It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are Catholics Christian?

page: 15
4
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 



Originally posted by Robhaidheuch
The idea that all individuals have a direct line to God, where God will regularly engage in direct communication to an individual has led some people to becoming delusional and suffering a mental disorder. Christians can sometimes suffer from this delusion, and decide that their internalised thought is actually a direct word from God


This is a good description of Paul, actually: A guy who fell off his horse and bumped his head and had a ‘revelation’ from God. Never met Jesus - but after his head trauma he knew all about Him!
Strangely though, it conflicts with the words of James, to wit: If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. (emphasis added) James 1: 5



Originally posted by Robhaidheuch
… Private revelation to individuals does occur but is uncommon, is rigorously tested by Church authorities for authenticity


But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt…James 1:6

Funny, Ol’ Jimmy there doesn’t seem to see the need for any priest, Pope, Virgin or saint to help a man get the Spirit of God or for a quorum in funny clothes to validate it. But, then again, what does Jim know? After all, he was only the brother of Jesus ( sorry …cousin/friend/casual acquaintance).




Originally posted by Robhaidheuch
… and is usually only experienced by mystics and contemplatives who engage in lives of prayer, choosing denial of human sensual pleasures through fasting, as a means to free their souls to draw closer to God, unhindered by earthly considerations.


So…where does that leave the Popes?




posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


"does the Queen as the head of the Church of England, have to appoint Saints, or they just not recognize anyone?
If they did, could it be an Englishman, like Bede who is already recognized by the Roman Catholic Church?"


I believe that, in reality, the Queen does not truly recognise herself as a spiritual leader, therefore she would never declare that someone has lived a heroic Christian life and has merited heaven. The way the Church of England is going, the first saint they declare will be a sexually active homosexual.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by passenger
 


You are just a screwed up bitter sad person with a massive chip on your shoulder spouting bile. Read the lives of the saints, and you may begin to understand the Truth. St. Paul is one of the greatest Christians who ever lived, and an intellectual pygmy like yourself is no match for his wisdom. You are so dim-witted it hasn't occurred to you that you use the Bible selectively, choosing what suits your absurd arguments, yet rejecting the writings of Paul. You are not a Bible-believing Christian but a hereticand a fool.

[edit on 16-7-2008 by Robhaidheuch]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


"And believe it or not,most gay priests choose to be celibate,therefore they are not offending God and they are not sinning against Him.Remember now,its only the sexual act of anal sex that is offensive to God."

I believe it is more wise and prudent not to admit homosexuals to seminary training. The fruits of that policy, no pun intended, have been plain to see in the incidences of sexual abuse perpetrated by priestly perverts against young males. I find it laughable that many of those same people who display outrage at priest abuse, by far mostly homosexual in kind, should also be outraged with a wise policy of barring admittance to seminary training for homosexuals. By the way, it has been shown in a statistical survey that clerical abuse is the lowest of all professions; paedophile abuses in much greater numbers are to be found among dentists, lawyers, doctors, and schoolteachers, therefore the rule of priestly celibacy, as has been suggested in some quarters, has no bearing on priest abuse.


[edit on 16-7-2008 by Robhaidheuch]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 



Queen does not truly recognize herself as a spiritual leader

So far, from what I found, the Archbishop of Canterbury is the head of the Anglican Communion.
They have at least one saint that they recognize, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Becket.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 



I know this question wasn't directed at me,but i hope you don't mind me answering.

In my mind, it was, though I might not have written it down.
Thanks for the clarification.
I think it is difficult for someone who has never been around this religion to understand it.
So they would recognize St. Bede.
I would expect that anyone who could possibly claim him as one of their own, would want to do so.
I was reading one site that claimed him as a saint of the Celtic Church.allsaintsbrookline.org...
From this quote I posted above I get the impression that Bede and Egbert were at least a little partisan against the Celtic Church and were in fact Romanizers.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 





I believe it is more wise and prudent not to admit homosexuals to seminary training. The fruits of that policy, no pun intended, have been plain to see in the incidences of sexual abuse perpetrated by priestly perverts against young males.



I'm amazed that in the 21st century some ppl still don't understand the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia.

Gay sex is an act performed by 2 consenting adults.

Pedophiles have sexual desires for children,any act performed between them is non-consenting,and is therefore rape!






You are just a screwed up bitter sad person with a massive chip on your shoulder spouting bile. Read the lives of the saints, and you may begin to understand the Truth. St. Paul is one of the greatest Christians who ever lived, and an intellectual pygmy like yourself is no match for his wisdom. You are so dim-witted it hasn't occurred to you that you use the Bible selectively, choosing what suits your absurd arguments, yet rejecting the writings of Paul. You are not a Bible-believing Christian but a hereticand a fool.



The opening sentence could be said about you too.passenger may have mocked Paul,but he did it with the truth,and every quote he gave backs up the Bible views on talking to God.

Do you pray? Do you do so in Jesus' name;the Saviour of Mankind,the Rock of Salvation or do you do it in Mary's name,or the Popes or one of the many Saints?

Luke 11:1-4 teaches us how to pray.

1 And it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples.2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.3 Give us day by day our daily bread.
4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil



As does Matthew 6:5-15.

5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.11 Give us this day our daily bread.12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.



You can't get much clearer than that can you.Here is Jesus himself telling us how each and everyone can pray to God,and as we all know prayer is how we communicate with God.There is no mention of priests or popes for they are not needed.
Prayer is not a mysterious practice reserved only for clergy and the religiously devout.Prayer is simply communicating with God -listening and talking to him.Believers can pray from the heart,freely,spontaneously,and in their own words.


And if you believe that only a member of the clergy can speak to God for you,then what is the point of you praying?



[edit on 16-7-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Haven't had chance to read the link,but i will.

I know many ppl not of the Catholic faith who show due respect to the various Saints and martyrs.It may be that church that cannonized but it doesn't detract from the work that these men and women did.

I believe that the CC are guilty of making saints exclusive.The NT constantly refers to the followers of Jesus as saints.
The Catholics believe that saints are capable of interceding for people on earth.No scripture exists to back up this claim as the only one who can intercede for us is Jesus.


You might find this link to Bede interesting.
www.newadvent.org...



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


Thanks for answering my questions.
A lot of this saint business is foreign to me.
I was never around anyone who was into it.
Maybe Americans are not too connected to people who lived in Europe.
As for that link, it may not be of interest to you.
Robhaidheuch was who got me started on Bede.
Actually I had been thinking of him for a couple of days before he mentioned him.
I was thinking I needed to look Bede up, since it had been so long since I had read his book.
Once Robhaidheuch mentioned Bede, I figured it was time to get off my butt.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


"Gay sex is an act performed by 2 consenting adults."

First of all, use of the term "Gay" to describe homosexuals is a misuse of language as a descriptive term; they are not definitely not 'gay' perhaps sad. They have made use of language to insidiously gain acceptance for sodomy. The use of 'two consenting adults' plants the seed that they have a just 'right' in engaging in perversity. One could apply the term 'performed by two consenting adults' to describe a conspiracy to murder, but common sense tells us no one has that right. Homosexual activists for changes in law have vigorously agitated for the lowering of age of consent, both in England by Peter Tachell and in the USA by the Man-Boy Love Association. Don't be fooled by the 'consenting adults' smokescreen, homosexuals are predatory and have an appetite for young meat.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by passenger
 


"passenger may have mocked Paul,but he did it with the truth,"

Anyone who mocks St. Paul is an ignorant fool, and anyone who condones such is no better.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 





First of all, use of the term "Gay" to describe homosexuals is a misuse of language as a descriptive term; they are not definitely not 'gay' perhaps sad.


The term Gay is actually G.A.Y.it stands for Good As You and was used as a less inoffensive term for homosexual men first and then for men and women.

Gays are not sad,thats just a myth fundies like you tell each other to legitamize your constant attempts to try and change homosexuals.


And you still haven't answered any of my comments about priests and worshiping false idols.Are you finding it difficult to back up the fact that the Catholic Church has been going against the Laws of God? Are you hoping that if you talk about gays long enough i'll forget that your arguments are failing??







[edit on 17-7-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 





Maybe Americans are not too connected to people who lived in Europe.


The Spanish and Italians have always been into the saints in a big way.Some south American and African countries are the same.

Heres some good links to information about the saints
en.wikipedia.org...
www.silk.net...
www.catholic.org...
www.fordham.edu...


A link to Bede's writings.
oll.libertyfund.org...





[edit on 17-7-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 


I am no expert on homosexuals.
There were these two gay women who worked at the gas station near me.
They would openly lust after 16 and 17 year old girls who came into the store.
I found that to be very disturbing.
Those two may not be a good example of how most gays are.
When I was 16, I was being approached by men who wanted to do things to me.
My ex-girlfriend's son had big problems when he was 17.
They are much more bold and persistent, now, than they were when I was young.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 



Originally posted by Robhaidheuch
You are just a screwed up bitter sad person with a massive chip on your shoulder spouting bile.…, and an intellectual pygmy like yourself is no match for his wisdom. You are so dim-witted… ou are not a Bible-believing Christian but a hereticand a fool.


I do believe I have been wronged here. But I am no theologian and no Christian, so I found myself at a loss as to how to defend myself. So I went and got an advisor, a guy who actually claims to have lived with Jesus! I figure he should know something about being a good Christian. My advocate has instructed me to remain silent at this point. Therefore, I’ll let my counsel speak on my behalf:

‘If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.’ James 1:26

‘Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment!’ James 2:12-13

‘With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be.’ James 3:9-10

Would the Defense care for a rebuttal?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by passenger
 



‘If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.’ James 1:26

That may have certain applications.
I found another text that is on the topic of restrained speech.
It can be used in a negative way.

Psalm 50: (New International Version)
18 When you see a thief, you join with him;
you throw in your lot with adulterers.
19 You use your mouth for evil
and harness your tongue to deceit.



[edit on 17-7-2008 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 





They would openly lust after 16 and 17 year old girls who came into the store.


But this isn't just a homosexual thing.
I know straight men in the 30's and 40's who lust after teenage girls.It makes me uncomfortable,the same goes for gays who do that.

When it comes to groups of any kind,you can't tar everyone with the same brush,even when it comes to fundamenalists like Robhaidheuch.





[edit on 17-7-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


Like I said, I am no expert, just making observations on what I know about.
I do not like to get into arguments on the subject and I do not go into "homosexual" discussion threads.
I just do not like the idea of naive young people being taken advantage of, by anyone.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


Homosexuals taking offense for being described as homosexuals!? That statement may be true, but that's their problem, not mine.

I take offence when homosexuals in government impose laws that make me a second class subject in the UK, as happened recently.

I take offence when Catholic adoption agencies have to close down because homosexuals decide that they have a right to adopt children, and once again a sick government populated by sodomites persecute Catholics and other Christians by denying us the right to freedom of religious belief/expression.

I take offence when Glasgow firemen are suspended from their jobs because they refused to hand out fire safety leaflets at a Gay Pride parade, and have to attend a homosexual propaganda course to retain their jobs.

I take offence when homosexuals try to impose their perverse behaviour by making it mandatory for little children learn about their deviancy within sex education lessons.

I take offence when a Lutheran pastor in Sweden is sentenced to a jail term for giving a homily in which he teaches that homosexual sex is a sin against God.

I take offence when a young female photographer in the USA turns down a job photographing two lesbians going through the farce of a marriage and receives a stiff fine.

I take offence at the Stalinist watchdogs in Canada who are calling religious expression 'Hate Crime' sitting in judgement on a tribunal where the defendent has to pay all legal costs while homosexual accusers pay nothing for bringing forward allegations of hatred directed toward them by church ministers guilty of citing biblical verses.

You know what, anyone who champions the homosexual agenda is not only a non-Christian but a pink fascist. I know Manchester and England is bursting at the seams with homosexuals, but then we Scots always referred to it as the English Disease,



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Robhaidheuch
 


Pink facist and proud......oh,wait,facists hate homosexuals don't they?

And you're still avoiding my arguments,are you desperatly trying to find something or someone who can back you up?

I'll give you a clue,don't look in the Bible,it'll contradict your beliefs.



[edit on 17-7-2008 by jakyll]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join