Luke 18:28-30

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

"Then Peter said, 'What about us? We left all we had to follow you.' He said to them, 'I tell you solemnly, there is no one who has left house, wife, brothers, parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not be given repayment many times over in this present time and, in the world to come, eternal life'.

The Jerusalem Bible

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003

Answers

As I read this Scripture in Luke, I can't help but to see the priesthood, nuns, and lay-people who have conformed to the role of following Christ as did the Apostles. It would be very difficult for most of us to drop everything in our lives and do as the Apostles. I could never see leaving my wife and children. How can anyone criticize the priesthood for taking a vow of celebacy? One must consider the fact that the priests now have a greater family to tend to. Unless I'm completely off with my understanding of Luke 18:28-30, the Protestants have it wrong by criticizing the priesthood and nunhood(proper word?).

rod... ..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


Yes, nuns and priests have given much, and so have missionaries! There are numerous Protestant missionaries as well, who sacrifice and risk their lives! They are to be honored as well.

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), June 30, 2003.


Because celibacy is a gift, it's when you forced yourself (or people) into celibacy that you get little boys raped an abused, nuns getting abortions and all the other sick stuff that happens in the RCC.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), June 30, 2003.

Hi David Ortiz. I've read your writings. Allow me to ask you the following:

Are you saying that the above Scriptures are bad or that there are bad people posing as followers of "the kingdom of God" doing bad things?

Are you isolating only those of the Catholic Church and implying that other denominations are immune to bad people?

Have you left your house and family to pursue "the kingdom of God"?

Could you do as the Apostles?

rod.. . ..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


The Scripture in Luke 18 is as plain as day. It doesn't say "force"; It simply tells us of the "repayment" for accepting such a mission. Many Saints did the same and we can expect that their "repayment" is "eternal life". ("is" because eternity is always in the now.)

rod...<

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.



No I haven't left home to 'pursue the kingdom of God'. But I'm looking into doing that. I never mentioned denominations, I never said the scriptures were bad. It's bad when people twist them around. Yes I'm saying Catholics are doing wrong. Of course Catholics will deny that, but their church doesn't preach the true Jesus Christ that paid the price in full on the cross for all of man's sins. Their Jesus is bread.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), June 30, 2003.

Hi David. I never twisted anything around. I simply asked some questions. I believe that I have given you the chance to make yourself very clear. This is why I ask so many questions.

rod.


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


I think the problem is not with the Church, but with the person who believes that they are called to do the work. I miss read your previous reply. I now understand what you meant by "twisting".

rod<

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


He..he. "Twisting" things around?
"Their Jesus is bread." I think that Catholics would write it like this instead:

Their bread is Jesus.

That's if you, David, will believe that Jesus is the bread from Heaven.

rod... . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


"miss read"?? . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


"Because celibacy is a gift, it's when you forced yourself (or people) into celibacy that you get little boys raped an abused, nuns getting abortions and all the other sick stuff that happens in the RCC"

If celibacy is the cause of children being abused, how do you account for the numerous cases of Protestant ministers molesting children? They have no rule of celibacy. In fact, most of the offenders have been married men! The Baptist preacher in Florida who molested over FIVE HUNDRED children was a married man. In fact, nationally over 70% of child molestors are married men - so much for any connection between celibacy and molestation! As for FORCED celibacy, I am unaware of any cases of men being forced to become priests. If you know of any, do tell. Do you also see marriage as "forced monogamy"?? As for nuns getting abortions, you are confusing what happens in the Catholic Church with what happens in Jack Chick pulp fiction. Throw out that trash and get yourself some decent literature, for God's sake!

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), June 30, 2003.


There is a strong message to Luke 18. I think that it deals with our true purpose in life and that is:

Our purpose in life is to follow God's will. If I cannot leave my house, wife, or family, I must then put all things second to God and make God first in our lives. He is the source of all and only God can provide our purpose in life. So, Luke 18 tells us to put God as the head of our families. But, like small children, we tend to not obey as we should. This happens at many levels.

ro

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), June 30, 2003.


Atleast the Protestant Ministers aren't claiming to be celebate. It's still wrong. Oh so you want to isolate certain people huh? Look at what your favorite Roman Catholic who "died defending the faith" did. Hitler, the Vatican's puppet, wiped out millions of 'heretics'. Paul you can trash your Catechism and the Apocrypha and you'll see the truth one day.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

David?

You are more interested in vanity than the evilness that men do?

The issue is not the teachings of the Church, but the evil men do. If those men would have followed the teachings, at least those men would not have been involved in the evilness.

You mentioned that you would pursue the "kingdom of God". So, you could be a better priest or evangelist? Do you believe that you could do such a thing by following the Church teachings or by defaming the teachings?

You are making connections that don't quite hold water or you are trolling in the worse of waters. You are just catching flak here.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


Hitler was not a Catholic. His parents were nominal "Catholics" but he himself was an atheist his entire adult life.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 01, 2003.


I am anti-false religion. What's wrong is the Roman Catholic Churches unbiblical Doctrines. I believe I can become a better evangelist by following the pure word of God. The bible tells us to expose the false religions and I have my mind set on that. I won't go around to other countries trying to convert people, I got about 60 million Catholics right here that new converting.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

Read his book! Mein Kampf.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

David.

I can now see your interest in Hitler. He was a madman whose mission was to exterminate the Jews. Your mission is to convert the 6 million Catholics? You've got to be kidding!

Do you actually believe that Hitler was a Catholic? Well, he sure did convert his victims, but not to his ideology only death and suffering.

David, you need to stand on your theology instead of your assaults on the Church. Let the theology do the converting, if it's the truth.

You are gonna convert six million Catholics? Next, you're gonna say that you walk on water.

rod..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


Doesn't matter, if I try and say the Lord's supper is symbolic here I'm automatically bashing the Catholic faith. Sound theology won't work on stubborn people.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

OH! WAIT. 60 MILLION!

Oh, ok. I can see sixty million. Yes, you probably can convert sixty million. "Here, let's go outside and play in the garden for awhile...ORDERLY!"

rod... .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


And I never said I was going to walk on water, or that I would convert 6 million Catholics, I just pointed out the fact that 60 millions catholics in America are in a false system and need to get out of her.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

If you were really anti-false religion, you could not possibly be associated with a tradition of thousands of conflicting manmade sects, which is a certain guarantee of widespread falsehood. If you were genuinely interested in true religion, the very first thing you would do is seek a church where there is unity of belief, for it is a logical necessity that the fullness of truth cannot be present unless unity is present. But you are not really interested in seeking truth. You are interested in attempting to justify your existence. When a group exists as the result of a rebellion, they feel immense pressure to demonstrate that what they rebelled against was BAD. Because, if what they rebelled against was good, then their rebellion itself was BAD. So now you feel trapped in this mire of doctrinal chaos called Protestantism, and though you cannot miss the inconsistency and contradiction of beliefs all around you, you see no way out. No way except the unthinkable - to admit that the rebellion was ungodly, to honestly face the obvious reality of widespread untruth, and to return to the one true Church founded for you by Jesus Christ. But until you respond to God's grace and come to that blessed day, all that remains is to desperately try to denigrate God's Church, in a futile effort to find some sense of legitimacy in shallow manmade religion.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 01, 2003.

D.O. - Hitler was not the Vatican's puppet. That was written by a man that did not know what he was talking about. It was not a scholarly piece of work and so it deserves to be ignored. Pius XII is going to be made a saint. He saved thousands of Jewish lives. At his funeral he was thanked by the Prime Minister of Israel for the work that he did in saving Jewish lives. Many Jews noted that if Pius XII would have spoken out that more people would have died. Both Jewish and Catholic. Also remember that Hitler sent Catholics to the death camps too. Also remember that Hitler had Jewish background. I think that his grandmother was Jewish. But anyway. Pius XII saved many people. He instructed monustaries to take in Jews. He even had Jews hide out in the Vatican. He also forged many baptismal documents so it would make the Jews look like Catholics so they would hopefully be saved. Pius XI wrote an encyclical called MIT BRENNENDER SORGE. It was the only encyclican ever to be written in German. He wrote it to say that people should not follow Hitler and the Nazis. Pius XI also gave many speeches condeming the movement. Pius XII also condemned the movement. But he had to do it in other ways. If Pius XII would have spoken up, would it have made any difference? Probably not. It probably would have resulted in the killing of more people. God Bless Pius XII and thank you for all that you did for the world.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), July 01, 2003.

It is very easy to understand the Eucharist as "symbolic". Have you ever made the attempt to understand it as "transubstantiation"?

I think that the journey one takes in understanding this mystery will enlighten one beyond their normal understanding. I don't have a full grasp of it and I may never understand it. But, I have opened my mind and learned not to reject what I don't understand. Somethings may take a lifetime to understand. Faith is the solution.

rod...

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


Here attack my beliefs:

WE BELIEVE...The Scriptures are Inspired by God and declare His design and plan for mankind.

WE BELIEVE...There is only One True God–revealed in three persons...Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (commonly known as the Trinity).

WE BELIEVE...In the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. As God's son Jesus was both human and divine.

WE BELIEVE...though originally good, Man Willingly Fell to Sin– ushering evil and death, both physical and spiritual, into the world.

WE BELIEVE...Every Person Can Have Restored Fellowship with God Through 'Salvation' (accepting Christ's offer of forgiveness for sin). [1 of 4 cardinal doctrines of the A/G]

WE BELIEVE...and practice two ordinances—(1) Water Baptism by Immersion after repenting of one's sins and receiving Christ's gift of salvation, and (2) Holy Communion (the Lord's Supper) as a symbolic remembrance of Christ's suffering and death for our salvation.

WE BELIEVE...the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is a Special Experience Following Salvation that empowers believers for witnessing and effective service, just as it did in New Testament times. [1 of 4 cardinal doctrines of the A/G]

WE BELIEVE... The Initial Physical Evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is ‘Speaking in Tongues,’ as experienced on the Day of Pentecost and referenced throughout Acts and the Epistles.

WE BELIEVE...Sanctification Initially Occurs at Salvation and is not only a declaration that a believer is holy, but also a progressive lifelong process of separating from evil as believers continually draw closer to God and become more Christlike.

WE BELIEVE...The Church has a Mission to seek and save all who are lost in sin. We believe 'the Church' is the Body of Christ and consists of the people who, throughout time, have accepted God's offer of redemption (regardless of religious denomination) through the sacrificial death of His son Jesus Christ.

WE BELIEVE...A Divinely Called and Scripturally Ordained Leadership Ministry Serves the Church. The Bible teaches that each of us under leadership must commit ourselves to reach others for Christ, to worship Him with other believers, and to build up or edify the body of believers–the Church.

WE BELIEVE...Divine Healing of the Sick is a Privilege for Christians Today and is provided for in Christ's atonement (His sacrificial death on the cross for our sins). [1 of 4 cardinal doctrines of the A/G]

WE BELIEVE...in The Blessed Hope—When Jesus Raptures His Church Prior to His Return to Earth (the second coming). At this future moment in time all believers who have died will rise from their graves and will meet the Lord in the air, and Christians who are alive will be caught up with them, to be with the Lord forever. [1 of 4 cardinal doctrines of the A/G]

WE BELIEVE...in The Millennial Reign of Christ when Jesus returns with His saints at His second coming and begins His benevolent rule over earth for 1,000 years. At that time many in the nation of Israel will recognize and accept Him as the Messiah, the Savior who died for them and all mankind.

WE BELIEVE...A Final Judgment Will Take Place for those who have rejected Christ. They will be judged for their sin and consigned to eternal punishment in a punishing lake of fire.

WE BELIEVE...and look forward to the perfect New Heavens and a New Earth that Christ is preparing for all people, of all time, who have accepted Him. We will live and dwell with Him there forever following His millennial reign on Earth. 'And so shall we forever be with the Lord!!

-- D.O. (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

Paul, we are the true church. We are united, your church is just like all those other cults and false religions who disagree with each other. There only one invisible church of christ. Our church has been around since Christ rose from the dead. Your church was built by mans hands, Our church was built by Jesus christ himself. The Holy Spirit guides our church, and the gates of hell never stop Jesus from making it. Your wrong Paul and Eugene and Rod. Your man made cult does not know the truth.

-- D.O. (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

Why not just say that you are a Pentecostal?

rod... . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


I'm a Christian rod, a christian. If you prefer to call me a pentecostal go ahead, but I'm a christian.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

Wow! A heretic has quite nearly called me a Catholic and mentioned my name with men whom I'm not worthy to be in the same sentence with. I think your truth, David, is a little off. Or, perhaps their is hope for me and my journey back to the Church. Those tributaries must all lead to the truth, eventually.

rod... .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


Actually, I've read comments made by the Church regarding Pentecostalism in a favorable view. I used to hang around the Pentecostal Church; the people and doctrine weren't as militant as you.

Do you speak in tongues?

rod... .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


Our church is the true church, guided by the Holy Spirit. Rod, the Catholic church is guided by the Devil himself. There is no salvation outside our church. Our church has existed for over 2000 years, Our faith born on the third day when Christ conquered death. Our church has the keys to the kingdom of heaven rod, not some man made Catholic church. If you harden your heart to the True Jesus Christ there's no hope for you.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

No I don't speak in tongues(haven't yet atleast), and we don't believe that one has to to be saved either.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 01, 2003.

The devil himself?

Have you read anything by Hislop lately? Your tactics have been tried on me before. Perhaps you should try a different approach. Does this mean that all the other churches are also demonic? Surely not the Baptists and not the Episcopalions......gosh.

I do believe that the Pentecostals admit that salvation can also be found in other denominations. So, I guess you're not a Pentecostal.

Does your church have a name or not?

rod...

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


D.O. - Why are you a Christian but I am a Catholic. Doesn't being a Christian mean believing in Jesus Christ. Christ is in Christian. So I am a Catholic Christian and you are a Pentacostal Christian. There are Orthodox Christians, Lutheren Christians, Baptist Christians, Chuch of God Christians, Methodist Christians and so on. You are my fallen away brother but you think of me as some punk that you won't even give the time of day.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), July 01, 2003.

The Pentecostal tradition of Protestantism was an offshoot of the Methodist Church which began in 1901 in Topeka, Kansas. If you don't even know the history of your own sect, it's no wonder you don't know the history of the True Church of Jesus Christ.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 01, 2003.

Back to the original post --

I have said many times that I believe that priests should have the option of marrying. Let me state it a different way. The Church should be more open to allowing a married person to become a priest.

Celibacy, in an of itself, for the sake of the good of the Church and the people is a gift from the Holy Spirit.

The problem is that some men have mistaken their differences from others as a call, which it was not.

The sexual abuse problem is seperate from the issue of celibacy.

We have a shortage of priests. Deacons (married deacons) could very easily fill the void, if the Church would allow it.

We have two full time, church paid, deacons who work very hard at our parish. Apart from saying the mass and hearing confessions, they do everything. Both are terrrific, well qualified, men.

We have about 50 deacon candidates studying now. 300 applied, and could very well have been chosen by the diocese. The shortage of priests is a fixable problem.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), July 01, 2003.


Hi John P.

Do you remember those small spare tires, the 100 mile tire?

I would agree with you 100% except after reading Luke 18. It seems to me that the Church would only "roll" for a short and cautious time on those emergency tires. I have nothing against Deacons (I Timothy 3:8-13); they have their duties and their reward. But just as Jesus wanted all, so does the Church. It sounds right to me.

rod.. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


...But, if the Church would decide on having Deacons take the reins of the parish, what would happen over time? I could imagine seeing people like Eugene and John G. taking on such a role. I'm sure that many have had the tremendous desire to be a priest, but could not complete the one vow of celebacy. And, in theory and in practice, those who could complete the vow are priest and nuns that Jesus gives "repayment". Of course, not for being celebate, for giving their lives to Christ just as Christ has given his life for us. (Retro-grade inversion?)

rod..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


Ah, I see that David Ortiz (who long ago forfeited his right to post at this forum) is a member of the "Assemblies of Swaggart" protestant denomination.

The creed he posted above [Jimmy, "WE BELIEVE" ...] is copied directly from the "16 Fundamental Truths of the Assemblies of God" (found here.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), July 01, 2003.


Yup. Some of the original wording used the words "might have salvation" and was later changed. I would dig it up, but why bother?

At one time, proof of the Holy Spirit in a person meant speaking in tongues, not the case today. Also, talk about man-made doctrines that require a dress code, little things like that split the church up. So, the Pentecostal church has had their reforms. Fundamentalism is a good way to describe their church. So would Charismatic if one considers that the Pentecostal Church started as a result of a group of people speaking in tongues, and I don't mean the Apostles.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


This poor ignorant dropout from the Catholic faith believes celibacy is wrong. He believes priests are ''forced'' to be celibate. He believes he's a preacher.

D.O.; tell us how celibacy can be just ''wrong'', when Jesus Christ was celibate. Would you tell us, from that vast revelation you are getting out of Bible-reading? If Jesus were married and with children, would you love Him more? You have to love him less because He lived in celibacy.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 01, 2003.


There is a high order occurring with the vow of celibacy. Christ had his children as God. We who have accepted Him are His children. Had Jesus married and had children the concept of us all being His children would have been destroyed. The priesthood has embraced this concept, I think.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


David,

St. Paul was celebate and believed that remaining single was "best."

That's in scripture, D.O. A man is not FORCED to become a priest. The Catholic Church does not go out into the streets and pull people out and then force them to become priests.

I personally know five Protestant pastors in my area who unfortunately committed adultery with women in the church, SO, GEE, D.O. I guess Protestants fall prey to sin too. In fact, sexual sin amongst Protestant ministers is greater (according to statistics). 98% of Catholics priests have NEVER EVEN BEEN ACCUSED of a sexual sin -- 98%, but yet you and others just go on and on and on and on. What's that saying . . . uhhh, something about people in glass houses!

It amazes me DO how completely full of hate you are. I have never read one edifying comment from your pen. You spew and spew and spew like a fountain set in the middle of a sewage pond.

If you have nothing good to say, why say anything at all! You need a good dose of the Holy Ghost to straightjacket that tongue of your's. Ahhh, but out of the HEART the mouth speaks. (Seems I've heard that somewhere -- OH, I KNOW -- it's in the BIBLE!)

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 01, 2003.


As I recall, was not the leader of D.O.'s church found to have committed adultry not once, but twice (that we know of)???

-- Thomas (tcdzomba@excite.com), July 01, 2003.

David, you said,

"No I don't speak in tongues(haven't yet at least), and we don't believe that one has to to be saved either," BUT you believe that EVERYONE who IS baptized in the Holy Spirit MUST speak in tongues contrary to what scripture says, right?. That's what AG believes. Yet scripture says "Not all speak in tongues, do they?" Speaking in tongues is a "badge of honor," distinguishing the have's from the have-not's.

I have many friends in the A/G and my husband was baptized there, but I could never get into all the clamor at the altar, the shaking, rattling and rolling. And of course the unbiblical belief that you aren't "filled" unless you "speak" was a real turnoff. My poor sister-in-law goes to the altar every week waiting for her gift, but goes home dejected time and time again. Last week she was slain in the spirit and lay unconscious for an hour. I had another friend who got all caught up in Benny Hinn and Rodney Howard Browne (hugely popular amongst AG'ers), and ended up going way off the deep end and had a nervous breakdown. She thought she and her husband were going to become the next Mr. and Mrs. T.V. Evangelist. (God was speaking to her ALL the time and telling her His secrets, so she thought.)

Oh BTW, this particular AG church has suffered through TWO pastors caught in adultery, one right after the other.

And David, where is "slain in the spirit" taught in scripture?

As to your eschatology, how come Jesus says, "AFTER the tribulation of those days you will see the Son of Man coming in great glory"? You guys believe Christ is coming BEFORE the tribulation, right? In a secret trip to gather the elect? But that is not what SCRIPTURE says! AFTER THE TRIBULATION -- Christ's own words! The rapture theology is completely unbiblical and based on the teachings of Darby and Scofield some 200 to 300 years ago. No one ever heard of it before then.

Just a few unbiblical things the AG believes, but I love 'em anyway.

Gail

P.S. I received the gift of speaking in tongues a long long time ago, but you know what, I would rather have the gift of LOVE!

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 01, 2003.


JFG, I'm a member of the Church of Christ, The True Church. If you want to attack the building I go to go ahead. That doesn't change anything about the 16 biblical fundamentals.

rod says "At one time, proof of the Holy Spirit in a person meant speaking in tongues, not the case today." Speaking in tongues is what it is, a Gift. Yes, that is a evidence of being batized in the Holy Spirit, but is not 'required' for salvation. AoG doesn't require a dress code.

Eugene, I was never a Catholic! I never said celibacy was wrong, I said celibacy is a gift a few people are blessed with. I said it's wrong trying to act celibate when your not, or forcing yourself to be celibate.

Gail, "I personally know five Protestant pastors in my area who unfortunately committed adultery with women in the church". Yes that's wrong, least they weren't claiming to be celibate. I say to you what you'll say to me, don't base your views on a few bad Christians that few away from God. Catholic priests moleste altar boys so by your standards I should stay away from a Catholic church.

"I guess Protestants fall prey to sin too." I never said no one was perfect (except Christ)

"It amazes me DO how completely full of hate you are. I have never read one edifying comment from your pen." Yes I am hateful. Is it wrong to hate the things God hates? I hate false religions. The truth hurts, don't let your pride keep you away from it. I have something good to say, and it's Jesus Christ, the Real Christ that doesn't hang around in bread and wine.

Thomas, "As I recall, was not the leader of D.O.'s church found to have committed adultry not once, but twice (that we know of)???" So by that standard all of us would be churchless. What someone in an organization does does not take away the fact that I am a christian. I never once said that only AoG was going to heaven. Their are true christians all over this world, in baptist churches, methodist churches, etc..

Gail, "BUT you believe that EVERYONE who IS baptized in the Holy Spirit MUST speak in tongues contrary to what scripture says, right?. That's what AG believes." I never said, stop assuming, we all know what happens when you ass/u/me. That's a 'misconception' you have about AoG.

"Yet scripture says "Not all speak in tongues, do they?" Speaking in tongues is a "badge of honor," distinguishing the have's from the have-not's." Not everyone speaks in tongues, and it's not a badge of honor, stop confusing Aof with UPC.

"As to your eschatology, how come Jesus says, "AFTER the tribulation of those days you will see the Son of Man coming in great glory"? You guys believe Christ is coming BEFORE the tribulation, right? In a secret trip to gather the elect? But that is not what SCRIPTURE says! AFTER THE TRIBULATION -- Christ's own words! The rapture theology is completely unbiblical and based on the teachings of Darby and Scofield some 200 to 300 years ago. No one ever heard of it before then." Wow what misunderstanding...."14 For this we say unto you in the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them who have slept. 15 For the Lord himself shall come down from heaven with commandment and with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God: and the dead who are in Christ shall rise first.16 Then we who are alive, who are left, shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ, into the air: and so shall we be always with the Lord."(1 Thessalonians 4:14-16 Douay-Rheims)

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. (Matthew 7:1-5)

David, do you feel that you or your foundation is so perfect that you can take the Catholic "speck" out of our eyes?

"It amazes me DO how completely full of hate you are. I have never read one edifying comment from your pen." Yes I am hateful. Is it wrong to hate the things God hates? I hate false religions. The truth hurts, don't let your pride keep you away from it. I have something good to say, and it's Jesus Christ, the Real Christ that doesn't hang around in bread and wine."

Since when is God hateful? You have just proven you are not Christ- centered. Jesus never hated anyone. A Man falsely accused, abandoned by His closest followers, scourged and forced to carry His cross in public humiliation, hung by that very same cross to die, and what were some of His last words? "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." (Luke 23:34). No, Jesus could never hate anyone. He didn't hate the Pharisees, nor the Scribes, nor the other elders. He did not hate Judas, the man who betrayed Him. He did not hate Peter, who denied Him three times, and yet Jesus loved him so much he made Him the rock of our Church. Jesus does not hate you, or me, or anyone who posts in this forum or anywhere else.

As for saying that the Real Christ doesn't hang around in the bread and wine, why don't you check out this link (if someone could hyperlink this, I would appreciate it):

http://webpages.marshall.edu/~trimbol3/4thcup4.htm

Scott Hahn was once as anti-Catholic as you are, but through his intensive studies of Scripture and history, he came to realize what was the one True Church, the Catholic Church.

Pax et Bonum

-- Thomas (tcdzomba@excite.com), July 02, 2003.


Ummm, David, it appears you are wrong AGAIN! You don't even know wht your own church believes. This excerpt is found at the AG's website:

Is tongues the only evidence of the infilling of the Holy Spirit? Will there be any significant changes in one's attitudes and actions after being baptized in the Spirit?

The first physical sign of the infilling of the Spirit is speaking in tongues. This is the one physical sign that is consistent in its recurrence, as pointed out earlier. However, the Baptism in not a goal but a gateway. It is a door to Spirit-filled living. It marks a beginning, not an end. Speaking in tongues is but the initial evidence and is to be followed by all the evidences of Christlikeness that mark a consistent Spirit-filled life.

But alas, AoG, teaches UNbiblically that all persons filled with the Holy Spirit WILL speak in tongues CONTRARY TO SCRIPTURE! No ASS/U/MPTION ABOUT IT DAVID!

AG practices the unbiblical "slaying in the spirit". In fact at our local AG it is the ultimate goal at EVERY service. WHERE IS THAT IN SCRIPTURE DAVID?

Gail

P.S. My mother-in-law has been going to AoG for YEARS and YEARS. She lays around the altar mumbling jibberish semi-unconsciously. Then when she IS conscious she is the most wicked, hateful bird you'd ever want to meet. (Kinda makes you wonder what 'spirit' she received while under 'hyponosis' at the altar.

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 02, 2003.


In speaking of the Body of Christ, the Christian community, Paul asked the question "Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? (1 Corinthians 12:29-30) The obvious implied response to each of these questions is "NO". There is therefore no scriptural basis for insisting that a particular charism be given to any person who is filled with the Holy Spirit. In fact, too much emphasis on a particular gift may interfere with reception of a different gift which God DOES wish to impart.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 02, 2003.

Thanks Paul, and further Corinthians says this:

For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguighing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues, BUT ONE AND THE SAME SPIRIT WORKS ALL THESE THINGS, DISTRIBUTING TO EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY JUST AS HE WILLS. 1 Cor 12 8-11

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 02, 2003.


Hi David.

I've seen people in the Pentecostal church do some very strange things that I could not understand at the time. It was explained to me that the Holy Spirit had entered them because of their faith in Jesus. I struggled with the idea that for some people it was merely a state of self-induced hysteria or psychosimatic (sp?) condition. Sure! I wish I could be filled with the Holy Ghost, but will I wind up doing those peculiar motions and verbalizations?

I've never experienced such a thing except for one peculiar thing (I won't bother you with it, as it has others). I do see evidence of the Holy Ghost in many people, but without the "animatronics". I guess it would be safe to make the connection with how people present themselves and what comes out of their mouth with having the Holy Ghost in them. We live in a time when man thinks they are so sophisticated and, therefore; man just won't accept old ancient theophanies. They accept what is relevant and logical and look for those characteristics in miracles. When a person appears Christ-like, we tend to listen. There are quite a bunch of people here who are very Christ-like and I have no doubt that the Holy Spirit is in them. Look for those people, David. I told you to try a new approach; I meant it. Either, listen to your church teachings or leave your church. Listen to the replies and teachings that you can find here and "gnaw" on them before you spit or swallow. It is easier to attack what we don't understand, than it is to embrace it until it makes sense.

Hey, David, some of my closest and dearest friends are Pentecostals and they aint nothing like you. Find peace and love before it destroys you. Be li

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


Sorry about the chopped off sentence, I'm on a Apple computer.

It should have ending with, "Be like Christ."

rod.. . . .. . .. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


Dear D.O.
All of us are familiar with the description of a ''rapture'' in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-16; it says ''caught up''.

But this moment comes after the tribulations. The tribulations are to last only a short time, Jesus tells us. This is for the sake of the elect (Mark 13:20). So the elect, the saints, will be on earth during the tribulation. Plain & simple.

In John 11:23, Jesus says to Martha, ''Thy brother (Lazarus) shall rise.'' And she answered Him: ''I know that he will rise at the resurrection, on the last day.''

Christ didn't correct Martha or say, ''The rapture comes before the last day.''

He said, ''I am the resurrection and the life.''

Thess 4 :14-16 is on the LAST DAY, David. You have learned from false teachers of Christ's gospel. Men who didn't know what they were talking about. That's why you don't know either. It's private interpretation of the scripture that leads to gross error. This is just one more proof.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 02, 2003.


God HATES sin.

Genesis 6:5-7 [5] The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. [6] The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. [7] So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth -- men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air -- for I am grieved that I have made them."

Psalms 5:4-6 [4] You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; with you the wicked cannot dwell. [5] The arrogant cannot stand in your presence; you hate all who do wrong. [6] You destroy those who tell lies; bloodthirsty and deceitful men the LORD abhors.

Hebrews 12:28-29 [28] Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, [29] for our "God is a consuming fire."

Go to this thread for more on the rapture The Rapture

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

"Genesis 6:5-7 [5] The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. [6] The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. [7] So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth -- men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air -- for I am grieved that I have made them."

Yet after the flood, God regretted the what He had done, and said He would not do so again, and sent the rainbow as proof of His covenant (don't have a Bible with me, can someone please provide the verses).

"Psalms 5:4-6 [4] You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; with you the wicked cannot dwell. [5] The arrogant cannot stand in your presence; you hate all who do wrong. [6] You destroy those who tell lies; bloodthirsty and deceitful men the LORD abhors."

Interesting, considering that the man who wrote this was an adulterer who took coveting thy neighbor's wife to an extreme by sending her husband to the front lines to be murdered. Yet, D.O., God did not hate your namesake because of his deceitfulness, nor did he destroy him. Just like he promised He would never destroy man after the flood. Just like he did not destroy the brothers of Joseph after they cast him into the well. Just like He did not destroy the Israelites who worshipped the golden calf. In fact, as we of course all know, that it was the lineage of David into which the Son of God was born. The Son of God who told us to love our enemies.

If God hates all who do wrong, than Heaven must be a very empty place, indeed.

Pax et Bonum.

Thomas

-- Thomas (tcdzomba@excite.com), July 02, 2003.


Genesis 9:8-17 (RSV)

8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, 9 "Behold, I establish my covenant with you and your descendants after you, 10 and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the cattle, and every beast of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark. 11 I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth."

12 And God said, "This is the sign of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: 13 I set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 When the bow is in the clouds, I will look upon it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth." 17 God said to Noah, "This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth."

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), July 02, 2003.


David.

I punish my children not because I hate, because I love them.

God does the same thing in a way. When we sin we open the door to suffering the consequences. It is through our own fault, not God's.

rod. . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


So he loves the bad things you do? He loves it when you reject him. He loves it when you worhship a false god. He loves it when you murder someone. He loves it when you disobey your parents. He loves it when you rape someone. Yes rod, he loves everything you do. I never said anything about punishment. God hates the sin we do, but "For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son: that whosoever believeth in him may not perish, but may have life everlasting." (John 3:16)

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

You've said it yourself. Why would God send His only begotten Son if He knew that we were sinners and evil doers and all that? If He hated anything or anyone, He wouldn't be sending Jesus. He loves us. I cannot put hate and God together (except in this sentence). He rejects evil/sin and will show us the error of our ways. Hate? I just don't see it. You know He creates and He may destroy, because God has that authority. Why would God need to hate? It just doesn't make sense. This sounds like Roman Mythology in that we must keep the gods happy or they will send doom and gloom down to us. God doesn't work that way. God is Love. If anyone hates, it is Satan. How can God have a character similar to Satan? He will not. The word "hate" is not the word we can/should associate with God.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


Does perfection include hatred? I don't think so.

rod. . . . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


I think your using illogic. "Human hate ='s bad, bad ='s evil, evil ='s sin."

"And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his friend: and love not a false oath: for all these are the things that I hate, saith the Lord." Ok so the Lords a liar rod. He loves sin.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

"And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his friend: and love not a false oath: for all these are the things that I hate, saith the Lord." Zacharias 8:17, (Douay-Rheims)

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

Gail says "Well, apparently you are ignoring my whole post including the part about Christ's 2nd Coming, so here it is again: But immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken, and the sign of the Son will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory, AND HE WILL SEND FORTH HIS ANGELS WITH A GREAT TRUMPET AND THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER HIS ELECT FROM THE FOUR WINDS, FROM ONE END OF THE SKY TO THE OTHER. Matt 24:29-31"
<
Matthew 24:29-31 refers to the physical return of Jesus Christ to the earth Not the Rapture. The rapture is a seperate event. The 2nd Coming and the Rapture are not the same.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

That's for sure! The Second Coming is a CHRISTIAN doctrine dating back to the time of Christ and the Apostles. The "Rapture", in its many forms and variations, is a 19th century manmade tradition with no genuine scriptural support.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 02, 2003.

The Rapture is biblical. So then the Immaculate Conception of Mary is a false doctrine since it was only introduced in the 1800's.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

The real rapture is scriptural enough. but you don't understand it. It has no relation at all to the false doctrine you've swallowed. Everybody has to live through the terrible tribulation prophesied in the Bible. In the moment of the true rapture, on the last day, the Lord will return in glory to judge the living and the dead. The saints will rise up to meet Him in the air. The damned will come up from the grave but not meet Him. He will descend (It is traditionally believed Jesus will return to the Garden of Olives) He will be our King and Judge. This is the last judgment; it is all on the last day.

NOT pre-tribulation. That is completely false; the teaching of false prophets. Your teachers, D.O.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 02, 2003.


No. David, the Lord is not a liar.

At first reading, I could understand how a person could say that God can hate. But, this still doesn't ring true.

Earlier, we had a discussion on a biblical name of "Lilith" (Isaiah 34:14) The Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible (1978). Further investigation found that "Lilith" no longer would be found in our popular Bibles. So, I would need to understand the use of the word "hate" in this context. For the moment, I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with you. But, you have brought up an excellent Scripture for studying.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


Hi David.

Here in Zechariah 8:17 there is a very fine line to be made.

The word "hate" is sitting right on that fine line. I believe that there are two meanings to the word "hate" as it is used in this Scripture and our human practice of it. As ordinary people, we show hatred through words and deeds of hostility or disrespect towards others. This use is quite human and sinful.

Now, the way I see "hate" being used in this Scripture is more about "rejection" of those things God wants us to reject. It doesn't tell us to do sinful things against sin, but to simply stay away or reject sin. So, it seems logical that if we sin, so God's grace will "reject" us for our sins until we repent.

I think the problem is how the word "hate" is being used in the past and in the present.

I don't believe God hates and does bad things to us, but he does reject our sinfulness.

I wonder if I've made things clear.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.


DO said "Matthew 24:29-31 refers to the physical return of Jesus Christ to the earth Not the Rapture. The rapture is a seperate event. The 2nd Coming and the Rapture are not the same." SAYS WHO? You? The AoG? Scripture teaches ABSOLUTELY nothing about a "rapture." NO CHRISTIAN IN CHURCH HISTORY PRIOR TO THE 1800'S EVER HEARD OF SUCH A THING!

The disciples asked "What is the sign of your coming and the end of the age?" Christ gave them the answer, "AFTER the tribulation." It doesn't get much plainer than that. The Thessalonians thought the Day of the Lord had already come. St. Paul corrected them, "The Day of the Lord will not occur until AFTER the apostacy and the man of sin is revealed." AGAIN, it doesn't get much plainer than that.

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 02, 2003.


No christian ever heard of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, or Pope's infallibilty before the 1800's. There false doctrines too.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 02, 2003.

Catholics are Christians. Saint John knew the Catholic doctrine. He was the apostle to whom Jesus entrusted the care of His holy mother after the crucifixion. All Catholics have been taught the truth of Mary's Immaculate Conception since the early days of Christianity. Churches were dedicated to Mary many centuries before 1800, David. The infallibility of our Holy Father is spoken of in scripture. All you need is Matthew 16:18. And in Acts, Peter raised a man from the dead.

Pretty infallible, even then. Sorry, D.O. Your brain was out to lunch again.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 03, 2003.


D.O. errs again. D.O. doesn not even know what his own church teaches, let alone the Catholic Church.

Immaculate Conception

"He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption." Hippolytus,Orat. Inillud, Dominus pascit me(ante A.D. 235),in ULL,94

"This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one." Origen,Homily 1(A.D. 244),in ULL,94

"Let woman praise Her, the pure Mary." Ephraim,Hymns on the Nativity,15:23(A.D. 370),in NPNF2,XIII:254

"Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother." "Ephraem,Nisibene Hymns,27:8(A.D. 370),in THEO,132

"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin." Ambrose,Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388),in JUR,II:166

"We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin." Augustine,Nature and Grace,42[36](A.D.415),in NPNF1,V:135

"As he formed her without my stain of her own,so He proceeded from her contracting no stain." Proclus of Constantinople,Homily 1(ante A.D. 446),in ULL,97

"A virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched, unsullied, holy in soul and body, like a lily sprouting among thorns." Theodotus of Ancrya,Homily VI:11(ante A.D. 446),in THEO,339

"The angel took not the Virgin from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged in the womb, when she was made." Peter Chrysologus,Sermon 140(A.D. 449),in ULL,97

"[T]he very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary, if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary." Jacob of Sarug(ante A.D. 521),in CE

"She is born like the cherubim, she who is of a pure, immaculate clay" Theotoknos of Livias,Panegyric for the feast of the Assumption, 5:6(ante A.D. 650),in THEO,180

"Today humanity, in all the radiance of her immaculate nobility, receives its ancient beauty. The shame of sin had darkened the splendour and attraction of human nature; but when the Mother of the Fair One par excellence is born, this nature regains in her person its ancient privileges and is fashioned according to a perfect model truly worthy of God.... The reform of our nature begins today and the aged world, subjected to a wholly divine transformation, receives the first fruits of the second creation" Andrew of Crete,Sermon I,On the Birth of Mary(A.D. 733),in THEO,180

"[T]ruly elect, and superior to all,not by the altitude of lofty structures, but as ecelling all in the greatness and purity of sublime and divine virtues, and having no affinity with sin whatever." Germanus of Constantinople,Marracci in S. Germani Mariali(ante A.D. 733),in ULL,98

"O most blessed loins of Joachim from which came forth a spotless seed! O glorious womb of Anne in which a most holy offspring grew." John of Damascus,Homily I in Nativ.(ante A.D. 749),in THEO,200

Quotes taken from the Church Fathers and assembled by Joseph A. Gallegos © 1999 All Rights Reserved.

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 03, 2003.


David's comment demonstrates one standard point of confusion among non-Catholics, especially non-Catholics who are hostile toward the True Christian Church, namely the difference between FORMALLY DEFINING an existing doctrine and originating a new doctrine. The latter is never done in the Catholic Church. It is frequently done in Protestantism of course. Otherwise there could not be thousands of conflicting doctrines. Occasionally the Church finds it necessary to formally define, in precise terms, a doctrine which has existed since earliest times. This usually occurs either because some confusion has developed concerning the exact meaning of the doctrine, or because the doctrine is under direct attack from an organized heretical source. In any case, no doctrine is ever formally defined unless it can be clearly shown to have its roots in the early Chriastian Church. Therefore, the fact that a doctrine is formally defined on a specific date (1854 in the case of the Immaculate Conception), rather than representing a new belief, actually proves exactly the opposite. It means that the doctrine has been extensively researched, and found to be traceable to apostolic times. Early Christian writings such as those Gail provided are a major source of such evidence.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 03, 2003.

A challenge for you Paul, Eugene, Gail & Co.; List all of these 'thousands' of conflicting doctrines. You can't even get to 100. Come on, show me all these "thousands" ofconfusing conflicting doctines and maybe then I'll believe you.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 03, 2003.

David.

Your kidding , again, right?

That's almost like dating every woman on the planet to see which one is the right one. You and I can tell when we are in company of the truth or un-truth. But, like a woman, we don't just make a relationship with just anyone. We look for what is right and if she isn't we leave her alone. And, when the right one comes along, we study her and grow with her, because we gradually get to know all of her. As, you should make the desire to know the truth by studying, not by defaming her.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 03, 2003.


David, where is your answer to the tongues issue?

Do you agree with your church's stance on tongues, or not?

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 03, 2003.


What was your question again Gail? Yes rod, I'm serious, it's one thing to make accusations like Paul and Eugene and all other anti protestants and another thing to prove it. The thing is, they can't prove it.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 03, 2003.

Ooooooookkkkkkaayy...

Number one:

David, do you believe in "once saved, always saved"? Or, can a soul fall from Grace?

rod. . . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 03, 2003.


Number two:

Do you believe that Jesus was an exalted man or He has always existed?

Try those two for starters.

rod, , , ,

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 03, 2003.


Shall we post all the various COMMENTARIES used by all the different denominations and then cross reference each and every single commentary on each and every scripture and see how many differences there are? The differences are astronomical. I have two commentaries on my shelf, and guess what -- THEY DON'T AGREE.

Ever looked at how many commentaries there are available, David? There are those the pentecostals use. There are those the Baptists use. There are those the Presbyterians use? There are those Word of Faith use. Every denomination, every church has a belief system based upon what the leader of their organization believes. They can't all be right, can they?

Do you think your church agrees with the Baptist church on the issue of tongues, David? How about the issue of once-saved always saved; does your church believe one can lose their salvation? How about the Presbyterians, David, does your church believe like the Presbyterians, that some are "CHOSEN" and some are not? Well, let's see, David, does your church believe the same as the Nazarenes and the Wesleyans that ENTIRE SANCTIFICATION IS NECESSARY BEFORE ONE IS INFILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT? How about Word of Faith Churches, David, does your church believe that if you are a Christian "you are EQUAL with God?" and that you can "confess your world into existence."

Gail

P.S. I have asked the question over and over and over again. Does your church teach that speaking in tongues is THE evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit? You do what Protestants on the stove always do, jump to the next pan when "things get too hot"!

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 03, 2003.


Ah! Gail, you beat me to tha punch. I was gonna "bird dog" David a bit.

David, even the Pentecostal doctrine distinguishes between two types of sin, but they do not go as far as labeling them. They also have particular understanding for "original sin". The view of "sin" is that which seperates man from God's grace and makes man responsible for his own sin, unlike some that put all of the blame on the devil.

rod. . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 03, 2003.


David.

Which Bible does your congregation use?

___King James Version

___New International Version

___New American Standard Bible

___Other

I think that the Bibles I've mentioned are used in your Pentecostal Church. Please, clarify.

rod. . . . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 03, 2003.


rod I think you misuderstand 'once save, always saved'. We can lose salvation when we backslide from God. Jesus has always existed. I hold a strong view about the KJV. But our church uses whatever bible that's available, they like to compare bibles to help explain something. rod, a sin is a sin, there's no such thing as mortal or venial sin. All sins are mortal.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 03, 2003.

Yes Gail, I would like to see you post ALL THOUSANDS OF THOUSANDS OF CONFUSING & CONFLICTING DOCTRINES OUR 200 MILLION DENOMINATIONS HAVE. AoG teaches that speaking in tongues a sign that a person has been baptized in the Holy Spirit.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 03, 2003.

For someone who claims to look to the Bible for all truth, you sure don't seem to know much about what it says. All sins are mortal? What does "mortal" mean? It means "deadly", or "leading to death", as in a mortal wound. Here is the biblical description of mortal and non- mortal sin ...

"If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this. All unrighteousness is sin, but there is a sin not leading to death". (1 John 5:16-17)

Could this be any clearer??

Let me transcribe it for you ...

"If anyone sees his brother committing a venial sin, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit venial sins. There is also mortal sin; I do not say that he should make request for this. All unrighteousness is sin, but there is a sin which is not mortal". (1 John 5:16-17)

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 03, 2003.


This passage does not prove the Catholic doctrine. You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart. And if thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee. For it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than thy whole body be cast into hell. (Matthew 5:27-29 Douay- Rheims).

"You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not kill. And whosoever shall kill, shall be in danger of the judgment. But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment. And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council. And whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."(Matthew 5:21,22 Douay- Rheims).

The wages of sin, whatever it may be, is death! Sin, any sin, is the defiance of the authority of God Almighty, and that’s what makes sin so serious.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 03, 2003.

So the Holy Spirit, in making this clear, straightforward statement through James, was WRONG?

This passage does not "support" or "prove" the Catholic doctrine. It IS the Catholic doctrine, which is why James, a Catholic bishop, wrote it!

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 03, 2003.


So then 'Matthew' was wrong? Which is right Paul?, if one is wrong and one is right then one doesn't belong.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 03, 2003.

That's right David. And since the statement of James is absolutely straightforward and cannot possibly be interpreted any other way, it must therefore be your personal interpretation of Matthew that is the source of your apparent conflict. No surprise there! All Matthew said is that sins less grievous than adultery and murder can still be mortal. He did not contradict James in any way. And the Catholic Church, of course, teaches exactly what Matthew said - AND exactly what James said. Hardly a surprise since James and Matthew were both leaders in the Church Jesus Christ founded, the Holy Catholic Church.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 03, 2003.

While all sin damages our relationship with God, David, not all sins are equal in the damage they do to ourselves and others.

Take for example Paul's admonition against sexual sin: He says in 1 Cor, 6: 18 Flee immorality. All other sin a man commits are done outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body."

We also see from this chapter that Paul exhorts the Corinthians to exclude the immoral man from fellowship, i.e., excommunication until he repents. So there are differing degrees of sin, David, CLEARLY.

Then take Paul's pronouncement here: 1 Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolatoers, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Then in Galatians Chap 5: 19 - 21 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carrousing, and things like these of which I forewarn you just as I have forewarned you that those who practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Gail

P.S. You still have not apologized for calling me an ass for pointing out that your church DOES teach one MUST speak in tongues after the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Ooooh, pride . . . the deadliest sin of all!

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 04, 2003.


Poor David,
His biggest sin is bigotry. A bigot always insists he's right, even when he's wrong and it's proven to him. Ironically, D.O. is complaining about ant-protestants. They are bashing protestants here!!! Hahaha!

He came to the Catholic forum as an intruder. We welcomed him, and our other pal Kevin, also a bigot He's a worse bigot, actually. They immediately start attacking the Church and her doctrines. They call her a false religion. They do their utmost to shake our faith. But they fail, always. Yet, after all this, David says we're anti-protestants! The victim of Catholic prejudice, D-O!!! The bigot from another church; which isn't a church at all, it's just a sect. Assembly of Bigots of God? God saves bigots???

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 04, 2003.


And the funny thing is, Eugene, David and Kevin are worlds APART in doctrine. David doesn't think Kevin is filled with the Holy Spirit UNLESS Kevin speaks in tongues. Even the great Billy Graham is not filled with the Holy Ghost according to David's church.

Has Kevin ever admitted what church he attends? Probably a non- musical Church of Christ -- you know, the one that thinks it is sinful to use musical instruments in the church! I don't know, he must be ashamed of it or something. He is always inviting us to parse his doctrines, and then when we do, he says we haven't!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 04, 2003.


Happy Fourth, Gail,
And God bless you & the other faithful on the forum. I notice Kevin refrains from giving even a tiny clue to his sectarian belief, his nationality, anything.

His style is that of an older man. Obviously very religious in manner, and severely anti- Catholic. The archetypical protestant bigot. As I've ventured to say to him, he's anglo-saxon. Caught in the web of sola scriptura, and self assured in that private interpretation. His ancestors are positively Catholics loyal to the Pope of their lifetimes. Some may have even resisted the heretical waves that struck Britain & Germany during that era. He is descended from a tragic family, that's for sure. Forced to give up the holy sacraments and renege on their clergy and their holy faith.

Ironically, through the next centuries all became Bible-only bigots, unwilling to allow ''Rome'' to exert the legitimate authority their own families once based the faith on, the apostle Peter.

Instead, they settled all faith on self-ordained ministers. Those who poisoned their minds against the Catholic faith and enforced on them every graphic misinterpretation of scripture. The best passages likely to arouse doubt in the Church.

The only passages in scripture by which they judge the Church center around the book of the Apocalypse, and Babylon. They were told by bigotted preachers this was the Harlot. The Pope the beast, etc., basing the calumny strictly on geography, on City of Rome.

They defend that false interpretation from their inherited phobia against Rome the Place; and ignore the obvious. That Revelations isn't telling the faithful the CHURCH is the Harlot, or the beast, or any of that drivel. Saint John referred to the Roman Empire; the Caesars, the idolaters. They were the ones ''drunk with the blood of the saints''. The Vatican isn't even near the Seven Hills; ''seven heads,'' etc., another bigotted private interpretation.

Geographically, you can't connect the Catholic religion with these odd visions of Revelations. The true Roman of Paul's epistle was clearly devout and ready to lay down his/her life for Jesus Christ. He or she were faithful catholics following Peter & Paul. A tour of Rome's catacombs will prove that clearly.

But just try & tell a bigot who worships a Bible. Maybe you, Gail, having once seen these circumstances in your life; maybe you can explain it?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 04, 2003.


Hi Eugene.

The main reason I stumbled across this forum, way back, was for the reason of getting down to the truth. Ex-Catholics were trying to convince me of all of those things you've mentioned. They had me believing that Mary was the anti-Christ and that Latinaes was the city of Satan built in, you guess it, Rome where the Vatican sits. Hislop's book seems like the bible for those who are trying to destroy the Church.

I first entered this forum with very hard hitting questions, which made me sound like those anti-Catholics. But, I got the answers that I needed. And, the answers were sound and logical. My fear has left me in regards to the Church. I was afraid of my Catholic pictures and artifacts as a result of the propaganda dumped on me, now, I am fully at ease and I have a much better understanding of my birth Church, thanks to the replies from you all.

I have a big step ahead of me that I believe I should start alone without my family. I have a mess of a road ahead of me, I feel.

rod. . . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 04, 2003.


...yes, I know. It isn't about the artifacts and pictures and rosaries and crucifix. It is about my worship for God.

rod. . . . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), July 04, 2003.


Gail, IT'S A PHYSICAL EVIDENCE! In Galatians 5:22, 23. Paul wrote, "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control."

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 04, 2003.

We (Kevin and I) are not doctrines apart Gail, I never said he wasn't filled with the Holy Spirit. STOP PUTTING words into my mouth. Atleast he knows the truth.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 04, 2003.

So, David do you agree or disagree with YOUR church's teaching on tongues?

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 04, 2003.


BTW, David, your scripture quote is concerning the "fruits" of the Spirit not the "gifts of the Spirit."

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 04, 2003.

Gail says "David, Do you agree or disagree with your church's stance on tongues?" Yes.

Gail says "I have asked you a million times, but you keep running away." Now that is a false statement, you haven't asked me a million times, more like 2 or 3. I only saw this post because it went to my email. I can't find the thread you posted it in.

Gail Says "In fact, I have noticed that you run away everytime you get cornered on an issue. I guess you simply start a new thread when the going gets to tough on another thread." Now why would I run away from you? I have posted a few responses but they have been deleted. I start a new thread for a different reasons, not to run away from you.

Gails says "As I recall, you insinuated that I was an ass for asserting that your church teaches that all persons filled with Holy Ghost MUST speak in tongues, which of course is contrary to scripture. Then when I posted what your church teaches FROM THEIR OWN WEBSITE, you completely ignored me." More lies, when did you 'insinuated' that you were an ass? It doesn't teach that all people filled with the Holy Spirit MUST speak in tongues! Assemblys of God teaches nothing that is contrary to scripture. If you looking at their website then read all their articles on speaking in tongues. And don't come back twisting an Isolating a sentence to fit your needs.

Gail says "Then on another thread where you made some preposterous claims concerning the deuterocanicals, and I proved to you that your statements were false, you ran again." Gails you make claims to, yet no effort to prove them. You proved nothing.

Gail says "Do you realize David, that you have continued to make false claims against the Catholic Church, and that you are guilty of perpetrating slander over and over? Do you realize, David, that slander is a very very serious offense? You have been told the truth, but you continue to spread vicious lies."

Do you realize Gail, that you continue to make false claims against the TRUE Church of Christ? What slander am I perpetrating over and over? Gail, the TRUTH is offensive to those who don't know it. You have been told the truth countless times and continue to spread false doctrine and more lies."

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@prodigy.net), July 06, 2003.

This is what you said, David:

Gail said: "BUT you believe that EVERYONE who IS baptized in the Holy Spirit MUST speak in tongues contrary to what scripture says, right?. That's what AG believes."

And you said: "I never said, stop assuming, we all know what happens when you ass/u/me. That's a 'misconception' you have about AoG."

This is what A/G says (from THEIR SITE):

"This A/G Perspective reflects commonly held beliefs based on scripture which have been endorsed by the church's Commission on Doctrinal Purity and the Executive Presbytery.

Is tongues the only evidence of the infilling of the Holy Spirit? Will there be any significant changes in one's attitudes and actions after being baptized in the Spirit?

THE FIRST PHYSICAL SIGN OF THE INFILLING OF THE SPIRIT IS SPEAKING IN TONGUES. This is the one physical sign that is consistent in its recurrence, as pointed out earlier. However, the Baptism in not a goal but a gateway. It is a door to Spirit-filled living. It marks a beginning, not an end. Speaking in tongues is but the initial evidence and is to be followed by all the evidences of Christlikeness that mark a consistent Spirit-filled life.

The apostle Paul described this wonderful life in the Spirit in Galatians 5:22, 23. He wrote, "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control."

It is a life to be lived, not just an experience to be remembered. Some have missed this essential distinction. They have been satisfied to recall that wonderful moment when the Holy Spirit came in His fullness and they magnified the Lord in other tongues. Failure to progress beyond that point is a tragedy.

The question is not only, "Have you been filled?" but, "How have you lived since you were filled?" The apostle Paul wrote, "Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit" (Galatians 5:25). The baptism in the Holy Spirit is the introduction to a victorious Christian life in the Spirit. Any lesser result falls short of God's purpose in bestowing this marvelous gift."

Tell me, David, how I am twisting what A/G teaches?

Now, as to my accusation of your slander, you make some pretty substantial boasts on another thread concerning the deuterocanicals.

This is what you said:

"Why the Apocrypha is not inspired.

Not one of them is in the Hebrew language like the rest of the Old Testament books. (Neither is the NT written in Hebrew. SO WHAT?)

Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration. (Neither do many of the books in the Bible)

These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord. (They were part of the Greek Septuigint which was the text extant during Christ's times. Please see how early church leaders QUOTED from them, found below. Also find the text of the Council at Carthage pronouncing the books of the apochrypha as canonical.)

They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian church. ABSOLUTELY FALSE. AGAIN, THEY WERE PART OF THE GREEK SEPTUIGINT WHICH WAS THE TEXT EXTANT. PLUS, THE EARLY CHURCH LEADERS QUOTED FROM THEM EXTENSIVELY. See below.

They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves. For example, in the Books of Maccabees alone, Antiochus Epiphanes dies three times in three places! (Antiochus Epiphanes had several sons with the same name. Even Protestants rely on the historicity of Macabees, especially with regard to end-times prophetic fullfillments. Antiochus Epiphanes is an arch-type of the antichrist.)

It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. (It shows that the Jews practiced prayers for the deceased, as DID EARLY CHRISTIANS!)

It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. (Oh brother, if that were the standard, then we'd have to cut out most all of the Old Testament. Ever hear of King David, Saul, Solomon?)

The definition of slander (Webster): the utterance of spreading of a false statement, harmful to another's character or reputation.

Everything you posted concerning the Catholic canon of scripture is false!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 06, 2003.


Rather than post AGAIN all the numerous quotes from early church fathers from the apochrypha, if you are interested, they can be found at this thread: "THOSE THAT BELIEVE THEY ARE SAVED, BUT LIVE IN DISOBEDIENCE AND REBELLION TO THE BIBLE, REFUSING TO DO THE WILL OF GOD, DECEIVE THEMSELVES" (They are too voluminous to post again here.)

Here's the Council of Carthage on the deuterocanicals:

Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397). The Third Council of Carthage was not a general council but a regional council of African bishops, much under the influence of Augustine. The English text below is from Bruce Metzger. Canon 24. Besides the canonical Scriptures (listed below), nothing shall be read in church under the name of divine Scriptures. Moreover, the canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the four books of the Kings,(a) the two books of Chronicles, Job, the Psalms of David, five books of Solomon,(b) the book of the Twelve [minor] Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, the two books of Ezra,(c) and the two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament: the Gospels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles, one book; the epistles of the apostle Paul, thirteen; of the same to the Hebrews, one epistle; of Peter, two; of John the apostle, three; of James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation of John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the Church across the sea shall be consulted. On the anniversaries of martyrs, their acts shall also be read

Perhaps your slander is unintentional, David, and I truly hope it is, but you refuse to be corrected when you are shown the truth. You just keep right on telling lies. The N.T. was compiled and "sealed" as canon at this council WITH the apochrypha in the late 300's.

Gail

P.S. The Reformers tampered with the Word of God!

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 06, 2003.


One more thing, David, so there is no misunderstanding, I love the Assemblies of God, though I do not agree with them, and see many problems with their doctrine of tongues. BUT, I have MANY friends at the AoG, brothers and sisters in the Lord, whom I fervently love . . . and whom love me. Their pastors are usually firey and devoted, zealous and committed, their music, stimulating.

I brought up the tongues issue to show you, however, that the AoG has been precluded from teaching the fullness of the truth. They teach something that is very easily disproven by scripture. Why can they not see that they are teaching falsely? Because God made a promise way back 2,000 years ago when Christ said, "the Holy Spirit will guide you into ALL the truth." He made that promise to one Church, and Behold, she is Catholic!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 06, 2003.


Well, I wasted an hour putting together a reply to you, and all you can respond with is one sentence that makes no sense.

I cannot understand why you feel it is necessary to proslytize on this forum. You surely know by now that we worship Jesus, we believe he died for our sins, we believe he rose from the dead, we believe in life everlasting, we believe in the Holy Trinity, etc. We believe in baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We denounce Satan and all of his works at every baptism. We also have some very good reasons for remaining Catholic. It is a complete joy! It is basking in all the gifts Christ has given His church throughout the ages.

You have an unreasonable hatred for the ancient Church, a hatred that is misplaced probably due to some anti-Catholic trash that has been fed to you. I have read some of their literature and I can honestly say that if it weren't for the early church fathers, and the catechism, and other great Catholic apologetics available ON-LINE, and available for all to see, their lies and slanders could be very persuasive, and have been persuasive in deluding millions of people.

But alas, we now live on the information highway, and there is no longer any excuse for ignorance for those such as yourself who have had the truth told to you over and over again. You are much like the ostrich who thrusts his head in the sand -- "Don't confuse me with the truth. If I can't see it, it ain't there."

Somehow, David, I do not feel it incumbant upon myself to surf the net looking for war amongst my fellow Christians. Stirring up hatred and dissension is the work of the devil for "a kingdom divided against itself shall not stand."

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 06, 2003.


Gail: your research and hard work is appreciated. I want to thank you for taking the time to explain the fallacies that are sometimes brought up. By the way, you are really knowledgeable about the Faith. How long have you been a Catholic?

May God continue to bless your work!

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), July 06, 2003.


Hi Catherine Ann:

Thanks for your encouragement. I REALLY appreciate it. I have been in the Church just over a year now. I was an Evangelical Protestant prior to that for many many years. I began to ask questions about the history of the Christian faith and long-story-short, here I am.

When I began to found out that everything I had been taught about Catholocism was wrong it gave me great pause. In fact, I had to quit my job for six months just to study church history and the writings of our blessed ancestors who have left us a virtual treasure in writings. But was struck me was that they were so "Catholic". How could this be? I thought the Catholic church was full of false teachings, so why is that St. Augustine (whom Protestants revere) believed in purgatory, the saints, Mary, etc. etc. St. Jerome, again, Catholic. And on and on.

I tried to get answers from Protestant pastors but the answers I was given did not jive with history. It was really alarming! I lost A LOT OF SLEEP as the proverbial rug was wripped out from underneath me!

Now, here I am a year later in a very quaint country parish singing and playing guitar with a great and godly lady who sounds like Carly Simon! I am AMAZED at the road I have travelled . . . and ever so grateful to be OUT of Protestantism!

I love your posts too, Catherine Ann! Very inspirations. You are in Canada? I am in the midwest, farm country, cows, horses, chickens and pigs, hot, humid, unbearable heat! BUT we have no bears!!

Love,

Gail

P.S. David, I Corinthians 12:7-11 For to one is given the word of wisdom through the spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

Then Paul ask rhetorically asks in vs. 29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? All do not have gifts of healings, do they? ALL DO NOT SPEAK WITH TONGUES, do they?

You see, David, tongues is one of many evidences of the manifestation of the indwelling Holy Spirit, not THE evidence as AG teaches, or more specifically "the initial evidence".

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), July 06, 2003.


Ortiz' middle name: Ignorance.

He stays here weeks, learns nothing. He thinks he's serving God; he serves the devil. He says the Church is a cult, and unbiblical.

But-- The Church brought the Bible into existence on earth. The Church was truly founded here by Jesus Christ. He founded only One, and not the sect called Assembly of God, which has only taught him bigotry. Jesus Christ is the founder of the catholic Church. She is standing for 2,000 years, and the holy Spirit protects her. The devil hates her from the beginning.

''And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you (all of the disciples), that he may sift you as wheat.'' (Break them up, as the 20,000 + non- Catholic denominations are today--) --''But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith may not fail; and do THOU (Peter) when once thou has turned again, strengthen thy brethren.'' (Luke 22 :31-32) --Jesus called on the Pope, Peter-- to strengthen the true Church, the one Satan wanted to destroy. He would have, but Jesus prayed personally for her, and for the Pope-- PETER!

Now, the devil hates Christ's Church since those days, Jesus said so. He placed Peter in the leadership post, strength of a ROCK. He continues keeping Christ's faithful in One church, while Satan ''sifts'' all the fragmneted remains of your thousands of sects, D.O.

It's good to have Jesus Christ's personal promise that you will not become the devil's disciples. Catholics like us, David; and all your blessed ancestors.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), July 06, 2003.


Wow, Gail, only a year! Congratulations!

I'm a cradle Catholic, and hearing all of these amazing conversion stories sometimes makes me feel left out. Then again, I would have missed having a great Catholic family and education, etc.

You know, if I hadn't been born a Catholic, I would probably be an atheist today - LOL! Nothing else really makes sense.

You know, the midwest sounds a lot like my part of Canada. Farm country (we don't farm, but nearly all our neighbours do), cows, horses, chickens, pigs, and especially the heat and humidity! (I've never seen a bear outside a zoo, but I'm not going to make any assumptions.) I love this area; we've got the best of everything: sprawling forests, rolling hills, lakes, rocks and the blue, blue sky...

Am I getting homesick already? And I haven't even left yet! September must be coming too quickly.

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), July 07, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ