| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 12/23/2015 6:58:49 PM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Thread has degenerated into personal battles. |
Posted on 12/20/2015 10:29:03 AM PST by ebb tide
No. It's just sad.
Hoss
“A little educational reading for you Vlad, to spur your Holiday forward perhaps.”
Nope, nothing particularly educational there. Some of it is even stupid: the New Testament was created in 325? If you follow their logic then that means you don’t believe John 8:44 is canonical, inspired scripture since they say this:
“Nicholas was among the most senior bishops who convened the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE and created the New Testament. The text they produced portrayed Jews as “the children of the devilâ€[footnote 11: John 8:44] who sentenced Jesus to death.”
Even this shows how laughably stupid the authors of your source website are: “[St. Nicholas] was only named a saint in the 19th century.” If that is so then how was the paricjh church NAMED St. Nicholas in Myra damaged in an earthquake in 529? http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/kale-church-of-st-nicholas-myra
I’ll enjoy Christmas - a wonderful Catholic celebration of Christ’s birth - all the more since you seemed to be opposed to it. It is telling that you think a website that believes the New Testament was created only in 325 as an anti-Jewish book is “educational”. Yeah, that tells us quite a bit doesn’t it?
“Are you sure you want to own this, vlad?”
And you think that’s a usual part of Christmas celebrations? I don’t see how you can. Thus, logically, I can only conclude that it is known to you that this won’t work for you anyway. Why bother posting it then?
“No. It’s just sad.”
Nope. Just true. And you posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS of sola scriptura. That’s just a fact.
Actually, no. But if it makes you feel good to think this, then Merry Christmas from Hoss to you -- enjoy it. Even though it's false.
Take care.
Hoss
Not at all surprising that you would pounce on one particular in order to dismiss the Historical materials which are in fact accurate. Magic thinking can make the misled so comfy in their delusions. You’re living proof!
-— People cannot come back from the dead -—
The saints in heaven are alive. It is not beyond God s power to allow them to appear to us. Neither has God revealed to us that He does not will saintly apparitions.
In fact, the Bible indicates that Moses and Elijah were made visible to the Apostles.
Regarding the witch of Endor, she was conjured up. This is what is proscribed.
We have Christ s Church on earth to tell us which apparitions cannot be trusted and which are permissible to trust.
Hoss
And Matthew 13:14
“Actually, no.”
Actually, yes. You posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS. It’s just that simple.
“But if it makes you feel good to think this, then Merry Christmas from Hoss to you — enjoy it. Even though it’s false.”
Christmas is false? No, what is false is your claim that there are no varying definitions of sola scriptura. And you proved that claim false by posting TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS of sola scriptura.
“Take care.”
Enjoy Christ’s Mass Day.
That doesn't give ANYONE, no matter who they claim to be, license to make stuff up out of thin air and teach it as Truth.
Talk about building on sand.
Try building on Christ, the Petra, the rock, and you'll be OK.
Everything else. Pffftttt.....
Meaningless. Christ is ALL and everything we need for life and godliness is given us by His divine power.
Anything else besides God is simply not necessary and likely to be of the enemy, including apparitions no matter who they claim to be and who gives it their stamp of approval.
Christ is ALL and everything we need for life and godliness is given us by His divine power.
It’s really a shame that Catholics don’t think Christ is enough for them. They are adding to Him and His work at every turn.
Everyone who has died is alive in the spiritual realm somewhere.
And yet, they still died. Their physical bodies ceased to function. They DIED. They are dead.
But but but, the vision was telling catholics how to avoid purgatory, so it just has to be acceptable to the magicsteeringthem!
Okay. Baby words for you:
If it makes you feel good to think I gave you two different definitions, then Merry Christmas to you -- even though what you think is false.
Apparently, your comprehension skills need help. Christmas is not false. The Mass is false and an abomination, but the celebration of the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the reason we celebrate -- not to sacrifice him over and over.
Now then. I hope this clears it up, even though I suspect you knew what was meant when it was originally written.
Merry Christmas. I hope you someday learn its true meaning.
Hoss
You need to copyright this; it is so true!!!
Hoss
“Not at all surprising that you would pounce on one particular in order to dismiss the Historical materials which are in fact accurate.”
Ha! So you think those are the only lies or errors on that webpage???
Seriously, did you even read it??? Here’s just one paragraph:
1st sentence: “In 1087, a group of sailors who idolized Nicholas moved his bones from Turkey to a sanctuary in Bari, Italy.”
The sailors were Christians and they didn’t idolize Nicholas. They moved his relics to a church in Italy. Are the authors afraid to say the word “church”?
2nd sentence: “There Nicholas supplanted a female boon-giving deity called The Grandmother, or Pasqua Epiphania, who used to fill the children’s stockings with her gifts.”
Utter nonsense. This was ITALY - it had been Christian for centuries and centuries. St. Nicholas supplanted no one.
3rd sentence: “The Grandmother was ousted from her shrine at Bari, which became the center of the Nicholas cult.”
Again, utter nonsense. A specially built church was erected for St. Nicholas’ relics starting in 1087 when the relics arrived in Bari: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_di_San_Nicola
4th sentence: “Members of this group gave each other gifts during a pageant they conducted annually on the anniversary of Nicholas’ death, December 6.”
“Magic thinking can make the misled so comfy in their delusions. You’re living proof!”
No, I clearly know the truth far better than you if your posts and sources are anything to go by.
Here’s another example, in fact:
“The Nicholas cult spread north until it was adopted by German and Celtic pagans.”
In 1087, there were no German or Celtic pagans.
“These groups worshipped a pantheon led by Woden –their chief god and the father of Thor, Balder, and Tiw. Woden had a long, white beard and rode a horse through the heavens one evening each Autumn. When Nicholas merged with Woden, he shed his Mediterranean appearance, grew a beard, mounted a flying horse, rescheduled his flight for December, and donned heavy winter clothing.”
Laughable. St. Nicholas’s feast day is December 6th - so it was always in December. The clothes he was shown to wear were always those similar to what a bishop at the time wore. He was shown to have a long white beard because he was a Greek bishop and that was their fashion in the Middle Ages.
“In a bid for pagan adherents in Northern Europe, the Catholic Church adopted the Nicholas cult and taught that he did (and they should) distribute gifts on December 25th instead of December 6th.”
Again, in 1087, there were no pagan adherents in Northern Europe who were Celts or Germans so now the author just says “pagan adherents”? Exactly who? Name the people. Also, if the Church changed the date gifts were given (and the Church wouldn’t care either way) why is it that even now many people in Northern Europe give gifts on December 6th?
And by the way, not that this would matter to anyone who cared about truth, but the website you chose says this: AUTHOR: LAWRENCE KELEMEN. Yet Jason Barlow wrote this book which has some of the same passages WORD-FOR-WORD: https://books.google.com/books?id=vDluAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA26&dq=Pasqua+Epiphania&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwivovKa7fLJAhUT4WMKHYo7BXsQ6AEIITAB#v=onepage&q=epiphania&f=false There’s no attribution on the website referring to Barlow. There’s no attribution in Barlow’s book referring to Kelemen. Someone’s a thief.
That right there is sad and funny at the same time. I wonder if there's a word for "sad and funny at the same time."
Anyway, that's not why I hit "post reply."
A while back I posted this list of Mary sightings. If you need links, let me know. I'm too lazy to html-up a post you'll just scoff at. I guess Catholics are not obliged to believe these either. After all, Fatima is the mother of all apparitions, right?
- Clearwater Virgin.
- Coogee Virgin
- Milton Hospital sighting
- New Jersey tree stump image of Mary
- A Ghanian rock Mary sighting
- Chi-town underpass called a "miracle"
- Janesville firewood apparition
- Fountain Valley chocolate revelation
- Throngs drawn to pizza pan
- half-eaten toast- the owner thinks it helped her win the lotto
MERRY CHRISTMAS, friends.
“You really, really love to twist stuff don’t you.”
Nope. You posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS. That’s all there is. It’s irrefutable.
“Okay. Baby words for you:”
No words you use can change the facts.
“If it makes you feel good to think I gave you two different definitions, then Merry Christmas to you — even though what you think is false.”
No, what you posted was false. It was false then, and is false now. Two different definitions is two different definitions.
“Apparently, your comprehension skills need help.”
Nope. I can see that two different definitions are two different definitions.
“Christmas is not false.”
Of course it isn’t.
“The Mass is false and an abomination,”
Nope. It is neither false nor an abomination. Nothing that comes from Christ could be and He said the first Mass and clearly told the Apostles to do it after Him. The NT shows they did so.
“but the celebration of the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the reason we celebrate — not to sacrifice him over and over.”
What’s false is clearly your understanding if you think anyone could sacrifice Jesus over and over again. No one could and no one wants to either. So which is it that you are getting wrong there? Are you wrong about someone being able to sacrifice Jesus over and over again or are you wrong on believing Catholics sacrifice Jesus over and over again? It has to be one or the other OR BOTH according to your own words. The correct answer is - BOTH - since both are impossible.
“Now then. I hope this clears it up, even though I suspect you knew what was meant when it was originally written.”
You posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS of sola scriptura and then denied doing so insisting the two are not actually different even though they are. The problem is not my understanding.
“Merry Christmas. I hope you someday learn its true meaning.”
I already know it - Christ’s Mass - He was born into the world to save us by dying on the cross and that is commemorated in Christ’s Mass. The prayers of Christ’s Mass make that clear:
(Christmas Day Mass):
At the Mass during the Day
ENTRANCE ANTIPHON Cf. Is 9: 5
A child is born for us, and a son is given to us;
his scepter of power rests upon his shoulder,
and his name will be called Messenger of great counsel.
GLORIA
COLLECT
O God, who wonderfully created the dignity of human nature
and still more wonderfully restored it,
grant, we pray,
that we may share in the divinity of Christ,
who humbled himself to share in our humanity.
Who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.
The Creed is said. All kneel at the words “and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate”.
FIRST READING Is 52:7-10
How beautiful upon the mountains
are the feet of him who brings glad tidings,
announcing peace, bearing good news,
announcing salvation, and saying to Zion,
“Your God is King!”
Hark! Your sentinels raise a cry,
together they shout for joy,
for they see directly, before their eyes,
the LORD restoring Zion.
Break out together in song,
O ruins of Jerusalem!
For the LORD comforts his people,
he redeems Jerusalem.
The LORD has bared his holy arm
in the sight of all the nations;
all the ends of the earth will behold
the salvation of our God.
RESPONSORIAL PSALM Ps 98:1, 2-3, 3-4, 5-6
Viderunt omnes termini terrae salutare Dei nostri.
R. (3c) All the ends of the earth have seen the saving power of God.
Sing to the LORD a new song,
for he has done wondrous deeds;
his right hand has won victory for him,
his holy arm.
R. All the ends of the earth have seen the saving power of God.
The LORD has made his salvation known:
in the sight of the nations he has revealed his justice.
He has remembered his kindness and his faithfulness
toward the house of Israel.
R. All the ends of the earth have seen the saving power of God.
All the ends of the earth have seen
the salvation by our God.
Sing joyfully to the LORD, all you lands;
break into song; sing praise.
R. All the ends of the earth have seen the saving power of God.
Sing praise to the LORD with the harp,
with the harp and melodious song.
With trumpets and the sound of the horn
sing joyfully before the King, the LORD.
R. All the ends of the earth have seen the saving power of God.
SECOND READING Heb 1:1-6
Brothers and sisters:
In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways
to our ancestors through the prophets;
in these last days, he has spoken to us through the Son,
whom he made heir of all things
and through whom he created the universe,
who is the refulgence of his glory,
the very imprint of his being,
and who sustains all things by his mighty word.
When he had accomplished purification from sins,
he took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
as far superior to the angels
as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
For to which of the angels did God ever say:
You are my son; this day I have begotten you?
Or again:
I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me?
And again, when he leads the firstborn into the world, he says:
Let all the angels of God worship him.
ALLELUIA Lk 2:10-11
A holy day has dawned upon us.
Come, you nations, and adore the Lord.
For today a great light has come upon the earth..
GOSPEL (Long Form) Jn 1:1-18
In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came to be through him,
and without him nothing came to be.
What came to be through him was life,
and this life was the light of the human race;
the light shines in the darkness,
and the darkness has not overcome it.
A man named John was sent from God.
He came for testimony, to testify to the light,
so that all might believe through him.
He was not the light,
but came to testify to the light.
The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.
He was in the world,
and the world came to be through him,
but the world did not know him.
He came to what was his own,
but his own people did not accept him.
But to those who did accept him
he gave power to become children of God,
to those who believe in his name,
who were born not by natural generation
nor by human choice nor by a man’s decision
but of God.
And the Word became flesh
and made his dwelling among us,
and we saw his glory,
the glory as of the Father’s only Son,
full of grace and truth.
John testified to him and cried out, saying,
“This was he of whom I said,
‘The one who is coming after me ranks ahead of me
because he existed before me.’”
From his fullness we have all received,
grace in place of grace,
because while the law was given through Moses,
grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
No one has ever seen God.
The only Son, God, who is at the Father’s side,
has revealed him.
PRAYER OVER THE OFFERINGS
Make acceptable, O Lord, our oblation on this solemn day,
when you manifested the reconciliation
that makes us wholly pleasing in your sight
and inaugurated for us the fullness of divine worship.
Through Christ our Lord.
PREFACE OF THE NATIVITY
It is truly right and just,
our duty and our salvation,
always and everywhere to give you thanks,
Lord, holy Father,
almighty and eternal God,
through Christ our Lord.
For through him the holy exchange that restores our life
has shone forth today in splendour:
when our frailty is assumed by your word
not only does human mortality receive unending honour
but by this wondrous union we, too, are made eternal.
And so, in company with the choirs of Angels,
we praise you, and with joy we proclaim:
Holy, Holy, Holy...
COMMUNICANTES
Celebrating the most sacred night (day)
on which blessed Mary the immaculate Virgin
brought forth the Savior for this world,
and in communion with those whose memory we venerate,
especially the glorious ever-Virgin Mary,
Mother of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ,
COMMUNION ANTIPHON Cf. Ps 98 (97): 3
All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.
PRAYER AFTER COMMUNION
Grant, O merciful God,
that, just as the Savior of the world, born this day,
is the author of divine generation for us,
so he may be the giver even of immortality.
Who lives and reigns for ever and ever.
SOLEMN BLESSING
May the God of infinite goodness,
who by the Incarnation of his Son has driven darkness from the world
and by that glorious Birth has illumined this most holy night (day),
drive far from you the darkness of vice
and illumine your hearts with the light of virtue.
R. Amen.
May God, who willed that the great joy
of his Son’s saving Birth
be announced to shepherds by the Angel,
fill your minds with the gladness he gives
and make you heralds of his Gospel.
R. Amen.
And may God, who by the Incarnation
brought together the earthly and heavenly realm,
fill you with the gift of his peace and favor
and make you sharers with the Church in heaven.
R. Amen.
And may the blessing of almighty God,
the Father, and the Son, †and the Holy Spirit,
come down on you and remain with you for ever.
R. Amen.
Yeah, I know EXACTLY what the true meaning of Christmas is.
Not according to this drivel. Try reading God's Word. Try seeing the truth of the Gospel as it is; not as some man-made, man-lead "church" claims it is.
I can't begin to recall how many RCs have stated that the Mass is a sacrifice...
Then you state:
What's false is clearly your understanding if you think anyone could sacrifice Jesus over and over again. No one could and no one wants to either. So which is it that you are getting wrong there? Are you wrong about someone being able to sacrifice Jesus over and over again or are you wrong on believing Catholics sacrifice Jesus over and over again? It has to be one or the other OR BOTH according to your own words. The correct answer is - BOTH - since both are impossible.
but wait -- let's see what catholic.com says...
"The Eucharist is a true sacrifice, not just a commemorative meal, as "Bible Christians" insist."
emphasis mine
That's the first sentence. Kinda says it all, no? So are you right or is catholic.com right? Seems we have a little issue here. So when you say:
No words you use can change the facts.
It appears my words may not be the ones in question here, Vlad ol' boy. Looks like you need to figure out what the Roman Catholic Church/Cult ACTUALLY says.
So, let's do that.... the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
"1323 "At the Last Supper, on the night he was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice of his Body and Blood. This he did in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until he should come again, and so to entrust to his beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of his death and resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a Paschal banquet 'in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.'"
But wait... there's more!
"1365 Because it is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: "This is my body which is given for you" and "This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood." In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he "poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.""
And....
"1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit: [Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.""
Hmmm. What was that word? Oh yes. SACRIFICE. Which honestly, Christ didn't institute a continuing sacrifice; he did institute the Lord's Supper. So it looks like Rome says it's a sacrifice as well. And funny -- 1366 talks out of both sides of Rome's mouth -- it calls Christ's crucifixion "he was to accomplish once and for all", and yet it is "re-presented" -- re-done. At EVERY Mass.
So. Rome or you? Who's right?
Sounds like someone's "poorly catechized...."
Once again: hoist on your own petard. Or impaled on your own stake. Whichever you like.
Take care.
Hoss
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.