News:

Our Hosting and Server Costs Are Expensive! Please Subscribe To Help With Monthly Donations.

Main Menu
+-+-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 80082
Latest: isadoramurta7
New This Month: 4
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 891366
Total Topics: 89615
Most Online Today: 128
Most Online Ever: 2999
(Fri Jan 13, 2023 - 21:20:46)
Users Online
Members: 4
Guests: 109
Total: 113

Born again......adults

Started by wincam, Sat Jan 30, 2016 - 05:24:20

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

skeeter

Quote from: Ladonia on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 07:59:33
The Catholic Church has no apologies to make as regards charitable giving and helping the poor. It is estimated that 25% of all AIDS victims worldwide are helped by the RCC. Before there was any government help on the healthcare front in this country, it was the Catholic Church that built and maintained many of the hospitals too. Many Catholic religious orders of today exist solely to help the poor, among them are the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal located in the South Bronx  and of course Mother Theresa's group - and there others also, too many to mention here.
yes, as with your post, the catholics are top notch at giving themselves a pat on the back for doing a good work. 
but no good work is worth anything without God. The RCC is also very good at deflecting people from God.
I read where Mother Teresa said it wasn't for  her to tell others about Christ but to help a Hindu be the best Hindu they could be and the same with a Muslim and others who don't follow Christ.  That isn't the mission given to us by Christ.


Quote from: Ladonia on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 07:59:33
So tell me, when will you be leaving YOUR extravagant lifestyle of a comfortable home, selling all your earthly possessions, giving the resulting money away to the poor and dedicating the rest of your life to helping the unfortunate among us? Please keep me appraised of what you are doing in the future, so I can include you and your new endeavors as part of my charitable giving.
I had to laugh at that 1st lime... anyone who knows me IRL would too.

the 2nd line highlighted is just as funny as I've been doing that for many years now. like a local church 'ranch' (halfway house) giving my things for their sale to raise money to feed their people.  I live rather primitively but won't bore you with those details.

If you want the name of the ranch house to donate to directly, I can msg that to you.

Ladonia

#316
Quote from: skeeter on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 15:00:50
Quote from: Ladonia on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 07:59:33
The Catholic Church has no apologies to make as regards charitable giving and helping the poor. It is estimated that 25% of all AIDS victims worldwide are helped by the RCC. Before there was any government help on the healthcare front in this country, it was the Catholic Church that built and maintained many of the hospitals too. Many Catholic religious orders of today exist solely to help the poor, among them are the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal located in the South Bronx  and of course Mother Theresa's group - and there others also, too many to mention here.
yes, as with your post, the catholics are top notch at giving themselves a pat on the back for doing a good work. 
but no good work is worth anything without God. The RCC is also very good at deflecting people from God.
I read where Mother Teresa said it wasn't for  her to tell others about Christ but to help a Hindu be the best Hindu they could be and the same with a Muslim and others who don't follow Christ.  That isn't the mission given to us by Christ.


Quote from: Ladonia on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 07:59:33
So tell me, when will you be leaving YOUR extravagant lifestyle of a comfortable home, selling all your earthly possessions, giving the resulting money away to the poor and dedicating the rest of your life to helping the unfortunate among us? Please keep me appraised of what you are doing in the future, so I can include you and your new endeavors as part of my charitable giving.
I had to laugh at that 1st lime... anyone who knows me IRL would too.

the 2nd line highlighted is just as funny as I've been doing that for many years now. like a local church 'ranch' (halfway house) giving my things for their sale to raise money to feed their people.  I live rather primitively but won't bore you with those details.

If you want the name of the ranch house to donate to directly, I can msg that to you.

Hey, I only pointed out the things the RCC does in the way of charity not to give ourselves a "pat on the back", but to counter your low blow statement that all it does is; "take money from the poor people to build the Vatican?" and "buy steaks for the priests to eat while people all around  us starve?" As for Mother Theresa, she didn't need to say anything as her actions in life spoke volumes and everyone in India and around the world knows that she did them because Christ was first in her life. We Catholics don't believe in proselytizing incessantly to those who are in need.

And it is nice to hear that you indeed live frugally, and sure send me the info about the halfway house and I will check it out.

mclees8

#317
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Mar 08, 2016 - 09:21:39
Quote from: winsome on Mon Mar 07, 2016 - 08:45:06
mclees
Here is something for you to think about:

When the Jews returned from exile in Babylon they found Jerusalem and the Temple in ruins. They set about rebuilding Jerusalem and their homes but not the Temple.
God complained:
Haggai  Chapter 1
2 "Thus says the LORD of hosts: This people say the time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the LORD."
3 Then the word of the LORD came by Haggai the prophet,
4 "Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins?

8 Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may appear in my glory, says the LORD.
 

The Lord punished them for not rebuilding his house.
9 Because of my house that lies in ruins, while you busy yourselves each with his own house.

10 Therefore the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce.

11 And I have called for a drought upon the land and the hills, upon the grain, the new wine, the oil, upon what the ground brings forth, upon men and cattle, and upon all their labors."

They set to work.
14 And the LORD stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel the son of She-alti-el, governor of Judah, and the spirit of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people; and they came and worked on the house of the LORD of hosts, their God,

Chapter 2
6 Once again, in a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land;
7 and I will shake all nations, so that the treasures of all nations shall come in, and I will fill this house with splendor, says the LORD of hosts.
8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, says the LORD of hosts.
9 The latter splendor of this house shall be greater than the former, says the LORD of hosts; and in this place I will give prosperity, says the LORD of hosts.'"

When they had restored the glory of God's house he then blessed them
18 Consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since the day that the foundation of the LORD's temple was laid, consider:
19 Is the seed yet in the barn? Do the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree still yield nothing? From this day on I will bless you."

It is like you and your church and fellow Catholics to reach back to the old Testament to justify these things in the knew.

Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)

Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.

In response to your three questions

Does not a way one dresses make a statement. It is not about the garment one wears but the meaning and purpose behind it. If a clown dresses as a clown is he not saying Im a clown. What we wear or dress as most certainly speaks loudly.  Im I right?   

If a prostitute wears skimpy out fits and hangs around the streets a night are they not saying something about themselves?
This answers you first two questions

Will one grant temple or even St Peters save you. When vistitors walk in they are awed at the beauty and grandeur. And will some say surely God must be  in this place. The day is coming and sooner than we think when every one of the things will be in ashes and ruin. This is not just opinion but a fact. St Peters is not going up to heaven, we are, and will stand before the righteous judge and then what condition will be the Temple He built  be in your heart?




winsome

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Mar 08, 2016 - 09:21:39
Quote from: winsome on Mon Mar 07, 2016 - 08:45:06
mclees
Here is something for you to think about:

When the Jews returned from exile in Babylon they found Jerusalem and the Temple in ruins. They set about rebuilding Jerusalem and their homes but not the Temple.
God complained:
Haggai  Chapter 1
2 "Thus says the LORD of hosts: This people say the time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the LORD."
3 Then the word of the LORD came by Haggai the prophet,
4 "Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins?

8 Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may appear in my glory, says the LORD.
 

The Lord punished them for not rebuilding his house.
9 Because of my house that lies in ruins, while you busy yourselves each with his own house.

10 Therefore the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce.

11 And I have called for a drought upon the land and the hills, upon the grain, the new wine, the oil, upon what the ground brings forth, upon men and cattle, and upon all their labors."

They set to work.
14 And the LORD stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel the son of She-alti-el, governor of Judah, and the spirit of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people; and they came and worked on the house of the LORD of hosts, their God,

Chapter 2
6 Once again, in a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land;
7 and I will shake all nations, so that the treasures of all nations shall come in, and I will fill this house with splendor, says the LORD of hosts.
8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, says the LORD of hosts.
9 The latter splendor of this house shall be greater than the former, says the LORD of hosts; and in this place I will give prosperity, says the LORD of hosts.'"

When they had restored the glory of God's house he then blessed them
18 Consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since the day that the foundation of the LORD's temple was laid, consider:
19 Is the seed yet in the barn? Do the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree still yield nothing? From this day on I will bless you."

It is like you and your church and fellow Catholics to reach back to the old Testament to justify these things in the knew.

Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)

Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.

In response to your three questions

Actually I fail to see how your comments below answer any of my three questions. Nor do they address the other points I made.

But let's examine your points

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
Does not a way one dresses make a statement. It is not about the garment one wears but the meaning and purpose behind it. If a clown dresses as a clown is he not saying Im a clown. What we wear or dress as most certainly speaks loudly.  Im I right?   

If a prostitute wears skimpy out fits and hangs around the streets a night are they not saying something about themselves?
This answers you first two questions

People certainly wear particular attire in particular circumstances, generally either by custom or rule.

A soldier wears a military uniform.
A judge (in the UK) normally wears a robe and a wig (as do barristers).
A flight attendant on an aircraft wears a uniform given them by the airline.
A policeman on duty wears a police uniform.
Doctors & nurses in a hospital wear different uniforms according to their rank and/or speciality.
A priest at Mass wears particular vestments as designated by the Church.

What I don't understand is why you have a problem with that.

I also cannot see how they answer my first two questions which were:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?

The only answer your comments give is that you cannot give me an example of where Jesus condemns clerical dress or priests wearing robes.

So again. what is your problem?
What do you see as wrong and why?

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
Will one grant temple or even St Peters save you. When vistitors walk in they are awed at the beauty and grandeur. And will some say surely God must be  in this place.

The beauty of a church is not so that visitors are awed by it. it is a part of giving glory to God and an appropriate setting to worship him.

And your answer does not answer my question: When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
The day is coming and sooner than we think when every one of the things will be in ashes and ruin. This is not just opinion but a fact. St Peters is not going up to heaven, we are, and will stand before the righteous judge and then what condition will be the Temple He built  be in your heart?

The day has already been when the desert Tabernacle was discarded and Temple in Jerusalem was in ruins, and God knew that even before they was built. Yet God commanded gold and silver to be used, the finest materials and the best craftsmen.

You have failed to give an answer to my three questions - because you know that Jesus did not condemn any of these things. Yet you think it fit to condemn them although you can give no good reason.

skeeter

Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)



Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?

Ladonia

#320
Quote from: skeeter on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 06:31:31
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 06:09:13
Quote from: skeeter on Tue Mar 08, 2016 - 16:16:44
Quote from: winsome on Mon Mar 07, 2016 - 10:20:02
Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Mar 07, 2016 - 09:34:50
Now think about this.   Steven before he was stoned convicted the Jewish hierarchy of killing the Messiah, and in his discourse he mentioned the great temple saying the earth is Gods footstool, what building could build for Him.

45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David; 46 Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob. 47 But Solomon built him an house. 48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, 49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? 50 Hath not my hand made all these things?    Acts 7: 45-50
God instructed the Israelites to build a Tabernacle of the finest materials, gold, silver, bronze and fine materials (Ex 35:2-9) made by the best craftsmen (Ex 35:10-19) and then came and dwelt in it (Ex 40:34)

Then Solomon built a greater Temple (2Sam 6) and God promised Solomon he would dwell in that Temple (2Sam 5:11)

Then after the exile God commanded the rebuilding of the Temple and promised gold and silver for the building (see previous post).

So sort that contradiction out.
are you likening commands from God to those of the RCC / builders?
God expects, demands, that we give him of our best. From the sacrifice of Abel, the sacrifice of Abraham, the sacrifices in the Temple he expects the best and he is displeased with less (see Malachi 1:6-14)

In the desert he commanded the best craftsmen, the finest materials, gold and silver. Similarly with Solomon's Temple. And God was pleased with what Solomon had done and said to Solomon "I have consecrated this house which you have built, and put my name there for ever; my eyes and my heart will be there for all time." (1Kg 9:3)
yes, those were commands of God at that time.  why do you suddenly think it's so all fired important? because you 're using it to support the extravagance of the RCC?
did God appear to your popes and tell them to take money from the poor people to build the Vatican? buy steaks for the priests to eat while people all around  us starve?

you've got your priorities all messed up.  and suddenly you're all behind what God says - gotta love that!

It seems to me that Winsome is not using those passages merely to support the "extravagance of the  RCC", (we didn't start this "discussion") but to debunk your claim that somehow the things we do are unbiblical. As usual, we merely defend against the most outrageous accusations levelled against us by folks like yourself. Winsome's points are right on and you seem to be at a loss to explain them away.

Ladonia

#321
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)



Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?


And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..

skeeter

Quote from: Ladonia on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 21:52:20
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)



Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..
He told us (or the Apostles did) everything that was important for us to know.  there are verses about not adding to or taking from His word.  Catholics do both.  they make up whatever they want to support their unbiblical practices and beliefs.
what He didn't tell us isn't forbidden? how do you  know?  most things the rcc makes up are forbidden.

He didn't 'leave' any unfinished business for the rcc to do.  The rcc isn't His church.


no, the most important thing to do is to share His message so others might know Him and be saved.

why didn't you answer my questions? my guess is that you don't know the answers.

winsome

#323
 
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
Since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

That's funny, coming from a protestant who doesn't even have all of scripture 

Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
Revelation IS a vision given to John.

I didn't say it wasn't.   
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?

Not quite. But in the Mass we participare in the heavenly liturgy.
  In the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle; we sing a hymn to the Lord's glory with all the warriors of the heavenly army; venerating the memory of the saints, we hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Saviour, Our Lord Jesus Christ, until He, our life, shall appear and we too will appear with Him in glory (Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 8)

The liturgy we celebrate on earth is a mysterious participation in this heavenly liturgy. (John Paul II, Angelus, November 3, 1996)

Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.

winsome

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04
Quote from: Ladonia on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 21:52:20
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)



Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..
He told us (or the Apostles did) everything that was important for us to know.  there are verses about not adding to or taking from His word.  Catholics do both.  they make up whatever they want to support their unbiblical practices and beliefs.
what He didn't tell us isn't forbidden? how do you  know?  most things the rcc makes up are forbidden.
Where did he say that? Can we have chapter & verse and then we can see how much you take things out of context.
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04

He didn't 'leave' any unfinished business for the rcc to do.
Prove it.
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04

The rcc isn't His church.
Yes it is.

skeeter

#325
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04
Quote from: Ladonia on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 21:52:20
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..
He told us (or the Apostles did) everything that was important for us to know.  there are verses about not adding to or taking from His word.  Catholics do both.  they make up whatever they want to support their unbiblical practices and beliefs.
what He didn't tell us isn't forbidden? how do you  know?  most things the rcc makes up are forbidden.
Where did he say that? Can we have chapter & verse and then we can see how much you take things out of context.
Deuteronomy 4:2
You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32
"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

Proverbs 30:6
6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

Revelation 22:18
For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;


Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04He didn't 'leave' any unfinished business for the rcc to do.
Prove it.
the rcc didn't exist then


Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04 The rcc isn't His church.
Yes it is.
the rcc didn't exist then
His church - His body of believers are those He called out (to Himself) from the masses of the unbelievers.  They put Him first, just as we do today.  the rcc does not.

skeeter

Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:03:27
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.
Ladonia  answered the questions in my post seen here just above your post?  or did he dance around them, like you just did?

winsome

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 17:14:13
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:03:27
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.
Ladonia  answered the questions in my post seen here just above your post?  or did he dance around them, like you just did?

I haven't danced around anything.

winsome

#328
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04
Quote from: Ladonia on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 21:52:20
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..
He told us (or the Apostles did) everything that was important for us to know.  there are verses about not adding to or taking from His word.  Catholics do both.  they make up whatever they want to support their unbiblical practices and beliefs.
what He didn't tell us isn't forbidden? how do you  know?  most things the rcc makes up are forbidden.
Where did he say that? Can we have chapter & verse and then we can see how much you take things out of context.

I thought it would expose how you take things out of context and I was right.

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49

Deuteronomy 4:2
You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Who is God addressing and for what purpose?

"And now, O Israel, give heed to the statutes and the ordinances which I teach you..."

And Moses continues:
"Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I speak in your hearing this day, and you shall learn them and be careful to do them. The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. Not with our fathers did the LORD make this covenant, but with us, who are all of us here alive this day. (Dt 5:1-3) 
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Deuteronomy 12:32
"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.
As above


Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Proverbs 30:6
6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

As above. It's about fidelity to the detailed instruction God gave through Moses

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Revelation 22:18
For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;

O come on, surely you know better than that.

Don't add to the prophecies in this book. Referring to the Book of Revelation.


Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04He didn't 'leave' any unfinished business for the rcc to do.
Prove it.
the rcc didn't exist then

Yes it did.

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04 The rcc isn't His church.
Yes it is.
the rcc didn't exist then
His church - His body of believers are those He called out (to Himself) from the masses of the unbelievers.  They put Him first, just as we do today.  the rcc does not.

Yes it do exist then, and Yes it does.

Jesus left a Church to carry on his work. and make decisions in the future. We can see that in action in the book of Acts, for example the choosing of Mattia to replace Judas (Acts 1), and the ruling on circumcision at the council of Jerusalem (Acts 15)
-

Ladonia

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04
Quote from: Ladonia on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 21:52:20
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..
He told us (or the Apostles did) everything that was important for us to know.  there are verses about not adding to or taking from His word.  Catholics do both.  they make up whatever they want to support their unbiblical practices and beliefs.
what He didn't tell us isn't forbidden? how do you  know?  most things the rcc makes up are forbidden.
Where did he say that? Can we have chapter & verse and then we can see how much you take things out of context.
Deuteronomy 4:2
You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32
"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

Proverbs 30:6
6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

Revelation 22:18
For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;


Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04He didn't 'leave' any unfinished business for the rcc to do.
Prove it.
the rcc didn't exist then


Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04 The rcc isn't His church.
Yes it is.
the rcc didn't exist then
His church - His body of believers are those He called out (to Himself) from the masses of the unbelievers.  They put Him first, just as we do today.  the rcc does not.

Matt 18:18 says: "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven".  Even if you reject the idea of the actual One Universal Church, and the power it has under the Apostolic Succession, it is clear that at the very least the Apostles themselves had the power to change things with said power given to them by God Incarnate on this earth, Jesus Christ Himself. So therefore, those three passages you cited from the OT have been superseded by Jesus's commands in the NT and have no relevance whatsoever to the argument you are trying to sustain.

winsome

Quote from: Ladonia on Sat Mar 12, 2016 - 10:54:00
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 16:54:49
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04
Quote from: Ladonia on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 21:52:20
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
since when do catholics take into consideration all of scripture (the Bible)?  they pick and choose (out of context) what they think supports rules/laws given to them by the RCC.

Revelation IS a vision given to John.

so, do catholics think they are already in a heaven here on earth?


when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
And here you go again with going on about the same things. Jesus did not mention everything and because he didn't that does not mean that they are forbidden. He came here and did what He had to do and then left the rest to the Church which He established.

At the very least our worship practice continues on with the most important thing that Jesus said for us to do, re-present and remember His Holy Sacrifice, something most Christian sects of today simply ignore..
He told us (or the Apostles did) everything that was important for us to know.  there are verses about not adding to or taking from His word.  Catholics do both.  they make up whatever they want to support their unbiblical practices and beliefs.
what He didn't tell us isn't forbidden? how do you  know?  most things the rcc makes up are forbidden.
Where did he say that? Can we have chapter & verse and then we can see how much you take things out of context.
Deuteronomy 4:2
You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32
"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

Proverbs 30:6
6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

Revelation 22:18
For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;


Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04He didn't 'leave' any unfinished business for the rcc to do.
Prove it.
the rcc didn't exist then


Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:09:43
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 01:35:04 The rcc isn't His church.
Yes it is.
the rcc didn't exist then
His church - His body of believers are those He called out (to Himself) from the masses of the unbelievers.  They put Him first, just as we do today.  the rcc does not.

Matt 18:18 says: "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven".  Even if you reject the idea of the actual One Universal Church, and the power it has under the Apostolic Succession, it is clear that at the very least the Apostles themselves had the power to change things with said power given to them by God Incarnate on this earth, Jesus Christ Himself. So therefore, those three passages you cited from the OT have been superseded by Jesus's commands in the NT and have no relevance whatsoever to the argument you are trying to sustain.

Exactly. You have summed it up nicely.

skeeter

Quote from: winsome on Sat Mar 12, 2016 - 03:53:48
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 17:14:13
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:03:27
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.
Ladonia  answered the questions in my post seen here just above your post?  or did he dance around them, like you just did?
I haven't danced around anything.
then repost the post # where you did answer those questions I asked...

winsome

Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 17:14:13
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:03:27
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.
Ladonia  answered the questions in my post seen here just above your post?  or did he dance around them, like you just did?

Ladonia answered your questions in post #319 and again in post #327

Moreover your questions are invalid because you have failed to show that it necessary for something to be explicitly commanded - in God's word, and in the NT, before it can be done.

Where in the Bible does it say that everything we do has to be commanded in the Bible?

Where in scripture does it say that all doctrines/practices must be explicitly stated in the New Testament?

Where in scripture does it say that Jesus produced a finished product in His Church that must not be altered in any way?

Where in scripture does it say that a practice/structure is only valid if scripture states that Jesus personally instituted it?


You can raise such irrelevant questions as yours about anything. For example:

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) commandanyone  to have choirs to lead singing?

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to translate scripture into other languages?

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to use artificial amplification for speaking or singing?






mclees8

#333
Quote from: winsome on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 12:40:48
Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
Quote from: winsome on Wed Mar 09, 2016 - 04:25:55
Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Mar 08, 2016 - 09:21:39
Quote from: winsome on Mon Mar 07, 2016 - 08:45:06
mclees
Here is something for you to think about:

When the Jews returned from exile in Babylon they found Jerusalem and the Temple in ruins. They set about rebuilding Jerusalem and their homes but not the Temple.
God complained:
Haggai  Chapter 1
2 "Thus says the LORD of hosts: This people say the time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the LORD."
3 Then the word of the LORD came by Haggai the prophet,
4 "Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins?

8 Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may appear in my glory, says the LORD.
 

The Lord punished them for not rebuilding his house.
9 Because of my house that lies in ruins, while you busy yourselves each with his own house.

10 Therefore the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce.

11 And I have called for a drought upon the land and the hills, upon the grain, the new wine, the oil, upon what the ground brings forth, upon men and cattle, and upon all their labors."

They set to work.
14 And the LORD stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel the son of She-alti-el, governor of Judah, and the spirit of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people; and they came and worked on the house of the LORD of hosts, their God,

Chapter 2
6 Once again, in a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land;
7 and I will shake all nations, so that the treasures of all nations shall come in, and I will fill this house with splendor, says the LORD of hosts.
8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, says the LORD of hosts.
9 The latter splendor of this house shall be greater than the former, says the LORD of hosts; and in this place I will give prosperity, says the LORD of hosts.'"

When they had restored the glory of God's house he then blessed them
18 Consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since the day that the foundation of the LORD's temple was laid, consider:
19 Is the seed yet in the barn? Do the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree still yield nothing? From this day on I will bless you."

It is like you and your church and fellow Catholics to reach back to the old Testament to justify these things in the knew.

Are you wanting to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant?

May I remind you that Paul wrote:
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (3Tim 3:16)

ALL scripture not just the bits that don't contradict your opinions.

And may I also remind you that both Ladonia and I drew on the New Testament – Revelation. But you wanted to discard that as just a vision. You seem to be very selective in which books of the Bible you accept from Catholics.

"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' (Lk 7:33-34)

Or in this case "I quoted the OT and you say 'it's too old'. I quoted the NT and you say 'it's too new'"

You  referenced Hebrews so perhaps you will accept that.

Hebrews says the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary (Heb 9:1). The writer also says that this earthly sanctuary was a copy of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 9:23-24). Indeed we find in the heavenly sanctuary described by St. John in Revelation many things that were also present in the sacrificial worship of the first covenant:

- a victim (Rev 5:6&12)
- a robed high priest (Rev 1:13)
- other priests (Rev 4:4, etc.)
- an altar (Rev 6:9 etc.)
- lampstands (Rev 1:12 etc.)
- incense (Rev 5:8 & 8:3-5)

These can also be found in the earthly worship of the Mass, when we partake in the heavenly worship.

In addition many other elements of the heavenly liturgy in Revelation are also found in the Mass.:
- antiphonal chants (Rev 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12)
- book or scroll (Rev 5:1)
- consecrated celibacy (Rev 14:4)
- intercessory prayer (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)

Here are a few questions:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?
When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

The answer to each question is that he didn't. And you have no cause to either.

In response to your three questions

Actually I fail to see how your comments below answer any of my three questions. Nor do they address the other points I made.

But let's examine your points

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
Does not a way one dresses make a statement. It is not about the garment one wears but the meaning and purpose behind it. If a clown dresses as a clown is he not saying Im a clown. What we wear or dress as most certainly speaks loudly.  Im I right?   

If a prostitute wears skimpy out fits and hangs around the streets a night are they not saying something about themselves?
This answers you first two questions

People certainly wear particular attire in particular circumstances, generally either by custom or rule.

A soldier wears a military uniform.
A judge (in the UK) normally wears a robe and a wig (as do barristers).
A flight attendant on an aircraft wears a uniform given them by the airline.
A policeman on duty wears a police uniform.
Doctors & nurses in a hospital wear different uniforms according to their rank and/or speciality.
A priest at Mass wears particular vestments as designated by the Church.

What I don't understand is why you have a problem with that.

I also cannot see how they answer my first two questions which were:
When did Jesus condemn clerical dress?
When did Jesus condemn priests for wearing robes?

The only answer your comments give is that you cannot give me an example of where Jesus condemns clerical dress or priests wearing robes.

So again. what is your problem?
What do you see as wrong and why?

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
Will one grant temple or even St Peters save you. When vistitors walk in they are awed at the beauty and grandeur. And will some say surely God must be  in this place.

The beauty of a church is not so that visitors are awed by it. it is a part of giving glory to God and an appropriate setting to worship him.

And your answer does not answer my question: When did Jesus condemn beauty in the Temple?

Quote from: mclees8 on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 10:49:47
The day is coming and sooner than we think when every one of the things will be in ashes and ruin. This is not just opinion but a fact. St Peters is not going up to heaven, we are, and will stand before the righteous judge and then what condition will be the Temple He built  be in your heart?

The day has already been when the desert Tabernacle was discarded and Temple in Jerusalem was in ruins, and God knew that even before they was built. Yet God commanded gold and silver to be used, the finest materials and the best craftsmen.

You have failed to give an answer to my three questions - because you know that Jesus did not condemn any of these things. Yet you think it fit to condemn them although you can give no good reason.

Oh I have answered them but you do not want say that. You talk about the Tabernacle discarded and the Temple was destroyed as Jesus said it would. That should say something in its self. You say that the archeological splendor of the cathedrals and basilica is built to glorify God. When did he say to build anything by the New Covenant church? Steven reminded the earth is the Lords footstool what building could you build for Him.   The problem is you and your games and denials

The New Testament Temple is built in our heart. Will you deny that scripture backs that up?

skeeter

Quote from: winsome on Sun Mar 13, 2016 - 07:12:32
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 17:14:13
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:03:27
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.
Ladonia  answered the questions in my post seen here just above your post?  or did he dance around them, like you just did?
Ladonia answered your questions in post #319 and again in post #327

Moreover your questions are invalid because you have failed to show that it necessary for something to be explicitly commanded - in God's word, and in the NT, before it can be done.

Where in the Bible does it say that everything we do has to be commanded in the Bible?

Where in scripture does it say that all doctrines/practices must be explicitly stated in the New Testament?

Where in scripture does it say that Jesus produced a finished product in His Church that must not be altered in any way?

Where in scripture does it say that a practice/structure is only valid if scripture states that Jesus personally instituted it?


You can raise such irrelevant questions as yours about anything. For example:

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) commandanyone  to have choirs to lead singing?

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to translate scripture into other languages?

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to use artificial amplification for speaking or singing?
no he didn't.  he posted some made up excuses given by the RCC, not God's word.
Those are interesting questions you pose above as you dance around answering my questions.  you also dance around God's word to avoid following it.  That tells me that neither of you can give an honest Biblical answer to my questions.

I don't have to show anything and you can believe any false teachings you'd like to - as you do.

that doesn't change that God's word is God's word.  What the RCC teaches is not.

Who is it you follow?  God or the RCC?  Christians follow Christ (and His word, the Bible), Catholics follow the RCC (and its word, the CCC).   On judgment day who will you account to?  God or the RCC?  God's word says we'll be judged by His word, not that of the ecfs or RCC.

why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.

RB

Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::

Ladonia

Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22
Quote from: winsome on Sun Mar 13, 2016 - 07:12:32
Quote from: skeeter on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 17:14:13
Quote from: winsome on Fri Mar 11, 2016 - 06:03:27
Quote from: skeeter on Thu Mar 10, 2016 - 20:19:44
when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command specific clerical dress to be worn?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus command priests (that didn't exist in the NT) to wear fancy, colorful robes for different occasions / services?

when (and where found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to build the Vatican? or any building that magnificent?
Ladonia has already answered this but I'll add my comments.

When and where did Jesus condemn these things?

Mclees is condemning these things so it is up to him to provide some biblical support for that condemnation – or just admit it is his personal preference.

Biblical support has already been provided for colourful robes/vestments and a beautiful building for the worship of God.
Ladonia  answered the questions in my post seen here just above your post?  or did he dance around them, like you just did?
Ladonia answered your questions in post #319 and again in post #327

Moreover your questions are invalid because you have failed to show that it necessary for something to be explicitly commanded - in God's word, and in the NT, before it can be done.

Where in the Bible does it say that everything we do has to be commanded in the Bible?

Where in scripture does it say that all doctrines/practices must be explicitly stated in the New Testament?

Where in scripture does it say that Jesus produced a finished product in His Church that must not be altered in any way?

Where in scripture does it say that a practice/structure is only valid if scripture states that Jesus personally instituted it?


You can raise such irrelevant questions as yours about anything. For example:

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) commandanyone  to have choirs to lead singing?

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to translate scripture into other languages?

When (and where is it found in God's word) did Jesus (in NT) command anyone to use artificial amplification for speaking or singing?
no he didn't.  he posted some made up excuses given by the RCC, not God's word.
Those are interesting questions you pose above as you dance around answering my questions.  you also dance around God's word to avoid following it.  That tells me that neither of you can give an honest Biblical answer to my questions.

I don't have to show anything and you can believe any false teachings you'd like to - as you do.

that doesn't change that God's word is God's word.  What the RCC teaches is not.

Who is it you follow?  God or the RCC?  Christians follow Christ (and His word, the Bible), Catholics follow the RCC (and its word, the CCC).   On judgment day who will you account to?  God or the RCC?  God's word says we'll be judged by His word, not that of the ecfs or RCC.

why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.

Those of us who follow orthodoxy are being taught God's word and your opinion on this is duly noted and rejected. All you are giving us is your opinion, nothing more, nothing less.  You reject the ECF's and what they taught and follow the modernists who didn't raise their heads with their false heretical gospel for over 1500 years  - and you all still can't agree! I'll stick with Christian orthodoxy, thank you very much.

Ladonia

Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::

Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches. You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.

mclees8

Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::

Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches. You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.



Unbelievable !   What a twist of thinking !   ::doh::

skeeter

Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches.
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.


skeeter

Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 12:31:07
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches. You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.
Unbelievable !   What a twist of thinking !   ::doh::
it sure is!



skeeter

Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::

::thumbsup::

Ladonia

Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 15:42:00
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches.
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.


No my friend, the "mere men" I speak of are those who were around in the late 1500's and spouting all the gobbledeegook doctrines that you now believe. You are no Prophet of God and no type of Church leader -  so you are the last person I would go to for any type of Christian truth. The false gospel of Sola Scriptura  has led you astray and all I can say is thank the Lord I never have succumbed  to such a thing.

skeeter

Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 22:50:24
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 15:42:00
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches.
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.
No my friend, the "mere men" I speak of are those who were around in the late 1500's and spouting all the gobbledeegook doctrines that you now believe.

You are no Prophet of God and no type of Church leader -  so you are the last person I would go to for any type of Christian truth. The false gospel of Sola Scriptura  has led you astray and all I can say is thank the Lord I never have succumbed  to such a thing.
you need to make up your mind... I don't go by what those in the 1500s taught. unless they taught what God's word teaches. 
I see you've moved on to calling God's word 'gobbledeegook' and a false gospel.  certainly not how I view His word.
be careful, you never know who God might use as a prophet, nor would you recognize one if you heard one.
Hopefully you'll 'succumb' to His word sooner than later...

mclees8

Quote from: skeeter on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 01:51:37
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 22:50:24
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 15:42:00
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches.
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.
No my friend, the "mere men" I speak of are those who were around in the late 1500's and spouting all the gobbledeegook doctrines that you now believe.

You are no Prophet of God and no type of Church leader -  so you are the last person I would go to for any type of Christian truth. The false gospel of Sola Scriptura  has led you astray and all I can say is thank the Lord I never have succumbed  to such a thing.
you need to make up your mind... I don't go by what those in the 1500s taught. unless they taught what God's word teaches. 
I see you've moved on to calling God's word 'gobbledeegook' and a false gospel.  certainly not how I view His word.
be careful, you never know who God might use as a prophet, nor would you recognize one if you heard one.
Hopefully you'll 'succumb' to His word sooner than later...

I would have to say for Ladonia, beware ! the God you offend may be your own.

Ladonia

#345
Quote from: skeeter on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 01:51:37
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 22:50:24
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 15:42:00
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches.
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.
No my friend, the "mere men" I speak of are those who were around in the late 1500's and spouting all the gobbledeegook doctrines that you now believe.

You are no Prophet of God and no type of Church leader -  so you are the last person I would go to for any type of Christian truth. The false gospel of Sola Scriptura  has led you astray and all I can say is thank the Lord I never have succumbed  to such a thing.
you need to make up your mind... I don't go by what those in the 1500s taught. unless they taught what God's word teaches. 
I see you've moved on to calling God's word 'gobbledeegook' and a false gospel.  certainly not how I view His word.
be careful, you never know who God might use as a prophet, nor would you recognize one if you heard one.
Hopefully you'll 'succumb' to His word sooner than later...

You sure do go by what those rejectionists of the 1500's taught, because you certainly do not subscribe to orthodox Christian doctrine. Your belief started somewhere and I hate to break it to you but you were not the first one to come up with the way you now view the Holy Scriptures. 

And let's be clear here, I am only calling your doctrines gobbledegook and a false gospel, not God's word. You certainly are not one to talk about what I say regarding this issue, as you have disparaged Gods word as represented by the Catholic faith tradition time and time again on these very pages.


Ladonia

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 07:58:42
Quote from: skeeter on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 01:51:37
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 22:50:24
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 15:42:00
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
Quote from: RB on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 05:29:17
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 01:02:22why do Catholics most often use writings from the ecfs or RCC to support what they believe rather than God's word?  There's a reason for that - figure it out.
Go get them sister!  ::smile::
Because the ECF's figured things out correctly, and passed on to us the truth that orthodoxy teaches.
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.
No my friend, the "mere men" I speak of are those who were around in the late 1500's and spouting all the gobbledeegook doctrines that you now believe.

You are no Prophet of God and no type of Church leader -  so you are the last person I would go to for any type of Christian truth. The false gospel of Sola Scriptura  has led you astray and all I can say is thank the Lord I never have succumbed  to such a thing.
you need to make up your mind... I don't go by what those in the 1500s taught. unless they taught what God's word teaches. 
I see you've moved on to calling God's word 'gobbledeegook' and a false gospel.  certainly not how I view His word.
be careful, you never know who God might use as a prophet, nor would you recognize one if you heard one.
Hopefully you'll 'succumb' to His word sooner than later...

I would have to say for Ladonia, beware ! the God you offend may be your own.

Is God manifest in other faith traditions? Well then, stop tearing down mine! If we could only converse in the spirit of a genuine desire to learn about how each of us comes to God, but alas we do not see that this is the goal of folks like you who come here to the Catholic section. It is quite the opposite for sure and thus I will continue to defend the Latin Rite of Christianity.

skeeter

#347
Quote from: Ladonia on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 09:16:18
Quote from: skeeter on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 01:51:37
Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 22:50:24
Quote from: skeeter on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 15:42:00
there's a lot of unbiblical things in the writings of those that catholics call the ecfs.
what you consider 'orthodoxy' is nothing more than the false teachings of the RCC.
and you pick and choose and twist what the ecfs say to support that.

that's why you use their writings instead of God's word.


Quote from: Ladonia on Mon Mar 14, 2016 - 08:30:25
You have strayed from it, coupling yourselves to teachings by mere men who themselves rejected what God had brought about.   
yes, I have strayed from the RCC false teachings, straight into the truth of God's word.  That was about 38 yrs ago thanks to God for circumcising my heart.

So now, as a catholic, you consider Jesus, Peter, Paul, Timothy, John etc to be 'mere'  men who reject what God 'has brought about'?

It's always amazing to read what catholics reveal about themselves and their beliefs.
No my friend, the "mere men" I speak of are those who were around in the late 1500's and spouting all the gobbledeegook doctrines that you now believe.

You are no Prophet of God and no type of Church leader -  so you are the last person I would go to for any type of Christian truth. The false gospel of Sola Scriptura  has led you astray and all I can say is thank the Lord I never have succumbed  to such a thing.
you need to make up your mind... I don't go by what those in the 1500s taught. unless they taught what God's word teaches. 
I see you've moved on to calling God's word 'gobbledeegook' and a false gospel.  certainly not how I view His word.
be careful, you never know who God might use as a prophet, nor would you recognize one if you heard one.
Hopefully you'll 'succumb' to His word sooner than later...
You sure do go by what those rejectionists of the 1500's taught, because you certainly do not subscribe to orthodox Christian doctrine.
so you don't know the difference between what is in God's word and what those you call the 'rejectionists of the 1500s'  taught?

by 'orthodox Christian doctrine' I guess you mean what the RCC teaches instead of God's word?


Quote from: Ladonia on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 09:16:18
Your belief started somewhere and I hate to break it to you but you were not the first one to come up with the way you now view the Holy Scriptures
yes, my belief did start somewhere... with God circumcising my heart and followed by reading and studying His word - direct from His word (the Bible) not as reinterpreted by a man made religion.

no, I'm not the 'first' one to 'come up with' the way I view the Holy Scriptures - many good people have done the same by turning to Him and reading His word rather than depending on someone else to tell them what it says.  Straight from His word, not put thru the blender of deceptive men.


Quote from: Ladonia on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 09:16:18
And let's be clear here, I am only calling your doctrines gobbledegook and a false gospel, not God's word. You certainly are not one to talk about what I say regarding this issue, as you have disparaged Gods word as represented by the Catholic faith tradition time and time again on these very pages.
what you term 'my doctrine' is straight from God's word.  so yes, you are calling His word gobbledegook and false.

how much time a day/week do you spend reading and studying His word?  or do you just depend on a few words spoken by someone else once a week?

I certainly don't disparage God's word.  His word isn't what is represented by the Catholic faith tradition. If you want to know what He says, go to His word and read it.

LexKnight

So 24 pages, has anything productive been produced here lately?

Paulus

Quote from: LexKnight on Tue Mar 15, 2016 - 15:01:10
So 24 pages, has anything productive been produced here lately?

Do you seriously expect anything worthy to be produced on this "Catholic Forum" when the sole purpose of some who come on it is to engage in anti-Catholic rants ?

Powered by EzPortal