Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Has the Pope Taken His First Steps into Last Days Apostasy?
American Prophet ^ | September 24, 2013 | Rev. Michael Bresciani

Posted on 09/25/2013 8:27:57 PM PDT by WXRGina

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-347 next last
To: Brian Kopp DPM
Oh, another OOPs-millennialist. Tee-hee-hee.

You know what the Pre-Tri Premillennialist said to the Amillennialist? See ya!
51 posted on 09/25/2013 10:21:19 PM PDT by righttackle44 (Take scalps. Leave the bodies as a warning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

Given that this May, May 21, he denied His Lord and Savior by stating atheists and those that don’t believe in God can get into Heaven by “being good” - WHATEVER THAT VAGUE RELATIVE TERM MEANS - totally invalidating Jesus Christ’s atoning death for all people,

I’d say yes.

Jesus DID die for all. Not ALL take Him up on His offer. NOBODY earns one singe part of their salvation. You can’t do anything “good” to earn one drop of your salvation, you can’t do anything to make it into Heaven on your own.

He that denies the Son denies the Father. They aren’t going to go to Heaven. Denying the Son denies Jesus was God, and denies His saving work for all men.


52 posted on 09/25/2013 10:32:32 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals

Just this one or all of them throughout history? While I believe that there were righteous men amongs the many Popes of history, please explain your comment vis-a-vis:

1. Pope John XII (955–964), murdered several people, gave land to a mistress, and was killed by a man who caught him 'in flagrante delicto' with his wife.

2. Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy, who was said to have had orgies in the Lateran palace, and who was said to have been primarily homosexual.

3. Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who tortured Cardinals who had conspired against him and complained that he did not hear enough screaming when they were tortured.

4. Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), the Libertine Borgia, he of multiple mistresses and multiple children.

5. Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift, who's actions were the primary cause of the Reformation, through his selling of indulgences to raise money for his profligate spending. According to both Francesco Guicciardini and Bishop Paolo Giovio, the Pope was homosexual.

There are many others, but I submit that a Pope, being mortal, fleshly, is prone to the same sins as any other man. How many times did Jesus rebuke the Pharisees as hypocrites when they did one thing, yet instructed others not to do what they did? How then, can such Popes be 'infallible' in matters of 'morals'?

53 posted on 09/25/2013 10:52:44 PM PDT by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was lost but now I'm found; blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

When Pope Francis has turned the Catholic Church down the path of liberation theology and social justice. Liberation Theology has as its roots, Marxism. Pope Francis is leading the Church into the realm of heresy and apostasy. Along this road, according to Pope Benidict XVI, will be “rebellion, division, dissent, offenses, anarchy . . . that inevitably lead to the betrayal of the cause of the poor and that a Marxist analysis of reality leads to the acceptance of positions that are incompatible with the Christian vision of man.”

It is incredible how stupid men can be to embrace the Marxist world view. It is like a fool shoving a needle of Heroin into his skin and thinking they have found the way, the truth and the happiness.


54 posted on 09/25/2013 10:57:17 PM PDT by jonrick46 (The opium of Communists: other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

And you know neither your Bible, nor prophecy. LOL!

That happens when one is stuck in a well, hearing only their own echo.


55 posted on 09/25/2013 11:46:27 PM PDT by RitaOK ( VIVA CHRISTO REY / Public education is the farm team for more Marxists coming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

Pope Francis excommunicates pro-gay marriage priest. He’s not the liberal the media wants
By Tim Stanley Religion Last updated: September 23rd, 2013
586 Comments Comment on this article

Despite all due temptation, he remains a Catholic.
From all of last week’s headlines saying that the Pope wants to forget this nonsense about abortion and gays, you’d imagine that Germaine Greer had been elected to run the Catholic Church. Actually what the Pope was saying was that he wants the Church to talk more about what it’s for than what it’s against. But that doesn’t mean it won’t still be against those things that contradict its teachings and traditions.
• Can Pope Francis save the Catholic Church?
• The Catholic Church will never be the same
• The mystery of what Pope Francis really believes
Just ask Greg Reynolds of Melbourne – a priest who appears to have been both defrocked and excommunicated because of his radical views on women clergy and gay marriage. From Australia’s The Age:
The excommunication document – written in Latin and giving no reason – was dated May 31, meaning it comes under the authority of Pope Francis who made headlines on Thursday calling for a less rule-obsessed church.
The document might give no explicit reason, but the reason is implicit and well understood: Reynolds has offended Mother Church with his politics. It’s interesting to note that the former priest tells The Age that he “wants the same thing as the Pope” which is “to encourage reform and clear need for renewal in the church.” I read from this that Reynolds has, like many liberals, misunderstood Francis’ words. Structural reform is clearly necessary to prevent future horrors like the child abuse scandal, and renewal is something that Christians always desire. But Reynolds would throw out Catholic doctrine – something Francis would never do because he is, despite the best wishes of so many in the media, a Catholic. His treatment of Reynolds proves that point.
Read more by Tim Stanley on Telegraph Blogs
Follow Telegraph Blogs on Twitter
Tags: greg reynolds, Melbourne, Pope Francis, the age


56 posted on 09/25/2013 11:46:42 PM PDT by johngrace (I am a 1 John 4! Christian- declared at every Sunday Mass , Divine Mercy and Rosary prayers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johngrace

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100237450/pope-francis-excommunicates-pro-gay-marriage-priest-hes-not-the-liberal-the-media-thinks/


57 posted on 09/25/2013 11:47:14 PM PDT by johngrace (I am a 1 John 4! Christian- declared at every Sunday Mass , Divine Mercy and Rosary prayers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina
Typically aging "American Prophets" see their own mortality creeping up on them and since they don't want to believe they will die before what they've promoted comes to pass, they begin to see signs of their prophecy being fulfilled in anything and everything. Americans in general also tend to equate what's happening in this country with what's happening in the entire world.

Each apostate American is being replaced by multiple faithful believers elsewhere and this author is just another run of the mill aging "American Prophet" who as dusk settles around him can't see the forest for the trees.

58 posted on 09/26/2013 1:27:28 AM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK

Wow, really!!

Catholics really do think they have a lock on all knowledge, don’t they?

Some here I have found to be genuinely lovely souls interested in knowing more and having sincere warmth.

The rest of you just need to crawl back under that rock you so like to profess and await your eternal destiny.....if you hurry you might even get a front row seat to the hellfire.

Take yourself far, far, far away from me!


59 posted on 09/26/2013 3:02:33 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM

Pretty frightening....geez.

As I told Rita, crawl back under the rock you like to profess so much and if you hurry you’ll get a front row seat to the fires of hell.

Get behind me.....wow.


60 posted on 09/26/2013 3:04:08 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM

AMEN to that.

Those who are Christian, followers of Jesus who are around when it all happens are all going to suffer, you confirm then there will not be a rapture as some Christians claim.


61 posted on 09/26/2013 3:05:34 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

As I have said, it will be faithful from the global south Christian faith communities who will be bringing back the good news of the Gospel of Jesus to America and to the west.


62 posted on 09/26/2013 3:09:02 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; Brian Kopp DPM; RitaOK

Thanks, Alamo-Girl, but these people are deaf, dumb, and blind.

They refuse to see that their whole way of thinking and believing is a precariously stacked house of cards that will come tumbling down right on top of them.

The phrase “none so blind as those who will not see” is so appropriate here!

Major prayer for spiritual blindness to be lifted is necessary.

God bless you,
jodyel

P.S. As an aside, my mother told me she witnessed the death of a friend’s mother, who was Roman Catholic, at her deathbed. She said it was a very hard death with much gasping and labored breathing and much fear. She said the fear in the room was palpable. She said right then she knew that the woman had never accepted Jesus as her Savior and was not going to be with Him.

Contrast that to the deaths of believers in Christ who die peacefully. My own grandmother told me a story of when her mother died. She said she and her sister were standing in front of the coffin weeping. Just above the coffin a voice spoke and said, “Don’t grieve for her. She is with Me now.”

And my father’s cousin, Charles, who died of colon cancer had been drifting in and out of consciousness for about three days before his death. My dad and another family member were sitting with him in the hospital room when he suddenly said, “Who is that man?” They looked at each other and there was only the two of them...they saw no other man and told him so. Charles then said, “That’s okay...it is Jesus.” And the next day he died peacefully.

So I say to all you Catholics out there who think you know it all and are saved, then you’d better rethink what you have been told and believed all these years because it is a lie straight from the pits of hell. And Satan won’t be behind you or anywhere else but right on top of you dragging you down with him.

And it serves me no purpose whatsoever to come here and lie to you. If I were lying, I would not even bother at all because frankly some of you are so obnoxious I’d rather not spend eternity with you. But personal feelings aside, I come because I love Christ and I must obey Him. So I say again, open your eyes and get out of this demonic religion called Catholicism and be born again into the true body of Christ, so that when you die your loved ones may also hear, “Do not grieve for them, they are with Me.”


63 posted on 09/26/2013 4:51:10 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM; RitaOK

http://www.gotquestions.org/difference-Rapture-Second-Coming.html

Buckle up, babies, if you think the Rapture happens after the tribulation cause you are in for one hell of a bumpy ride!!

And since Catholic doctrine is all about falsehood, it does not surprise me you got this wrong too. You guys really are playing with fire....good thing true believers are here to set you straight so you don’t end up playing with it for eternity. However, you are required to HEAR...something none of you like to do.


64 posted on 09/26/2013 4:52:28 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

http://www.gotquestions.org/difference-Rapture-Second-Coming.html

Question: “What is the difference between the Rapture and the Second Coming?”

Answer: The rapture and the second coming of Christ are often confused. Sometimes it is difficult to determine whether a scripture verse is referring to the rapture or the second coming. However, in studying end-times Bible prophecy, it is very important to differentiate between the two.

The rapture is when Jesus Christ returns to remove the church (all believers in Christ) from the earth. The rapture is described in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15:50-54. Believers who have died will have their bodies resurrected and, along with believers who are still living, will meet the Lord in the air. This will all occur in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye. The second coming is when Jesus returns to defeat the Antichrist, destroy evil, and establish His millennial kingdom. The second coming is described in Revelation 19:11-16.

The important differences between the rapture and second coming are as follows:

1) At the rapture, believers meet the Lord in the air (1 Thessalonians 4:17). At the second coming, believers return with the Lord to the earth (Revelation 19:14).

2) The second coming occurs after the great and terrible tribulation (Revelation chapters 6–19). The rapture occurs before the tribulation (1 Thessalonians 5:9; Revelation 3:10).

3) The rapture is the removal of believers from the earth as an act of deliverance (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17, 5:9). The second coming includes the removal of unbelievers as an act of judgment (Matthew 24:40-41).

4) The rapture will be secret and instant (1 Corinthians 15:50-54). The second coming will be visible to all (Revelation 1:7; Matthew 24:29-30).

5) The second coming of Christ will not occur until after certain other end-times events take place (2 Thessalonians 2:4; Matthew 24:15-30; Revelation chapters 6–18). The rapture is imminent; it could take place at any moment (Titus 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 15:50-54).

Why is it important to keep the rapture and the second coming distinct?

1) If the rapture and the second coming are the same event, believers will have to go through the tribulation (1 Thessalonians 5:9; Revelation 3:10).

2) If the rapture and the second coming are the same event, the return of Christ is not imminent—there are many things which must occur before He can return (Matthew 24:4-30).

3) In describing the tribulation period, Revelation chapters 6–19 nowhere mentions the church. During the tribulation—also called “the time of trouble for Jacob” (Jeremiah 30:7)—God will again turn His primary attention to Israel (Romans 11:17-31).

The rapture and second coming are similar but separate events. Both involve Jesus returning. Both are end-times events. However, it is crucially important to recognize the differences. In summary, the rapture is the return of Christ in the clouds to remove all believers from the earth before the time of God’s wrath. The second coming is the return of Christ to the earth to bring the tribulation to an end and to defeat the Antichrist and his evil world empire.

Recommended Resource: Three Views on the Rapture by Gleason L. Archer, Jr., ed..


65 posted on 09/26/2013 4:57:40 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

AMEN! Maranatha, Lord Jesus!

smvoice


66 posted on 09/26/2013 5:21:57 AM PDT by smvoice (The 2 greatest days of your life: the day you're born. And the day you discover why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian

“There are many others, but I submit that a Pope, being mortal, fleshly, is prone to the same sins as any other man. How many times did Jesus rebuke the Pharisees as hypocrites when they did one thing, yet instructed others not to do what they did? How then, can such Popes be ‘infallible’ in matters of ‘morals’?”

Own a really good dictionary? Open it up. Look up “impeccable” in regard to sin. Then look up “infallible” in regard to doctrine. See the difference?

Here, let me help you:

Impeccable: you’ll discover that a man who is impeccable in regard to sin can’t sin. No one claims the pope can’t sin.

Infallible: you’ll discover that a man, the pope, can be infallible in regard to doctrine, only under certain circumstances, and that it has nothing to do with impeccability at all.

here is something else to help you:

Infallibility versus Impeccability

One of the most commonly-leveled charges against the Catholic Church is based on a faulty understanding of the doctrine of papal infallibility. It is important to understand what this doctrine means, and what it does not.

Papal infallibility means that the pope, when pronouncing definitively and dogmatically on matters of faith and morals is protected from teaching errors. This protection comes from the Holy Spirit and was promised by Jesus Christ when He said that He would send the Holy Spirit to the Apostles to teach them all truth. The pope only enjoys this special protection when he is speaking in union with the other bishops (the successors of the Apostles) as the successor to Saint Peter (the leader of the Apostles).

This is what infallibility means, but there are many things which it does not mean, although a number of non-Catholics would like it to mean this – as these things are easy to argue against!

Firstly, infallibility is not the ability to always be right or know the correct answer to a matter of history, science or some academic discipline. Although the popes are generally very well-educated men their intellects are not perfect, and they are capable of having gaps in their knowledge or of making mistakes. Thus, if a pope were to say that two plus two is five this would not mean that, for Catholics, two plus two equals five. It would mean that the pope has to take some more math lessons! The pope is only infallible when he speaks on matters of faith or morals – he is not always right and the Holy Spirit does not “teach him all truth” when it comes to academic matters.

Secondly, infallibility is only conferred on papal pronouncements which are solemnly and dogmatically defined, and does not apply to remarks made by the pope as a private individual, or even as a priest, the bishop of Rome or the pope. Only when he speaks as the pope ex cathedra (literally “from the chair” - meaning that he is formally defining something as infallible) is infallibility invoked. Such instances are very rare indeed – far rarer than many non-Catholics think.

Thirdly, and most importantly, infallibility should not be confused with impeccability. Impeccability is best defined as being sinless, or never making a moral mistake – Jesus and Mary were impeccable, for example. As we read in Saint Paul’s letter to the Romans, all have sinned and fallen short of the grace of God. We read in the Gospels how Peter himself sinned by denying Christ, and in Acts how he fell short of his own teaching regarding eating with gentiles and had to be rebuked by Paul. But infallibility and impeccability are not the same thing, and Jesus never promised that the pope would be impeccable. The number of times Jesus speaks of there being sinners in the Church (such as the tares among the wheat, or the bad fish in the catch) should be enough to make this clear.

In point of fact, it is interesting to note that the bad popes stand out precisely because there are so few of them – out of over 250 popes, only a handful can be shown as being examples of “bad popes”. This, of course, does not prove infallibility, but is interesting as it shows that so few popes have been “bad”.

There are a number of specific cases which are cited where popes are shown to have disagreed with each other, or seem to have changed their minds or taught something else. Each and every one of these cases can be shown to be either a complete falsehood, or a misunderstanding of the doctrine of papal infallibility. Most of the time, the pope was not speaking on a matter of faith or morals, or was simply not solemnly defining something, but was simply speaking as a private individual rather than ex cathedra. There is no space to speak of each and every case here – but we will quote from Robert Knox in a letter to Arnold Lunn, speaking of the very few cases of “non-infallible” popes;

“Has it ever occurred to you how few are the alleged ‘failures of infallibility’? I mean, if somebody propounded in your presence the thesis that all the kings of England have been impeccable, you would not find yourself murmuring, ‘Oh, well, people said rather unpleasant things about Jane Shore . . . and the best historians seem to think that Charles II spent too much of his time with Nell Gwynn.’ Here have these popes been, fulminating anathema after anathema for centuries—certain in all human probability to contradict themselves or one another over again. Instead of which you get this measly crop of two or three alleged failures!”

Although this is hardly a totally solid argument, it should certainly give pause for thought. After 2000 years of the Catholic Church, there should be more than a few alleged failures which are not very clear cut at all!

The favorite argument of the non-Catholics is one which we will touch on briefly, and have in fact mentioned above. It concerns the first pope, Saint Peter, and his not eating with the gentile converts. This is mentioned in Galatians 2:11-14; Saint Paul says that he corrected and rebuked Peter. Surely, the argument goes, if Saint Peter were not infallible, then how could he be the first pope (if the pope is infallible) or, if Saint Peter were the first pope and was not infallible, how could all the other popes be infallible?

This argument is easy to refute by a close reading of the text. It is made very clear in the Scripture that Saint Peter did not in fact teach or solemnly define something which was wrong. In fact, quite the opposite – Saint Peter had argued that Jewish and Gentile Christians should eat together – but he just wasn’t living up to his own teaching! Saint Paul rebuked him not for an error in teaching, but rather for hypocrisy. This is a clear – and probably the first – example of infallibility versus impeccability.

Those people who deny papal infallibility often do so not out of a desire to understand it, but rather out of a belief that it is something it is not. This is called the “straw man” argument, as it involves setting up a false argument and then defeating that. The argument does not put up a fight and is, therefore, a “straw man”. Catholics do not believe the pope is omniscient or that he is impeccable. We believe he is, generally speaking, a wise man and a good man. But we also believe that he is infallible when it comes to matters of faith and morals which he solemnly pronounces.

This is entirely in accord with the Scriptures – as we read in the great Petrine defense of Matthew 16:18, the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church. The Church will last forever – but how can she last forever if her teaching is in danger of being corrupted and changed? Then she would not be Christ’s Church. If the Church is to endure forever, protection of her doctrines and teachings must be invested in something or someone. As Peter was the rock upon which Christ built His Church, it is clear this protection is invested in the pope, Saint Peter’s successors.
http://www.catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/4i.htm


67 posted on 09/26/2013 5:23:34 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

Good comment and i agree, but i think the Present pope actually sees what is going on in the Church and the Pope excommunicated an Australian priest who was pro gay-marriage.

And does any one doubt that he has read Revelation 17?.

I too don,t want to sound like a broken record but if the Catholic Church is the great harlot then it is almost certain that the protestant Churches are her daughters, so almost no one wants to even admit that it exists much less talk about it.

Is Rev 17 so plain to Protestants as well as Catholics that no one wants to go there?


68 posted on 09/26/2013 5:25:23 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

Someone on this thread needs to switch to decaf.


69 posted on 09/26/2013 5:38:09 AM PDT by Oratam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ravenwolf

Rev. 17 is not the problem with Catholics. It is Rev. 12 and their belief that the Catholic Church is THAT woman. They deny that that woman is Israel and see herself as the woman clothed with the sun.


70 posted on 09/26/2013 5:40:11 AM PDT by smvoice (The 2 greatest days of your life: the day you're born. And the day you discover why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: smvoice

Rev. 17 is not the problem with Catholics. It is Rev. 12 and their belief that the Catholic Church is THAT woman. They deny that that woman is Israel and see herself as the woman clothed with the sun.


Like i said, no one wants to talk about Rev 17 because it points to the protestant Churches as well as the Catholic.

Thanks for the evidence.


71 posted on 09/26/2013 6:02:57 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: jodyel
As I told Rita, crawl back under the rock you like to profess so much and if you hurry you’ll get a front row seat to the fires of hell.

The mask slips away, the veil is pulled back.

Thank you. Catholics here need to see exactly what you're all about so they don't fall prey to your kind.

72 posted on 09/26/2013 6:04:36 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

If I recall dispensationalist theory, isn’t the Holy Spirit removed after the Rapture? If so, how can anyone be saved? With no indwelling of the Holy Spirit to lead, how can any be saved? The 144,000 from the twelve tribes who preach, must be preaching in vain, as no one can be saved. A ‘pre-trib rapture’ suggests that Jesus Second Coming is actually His ‘second and a half’, or third coming, due to the ‘pre-trib rapture’. FWIW, after some study, I lean toward a partial-preterist view, that much of Revelation has occured and we are awaiting the return of Jesus. Let us assume that 25% of self described Christians are actually in the Lord, therefore, ‘raptured’. All of a sudden, 550 MILLION people disappear. The disappearance of 8% of the earth’s population would not go unnoticed.

In any event, when we vehemently attack each other’s viewpoint, are we not doing the work of Satan? The unchurched see Christians circling up and forming an inward-aiming firing squad. When we tear each other apart in public, the unchurched see no difference between a Christian and ‘the World’, so many who might come to Jesus, don’t.

Jesus knew that man, blessed with a very finite mind, in trying to understand and explain God, (infinite wisdom, love, knowledge, etc.), would add his (man’s) ‘spin’ on God. That is why Jesus kept Salvation so simple. So simple that even a repentant thief, executed next to Jesus, could be saved with no ‘works’ on his part. It is mankind that has added to His doctrine.


73 posted on 09/26/2013 6:05:55 AM PDT by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was lost but now I'm found; blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian; jodyel

The Holy Spirit is never removed from this earth. He is ministering to the tribulation saints.


74 posted on 09/26/2013 6:07:23 AM PDT by smvoice (The 2 greatest days of your life: the day you're born. And the day you discover why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM

This is why we need a relationship with out savior and not a church!


75 posted on 09/26/2013 6:11:02 AM PDT by ForAmerica (Texas Conservative Christian *born again believer in Jesus Christ* Black Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM; WXRGina
It’s the end of everything as you know it...

...and I feel fine.

76 posted on 09/26/2013 6:12:22 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (Just a common, ordinary, simple savior of America's destiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM

What about the “silly notion of Mary’s perpetual virginity”?


77 posted on 09/26/2013 6:13:58 AM PDT by ForAmerica (Texas Conservative Christian *born again believer in Jesus Christ* Black Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #78 Removed by Moderator

To: jodyel
you are a fool and not worthy of being in His kingdom.

That's making it personal, judging another's soul. I suggest you refrain from such on the Religion Forum, and in real life.

79 posted on 09/26/2013 6:33:25 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: jodyel; Religion Moderator

Wow. Talk about making it personal. LOL.


80 posted on 09/26/2013 6:36:42 AM PDT by sitetest ( If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: ForAmerica

Seems protestants or rather most Fundamentalists find the notion of Luke 1:48, “all generations will call me blessed” as silly. In turn, many may then say “but we do” but it certainly appears disingenuous.


81 posted on 09/26/2013 6:45:32 AM PDT by BeadCounter (Really? Syria?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

“He pointed out that the catholic church didn’t even come into existence for several hundred years... “

________________________________________

The combination ‘the Catholic Church’ (he katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110.


82 posted on 09/26/2013 6:57:10 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian

The Holy Spirit will not indwell and seal believers as He does now in the Church Age...but He will come upon them as He did in Old Testament times and minister to believers. But believers in the tribulation will be tasked with keeping their faith. It is not guaranteed as ours is now. The following sites can give more insight.

http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/the-holy-spirit-and-the-tribulation

http://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/in-the-tribulation-who-are-sealed/

Dr. Thomas Ice of the Pre-Trib.org website is the executive director and a list of his articles is here:

http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/ttcol.html

http://gracethrufaith.com/topical-studies/prophecy/understanding-the-olivet-discourse-parables/

Here is the difference, AFPC: Catholics are not Christians and as such fall under the same admonition from Christ for evangelization that unbelievers outside the Catholic church do. No difference. They have not been born again of the Spirit and filled with the Spirit. So I am under no obligation except to proclaim the Gospel to them as I would to a Muslim, a Hindu, a Mormon, or anyone else in a false religion.

Catholics are professing Christians, or Christians in Name Only. You may think that I am harsh and so may many others here but where matters of an eternal soul are concerned, I will be as harsh as I need be to wake people up, stop appeasing their false doctrine, and bring them out of that abomination that is leading them all to Hell.

The only allegiance I have is to the Lord. Time is short and you can either pussyfoot around so as not to hurt their feelings or you can stand up for Christ and display righteous anger over their unsaved status.

Thanks for your post,
jodyel


83 posted on 09/26/2013 7:07:57 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

Jodyel, the good thing to remember is that whether one believes in “pre,” “mid” or “post-tribulation” “rapture” (a word not found in the Bible), it is not a make-or-break salvation issue. All who call on the name of Jesus will be saved.

As you may know, the idea that Jesus is going to secretly come back for His church before His second coming is a new “doctrine,” only created in the 19th century. There are plenty of scriptures that debunk it, as you likely know.

But, as I said, no one is “going to hell” for thinking the Lord is coming back at any certain time. It’s just that it may very well rock the foundation of “pre-trib rapture” believers if they find themselves in the middle of the great tribulation and wonder why they weren’t snatched away. It could really shake one’s faith.


84 posted on 09/26/2013 7:10:22 AM PDT by WXRGina (The Founding Fathers would be shooting by now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

True for believers, but not in the case of Catholics.

And that is who my post was meant for.

Not sure where that 19th century theory comes from but we can leave it for another time.

And I am so angry that they are so deceived I can hold back no longer.

Thanks, WXRGina.


85 posted on 09/26/2013 7:13:58 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

Comment #86 Removed by Moderator

To: jonrick46

When Pope Francis has turned the Catholic Church down the path of liberation theology and social justice. Liberation Theology has as its roots, Marxism. Pope Francis is leading the Church into the realm of heresy and apostasy.

____________________________________

Actually, Francis has preached about the problem of liberation being rooted in Marxism, and that, because of that and its twisting of the The Gospel, that it must never be accepted. He has been quite vocal about this....which earned him the wrath of several of his dissident Jesuit brothers in Latin America.


87 posted on 09/26/2013 7:15:49 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

Would your rather I sit back and appease him in his folly?

Sorry, but that won’t happen.

These people are perishing and I am sick and tired of this kinder, gentler nonsense that says we have to not say it like it is.

The whole thing is personal, it is a personal relationship with Christ...what part of it is not personal? We server a PERSONAL GOD!!!


88 posted on 09/26/2013 7:17:58 AM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

Catholics are professing Christians, or Christians in Name Only.

_________________________

I think you mean well, but you are not correct about this. Though there are some Catholics who are so in name only (just as there are others who identify themselves as Christians but do not live that actively), there are also many who have an intimate relationship with Jesus Christ and know Him to be their Savior.

Those who DO have this intimate relationship with the Savior should be working together to help others to see the power of the Good News. Now THAT would be a great witness!

;-)


89 posted on 09/26/2013 7:27:38 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

Oh, I’m very much with you there, Jodyel, and the vicious hostility many of them exhibit when their beliefs are challenged is quite “impressive.”

The “pre-tribulation rapture” theory is credited to John Darby in the 1830s. An Internet search of his name and “rapture” will bring plenty of results, like: http://ichthys.com/mail-pre-Trib%20rapture%20origin%20and%20danger.htm

and: http://www.bible.ca/rapture-origin-john-nelson-darby-1830ad.htm

Thanks, Jodyel!


90 posted on 09/26/2013 7:30:45 AM PDT by WXRGina (The Founding Fathers would be shooting by now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

But the Catholic Church existed from the time of Christ when he founded it on the Apostles, the first Bishops.


91 posted on 09/26/2013 7:32:03 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Yes, I was referring to written historical evidence.


92 posted on 09/26/2013 7:38:54 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: jodyel
Notwithstanding your beliefs, on this Religion Forum the guideline is to "discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal."

The reason such posts get pulled, e.g. your #78, or posters warned is that ad hominems in religious debate often provoke more of the same in reply and quickly spiral into flame wars which ruin the forum for everyone else.

93 posted on 09/26/2013 7:49:06 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator

Thank you.


94 posted on 09/26/2013 7:50:38 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
the earliest Christians soon (in the first century) became known as Catholic (Universal)

No, they were catholic, universal.

The capital "c" was added later so some could claim that the only Christians at the time Jesus walked the earth were Catholics, when in fact they were Christians.

say thanks to the Catholics!!

The scriptures come from God, not "Catholics."

Christians thank God, Catholics thank Catholics.

Believe in what you wish, but attempting to change Christians from following God to following a "Pope" (or your misrepresentations lol) is folly.

95 posted on 09/26/2013 7:54:44 AM PDT by Syncro ("So?" - -Andrew Breitbart --The King of All Media RIP Feb 1, 1969 – Mar 1, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator

What’s a forum without rodeo clowns? We all need to laugh every once in a while. Otherwise, it’s just “suit ‘em up, bring ‘em in, and watch the mayhem unfold”. Much like the Roman Forum of old. We even have the “thumbs up, thumbs down” audience participation scenes. Why not let loose the hounds of horrific humor and see where it takes us...:)

:)


96 posted on 09/26/2013 7:59:29 AM PDT by smvoice (The 2 greatest days of your life: the day you're born. And the day you discover why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Syncro; terycarl
You two might find the etymology of the word interesting.
97 posted on 09/26/2013 8:00:16 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

Thank you so much for your encouragement, dear Nervous Tick, and for sharing your views!


98 posted on 09/26/2013 8:01:48 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Are you brainwashed by Catholic haters?

Assuming that your statements infers that there are posters here that post hate towards Catholics (re individual posters who are Catholic) that is not possible, as they would be kicked out of the RF and FR also if that attitude is kept up. That's been my experience of observations.

Also, Catholics that post hate towards Christians are also restricted from posting.

Just a little clarity here.

If you have ever followed any of the Mormon threads on FR, you will see that many Mormons were banned for hating Christians for the mere act of posting truths about their false un Godly belief system

99 posted on 09/26/2013 8:07:33 AM PDT by Syncro ("So?" - -Andrew Breitbart --The King of All Media RIP Feb 1, 1969 – Mar 1, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

Sounds like he’s speeding along the RCC’s end times, ecumenism role. Get rid of God’s Word, and what’s left? Man’s ideas and traditions, doing whatever is right in his own eyes.


100 posted on 09/26/2013 8:09:38 AM PDT by wolfman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-347 next 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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