Zone1 is the Vatican in the bible?

[Cougarbear]

Aha. This suspicion I had from the beginning - specially because you are an anti-Catholic.



Eh?



¿But?



You did teach math? ... Whoow ... Ever heard something from "logic"?



Aha. What a fortunate coincidence.



Your father was a Jew and you was a teacher in a Catholic school who not understands what Catholics (and Jews) say? Which form of absurdity is this now?



Ufff ... what a luck that I am not an US-American. I guess this means something.



Counterquestion: What has scientology to do with science except less than nothing? Scientology has not even anything to do with religion. Scientology is only a criminal organisation - nothing else.



Exactly. We have been called "Christians" from others. But we overtook this name immediatelly. It was very clear. Saints exist in all religions.



I don't know now whether they hated us or not - and whether this had been a deprecating expressionsor not - but what can I say? The expression "Christians" is today not unknown - and some think this comes from "criminals" and other think this comes from "saints".



Not all Christians believe(d) this. Theoderic rex for example had been an Arian. The Vandals - nice people by the way but sometimes a little rough - also had been Arians.



Yea. Mary is Mary. Nothing compares to her.



Hmm ... hmhmhm ... hmhmhmhmhmhmhm ... I would say first of all is important to see that the allmighty god suffered in Jesus Christ helpless with us.



You like to baptize a dead person? How? ... Sorry ... You are really spooky. ... When I take the picture of a baptized baby and compare it with the picture of ... no no ... no. I prefer such pictures:

Why spoke Mr. Joseph Smith in this text "we"? Point 2 for example makes in my form to think not a big sense at all - specially is not punishment the centre. The centre is to come home to god father in the best of all possible ways. In point 3 I have not any idea what the word "saved" means and why all mankind should be saved - and what for heavens sake means to obey laws when Paulus said the opposite? And what is ordinance of the gospel? Means ordinance sacrament? Then it would be nonsense. A Gospel is a text - and not a sacrament. Sense makes to say to follow the spirit of the gospels. ... Whatever ... When I read all this stuff which you say here then I do not understand why you have a problem to be called "Mormon" when you believe the "book of Mormon" - whatever this could be - is the word of god. ... We made the bible exactly on reason to be sure that the books in this "book of the books" are authentic. The 'book of Mormon' is not part of the bible - so it is not authentic.

You really need to learn how to debate in these forums. Stringing together statements like this makes in impossible to debate. So, I'll take one point and see what happens. Why did you bring up scientology? Did you have to move the goal posts to get out from under the truth of my words? Yes!
As far as being "anti" Catholic, no. You have the right to believe as you may, even if you don't live in the U.S.A. I support good in all people and denounce evil in all people. However, when a church knows they error in doctrine, such as infant baptism, then I reject that doctrine.
Here's one for you. While at St. Bonny, the teachers were asked to attend a Mass in the library for just teachers. Father Joseph performed the Mass. During the Mass, Father Joseph read from Matthew 23 verse 9, "Do not call anyone on earth "father," for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." I looked at one of the teachers and he made this puzzle face look as if "Wait, Why are we calling Joseph, Father Joseph?" I smiled ever so slightly knowing others are puzzled about this doctrine. Jesus was referring to religious leaders calling themselves "Father." That apostasy was already happening and Jesus was trying to correct the people. But, here comes the Catholics hundreds of years later making the same error. It's become customary through "traditions." False traditions such as Jews do as well.

I will say in The Church of Jesus Christ today, we fight people who bring in false doctrine all the time. It's not easy but we don't succumb to it. I remember a missionary saying that they knocked on a door and the people were very Hispanic with their language as well. But, they welcomed them in and said they were members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints baptized in Mexico. Then, the dad said we pray to Saint Moroni every day, pointing to a statue of the Angel Moroni. The Elder's chuckled and then taught them true doctrine and not to pray to statues no more.

I understand that if something of a tradition lasts in the Church for 50 years, it becomes doctrine. Is this true still?

 

[Cougarbear]

1. I was confused by how you perceived Catholic baptism, so to better understand your perception, I asked you about Mormon baptism. When you responded, the fog cleared. Mormons and Catholics may use the same word, "Baptism", but to each it means something entirely different from the other. I thanked you for this information. For me, that would be the end.

2. Your request for me to explain Catholic baptism, opened things up again. I'll note, to me, your post asking about Catholic baptism came across as a rather haughty demand that did not bode well. Shrugged that aside, because the printed word often comes across differently than it would if spoken with a smile.

3. I clearly laid out the Catholic view of baptism, and you dare to tell me that is not what Catholics are "really" doing or "really" believe.

4. A college journalism course covering propaganda, noted to beware any person or group who feels they must start by denigrating or tearing down what came before. They are terrified of the strength of the older tradition and their own frailty in comparison. So throw a lot of mud and do a lot of sneering. The Catholic faith withstands this and more from Mormons.

5. Another propagandist strategy is to build a straw man and claim that is what the older/stronger institution/business is "really" about or "really" doing. This is exactly what you did/are doing with Catholic baptism. You (or Mormons) come across as absolutely desperate that another, older purpose of baptism be proven wrong with the Mormon claim Catholics "lost the priesthood" and that God even took it away from them. Always gives me a chuckle.

6. By comparison, note the strength of Islam stands without a need to tear down older traditions. They stand along side them.

Here's the deal: Catholics recognize and accept we are a part of a broken humanity. As such, we realize even as a Church, we will stumble. We also have a powerful faith that as we walk with God, as we walk in the Way of Christ, the Holy Spirit will lead us to repentance and correction. Further, the Church has never been one person (Pope or Bishop) doing wrong. The Church is the entire Body of Christ while we as individuals acknowledge that we, individually are part of a broken humanity. It is why we value the Sacrament of Reconciliation. So, when you gleefully point to a Pope and chortle, "They lost the priesthood!" we simply smile, shake our heads, and move on. Our priesthood is not in a pope or any single individual. Our priesthood is Christ, and with our baptism, each of us (as much as any pope) enter into becoming and being priest, prophet, king in the Body of Christ. Our great Popes understand this. After all, when they are no more, the Church still is. As it ever will be for Christ is our cornerstone.

I have not said that The Roman Catholic Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints understand baptism differently. Of course we do understand it differently. I am simply pointing out that the words used in interpreting what baptism is and for is not correct with RCC doctrinal teachings. I have explained why as well. Same with the Sacraments are understood differently. And, the words don't agree with RCC doctrine on the Sacraments either. We actually have the Bible in a form in which we don't need priests to read them for us like in the dark ages. When it was illegal for people to read the bible. Thank you Guttenberg. The Sacraments are for the remembrance of the atonement of Jesus Christ and baptism for the remission of sins (which an infant cannot commit). As I understand, Catholic priests pull the Christ off his thorn thousands of time a day around the world and make him die all over. That the Sacraments literally become the body and blood of Christ. EEEUUUUU! Canabalism... Maybe you can straighten me out on this one too.

 

[zaangalewa]

You really need to learn how to debate in these forums.

I am no politician. I do not debate. I say what I think.

Stringing together statements like this makes in impossible to debate.

?

So, I'll take one point and see what happens. Why did you bring up scientology?

As an exmaple that names are "sound and smoke" - or how your culture says: "It's all hollow words".

Did you have to move the goal posts to get out from under the truth of my words? Yes!

?

As far as being "anti" Catholic, no.

You have the right to believe as you may, even if you don't live in the U.S.A.

What a bullshit sentence.

I support good in all people and denounce evil in all people. However, when a church knows they error in doctrine, such as infant baptism, then I reject that doctrine.

You do so because you are brainwashed - that's all. Your thoughts are not authentic. In my worId I call such people "tattooed buffers". Tattoos do not live but the skin under their tattoos lives.

Here's one for you. While at St. Bonny, the teachers were asked to attend a Mass in the library for just teachers. Father Joseph performed the Mass. During the Mass, Father Joseph read from Matthew 23 verse 9, "Do not call anyone on earth "father," for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." I looked at one of the teachers and he made this puzzle face look as if

¿"look as if"?

"Wait, Why are we calling Joseph, Father Joseph?" I smiled ever so slightly knowing others are puzzled about this doctrine.

Read what Catholic philosophers say about this theme. By the way: Your own psychological structure is not the same as the psychological strcture of other human beings. You did not see a face "look like" - you saw a strange joke which you are able to make. Or with other words: Maybe you are only a propagandist of hate.

Jesus was referring to religious leaders calling themselves "Father."

No. Let me give you a concrete example: A black German girl here thought she will be able to find her black roots when she will find her black biological parents in Africa. She found her father there. He raped her. If she had searched for your "Father Joseph" in America she had perhaps found a real father and real roots.

That apostasy

What?

was already happening and Jesus was trying to correct the people.

Dear boy - you speak bullshit, that's all.

But, here comes the Catholics hundreds of years later making the same error. It's become customary through "traditions." False traditions such as Jews do as well.

So monotheism is wrong in your view to the world? Or are you a monoteist? If you are a monotheist - where from comes this monotheism? And if you are a polytheist - what has this to do with Christians at all? For a math teacher you are on an astonishing deep level of logic.

I will say in The Church of Jesus Christ today, we fight people who bring in false doctrine all the time.

Let me say it this way: Baptizing children is a nice family tradition. The background is to educate children in the own religion. But baptizing dead men and women is ... a horror idea from a very bad film. How to ask them? How to do this?

So are you really sure we Catholics have to justify the 2000 years old tradition to sprinkle some water in the face of children of god and to speak out the words Jesus teached us to say?

It's not easy but we don't succumb to it. I remember a missionary saying that they knocked on a door and the people were very Hispanic with their language as well. But, they welcomed them in and said they were members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints baptized in Mexico.

In Mexico exist Mormons? Never thought so.

Then, the dad said we pray to Saint Moroni every day,

To whom?

pointing to a statue of the Angel Moroni. The Elder's chuckled and then taught them true doctrine and not to pray to statues no more.

I understand that if something of a tradition lasts in the Church for 50 years, it becomes doctrine. Is this true still?

Dear boy: You father was no Jew and you never was a math teacher in a Catholic school, isn't it? Why do you say such a bullshit? Btw: What was the religion of your mother?

 

[22lcidw]

I have not said that The Roman Catholic Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints understand baptism differently. Of course we do understand it differently. I am simply pointing out that the words used in interpreting what baptism is and for is not correct with RCC doctrinal teachings. I have explained why as well. Same with the Sacraments are understood differently. And, the words don't agree with RCC doctrine on the Sacraments either. We actually have the Bible in a form in which we don't need priests to read them for us like in the dark ages. When it was illegal for people to read the bible. Thank you Guttenberg. The Sacraments are for the remembrance of the atonement of Jesus Christ and baptism for the remission of sins (which an infant cannot commit). As I understand, Catholic priests pull the Christ off his thorn thousands of time a day around the world and make him die all over. That the Sacraments literally become the body and blood of Christ. EEEUUUUU! Canabalism... Maybe you can straighten me out on this one too.

I went to Catholic School like some others here. Never with what is typed that I heard a nun, a priest or a lay teacher spout a word of hate towards others. No matter the religious doctrine taught.

 

[zaangalewa]

Cougarbear

By the way: The peace of WestphaIia - a great date of history - has this year the 375th birthday.

 

[surada]

greetings
I don't know this book, but I'm familiar with some of Hal Lindsey's teachings about Islam, they are a key player as you see.
The Vatican is sleeping with the enemy, Islam this I know to be true, but I see many skeptics.
I need time to look into this.

The book of John in the Bible? Really?

 

[surada]

John was in tribulation as he was in prison. The rest of the church was falling into apostasy which is tribulation. Revelation was written to anyone who would read and understand that he was speaking of the end of days.

John is in tribulation along with the first century Christians he's writing to...

That's what it says in every Bible translation.

Revelation 1:9 - John's Vision on Patmos

I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance that are in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and my testimony about Jesus.

biblehub.com

 

[Meriweather]

We actually have the Bible in a form in which we don't need priests to read them for us like in the dark ages. When it was illegal for people to read the bible.

Quality control is the reason for bans being placed on reading the Bible in public. With the advent of the printing press, and with the Bible the most well-known book, it could be a financial bonanza. Careless translation; material being left out; non-Biblical material being added were reasons for these bans. During this same time period, authorized translations were being written, printed, published.

Then there is the matter of what is lost in the translation, in changing languages, in not knowing the histories and cultures of Biblical times. No problem...everyone could decide for themselves what the books and passages meant. No education or study needed, and ignorance of the intent of the original authors of the Bible spread. The idea that scripture is meant to be studied, not read, was tossed aside. Claim the Holy Spirit explains it and that quality control isn't needed with the Holy Spirit in charge.

 

[Meriweather]

I am simply pointing out that the words used in interpreting what baptism is and for is not correct with RCC doctrinal teachings.

What you are "simply pointing out" is that in your opinion there is no need to pay attention to what Catholicism says. Simply claim that Apostolic teachings going back two thousand years to the time of Christ are incorrect, but never fear, Mormons have teachings dating back two hundred years where a con man presents "the truth."

 

[Meriweather]

That the Sacraments literally become the body and blood of Christ. EEEUUUUU! Canabalism... Maybe you can straighten me out on this one too.

Straighten you out? I believe I will follow Christ's example in this. When many of Jesus' disciples returned to their former lives after hearing Jesus say, "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life...." Jesus did not run after them calling, "Wait! You misunderstand! This is not cannibalism!" He let them go.

I'll do the same with you, while offering this thought: Many babies receive nourishment directly from their mother's body without being accused of cannibalism. Those who cannot believe Jesus can nourish us with his body and blood without it being cannibalism should go away in peace. Maybe seek out a con man. That would certainly be returning to a former way of life considering the con the serpent played in the Garden.

Yes, I know, a cheap shot that I would generally refrain from making, but seriously--grow up! You have the wrong ideas about Catholicism and will not learn because you have no interest in learning, and therefore explaining anything to you is a waste of time.

 

[Cougarbear]

Quality control is the reason for bans being placed on reading the Bible in public. With the advent of the printing press, and with the Bible the most well-known book, it could be a financial bonanza. Careless translation; material being left out; non-Biblical material being added were reasons for these bans. During this same time period, authorized translations were being written, printed, published.

Then there is the matter of what is lost in the translation, in changing languages, in not knowing the histories and cultures of Biblical times. No problem...everyone could decide for themselves what the books and passages meant. No education or study needed, and ignorance of the intent of the original authors of the Bible spread. The idea that scripture is meant to be studied, not read, was tossed aside. Claim the Holy Spirit explains it and that quality control isn't needed with the Holy Spirit in charge.

WOW! No freedoms of the press. No free thought or free speech. No freedom of religion. All because of the money? Ya, the wealthy Catholic Church that gained power and wealth by cozying up with governments. And, quality contro? Control? LOL! After stretch racks to chase evil spirits away! That was really weak and shows you know I’m right.

 

[Cougarbear]

What you are "simply pointing out" is that in your opinion there is no need to pay attention to what Catholicism says. Simply claim that Apostolic teachings going back two thousand years to the time of Christ are incorrect, but never fear, Mormons have teachings dating back two hundred years where a con man presents "the truth."

It’s a Lot easier to change the everlasting doctrine of Christ I’ve two thousand years as the RCC has done. All the pop and circumstances and elevating popes, cardinals, arch bishops to rock band status is really pathetic. The teachings have been corrupted as Paul and many other prophets told of the last days. The con is the idea that a priest can stand in the place of Christ, pull the Christ off his throne at every Mass and kill him again over and over as bread and wine turn into literal flesh and blood. I am so glad that the Lord would open back up the Heavens and give us one more chance to have the true gospel and priesthood with all the exaltation ordinances through the Prophet Joseph Smith.

By the way, it would be nice if the Vatican would make available all the old writings it doesn’t want the world to read.

 

[Cougarbear]

Straighten you out? I believe I will follow Christ's example in this. When many of Jesus' disciples returned to their former lives after hearing Jesus say, "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life...." Jesus did not run after them calling, "Wait! You misunderstand! This is not cannibalism!" He let them go.

I'll do the same with you, while offering this thought: Many babies receive nourishment directly from their mother's body without being accused of cannibalism. Those who cannot believe Jesus can nourish us with his body and blood without it being cannibalism should go away in peace. Maybe seek out a con man. That would certainly be returning to a former way of life considering the con the serpent played in the Garden.

Yes, I know, a cheap shot that I would generally refrain from making, but seriously--grow up! You have the wrong ideas about Catholicism and will not learn because you have no interest in learning, and therefore explaining anything to you is a waste of time.

So, you really believe you are chewing and drinking the actual flesh and blood. He said do this in remembrance of my blood and body that was shed. They were eating bread, drinking grape juice. Not his actual flesh. In remembrance as a similitude. The Marlin magician magic of changing bread into skin and wine into blood is ridiculous. This is how the RCC keeps mind control over the flock.

 

[surada]

What you are "simply pointing out" is that in your opinion there is no need to pay attention to what Catholicism says. Simply claim that Apostolic teachings going back two thousand years to the time of Christ are incorrect, but never fear, Mormons have teachings dating back two hundred years where a con man presents "the truth."

Joseph Smith has 40 wives. Can you imagine?

 

[Meriweather]

That was really weak and shows you know I’m right.

It shows a lack of knowledge of history, culture, and government of the time. Should anyone develop an interest in those days, I recommend primary sources.

 

[Meriweather]

I am so glad that the Lord would open back up the Heavens and give us one more chance to have the true gospel and priesthood with all the exaltation ordinances through the Prophet Joseph Smith.

If that is what works to bring you closer to God, then may you go with God. I have it on the very best authority it is not for me. (I followed the advice in Moroni 10:3–5 and received a very clear answer.)

 

[Meriweather]

This is how the RCC keeps mind control over the flock.

Ah. Yet another nugget on what "really" happens in the Catholic faith brought here by a Mormon who holds Catholicism in contempt.

 

[Meriweather]

Joseph Smith has 40 wives. Can you imagine?

Con artists also have a pattern:

• Expect them to be friendly and courteous.
• Be aware of down-and-out storytellers.
• They encourage haste or say there is no reason not to trust them.

There is also a proverb saying it is easier for a person to be conned than to admit they had been conned. Add all this to Smith taking advantage of the mood the Second Great Awakening created and people were ripe for the picking, especially when one starts out by convincing people there was a lost priesthood, but Hallelujah, it had been rediscovered along with gold. And forty wives....

 

[Cougarbear]

It shows a lack of knowledge of history, culture, and government of the time. Should anyone develop an interest in those days, I recommend primary sources.

History, cultural and government have no bearing on performing the ordinances correctly. That’s what happens over time without a Prophet to lead and guide. Especially in these latter days.

 

[Cougarbear]

If that is what works to bring you closer to God, then may you go with God. I have it on the very best authority it is not for me. (I followed the advice in Moroni 10:3–5 and received a very clear answer.)

You went in with a double mind as James 1:5-9 says. Wanting to prove something true when Moroni said if it isn’t true. Oops!