Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Search of Noah’s Ark
MSNBC ^ | July 21st, 2003 | Eve Conant

Posted on 07/23/2003 7:03:32 AM PDT by LOL Clinton Was Impeached

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-139 last
To: BibChr
No - JWs do not believe that Christ was the Son of God. Mormons believe that the kind of life that you've chosen to live will determine whether you will be placed in one of four distinct afterlives: Celestial, Terrestial, Telestial, Outer Darkness. Neither would agree with that statement. They are not Christians.

The following is precisely what each Catholic believes:

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
and born of the Virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again.
He ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

Note the small 'c' in catholic - meaning "universal", not Rome.

Also note this: "He will come again to judge the living and the dead" Jesus will judge, not Rome.
101 posted on 07/23/2003 6:35:57 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: lupie
Your right on!

Many of the errors in Modern Christian Denominations, can be traced to the misunderstanding of the importance of the OT on Doctrine and Prophesy. Much of the NT revelation only becomes clear when viewed in light of the OT. Example: what is that scroll thing all about in the book of Revelation? See the book of Ruth... etc. ...etc ...etc, from front cover to back.
102 posted on 07/23/2003 6:36:44 PM PDT by D Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
The Bible is an excellent and heartwarming source of morals and principles to live by, as well as cautionary tales. But it's not a history or scientific text, regardless of how hard some attempt to make it so

It's too late for you to judge Scripture. You, instead, are evaluated by it.

It's either true or baloney. It either is accurate or fable. It's not "nice" or "heartwarming."

"Principles to live by"? What does that mean? It's either God's Word or *not* God's Word. If it's *not* God's Word, then it's a pretty dangerous thing, and the Creator is pretty impotent not to be able to communicate clearly with His creatures....

Are you the kind of person who says that Jesus was a good moral teacher? Jesus, the One Who said He and the Father were One? Heartwarming?

Unbelievable....

103 posted on 07/23/2003 6:54:50 PM PDT by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: eyespysomething
The book of JOB describes Leviathian as existant in the 6,000 years of Biblical History, it certainly qualifies as a dinosaur from the way it is described!
104 posted on 07/23/2003 7:01:14 PM PDT by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kidd
You really shouldn't argue about JW's or Mormons, I do know whereof I speak. They both certainly would agree with the words you wrote. It is what they would MEAN by that agreement, what content they would import into (or from) the words, that is the problem.

As with Romanism.

You cite a creed with which all Christians would agree, and some non-Christians, in the same manner discussed above.

But you still didn't answer my questions.

Dan
105 posted on 07/23/2003 7:14:53 PM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Theo; TomB
"It's too late for you to judge Scripture. You, instead, are evaluated by it."

I can judge what I wish; I am a free man. As far as evaluations go, well, my son's smile and laugh as he looks at me is all I need in this life.

"It either is accurate or fable."

Well, we know it's not accurate. In addition to the story of Noah (Two members of a large mammalian species is insufficient to "seed" that species, by about 500-1000 individuals; among OTHER impossibilities), the story of Genesis is flatly contradicted by the geologic, paleonologic, bilogic, and cosmologic record. Thus, the only conclusion is that it is fable, that is, allegorical stories. This does NOT, however, diminish those tales' essential wisdom.

"It's not "nice" or "heartwarming."

Well, not ALL of the stories. Some are quite violent and dreary. The overall message is one of hope and warmth, though, for millions of people.

"Are you the kind of person who says that Jesus was a good moral teacher? Jesus, the One Who said He and the Father were One? Heartwarming?"

Are you the kind who says he was NOT? I thought you had read the Bible. Was his purpose NOT to bring love and hope to mankind? I must have missed him doing otherwise...

" If it's *not* God's Word, then it's a pretty dangerous thing, and the Creator is pretty impotent not to be able to communicate clearly with His creatures...."

Clearly is a matter of opinion, isn't it? At any rate, he has not "communicated" with any of us for at least 2,000 years, if we take as our guide the Bible. But tell me, why would it be so "dangerous" if it were NOT God's Word? It wouldn't make me suddenly wish to lead an evil life, the benefits of living a decent life are manifest regardless of what religion one subscribes to, if any. You'd still live your life the way you do now, I'm sure. What "danger" would there be, save to those who truly do not wish to lead good lives ANYWAY, and do so out of fear, or to those whose faith and morality are so weak that mere words on paper are all they rest on?

106 posted on 07/23/2003 8:32:31 PM PDT by Long Cut (Mini-Cut: Our baby BOY born 10 July 2003, 7 pounds, 13 ounces. Welcome to the world, SON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
I answered your question perfectly. Don't try and tell me what I believe - I know what I believe. Your "lying eyes" won't let you believe anything that goes against your pre-set so-called knowledge about Catholics. Every Catholic that attends Mass recites the Apostle's Creed (or the similar Nicene Creed) AS A PROFESSION OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE. I know it by heart and I have examined every statement in it and I am 100% agreement with it. And no, there isn't a single non-Christian who would agree with the entire Apostle's Creed - if they did they would be Christians.
107 posted on 07/24/2003 6:42:25 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: kidd
I was afraid you couldn't handle a genuine dialogue. As a rule, RC's can't.

I usually don't do this, since our posts are all easily accessible, but here once again is the question you did not, in fact answer:

Now, honesty (or knowledge of your Rome's dogma?) test: what does the church of Rome ADD TO that statement as requirements for salvation ("...Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died for my sins so that I may be saved")?

Dan
108 posted on 07/24/2003 6:46:44 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Lighten up, Dan. I was just curious.
109 posted on 07/24/2003 7:23:41 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: BibChr; kidd
Now, honesty (or knowledge of your Rome's dogma?) test: what does the church of Rome ADD TO that statement as requirements for salvation ("...Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died for my sins so that I may be saved")?

That we should live by the laws set up by God himself and given to us through His Word ... the Bible. That seems to be something that many non-Catholics like to forget (OSAS).

110 posted on 07/24/2003 7:30:51 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: al_c
Commencing to "lighten up":

How's that?

Dan

111 posted on 07/24/2003 7:31:27 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: al_c
Hey, no fair! You told me to lighten, then went deep! So, so everyone's clear, you're saying that your position, as an RC< is this::
Eschatological (ultimate) salvation is a result of
Our faith, plus
Our obedience to God's laws

Right?

Dan

112 posted on 07/24/2003 7:34:05 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Now, honesty (or knowledge of your Rome's dogma?) test: what does the church of Rome ADD TO that statement as requirements for salvation ("...Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died for my sins so that I may be saved")?

I answered it in length (which to everyone else is considered dialogue), but apparently you like "dialogue" in one word sentences:

Nothing.

At length:
RCs believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God
RCs believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins
RCs believe that because Jesus Christ died for our sins that we can enter heaven if He judges that we can.

You are right though - this is not a dialogue. A dialogue is an exchange of opinions and ideas. I give my opinions and beliefs. You, like some self-appointed all-knowing professor, come back and tell me that my beliefs are wrong. You even have the nerve to "test" me. So the "dialogue" is only half-way, and in this case its coming from the RC end only.

Who are you to "test" me on Catholicism? Please provide your credentials professor.
113 posted on 07/24/2003 7:34:41 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
That's more like it. ;o)
114 posted on 07/24/2003 7:39:34 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Ahban
"In other words, 6,000 species released 10-12K ago could split into 11,000 today.

Ya mean, kind'a like in evolution???

115 posted on 07/24/2003 7:43:48 AM PDT by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Hey, no fair! You told me to lighten, then went deep!

You asked (twice). ;o)
I know you didn't ask me, but I'm being a buttinski.

So, so everyone's clear, you're saying that your position, as an RC< is this::

Eschatological (ultimate) salvation is a result of
Our faith, plus
Our obedience to God's laws
Right?

Salvation is a result of Christ's sacrifice for us. That's the main thing. How do we respond to that? We praise Him and we follow His precepts. We can do nothing to earn salvation, but we risk losing it through our disobedience.

116 posted on 07/24/2003 7:44:08 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: kidd; drstevej
Credentials: see above, at least twice so far. See my web page, read "Your Host." Do your own homework.

If that's your answer, you're either a liar or not a loyal RC and should leave the sect immediately.

This is neither rocket science nor arcane, mystic lore. The difference between RCism and Christianity is the word "alone." RCism affirms faith, grace, the Bible, in a formal way. Christianity (i.e. the Bible) says that the only way to salvation is by grace ALONE, through faith ALONE, on the basis of the work of Christ ALONE, as we learn from the Bible ALONE, so that all the glory goes to God ALONE.

You can't do dialogue, don't blame me. Honesty is essential.

Dan
117 posted on 07/24/2003 7:45:20 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: seleniteswells
Not teying to offend anyone but the first testement is fiction. Find a grave from someone in the first testement.

All right:

This is the tomb of Ramses II, Pharaoh of Egypt during the time of Moses and the Exodus.

118 posted on 07/24/2003 7:49:50 AM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: al_c
...I'm being a buttinski.

Oh well, it's not like we're talking in a private booth in the corner of a dark restaurant somewhere.

Not meaning to be strident, but can you give me a yes or no on my question? If it's no, then I'll really be puzzled with your first post. I know the RC position quite well; as I just duh-ed to Kidd, it's not like it's in a footnote on a scroll in the basement of an ancient scriptorium in Cairo. But what continues to puzzle me is that (A) RC's are so reluctant to come out and say, "Yep, that's what I believe!" (as if uncomfortable with it), yet (B) won't even consider simply leaving the position that makes them so uncomfortable, and the sect that imposes it on them.

Dan

119 posted on 07/24/2003 7:51:08 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
I believe I answered you question quite clearly and in a way that is in total agreement with the teachings of the RCC. We don't earn salvation. It can't be done. Do you disagree with my answer? Should we just ignore His precepts?
120 posted on 07/24/2003 8:02:51 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Oberon
Good job!
121 posted on 07/24/2003 8:04:32 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: al_c
No no no, don't try to tell me that.

I said, Now, honesty (or knowledge of your Rome's dogma?) test: what does the church of Rome ADD TO that statement as requirements for salvation ("...Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died for my sins so that I may be saved")?

To THAT QUESTION, you responded, That we should live by the laws set up by God himself and given to us through His Word ... the Bible.

Now you say something different. Do not blame ME for being confused.

As to the Christian (i.e. Biblical) position, see post 117.

Dan

122 posted on 07/24/2003 8:06:55 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
It's not different. Let me put it on a bumper sticker for you ...

what does the church of Rome ADD TO that statement as requirements

(If the RCC adds anything as you claim) ... To live according to His Word.

123 posted on 07/24/2003 8:17:38 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

Comment #124 Removed by Moderator

To: al_c
Okay, al dear al, I swear I'm not meaning to be argumentative, but that statement as I'm trying to plain-English it, means that you believe that salvation is won/earned/received/bestowed (pick your verb) ON THE BASIS OF (or by means of) our faith and our works. That is Rome's position.

The position I laid out, what I understand the Bible to be teaching, is quite different. At least we ought to be clear on that; hard to dialogue otherwise. Like once when I talked with an RC priest; nice guy, liked him a lot, but it was like boxing with a fog-bank.

Dan

125 posted on 07/24/2003 8:30:36 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Okay, al dear al, I swear I'm not meaning to be argumentative, but that statement as I'm trying to plain-English it, means that you believe that salvation is won/earned/received/bestowed (pick your verb) ON THE BASIS OF (or by means of) our faith and our works. That is Rome's position.

Or are you hearing only what you want to hear because I am a Catholic Christian?

The position I laid out, what I understand the Bible to be teaching, is quite different.

Your own personal interpretation of scripture?

At least we ought to be clear on that; hard to dialogue otherwise. Like once when I talked with an RC priest; nice guy, liked him a lot, but it was like boxing with a fog-bank.

Pot, meet kettle. ;o)


126 posted on 07/24/2003 8:36:22 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: seleniteswells
You want a grave from an individual named in the Old Testament who is not a historical figure? I'm not sure I understand what it is exactly that you're looking for.

Maybe this will help:

"Over her tomb Jacob set up a pillar, and to this day that pillar marks Rachel's tomb." -Genesis 35:20

And here it is:

127 posted on 07/24/2003 8:40:47 AM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
So you have ZERO experience in the study of the Catholic faith. You have a lot of experience in Protestant studies, but all you have for experience is Protestant propoganda.

And you try to preach to me what Catholics believe in??? I'm having a theological gunfight with an unarmed man.

Sorry bub, but you are no better than the fools who believe that the LA Times presents the news in a fair manner. I suggest that you add the Catholic Catechism to your reading list before you continue as a vocal critic of Catholicism.

If you are the type of person who would urge a liberal to try the Free Republic to discuss politics intelligently, then you should read the Catechism to discuss Catholicism intelligently. Fair enough?

Don't worry, I'm not looking to convert you, and I'll bet that you will agree with 99% of the Catholic Catechism. I've read your replies on the subject of nuclear power and I've read your history. You lack discernment. I suggest that you pray and ask God for the gift of dicernment - and then develop that gift by reading materials that might educate you - even if it results in a change in a hard-set opinion.

Post 117 leads into the usual Protestant/Catholic discussion of works, grace and performing the commandments of Jesus. Thats been done many times before and I will simply agree to disagree with you on that. You've tried to steer this thread into this discussion. My original beef was with your assertion that Catholics don't read the bible. Your response in #117 does nothing to confirm your post in #28, in fact I would judge that it affirms my point that Catholics read the bible.
128 posted on 07/24/2003 8:53:24 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: al_c
That was a stupid posting, al. Now you're just arguing. Agree or disagree, there wasn't a thing "fog"-like in my posting. If the RC position embarrasses you, that's your issue. You want it solved, let's talk. You want to keep it, we're done.

Dan
129 posted on 07/24/2003 8:56:44 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Again, sheer empty rhetoric, and false to boot.

Only one specific carge levelled, and it is PALPABLY in error. You were already corrected, too! You misstate my plainly-stated "original beef." Care about truth? Look it up and correct yourself. Don't care? Find another hobby.

Dan
130 posted on 07/24/2003 8:59:31 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Have a good day, Dan.
131 posted on 07/24/2003 9:20:14 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: LOL Clinton Was Impeached
B4L8r = BUMP for later

I supose to make more accurate, I should make it: BMP4L8r, but I didn't want to type that many letters.

132 posted on 07/24/2003 9:34:39 AM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: al_c
I will endeavor to persevere. You do the same!

Dan
133 posted on 07/24/2003 10:01:14 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Will do.

God bless,
Al

134 posted on 07/24/2003 10:37:23 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: seleniteswells
Biblical reference from first trestement. Ramses is a historical figure.

Oh, I get it... You're wondering where Ramses II is mentioned in the OT. Sorry about that. I was having difficulty translating your post.

Here's one of the many references:

"Moses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three when they spoke to Pharaoh." -Exodus 7:7

According to historians, the Pharaoh mentioned here would have been Ramses II, whose tomb I showed you earlier. This Pharaoh is mentioned throughout the first eight chapters of Exodus.

135 posted on 07/24/2003 11:08:53 AM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]


 GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach
Note: this topic is dated 7/23/2003.

Blast from the Past.

Thanks LOL Clinton Was Impeached.

Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.


136 posted on 06/30/2013 6:04:03 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (McCain or Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 75thOVI; agrace; aimhigh; Alice in Wonderland; AndrewC; aragorn; aristotleman; Avoiding_Sulla; ...
Note: this topic is from 7/23/2003. Thanks LOL Clinton Was Impeached.



137 posted on 06/30/2013 6:05:08 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (McCain or Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Since this is from 2003, I’ll take it that things didn’t pan out with the ark and all............Just surmising :)


138 posted on 06/30/2013 6:12:58 PM PDT by The Cajun (Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Ted Cruz, Trey Gowdy......Nuff said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: The Cajun

They found an old homestead site (foundation at least, other stuff) and eventually (maybe from the same expedition) they found a Byzantine-era wreck with the mast still standing, down in the anoxia depths. The keywords ballard, robertballard, blacksea, noahsflood should turn up later topics. :’)


139 posted on 07/01/2013 3:05:55 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (McCain or Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-139 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson