RELIGION

[Obese Bo Ricardo]

---

Lasala is just as good and perceptive as Josephine Quiño - but her book doesn't have Pezzota's accurate definition of "worship" that means extravagant praise or honor.

Well, Catholics will just tell Christians that they are taking the Bible literally when in fact it is in the RCC that literalism blossoms (such as rev. 12, or the Eucharist "eat" a figurative term) Actually the first recorded apparition is 47 A.D. right after Mary died and all the apostles when the lawless one was already at it's insidious scheme 2Thes2:7

Sometimes lawless one is referred to as "man of sin" but in Greek anthropos man is synonymous to "one" or "someone" so "lawless one" is a more accurate term. In Lasala's article, unlike in Pezzota, Armado Ang, etc. there is the significance of why supernatural phenomena such as the marian apparitions occur or why the apparition centers all attention in the eucharist.

http://onemediator.4t.com/whats_new.html

[Sovabon]

Obese, you are in the right track! go ahead!

[Obese Bo Ricardo]

Obese, you are in the right track! go ahead!

Thanks but it's only because I'm intuitive to what is Scriptural and what is "excess baggage" but even to Richard, the author of this thread who is looked upon by many as a bigot I insist he study on knowing the significance of these apparitions and supernatural events...

http://onemediator.4t.com/whats_new.html

Thanks Von-X and Sovabon. I hope you too continue on this thread... but for those soil who are hardened we can NEVER argue with them bisag idokol pa og Bibliya.

And to dacs, if I must be so redundant if Pezzota has disappointed you then there are things in Lasala's page that aren't found in Pezzota not sure about those other books you've mentioned

http://onemediator.4t.com/whats_new.html

Regarless of what banner you wave, Marian apparitions are such big and grandiose events that it is safe to ask the question - are there Scriptural predictions of these kinds of events during the end times?
Also the bleeding eucharist miracles. What is their significance in these last days?

http://onemediator.4t.com/whats_new.html

am NOT advertising but I'm just pushing Dacs for this.... and perhaps Richard may take the time too. But for you Sovabon and Von-X you no longer need to be enlightened on this, I presume but I hope you continue your support for the Christians in this thread because Richard was almost flaming at some point - Christians will be looked down on as bigots by Catholics.

[richard79]

thanks Obese... i think i couldnt say more on that one... somebody said it better and much better.... with much references... hands down on you man!

salamat sa paghatag nakog impormasyon sa kani nga akong mga questions... i hope naka understand pud ang katong mga taw nga wala kasabot...... just open up your mind lang mga pre........ and try to look around...... just be naive on what you believe in first and think.... and observe....... ngano kaha?

[pnoize]

I was born catholic but am no longer practicing its rituals. what i cannot understand in ANY organized religious order is why it thinks it is higher than any religious order, the intolerance against other religions sickens me. The catholic church, has ex-communicated hundreds of people maybe even thousands already, why? because these people broke its rules?But didn't Christ forgive those who went against him? Other religious orders also have their faults, like churches that attack other religions through television, polygamy, etc.

In my years of searching, I have come to realize that there is no perfect religion. EVERY SINGLE religious order have their own faults, every religion has a loophole only to be defended by thousands of literature written by those who did not build the foundation of that religion. And yet, they accuse each other.

Faith is personal and so is one's choice of religion. If he feels closer to The Creator and does no wrong to his fellow and to himself, then I say leave him be. After all, this is what we claim is what would please The Creator.

[dacs]

Judith 13: 18 - even she was to be called the Most Blessed among women. But the RCC has turned "Mary" into singular.

Who says?

Pezzota was lacking. and some of his interpretations of the apparitions are tentative whereas Lasala is CONFIDENT and CONCISE. With Lasala, if you make counter-arguments then we might get into a real conversation. There are even interpretations of Revelation 13, the identity of the harlot in chapter 17 proven beyond a doubt. It's NOT in Pezzota or Armado Ang (not familiar with those other "antiCatholic" books you mentioned though)

Give me authoritative sources, bro. Don't me give sentiments from former priest who have no power outside of his bishop even when he was a priest.

Mary of Nazareth lived her life as a humble servant in perfect imitation of Christ's humility.

So you claim that Mary perfectly imitate the humility of Christ? Wow!

But Mary of the Apparitions, a different person altogether is the exact opposite

Give widely-accepted scholarly resources, bro.

The common front being proposed by these apparitions is the farce called ecumenicalism the antichrist (Satan vis a vis Mary) just like in the dark ages (after the slaughter of the "heretics" who refused to bow to the Eucharist) seeks to unite all peoples to fellowship in error once again. Mary is the perfect disguise. no one with an iota of love for God would dare revile Mary, or link her name to the antichrist.

Pure crap, bro. Come on. You can do better than that.

Trust me

Why should I? Most of the time, you misrepresent Catholic teachings - whether intentionally or not, God knows.

[

The mediation and intercession (Heb. 7: 25) of Christ is all-sufficient. the need for an alternate source of Hope, Life and another Advocate (1 Jn 2:1) is uncalled for. Those are just one of the attributes ascribed to "Mary" by the RCC, some of those probably courtesy of Alphonsus Liggouri.

This is old-news Catholic bashing. Forgive me but there simply cannot be any intelligent conversation with you regarding this topic the way you handle your argument.

Cite any early Christian writing that actually said what you are saying.

2 Peter 1:20 – "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation..."

2 Pet. 3: 16 – "...there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures."

Ephesians 3:10 – "...so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the principalities and authorities in the heavens."

Galatians 1:8 –"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed. As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!"

Matthew 18:15-18 – "...If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector."

Numbers 16:1-35 – Korah objects to the authority of the heirarchy: "They stood before Moses and held an assembly against Moses and Aaron, to whom they said, 'Enough from you! The whole community, all of them, are holy; the Lord is in their midst. Why then should you set yourselves over the Lord's congregation?' ...They went down alive to the nether world with all belonging to them; the earth closed over them, and they perished from the community..." Again we see clearly that the community of the faithful is hierarchical, and those who refuse to submit to it are punished. It is interesting to note that many people today who object to 'organized religion' make much the same argument as Korah did.

2 Peter 2:1-2 – "...there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their licentious ways..."

These guys should give credence to their claims with reference to historical facts and Christian authors. If they are privately interpreting the Bible, then no Christian should listen to them. Remember : no one can believe unless he has heard; no one can hear unless someone has proclaimed; and no one can proclaim unless he is sent. The one who proclaims the gospel must be able to trace the 'sending' succession back to the times of the apostles.

[dacs]

- not again! -
- double post -
- again! -

[dacs]

I was born catholic but am no longer practicing its rituals. what i cannot understand in ANY organized religious order is why it thinks it is higher than any religious order, the intolerance against other religions sickens me.

So, I guess, you are not a Christian anymore. Christians believe that Christ is the only Savior of the world. Islam is not also part of the option since it already divided the world between the abode of Islam and the abode of war. So, do you have affiliation now?

The catholic church, has ex-communicated hundreds of people maybe even thousands already, why?

Why keep on asking that question when you can ask your bishop about that - at least, the bishop near your place. Are you just content on living with your prejudice?

because these people broke its rules?But didn't Christ forgive those who went against him?

Did not Christ 'whack' those vendors out of the Temple area? Did He forgive the 'other thief' at His crucifixion? Who was Christ referring to when He said 'it is better for that man not to have been borne'?

Other religious orders also have their faults, like churches that attack other religions through television, polygamy, etc.

What do mean attacking through polygamy?

In my years of searching, I have come to realize that there is no perfect religion. EVERY SINGLE religious order have their own faults, every religion has a loophole only to be defended by thousands of literature written by those who did not build the foundation of that religion. And yet, they accuse each other.

It does not follow that none of these claimants is true.

Faith is personal and so is one's choice of religion. If he feels closer to The Creator and does no wrong to his fellow and to himself, then I say leave him be. After all, this is what we claim is what would please The Creator.

Indeed, the choice of religion is personal - personal in the sense that you must be free to choose and accept it. Yet, you are never free to choose any other form of religion once you have heard the truth about Christianity. Once you know that its claims are true, you are never free to choose to be indifferent to it. To do so will be tantamount to making yourself your own God.

[Obese Bo Ricardo]

But The clergymen of the RCC are also self-interpreters of the Bible!
No different than Jehovah's Witnesses or authors of THE REMNANT who have very carnal conceptions of the apocalypse.

give me widely accepted scholarly sources

A requirement like that might be the case... but in some cases, 1 Cor. 3: 19, and Matt. 11: 25-26 should be given some consideration.

Galatians 1: 8 Doesn't the RCC preach a different Gospel from the one already preached? Even God commends the Philadelphians who responded rather skeptically and rebelliously against what Ignatius thought that was extraBiblical (Rev. 3: 8 ) Ignatius was so heartbroken, he the whole RCC and yourself call it "schism".

It was nothing less than their obedience to Paul's admonitions not to go beyond what is written (1 Cor. 4: 6, 2 Jn. 9)

I see that you won't give Lasala a chance because he is just some obscure priest without any authority outside his bishop? I'm sorry I might have misquoted you.... but anyway the apostles weren't teachers of the law either, they were what you would call "lay men" made up of fishermen, tax collectors et cetera. The Pharisees and other sects didn't give them a chance (at least most of them) because they have the biased notion against the rather "unlearned" and "unscholarly".

http://onemediator.4t.com/whats_new.html

I'll end up quoting that article unconsciously anyway I might even quote from Pezzota or Josephine Quiño but what if I considered the article "my argument"? Since it's there... I don't have a copy of Pezzota or Quiño online and other articles aren't that very profound... just give it a chance.

By faith we are given the Spirit (Gal. 3: 14) that teaches the only one that can teach (1 Jn. 2: 27), the only way to attain that level of understanding in accuracy or virtual innerance is to understand the Holy One of Israel (Pro. 9: 10) and the entirety of His Word, that is TRUTH (Ps. 119: 160)

Yes, your comparison of those who reject hierarchy in the Old Testament is valid, and history does have it's pattern but sometimes there are things that cannot be defined by what we see hear, taste and smell and those who are ignorant to it can never understand (1 Cor. 2: 14)

Suppose I told you, Dacs that the Catholic Church is just like any other denomination only filled with excess baggage..... and suppose there was an explanation a clear-cut explanation of the proliferating miracles involving "Mary" or the Eucharist, supported by the Divine Mercy and archangel visions?

http://onemediator.4t.com/whats_new.html

My hierarchy? The line I come from? I'm just one of the living stones (1 Pet. 2: 4) that make up the Holy temple that rises with other believers with Christ as the chief foundation and cornerstone (Eph. 2: 20, 21) and Rock (1 Cor. 10: 4, Deut. 32: 4, 15, NAB) the Holy Temple that God pours His Holy Spirit. (1 Cor. 6: 19, Eph. 2: 18-22)

Like I said there are some things that cannot be defined by what is visible and tangible exempli gratia history that could be 50% authentic or 50% fictitious. (1 Cor. 2: 14) But we can use Scripture as the weighing scale of discerning spiritual truths. (2 Tim. 3: 16, 1 Thes. 5: 21)

[Von!-x]

@dacs - it seems that the tone of your posts is a debate between a CFD and an INK, now full of rhetorics, protecting religion, while destroying the unaware listeners.Â* Â*However, interested posters here read the links, study the scripture and even re-read church history vis-a-vis world history.

Though, I read the verses and catholic church dogmas you quoted, it still does not prove that sola fide and sola scriptura are erroneous doctrines.Â* We all know that the early church (after all apostles have died) found themselves attacked by doctrinal errors, as already prophesied in the book of revelation.Â* But they did not massacre those who strayed.Â*

I do not know the exact reason why the "excess baggage" were institutionalized by the RCC when such cannot be traced in the NT.Â* But we all know the cost of disobedience: excommunication and even death.Â* If you say that faith and good works can bring you to heaven, would you say that those inquisitors and those popes who approved the inquisition would go to heaven?Â*

@richard - keep on reading the scriptures and learn the truth.Â* The faith that saves is not the "faith on ourselves nor the faith on the church".Â* That saving faith is putting your trust in Jesus and what he did on the cross for you.Â* He is the ultimate sacrifice, and that in itself is complete.Â*

I guess a lot of "Christians" here do not know what and why they believe.Â* That is why richard must have called it blind faith, in his early posts.Â* Both Dacs and Obese Bo Ricardo are well informed.Â* I guess we can continue the discussions without the ugly rhetorics, for the sake of those who wants to know the truth.

Peace!!Â*

Â* Â*



Â* Â*