Ask a Catholic

[gtopa1]

.

I believe it is very clear that the Catholic Church promotes the worshiping of Images

and the Roman Church also promotes worshiping another - God

The Catholic The Catholic Church claims within Catholic Catechism 2 nd ed 841 that

'' Muslims;... these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us [Catholics].....they adore the one, merciful god, mankind's judge on the last day

The catholic god is the Muslim god

that’s why your pope can kiss and stroke / caress - and bow to the unholy Quran

photos of pope kissing quran - Google Search

images.google.com

In May 1985 - Pope John Paul ll - repeats Rome’s declaration to audience of thousands the pope said: “Catholics Muslims, we have many things in common as believers and as human beings....

we believe in the same god

https://quotepark.com/quotes/1723788-pope-john-paul-ii-christians-and-muslims-we-have-many-things-in-com/
Meeting with the young Muslims in Casablanca - Morocco (August 19, 1985) | John Paul II
https://occatholic.com/shared-beliefs/

The reality of the situation is that not only do Catholics claim to worship Allah - which is worshiping another God

but they also promote Idol worship by bowing down to Images and even believe that bodily fluids and bodily secretions and excrements are and discharging from the orifices of their idols they serve,

their pope spends millions making trips to check the bodily fluids Catholics claim are oozing and secreting from these idols.

You will find in the Old Testament that the high priest was never instructed to bow down to these wings of cherubim or to pray to the angels in heaven that they represented.

the bible condemns bowing to any angel and image.

and never were congregation ever ever …. allowed to even go into the temple to venerate anything where the gold wings of the cherubim were placed.

Also - no one was told to bow down to the brass serpent, and neither was anyone instructed to pray before it, the golden cherubim and other images of the Hebrew sanctuary were not used to bow down before and were never the focus of any prayer or veneration

Remember - Moses did not have the people venerate and bow down before the brass serpent, they only needed to look upon it and be healed by recognizing their sin was represented in the serpent.

but many years later, when the people began to venerate / worship the brass serpent as an idol by burning incense before it, King Hezekiah did right in the sight of the Lord and destroyed it, breaking it into pieces.

The fact is, Roman Catholics worship another God by proclaiming that the God of Islam is the God of the Bible - Allah is not the God of Jews and Christians.

Allah is another god - yet Catholics demand that they worship Allah as the same God of the Bible. Catholics also bow down and venerate images and they have deleted and removed and changed their Translation - in every single last commandment in the entire Bible that commands to not bow down before images - they deleted this completely.

they change and alter everything in the Bible that does not conform to their faith system,

No I don't.

Greg

 

[Meriweather]

Both of us know you can't

Colin, in other threads I ignore all your posts. In threads I create I extend the courtesy of responding to those I otherwise ignore. This thread is about what Catholics believe, and I am well qualified to answer the question of what Catholics believe how Catholics came by those beliefs. This thread is not about changing anyone's mind. It merely presents Catholic beliefs and teachings.

I do not tolerate abuse in real life, have never understood how in real life the abused return to the abuser. When babyish tantrums are directed at me in my own thread, I will ignore them, but what I will not ignore is abuse directed at others participating in threads I create. Those I will report. Grow up. Become a man. In civilized discourse, real men do not engage in behavior unbecoming of their stature.

 

[Colin norris]

Colin, in other threads I i
gnore all your posts. In threads I create I extend the courtesy of responding to those I otherwise ignore. This thread is about what Catholics believe, and I am well qualified to answer the question of what Catholics believe how Catholics came by those beliefs. This thread is not about changing anyone's mind. It merely presents Catholic beliefs and teachings.

I do not tolerate abuse in real life, have never understood how in real life the abused return to the abuser. When babyish tantrums are directed at me in my own thread, I will ignore them, but what I will not ignore is abuse directed at others participating in threads I create. Those I will report. Grow up. Become a man. In civilized discourse, real men do not engage in behavior unbecoming of their stature.

I don't care what you think or believe. You will not intimidate me with your condescending mealy mouthed words.

I'm not here to change anyone's mind but why should I tolerate godbotherers belching their beliefs as it is fact. Its not. That attitude gives me the right to put an alternative view. So don't tell me what I can't say because you cannot prove me wrong.

It's not a tantrum son , it's fact and you know it. If I were totally wrong you would firstly post otherwise to prove your point them laugh at my stupidity.
But no. You launch into a personal attack because you cannot refute it.

You have no more qualifications to explain my questions than anyone else. You're not an authority on religion whereby questions are posed and you give answers. Answer my questions about immaculate conception and virgin births. If you can't, say so. Don't blather about your being questioned by who you believe are inferior. How arrogant are you.
I have the same rigjt to be here as you and if you don't like beings asked the hard questions, don't post.
So get off your self assessed pompous position of some Prophet who has gods approval to spread rubbish. You don't.

 

[Colin norris]

I said you are hateful. I don't see in hate an emotional expression like anger. Anger is not per se negative. Sometimes it makes sense to be angry.



Interesting form of spiritual belief, specially because many atheists believe not to believe.



What do you know about me? (a) Something, (b) nothing or less than (c) nothing. I guess it's (c).



For example if you like to move a heavy sack from ground 0 to the loading surface area of a truck then this is more easy if you are angry. And perhaps also on other reasons.



I'm not allknowing but I know who is allknowing: you!



To be honest: I thought I will not have to die as a martyr - but if this is god's will fro me to have to do so - whatelse to do? Better to be the worst loser in Christ then to be a winner for a devil.



?



Drugs? ... Do you have a problem with drugs?



If you think so.



With what?



Do you?



I hope you know that you think in brainwashing stereotypes and it is your own free will to use this stereotypes.

I said you are hateful. I don't see in hate an emotional expression like anger. Anger is not per se negative. Sometimes it makes sense to be angry.



Interesting form of spiritual belief, specially because many atheists believe not to believe.



What do you know about me? (a) Something, (b) nothing or less than (c) nothing. I guess it's (c).



For example if you like to move a heavy sack from ground 0 to the loading surface area of a truck then this is more easy if you are angry. And perhaps also on other reasons.



I'm not allknowing but I know who is allknowing: you!



To be honest: I thought I will not have to die as a martyr - but if this is god's will fro me to have to do so - whatelse to do? Better to be the worst loser in Christ then to be a winner for a devil.



?



Drugs? ... Do you have a problem with drugs?



If you think so.



With what?



Do you?

You are pathetic. You have not answered or refuted anything I said but wander off into personal attacks. Make reference to a drug habit I could have. Is that the best you've got?

I know you can't answer the big questions because you keep avoiding them. You have these fervent beliefs in nothing but BS but wonder why someone challenges you for it.

You've been conned by the oldest trick known to man. There is no God nor has there even been a reason for one to explain anything in the universe.
You speak of it like it's legislated but it's complete rubbish.

You do not have the research, willingness or intellect to understand the stupidity of your beliefs. Faith does not equate to facts. What can be asserted without evidence can dismissed without evidence..

Every time you reply I get another whack at you.

 

[Meriweather]

I don't care

Post ignored/not read after first sentence. Addresses poster, not the topic.

 

[Colin norris]

Post ignored/not read after first sentence. Addresses poster, not the topic.

Yeah sure you did. I'll take that as a complete capitulation after you cannot defend your position. You are not then know all you think.

Some advice comrade. Don't post lies like that again if you don't enjoy me challenging them. I'll keep watching.

 

[Meriweather]

Yeah

Ignored after first sentence. Address the topic thread, not the posters.

 

[zaangalewa]

Colin norris You quoted some of your comment in the wrong formal way - so I have to give you an additional answer about this points.


-----

You cannot say who has a knowledge of science and be a godbotherer simultaneously. Clearly it's you who refuses to read science.

Just a moment ago I started to read a book about the phenomenon "time" from the physicist Harald Lesch and the philosoper Ursula Forstner. I love all themes in the context natural science, philosophy and psychology. I love mathematics and music.

No he didn't. He made a vacci lk action that believers embraced because to that point, anything was worth grabbing to justify it. His theory was never presented to be validated. Its total rubbish.

Only idiots say the mathematics of Kurt Goedel is rubbish. He's one of the greatest mathematicians the world ever had seen. And for a Christian is this proof by the way unimportnat - as any other proof of god. But all this proofs are not unimportant for the history of philosophy and science about new ways how to think sensefully.

In the language of science: We are only able to falsify a hypothese, so everything what's not false is true. Goedel made a proof of god which still is not falsified. So god exists.

In the language of Christians: Nice. But not important for us, because we believe in god - what means we believe god [meta-]exists for us and we trust in him. This depends not on any hypothese of any philosopher or scientist - or in the quality of the bread a baker is able to bake.

Pathenogenisis

Parthenogenisis

means being able to reproduce without the input of male sperm. If you believe otherwise, you are believing rubbish. That can be checked in any dictionary but you'll never find it in a bible.

Again: What has this to do with mother Mary?

I know she was unmarried. That's why her children were all illegitimate. Further down you say she was married to Joseph. You cant have it both ways.

I will not discuss with you about something about what you should know basics of the Catholic religion. Short: What you say here sounds extremely hateful and very stupid in my ears, specially if I Iet pass some hundreds - even thousands - of years in my mind.

That is in reply to where I suggested she did not have communication with any God and I stand by that comment. Its probably some that religion fabricated to add more mystery and Intrigue to an already ridiculous scenario.

No comment.

SOMEHOW LEGALISED? What a load of rubbish. You don't know but you think you know everything else.
They were never married.

Read what's written in the bible about Joseph. He's one of the most fascinating saints. I will here quote again what I had yet quoted from the bible. I forgot something because of the hectic in our world in which we live here.

-----
The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah, and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.
-----


-----

 

[Colin norris]

Colin norris You quoted some of your comment in the wrong formal way - so I have to give you an additional answer about this points.






Just a moment ago I started to read a book about the phenomenon "time" from the physicist Harald Lesch and the philosoper Ursula Forstner. I love all themes in the context natural science, philosophy and psychology. I love mathematics and music.



Only idiots say the mathematics of Kurt Goedel is rubbish. He's one of the greatest mathematicians the world ever had seen. And for a Christian is this proof by the way unimportnat - as any other proof of god. But all this proofs are not unimportant for the history of philosophy and science about new ways how to think sensefully.

In the language of science: We are only able to falsify a hypothese, so everything what's not false is true. Goedel made a proof of god which still is not falsified. So god exists.

In the language of Christians: Nice. But not important for us, because we believe in god - what means we believe god [meta-]exists for us and we trust in him. This depends not on any hypothese of any philosopher or scientist - or in the quality of the bread a baker is able to bake.


Parthenogenisis


Again: What has this to do with mother Mary?



I will not discuss with you about something about what you should know basics of the Catholic religion. Short: What you say here sounds extremely hateful and very stupid in my ears, specially if I Iet pass some hundreds - even thousands - of years in my mind.



No comment.



Read what's written in the bible about Joseph. He's one of the most fascinating saints. I will here quote again what I had yet quoted from the bible. I forgot something because of the hectic in our world in which we live here.

-----
The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah, and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.
-----


-----

Again, you CANNOT answer the same questions which have been posed to religion for 2000 years. You have nothing but blind faith and not a fact in sight.
Yet you project yourself and beliefs as a standard which society should accept.

Like every godbotherer I've challenged, they wander off on tangents to avoid the big single question, prove there is a god.
The onus of proof is on you.
Go ahead. Prove to the world you have unique access to the truth.
I know you can't do you're just another delusional godbotherer.

 

[zaangalewa]

Again, you CANNOT answer the same questions which have been posed to religion for 2000 years. You have nothing but blind faith and not a fact in sight.
Yet you project yourself and beliefs as a standard which society should accept.

Like every godbotherer I've challenged, they wander off on tangents to avoid the big single question, prove there is a god.
The onus of proof is on you.
Go ahead. Prove to the world you have unique access to the truth.
I know you can't do you're just another delusional godbotherer.

I fear you never will understand how absurde all this sounds what you say. But if you like to live in a godless society - why not? Do it!

 

[james bond]

Go ahead. Prove to the world you have unique access to the truth.

The proof is in the pudding. We are all here -- the universe, Earth, and everything in it. We have the seven continents and 3/4 of the Earth in water due to the great flood. We have the Earth floating in space. spinning on its axis to show and revolving around the sun in 24-hrs, at just the right distance from the sun, but not yet pulled off towards the sun by gravity and more. Evolution and evolutionary thinking cannot explain. Atheists/ags have no proof on no God/gods. It leaves you on the losing side. The truth will hurt in the afterlife for the losing side.

 

[Colin norris]

The proof is in the pudding. We are all here -- the universe, Earth, and everything in it.

How does that explain it was put here by God? You might believe God did it but I don't.

We have the seven continents and 3/4 of the Earth in water due to the great flood.

Rubbish. Firstly the water came to this planet by way of asteroids of ice colliding to form the oceans.
Secondly, if the earth was covered over the top of mt. Everest, where did all the water go after it receeded about 7 km?
Someone drank it?
Also, did God bring it with him when he magically built everything in 6 days?
Do you expect rational people to believe that crap?

We have the Earth floating in space. spinning on its axis to show and revolving around the sun in 24-hrs,

I know we do but God didn't do that. It was done 4.5 billion years ago by gravity and by being struck by asteroids.

at just the right distance from the sun, but not yet pulled off towards the sun by gravity and more.

So you are suggesting God had all the physics and science available to him and chose this spot on those assumptions?
You must be kidding or drunk.


Evolution and evolutionary thinking cannot explain. Atheists/ags have no proof on no God/gods.

Evolution is a fact, if you believe it or not.
In regard to the existence of a God, you have not produced evidence of it so it's safe to assume, you have none.
Atheists have since time began claimed nothing but what is. I see evolution everywhere and no reason why a god was ever needed to make stars etc. Its all perfectly explained how it came by science. Every little detail. No God of gaps like you rely on.



It leaves you on the losing side. The truth will hurt in the afterlife for the losing side.

This is not a contest to see who wins dopey. Its about presenting plausible, understandable and repeatable evidence.
Religion has relied on a 2000 year old hook, written by illiterate barbarians where as science relies on evidence.
The bible has not one verifiable fact in it other the the page numbers.

Furthermore don't threaten me with eternal fire because you cannot present conclusive evidence.
Arrogant smart arse pricks like you have no knowledge of my destination or punishment if any, after I die. You have no certainty as to where you are going and don't say you do.

You are one if millions on this planet who have been conned by religion. You are insecure, afraid of death and expect a reward for your addiction to religion whilst sentencing others.
How vain, presumptuous and sanctamonious are you? Include dickhead in that also.

 

[Colin norris]

I fear you never will understand how absurde all this sounds what you say. But if you like to live in a godless society - why not? Do it!

In case you don't know, you also live in a godless society. Because you have no evidence there is one.

The word is absurd, not absurde. It only sounds absurd to an ignoramus godbotherer like you. Don't try to belittle me with your childish put downs. That's not becoming. I know you're out of the standard religious ammo when all the silly bits are included as rebuttals.

Basically, you don't really know a lot about what you think you know a lot about. You're repeating the same clap trap that all the numb minded Jesus junkies quote and expect rational adults to swallow it as if fact.

Try you rubbish on some little kids like religion does. Not me.

 

[zaangalewa]

In case you don't know, you also live in a godless society. Because you have no evidence there is one.

The word is absurd, not absurde. It only sounds absurd to an ignoramus godbotherer like you. Don't try to belittle me with your childish put downs. That's not becoming. I know you're out of the standard religious ammo when all the silly bits are included as rebuttals.

Basically, you don't really know a lot about what you think you know a lot about. You're repeating the same clap trap that all the numb minded Jesus junkies quote and expect rational adults to swallow it as if fact.

Try you rubbish on some little kids like religion does. Not me.

What is your problem? Are you senile or do you use drugs? In case you are senile it would be better for you not to live in a "godless"(= god denying or a- or anti-spiritual) society. And in case drugs are your problem it would be better for you to leave your godless society.

 

[Meriweather]

One of my favorite topics is Galileo because his story is such an excellent example of how we forget how cultures change. The story promoted by Protestants is that the Catholic Church threw Galileo into prison for saying the earth revolved around the sun.

In actuality, Galileo was placed under house arrest for insisting the Bible be changed to note the earth revolved around the sun. In Galileo's time there were very few books, and the most prolific book was the Bible, which Galileo saw as the perfect vehicle to teach the earth revolving around the sun.

The Church wanted to know whether it was fact or theory. At the time, Galileo readily admitted it was still theory, but would at some time be proven fact. The Church first of all did not wish to change the Bible to accommodate a theory, and there was even a more passionate argument that the Bible should remain as originally written--not changed at all.

What I find riveting is that Galileo, the man who introduced the theory of the earth revolving around the sun, could not picture a time when there would be more science books in print than Bibles. Galileo was convinced the Bible was his only teaching tool--and admittedly, pretty much was the most widely circulated book at that time. Still, an irony, don't you think, one of the most knowledgeable men of the time, could not foresee he did not need the single Bible for his work to become taught, that one day there would be countless books in circulation.

Meanwhile I think it is right that people in earlier times stood firm in not changing original Bible accounts. In the end, it turned out best for both sides.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

See Post #392.

Nope. Gonna avoid my point?

 

[Meriweather]

Nope. Gonna avoid my point?

Which is?

 

[Colin norris]

What is your problem? Are you senile or do you use drugs? In case you are senile it would be better for you not to live in a "godless"(= god denying or a- or anti-spiritual) society. And in case drugs are your problem it would be better for you to leave your godless society.

Here we Go. The frustration is building and out comes the thinly veiled hatred. If heaven is so good, why are you delaying it.
Same diatribe of pathetic drug abuse and lack of intelligence insinuations yet you believe in immaculate conception and virgin births. Get back to answering my questions. I know you can't so its best you leave this thread and stop me from embarrassing you further.

But if you must be petulant, continue. Every time you reply I get another whack at you.

Einstein was a devout atheist. Check some real facts, not some quote you try to own.

 

[BreezeWood]

One of my favorite topics is Galileo because his story is such an excellent example of how we forget how cultures change. The story promoted by Protestants is that the Catholic Church threw Galileo into prison for saying the earth revolved around the sun.

In actuality, Galileo was placed under house arrest for insisting the Bible be changed to note the earth revolved around the sun. In Galileo's time there were very few books, and the most prolific book was the Bible, which Galileo saw as the perfect vehicle to teach the earth revolving around the sun.

The Church wanted to know whether it was fact or theory. At the time, Galileo readily admitted it was still theory, but would at some time be proven fact. The Church first of all did not wish to change the Bible to accommodate a theory, and there was even a more passionate argument that the Bible should remain as originally written--not changed at all.

What I find riveting is that Galileo, the man who introduced the theory of the earth revolving around the sun, could not picture a time when there would be more science books in print than Bibles. Galileo was convinced the Bible was his only teaching tool--and admittedly, pretty much was the most widely circulated book at that time. Still, an irony, don't you think, one of the most knowledgeable men of the time, could not foresee he did not need the single Bible for his work to become taught, that one day there would be countless books in circulation.

Meanwhile I think it is right that people in earlier times stood firm in not changing original Bible accounts. In the end, it turned out best for both sides.

.

Meanwhile I think it is right that people in earlier times stood firm in not changing original Bible accounts. In the end, it turned out best for both sides.

both sides ...

the christian bible was written 4 centuries after the events of the 1st century - by the perpetrators that crucified the 1st century religious itinerant and is written as - the state religion of the roman empire - no they have never bothered to change their book, nor have they ever been brought to justice ...

galileo described by revisionist meriweather - is pure religious pandering.

 

[zaangalewa]

... Einstein was a devout atheist. ...

Einstein was an agnostics as I am too. Indeed I have a lot of parallels in my basic ideas with my friend Albert.

„Die fanatischen Atheisten sind wie Sklaven, die immer noch das Gewicht ihrer Ketten spüren, die sie nach hartem Kampf abgeworfen haben. Sie sind Wesen, die in ihrem Groll auf die traditionellen Religionen als ‚Opium der Massen’ die Musik der Welt nicht hören können.“
Albert Einstein

My translation: "The fanatical atheists are like slaves who still feel the weight of their chains, which they had thrown off after a hard fight. They are beings - in their resentment of traditional religions as the 'opium of the masses' - who don't hear the music of the world."