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.

 

Vatican exposures: Catholic ATS members? What say you?

page: 12
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 


I must confess that I'm pretty rusty on eschatological matters, since it's not very important to me to know the when. I can say that I'm not "pre-millenial" or "post millenial" for two reasons: 1) I'm "pan-millenial", in that I believe it will all "pan" out in the end, and I don't much care how or when, and 2) I don't believe in a literal millenial reign at all. That notion comes from Daniel and Revelations, and is predicated on their being predictive prophecy which has not already come to pass, and that they have a particular interpretation.

If the "remnant" are the faithful who live through the tribulation and into a millenial reign, what happens to the other faithful who don't meet both of those two requirements, and what are they called?

I believe that "the Real Presence", "the Eucharist" and "the Great Warning" must be largely Catholic concepts, so I shouldn't wonder that most of the world rejects them. I was told long ago that revelations 6:12-17 referred to a nuclear war. I don't believe that, either, although the description does seem on the surface to match the description of a mushroom cloud rolling upwards.

According to the Garabandal Apparitions, which you reference elsewhere, the "Great Warning" occurred in 1965. Garabandal is of some academic interest to me, since the beginning of it, from the first alleged sighting of the angel to the first alleged message brackets my birth. as a matter of fact, the incident with the alleged materialization of the communion wafer occurred in the same week as my birth, and was alleged to have happened just a couple days before I was born. I don't for an instant believe it was a real Marian Apparition. The antics and contortions of the girls sounds suspiciously like those gone through by the girls who were the accusers at the Salem witch trials, with about the same results - they "saw" and "heard" things that no one else present could see or hear.

The last "message". 18 June 1965, said in part "I, your Mother, through the intercession of St. Michael the Archangel, wish to tell you that you should make amends. You are now being given the last warnings. I love you very much, and I do not want your condemnation. Ask Us sincerely and We shall grant your plea." That indicates two things:1) That was "the Last Warnings", and 2) whomever this alleged "Mother" was, she expected worship, and could grant the answers to prayers. It appears to have had the character of a "Mother Goddess", which I'm told that Catholics don't view Mary as - although their practice appears to be somewhat different from what they preach to us outsiders in that regard.






edit on 2012/3/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes

The RCC has denounced the Garabaggaboo thing, but they are wrong?



I don't know of them actually denouncing it. They seem to have distanced themselves from it, neither saying yea or nay, but adopting a "wait and see if anything happens in the miraculous department" attitude.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by colbe
 

I must confess that I'm pretty rusty on eschatological matters, since it's not very important to me to know the when. I can say that I'm not "pre-millenial" or "post millenial" for two reasons: 1) I'm "pan-millenial", in that I believe it will all "pan" out in the end, and I don't much care how or when, and 2) I don't believe in a literal millenial reign at all. That notion comes from Daniel and Revelations, and is predicated on their being predictive prophecy which has not already come to pass, and that they have a particular interpretation.
If the "remnant" are the faithful who live through the tribulation and into a millenial reign, what happens to the other faithful who don't meet both of those two requirements, and what are they called?

I believe that "the Real Presence", "the Eucharist" and "the Great Warning" must be largely Catholic concepts, so I shouldn't wonder that most of the world rejects them. I was told long ago that revelations 6:12-17 referred to a nuclear war. I don't believe that, either, although the description does seem on the surface to match the description of a mushroom cloud rolling upwards.

According to the Garabandal Apparitions, which you reference elsewhere, the "Great Warning" occurred in 1965. Garabandal is of some academic interest to me, since the beginning of it, from the first alleged sighting of the angel to the first alleged message brackets my birth. as a matter of fact, the incident with the alleged materialization of the communion wafer occurred in the same week as my birth, and was alleged to have happened just a couple days before I was born. I don't for an instant believe it was a real Marian Apparition. The antics and contortions of the girls sounds suspiciously like those gone through by the girls who were the accusers at the Salem witch trials, with about the same results - they "saw" and "heard" things that no one else present could see or hear.

The last "message". 18 June 1965, said in part "I, your Mother, through the intercession of St. Michael the Archangel, wish to tell you that you should make amends. You are now being given the last warnings. I love you very much, and I do not want your condemnation. Ask Us sincerely and We shall grant your plea." That indicates two things:1) That was "the Last Warnings", and 2) whomever this alleged "Mother" was, she expected worship, and could grant the answers to prayers. It appears to have had the character of a "Mother Goddess", which I'm told that Catholics don't view Mary as - although their practice appears to be somewhat different from what they preach to us outsiders in that regard.






edit on 2012/3/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)


You say you are "rusty" and do not care about eschatology, why take you seriously anything you say about it then? A waste of posting, first rejecting the faith, following up with misquoting a Catholic prophecy doesn't help your protest a bit.

For not caring about the end times, you continue with questions. I'll share again, the Remnant is Roman Catholic. You're asking about the "other faithful", who are they? I think you mean the non-Catholic Christians and non-Christians who will convert to the faith (there is only one) at the Great Warning. Like the first Christians, there will be martyrs, not everyone will make it through to the Era of Peace, the 7th Day.

The Garabandal messages and "miracle" of the Eucharist began and/or
happened on your birthday, why share this? You've rejected marian apparitions already, why speak of them in this reply?

Once again, your mistaken opinion. Mary is not a "goddess", she is the mother of God. You used the word "outsider", you don't have to remain
a non-Catholic. God wants everyone to be Roman Catholic. Who would
choose juice and crackers when they can receive God Himself.

Desire the Eucharist neno.


prayers,


colbe



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Just to be clear I don’t believe in that whole Jesus story – but should such a character ever show up I am guessing his first act would be to break his foot off in the popes’ a$$


Originally posted by colbe
The teachings of the faith are the same as Christ's teachings.


The cognitive dissonance required to link the name of a character who said



Matthew 19:21:
Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.


With




Is well beyond (my) belief



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 


There really isn't any reason to take me seriously in eschatological matters, other than this: the time of the end and the events of the end are supremely unimportant. What IS important is to be right with God and prepared for the end at any time, for the end will come for us all at some time, and it's usually unannounced.

Just as people are missing seeing the daily miracles in their lives because everyone thinks they have to see a "Burning Bush" spectacular miracle to qualify, many are forsaking their relationship with God in order to ferret out details of a time they may not live to see. They throw out the wheat and save the chaff, thinking it has some importance in their lives.

I don't "reject the faith", I reject Roman Catholicism. I am curious as to which Catholic prophecy you think I misquoted.

I continue with my questions in order to try to understand what it is you are thinking, not because I think "end times" are important in the grand scheme of things.

No, by "other faithful", I meant just what I said - those believers who do not meet the two conditions you imposed to be included in the "remnant".

I brought up the Garabandal Apparitions because you cited them as some sort of prophecy for your "Great Warning", but I've found no such reference in them so far. Perhaps you could point it out. The entity posing as Mary claimed to be "your Mother" when speaking to the girl, not "His Mother". that would indicate that it thought of itself (or wanted others to think of it) as a "Mother Goddess". That view is further bolstered by it's claim that if we asked it sincerely, it would grant our plea. Answering prayers is the provenance of God, and God alone. This entity considers itself a god(dess).

Didn't the Roman Catholic Church claim it had found Mary's last home in a house in Ephesus, Turkey, where it claimed she lived up to her alleged "assumption", all based off of some "prophecy"? Can you name the OTHER famous Mother Goddess who "lived" in Ephesus?

Quite the coincidence there, no?

God does not want me to be a Roman Catholic - if he did, I would be. I am only human, and I cannot thwart His will. I do not desire a Eucharist. I have no desire to participate in magical conversions of the mundane into the sublime because some mortal cited incantations over it. In the end, after the incantations, the bread still looks and tastes like bread rather than the flesh Catholics purport it to be, and the wine doesn't taste even a little bit like the blood Catholics claim it is.

If there are two things I know when I see them, they're flesh and blood.







edit on 2012/3/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by racasan
 


Dude, I have seen some scary humans in my days, but Ratzinger is one of the scariest looking people I have EVER seen. that includes the ones who were shooting at me - he's even scarier looking than THEM.

Thanks for that post - and the nightmares that are sure to follow!



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Oh I would never make fun of someone’s appearance – but yes he really does have that evil emperor vibe going on




So I suppose if the pope gig doesn’t work out for him George Lucas can find him something useful to do



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by colbe
 


There really isn't any reason to take me seriously in eschatological matters, other than this: the time of the end and the events of the end are supremely unimportant. What IS important is to be right with God and prepared for the end at any time, for the end will come for us all at some time, and it's usually unannounced.

Just as people are missing seeing the daily miracles in their lives because everyone thinks they have to see a "Burning Bush" spectacular miracle to qualify, many are forsaking their relationship with God in order to ferret out details of a time they may not live to see. They throw out the wheat and save the chaff, thinking it has some importance in their lives.

I don't "reject the faith", I reject Roman Catholicism. I am curious as to which Catholic prophecy you think I misquoted.

I continue with my questions in order to try to understand what it is you are thinking, not because I think "end times" are important in the grand scheme of things.

No, by "other faithful", I meant just what I said - those believers who do not meet the two conditions you imposed to be included in the "remnant".

I brought up the Garabandal Apparitions because you cited them as some sort of prophecy for your "Great Warning", but I've found no such reference in them so far. Perhaps you could point it out. The entity posing as Mary claimed to be "your Mother" when speaking to the girl, not "His Mother". that would indicate that it thought of itself (or wanted others to think of it) as a "Mother Goddess". That view is further bolstered by it's claim that if we asked it sincerely, it would grant our plea. Answering prayers is the provenance of God, and God alone. This entity considers itself a god(dess).

Didn't the Roman Catholic Church claim it had found Mary's last home in a house in Ephesus, Turkey, where it claimed she lived up to her alleged "assumption", all based off of some "prophecy"? Can you name the OTHER famous Mother Goddess who "lived" in Ephesus?

Quite the coincidence there, no?

God does not want me to be a Roman Catholic - if he did, I would be. I am only human, and I cannot thwart His will. I do not desire a Eucharist. I have no desire to participate in magical conversions of the mundane into the sublime because some mortal cited incantations over it. In the end, after the incantations, the bread still looks and tastes like bread rather than the flesh Catholics purport it to be, and the wine doesn't taste even a little bit like the blood Catholics claim it is.

If there are two things I know when I see them, they're flesh and blood.







edit on 2012/3/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)


"the time of the end" is extrememly unimportant", which "end" is that neno? LOL.

You do too mock the faith, there is only one faith, read Scripture. That's
why you are here.

I didn't bring it up, you replied denying Garabandal because the OP mentioned Garabandal in her mocking way. You write a book, every post.

Thanks for making the Catholic point, you believe it is Christ even
though you don't see a change in the consecrated host. That's called faith.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 



t's kinda funny you defending Flyersfan on her rejection of some private revelation. That's fine. She can but she has also called you on your anti-Catholicism.

I'm not defending her....I'm saying she's on your team, and even she says you are wrong.

She has also called me on my anti-Catholicism? You mean the same anti-Catholicism that I freely admit?
What has that got to do with anything?
Wow, you really do have a hard time tracking, don't you, colbe?
Now your seer is "some private revelation"?

You are contradicting yourself at every turn. Even the Catholics on here have corrected you! I don't need to any further...you've displayed your fanatacism perfectly well.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by colbe
 

I must confess that I'm pretty rusty on eschatological matters, since it's not very important to me to know the when. I can say that I'm not "pre-millenial" or "post millenial" for two reasons: 1) I'm "pan-millenial", in that I believe it will all "pan" out in the end, and I don't much care how or when, and 2) I don't believe in a literal millenial reign at all. That notion comes from Daniel and Revelations, and is predicated on their being predictive prophecy which has not already come to pass, and that they have a particular interpretation.
If the "remnant" are the faithful who live through the tribulation and into a millenial reign, what happens to the other faithful who don't meet both of those two requirements, and what are they called?

I believe that "the Real Presence", "the Eucharist" and "the Great Warning" must be largely Catholic concepts, so I shouldn't wonder that most of the world rejects them. I was told long ago that revelations 6:12-17 referred to a nuclear war. I don't believe that, either, although the description does seem on the surface to match the description of a mushroom cloud rolling upwards.

According to the Garabandal Apparitions, which you reference elsewhere, the "Great Warning" occurred in 1965. Garabandal is of some academic interest to me, since the beginning of it, from the first alleged sighting of the angel to the first alleged message brackets my birth. as a matter of fact, the incident with the alleged materialization of the communion wafer occurred in the same week as my birth, and was alleged to have happened just a couple days before I was born. I don't for an instant believe it was a real Marian Apparition. The antics and contortions of the girls sounds suspiciously like those gone through by the girls who were the accusers at the Salem witch trials, with about the same results - they "saw" and "heard" things that no one else present could see or hear.

The last "message". 18 June 1965, said in part "I, your Mother, through the intercession of St. Michael the Archangel, wish to tell you that you should make amends. You are now being given the last warnings. I love you very much, and I do not want your condemnation. Ask Us sincerely and We shall grant your plea." That indicates two things:1) That was "the Last Warnings", and 2) whomever this alleged "Mother" was, she expected worship, and could grant the answers to prayers. It appears to have had the character of a "Mother Goddess", which I'm told that Catholics don't view Mary as - although their practice appears to be somewhat different from what they preach to us outsiders in that regard.






edit on 2012/3/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)


You say you are "rusty" and do not care about eschatology, why take you seriously anything you say about it then? A waste of posting, first rejecting the faith, following up with misquoting a Catholic prophecy doesn't help your protest a bit.

For not caring about the end times, you continue with questions. I'll share again, the Remnant is Roman Catholic. You're asking about the "other faithful", who are they? I think you mean the non-Catholic Christians and non-Christians who will convert to the faith (there is only one) at the Great Warning. Like the first Christians, there will be martyrs, not everyone will make it through to the Era of Peace, the 7th Day.

The Garabandal messages and "miracle" of the Eucharist began and/or
happened on your birthday, why share this? You've rejected marian apparitions already, why speak of them in this reply?

Once again, your mistaken opinion. Mary is not a "goddess", she is the mother of God. You used the word "outsider", you don't have to remain
a non-Catholic. God wants everyone to be Roman Catholic. Who would
choose juice and crackers when they can receive God Himself.

Desire the Eucharist neno.


prayers,


colbe


"Who would choose juice and crackers when they can receive God Himself."

This is just my opinion, but I think Catholics should treat the juice and crackers of non-Catholic Eucharist as if it was truly the blood and body and Jesus, because it probably is. Why shouldn't it be? Can anyone honestly believe in Jesus and think that He wouldn't show up in communion for any group of people that asks Him? The hard-line ideas of Catholics and Orthodox might seem to be faith, but they are actually faithlessness.
edit on 28-3-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 



You do too mock the faith, there is only one faith, read Scripture. That's
why you are here.
What? I'm pretty sure neno is here to debate your points. Your "faith" in these "seers", and in bread and wine being transformed by magic, is based on imagination, colbe, and superstition. Do you not see that? You aren't even really presenting anything that Christ himself said and did, with the exception of claiming he made Peter a Pope (which he did not).


I didn't bring it up, you replied denying Garabandal because the OP mentioned Garabandal in her mocking way.

You have brought it up innumerable times. Over and over again.


You write a book, every post.

Now who's mocking? neno is articulate, knowledgeable, intelligent, and makes perfect sense. He takes the time to point out his thinking (which 'thinking' I understand), and is trying to figure out yours (as am I, and it's looking more and more like your thinking is very skewed).

If you have a hard time with people who write well and thoroughly, who respond sentence by sentence to quoted statements (as would a person in conversation) in the order they were delivered, then how do you understand the Bible?

Yeah, we get it. You wish us to become Catholic. Yet you have not presented any substantial evidence or historical facts or even logic to try to achieve it. Therefore, you have not succeeded in converting anyone here, for all your wishing and praying, because those with common sense, life experience, education, and open minds would not be sucked in by your repetitive claims of channeled messages, your intolerance and exclusion of others, and your presented, fragmented wherefores.

But, that's okay. I'm sure you're doing your best, in your way, and that you do care about the salvation of everyone else.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by cloudyday
 



Can anyone honestly believe in Jesus and think that He wouldn't show up in communion for any group of people that asks Him? The hard-line ideas of Catholics and Orthodox might seem to be faith, but they are actually faithlessness.

cloudyday, that is absolutely how I see it myself. In fact, he would show up for one person just for the asking.

I guess it seems like faith to some people...but it seems like hypocrisy and a feeling of superiority to me. Not what Jesus wanted.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 


NONE of the "end times" are important, including mine individually. it will happen whether we like it or not, and it usually happens unannounced. The important thing is being ready to go, not what time it comes.

Which is it you think I'm doing? Mocking the faith or rejecting Roman Catholicism? I've already told you which it is, but believe as you will.

No, I brought up Garanbandal because YOU did first, in this post, and claimed that it somehow prophecied your "Great Warning". Specifically, you said in that post:



Your reply about Flyersfan. She cannot answer to why the messages of Divine Mercy speak of Garabandal's repeated prophetic revelation about the Great Warning.


You seem to have misunderstood me - I do NOT believe that the communion elements are literal flesh and blood of anyone at all. They are bread, and wine, and of a symbolic rather than a literal nature. I made that clear enough already, and if I didn't then, I have now. No mortal magician can make it so merely by muttering incantations over it.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by EricD
reply to post by cloudyday
 


Feel free to pm me with any questions. If I don't know the answers, I'd be happy to point you to someone that would.

Eric


I would be curious if the Catholic Church officially believes that the bread and wine/juice in non-Catholic churches is Jesus. They seem to use the Creed issue to avoid confronting this question. But I think the Catholic church tries harder than others to have answers for questions. I hear the wisecrack about "crackers and juice" from Catholic lay people but I'm curious if that belief goes all the way to the top. I know my Orthodox priest believed in the "crackers an juice" theory, but I assume he extended that to the Catholics as well as Protestants. Another Orthodox priest I asked said essentially that only the Orthodox church has the grace for communion.

It's an important question, because it's very hard to believe these things. Especially when we have the Catholics and Orthodox with very similar beliefs and practices each claiming to be the Church. It makes me doubt both churches.
edit on 28-3-2012 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


I thank you for the kind words, but colbe is not the first to point out that I some times get long winded in my efforts to make myself clearly understood.


I have debated points of religion with Preachers, Priests, and lay people, Christian and Muslim. In all honesty, the Catholics, especially priests, have been the least likely in my experience to get spastic, and that goes a long way in recommending their comfort in their faith - more than any preaching me into hell could ever do. Most are very comfortable with their choices, and rarely get upset at questioning.

I once made a Freewill Baptist preacher's entire head turn purple, looking like a giant grape. I had to let up on him, since it appeared that his blood pressure might send him off to Heaven any second, and he was clearly unready for that event.

Catholics, on the other hand, tend to smile and nod and just quietly send peasants to shoot at me - particularly the Jesuit variety.

Many people whose religion is based more upon human word of mouth than scripture tend to have a habit of getting unsettled in their faith when presented with logic, whether they show that immediately or at some later time. I guess maybe the god of those persons isn't logical, doesn't care to make sense.

Catholics can't really be blamed for their pecadillos, because they have been inculated from their beginning in a church which insists on adding church doctrines to recorded scripture. A case in point is what you mention of Peter being made "Pope". The Bible doesn't say that, at all, but the Catholic Church interprets what is said by passing it through a Catholic-Church-approved filter in order to try to legitimize dogma that can otherwise not be supported at all.

The same goes for Catholic Marianology. It cannot be supported by internal evidence in the Bible, but over time a body of Church teaching has built up in regard to it. It's really a fascinating thing to follow the history of it's development, and see how it strengthens over time, while the Bible remains the same. The very first recorded prayer to Mary was around 250 AD. There was another spike in the development of Marianology around 380 AD, and a lesser spike in the mid 400's, both apparently in response to controversy in the matter at those times, It's development picked up again around 1850, and appears to be accelerating Mary to full goddesshood. That hasn't happened fully yet, but it's well on it's way.

NONE of it comes from the Bible or the Primal Church thought. Not until 250 AD.

And here I am, getting long winded again!



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by cloudyday
 



Can anyone honestly believe in Jesus and think that He wouldn't show up in communion for any group of people that asks Him? The hard-line ideas of Catholics and Orthodox might seem to be faith, but they are actually faithlessness.

cloudyday, that is absolutely how I see it myself. In fact, he would show up for one person just for the asking.

I guess it seems like faith to some people...but it seems like hypocrisy and a feeling of superiority to me. Not what Jesus wanted.


Exactly so. In their insistence on seeing visions of Christ, people miss it entirely when he sits right next to them for a meal. It's the "Burning Bush" syndrome all over again. they miss out on the miracles every day because they insist on the spectacular "Burning Bush" variety.

Those people make Baby Jesus cry.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
what is a Pope anyway? I totally don't get it... but it might be because I was born in USA?
edit on 28-3-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by cloudyday
 


I'm ok with the Catholics applying the "cracker and juice" theory to non-Catholic communions - after all, it's the same thing I believe. I believe it consistently, however - that THEIR elements are just "crackers and juice" too, and I think they ought to be willing to apply their own beliefs consistently. If they think theirs is "flesh and blood", then they should think the same of all. I take it as the practice of division in the face of their preaching "Unity". What is important is the state of one's heart and mind during the communion, not whether or not he is literally engaging in cannibalism.

I believe that the True Church has no denomination, and that members of it can be found in ALL Christian denominations, but not all members of any one denomination are the "True Church".

Catholic "Unity" appears to mean unity under the Pope, rather than unity under Christ, and that is a grave mistake.

A GRAVE mistake.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


The Pope is the Emperor of the last remaining vestiges of the old Roman Empire.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


The Pope is the Emperor of the last remaining vestiges of the old Roman Empire.


cool I am looking now... definition says "Father" pronounced like pop/popa.

Only Jesus is our father on this side of the pond...



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join