Posts for: Doc110
Jun 25, 2015 12:53:31 #
(Main)
Here is another balanced article, on the SCOTUS decision
http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/obamacare-subsidies-upheld-by-supreme-court/
http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/obamacare-subsidies-upheld-by-supreme-court/
Jun 25, 2015 12:48:00 #
(Main)
It's all over the Drudge report, http://www.drudgereport.com
Try going to this website for a balanced comment and understanding in plain english. http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/06/court-backs-obama-administration-on-health-care-subsidies-in-plain-english/
The two other sites at the Supreme Court is legal gobble-gook. Unless your a lawyer.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-114_qol1.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/14-114_1bo2.pdf
Court backs Obama administration on health-care subsidies: In Plain English
Since it was enacted in 2010, Republicans in Congress have v**ed dozens of times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obamas signature legislative achievement. With no success on the legislative front, opponents of the ACA have tried their luck in the courts, but that avenue hasnt proven any more fruitful. Three years ago, the Court upheld the Acts individual mandate, which compels everyone to buy health insurance or pay a penalty, against a challenge based on the argument that Congress lacked the power to impose such a requirement. And today the Court turned back a challenge to the subsidies that many people receive to pay for their health insurance, ending a case that had the potential to seriously undermine the ACA, if not dismantle it altogether. Lets talk about todays decision in King v. Burwell in Plain English.
To understand whats going on in this case and why todays decision matters, it may be useful to start with a little bit of background about the Affordable Care Act more generally. There are three key features to the law. The first is whats known as the non-discrimination rule: health insurance companies must sell insurance to everyone, even people who are currently sick or have a history of chronic illnesses, at a reasonable price.
The second is the individual mandate, which requires everyone to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty. This provision ensures that there are enough healthy people in the insurance pool to balance out the sick people: if healthy people arent required to buy health insurance, the thinking goes, but they know (because of the non-discrimination rule) that they can do so at any time, they will wait and only buy insurance if they get sick.
The subsidies are the third pillar of the system created by the ACA. Many people get health insurance through their employers, but the people who dont because they are self-employed or unemployed, for example need some way to buy it. So the ACA provides for the creation of an online marketplace, known as an exchange, in each state. The drafters of the ACA had originally expected each state to set up its own exchange, but after many states declined to do so, the federal government (as authorized by another provision of the ACA) stepped in to create them instead. And to ensure that everyone can afford the health insurance that they are now required to buy, the ACA also provides for subsidies for people who buy their health insurance through an exchange. Here is the heart of the dispute: one provision of the ACA indicates that subsidies are only available to people who purchase their health insurance on an exchange established by the State. The plaintiffs in the case argued that this means that subsidies are not available to the millions of people who purchased their health insurance on an exchange that was created by the federal government, because the federal government is not a State.
Today, by a v**e of six to three, the Court agreed with the Obama administration that the subsidies are available for everyone who bought health insurance through an exchange, no matter whether that exchange was created by a state or the federal government.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the Courts opinion, which Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan all joined. The Court acknowledged that, at first blush, the phrase established by the State does not appear to include the federal government. After all, the ACA specifically defines State as each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia. But other parts of the law, the Court explained, suggest that the meaning of the phrase established by the State is not so clear. For example, one provision that defines who is qualified to purchase insurance on an exchange refers to an individual who resides in the State that established the Exchange which on the plaintiffs reading would mean that no one would be qualified to buy health insurance on exchanges established by the federal government.
And if the phrase established by the State is in fact not clear, the Court continued, then the next step is to look at the Affordable Care Act more broadly to determine what Congress meant by the phrase. And when you do that, the Court reasoned, it becomes apparent that Congress actually intended for the subsidies to be available to everyone who buys health insurance on an exchange, no matter who created it. If the subsidies werent available in the states with federal exchanges, the Court explained, the insurance markets in those states simply wouldnt work properly: without the subsidies, almost all of the people who purchased insurance on the exchanges would no longer be required to purchase insurance because it would be too expensive. This would create a death spiral, in which insurance premiums would go up and enrollment would go down. It is implausible, the Court concluded, that Congress meant the Act to operate in this manner.
Justice Antonin Scalia dissented, in an opinion joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito that began by describing the majoritys conclusion as quite absurd. The tone only gets even more strident from there, with Scalia lamenting that words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by the State is established by the State. And he concludes by complaining that the majoritys opinion as it did three years ago in upholding the individual mandate changes the usual rules of statutory interpretation for the sake of the Affordable Care Act. Perhaps, he suggested, We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.
A ruling for the challengers today could have had effects far beyond the insurance markets and the wallets of people who would no longer receive subsidies: it almost certainly would have carried over into both the political arena as the people who could no longer afford health insurance directed their frustration at elected officials and the stock market. But by siding with the Obama administration, the Court effectively maintains the status quo, with the subsidies continuing to flow to low- and moderate-income Americans and, more generally, all three key provisions of the ACA remaining intact. Opponents of the ACA will have to re-focus their efforts to repeal the Act on retaining Republican control of Congress and retaking the White House from Democrats in 2016.
And if you are tired of hearing about the Supreme Court and the Affordable Care Act, I have bad news for you: the Acts requirement that businesses provide their female employees with health insurance that includes access to birth control could be back before the Justices again soon, this time on a challenge by non-profit religious groups who believe that the rule violates their religious beliefs. If it is, well be back to report on it in Plain English.
Try going to this website for a balanced comment and understanding in plain english. http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/06/court-backs-obama-administration-on-health-care-subsidies-in-plain-english/
The two other sites at the Supreme Court is legal gobble-gook. Unless your a lawyer.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-114_qol1.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/14-114_1bo2.pdf
Court backs Obama administration on health-care subsidies: In Plain English
Since it was enacted in 2010, Republicans in Congress have v**ed dozens of times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obamas signature legislative achievement. With no success on the legislative front, opponents of the ACA have tried their luck in the courts, but that avenue hasnt proven any more fruitful. Three years ago, the Court upheld the Acts individual mandate, which compels everyone to buy health insurance or pay a penalty, against a challenge based on the argument that Congress lacked the power to impose such a requirement. And today the Court turned back a challenge to the subsidies that many people receive to pay for their health insurance, ending a case that had the potential to seriously undermine the ACA, if not dismantle it altogether. Lets talk about todays decision in King v. Burwell in Plain English.
To understand whats going on in this case and why todays decision matters, it may be useful to start with a little bit of background about the Affordable Care Act more generally. There are three key features to the law. The first is whats known as the non-discrimination rule: health insurance companies must sell insurance to everyone, even people who are currently sick or have a history of chronic illnesses, at a reasonable price.
The second is the individual mandate, which requires everyone to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty. This provision ensures that there are enough healthy people in the insurance pool to balance out the sick people: if healthy people arent required to buy health insurance, the thinking goes, but they know (because of the non-discrimination rule) that they can do so at any time, they will wait and only buy insurance if they get sick.
The subsidies are the third pillar of the system created by the ACA. Many people get health insurance through their employers, but the people who dont because they are self-employed or unemployed, for example need some way to buy it. So the ACA provides for the creation of an online marketplace, known as an exchange, in each state. The drafters of the ACA had originally expected each state to set up its own exchange, but after many states declined to do so, the federal government (as authorized by another provision of the ACA) stepped in to create them instead. And to ensure that everyone can afford the health insurance that they are now required to buy, the ACA also provides for subsidies for people who buy their health insurance through an exchange. Here is the heart of the dispute: one provision of the ACA indicates that subsidies are only available to people who purchase their health insurance on an exchange established by the State. The plaintiffs in the case argued that this means that subsidies are not available to the millions of people who purchased their health insurance on an exchange that was created by the federal government, because the federal government is not a State.
Today, by a v**e of six to three, the Court agreed with the Obama administration that the subsidies are available for everyone who bought health insurance through an exchange, no matter whether that exchange was created by a state or the federal government.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the Courts opinion, which Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan all joined. The Court acknowledged that, at first blush, the phrase established by the State does not appear to include the federal government. After all, the ACA specifically defines State as each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia. But other parts of the law, the Court explained, suggest that the meaning of the phrase established by the State is not so clear. For example, one provision that defines who is qualified to purchase insurance on an exchange refers to an individual who resides in the State that established the Exchange which on the plaintiffs reading would mean that no one would be qualified to buy health insurance on exchanges established by the federal government.
And if the phrase established by the State is in fact not clear, the Court continued, then the next step is to look at the Affordable Care Act more broadly to determine what Congress meant by the phrase. And when you do that, the Court reasoned, it becomes apparent that Congress actually intended for the subsidies to be available to everyone who buys health insurance on an exchange, no matter who created it. If the subsidies werent available in the states with federal exchanges, the Court explained, the insurance markets in those states simply wouldnt work properly: without the subsidies, almost all of the people who purchased insurance on the exchanges would no longer be required to purchase insurance because it would be too expensive. This would create a death spiral, in which insurance premiums would go up and enrollment would go down. It is implausible, the Court concluded, that Congress meant the Act to operate in this manner.
Justice Antonin Scalia dissented, in an opinion joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito that began by describing the majoritys conclusion as quite absurd. The tone only gets even more strident from there, with Scalia lamenting that words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by the State is established by the State. And he concludes by complaining that the majoritys opinion as it did three years ago in upholding the individual mandate changes the usual rules of statutory interpretation for the sake of the Affordable Care Act. Perhaps, he suggested, We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.
A ruling for the challengers today could have had effects far beyond the insurance markets and the wallets of people who would no longer receive subsidies: it almost certainly would have carried over into both the political arena as the people who could no longer afford health insurance directed their frustration at elected officials and the stock market. But by siding with the Obama administration, the Court effectively maintains the status quo, with the subsidies continuing to flow to low- and moderate-income Americans and, more generally, all three key provisions of the ACA remaining intact. Opponents of the ACA will have to re-focus their efforts to repeal the Act on retaining Republican control of Congress and retaking the White House from Democrats in 2016.
And if you are tired of hearing about the Supreme Court and the Affordable Care Act, I have bad news for you: the Acts requirement that businesses provide their female employees with health insurance that includes access to birth control could be back before the Justices again soon, this time on a challenge by non-profit religious groups who believe that the rule violates their religious beliefs. If it is, well be back to report on it in Plain English.
Jun 25, 2015 12:18:55 #
(Main)
Quote:
Kevyn, 22% of the US population or nearly seventy ... (show quote)
Kevyn, If you had read the actual words Pope Francis said and my earlier post threads comments, you would not be commenting me on this post tread topic. Since you can't put 2 + 2 together. Kevyn Did you even read what was actually said in Pope Francis's address ?
TURIN, Italy (Reuters) - People who manufacture weapons or invest in weapons industries are hypocrites if they call themselves Christian, Pope Francis said on Sunday. The Pontiff blasts Christians who invest in defence companies, saying "duplicity is the currency of today".... they say one thing and do another."
Francis issued his toughest condemnation to date of the weapons industry at a rally of thousands of young people at the end of the first day of his trip to the Italian city of Turin.
"If you trust only men you have lost," he told the young people in a, talk about war, trust and politics after putting aside his prepared address.
"It makes me think of ... people, managers, businessmen who call themselves Christian and they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit a distrust, doesn't it?" he said to applause.
Francis reiterated his view that conflicts in the world today are tantamount to "a Third World War in segments".
I personally believe in home weapon ownership, as a American Catholic. Pope Francs did not make a encyclical or papal address to be mandatory about personal weapons ownership, he only made a comment on Arms manufacturers.
Pope Francis, never said that American Catholic or any Catholic in the world should turn in their weapons, or renounce weapon ownership. Read his comments again, on Arm's manufactures.
The News-Media and yourself, have taken his words out of context, to what he actually said. The Pope never said "You're not Christian if you own a gun!
This was this the Papal opinion and message ? Pope Francis can make any opinion he wants. Does it make it right ? In his opinion on secular and humanism opinions, he has opened him self to public criticism and ridicule.
Hence the post-article e.g, The OPP Post-Thread: Pope says, you're not Christian if you own a gun! - I say WTF T*****r?
In my personal opinion, Pope Francis should have refrain giving his opinion on these global issues, and stick what he understands best, which is Catholic spiritual teaching and Spiritual inspiration to Catholics. But that's my opinion.
1.What on earth does it have to do with you ?
Kevyn, There is nothing in Catholic church teaching, or biblical references that say's I have to be a complete pacifist, when it comes to defending one's self, defending others, following the laws of United States Constitution, or preventing oneself from joining the US military and or going to war. As an American Catholic you have freedom to choose or be a pacifist, if that's you're choice.
I cite the American Baltimore-catechism, which gives a good explanation for American Catholics, as their role in United State society, which is approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Vatican.
www.usccb.org, www.catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson19.html
245. What are the duties of a citizen toward his country ?
A citizen must love his country, be sincerely interested in its welfare, and respect and obey its lawful authority.
246. How does a citizen show a sincere interest in his country's welfare ?
A citizen shows a sincere interest in his country's welfare by v****g honestly and without selfish motives, by paying just taxes, and by defending his country's rights when necessary.
247. Why must we respect and obey the lawful authority of our country ?
We must respect and obey the lawful authority of our country because it comes from God, the Source of all authority.
248. Why are we obliged to take an active part in works of good citizenship ?
We are obliged to take an active part in works of good citizenship because right reason requires citizens to work together for the public welfare of the country.
249. What are the chief duties of those who hold public office ?
The chief duties of those who hold public office are to be just to all in exercising their authority and to promote the general welfare.
Biblical reference, [Wisdom 6:3-4] Give ear, you that rule the people, and that please yourselves in multitudes of nations; for power is given you by the Lord, and strength by the most High, who will examine your works, and search out your thoughts.
250. What does the fourth commandment forbid ?
The fourth commandment forbids disrespect, unkindness, and disobedience to our parents and lawful superiors.
251. What is the fifth commandment of God ?
Biblical reference, [Exodus 20:13] Thou shalt not k**l.
252. What are we commanded by the fifth commandment ?
By the fifth commandment we are commanded to take proper care of our own spiritual and bodily well-being and that of our neighbor.
253. What does the fifth commandment forbid ?
The fifth commandment forbids murder and suicide, and also fighting, anger, hatred, revenge, drunkenness, reckless driving, and bad example.
Biblical reference, [I John 3:15] Everyone who h**es his brother is a murderer. And you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
2. If you are Catholic and do not agree with the teachings of the church, leave the church no one is forcing you to stay.
You're a loud mouth and pretty offensive also, on telling what American Catholics should do with their personal lives and spiritual lives. On the other hand you don't know what your talking about on many issues, e.g., Weapon's, A******n and c*****e c****e, as to what American Catholic believe in and or practice.
This is not a mandatory teaching from Pope Francis, and or is Pope Francis forcing me to chose and give up my Catholic faith and or on "Weapon ownership," it was a comment on Arms manufacturers. Duh.
3.As far as the message of the church be it on guns, c*****e c****e or birth control it is very clearly protected in the first amendment without a qualifier like the "well regulated m*****a" clause in the second amendment.
There is no conflict with my Catholic American faith on these issues. I reject A******n, with the exception of rape, incest and the health of the mother, and I have no problems with any of the Constitutional Amendments, e.g., freedom of speech and M*****a's or Weapon Ownership.
As far as G****l w*****g I disagree with Pope Francis's message. The scientific data is not conclusive, that Greenhouse gases e.g., Carbon is the cause. More likely it is the Sun, that is the prime cause of G****l W*****g and Cooling.
Am I going to leave my Catholic faith because I disagree with Pope Francis's opinion on G****l W*****g. I don't think so.
4. The Pope is on firm ground both in Rome and in the US. American Catholics have an easy choice they can give up their arms or burn in hell for eternity.
Kevyn who made you the OPP "GOD or POPE," spokesperson to tell American Christians Catholics to give up their weapons and that they can go burn in Hell ?
Kevyn, Pope Francis message and comment was on, Arms manufacturers. Duh.
As far as I can see your point and comments are just that. "Null and Void." You are pretty crude and arrogant in your opinions.
You lump you're opinions all together, have limited factual understanding as to your objectivity in this post thread and do not understand the American Catholic Spiritual relationship to the Holy See, the Vatican and the Pope's ecumenical encyclical or papal address to worldwide Christian Catholics.
Did you even read what was actually said in Pope Francis's address ?
Or do you comment for the sake of commenting ?
Jun 25, 2015 11:14:26 #
(Main)
Supreme Court Validates Obamas Power Grab
http://www.cato.org/blog/supreme-court-validates-obamas-power-grab
Today the Supreme Court allowed itself to be intimidated. Afraid that ObamaCare as written would throw the sickest patients out of their health plans a second time, the Court rewrote ObamaCare to save itagain. In doing so, the Court has sent a dangerous message to future administrations: If you are going to violate the law, make sure you go big.
The Court today validated President Obamas massive power grab, allowing him to tax, borrow, and spend $700 billion that no Congress ever authorized. This establishes a precedent that could let any president modify, amend, or suspend any enacted law at his or her whim.
ObamaCare will continue to disrupt coverage for sick Americans until Congress repeals it and replaces it with reforms that make health care better, more affordable, and more secure. Despite todays ruling, ObamaCare remains unpopular with the American public and the battle to set in place a health care system that works for all Americans is far from over.
http://www.cato.org/blog/supreme-court-validates-obamas-power-grab
Today the Supreme Court allowed itself to be intimidated. Afraid that ObamaCare as written would throw the sickest patients out of their health plans a second time, the Court rewrote ObamaCare to save itagain. In doing so, the Court has sent a dangerous message to future administrations: If you are going to violate the law, make sure you go big.
The Court today validated President Obamas massive power grab, allowing him to tax, borrow, and spend $700 billion that no Congress ever authorized. This establishes a precedent that could let any president modify, amend, or suspend any enacted law at his or her whim.
ObamaCare will continue to disrupt coverage for sick Americans until Congress repeals it and replaces it with reforms that make health care better, more affordable, and more secure. Despite todays ruling, ObamaCare remains unpopular with the American public and the battle to set in place a health care system that works for all Americans is far from over.
Jun 25, 2015 01:42:21 #
(Main)
son of witless, I don't know how many will read something that long.
My intent, son of witless, was to reply to rebob14, to the allegations that Catholics are Christian and to him alone. Up front, in my first sentence, I did apologize, from the beginning that my reply would would be long and factual.
Tell me how would you have responded differently ?
Remember I'm not you, son of witless.
What does one do, when you know that the allegations are totally inaccurate, blatantly false and are offensive allegations as a Christian Catholic ?
Time and time again, how many OPP commenters, do not check their facts and make blanket false statements that are offensive to others ? How many OPP commenters, should hide their heads in shame, when they have posted inaccurate offensive statements ? And or have been corrected by OPP commenters on inaccurate and misleading offensive comments and or website threads or posted articles.
Many OPP readers don't make comments, but they may perpetuate that inaccurate offensive lie, in the future, that my friend is what bigotry is !
Or better yet. How many times do OPP commenters, keep responding with the same old lie's and offensive, perpetuated inaccurate facts in their comments ?
I do believe, that this was the best way to put this issue to rest that, "Catholics are Christian." At the end of my thread-post. I replied, to rebob14, "So be it, to your opinion. I have provided you a historical and spiritual balance of Catholic Christianity."
So, are Catholics Christian? Of course Catholics are Christian.
Thats the problem on the OPP post articles. We expect our opinions to be short one-liners and fire back at one another. This is a continued problematic Christian issue, which needed a greater, gentler reply on this post threads.
Can you tell me how many thread comments get this type of reply ? On many scientific topics like G****l w*****g and some others. Why not tackle this comment with a reply like I gave to rebob14 ?
I believe, that this was my only option. How to reply in a Christian thoughtful manner, and put an end of blatant, inaccurate offensive discussion, as rebob14 so eloquently stated, that "Catholics are not Christians."
Instead of getting in a shouting match of stupidly idea's and thoughts. I felt that it was prudent to proceed in this rebuttal style.
Complex issues like rebob14 accusations, need a factual, well thought out reply, to rebut, rebob14 ignorant, unsubstantiated statements. Did achieve the desired effect, that Catholics are Christians ?
"From this day, you have need to call no man father; You have one father, who is in heaven"...........The "rock" upon which the church would be built was the revelation god gave Peter, NOT to Peter himself.
This deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been. To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism!
There was a lot to counter in rebob14 ignorant thought-less statements. I also knew, that I had to provide historical, biblical references and some anecdotal thoughtful replies, to his negative contentious offensive statements.
My question to you son of witless. Did my reply have the desired effect and outcome ?
I'll let you ponder and answer that question yourself ?
My other question to you is, did you learn anything about Catholics and the general public misconception about Catholics, that Catholic are Christians ?
So far we haven't heard from rebob14, and haven't heard from others on the thread-post, to suggest that Catholics are not Christians. Have we ?
Here is a prayer, that I ask you to consider saying this prayer, "Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians become a reality, in Your way. We have absolute confidence that you can bring your people together, we give you absolute permission to move. Amen
My intent, son of witless, was to reply to rebob14, to the allegations that Catholics are Christian and to him alone. Up front, in my first sentence, I did apologize, from the beginning that my reply would would be long and factual.
Tell me how would you have responded differently ?
Remember I'm not you, son of witless.
What does one do, when you know that the allegations are totally inaccurate, blatantly false and are offensive allegations as a Christian Catholic ?
Time and time again, how many OPP commenters, do not check their facts and make blanket false statements that are offensive to others ? How many OPP commenters, should hide their heads in shame, when they have posted inaccurate offensive statements ? And or have been corrected by OPP commenters on inaccurate and misleading offensive comments and or website threads or posted articles.
Many OPP readers don't make comments, but they may perpetuate that inaccurate offensive lie, in the future, that my friend is what bigotry is !
Or better yet. How many times do OPP commenters, keep responding with the same old lie's and offensive, perpetuated inaccurate facts in their comments ?
I do believe, that this was the best way to put this issue to rest that, "Catholics are Christian." At the end of my thread-post. I replied, to rebob14, "So be it, to your opinion. I have provided you a historical and spiritual balance of Catholic Christianity."
So, are Catholics Christian? Of course Catholics are Christian.
Thats the problem on the OPP post articles. We expect our opinions to be short one-liners and fire back at one another. This is a continued problematic Christian issue, which needed a greater, gentler reply on this post threads.
Can you tell me how many thread comments get this type of reply ? On many scientific topics like G****l w*****g and some others. Why not tackle this comment with a reply like I gave to rebob14 ?
I believe, that this was my only option. How to reply in a Christian thoughtful manner, and put an end of blatant, inaccurate offensive discussion, as rebob14 so eloquently stated, that "Catholics are not Christians."
Instead of getting in a shouting match of stupidly idea's and thoughts. I felt that it was prudent to proceed in this rebuttal style.
Complex issues like rebob14 accusations, need a factual, well thought out reply, to rebut, rebob14 ignorant, unsubstantiated statements. Did achieve the desired effect, that Catholics are Christians ?
"From this day, you have need to call no man father; You have one father, who is in heaven"...........The "rock" upon which the church would be built was the revelation god gave Peter, NOT to Peter himself.
This deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been. To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism!
There was a lot to counter in rebob14 ignorant thought-less statements. I also knew, that I had to provide historical, biblical references and some anecdotal thoughtful replies, to his negative contentious offensive statements.
My question to you son of witless. Did my reply have the desired effect and outcome ?
I'll let you ponder and answer that question yourself ?
My other question to you is, did you learn anything about Catholics and the general public misconception about Catholics, that Catholic are Christians ?
So far we haven't heard from rebob14, and haven't heard from others on the thread-post, to suggest that Catholics are not Christians. Have we ?
Here is a prayer, that I ask you to consider saying this prayer, "Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians become a reality, in Your way. We have absolute confidence that you can bring your people together, we give you absolute permission to move. Amen
Jun 24, 2015 23:18:04 #
Why Golf is better than Sex ...!!!
David Letterman's Top 10 Reasons Why Golf Is Better Than Sex ...
#10 ... A below par performance is considered damn good.
#09 ... You can stop in the middle and have a cheeseburger and a couple of beers.
#08 ... It's much easier to find the sweet spot.
#07 ... Foursomes are encouraged.
#06 ... You can still make money doing it as a senior.
#05 ... Three times a day is possible.
#04 ... Your partner doesn't hire a lawyer if you play with someone else.
#03 ... If you live in Florida , you can do it almost every day.
#02... You don't have to cuddle with your partner when you're finished.
And the NUMBER ONE reason why golf is better than sex ......
#01 ... When your equipment gets old you can replace it!
David Letterman's Top 10 Reasons Why Golf Is Better Than Sex ...
#10 ... A below par performance is considered damn good.
#09 ... You can stop in the middle and have a cheeseburger and a couple of beers.
#08 ... It's much easier to find the sweet spot.
#07 ... Foursomes are encouraged.
#06 ... You can still make money doing it as a senior.
#05 ... Three times a day is possible.
#04 ... Your partner doesn't hire a lawyer if you play with someone else.
#03 ... If you live in Florida , you can do it almost every day.
#02... You don't have to cuddle with your partner when you're finished.
And the NUMBER ONE reason why golf is better than sex ......
#01 ... When your equipment gets old you can replace it!
Jun 24, 2015 01:25:32 #
(Main)
Gener wrote:
As far as Catholics go, some are Christian, and so... (show quote)
I agree with you most hardly, true Christians come and go, and shopping cart Christians come and go. But it all comes down to, do we follow and believe in our faith ? Thats between God, the Priest, you and your last breath we take...
I don't get caught up with the RC problems. I keep it humbly local, with my church and family.
There is nothing under the stars that has not happened before, a strange idiom, Ecclesiastes 1:9 That which has been, is that which will be, And that which has been done, is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.
All religions, social and political groups always want power and control over others, this is nothing new. It's because of the new media and the internet that we are now being exposed to. I fully embrace science, and enjoy all of the new technologies that are out there, I pray it is for good, not evil against humanity.
As far as the subject to torture, and then death, those reforms in the RC Church are over. Did any religion or Government do anything more or less.
It's man's inhumanity against humanity that have created these woe's.
But we are seeing a resurgence in the Muslim faith, as the wheel of time spin's, these human suffering will happen.
As far as the new observatories there is another one recently been built by the EU in Chile that is very impressive. We shall see what happens, keep your eyes wide open for knowledge and learn.
God Bless
Jun 24, 2015 00:42:17 #
(Main)
But do you still have your faith in God ? I still remain stead fast in my faith.
I read a lot, and came from a strict Irish Catholic family background, and have taught adult classes, RICA and children Sunday school. I really enjoy history, and religion learning new facts all the time and relating these historical facts to all religions and did a little soul searching when I was younger.
But returned always back to my Christian Catholic roots. Maybe I should have been a priest, but that was not my calling in life. I've only read the Bible from cover to cover, six or more times, and I learn something new every time. It's the Holy spirit, reaching out to each and every one's soul.
I don't get to excited, most people are misinformed, and just repeat what others spout off . They just fail to do the research and learn the tenants of their Faith accurately and did not do the analysis to understand more in a deeper spiritual way.
Check out these websites the first one is you have 2,000 year library
at your fingertips. http://w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html
The other one is a free audio books By Chuck Misstler and biblical prophesy very interesting stuff. Re-live Genesis all over again with a good analytical explanation and biblical and jewish word references. Re-learn the judges and the prophets and their amazing predictions and how the old and new testaments relate to one another.
You'll learn a lot. It's all about learning every day. http://www.allaboutgod.com/chuck-missler.htm
Their have always been good and poor Popes, Your Faith is God is the most encouraging thing in our lives.
Remain faithful, we are not apart of this world or called to be of this world, but are called to be a sours of illumination in this dark hedonistic world.
I read a lot, and came from a strict Irish Catholic family background, and have taught adult classes, RICA and children Sunday school. I really enjoy history, and religion learning new facts all the time and relating these historical facts to all religions and did a little soul searching when I was younger.
But returned always back to my Christian Catholic roots. Maybe I should have been a priest, but that was not my calling in life. I've only read the Bible from cover to cover, six or more times, and I learn something new every time. It's the Holy spirit, reaching out to each and every one's soul.
I don't get to excited, most people are misinformed, and just repeat what others spout off . They just fail to do the research and learn the tenants of their Faith accurately and did not do the analysis to understand more in a deeper spiritual way.
Check out these websites the first one is you have 2,000 year library
at your fingertips. http://w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html
The other one is a free audio books By Chuck Misstler and biblical prophesy very interesting stuff. Re-live Genesis all over again with a good analytical explanation and biblical and jewish word references. Re-learn the judges and the prophets and their amazing predictions and how the old and new testaments relate to one another.
You'll learn a lot. It's all about learning every day. http://www.allaboutgod.com/chuck-missler.htm
Their have always been good and poor Popes, Your Faith is God is the most encouraging thing in our lives.
Remain faithful, we are not apart of this world or called to be of this world, but are called to be a sours of illumination in this dark hedonistic world.
Jun 24, 2015 00:11:21 #
(Main)
THE FUNNIEST GUIDE TO POLITICALLY CORRECT BEHAVIOR EVER!
Where do they come-up with this compost !
The University of California published a guide to microaggressions. If you dont know what that is, microaggressions are ordinary, unoffensive comments and actions that offend feminists and minority activists with chips on their shoulders.
Because this is such a big problem in the minds of liberals, UC has published an unintentionally hysterical guide, to microaggressive behavior. What follows is a list of microaggresive behaviors, exactly as written, and then my own interpretation of what would not be microaggressive alternatives:
Microaggressive: Saying youre not a r****t because you have Black friends.
Not Microaggressive: Saying youre a not a r****t because you have black friends who are also r****t.
Microaggressive: To compliment an Asian person on his math abilities.
Not Microaggressive: To compliment an Asian person on his reading abilities.
Microaggressive: America is a melting pot or There is only one race, the human race.
Not Microaggressive: You are as different from me as I am from an amoeba.
Microaggressive: As a woman, I know what youre going through being a minority.
Not Microaggressive: As a minority, I know what youre going through being a woman.
Microaggressive: I believe the most qualified person should get the job. (Really this is actually listed as a microaggression!)
Not Microaggressive: I believe that the least white person should get the job. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Where do they come-up with this compost !
The University of California published a guide to microaggressions. If you dont know what that is, microaggressions are ordinary, unoffensive comments and actions that offend feminists and minority activists with chips on their shoulders.
Because this is such a big problem in the minds of liberals, UC has published an unintentionally hysterical guide, to microaggressive behavior. What follows is a list of microaggresive behaviors, exactly as written, and then my own interpretation of what would not be microaggressive alternatives:
Microaggressive: Saying youre not a r****t because you have Black friends.
Not Microaggressive: Saying youre a not a r****t because you have black friends who are also r****t.
Microaggressive: To compliment an Asian person on his math abilities.
Not Microaggressive: To compliment an Asian person on his reading abilities.
Microaggressive: America is a melting pot or There is only one race, the human race.
Not Microaggressive: You are as different from me as I am from an amoeba.
Microaggressive: As a woman, I know what youre going through being a minority.
Not Microaggressive: As a minority, I know what youre going through being a woman.
Microaggressive: I believe the most qualified person should get the job. (Really this is actually listed as a microaggression!)
Not Microaggressive: I believe that the least white person should get the job. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Jun 23, 2015 23:49:52 #
(Main)
That's some pretty tricked out stuff...
hmmm I'm gonna send it around see what the peeps say...
It's more factual, than "tricked out stuff", hopefully i've done the an okay research and explanation to provide factual information to rebob14 legations.
I've provided Biblical and historical references and anecdotal response with a smidgeon of Socratic reasoning. A + B = C if you catch my pun.
It took me a while to research and come up with the facts and quotes.
But it should dispel the Protestantism belief that Catholic's are not Christians.
But you have freewill to believe what you want.
Remember that Pope's come and go, there have been six Pope's in my lifetime. Their men, and they make incredible mistake sometimes.
How about this one big mistakes by past Pope's.
From Pope Benedict XIV, quoted in 2006, not that I don't agree with this quotation from the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos in the 14 century.
Who said, show me just what Muhammad brought, that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword, the faith he preached. Kinda got the Muslims rilled up.
Right on the Mark in my military opinion.
hmmm I'm gonna send it around see what the peeps say...
It's more factual, than "tricked out stuff", hopefully i've done the an okay research and explanation to provide factual information to rebob14 legations.
I've provided Biblical and historical references and anecdotal response with a smidgeon of Socratic reasoning. A + B = C if you catch my pun.
It took me a while to research and come up with the facts and quotes.
But it should dispel the Protestantism belief that Catholic's are not Christians.
But you have freewill to believe what you want.
Remember that Pope's come and go, there have been six Pope's in my lifetime. Their men, and they make incredible mistake sometimes.
How about this one big mistakes by past Pope's.
From Pope Benedict XIV, quoted in 2006, not that I don't agree with this quotation from the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos in the 14 century.
Who said, show me just what Muhammad brought, that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword, the faith he preached. Kinda got the Muslims rilled up.
Right on the Mark in my military opinion.
Jun 23, 2015 23:23:18 #
(Main)
Sorry I just responded to another post-thread, its kinda long and lengthy.
But I needed to respond, It's in this thread, just scroll down.
rebob14......."from this day, you have need to call no man father; you have one father, who is in heaven"...........The "rock" upon which the church would be built was the revelation god gave Peter, NOT Peter himself.
This deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism!
I hope this answers your question, on any misinterpretation Re; the Pope.
He is a spiritual leader, he is also a man, who is not infallible and has made some area whoppers these past few days.
Yes, he has made an error in judgment on "Gun Control" "C*****e-C****e "G****l W*****g" and I'm not particularly fond of his hypocritical income ine******y statements either.
He may even be a Socialist-Marxist, but I don't know.
But this is a new Pope, who has a different style from the past Pope's.
He has a progressive un-orthodox, political-social teaching style.
I agree with his vow of poverty and not judging others, and changing the Vatican banking and ending ties to the Italian mafia.
But his comments on the secular and humanist world should be kept to him self, and focus on the Christianity spiritual theology teaching.
Christians need more more help more than ever, we are being assaulted on a daily basis for our morals and faith. It won't be long before the persecution begins in this country, we are seeing bits and pieces, incrementally.
Pope, Francis, is no John-Paul II.
But I needed to respond, It's in this thread, just scroll down.
rebob14......."from this day, you have need to call no man father; you have one father, who is in heaven"...........The "rock" upon which the church would be built was the revelation god gave Peter, NOT Peter himself.
This deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism!
I hope this answers your question, on any misinterpretation Re; the Pope.
He is a spiritual leader, he is also a man, who is not infallible and has made some area whoppers these past few days.
Yes, he has made an error in judgment on "Gun Control" "C*****e-C****e "G****l W*****g" and I'm not particularly fond of his hypocritical income ine******y statements either.
He may even be a Socialist-Marxist, but I don't know.
But this is a new Pope, who has a different style from the past Pope's.
He has a progressive un-orthodox, political-social teaching style.
I agree with his vow of poverty and not judging others, and changing the Vatican banking and ending ties to the Italian mafia.
But his comments on the secular and humanist world should be kept to him self, and focus on the Christianity spiritual theology teaching.
Christians need more more help more than ever, we are being assaulted on a daily basis for our morals and faith. It won't be long before the persecution begins in this country, we are seeing bits and pieces, incrementally.
Pope, Francis, is no John-Paul II.
Jun 23, 2015 22:03:07 #
(Main)
[quote=rebob14]......."from this day, you have need to call no man father; you have one father, who is in heaven"...........The "rock" upon which the church would be built was the revelation god gave Peter, NOT Peter himself.
This deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism![/quote]
My apologies if this is a lengthily reply, to your post thread-comment.
rebob14,
Here is a prayer that I ask you to consider, "Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians become a reality, in Your way. We have absolute confidence that you can bring your people together, we give you absolute permission to move. Amen
So Are Catholics Christian ?
I think it is good that Evangelicals and Catholics have lively discussions on the interpretation of Scripture. Evangelicals do that with each other all the time.
Why are there are so many different Christian denominations. Presently we have over 2,800 Christian denominations and growing, and I might add, which continue to splinter from the Reformation of the Protestant Church's and other Main-line Protestant Church Organizations, at an ever-more alarming rate.
Typically in our present age, it is most probably because of women ministers and bishops, homosexual minsters and bishops and the definition of unborn life and a******ns of these unprotected children of God.
Hence the Protestant name origin, "To Protest." Look at the diagram of the historical origins of Christian Churches. (Below)
rebob14, That leaves the two oldest historical churches, from the original teachings, ministry of Jesus Christ and the, The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, founded by Jesus Christ and the the seven core sacramental rites, institutions establishes by Jesus Christ and defined by the Old and New Testaments: e.g., Baptism, Confession, The Holy Eucharist, Conformation, Marriage, Holy Orders, and Healing of the Sick Holy.
These are the seven core foundations for Christian Catholic adults to live by and with a spiritual life with Jesus Christ. I believe this the most simplistic way to explain my faith. How I live my life with and the Holy Trinity of God.
a. From the beginning of Jesus Christ ministry, The Catholic Church, meaning (Universal) Church. It's Christian seven core teachings The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. e.g., see above paragraph
b. The Eastern Orthodox Church origins 1054 AD also the same original sacramental rites, institutions teachings. This is not disputed by Churches, theologians and history.
Until 1054 AD Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism were branches of the same body The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. 1054 marks the very first major division in Christianity and the beginning of present day 2,800 hundred "Christian Denominations, found here on Earth"
The two branches, disagreed over issues pertaining to the nature of the Holy Spirit, the use of icons in worship, the correct date for celebrating Easter and the authority of the Pope. Cultural differences played a major role too, with the Eastern mindset more inclined toward philosophy, mysticism, and ideology.
However rebob14,
I have a big problem with any organization that says "Catholics are not Christians," because they ignoring the history and the Teaching of the Apostolic origins of the Founding Fathers and the Apostles and the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Which can be found in the Holy Bibles 73 books and the recorded teaching of Jesus Christ. By the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, John and Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles and was revealed spiritually and in subsequence letters and books of the New Testament as to the validity and origin of Jesus Christ our Lord and savior.
This was in fulfillment of the scriptures Old Testament prophecies of the Jewish Torah, Pentateuch and Talmudic Midrash teachings as to the validity and origin of Jesus Christ our Lord and savior.
The Christian Catholic Church draws its origins on the early Church Traditions and teaching arm the "Magisterium" and the Holy Bible, to guide and teach Christian Catholics, in spirituality and faith, this is Apostolic teaching. Which has not changed, but had been refined for almost 2000 years so that Christian Catholics understand and follow Jesus Christs teachings and are saved.
Tell me rebob14, How many historical years does your Christian denomination teaching, go back in actual years ?
Does not your Christian denomination borrow from the Catholic Church, biblical records and compiled biblical foundations ?
Do you know that all Christian doctrine center's around the "Council of Nicea," in which this council finally defined and drafted the "Christian Bible" and the "Nicean Creed" that defined Christianity beliefs in a Christian Catholic Creed in 325, A.D. http://www.churchhistory101.com/century4-p8.php
Look at the Historical context and Church, It's origin, time-line at this website. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/timeline_of_catholic_church.php
Lets move to the next important historical event in the Western Catholic Church, the Gutenberg Bible which was a Christian Catholic Bible. The significance of Gutenberg printing press was that more Christians Catholics were able to have their own personal bible and read their personal Bibles in there own homes.
Before 1455, the Bible was very expensive to reproduce and were either copied by hand or printed from engraved wooden blocks and could take years to complete. The printing press allowed in a relatively short amount of time in many different printed Bibles, in their native European languages.
On Halloween of 1517, Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door at Wittenberg, accusing the Roman Catholic church of heresy upon heresy.
Many people cite this act as the primary starting point of the Protestant Reformation though to be sure, John Wycliffe, John Hus, Thomas Linacre, John Colet, and others had already put the lifes work and even their lives on the line for same cause of t***h, constructing the foundation of Reform upon which Luther now built.
Luther's action was in great part a response to the selling of indulgences by Johann Tetzel, a Dominican priest. Luther's charges also directly challenged the position of the clergy in regard to individual salvation.
In 1536 Martin Luther removed 4 N.T. books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) and t***slated the Bible from Greek into German, and placed them in an appendix saying they were less than canonical. http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/martin-luther.html
In 1546 the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirmed once and for all the full list of 73 books. http://www.catholicbible101.com/thebible73or66books.htm The council also confirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books which had been a part of the Bible canon since the early Church and was confirmed at the councils of 393 AD, 373, 787 and 1442 AD. https://www.osv.com/myfaith/modelsofthefaith/article/tabid/684/artmid/13728/articleid/2565/did-the-council-of-trent-change-the-church.aspx?ref=hptopics
http://www.catholicbible101.com/thebible73or66books.htm
In 1555, The Church fathers at Trent clarified but did not change Catholic teachings, they did make many lasting reforms a "Anti-Reformation" to counter and reform and change the Christian Catholic abuses and remains in force to the organization and administration of the Church. These reforms included:
- Ending the practices of simony, nepotism and pluralism.
- Every bishop was obligated to maintain high moral standards, live frugally and avoid excess.
- Requiring strict discipline within religious orders and placing monasteries under the jurisdiction of the bishop, rather than the pope.
- Giving special attention to the education of the clergy, including the goal of establishing a seminary in every diocese.
- Celibacy was upheld, bishops were responsible to select and mentor men for the priesthood, and those men could not be ordained before age 25.
- Promoting the development of the Roman Missal to standardize the Mass and a catechism containing a concise summary of Catholic beliefs which remains in effect to this date with a uniform teaching.
Currently several Main-Line Protestant Churches still follow this practice of the the Roman Missal and the churches teachings practices through the calendar year. e.g., The Anglican church and the Lutheran Church among major Christian Churches.
408 years later in 1963, was Vatican II, which has been rightly described as the most important religious event of the 20th century, and began 50 years ago today in St. Peters Basilica.
Over three years, from 1962 to 1965, some 2,800 bishops from 116 countries produced 16 documents that set the Roman Catholic Churchs course for the future.
Its proceedings were closely followed in the media, bringing the church into the homes of hundreds of millions of ordinary Catholics on nearly a daily basis.
What were the Christian Catholic Church changes:
-Vatican II, halting steps on governance, is that it took account of the world outside the church. The church validated for the first time the principle of religious freedom and rejected all forms of civil discrimination based on religious grounds.
-Catholics were encouraged to foster friendly relations with Orthodox and Protestant Christians, as well as Jews and Muslims, and even to pray with them. The council condemned all forms of anti-Semitism and insisted on respect for Judaism and Islam as Abrahamic faiths, like Christianity.
-The council, in its decree on the liturgy, also opened the Mass to symbols and traditions of non-Western cultures, permitting the displacement of Latin with vernacular languages.
-This reconciliatory move has played a part in the remarkable growth of the church in Africa and parts of Asia.
-The post-Vatican II church was not a different church. But if you take the long view, it seems to me incontestable that the turn was big, in implementation have made it less big in certain areas than the council intended.
-Pope John Paul II took up the work of reconciliation with the Jewish faith, the Eastern Orthodox Christian faith and many Protestant Main-line faiths.
So rebob14, let me ask you again, Are Catholics Christian ?
The name Christian Catholic Church predates all Protestant and Evangelical Churches by over a millennium or approximately, 1487 years. And the Eastern Orthodox Church predates all Protestant and Evangelical Churches by approximately, 463 years. Do you see the historical context that I have presented.
Many Evangelicals who think that Catholics and Orthodox Churchs are not Christian may be surprised to learn they accept the authority of several Catholic councils every time they pick up their Bible.
The Bible didn't fall out of the sky, spiral bound with an NIV or King James version sticker on it. The Bible has a rich Christian Catholic history of 1487 years that all 2,800 Christian denomination borrow from. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/timeline_of_how_the_bible_came.php
Any time spent studying the Church Fathers, will make it abundantly clear that early Christian beliefs are, Christian Catholic in origin. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/early_church_fathers.php
Their complete unity over the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is only one example. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/are_catholics_christian.php
So let me ask you once again, Are Catholics Christian ?
Its not a difficult question to answer, not because there is no answer.
But because the answer is on the one hand so obvious.
Yet if the question is being asked, you realize that the answer is not obvious at all.
In fact, you realize that the person asking the question is only doing so, because he already truly believes, that Catholics are not Christian.
Its time to research the Founding Fathers and the Christian Catholic Papal Tradition of Apostolic succession. Let history be your guide.
So rebob14, Their is way forward, which is to define what we mean by being a Christian ?
Catholics define Christian as any person who is baptized and who has faith in Jesus Christ. Most Christians from every denomination, would agree to this same wording?
This is a definition of Christian is a baseline. Its a beginning foundation to move forward. Are we in agreement ?
The problem comes with Evangelical, Biblicists, who dont actually have a clear definition of what a Christian is ?
Except to say that a Christian is someone who has accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. Or someone who has been saved or someone who has asked Jesus into their heart.
The problem with this definition is that there is no objectivity to it.
Just what does it mean to accept Jesus into your heart to get saved or accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior?
Very often, this means that the person in question, has had a particular type of religious experience. They have gone forward at a revival meeting or prayed the sinners prayer, or wept for their sins and turned to Jesus.
It doesnt take long to see, that if this is the criteria for being a Christian then (allowing for a few slight differences in language) that most Catholics have done precisely this.
If the sinners prayer, is a way of rejecting the world, the flesh and the devil and believing in Christ as Savior and Lord, then this is precisely what happens within the Catholic baptism rite, their adult spiritual life, and the seven core sacramental rites, establishes by Jesus Christ and defined by the Old and New Testaments.
Here is another Christian theology example, that I suggest you to consider.
Jesus Appears to the Disciples, John 20:21.
21. So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you."
22, And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
23,"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."
Most Evangelicals really don't like this quoted passage from the bible. Jesus Christ's words are not disputed here, they are forcibly spoken with authority and eloquent as to the origins of Christian Catholic sacramental confession and the forgiveness of sins.
Repenting of ones sins and accepting the forgiveness of Christ is precisely what happens when a Catholic goes to confession. Repenting of sins and accepting Christ is precisely what happens at Christian Catholic Mass.
The Evangelical is not comfortable with this, because it all happens with somebody just reading prayers out of a book.
But why should the Catholic liturgy with set prayers and set music and hymns be any worse than the liturgy of the Evangelical preacher who follows a set formula for preaching, for giving the altar call and using the same emotional music (Just As I Am Without One Plea)
The Christian Catholic Church has been practicing this for almost 2000 years.
Are not both liturgical set pieces? I believe and think they are.
So, are Catholics Christian? Of course Catholics are Christian.
a. Theyve repented of their sins.
b. Theyve accepted the forgiveness of Christ.
c. Theyve rejected the world, the flesh and the devil.
d. They decided to follow Christ within the faith of the Catholic Church and e. Apostolic Biblical teaching origins of the Founding Fathers and of Jesus Christ.
There is a very good comparison between Evangelical and Catholic Christianity read the book "More Christianity."
More Christianity explores the fullness of the Christian faith in the Catholic Church. "More Christianity" calls Evangelical Christians to come further up and further in to the Catholic Church.
This is a friendly explanation of Catholicism for Evangelical Christians. And is a take-off from C.S.Lewis's famous book with a similar name.
C.S.Lewis, famous book "Mere Christianity" gave radio lectures during WWII addressing the central issues of what Christianity is. "Mere Christianity" explains by a rational basis for Christianity and builds an edifice of compassionate morality atop this foundation.
I surge you to read these two books. They are a wonderful read and for you to learn from your Christian origins.
C.S.Lewis, a Protestant clearly demonstrates, Christianity is not a religion of flitting angels and blind faith, but of free will, an innate sense of justice and the grace of God. Here is a free audio online version of the book. http://www.t***haccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-toc.php
The two books compare the Evangelical way of looking at some aspect of Christian tradition and show how Catholicism does not contradict the Evangelicals faith, but fulfills and complete's it.
The question therefore is not, Are Catholics Christian or Are Evangelical Protestants Christian but How much of the Christian faith do you embrace ?
Evangelicals tend to follow a reduced, minimalist version of the faith.
Catholics wish to have it all.
It's kind of like this analogy, "Think a cheese c*****r and water" or "a five course Italian banquet." I know which Id prefer.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2012/03/are-catholics-christian.html
So rebob14, The confusion is cased by the fact that different groups define the term Christian differently. Would you not agree ?
A Catholic would define a Christian as anyone who professes faith in Christ and who has been validly baptized (water baptism).
Many Protestants do not use or have the same vocabulary defining the term Christian and or Catholic Christians in this way.
Different denominations have different criteria for determining who is a Christiane.g., Christians are those who have "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" or those who profess to be saved "by faith alone."
Since Catholics dont generally use this vocabulary language, they classify Catholics as non-Christians (though many are willing to concede that some Catholics are Christians, even though they dont use this language).
Catholics have have "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" or those who profess to be saved "By faith and by good-works."
"Is the definition of being saved by Jesus Christ by "faith and by good-works," a either or socratic method, or is it, and-or-both ?
Catholic Christians believe that we are "Saved by Faith" and by "Good-Works."
James 2:14-26, Faith Without Works Is Dead.
14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food,
16 and one of you says to them, Depart in peace, be warmed and filled, but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?
17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
So, once again I ask you, are Catholics Christian ? Of course Catholics are Christian.
rebob14, Your approach in defining Christian Catholic's is is what is at issue here.
That the Christian Catholic Church is a deliberate mis-interpretation, and needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been. I question your validity to even suggest this argument.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man.
rebob14,, What kind of nonsense are you talking about ?
Christian Catholics biblical reference for the the Pope is, Matthew 16:18 Peter's Confession of Christ. If you know the messianic Old Testament understanding of the keys from the kings of Israel and their Kings Chief steward who ran the Jewish kingdom for the Kings of Israel.
[color=red]The you would understood, the message of the "Keys of the kingdom" in the Old Testament and their correlation to the teaching of Jesus Christ. Then you would understand the teaching of the doctrine of the 266 Pope's and the Apostolic succession.
Then you might come to understand the Christian Catholic Church teaching and It's almost 2,000 year traditions. And you would not say this blanket statement that we worship the Pope.
I hope this clarifies your Christian Catholic misunderstanding.
Jesus Christ gave stewardship the keys of his church to Peter, in Matthew 16:18. We Christian Catholic do not worship the Pope. He has been given spiritual leadership of the Christian Catholic Church and thats all. He is a man, and with all men and women, we all sin.
Here is a interesting quotation. To the Christian we know, from Romans 1:5,6 That we are, if we are true Christians, in just as much authority as Peter and the others. We must be ever active to give the gospel out by our efforts to loose (give out) we communicate the Good News to others.
In our silence we bind (withhold) that awesome news to others. To the Non-Christian as long as he refuses to hear the good news, and has no desire to have understanding of the Kingdom, he is shut out with hell as their destination.
Matthew 16:18 Peter's Confession of Christ
17, And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and wh**ever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and wh**ever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."
Read a Bible.........not the catechism! deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism!
rebob14, We Christian Catholics read the bible all the time e.g., I personally own The Ignatius Bible, Vulgate Bible, the NAB Bible, The NRSV Bible, The New Jerusalem Bible, the DouayRheims Bible and the New King James version Bible. http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/
In the end, there may not be a need to select only one t***slation of the Bible to use. It is often possible to get a better sense of what is being said in a passage by comparing several different t***slations.
So, which Bible is the best? Perhaps the best answer is this: The one youll read.
So, once again I ask you, are Catholics Christian ?
Of course Catholics are Christian. Yes they are, the Catholics Christian may not come under your belief and definition of what your Christian Church theology and understanding is.
So be it, to your opinion. I have provided you a historical and spiritual balance of Catholic Christianity.
(1) Catholics are Christians;
(2) the Catholic Church is the Church Jesus started and which he said would never pass away (Mt 16:18).
(3) when Scripture speaks of Christians it speaks of every church member as a Christian, no matter what his "walk with God" may be like.
(4) Christians throughout history have always recognized baptism as the method by which one becomes a Christian.
rebob14, It was not until after the Protestant Reformation was underway, that people denied this these Christian beliefs.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-do-some-protestant-denominations-not-consider-catholics-to-be-christians-and-how-
So, are Catholics Christian? Of course Catholics are Christian.
ebob14,
Here is a prayer, that I ask you to consider saying this prayer, "Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians become a reality, in Your way. We have absolute confidence that you can bring your people together, we give you absolute permission to move. Amen
This deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism![/quote]
My apologies if this is a lengthily reply, to your post thread-comment.
rebob14,
Here is a prayer that I ask you to consider, "Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians become a reality, in Your way. We have absolute confidence that you can bring your people together, we give you absolute permission to move. Amen
So Are Catholics Christian ?
I think it is good that Evangelicals and Catholics have lively discussions on the interpretation of Scripture. Evangelicals do that with each other all the time.
Why are there are so many different Christian denominations. Presently we have over 2,800 Christian denominations and growing, and I might add, which continue to splinter from the Reformation of the Protestant Church's and other Main-line Protestant Church Organizations, at an ever-more alarming rate.
Typically in our present age, it is most probably because of women ministers and bishops, homosexual minsters and bishops and the definition of unborn life and a******ns of these unprotected children of God.
Hence the Protestant name origin, "To Protest." Look at the diagram of the historical origins of Christian Churches. (Below)
rebob14, That leaves the two oldest historical churches, from the original teachings, ministry of Jesus Christ and the, The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, founded by Jesus Christ and the the seven core sacramental rites, institutions establishes by Jesus Christ and defined by the Old and New Testaments: e.g., Baptism, Confession, The Holy Eucharist, Conformation, Marriage, Holy Orders, and Healing of the Sick Holy.
These are the seven core foundations for Christian Catholic adults to live by and with a spiritual life with Jesus Christ. I believe this the most simplistic way to explain my faith. How I live my life with and the Holy Trinity of God.
a. From the beginning of Jesus Christ ministry, The Catholic Church, meaning (Universal) Church. It's Christian seven core teachings The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. e.g., see above paragraph
b. The Eastern Orthodox Church origins 1054 AD also the same original sacramental rites, institutions teachings. This is not disputed by Churches, theologians and history.
Until 1054 AD Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism were branches of the same body The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. 1054 marks the very first major division in Christianity and the beginning of present day 2,800 hundred "Christian Denominations, found here on Earth"
The two branches, disagreed over issues pertaining to the nature of the Holy Spirit, the use of icons in worship, the correct date for celebrating Easter and the authority of the Pope. Cultural differences played a major role too, with the Eastern mindset more inclined toward philosophy, mysticism, and ideology.
However rebob14,
I have a big problem with any organization that says "Catholics are not Christians," because they ignoring the history and the Teaching of the Apostolic origins of the Founding Fathers and the Apostles and the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Which can be found in the Holy Bibles 73 books and the recorded teaching of Jesus Christ. By the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, John and Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles and was revealed spiritually and in subsequence letters and books of the New Testament as to the validity and origin of Jesus Christ our Lord and savior.
This was in fulfillment of the scriptures Old Testament prophecies of the Jewish Torah, Pentateuch and Talmudic Midrash teachings as to the validity and origin of Jesus Christ our Lord and savior.
The Christian Catholic Church draws its origins on the early Church Traditions and teaching arm the "Magisterium" and the Holy Bible, to guide and teach Christian Catholics, in spirituality and faith, this is Apostolic teaching. Which has not changed, but had been refined for almost 2000 years so that Christian Catholics understand and follow Jesus Christs teachings and are saved.
Tell me rebob14, How many historical years does your Christian denomination teaching, go back in actual years ?
Does not your Christian denomination borrow from the Catholic Church, biblical records and compiled biblical foundations ?
Do you know that all Christian doctrine center's around the "Council of Nicea," in which this council finally defined and drafted the "Christian Bible" and the "Nicean Creed" that defined Christianity beliefs in a Christian Catholic Creed in 325, A.D. http://www.churchhistory101.com/century4-p8.php
Look at the Historical context and Church, It's origin, time-line at this website. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/timeline_of_catholic_church.php
Lets move to the next important historical event in the Western Catholic Church, the Gutenberg Bible which was a Christian Catholic Bible. The significance of Gutenberg printing press was that more Christians Catholics were able to have their own personal bible and read their personal Bibles in there own homes.
Before 1455, the Bible was very expensive to reproduce and were either copied by hand or printed from engraved wooden blocks and could take years to complete. The printing press allowed in a relatively short amount of time in many different printed Bibles, in their native European languages.
On Halloween of 1517, Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door at Wittenberg, accusing the Roman Catholic church of heresy upon heresy.
Many people cite this act as the primary starting point of the Protestant Reformation though to be sure, John Wycliffe, John Hus, Thomas Linacre, John Colet, and others had already put the lifes work and even their lives on the line for same cause of t***h, constructing the foundation of Reform upon which Luther now built.
Luther's action was in great part a response to the selling of indulgences by Johann Tetzel, a Dominican priest. Luther's charges also directly challenged the position of the clergy in regard to individual salvation.
In 1536 Martin Luther removed 4 N.T. books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) and t***slated the Bible from Greek into German, and placed them in an appendix saying they were less than canonical. http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/martin-luther.html
In 1546 the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirmed once and for all the full list of 73 books. http://www.catholicbible101.com/thebible73or66books.htm The council also confirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books which had been a part of the Bible canon since the early Church and was confirmed at the councils of 393 AD, 373, 787 and 1442 AD. https://www.osv.com/myfaith/modelsofthefaith/article/tabid/684/artmid/13728/articleid/2565/did-the-council-of-trent-change-the-church.aspx?ref=hptopics
http://www.catholicbible101.com/thebible73or66books.htm
In 1555, The Church fathers at Trent clarified but did not change Catholic teachings, they did make many lasting reforms a "Anti-Reformation" to counter and reform and change the Christian Catholic abuses and remains in force to the organization and administration of the Church. These reforms included:
- Ending the practices of simony, nepotism and pluralism.
- Every bishop was obligated to maintain high moral standards, live frugally and avoid excess.
- Requiring strict discipline within religious orders and placing monasteries under the jurisdiction of the bishop, rather than the pope.
- Giving special attention to the education of the clergy, including the goal of establishing a seminary in every diocese.
- Celibacy was upheld, bishops were responsible to select and mentor men for the priesthood, and those men could not be ordained before age 25.
- Promoting the development of the Roman Missal to standardize the Mass and a catechism containing a concise summary of Catholic beliefs which remains in effect to this date with a uniform teaching.
Currently several Main-Line Protestant Churches still follow this practice of the the Roman Missal and the churches teachings practices through the calendar year. e.g., The Anglican church and the Lutheran Church among major Christian Churches.
408 years later in 1963, was Vatican II, which has been rightly described as the most important religious event of the 20th century, and began 50 years ago today in St. Peters Basilica.
Over three years, from 1962 to 1965, some 2,800 bishops from 116 countries produced 16 documents that set the Roman Catholic Churchs course for the future.
Its proceedings were closely followed in the media, bringing the church into the homes of hundreds of millions of ordinary Catholics on nearly a daily basis.
What were the Christian Catholic Church changes:
-Vatican II, halting steps on governance, is that it took account of the world outside the church. The church validated for the first time the principle of religious freedom and rejected all forms of civil discrimination based on religious grounds.
-Catholics were encouraged to foster friendly relations with Orthodox and Protestant Christians, as well as Jews and Muslims, and even to pray with them. The council condemned all forms of anti-Semitism and insisted on respect for Judaism and Islam as Abrahamic faiths, like Christianity.
-The council, in its decree on the liturgy, also opened the Mass to symbols and traditions of non-Western cultures, permitting the displacement of Latin with vernacular languages.
-This reconciliatory move has played a part in the remarkable growth of the church in Africa and parts of Asia.
-The post-Vatican II church was not a different church. But if you take the long view, it seems to me incontestable that the turn was big, in implementation have made it less big in certain areas than the council intended.
-Pope John Paul II took up the work of reconciliation with the Jewish faith, the Eastern Orthodox Christian faith and many Protestant Main-line faiths.
So rebob14, let me ask you again, Are Catholics Christian ?
The name Christian Catholic Church predates all Protestant and Evangelical Churches by over a millennium or approximately, 1487 years. And the Eastern Orthodox Church predates all Protestant and Evangelical Churches by approximately, 463 years. Do you see the historical context that I have presented.
Many Evangelicals who think that Catholics and Orthodox Churchs are not Christian may be surprised to learn they accept the authority of several Catholic councils every time they pick up their Bible.
The Bible didn't fall out of the sky, spiral bound with an NIV or King James version sticker on it. The Bible has a rich Christian Catholic history of 1487 years that all 2,800 Christian denomination borrow from. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/timeline_of_how_the_bible_came.php
Any time spent studying the Church Fathers, will make it abundantly clear that early Christian beliefs are, Christian Catholic in origin. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/early_church_fathers.php
Their complete unity over the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is only one example. http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/are_catholics_christian.php
So let me ask you once again, Are Catholics Christian ?
Its not a difficult question to answer, not because there is no answer.
But because the answer is on the one hand so obvious.
Yet if the question is being asked, you realize that the answer is not obvious at all.
In fact, you realize that the person asking the question is only doing so, because he already truly believes, that Catholics are not Christian.
Its time to research the Founding Fathers and the Christian Catholic Papal Tradition of Apostolic succession. Let history be your guide.
So rebob14, Their is way forward, which is to define what we mean by being a Christian ?
Catholics define Christian as any person who is baptized and who has faith in Jesus Christ. Most Christians from every denomination, would agree to this same wording?
This is a definition of Christian is a baseline. Its a beginning foundation to move forward. Are we in agreement ?
The problem comes with Evangelical, Biblicists, who dont actually have a clear definition of what a Christian is ?
Except to say that a Christian is someone who has accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. Or someone who has been saved or someone who has asked Jesus into their heart.
The problem with this definition is that there is no objectivity to it.
Just what does it mean to accept Jesus into your heart to get saved or accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior?
Very often, this means that the person in question, has had a particular type of religious experience. They have gone forward at a revival meeting or prayed the sinners prayer, or wept for their sins and turned to Jesus.
It doesnt take long to see, that if this is the criteria for being a Christian then (allowing for a few slight differences in language) that most Catholics have done precisely this.
If the sinners prayer, is a way of rejecting the world, the flesh and the devil and believing in Christ as Savior and Lord, then this is precisely what happens within the Catholic baptism rite, their adult spiritual life, and the seven core sacramental rites, establishes by Jesus Christ and defined by the Old and New Testaments.
Here is another Christian theology example, that I suggest you to consider.
Jesus Appears to the Disciples, John 20:21.
21. So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you."
22, And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
23,"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."
Most Evangelicals really don't like this quoted passage from the bible. Jesus Christ's words are not disputed here, they are forcibly spoken with authority and eloquent as to the origins of Christian Catholic sacramental confession and the forgiveness of sins.
Repenting of ones sins and accepting the forgiveness of Christ is precisely what happens when a Catholic goes to confession. Repenting of sins and accepting Christ is precisely what happens at Christian Catholic Mass.
The Evangelical is not comfortable with this, because it all happens with somebody just reading prayers out of a book.
But why should the Catholic liturgy with set prayers and set music and hymns be any worse than the liturgy of the Evangelical preacher who follows a set formula for preaching, for giving the altar call and using the same emotional music (Just As I Am Without One Plea)
The Christian Catholic Church has been practicing this for almost 2000 years.
Are not both liturgical set pieces? I believe and think they are.
So, are Catholics Christian? Of course Catholics are Christian.
a. Theyve repented of their sins.
b. Theyve accepted the forgiveness of Christ.
c. Theyve rejected the world, the flesh and the devil.
d. They decided to follow Christ within the faith of the Catholic Church and e. Apostolic Biblical teaching origins of the Founding Fathers and of Jesus Christ.
There is a very good comparison between Evangelical and Catholic Christianity read the book "More Christianity."
More Christianity explores the fullness of the Christian faith in the Catholic Church. "More Christianity" calls Evangelical Christians to come further up and further in to the Catholic Church.
This is a friendly explanation of Catholicism for Evangelical Christians. And is a take-off from C.S.Lewis's famous book with a similar name.
C.S.Lewis, famous book "Mere Christianity" gave radio lectures during WWII addressing the central issues of what Christianity is. "Mere Christianity" explains by a rational basis for Christianity and builds an edifice of compassionate morality atop this foundation.
I surge you to read these two books. They are a wonderful read and for you to learn from your Christian origins.
C.S.Lewis, a Protestant clearly demonstrates, Christianity is not a religion of flitting angels and blind faith, but of free will, an innate sense of justice and the grace of God. Here is a free audio online version of the book. http://www.t***haccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-toc.php
The two books compare the Evangelical way of looking at some aspect of Christian tradition and show how Catholicism does not contradict the Evangelicals faith, but fulfills and complete's it.
The question therefore is not, Are Catholics Christian or Are Evangelical Protestants Christian but How much of the Christian faith do you embrace ?
Evangelicals tend to follow a reduced, minimalist version of the faith.
Catholics wish to have it all.
It's kind of like this analogy, "Think a cheese c*****r and water" or "a five course Italian banquet." I know which Id prefer.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2012/03/are-catholics-christian.html
So rebob14, The confusion is cased by the fact that different groups define the term Christian differently. Would you not agree ?
A Catholic would define a Christian as anyone who professes faith in Christ and who has been validly baptized (water baptism).
Many Protestants do not use or have the same vocabulary defining the term Christian and or Catholic Christians in this way.
Different denominations have different criteria for determining who is a Christiane.g., Christians are those who have "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" or those who profess to be saved "by faith alone."
Since Catholics dont generally use this vocabulary language, they classify Catholics as non-Christians (though many are willing to concede that some Catholics are Christians, even though they dont use this language).
Catholics have have "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" or those who profess to be saved "By faith and by good-works."
"Is the definition of being saved by Jesus Christ by "faith and by good-works," a either or socratic method, or is it, and-or-both ?
Catholic Christians believe that we are "Saved by Faith" and by "Good-Works."
James 2:14-26, Faith Without Works Is Dead.
14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food,
16 and one of you says to them, Depart in peace, be warmed and filled, but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?
17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
So, once again I ask you, are Catholics Christian ? Of course Catholics are Christian.
rebob14, Your approach in defining Christian Catholic's is is what is at issue here.
That the Christian Catholic Church is a deliberate mis-interpretation, and needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been. I question your validity to even suggest this argument.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man.
rebob14,, What kind of nonsense are you talking about ?
Christian Catholics biblical reference for the the Pope is, Matthew 16:18 Peter's Confession of Christ. If you know the messianic Old Testament understanding of the keys from the kings of Israel and their Kings Chief steward who ran the Jewish kingdom for the Kings of Israel.
[color=red]The you would understood, the message of the "Keys of the kingdom" in the Old Testament and their correlation to the teaching of Jesus Christ. Then you would understand the teaching of the doctrine of the 266 Pope's and the Apostolic succession.
Then you might come to understand the Christian Catholic Church teaching and It's almost 2,000 year traditions. And you would not say this blanket statement that we worship the Pope.
I hope this clarifies your Christian Catholic misunderstanding.
Jesus Christ gave stewardship the keys of his church to Peter, in Matthew 16:18. We Christian Catholic do not worship the Pope. He has been given spiritual leadership of the Christian Catholic Church and thats all. He is a man, and with all men and women, we all sin.
Here is a interesting quotation. To the Christian we know, from Romans 1:5,6 That we are, if we are true Christians, in just as much authority as Peter and the others. We must be ever active to give the gospel out by our efforts to loose (give out) we communicate the Good News to others.
In our silence we bind (withhold) that awesome news to others. To the Non-Christian as long as he refuses to hear the good news, and has no desire to have understanding of the Kingdom, he is shut out with hell as their destination.
Matthew 16:18 Peter's Confession of Christ
17, And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and wh**ever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and wh**ever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."
Read a Bible.........not the catechism! deliberate mis-interpretation needs to be, finally, put to rest. Catholics are not Christians and have never been.
To follow this "pope" is to worship a man. Read a Bible.........not the catechism!
rebob14, We Christian Catholics read the bible all the time e.g., I personally own The Ignatius Bible, Vulgate Bible, the NAB Bible, The NRSV Bible, The New Jerusalem Bible, the DouayRheims Bible and the New King James version Bible. http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/
In the end, there may not be a need to select only one t***slation of the Bible to use. It is often possible to get a better sense of what is being said in a passage by comparing several different t***slations.
So, which Bible is the best? Perhaps the best answer is this: The one youll read.
So, once again I ask you, are Catholics Christian ?
Of course Catholics are Christian. Yes they are, the Catholics Christian may not come under your belief and definition of what your Christian Church theology and understanding is.
So be it, to your opinion. I have provided you a historical and spiritual balance of Catholic Christianity.
(1) Catholics are Christians;
(2) the Catholic Church is the Church Jesus started and which he said would never pass away (Mt 16:18).
(3) when Scripture speaks of Christians it speaks of every church member as a Christian, no matter what his "walk with God" may be like.
(4) Christians throughout history have always recognized baptism as the method by which one becomes a Christian.
rebob14, It was not until after the Protestant Reformation was underway, that people denied this these Christian beliefs.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-do-some-protestant-denominations-not-consider-catholics-to-be-christians-and-how-
So, are Catholics Christian? Of course Catholics are Christian.
ebob14,
Here is a prayer, that I ask you to consider saying this prayer, "Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians become a reality, in Your way. We have absolute confidence that you can bring your people together, we give you absolute permission to move. Amen
Jun 23, 2015 12:05:01 #
(Main)
Isaiah 22:22
And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
Matthew 16:18 Peter's Confession of Christ
17"And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and wh**ever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and wh**ever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."
Revelation 3:7
"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.
And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
Matthew 16:18 Peter's Confession of Christ
17"And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and wh**ever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and wh**ever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."
Revelation 3:7
"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.
Jun 23, 2015 01:55:23 #
(Main)
Lets hope and pray that the SCOTUS rules for States rights and the way that the Law was written as and not the change of a political whim from POTUS.
We can only hope and pray for a economic death spiral for Obama-Care and the neo-cons GOP don't turn turncoat again.
We can only hope and pray for a economic death spiral for Obama-Care and the neo-cons GOP don't turn turncoat again.
Jun 23, 2015 01:45:39 #
(Main)
Haven't lost all respect for him, But in this morass of secularism and Humanism,.
Pope Francis need to stick to what he is been elected to do. and be the spiritual leader in Christian Faith, more now than ever, in this amoral agnostic, atheistic and pagan world that we live in.
Pope Francis need to stick to what he is been elected to do. and be the spiritual leader in Christian Faith, more now than ever, in this amoral agnostic, atheistic and pagan world that we live in.