Everyone Here Needs to Read This Book

[MichaelF]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1013806' date='Jun 28 2006, 09:13 AM']
The Pope called me last night. The Jesuits have taken their place at the points we spoke about at the last international convocation of Papist moles. Our plans are about to come to fruition.

Execute plan 66!
[/quote]


NO! Plan 68? That only gives me 4 hours to get to Singapore with the ground beef!!!

[Jesuspaidtheprice]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1013935' date='Jun 28 2006, 02:06 PM']
You're hostile?

I don't think you're hostile...heck, you called us your "Catholic friends."

Oh, but we don't need correcting, at least not in as much as we're Catholic.
[/quote]

Only in as much as we don't need correcting as much as we are Christians I suppose. Perhaps in the spirit of that Decree on Ecumenism from Vatican II we shall learn about each others beliefs as time goes on. I've learned enough that I wouldn't dare simply consider Catholics "baptized pagans" as some more fast fingered fundies would, however there are very real differences.

A Catholic on another thread earlier considered me "hostile". I suppose I am. I want to see you all go to heaven.

[MichaelF]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1013922' date='Jun 28 2006, 12:41 PM']


And be patient. I've already been labeled "hostile" here.
[/quote]


No, you've been labelled "somewhat clueless". Saying Constantine founded the Catholic Church [b]53 years AFTER his death[/b] will get that reaction.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1013988' date='Jun 28 2006, 02:57 PM']
Only in as much as we don't need correcting as much as we are Christians I suppose. Perhaps in the spirit of that Decree on Ecumenism from Vatican II we shall learn about each others beliefs as time goes on. I've learned enough that I wouldn't dare simply consider Catholics "baptized pagans" as some more fast fingered fundies would, however there are very real differences.

A Catholic on another thread earlier considered me "hostile". I suppose I am. I want to see you all go to heaven.
[/quote]
We all want you to get to heaven, too, I'm certain. Of course, when you experience a foretaste of heaven on earth in the Eucharist (and when your faith allows you to experience that joy), you simply wouldn't leave it behind for anything. Why would we not want you to become Catholic and taste the joy we ourselves have tasted?

I'd be glad to learn more about your beliefs. PM me, if you wish.

[KatS]

[quote]The Pope called me last night. The Jesuits have taken their place at the points we spoke about at the last international convocation of Papist moles. Our plans are about to come to fruition.

Execute plan 66!




NO! Plan 68? That only gives me 4 hours to get to Singapore with the ground beef!!![/quote]

Well y'know the Pope has the number 666 embroidered on the inside of all of his mitres... :wink:

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1013922' date='Jun 28 2006, 01:41 PM']
Shucks now friend, at least use solid, stand up, Protestant resources for correcting our Catholic friends here. When I evangelize Buddhist's it doesn't do me any good if I call them Muslims. Try to thoroughly learn where they are coming from so you can reach them where they are at. These anti-catholic tracts aren't going to help you do that. Stay firmly rooted in your Bible (KJV I hope), but read their catechism as well.

And be patient. I've already been labeled "hostile" here.
[/quote]
I asked if you were berean because I googled the tract you listed.

[homeschoolmom]

What does it mean to "be Berean"? I know that the book of Acts refers to the Bereans who searched Scripture... what is "Berean" in this context?

[Church Punk]

Thats the Mother of the Living God your are talking about... please watch what you say.

[morostheos]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1013988' date='Jun 28 2006, 02:57 PM']
Only in as much as we don't need correcting as much as we are Christians I suppose. Perhaps in the spirit of that Decree on Ecumenism from Vatican II we shall learn about each others beliefs as time goes on. I've learned enough that I wouldn't dare simply consider Catholics "baptized pagans" as some more fast fingered fundies would, however there are very real differences.

A Catholic on another thread earlier considered me "hostile". I suppose I am. I want to see you all go to heaven.
[/quote]

There have been hostile people here before, and believe me, you're certainly not one of them. I enjoy your posts.

[Budge]

[quote]

I read a book by Tetlow already(messages from heaven). Full of errors and distortions like the usual anti-catholic jibberish. By the way I recieved it from him personally, free of charge.[/quote]

What errors, he was careful to cite even approved vs. unapproved apparitions.

Most of the book is based on the warnings of scripture.

I got the book right here.

Name one or two errors, lets deal with it.

[quote]Thats the Mother of the Living God your are talking about... please watch what you say.[/quote]

the apparitions are not the same person as Mary, mother of jesus who was a humble blessed lady that sought after God's will and who would never put focus on herself instead of Jesus Christ.

the apparitions are the daughter of Chaldea.

[thessalonian]

Happen to have mine here as well.

"Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this Catholic doctrine is that Christ is being re-sacrifiec daily by thousands of Catholic priests".

Christ is not being resacrificed. We do not teach that and he doesn't believe it is possible. The mass is a reeeepresentation (not to be confused with a representation) of the one sacrifice of the cross on calvary. It is that grace brought forward and applied to our lives. This is one of those same old loaves of fruitcake passed on from one Christmass to the next in Protestant "tradition" of what Catholics believe. And it is undeniably a false strawman.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

I've been reading many "anti-Catholic" books this summer in hopes of better understanding the Protestant perspective.

What I'm finding is a lot of ignorance... and perhaps some deceit. Many "former priests" claiming a background full of orthodox training at good Catholic institutions are lacking a basic understanding of Catholic principles. So, aside from suspicions of deceit, which, for now, I will give them the benefit of the doubt... there is genuinely a great deal of misunderstanding that revolves around Catholic theology, much of what is quoted from the Catechism and other authoritative sources is taken out of context and/or just plain misunderstood. You cannot read into a document what YOU want it to say, as many authors seem to be doing with papal and conciliar documents.

[Budge]

[quote]
"Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this Catholic doctrine is that Christ is being re-sacrifiec daily by thousands of Catholic priests".

Christ is not being resacrificed. We do not teach that and he doesn't believe it is possible. The mass is a reeeepresentation (not to be confused with a representation) of the one sacrifice of the cross on calvary. It is that grace brought forward and applied to our lives. This is one of those same old loaves of fruitcake passed on from one Christmass to the next in Protestant "tradition" of what Catholics believe. And it is undeniably a false strawman.[/quote]

This is what evangelicals believe of the Catholic Mass, it is NOT an error, it is how we see it.

The book of Hebrews states over and over it was to be a one time sacrifice.

I have asked Catholics this one question and NEVER gotten an answer.

[size=6]Why does Christ need his one time sacrifice RE-PRESENTED?[/size][font=Arial Black].

The Eucharist doctrine seems to require extreme doubletalk.

The Catholics online will tell me over and over....

"It is REAL BLOOD, but it really ISN'T real blood."

"And it was a ONE TIME sacrifice, that we REDO over and over and over every day. But it isn't SYMBOLIC, it a REAL sacrifice, but it isn't, but it is, but isn't."

As for the remission of sins, what part did JESUS NOT GET DONE RIGHT the first time? Im wondering...

The authors were not in error to write what they believe of the Eucharist. That is a difference in belief, not an error.

Edited June 29, 2006 by Budge

[KatS]

I found this quote from an apologist website, www.biblechristiansociety.com:

[quote]Q: Why do Catholics call Mary the Queen of Heaven? Doesn't God rebuke the Israelites in the O.T. for worshipping a false goddess called the Queen of Heaven? Should we not refer to Mary with that title, therefore, since it is the title of a false goddess?

A. In Jeremiah 7:18, God is indeed upset with the Israelites for worshipping a false goddess called the "queen of heaven". However, just because God rebuked them for worshipping the false queen of heaven, doesn't mean that we cannot pay honor to the true Queen of Heaven...the Blessed Mother.

That type of thinking would lead you to believe that just because people worship a false god that they call "god," we, therefore, should not call the true God, by that same name...God...because that's the same title the idolaters use for their god! That is faulty logic and it makes no sense whatsoever.

Again, the fact that there is a false "queen of heaven", does not lead to the conclusion that we worship a false goddess when we call Mary the "Queen of Heaven." Just as the fact that there is a false "god", does not lead to the conclusion that we worship a false god when we call our Father in Heaven, God.

And there is a true Queen of Heaven, we see this quite clearly in Revelation 12:1, "And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars..." Let's see. There's a woman...she's in Heaven...and she has a crown on her head. I could be wrong, but I don't think it's the maid! No! It is the true Queen of Heaven, Mary, the mother of the male child who is to rule the nations.

We do not worship Mary, we honor her, just as Jesus honors her. So, there is absolutely nothing wrong, from a scriptural point of view, in calling Mary the Queen of Heaven, and in honoring her just as Jesus honors her. [/quote]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1014581' date='Jun 29 2006, 12:56 PM']
This is what evangelicals believe of the Catholic Mass, it is NOT an error, it is how we see it.

The book of Hebrews states over and over it was to be a one time sacrifice.

I have asked Catholics this one question and NEVER gotten an answer.

[size=6]Why does Christ need his one time sacrifice RE-PRESENTED?[/size][font=Arial Black].[/quote]

Christ's sacrifice was once for all. However, in the Mass, that sacrifice is presented to us again and again. Don't see it as the sacrifice being repeated or replayed, think of it as the Church being transported back to Calvary. This is not at all a violation of the truth that it must be once for all.

[quote]The Eucharist doctrine seems to require extreme doubletalk.

The Catholics online will tell me over and over....

"It is REAL BLOOD, but it really ISN'T real blood."[/quote]

I don't know who told you that. It is real blood. It is real blood because it is substantially Christ's blood. However, there are no cells or plasma or platelets or anything like that. It is the substance of Christ's blood...the very being of His blood and what it is on a much deeper level than cellular biology. Further, it's not His local blood. That is to say, it's not the same blood that is at this moment coursing through the Lord's veins and arteries. If it were, then we would be cannibals, eating living flesh ripped from a locally present being. Rather, we eat supernaturally living flesh, provided by a miracle not too much unlike the miracle of the loaves.

[quote]"And it was a ONE TIME sacrifice, that we REDO over and over and over every day. But it isn't SYMBOLIC, it a REAL sacrifice, but it isn't, but it is, but isn't."[/quote]

We don't redo it, as I've already pointed out. It is symbolic, but in the full sense of the term (see my [url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=18686"]tract[/url] on the word "symbol"). It is also a real sacrifice, but not in the way that you could say we are re-sacrificing Christ. It is a sacrifice because it is linked and is indeed the same as the one sacrifice of Christ on Calvary.

[quote]As for the remission of sins, what part did JESUS NOT GET DONE RIGHT the first time? Im wondering...[/quote]

The same part St. Paul spoke about. What's lacking in Christ's sacrifice? The fact that no matter how great His sacrifice, it must still be attributed to me. I must accept it in myself. That's what the Eucharist is for.