What did the Catholic Church ever do to You?

It is a good thing that the Catholic Church does not support gay marriage. Can you imagine what would happen if they did?

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New International Version, ©2010)

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

So in God's word he thinks a women should be forced to marry her rapist, only after her rapist pays off her father with silver. They may also never be divorced. She is stuck with her rapist forever.

Are you feeling the love? Is this another example of God's justice? Mercy? Tolerance?

If the Catholic Church openly supported gay marriage, can you imagine how many little boys would be have to marry their Priest? We could never have that!!

reply to post by Evil3unnie


I do not understand why you are even talking about the bible. This is about Catholics. Some of the first things I learned from the bible were that you do not pray to anyone but god and you do not create graven images or else they might become idols of worship. Some of the first things I was told to do in Catholic school were pray to various statues of saints as well as Mary.

Originally posted by MrWendal
It is a good thing that the Catholic Church does not support gay marriage. Can you imagine what would happen if they did?

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New International Version, ©2010)

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

So in God's word he thinks a women should be forced to marry her rapist, only after her rapist pays off her father with silver. They may also never be divorced. She is stuck with her rapist forever.

No man, they don't have to pay or marry unless they are actually caught..its fine otherwise.
Shesh..imagine a rapist having to marry all the victims he wasn't caught with..thats just bad economics.


But, I would recommend only rapeing non-virgins...then it doesn't matter if your discovered.

reply to post by oliveoil


I'm guessing you saw the wikileaks Vatican post and flew into a RAGE!

FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!

Originally posted by oliveoil
reply to post by Hefficide

 

On a serious note this is all isolated individual instances. Not the church as a whole.

edit on 27-12-2010 by oliveoil because: (no reason given)

Not the church as a whole? Are you serious? Do you really believe the church knew nothing of what was going on? The Crusades, the abuse, the Nazi involvement were just done by a few rogue elements of the church? Of course they knew and of course they approved it. I suppose you also believe the church had no knowledge what so ever of the abuse that was going on until the story broke? JESUS CHRIST! (pun intended) The order to carry out those things, especially the Crusades had to come directly from the heads of the church. The decision must of been made by them to do it. That's like saying the military isn't responsible for a missile attack in particular place in Afghanistan because an individual "unit" launched the missile. A convenient way to clam plausible denial ability btw. The church is one of if not the biggest and wealthiest institutions known to man. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. You think somehow an organization run by humans of that size is somehow magically immune to that? I wonder what I could brainwash you with given the time.

"For the believer, no proof is necessary. For the non believer, no proof is enough"

The church of the eagle has smeared my shamanic tradition from the world, lied about it and told us we were all going to hell for worshiping god in another name then we were privy to know.

All that remains of my tradition is the ash from the fire and the charred still breathing bodies of my ancestors who were brave enough to continue to share the ancient wisdom.

No...You dont get the shield, you dont get the sword. You will stand there naked in the eyes of the re growing strength of the pagan faiths and you will beg for forgiveness.

I only hope that through our trials, we have become more then human so that you may be forgiven.


Blessings,


-G

The Roman Catholic Church contends that its origin is the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ in approximately 30 A.D. The Catholic Church proclaims itself to be the Church that Jesus Christ died for, the Church that was established and built by the Apostles. Is that the true origin of the Catholic Church? On the contrary. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament will reveal that the Catholic Church does not have its origin in the teachings of Jesus, or His apostles. In the New Testament, there is no mention of the papacy, worship / adoration of Mary (or the immaculate conception of Mary, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the assumption of Mary, or Mary as co-redemptrix and mediatrix), petitioning saints in Heaven for their prayers, apostolic succession, the ordinances of the church functioning as sacraments, infant baptism, confession of sin to a priest, purgatory, indulgences, or the equal authority of church tradition and Scripture. So, if the origin of the Catholic Church is not in the teachings of Jesus and His apostles, as recorded in the New Testament, what is the true origin of the Catholic Church?

For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine “legalized” Christianity at the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. Later, in A.D. 325, Constantine called together the Council of Nicea, in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.

Constantine found that with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse – not everyone would agree to forsake their religious beliefs and instead embrace Christianity. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities. Some clear examples of this are as follows:

(1) The Cult of Isis, an Egyptian mother-goddess religion, was absorbed into Christianity by replacing Isis with Mary. Many of the titles that were used for Isis, such as “Queen of Heaven,” “Mother of God,” and “theotokos” (God-bearer) were attached to Mary. Mary was given an exalted role in the Christian faith, far beyond what the Bible ascribes to her, in order to attract Isis worshippers to a faith they would not otherwise embrace. Many temples to Isis were, in fact, converted into temples dedicated to Mary. The first clear hints of Catholic Mariology occur in the writings of Origen, who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which happened to be the focal point of Isis worship.

(2) Mithraism was a religion in the Roman Empire in the 1st through 5th centuries A.D. It was very popular among the Romans, especially among Roman soldiers, and was possibly the religion of several Roman emperors. While Mithraism was never given “official” status in the Roman empire, it was the de-facto official religion until Constantine and succeeding Roman emperors replaced Mithraism with Christianity. One of the key features of Mithraism was a sacrificial meal, which involved eating the flesh and drinking the blood of a bull. Mithras, the god of Mithraism, was “present” in the flesh and blood of the bull, and when consumed, granted salvation to those who partook of the sacrificial meal (theophagy, the eating of one’s god). Mithraism also had seven “sacraments,” making the similarities between Mithraism and Roman Catholicism too many to ignore. Constantine and his successors found an easy substitute for the sacrificial meal of Mithraism in concept of the Lord’s Supper / Christian Communion. Sadly, some early Christians had already begun to attach mysticism to the Lord’s Supper, rejecting the Biblical concept of a simple and worshipful remembrance of Christ’s death and shed blood. The Romanization of the Lord’s Supper made the transition to a sacrificial consumption of Jesus Christ, now known as the Catholic Mass / Eucharist, complete.

(3) Most Roman emperors (and citizens) were henotheists. A henotheist is one who believes in the existence of many gods, but focuses primary on one particular god, or considers one particular god supreme over the other gods. For example, the Roman god Jupiter was supreme over the Roman pantheon of gods. Roman sailors were often worshippers of Neptune, the god of the oceans. When the Catholic Church absorbed Roman paganism, it simply replaced the pantheon of gods with the saints. Just as the Roman pantheon of gods had a god of love, a god of peace, a god of war, a god of strength, a god of wisdom, etc., so the Catholic Church has a saint who is “in charge” over each of these, and many other categories. Just as many Roman cities had a god specific to the city, so the Catholic Church provided “patron saints” for the cities.

(4) The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. With the city of Rome being the center of government for the Roman empire, and with the Roman emperors living in Rome, the city of Rome rose to prominence in all facets of life. Constantine, and his successors, gave their support to the bishop of Rome as the supreme ruler of the church. Of course it is best for the unity of the Roman empire that the government and state religion be centered in the same location. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. When the Roman empire collapsed, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors – Pontificus Maximus.

Many more examples could be given. These four should suffice in demonstrating the true origin of the Catholic Church. Of course the Roman Catholic Church denies the pagan origin of its beliefs and practices. The Catholic Church disguises its pagan beliefs under layers of complicated theology. The Catholic Church excuses and denies its pagan origin beneath the mask of “church tradition.” Recognizing that many of its beliefs and practices are utterly foreign to Scripture, the Catholic Church is forced to deny the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.

The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the Gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church “Christianized” the pagan religions, and “paganized” Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, yes, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the people of the Roman empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the “Roman world” for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word.

2 Timothy 4:3-4 declares, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.”

Originally posted by oliveoil
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Bro, The Catholic Church is against (then and now) everything it disapproves.

Well, that's logical, but still not very informative. Can you name someone who is NOT "against everything they disapprove of"?

Your bringing up arbitrary instances though out history.

So far, all I've brought up is your posts. I suppose those could be thought of as "arbitrary instances throughout (a very short) history".

This is not the Catholic Church as a whole. The whole of something is all its parts.

Precisely. It disingenuous to deny the inconvenient parts that it is made up of and try to segregate them from the whole that is the Catholic Church. They're there, and it's pretty telling to try to dismiss them without acknowledgment or explanation.

I'm still reading in the thread, hoping to bump up against the post where you explain what you meant when you claimed that Jesus instituted the Catholic Church. Haven't found it yet, but it's gotta be there, right?

Any organization as large and diverse as the Catholic Church is certainly an easy target. It has been said that all Christian religion is derived, directly or indirectly, from Catholicism and these splinters have every human weakness seen in the original. Witness all the bible thumpers caught with their hand in the tills or something else in their followers of both sexes. Tearful public confessions from the hypocrites who bleed little old ladies out of their life savings are becomng commonplace.

The offshoots have further elaborated on the theological tenets of Catholicism with some interpretations and inventions of their own. Condemnation of other religions and branches of Christianity with a special hatred of Jews and Catholics is certainly not Christian. Christ was a Jew first and the first Christian but many of these ministers do not seem to be aware of that or the Christian principle of tolerance. Hatred of those that are unlike them is an underlying tenet. If you accept Jesus, you will be saved. If you never heard of Jesus because you are living in a jungle somewhere, you are toast. Some sects even dictate how many will be "saved."

Literal reading of an allegorical bible also makes for some awkward and humorous situations. Assuming [wrongly] that the entire course of human history had been recorded, with no one left out, a half-wit calculated the age of the earth based on the list. Other half-wits never questioned the first and the age of the earth became dogma. Now, great masses of half-wits espouse that Darwin was wrong because the Bible says so. They are good intentioned half-wits but half-wits all the same. In a humorous case, a WV state legislator/Fundamentalist minister thumped his bible on the podium and said that English was good enough for Jesus Christ and it was good enough for him. The chamber was stunned into silence.

As noted in the video posted earlier, there are many inconsistencies in the Bible. The literal readers are in denial but it is true. The bible had beginnings before the written word and mistakes were made in oral traditions. Not all of it may be written. No one knows how many authors/speakers it had. Quantities were often in doubt and an extra zero here or there was to be expected. Methuselah lived 972 years...or months, about 81 years. There are Gospels that are not included; how many apostles and how many gospels?

The world would be a better place if the self-righteous would practice tolerance, charity, and a little humility. If you have issues with any religion, select another franchise. Live and let live.

reply to post by Sinnthia


Please tell me what book Catholics use?

Originally posted by Evil3unnie
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Please tell me what book Catholics use?

I have no idea what book they "use."
All I can tell you is that the book they terribly miss-use is the bible. I believe I gave you a pretty good example of that already. Was it too vague?

Originally posted by Evil3unnie
reply to post by MrWendal

 

I am willing to bet that you have never opened the Bible and actually did some research on your own. I take that back. Based on both videos you posted I KNOW you have never even bated and eye at the thought. Instead you pick videos from Youtube about contradictions in the Bible (like the first one) never doing any research about the subject yet you seem to think you know what you are talking about?

It is easy for anyone to follow the masses and do what is cool and in (i.e poking fun at Jesus, and religion). Who is more blind one who actually investigates things for themselves or the one who never even tries and just goes with status que?


Again thanks for the videos I will actually use them to learn.

Well it is a good thing you do not make predictions your profession. You would be starving

I am actually what you would probably call a reformed Christian. When I was about 17 years old I became very active in the Christian Church. Not only have I read the bible multiple times, in 4 different formats (my favorite at the time was actually written in a story book format), I even used to attend Bible Study 3 nights a week. That was only after I had fought tooth and nail with various members of the Church and the Bible Study group to be allowed to attend. You see, at age 17 I had long hair a couple tattoos, so automatically I was an agent of Satan.

Interesting to note is that my opinions of religion are not only based on my research (as a believer) but also my interactions with "like minded" people such as myself at that time. This Church was located in Arkansas City Kansas. It was a Christian Church. The Church had a bit of it's own scandal going on at the time because there were two Ministers who ran the whole show. One was an old white man, who really represented the traditional ideas and concepts about Christianity. The other was a younger white women, who really represented a newer generation. She was certainly much more understanding and liberal than her counter part. Anyway, long story short the old white man was eventually run out of the church when it came to light that he (a married man) was having an affair with a member of the Congregation (a married women). I was eventually accept into this Church, and Baptized in this Church after the remaining Minister debated with many members of this Congregation about why it was ok for me to attend even though I had long hair and tattoos and that meant I was going to burn in hell anyway. So do us both a favor, don not waste your breathe telling me what "YOU KNOW" about me. When you do that, it is called an assumption and we all know what they say about assuming don't we?

I don't think it is cool to "bash God". I don't think it is cool to bash anyone, however I will not turn a blind eye to obvious contradictions. The book of Genesis alone (at the very start of the bible) give two separate explanations for the creation of the world. I do not need a Youtube video to tell me about it. I can open any bible and find it. As a matter of fact, since "YOU KNOW" I have never cracked open and read the bible.. let us do that now together shall we? I mean, since "YOU KNOW" I have no knowledge of the bible outside of doing whats cool and watching a couple Youtube videos, you wouldn't mind debating a simple topic like this right? It should be pretty easy since I know nothing about what I am talking about.

Genesis 1

So here is Genesis 1 which tells us about creation, this is also known as the "Priestly Tradition"
Day 1 God makes the sky, Earth, light and names darkness.
Day 2 God makes water. Notice the choice of words here, god not only made water on earth to fill the basins, but also in the sky. Which he separates and creates Heaven so now we know there is water in Heaven.
Day 3 God creates Plants, Trees, seeds and vegetation of all types.
Day 4 God makes the Sun, Moon, Stars, and Seasons.
Day 5 God creates animals. Whales, fish, birds, and every kind of creepy crawler there is. He tells them to multiply.
Day 6 God creates Man and Women. Both sexes at the same time. He tells them that they "have dominion" over "every living thing that moves on earth", and he tells them to make babies.
Day 7 God rested

Now let us look at Genesis 2

Genesis 2 is referred to as the Yahwist Tradition and in it we see that God created the Earth and Heavens already. The Earth was desolate and had no plant life at all. He then created Man from dust, created the Garden of Eden to the East and dropped Adam off in the Garden. In this Garden it was Adam's job to work the Garden and keep it. Eventually God brings every animal to Adam and Adam names every living animal and insect. God then causes Adam to sleep, removes his rib, and creates Eve.

Now if you want to sit here and tell me that I know nothing about the contradictions in the Bible, then I would strongly suggest you remove your blinders and read your Bible again. This time, read it with an open mind and intellect rather than blind faith. Read it and place it under the same scrutiny as you would and piece written on ATS. Then come back and tell me how well it holds up.

On a serious note this is all isolated individual instances. Not the church as a whole.

Hey, that whole Holocaust business? It was just isolated instances, not the Nazis as a whole.

See why that argument doesn't hold up?


Should be obvious that the OP was flamebait right from the get-go....borderline trolling. Surprised it's gone on this long.

It's like Marx said, 'Religion is the opium of the people' (and no I'm not a Marxist). I'm just saying that I agree with that statement. People believe what they WANT to believe...if you're good you'll go to heaven, if you're bad and unrepentant, you'll go to hell. Simple children's stories for simple people who do not want to THINK, or take the leap of faith to finding out for themselves, what's really what. Just because we 'believe' something, does that mean it's true God, or the Creator, or our Maker, or, The Divine, or....whatever you wish to call the Source, does not require humans to join organized religion of any kind, to be 'found'. Do you really think God wants people to be obedient 'following children', who become manipulated and controlled by priests, and other religious figures that we give our power away to? I think it's shocking and hysterical that people read 'The Bible' and assume that whatever is in there is ultimate proof and fact! Of anything! Did Jesus really want everyone to 'go to church' or did he simply want everyone to understand what it means to be sons and daughters of God? To just wake the f*@# up and see the reality. How 'bout we use just a little bit of COMMON SENSE to answer that one. I thought that the exposure and prosecution the horrendous sexual abuse down the ages, by the Catholic church, and its cover-up right up to the highest levels, to you know, the Poop, I mean, Pope, down the ages, would surely bring the church down in flames, finally. (One can hope, right?) But no, the denial continues on so many levels! People still defending the church! WTFF!! What besides sexual abuse, physical abuse and cruelty, and cover-up could bring the church down then? Perhaps the eventual dawning revelation through thick public skulls that the Vatican is nothing more than a ginormous power conglomerate ruling half the planet, wanting desperately to keep that control...control...control..... and so much more that's ugly and heinous..yes, that's the catholic church. I've known too many catholics who are x-caths who have told me too many inside stories that would turn your socks inside out right on your feet. But we can save that for another posting, since attention spans can get shaky pretty quick.

Not really into secular religion, all beings know instinctively between right and wrong. The present pope is obviously a bit like the false Dali lama..... It is strange how we allow these dark forces run our lives when there are good people everywhere. Sometimes it can be bewildering. Good people are good people, it has nout to do with what they choose to believe. I have met many a good, charitable freemason for example....The list could go on. No need.

reply to post by oliveoil


Here is a most excellent debate - Is the catholic church a force for good in the world ?

What is most fascinating is the final statistics from the vote taken from the audience, I personally am glad to see the continuing demise of this monster masquerading as an institution of good.

I highly recommend that anyone who hasn't watched this debate to do so as you may well find it enlightening as well as entertaining.


On a personal level Olive Oil I personally have found that every Catholic that I have ever spoken to to be some of the most ignorant deluded and intellectually challenged people ever.

Why or why a Catholic of all the deluded xtians should choose to pedal their pious pedo ware here on ATS is astonishing. If any group of religious bigots deserve verbal kicking it is those that support the Catholic church.
The sooner this Roman monster withers and dies the better for all humanity as a whole.

AloG_pu1zmc&feature

oliveoil - sorry, but Jesus did not "create" the Catholic church. This is only believed as a point of faith. And Catholic doctrine asserts that it is the continuation of the Church that was founded at the Confession of Peter. So get your facts and history straight - Jesus did not personally create the Catholic church. His work is the foundation of Christianity, yes. As far as the church always "being there" - sure. They were there when they successively killed off other beliefs. They were there when they forced the conversion of thousands of Jews, later putting them into ghettos, and still later killing them off by the thousands anyway (by Papal decree). They were there when the Inquisition took the lives of even more thousands, and still there when several crusades took the lives of still more thousands. There were there when Hitler needed help (and the Vatican itself aided in the export of several high ranking Nazi figures out of Europe - read about Operation Paperclip and the Knights of Malta). They are there today preaching that condom use is not good for avoiding procreation (yet the very practice would help stave off disease and problems in Africa). They are there today as well in hiding and shuffling around dirty minds of the preisthood who get caught fumbling their fingers around little children (particularly little boys). They were there when John Paul I was killed, and they were there when John Paul II was attempted to be killed. Giving and supporting people in need? Sure. The salvation of your very soul, indeed. I'm sure the countless thousands murdered throughout history (more from the Catholic church than any other faith in history) would agree with you that you can "always count on the Catholic church."

You are hidden behind the shroud of naivitae. You need to start digging around, checking sources, falling down into rabbit holes, and searching for the TRUTH (and not one that comes from a preist's mouth, either). Then you can make your decision about the institution they call the Catholic church.

As for religion - that is most definitely your call. Do not change your beliefs or your faith. But do not turn a blind eye to the evils of institution, either (lest you be one of the little lambs that get carted off to the slaughter).

-R

p.s. start by reading the following:

"Constantine's Sword"

Originally posted by oliveoil
Seriously, 99 % of all you posters out there seem to have beef with the catholic church. The Church Jesus Christ himself established. WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM ? The Church has always been there though out the ages always giving and supporting people in need.You cant always turn toward your family but you can always count on the Catholic church. (hypocrites)

Mods, please post this where you seem fit. Thanks OO

edit on 27-12-2010 by oliveoil because: (no reason given)

They changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday,(Canon 29 Council of Laodicea). Most Christian churches follow this error today.
Lev 23:3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.
The Bible is very clear about what day the Sabbath is. The Catholic Church is in error.

You ask what the Catholic church did to me? I have only been jilted by them once but I have heard too many stories of instances that I do not feel are very God-like. Here are a few reasons that I do not like the Catholic church.

My husband and I were married in a historical chapel by a non-denominational minister and though our parents and grandparents are devout Catholics nobody seemed to mind. My husbands grandparents never showed up to the ceremony but neither of us thought much of it due to the fact that his mother told me that the person giving them a ride couldn't be there until later and she told my husband that they couldn't come up early for the ceremony because his grandma had to have her asthma treatment before they left. Thinking nothing of it neither of us said anything to the other due to the fact that when we were each told this plausible lie. It came out almost a year later that his grandma had gone to confession and confessed that she was saddened that her grandson chose not to partake in the sacrament of matrimony. Her priest then convinced her the best way to show her love to the church and to her grandson was to not go to our wedding ceremony, because in doing so it would be sacrilegious to condone a marriage union that was not Catholic, and by not going she would show her grandson how important the Catholic church is. She then asked my husbands mother not to tell us the truth why they didn't go to the ceremony. How brainwashed she was by this religion that she allowed a man who thought his word was God, to tell her what she should and should not do. I find fault on both party's but mostly on the church. My mother in law went to talk to this priest after she found out what he told my husbands grandma and when she asked him what right he had to tell her mother what she should and shouldn't he told her that he had the rights from God. That what ever he decided was best for his congregation was Gods word because he was sanctioned by God to do as he pleased to serve God. Now tell me that is not pompous and ignorant. That is not the kind and loving compassion that I expect from those who consider themselves religious leaders.

This is not the only incident that has helped grow my disdain for the Catholic church. I had a friend who had a child out of wedlock that the Catholic church refused to baptize. While my uncle who has two children, with a woman he has been with for 8 years but is not married to, is allowed to baptize his children because he donates beverages to all the church functions. How is that fair? In theory he is paying the church to baptize his children while my friend who was full of faith and trust in her church was turned away? How is that righteous?

Those are only a few examples of what I have seen the Catholic church do. They are also why I say that I was raised Catholic but am no longer Catholic.

Originally posted by Evil3unnie
reply to post by MrWendal

 

Ya! I prayed and prayed last night and got exactly what I asked for

. Thank you so much for this video It is exactly what I needed to grow in Faith in Jesus! Looks like I have some more reading to do. I will get back to this post when I have time to look at this video and find out what verses they are talking about. I have a feeling that these are nothing more than verses taken out of context.
God bless!

edit on 28-12-2010 by Evil3unnie because: MrWendal knows not of what he speaks! verses taken out of context.

Here you go MrWendal read away no contradiction here. Like I said anyone can take a verses out of the bible and make it appear to conflict with another. Here is the kicker... You have to actually read/comprehend the chapter/book in order to understand the context of a passage. By all means ask questions and I will answer to the best of my ability but please don't grab some random nonsense and claim it as truth when you know not of what you speak about. People like you irritate me.

Purpose of Writing: The message of the Book of Micah is a complex mixture of judgment and hope. On the one hand, the prophecies announce judgment upon Israel for social evils, corrupt leadership and idolatry. This judgment was expected to culminate in the destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem. On the other hand, the book proclaims not merely the restoration of the nation, but the transformation and exaltation of Israel and Jerusalem. The messages of hope and doom are not necessarily contradictory, however, since restoration and transformation take place only after judgment.

Micah 7:18-19, "Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of His inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy. You will again have compassion on us; you will tread our sins underfoot and hurl all our iniquities into the depths of the sea."

Brief Summary: The prophet condemns the rulers, priests, and prophets of Israel who exploit and mislead the people. It is because of their deeds that Jerusalem will be destroyed. The prophet Micah proclaims the deliverance of the people who will go from Jerusalem to Babylon and concludes with an exhortation for Jerusalem to destroy the nations who have gathered against her. The ideal ruler would come from Bethlehem to defend the nation, and the prophet proclaims the triumph of the remnant of Jacob and foresees a day when Yahweh will purge the nation of idolatry and reliance on military might. The prophet sets forth a powerful and concise summary of Yahweh's requirement for justice and loyalty and announces judgment upon those who have followed the ways of Omri and Ahab. The book closes with a prophetic liturgy comprising elements of a lament. Israel confesses its sin and is assured of deliverance through Yahweh's mighty acts.


Purpose of Writing: The Book of Jeremiah records the final prophecies to Judah, warning of oncoming destruction if the nation does not repent. Jeremiah calls out for the nation to turn back to God. At the same time, Jeremiah recognizes the inevitability of Judah’s destruction due to its unrepentant idolatry and immorality

Jeremiah 17
1 “Judah’s sin is engraved with an iron tool, inscribed with a flint point, on the tablets of their hearts and on the horns of their altars.
2 Even their children remember their altars and Asherah poles[a] beside the spreading trees and on the high hills.
3 My mountain in the land and your wealth and all your treasures will give away as plunder, together with your high places,
because of sin throughout your country.
4 Through your own fault you will lose the inheritance I gave you. I will enslave you to your enemies in a land you do not know, for you have kindled my anger, and it will burn forever.”
5 This is what the LORD says:
“Cursed is the one who trusts in man, who draws strength from mere flesh and whose heart turns away from the LORD. 6 That person will be like a bush in the wastelands; they will not see prosperity when it comes. They will dwell in the parched places of the desert,
in a salt land where no one lives.


Brief Summary: The Book of Jeremiah is primarily a message of judgment on Judah for rampant idolatry (Jeremiah 7:30-34; 16:10-13; 22:9; 32:29; 44:2-3). After the death of King Josiah, the last righteous king, the nation of Judah had almost completely abandoned God and His commandments. Jeremiah compares Judah to a prostitute (Jeremiah 2:20; 3:1-3). God had promised that He would judge idolatry most severely (Leviticus 26:31-33; Deuteronomy 28:49-68), and Jeremiah was warning Judah that God’s judgment was at hand. God had delivered Judah from destruction on countless occasions, but His mercy was at its end. Jeremiah records King Nebuchadnezzar conquering Judah and making it subject to him (Jeremiah 24:1). After further rebellion, God brought Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian armies back to destroy and desolate Judah and Jerusalem (Jeremiah chapter 52). Even in this most severe judgment, God promises the restoration of Judah back into the land God has given them (Jeremiah 29:10).

edit on 28-12-2010 by Evil3unnie because: (Trying to fix bold letters )

edit on 28-12-2010 by Evil3unnie because: (no reason given)

If you are going to go back and edit your post, can you at least have the decency to admit you are copying and pasting someone else's opinions and not your own? While you at, can you at least link the your source and let whomever's opinions you are attempting to parrot have the credit for it?

And you accuse me of never having read the bible, I guess it is so much easier to have such a strong belief when the best you can believe in is what your TOLD to believe