time, the eternal God. For we must bear in mind, that she does not speak like an ordinary woman at her own suggestion, but merely utters what was dictated by the Holy Spirit. This name Lord strictly belongs to the Son of God “manifested in the flesh,” (1 Timothy 3:16,) who has received from the Father all power, and has been appointed the highest ruler of heaven and earth, that by his agency God may govern all things. Still, he is in a peculiar manner the Lord of believers, who yield willingly and cheerfully to his authority; for it is only of “his body” that he is “the head,” (Ephesians 1:22, 23.) And so Paul says, “though there be lords many, yet to us,” that is, to the servants of faith, “there is one Lord,” (1 Corinthians 8:5, 6.) By mentioning the sudden movement of the babe which she carried in her womb, (ver. 44,) as heightening that divine favor of which she is speaking, she unquestionably intended to affirm that she felt something supernatural and divine.
(Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels, comment under Luke 1:43; Calvini Opera, ibid., vol. 45, 35)
Moreover, The Formula of Concord (1577), binding on Lutherans, states:
Hence we believe, teach, and confess that Mary conceived and bore not a mere man and no more, but the true Son of God; therefore she also is rightly called and truly is the mother of God.
(Epitome, Article VIII: The Person of Christ, section 7)
On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed Virgin, bore not a mere man, but, as the angel [Gabriel] testifies, such a man as is truly the Son of the most high God, who showed His divine majesty even in His mother's womb, inasmuch as He was born of a virgin, with her virginity inviolate. Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin.
(Solid Declaration, Article VIII: The Person of Christ, section 24; see also Catalog of Testimonies, section 8)


So what part here that your Protestant fore fathers had to say that you disagree with?


Catholicism..... built on solid Rock. Protestantism.... built on shifting sands.


Pax Christi


"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed. ---Luke 1:48.


 
D

didymos

Guest
yahweh is anti-catholic, anti-satan, anti-pedophiles, anti-gaydom, anti-sin, anti-antichrist, anti-mar..logy,
yahweh is anti-idolatry, anti-doctrinesOFdemons, anti-traditionsOFman...
.
Heck, He's even anti-'Yahweh.'
 
Sep 16, 2014
1,278
23
0
True, no one can know the exact date when Jesus returns, BUT we CAN know the season!

We do know for a fact that the False Prophet and the Anti-Christ will come first then after 7 years Jesus will come to rule the World. Today we see signs that are telling us that we are entering into the end times. We need to be on watch!

And it is true that the Catholics HATE what the Holy Spirit says in the Bible! We do know for a fact that Catholics reject what God says to listen to the corrupted Catholic Church and its lies from Satan!

It does not matter what the Catholics say or teach because only what the Holy Spirit has said is what counts. AND the Holy Spirit clearly teaches the ONLY Jesus Christ will rule the World, not Jesus Christ and the Catholics, and He will rule for a thousand years!

How stupid can the Catholics be in thinking they are greater than God?
 

Jackson123

Senior Member
Feb 6, 2014
11,769
1,371
113
Lol!!! I alwasy find this ironic when todays Protestants bring up this subject. You never seem to do your homework before posting such doltish remarks such as this. You are so blinded by anti-Marianism within your Protestant circles to what you perceive as an "excessive Mariology" in the Catholic Church. These Protestant circles have become downright irrational in their opposition to "Mother of God." This opposition, however, is not intrinsic to Protestantism, since early Protestant leaders Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and Bullinger all used the term "Mother of God". I mean talk about confusion. when did the time come that Protestantism decided to "Toss Out" what their forefathers believed?
Martin Luther:
A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph, and had more children after that.
(That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew, 1523, Luther's Works [LW], Vol. 45, 199)
She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man's understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.
(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; LW, Vol. XXI, 326)
I would venture to wager my neck that none of those very liars who allege such great things in honor of the mother of God believes in his heart a single one of these articles.
(That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew, 1523, LW, Vol. 45, 199)
he is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God. . . . it is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God.
(Sermon on John 14:16, 1539, LW, Vol. XXIV, 107)
We, too, know very well that Christ did not derive his deity from Mary; but it does not follow that it must, therefore, be false to say, “God was born of Mary” and “God is Mary's Son” and “Mary is God's mother.”
(On the Councils and the Church, 1539; Works of Martin Luther [PE], edited and translated by C.M. Jacobs and A. T. W. Steinhaeuser et al; Philadelphia: A.J. Holman Co. and the Castle Press, 1930, six volumes; also reprinted by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982; Vol. V, 218)
He [Nestorius] admits that Christ is God and man in one Person; but since His deity does not come from His mother, Mary, she ought not to be called the mother of God. This was rightly condemned in the council, and ought to be condemned.
(Ibid., PE, Vol. V, 219)
Mary is the true, natural mother of the child called Jesus Christ, and the true mother and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God, made broth and soup for God. For God and man are one Person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two persons . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, -- body from you, soul from God alone.
(Ibid., PE, Vol. V, 220)

Luther wasn't the only early Protestant who used the term. Huldreich Zwingli had printed in 1524 a sermon on "Mary, ever virgin, mother of God."
I have never thought, still less taught, or declared publicly, anything concerning the subject of the ever Virgin Mary, Mother of our salvation, which could be considered dishonourable, impious, unworthy or evil . . . I believe with all my heart according to the word of holy gospel that this pure virgin bore for us the Son of God and that she remained, in the birth and after it, a pure and unsullied virgin, for eternity.
(from: Max Thurian, Mary: Mother of all Christians, translated by Neville B. Cryer, New York: Herder & Herder, 1963, 76 / primary source: Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424)
Heinrich Bullinger, Zwingli's successor in Zurich, agreed:
The Virgin Mary . . . completely sanctified by the grace and blood of her only Son and abundantly endowed by the gift of the Holy Spirit and preferred to all . . . now lives happily with Christ in heaven and is called and remains ever-Virgin and Mother of God.
(from: Hilda Graef, Mary: A History of Doctrine and Devotion, combined edition of volumes 1 and 2, London: Sheed & Ward, 1965, vol. 2: 14-15)
Even John Calvin concurred:
It cannot even be denied that God conferred the highest honour on Mary, by choosing and appointing her to be the Mother of his Son.
(from: Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels, comment under Luke 11:27; primary source: Calvini Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Braunschweig-Berlin, 1863-1900, v. 45, p. 348, 35.
She [Elizabeth] calls Mary the mother of her Lord This denotes a unity of person in the two natures of Christ; as if she had said, that he who was begotten a mortal man in the womb of Mary is, at the same time, the eternal God. For we must bear in mind, that she does not speak like an ordinary woman at her own suggestion, but merely utters what was dictated by the Holy Spirit. This name Lord strictly belongs to the Son of God “manifested in the flesh,” (1 Timothy 3:16,) who has received from the Father all power, and has been appointed the highest ruler of heaven and earth, that by his agency God may govern all things. Still, he is in a peculiar manner the Lord of believers, who yield willingly and cheerfully to his authority; for it is only of “his body” that he is “the head,” (Ephesians 1:22, 23.) And so Paul says, “though there be lords many, yet to us,” that is, to the servants of faith, “there is one Lord,” (1 Corinthians 8:5, 6.) By mentioning the sudden movement of the babe which she carried in her womb, (ver. 44,) as heightening that divine favor of which she is speaking, she unquestionably intended to affirm that she felt something supernatural and divine.
(Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels, comment under Luke 1:43; Calvini Opera, ibid., vol. 45, 35)
Moreover, The Formula of Concord (1577), binding on Lutherans, states:
Hence we believe, teach, and confess that Mary conceived and bore not a mere man and no more, but the true Son of God; therefore she also is rightly called and truly is the mother of God.
(Epitome, Article VIII: The Person of Christ, section 7)
On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed Virgin, bore not a mere man, but, as the angel [Gabriel] testifies, such a man as is truly the Son of the most high God, who showed His divine majesty even in His mother's womb, inasmuch as He was born of a virgin, with her virginity inviolate. Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin.
(Solid Declaration, Article VIII: The Person of Christ, section 24; see also Catalog of Testimonies, section 8)


So what part here that your Protestant fore fathers had to say that you disagree with?


Catholicism..... built on solid Rock. Protestantism.... built on shifting sands.


Pax Christi


"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed. ---Luke 1:48.




I believe Calvin said if his teaching not inline with the bible then follow the bible.


1.The bible said Jesus is God the creator of everything include Mary.

2.Jesus is the beginning and the end, mean Jesus exist before Mary.

From this fact it is impossible Jesus was Mary son.

100 years before His first coming to the earth Mary not exist, can you say Jesus is Mary son?

For temporary Jesus body was Mary son. not His spirit. His spirit exist before Mary.

Now Jesus is Spirit and not Mary son.

The bible said God is spirit.

To say Jesus is Mary son forever is false.

It is just looking for loopholes in order to incorporate the teachings of the Roman pagan queen of heaven