Posted on 05/22/2020 5:13:40 PM PDT by ebb tide
Ping
I am convinced we have had one. November 8, 2016.
imho, I think we are still in the early-church years, and have thousands of years to go.
My personal view is that what we’re seeing now is indeed a divine “thumbs down” on this deplorable pontificate. Francis and his sycophants in and out of the Vatican, of course, don’t see it that way and will likely never repent of their misguided ways. Those who think that this is NOT a chastisement, my response would be, “In most of the world whole Church is shut down. If that doesn’t look like a chastisement to you, what *would* look like one?”
Right there is the error.
The only way to have salvation is through faith in Christ.
Paul warned the Galatians about listening to a false gospel.
Roman Catholics would do well to listen to Paul and reject this idolatrous false teaching.
*****
6I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;
7which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
8But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
9As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
Galatians 1:6-9 NASB
Shepherds who deny God sends chastisement are ‘immersed in atheism’: Catholic historian
I like your thinking Coleus.
What happened then? I am skeptical about divine interventions
The false message of the apparition is clear when one does this.
Thanks for not giving in to the defeatism I see on so many of these threads.
I recently read a couple histories of the papacy, going back all the way to the earliest years of the church.
My two takeaways:
1.) There have been good popes and bad popes — some very bad indeed.
2.) The church has endured.
So says the same pope who calls for obedience to the police state in keeping Catholics out of their churches when they wish to give glory to God.
The thousand year reign has already happened.
From the Emperor Constantine until the French Revolution. Over a thousand years of the reign of Christ.
Yes false message, false Church... I get it..... That's been going for 2000 years against Christ's Church.
No...it's been going on since the apparition first showed up.
Which scripture should one compare it to that doesn't contradict Paul?
Already gave you one.
The problem with the apparitions is it says some truth...but then it mixes in the false teaching.
You said Catholics should heed the writings of St. Paul (albeit some of his letters seem to contradict Christ and the Apostles) and indeed we do listen to Paul at every Mass.
Well, then you're not listening or whoever is explaining the passages is doing a poor job. Paul doesn't contradict Christ nor does Christ contradict Paul. The issue is then that of the messenger or the message.
We understand Paul encourages ALL OF US to give of ourselves to save souls through prayer, intercession and supplication. Yes that's in the scriptures.
Yes. His letters were written to people here on earth.
Mary was/is no different. She gave her immaculate heart to God- AND ALL OF US- as she is BLESSED FOR ALL AGES...
Well, no. Mary wrote no letters. She didn't lead the Apostles. She played very little role in the spreading of the Gospel as we read in Acts.
And you repeat the error. Her heart, while no doubt that of a believer, was not immaculate for she was a sinner like the rest of every created being on the planet.
Mary did not give her heart to us nor was she given to the church as some in Rome claim. She was given specifically to John. No one else.
Being of Grace and doing God's will in being the "Mother of our Lord"- she would be absolutely and forever involved in saving souls as well. That is her battle in John's Revelation- whom Christ gave John and all of us in his hour of excruciating suffering for us.
Again more error. It is not her battle. If you want to hold up Revelation 12:1-2 you're gonna contradict a great deal of RC teaching on the Immaculate Conception.
As noted earlier....she was only given to John. The text is crystal clear.
ALL Catholics learn and know that Christ is the ONLY redeemer , the ONLY hope and way we can have for salvation to be offered to us.
Yet Rome calls Mary the Co-Redemptrix.
And some Roman Catholic writers say one has to go through Mary for salvation. Others say salvation is quicker if one calls upon Mary.
All of that contradicts Scripture and shows a low regard for the Father and the Son and the promises made in Scripture.
For anyone to conflate or confuse this dogma - Catholic or Non- is simply incorrect. To imply someone denies this redemptive salvation through Christ alone -through adoration of Mary- who's soul MAGNIFIES The Lord, is not being honest.
And you continue to repeat error. There is NO adoration of Mary that is necessary. None is required. Again, Scripture is crystal clear on this.
Catholics understand when Mary was at Cana.... she tells us, ready or not....."Do whatever he (Jesus) tells you" In nothing less than subordinate Love she has for us.....
This is the sin of ambition that some ECFs say Mary committed.
St. Chrysostom (349-407) “accuses her of ambition, and of putting herself forward unduly when she sought to speak to Jesus at Capernaum.” Chrysostom is recognized as a Doctor of the Church.
Irenaeus (130-202) suggests Mary had “untimely haste” at the wedding of Cana.
::Sigh::
Looks like someone thinks the story of Adam and Eve (which says death entered the world only after Adam sinned) is a fairy tale.
Did you know that it's scientifically impossible for a human virgin to give birth without a sperm? If you reject that claim of uniformitarian science, then you lose all right to object to the first eleven chapters of Genesis.
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.