(my late wife was Marian and I miss her) why do you need to hide behind Mary? We can boldly approach the Throne of Grace (Jesus Christ) Hebrews 4:16. Oh, by the way God (YHVH) does not resort to apparitions to convince the world of his exisistance! Marian apparitions Marian apparition
I've seen her. Four times, every two years since I was thirteen, and once when I was twenty. It is not impossible if just a nobody girl can see and hear and speak to the Blessed Virgin.
"Check out my YouTube channel/playlists and websites for present-truth materials, Three Angels' Messages and God's last-mercy warning to His people in these last days.
Papacy = Antichrist / Little Horn / Beast from the Sea
Roman Catholicism = Whore of Babylon
Investigative Judgement has commenced in 1844 (1st Angel’s Message)
Ellen G. White, 1827-1915 = End-time Prophet Sent of God
7th-day Sabbath = Seal of God
Sunday Worship to be Enforced as Mark of the Beast""
Read your kjv Bible and.continue to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.All you need to be a Christian is Jesus and the Bible.All else is a distraction.On you tube type in walter veith signs and wounders pt. 1-9.Former Catholic.Also,type in WALTER VEITH RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY 1-6 ON YOU TUBE.GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
@marinegrunt76 - Bible -Only "christianity" is unbiblical. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we are to go by the Bible alone. You are part of a man-made religious system created by a heretical, fallen away monk who suffered from deep seated inclinations towards sexual perversion (Martin Luther) who rather than cooperating with God's grace received in the sacrament of Confession and turning away from sin, he rejected Christ's One True Church and allowed Satan to corrupt his soul.
First of all, when the Mary of the bible died the scriptures tells us that all believers bodies go to the grave and our spirt goes to be with the Lord. She is awaiting the Resurection by the power of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ like all other believers. Mary of the the bible is not floating around the world appearing and claiming to b co-redeemer as some of these demonic apparitions claim. Hail Mary...???? No! Praise Jesus!
@Tommycancan Hail Mary.. NO???? hmmmm trying arguing that with the Archangel Gabriel who greeted her with that message. No Mary, No Jesus. Know Mary, Know Jesus :)
I had a very powerful dream of Mary appearing to me as Queen of Heaven. I called a local priest, he told me, "Just consider your dream a personal blessing. Mary often appears to people today because today is the Feast of the Immaculate Conception." This coincidence was not something that I knew. I had no idea that it was a holy Feast of Mary day. So, I can only assume that Mary was well aware that it was her special day. It was rather amazing.
as a practitioner of the occult arts for over 20 years - I will say one thing for the Nazarene - his name has power - not sure that makes him the son of god but this is what I have observed in my interaction with what most of you would consider to be demonic entities. be well my friends
All Marian apparitions tell the believer to get closer to her Son, the Lord. None of them tell us to worship her. It is thru her holy son that she comes to us with messages for the faithful.
All truth comes from the word of God, not man. We should all read the bible for ourselves. I will live by every word that precedes out of the mouth of Christ and not man. We are to praise Jesus and not apparitions. The bibile does mention familiar spirits. Please read Lev 19:31. The Bible warns us 1 John 4:1 "Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world."
@ctholder79 yes.....Jesus gave us the Church which 1Timothy 3:15 says it the pillar and foundation of Truth. The Catholic Church complied the Holy Bible with 73 books in the 4th century, if you think the Catholic Church is wrong then your going to have to question the book it compiled....the Holy BIble.
@ctholder79 No one is praising apparitions, Mary is and has been venerated and Honored (not worshipped) as the Mother of God (Jesus is God) since the beginning of Christianity, even the Early Reformers honored and loved Jesus' mother. Also when Mary does appear what is her message? it is always to come to her son and believe and live your life faithfully. When Mary appears millions consecrate their lives to Jesus. Doesnt sound evil to me.
Jesus comes to us through Mary. How can you love Jesus and yet reject his mother? It is okay to investigate, of course to make sure it is a true apparition, but we should be careful not to dismiss these out of hand
@johnthreesixteen316 If Marian apparitions are "clearly the work of Satan, why does Mary ask for repentance, fasting, reconciliation, prayer and surrender to Jesus Christ? If these apparitions are clearly the work of Satan and his minions, why have more than 30 million pilgrims gone to Medjugorje to seek salvation through glorifying Jesus Christ? It seems the work of Satan continues to have a reverse effect, with the consecration of millions upon millions of souls over to Jesus Christ.
@Flametopology great response man. This guy Johnthreesixteen doesn't like to listen to reason, he lets his illogical hatred of the Catholic Church blind his intelligence and reason. When his day of judgement comes God's gonna ask him why he persecuted his Church and i hope he has a better answer then the nonsense he is spouting on this forum. Take Care Man.
@Flametopology We do need to be wary of apparitions that are not yet recognized by Rome. In the case of Medjugorie, there are good reasons to be skeptical. You can look that up yourself from Catholic sources.
@Flametopology You are absolutely consistent with the mind of Christ: [Luke 11:17, 20] He [Jesus] knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and house will fall against house.... then the kingdom of God has come upon you." Christ IS Risen! +Peace+
@Flametopology You are absolutely consistent with the mind of Christ: [Luke 11:17, 20] He [Jesus] knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and house will fall against house.... then the kingdom of God has come upon you." Christ IS Risen! +Peace+
The point is why is Mary appearing in the first place, hasnt Jesus told us that he alone we must pray and consult. Isnt looking up the apparitions against what God wants, we should look to christ alone. I am from portugal and my family is catholic. I see how devastating these apparitions can be when people in my country walk miles on their knees to Fatima in order for help from Mary, most of these people are old. This isn't what God wants, it serves no purpose.
@Flametopology I am so glad i am not the only one to see and say that. It is so ridiculous what people say. and i am wondering why those who say that, bother to come to these sites. i guess to just mock and ridicule the beautiful BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. and to attack us. they have nothing better to do. and they do not know any better. a good christian would not attack anyone for any reason. we are to love everyone, including our enemies. they need to learn this. and only GOD judges us. not them.
This apparition claims to be our co-redeemer, our suffering servant, our advocate, our mediator, omni-present, sinless and worthy of our adoration. These are all attributes of God Himself, Jesus Christ. These apparitions are clearly the work of Satan and his minions. God says He will share His glory with nobody.....KJV.....Isaiah 48:11...."For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another."
Satan is no dummy. If he wants to hand out a false message, he certainly isn't going to appear in his real form showing his true character. Instead he pretends to be Mary and decieves many. Yet, try as he may, he can't fool those who are biblically sound.
@johnthreesixteen316 Didn't Christ say in the Bible "A house divided upon itself will fall" (Luke 11:17)? In fact, He said this in response to the Pharisees who were saying basically the same thing you are saying right now: that by the power of demons was He showing them Signs from Heaven.
Ask yourself: why would Satan appear as Mary to "trick" others into worshiping Christ? Every apparition has the same message: turn to Christ, repent, and you'll be saved.
1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils."
1 John 4:1....."Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."
If we test the words of these apparitions we will find that they are Satanic, not Biblical.
Ephesians 6.....11 "Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
@johnthreesixteen316 what does this excerpt from scripture have to do with the video? You are claiming that the apparition of Mary is demonic. Please elaborate on why you think this. And if you say something dumb like "catholics worship mary!!!" This is not what the Catholic Church teaches. If you say this youll be breaking the 8th commandment. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
@carthage397 The apparitions aren't Mary. Millions around the world 'want' to believe it is because it appears so sweet and benevolent. Satan isn't stupid. He is very clever. You owe it to yourself to do some scriptural homework and then the truth of this matter will become quite clear.
again, please show me where the apparition said something that was un-scriptural. From what i have read Mary's main message in the apparition is that people need to be converted over to Christ. If this was a demon why would it tell people to stop sinning and convert to Christ?
Again please give me evidence that supports your claim. You cant just assume something without any justification for it.
and the argument that Mary was sweet so it was really a demon makes no sense. Mary was sweet because Mary IS sweet, shes the Mother of God (Jesus).
By your logic one could say that when Jesus appeared to the Apostles after the resurrection it was really a demon because he was benevolent and good to them.
Pick and apparition, look up the script for the apparition (and not from an anti-catholic site) from a non bias source and show me where it conflicts with scripture.
She will be called blessed, she is shared no prophecy , nor is she given the responsibiilty to act as an helper. He is blessed as she is the Mother of Jesus. The Son of Man who was born through the holy spirit. The son of Man was choosen to be Son of God, the same who was there since the begining.
Virgin Mary did not prefer to attend the Prabables of Christ. 101 reason why no woman cannot be a saint or bear stigmata, or have the responsibility of spreading the news (publically)
actually you have to do yours. your the one making these allegations. You say that the apparition of Mary is really a demon and i asked your 3 times to justify your position and you refuse to.
If you make a statement but then you cant justify it with evidence then you should withdraw your statement. It makes you look foolish.
It isn't Mary. Open your eyes please.....2 Corinthians 11.....13 "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."
A question for any Roman Catholic here: have you met your Dioceses Bishops wife and children yet?
This is not a facetious question. Paul himself flatly stated to Timothy in his First Epistle to him, Chapter Three thereof, what the REQUIREMENTS for the office of Bishop (Greek: ἐπισκοπῆς [episkopēs], translated as "Bishop" in the original Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible translation). Bishops are absolutely REQUIRED to be MARRIED, WITH CHILDREN. Paul even says WHY in verse 5 (good reason)!
@COMALiteJ also you specifically singled out Roman Catholic Bishops, you have failed to mention the other 22 Catholic rites as well as the Orthodox Churches, which also require the discipline of celibacy amongst their bishops. The Church so strongly follows Pauls advice in 1 Corinthians 7. If you look at 1 Timothy honestly you will see that the reference to marriage is in line with Jesus' teaching on divorce and not a mandatory requirement of being married
@carthage397 First of all, the apparition isn't Mary. This demon, or it maybe Satan himself, calls itself the co-mediator when the Bible says there is only one mediator, Christ. If you open the old testament you will see that the 'queen of heaven' was busy back then too. Read God's warnings about this so called 'queen'.
I didn't intend to single out Roman Catholics. I asked because this video was apparently done by Roman Catholics.
I Timothy flatly says that the Bishop MUST be the husband of one wife (or married only once, depending on translation). MUST. He MUST keep his CHILDREN in line in righteousness. Verse 5 says WHY: if a man can't properly rule a HOUSEHOLD (family), how can he be expected to properly rule a Church of God!? That's a pretty darn good reason.
@COMALiteJ in regards to 1 Timothy 3:2 when St. Paul says a bishop must be married only once, the emphasis is on ONLY, so that a bishop wont be married several times and cause scandal. Im sure not every bishop in the early Church was married. St. Paul actually strong supports celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7 due to fact that you can fully serve God and not have to be divided between wife/kids and Church
His emphasis is on "only"? How do you know? Did he use HTML ‹em› or ‹strong› or even ‹i› or ‹b› tags? Or specify italics or boldface in his copy of Microsoft Word for Koine Greek Parchment?
That said, you're right that the commandment is against DIVORCE by the clergy (Bishops and Deacons). Obviously, divorce indicates failure in living up to Verse 5, the requirement to SUCCESSFULLY manage a household to DEMONSTRATE the ability to likewise SUCCESSFULLY manage the Church of God.
@COMALiteJ Word for Koine, thats a good one (im not being sarcastic, it was funny).
On to business...Where you say 1 Tim says that bishop MUST be the husband of one wife, it actually doesnt say MUST directly before husband. Verse 2 starts off as "a bishop MUST be irreproachable, married only once". The MUST isnt placed directly before the husband part.
Glad you liked my attempt at humor. I, too, was not trying to be sarcastic (or at least not insultingly so), but just to add a little levity.
As for "must," while I admit to being no expert on Roman Empire era Koine Greek grammar, in English at least, if the word "must" precedes a comma-separated list of qualifications or criteria, it applies to ALL of them unless something like "or, optionally" preceeds one or more items in the list.
Common sense says he meant the whole list in his "must."
@COMALiteJ if you are going to take this approach and say that the empahsis is not on ONE but that he MUST be married then there is some problems, because in verse 4-5 it says the bishops must manage his CHILDREN (plural). This way of looking at it would rule out any bishop who has no children, where his wife cant have children, or a bishop who only has 1 child. Also if his wife dies since he cant get married because it says ONLY one wife then he wouldnt be able to serve as bishop anymore
The WHOLE POINT was that the wannabe Bishop MUST have DEMONSTRATED the ability to rule a HOUSEHOLD in righteousness, BEFORE he would be permitted to rule the Church of God.
So, yes, children. Childless marriage? Sorry, can't be a Bishop (though adoption would be an option, I suppose, and one child may be enough to qualify as a household).
Widower would be fine, if, prior to her death, he had demonstrated the ability to rule a household in righteousness.
@COMALiteJ again this is your english interpretation of the text with your emphasis on MUST, but St. Jerome who in the 4th century translated the text and knew the language fluently disagrees with your point and said the emphasis is on the bishop cant be married twice. Those bishops that do get married ONCE must keep their kids in check.
@COMALiteJ The reason I say the emphasis is on ONLY is if Paul wanted to stress that the bishop MUST be married he would simply say "he must be married".....why the ONLY? This would imply that he is specifically addressing the issue that bishops shouldn't be married more then 1 time and not so much that it is mandatory that a bishop be married.
Now this is just my interpretation against yours. My next comments are 2 quotes from the early Church fathers interpreting this precise passage
The idea that the marriage is optional, and that "married only once" means "married NO MORE THAN once," or "married zero or one times," is flatly refuted by verse 5, which I have called your attention to repeatedly.
If the wannabe Bishop has never been married, then he has BY DEFINITION never demonstrated the ability to successfully rule a HOUSEHOLD in righteousness. Paul goes OUT OF HIS WAY to make that clear.
The marriage requirement is for THAT SPECIFIC REASON.
@COMALiteJ The first quote is from St. Ambrose of Milan who baptized the great St. Augustine of Hippo, and the 2nd is by St. Jerome who translated the bible into Latin (the vulgate of St. Jerome). Both these men had say and participated in the compiling of the canon of scripture so these men are credible and one would assume they have a very clear understand of scripture and what it means. They are writing in the 4th century, just before the canon of scripture is compiled.
I'm not impressed by your fourth century Church fathers. While they seem ancient to US, they were no closer to Paul in time than we are to, oh, say, Pocahontas — over a century further from Paul than we are from, oh, say, Thomas Jefferson — and you should see the debates I get into over what HIS writings meant and HIS intentions were! If we can't even know the mind of Thomas Jefferson today, how could they know the mind of Paul, barring divine revelation which your Church says was over?
@COMALiteJ no when it comes to the 4th Century Church fathers, to say your not impressed by them then your gonna run into alot of problems. 1. Jerome translated scripture from the Greek to Latin, so therefore he was an EXPERT on ancient Greek. He translates 1 Timothy and then writes a commentary on what it means (that a bishop doesnt have to be married but cant have more then 1 wife) and you find that unacceptable? With all respect what else do you want? seriously man. lol
@COMALiteJ in regards to St. Ambrose of Milan, he baptized and mentored St. Augustine, the very same St. Augustine who pushed for including the book of Revelation in the BIble! At the late 4th century council (when the bible was compiled) Augustine, inspired by the Holy Spirit, said that the Revelation of St. John was inspired.
if you are not impressed by these men who played a huge role in compiling the bible we have today then i must say in all respect your beliefs are based on straw.
You believe that St. Augustine spoke from inspiration? Then that would qualify as revelation, yet the Church claims that all general revelation ceased with the Apostles, does it not?
@COMALiteJ also St. Augustine was guided by the Holy Spirit, inspiration and divine guidance is different from divine revelation. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit will be with his Church and guide it to all truth. Of course the Holy Spirit was guiding the council fathers on matter on matters of faith and discerning the inspired books, if he wasnt they would have screwed it up royally.
@COMALiteJ Ambrose of Milan's Duties of Clergy Bk 1 ch 50 ph 257. in 255 he quotes 1 Tim 3:2 and explains it saying: "But what shall I say about chastity, when only one and no second union is allowed? As regards marriage, the law is, not to marry again, nor to seek union with another wife. It seems strange to many why impediment should be caused by a second marriage entered on before baptism, so as to prevent election to the clerical office.."
@COMALiteJ you can see clearly that Ambrose is interpreting the text to address the issue that bishops cannot be married a 2nd time, not that they HAVE to be married. ok the next quote is from St. Jermone's Against Joviniaus bk.1 ph 34-35. This is a little long so im gonna make several comments
@COMALiteJ "To take the other view, if the Apostle's meaning be that marriage is necessary in a bishop, the Apostle himself ought not to have been a bishop, for he said, 1 Corinthians 7:7 Yet I would that all men were even as I myself. And John will be thought unworthy of this rank, and all the virgins, and the continent, the fairest gems that give grace and ornament to the Church....."
@COMALiteJ "35. The bishop, then, must be without reproach, so that he is the slave of no vice: the husband of one wife, that is, in the past, not in the present; sober, or better, as it is in the Greek, vigilant, that is νηφάλεον; chaste, for that is the meaning of σὼφρονα; distinguished, both by chastity and conduct"
so again you can see that Jerome directly interpreting the text even greater emphasizes the text does not say it is mandatory that a bishop marry.
"The bishop, then, must be ... the husband of one wife, that is, in the past, not in the present;"
Oh, please. First off, verse 5 again. Secondly, if the Bishop has to have been married in the past but not in the present, then by definition he must either be a widower or divorced.
DIVORCE is the thing that is forbidden! That's the ONLY part of the whole chapter of I Corinthians 7 that is NOT Paul's own opinion, but an actual commandment from the Lord, BY HIS OWN EXPLICIT STATEMENT!
That leaves widower. So, by that statement, a prospective Bishop must have been married, and must either wait until his wife dies (hoping that he doesn't die first), or else murder her himself or have her murdered! There is no other option — except for violating the only explicit commandment from the Lord in I Corinthians Chapter 7 and divorcing her!
Methinks that Jerome wasn't thinking his logic all the way through there.
@COMALiteJ God worked through these men to fight the heretics during the early years of the Church, they are responsible for compiling and sustaining the Bible that you hold dear, they are responsible for defending the trinity, dual nature of Christ, etc and did so by formulating doctrines. All the orthodox beliefs you hold are because of God working through these men to uphold and hand them down.
What makes you think that I hold orthodox beliefs? I'm neither Catholic, Orthodox, nor Protestant (though I have been the latter).
A lot of the people the Catholic fathers condemned as "heretics" I consider closer to what the Bible actually taught than the Catholic fathers themselves were.
A lot of politics was involved in those decisions.
@COMALiteJ do you use a 66 book bible, do you believe in the the rapture? do you believe in the 5 solas, if so your a protestant. Nowadays most protestants dont want to be called protestant they just want to be called Christian......they are still protestant whether they want to be called that or not.
66-book Bible? The Bible I use has 66 books, but I do not believe that all of them are equally inspired, nor do I believe that they comprise all of God's word. There are well over a dozen books mentioned in the Bible itself, many by name, in almost two dozen references, often on an absolutely equal footing with books that ARE in the Bible. Examples include the books of Nathan, Gad, Iddo, Jasher, an Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians PRIOR TO the so-called First ("I" Corinthians 5:9), etc.
(I've actually read a book that claims to be the Book of Jasher, though I have my doubts as to its authenticity.)
Rapture? No. Like "Trinity," that word appears nowhere in the Bible in any form.
5 Solas? No. Especially not salvation by grace alone. Matthew 25:31-46 among many others makes it quite plain that works are indeed important to salvation. Even Paul said as much in Galatians chapter 5, listing some sins and saying that those who do them shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.
@COMALiteJ ok heres my question. If you dont accept the trinity and you accept extra biblical books as equal to biblical books, and if you think that the fathers made mistakes with the trinity, etc, why believe in the bible at all?
Secondly, when I was still a believer, in my studies I concluded that the Father and Son were two separate beings, from, among other things, the entire 17th Chapter of John (which puts the Comma Johanneum [the only explicit mention of the Trinity doctrine anywhere] in a whole new light, even if it's authentic [its authenticity is questionable at best, as it's missing from most older manuscripts including the first two versions of the Textus Receptus).
@COMALiteJ ok dont be an atheist, its not logical. That everything was created from nothing by nothing. it doesnt make any sense. Christianity is a religion of mystery. There is the mystery of the incarnation, the mystery of the trinity, the mystery of the eucharist. Just because something cannot be fully comprehended by science or limited human intelligence doesnt mean it is false. There are many things that happen in nature that people dont understand or dont even know about yet
"There are many things that happen in nature that people dont understand or dont even know about yet "
True, but we keep trying to learn them and eventually do. If we declared everything that we don't understand to be an unsolvable Divine Mystery, we would never have advanced in knowledge.
Note that when the Church ruled Europe absolutely (the Dark Ages), knowlege REGRESSED over a period of many centuries. We were more advanced at the time of Christ than we were centuries later.
"ok dont be an atheist, its not logical. That everything was created from nothing by nothing. it doesnt make any sense."
You're confusing atheism (the lack of believe in any gods) with the Big Bang Theory (or, rather, the common misinterpretation of the Big Bang Theory).
The Universe, Time, etc. doesn't HAVE to have a beginning. Time having a beginning or NOT having a beginning are BOTH incomprehensible to our experience, yet one or the other MUST be true, and they cannot BOTH be true.
@COMALiteJ sorry for the delayed response, the big bang theory works well with theism. The big bang theory was actually thought up by a Belgian Catholic Priest. IT makes not sense that everthing, especially intellegent life came from nothing and is guided by nothing. I find that illogical.
Modern scientific theory does not say that everything came from nothing. It says that everything came from the singularity that expanded (not exploded — there is a difference) at the so-called "Big Bang."
I suppose that technically I'd be a Deist right now, since I believe that the Universe had a First Cause / Uncaused Causer, that being whoever or whatever initiated the expansion of the singularity.
The Big Bang itself would be the First EFFECT, NOT the First CAUSE.
@COMALiteJ ok by something or someone had to have orchestrated this singularity that caused the big bang and put all the laws of physics into place.
Im just saying before you abandon Christianity you should read some really Christian material, Catholic material. Its very deep, philosophical, very good writings. You might be interested in the writings of Thomas Aquinas, one of the greatest philosophers of the Western World.
I'm familiar with Aquinas and others. Not impressed. Logical fallacies abound (most notably using the intended conclusion as a premise, aka circular reasoning).
My problems with Christianity cannot easily be explained in 500-character chunks.
I do not accept that the First Cause necessarily had to be some sort of sapient being aware of its own existence. It only had to be whatever initiated the chain of causality.
You see the golden gate bridge, you know that logic dictates that since it is a complex structure then it needed to be built by intelligent beings who had the skill and man power to build it. You werent there to witness the bridge being built but you assume the above.
Now you look at biological life, laws the physics, intelligent humans, how can a non-sapient, un-intelligent force create such complex/intelligent life, laws etc.
Your analogy would be appropriate if Daddy Bridge could have sex with Mommy Bridge and have Baby Bridge that shares BNA (Bridge Nucleic Acid) genes from both parents along with some random mutations, and subsequent generations can mix and match these, some of which will be naturally selected and others rejected (powerful filtering process applied to random input produces order).
Now you look at snowflakes. The Saints won the Super Bowl so Hell froze over and 49 States got snow on the same day. Over all these States, clouds formed from RANDOM supercooled water droplets. These collected onto RANDOM dust particles. But the water droplets froze, and ice crystals formed in a hexagonally symmetrical shape. As the nascent snowflake fell, it passed through different layers of air and water droplets, which changed how the snowflake was forming, and no two formed the same way.
@COMALiteJ yes i am aware how snow forms. I am saying that an intelligent being had to lay down the physical/biological laws for this. Why do things fall at 9.8meter per second ^2.....due to the mass of the earth you have a particular gravitational pull......ok but why, why do objects that have a larger mass have a greater pull, someone had to have orchestrated these laws and put them in place
@COMALiteJ science and religion donot conflict. Some of the greatest scientists were and are Catholic Priests, especially Jesuits. Thomas Aquinas has that to better understand the creator you must better understand his creation. Very logical, rational statement to me.
I agree that science and religion do not inherently conflict. That said, the Judaeo-Christian religion in particular DOES conflict with directly observed science, and seriously so.
Case in point: insects have six legs, not four (Leviticus 11:20-23 [and don't forget verse 23 when posting the usual apologist attempts to explain this one away]). A rainbows is formed by sunlight being diffracted into component spectral colors, and is NOT God's BOW (as in "AND ARROW" — Genesis 9:8-17).
These snowflakes show astounding complexity and order, and we even find them beautiful, yet they're so small and fragile that rarely do we actually get to appreciate their beauty. The vast majority of snowflakes clump together, get smushed into slush (crushing the delicate crystals), and finally melt away, without a single person ever looking at them through a magnifier and appreciating their unique beauty.
Do you believe that God personally hand-carves each snowflake, ever, individually?
I got interrupted by an important and lengthy phone call before I could finish and post the above continuation to my post about snowflakes, and you got in before I could do so.
The point is that snowflakes are directly osberved proof that amazing structure and order can and does arise from random chaos, without any intelligent entity necessarily directing it, just from natural laws as we know them. That happened BRAZILLIONS of times during the recent Snowmageddon / Snowpocalypse. :-)
responding to your second comment on snowflakes, i dont agree that the complexity of snowflakes and that fact that they crash together and make mounds of snow proves in anyway that this is unguided and random chaos.
snow flakes are beautiful when seen under a microscope and snow is beautiful when it blankets a wooded landscape. There is on one had micro beauty and on the other hand macro beauty....i dont see random chaos in this.
It is only we humans who find snow and tree leaves beautiful. That's in our minds, not in the reality. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and all that. And not all of us find such things beautiful. Some people hate snow, and despise the sight of it, for instance.
Tree leaves change color because the chlorophyl, a strong green dye that performs photosynthesis, fades, revealing other, weaker dyes underneath. Which dyes depend on which species of tree.
take for instance the season of fall. the leaves are dying but they die in such a magnificent way. From close each has a different color, but when you look at a mountainside in fall you see a tapestry of beauty and color. It looks almost as if a painter created such beauty......to leave this to random chaos i believe there would be a greater chance of it looking like crap then it looking so beautiful.....and you can apply this to everything in nature.
God set up the laws of nature for snow flakes to be created in this manner. The fact that they are unique and so beautiful further fortifies my belief that an intelligent being (God) orchestrated all of this beautiful and detail.
@COMALiteJ not really......you dont have to reiterate your knowledge of biology to me, this i not the point i am making. Im talking logic. To create intelligent beings, the Creator must be intelligent himself. Everything created comes from something bigger then itself. Im talking plain logic.
I do not accept your premises. "Everything created comes from something bigger than itself"? Ants are much smaller than anthills. Beavers are smaller than beaver dams. People are much smaller than buildings and cities.
You may not use an unproven premise, nor one that we do not both accept as true. You must first prove the premise in prior logic before you can use it in subsequent logic.
I also do not accept your premise that intelligent beings require an intelligent Creator. That just begs the question: since you believe that God is an intelligent Creator, He is by definition intelligent, and if intelligence requires an intelligent Creator, then who created HIM?
And who created HIS Creator? And who created the Creator of God's Creator? And so on, and so forth, ad infinitum.
If God's intelligence did NOT require a Creator, on the other hand, then neither does ours.
well in human logic pertaining to nature, it is understood that for something complex to be created it must be created by a being that has the skill and intelligence to create (ex: humans creating a car or bridge). With this established it is safe to say since the universe is extremely complex and harbors intelligent and complex life, logic dictates that it must have been created by an intelligent being with the skill and knowledge to create all of this.
Re: your use of the word "logic" — well, this guy says it best: /watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
"Logic" is NOT a synonym for "reason." "Logical" is thus not a synonym for "reasonable."
Logic is a formal mathematical system for determining truth. Proper logic is 100% reliable when given true premises. Proof of this? The very fact that you're reading this text! Your computer contains billions if not trillions of logic circuits, performing billions of logic operations per second.
And not just your computer is involved. My computer, when I typed in this text. The YouTube™ computers at Google® that store and process and format it for the Web. The Internet routers between my computer and YouTube, and YouTube and your computer. And so on, and so on, and so on.
If logic were only 99.9999% reliable, your computer would crash hundreds of times a second. If logic were only 99.999% reliable, it would crash thousands of times a second, and so on.
But for logic to be reliable, a logical argument must be BOTH valid AND sound.
Valid means that the logic is properly formed. Sound means that the premise(s) are previously proven true.
"All humans have plaid skin. You're a human. Therefore, you have plaid skin." — that is valid logic, in the form called a "syllogism." But it's unsound, because its premise is false. Thus it fails.
The "logic" used by Creationists and IDers, on the other hand, is INVALID AND unsound.
who created the creator? this is where we come to the conclusion that the creator has always been. The creator exists outside of the rhelm of space and time, therefore the laws of space and time donot apply to the creator.
No you can say i just dont accept that, but its a hell of a lot better explanation for the complexity of life and the cosmos then saying "all of this complexity and life came from nothing and was guided by nothing"
At least the theist has a hypothesis, as opposed to nothing
But if the Creator has always been, then we can just drop the Creator and say that the UNIVERSE has always been (as a singularity or whatever, but still) and not require a Creator.
Since TIME apparently started with the Big Bang, there was (mathematically, anyway) NO SUCH THING as "BEFORE the Big Bang." There was no THEN then, as WELL as no THERE there (space, too, came from it).
That doesn't mean that the singularity was in an empty void. There wasn't even an EMPTY VOID around it!
sorry for my bad choice of words, allow me to rephrase "everything created comes from something greater then itself" You need an adult male ant and a adult queen ant to create thousands of new ants. You need preexisting developed worker ants to create the intricate ant hill.
The point is the ants had the instinct and the skill to create the complex anthill,if the ants werent endowed with this ability then there would be no ant hill, just like humans with the golden gate and God with the cosmos
@COMALiteJ we know by logic that a person who is unfamiliar with calculus cannot teach a calculus class nor can a person who has no knowledge of human anatomy be a doctor. One cannot give or teach what they dont have already. So how can intelligent/complex life be created by a force which lacks these basic traits.
@COMALiteJ have you ever read any catholic writings, they are so rich and so deep, philosophical as well as theological. im not saying this just because im Catholic. i can name a dozen books off the top of my head that will help you if you like. Protestant theology rejects alot of philosophy so it is very shallow, but Catholic theology is amazing, dont take my word for it, experience it yourself and read some of this stuff....you wont be disappointed.
@COMALiteJ i agree 100% with that logic. many protestants are very good, faithful people but I believe that their theology is screwed up more or less depending on the denomination. I could recommend some good Catholic books that can help you with your journey/decision if you like. Many are spiritual, apologetic, historical, philosophical. I try to read as much as possible but i havent even made a dent with it comes to Catholic literature, nor do i even know of majority of Catholic books
@COMALiteJ also when it comes to the trinity, there are many references to Jesus being equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit in scripture, esp in the new testament. Matthew 28, why would Jesus tell the disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Matthew puts the 3 persons of the trinity on the same level. There isnt the word trinity but it is implied. If you want we can talk about this as well.
@COMALiteJ some of the books i would recommend arent even Catholic but anglo-catholic, but non the less very good stuff. let me know man. im leaving the office so my response will be delayed. have a nice night.
@COMALiteJ you should read the writings of the really early father around the turn of the 1st to 2nd centuries. they were taught by the apostles, so they have the clearest understanding of what is Christian Truth. Ignatius of Antioch was John the Apostles disciples, and he became the bishop of Antioch in Turkey, he has alot of nice writings from around 90-106AD that might interest you
@COMALiteJ the Catholic/Orthodox Churches use a bible with 73 books, because when the bible was compiled at the council of carthage in 397 and synod of hippo in 393 it was compiled with 73 books . Those 7 books that Catholics have that protestants dont are called dueterocanonical by us and Apocrapha by protestants. All bible had 73 books up until the 1820's when protesants circles removed the 7 which gives you the present day 66 book protestant bible (niv, kjv, etc)
I'm well aware of the Apocrphya (for the record, the KJV did include them in its original printings, albeit grouped separately between the Old and New Testaments, and not placed in their logical places within the Old Testament).
I've read the Apocrypha, as I have the rest of the Bible. I found much of it quite worthwhile, and believe that it should be considered scripture. Some of it was balderdash (the extra chapters of Daniel re: Susannah, and Bel and the Dragon, for instance).
@COMALiteJ yeah i have the 1611 king james bible, i did a crappy video on it lol. it had the 7 books in an apendix in the middle, many other pre 1820's protestant bibles had them groupped in the back, but it wasnt until the 1820s that they were completely removed.
@COMALiteJ to say the early church fathers dont know what they are talking about (especially Jerome who translated the text from the Greek and did a exegeses on it) is in all due respect illogical, any historian or archeologist would tell you that. And again i say this in all respect, im not being sarcastic or attacking you as person.
I didn't say that they didn't know what they were talking about. I said that, barring revelation, they didn't know for sure what Paul actually intended, beyond what his actual words state.
The actual words of Paul say that Bishops must be, or must have been, married only once (as in never divorced — divorce would automatically indicate failure in successfully ruling a household in righteousness), having ruled a household including children in righteousness.
@COMALiteJ so again you have two early church fathers that played a major role in the compiling of scripture say that the text doesnt say a bishop must be married, that the emphasis is on the prohibition of a 2nd wife. This is why the Orthodox/Catholic/Apostolic Churches maintain the disciple of married clergy not being able to remarry if their spouse dies.
The Marian apparitions are clearly demonic. Don't take my word for it. Brush the dust off of your Bibles and compare what the demon pretending to be Mary says and what the truth in the Bible says. You will be surprised to see they are the opposite. "Marvel not, for Satan can appear as an angel of light and deceive many."
@johnthreesixteen316 i was about to respond to your medeatrix comment but you removed it, do you still want me to respond or have you retracted your statement?
haha, this guy is assuming that marian appearances entail actual divine encounters. People who lack education often lack the critical means to deduce the various other possibilities that could explain such things.
What a stupid video overall, because they don't question the validity of marian apparitians and whether seh even existed or not.
Enigma, try to understand something very important. This is a biased documentary because it does not include a balanced perspective. For instance, she even says at the beginning: ""how are such messages delivered or received?" The question that should be answered here is: 'are these messages actually real, and from where might they possibly originate?' What she's doing is psychological trickery; it makes the viewer feel comfortable in assuming that God exists in the first place.
God bless all of you of the Protestant faiths that are opening up your hearts and mind to the Blessed Mother! It's truly a beautiful thing! Keep asking questions about her! And pray to her for enlightenment! God bless again!
people, the prophesies are coming true right now, in this year. God said He would harden the hearts of people, and that He will send a delusion to people, so that they will follow after the beast. the only way to stop from being deluded is to seek God out and ask Him for wisdom and understanding to know His ways. and you have to ask Him every night, not just once or twice. get on your knees EVERY DAY, and beg for mercy, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e., wisdom and understanding. God Bless!
i am just learning about the catholic church, and even though i am unsure about mary, you can't help but learn about padre pio, who had the stigmata for 50 years, and he was big on asking mary for intervention. there has got to be something there, and even though i grew up baptist, i know this is catching my interest. and the funny thing is, the catholic church is the first one to downplay this kind of stuff.
tti01, i read your post about rejecting materialism and it was very well put, also i read that you are learning about the catholic church and may have some marian questions. I am a devout Catholic and i know a decent amount of information, if you would like i would be happy to help answer any questions you have. take care.
Any questions you may have, please ask me. Check out my video on the brown scapular and a soon to come one on the Rosary. I also intend to do a general informative video on her. feel free to drop me a personal message with any questions you may have.
The one who is free of sin, cast the first stone. The biggest sin of Evangelical Christians is having rejected the mother of Christ. Evangelicals have created more than 40.000 denominations... if that is not division created by Satan itself... what is it?
Yeah, but the Catholic church is more than aware of this and are so meticulous in examining such things afterwards, even independent investigators and athiests are brought in, and even then they remain very cautious. But, you try telling that to the bigoted protestants from the US bible belt who reply to me with such hatred for Catholicism, calling Our Lady a demon from hell.
don't you just hate that? people are so vicious towards catholicism, even when you're simply trying to be informative, not evangelical!mary brought us jesus and through her miracles continues to do so today, so i don't see how people can be so hateful towards our respect for her.
(my late wife was Marian and I miss her) why do you need to hide behind Mary? We can boldly approach the Throne of Grace (Jesus Christ) Hebrews 4:16. Oh, by the way God (YHVH) does not resort to apparitions to convince the world of his exisistance! Marian apparitions Marian apparition
TheDominicanOne1 4 months ago
Medjugorje was fake m8 fatima was the last real one.
cannon0286 5 months ago
This bird is fit.
Daveyboyroy 7 months ago
I've seen her. Four times, every two years since I was thirteen, and once when I was twenty. It is not impossible if just a nobody girl can see and hear and speak to the Blessed Virgin.
PrincipessaDellOpera 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Check out my YouTube channel/playlists and websites for present-truth materials, Three Angels' Messages and God's last-mercy warning to His people in these last days.
Papacy = Antichrist / Little Horn / Beast from the Sea
Roman Catholicism = Whore of Babylon
Investigative Judgement has commenced in 1844 (1st Angel’s Message)
Ellen G. White, 1827-1915 = End-time Prophet Sent of God
7th-day Sabbath = Seal of God
Sunday Worship to be Enforced as Mark of the Beast""
SeventhDayRemnant 8 months ago
Carfin, Our Lady of Fatima statue- photos- 20/04/11
watch?v=tPTq_SQTTTM
greenmagoos 10 months ago
Don't waste your time entertaining protestants. Catholics, Orthodox, even Muslims will continue to venerate Mary as the chosen mother of Jesus.
tacotony24 10 months ago
Read your kjv Bible and.continue to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.All you need to be a Christian is Jesus and the Bible.All else is a distraction.On you tube type in walter veith signs and wounders pt. 1-9.Former Catholic.Also,type in WALTER VEITH RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY 1-6 ON YOU TUBE.GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
marinegrunt76 10 months ago
@marinegrunt76 - Bible -Only "christianity" is unbiblical. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we are to go by the Bible alone. You are part of a man-made religious system created by a heretical, fallen away monk who suffered from deep seated inclinations towards sexual perversion (Martin Luther) who rather than cooperating with God's grace received in the sacrament of Confession and turning away from sin, he rejected Christ's One True Church and allowed Satan to corrupt his soul.
pjb1983 2 months ago
First of all, when the Mary of the bible died the scriptures tells us that all believers bodies go to the grave and our spirt goes to be with the Lord. She is awaiting the Resurection by the power of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ like all other believers. Mary of the the bible is not floating around the world appearing and claiming to b co-redeemer as some of these demonic apparitions claim. Hail Mary...???? No! Praise Jesus!
Tommycancan 11 months ago
@Tommycancan Hail Mary.. NO???? hmmmm trying arguing that with the Archangel Gabriel who greeted her with that message. No Mary, No Jesus. Know Mary, Know Jesus :)
remonramos 8 months ago
Comment removed
pjb1983 2 months ago
I had a very powerful dream of Mary appearing to me as Queen of Heaven. I called a local priest, he told me, "Just consider your dream a personal blessing. Mary often appears to people today because today is the Feast of the Immaculate Conception." This coincidence was not something that I knew. I had no idea that it was a holy Feast of Mary day. So, I can only assume that Mary was well aware that it was her special day. It was rather amazing.
LoneMonk1 1 year ago 2
@LoneMonk1 she's beautiful huh
Houstone2ndward 1 year ago
as a practitioner of the occult arts for over 20 years - I will say one thing for the Nazarene - his name has power - not sure that makes him the son of god but this is what I have observed in my interaction with what most of you would consider to be demonic entities. be well my friends
phorlakhnanta 1 year ago
All Marian apparitions tell the believer to get closer to her Son, the Lord. None of them tell us to worship her. It is thru her holy son that she comes to us with messages for the faithful.
Seanis777 1 year ago 5
All truth comes from the word of God, not man. We should all read the bible for ourselves. I will live by every word that precedes out of the mouth of Christ and not man. We are to praise Jesus and not apparitions. The bibile does mention familiar spirits. Please read Lev 19:31. The Bible warns us 1 John 4:1 "Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world."
ctholder79 1 year ago
@ctholder79 yes.....Jesus gave us the Church which 1Timothy 3:15 says it the pillar and foundation of Truth. The Catholic Church complied the Holy Bible with 73 books in the 4th century, if you think the Catholic Church is wrong then your going to have to question the book it compiled....the Holy BIble.
carthage397 1 year ago
@ctholder79 No one is praising apparitions, Mary is and has been venerated and Honored (not worshipped) as the Mother of God (Jesus is God) since the beginning of Christianity, even the Early Reformers honored and loved Jesus' mother. Also when Mary does appear what is her message? it is always to come to her son and believe and live your life faithfully. When Mary appears millions consecrate their lives to Jesus. Doesnt sound evil to me.
carthage397 1 year ago
Jesus comes to us through Mary. How can you love Jesus and yet reject his mother? It is okay to investigate, of course to make sure it is a true apparition, but we should be careful not to dismiss these out of hand
MsCynthia56 1 year ago
@johnthreesixteen316 If Marian apparitions are "clearly the work of Satan, why does Mary ask for repentance, fasting, reconciliation, prayer and surrender to Jesus Christ? If these apparitions are clearly the work of Satan and his minions, why have more than 30 million pilgrims gone to Medjugorje to seek salvation through glorifying Jesus Christ? It seems the work of Satan continues to have a reverse effect, with the consecration of millions upon millions of souls over to Jesus Christ.
Flametopology 1 year ago 22
@Flametopology great response man. This guy Johnthreesixteen doesn't like to listen to reason, he lets his illogical hatred of the Catholic Church blind his intelligence and reason. When his day of judgement comes God's gonna ask him why he persecuted his Church and i hope he has a better answer then the nonsense he is spouting on this forum. Take Care Man.
carthage397 1 year ago
@Flametopology good exlaination my friend, i eas in medjugorje a week ago and it is magnificent.
laaaguna13 1 year ago
@Flametopology We do need to be wary of apparitions that are not yet recognized by Rome. In the case of Medjugorie, there are good reasons to be skeptical. You can look that up yourself from Catholic sources.
chifai30 1 year ago
@Flametopology You are absolutely consistent with the mind of Christ: [Luke 11:17, 20] He [Jesus] knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and house will fall against house.... then the kingdom of God has come upon you." Christ IS Risen! +Peace+
michiganois 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Flametopology You are absolutely consistent with the mind of Christ: [Luke 11:17, 20] He [Jesus] knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and house will fall against house.... then the kingdom of God has come upon you." Christ IS Risen! +Peace+
michiganois 1 year ago
@Flametopology
The point is why is Mary appearing in the first place, hasnt Jesus told us that he alone we must pray and consult. Isnt looking up the apparitions against what God wants, we should look to christ alone. I am from portugal and my family is catholic. I see how devastating these apparitions can be when people in my country walk miles on their knees to Fatima in order for help from Mary, most of these people are old. This isn't what God wants, it serves no purpose.
Nunogomes77 1 year ago
@Flametopology I am so glad i am not the only one to see and say that. It is so ridiculous what people say. and i am wondering why those who say that, bother to come to these sites. i guess to just mock and ridicule the beautiful BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. and to attack us. they have nothing better to do. and they do not know any better. a good christian would not attack anyone for any reason. we are to love everyone, including our enemies. they need to learn this. and only GOD judges us. not them.
LanaV6 1 year ago
This apparition claims to be our co-redeemer, our suffering servant, our advocate, our mediator, omni-present, sinless and worthy of our adoration. These are all attributes of God Himself, Jesus Christ. These apparitions are clearly the work of Satan and his minions. God says He will share His glory with nobody.....KJV.....Isaiah 48:11...."For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another."
johnthreesixteen316 1 year ago
Satan is no dummy. If he wants to hand out a false message, he certainly isn't going to appear in his real form showing his true character. Instead he pretends to be Mary and decieves many. Yet, try as he may, he can't fool those who are biblically sound.
johnthreesixteen316 1 year ago
@johnthreesixteen316 Didn't Christ say in the Bible "A house divided upon itself will fall" (Luke 11:17)? In fact, He said this in response to the Pharisees who were saying basically the same thing you are saying right now: that by the power of demons was He showing them Signs from Heaven.
Ask yourself: why would Satan appear as Mary to "trick" others into worshiping Christ? Every apparition has the same message: turn to Christ, repent, and you'll be saved.
CircusofPython 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils."
johnthreesixteen316 1 year ago
1 John 4:1....."Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."
If we test the words of these apparitions we will find that they are Satanic, not Biblical.
johnthreesixteen316 1 year ago
Ephesians 6.....11 "Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
@johnthreesixteen316 what does this excerpt from scripture have to do with the video? You are claiming that the apparition of Mary is demonic. Please elaborate on why you think this. And if you say something dumb like "catholics worship mary!!!" This is not what the Catholic Church teaches. If you say this youll be breaking the 8th commandment. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
carthage397 2 years ago
@carthage397 Compare Biblical scripture with the apparition messages over the years. Obviously demonic. Leading people away from the true Christ.
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
What in particular did Mary say in the apparition that was contrary to scripture that would lead you to this conclusion? Please specify.
carthage397 2 years ago
@carthage397 The apparitions aren't Mary. Millions around the world 'want' to believe it is because it appears so sweet and benevolent. Satan isn't stupid. He is very clever. You owe it to yourself to do some scriptural homework and then the truth of this matter will become quite clear.
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
again, please show me where the apparition said something that was un-scriptural. From what i have read Mary's main message in the apparition is that people need to be converted over to Christ. If this was a demon why would it tell people to stop sinning and convert to Christ?
Again please give me evidence that supports your claim. You cant just assume something without any justification for it.
carthage397 2 years ago
and the argument that Mary was sweet so it was really a demon makes no sense. Mary was sweet because Mary IS sweet, shes the Mother of God (Jesus).
By your logic one could say that when Jesus appeared to the Apostles after the resurrection it was really a demon because he was benevolent and good to them.
Pick and apparition, look up the script for the apparition (and not from an anti-catholic site) from a non bias source and show me where it conflicts with scripture.
carthage397 2 years ago 10
@carthage397
She will be called blessed, she is shared no prophecy , nor is she given the responsibiilty to act as an helper. He is blessed as she is the Mother of Jesus. The Son of Man who was born through the holy spirit. The son of Man was choosen to be Son of God, the same who was there since the begining.
Virgin Mary did not prefer to attend the Prabables of Christ. 101 reason why no woman cannot be a saint or bear stigmata, or have the responsibility of spreading the news (publically)
AdamtoJesus 1 year ago
Do your homework.
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
actually you have to do yours. your the one making these allegations. You say that the apparition of Mary is really a demon and i asked your 3 times to justify your position and you refuse to.
If you make a statement but then you cant justify it with evidence then you should withdraw your statement. It makes you look foolish.
carthage397 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It isn't Mary. Open your eyes please.....2 Corinthians 11.....13 "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
A question for any Roman Catholic here: have you met your Dioceses Bishops wife and children yet?
This is not a facetious question. Paul himself flatly stated to Timothy in his First Epistle to him, Chapter Three thereof, what the REQUIREMENTS for the office of Bishop (Greek: ἐπισκοπῆς [episkopēs], translated as "Bishop" in the original Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible translation). Bishops are absolutely REQUIRED to be MARRIED, WITH CHILDREN. Paul even says WHY in verse 5 (good reason)!
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
Oops, YouTube™ ate my fancy apostrophes!
A question for any Roman Catholics here: have you met your Diocese's Bishop's wife and children yet?
(continue on with explanation from previous post of why that is not a facetious question)
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ also you specifically singled out Roman Catholic Bishops, you have failed to mention the other 22 Catholic rites as well as the Orthodox Churches, which also require the discipline of celibacy amongst their bishops. The Church so strongly follows Pauls advice in 1 Corinthians 7. If you look at 1 Timothy honestly you will see that the reference to marriage is in line with Jesus' teaching on divorce and not a mandatory requirement of being married
carthage397 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@carthage397 First of all, the apparition isn't Mary. This demon, or it maybe Satan himself, calls itself the co-mediator when the Bible says there is only one mediator, Christ. If you open the old testament you will see that the 'queen of heaven' was busy back then too. Read God's warnings about this so called 'queen'.
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
I didn't intend to single out Roman Catholics. I asked because this video was apparently done by Roman Catholics.
I Timothy flatly says that the Bishop MUST be the husband of one wife (or married only once, depending on translation). MUST. He MUST keep his CHILDREN in line in righteousness. Verse 5 says WHY: if a man can't properly rule a HOUSEHOLD (family), how can he be expected to properly rule a Church of God!? That's a pretty darn good reason.
I Corinthians 7 doesn't even MENTION clergy.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ in regards to 1 Timothy 3:2 when St. Paul says a bishop must be married only once, the emphasis is on ONLY, so that a bishop wont be married several times and cause scandal. Im sure not every bishop in the early Church was married. St. Paul actually strong supports celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7 due to fact that you can fully serve God and not have to be divided between wife/kids and Church
carthage397 2 years ago
His emphasis is on "only"? How do you know? Did he use HTML ‹em› or ‹strong› or even ‹i› or ‹b› tags? Or specify italics or boldface in his copy of Microsoft Word for Koine Greek Parchment?
That said, you're right that the commandment is against DIVORCE by the clergy (Bishops and Deacons). Obviously, divorce indicates failure in living up to Verse 5, the requirement to SUCCESSFULLY manage a household to DEMONSTRATE the ability to likewise SUCCESSFULLY manage the Church of God.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ Word for Koine, thats a good one (im not being sarcastic, it was funny).
On to business...Where you say 1 Tim says that bishop MUST be the husband of one wife, it actually doesnt say MUST directly before husband. Verse 2 starts off as "a bishop MUST be irreproachable, married only once". The MUST isnt placed directly before the husband part.
carthage397 2 years ago
Glad you liked my attempt at humor. I, too, was not trying to be sarcastic (or at least not insultingly so), but just to add a little levity.
As for "must," while I admit to being no expert on Roman Empire era Koine Greek grammar, in English at least, if the word "must" precedes a comma-separated list of qualifications or criteria, it applies to ALL of them unless something like "or, optionally" preceeds one or more items in the list.
Common sense says he meant the whole list in his "must."
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ if you are going to take this approach and say that the empahsis is not on ONE but that he MUST be married then there is some problems, because in verse 4-5 it says the bishops must manage his CHILDREN (plural). This way of looking at it would rule out any bishop who has no children, where his wife cant have children, or a bishop who only has 1 child. Also if his wife dies since he cant get married because it says ONLY one wife then he wouldnt be able to serve as bishop anymore
carthage397 2 years ago
The WHOLE POINT was that the wannabe Bishop MUST have DEMONSTRATED the ability to rule a HOUSEHOLD in righteousness, BEFORE he would be permitted to rule the Church of God.
So, yes, children. Childless marriage? Sorry, can't be a Bishop (though adoption would be an option, I suppose, and one child may be enough to qualify as a household).
Widower would be fine, if, prior to her death, he had demonstrated the ability to rule a household in righteousness.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ again this is your english interpretation of the text with your emphasis on MUST, but St. Jerome who in the 4th century translated the text and knew the language fluently disagrees with your point and said the emphasis is on the bishop cant be married twice. Those bishops that do get married ONCE must keep their kids in check.
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ The reason I say the emphasis is on ONLY is if Paul wanted to stress that the bishop MUST be married he would simply say "he must be married".....why the ONLY? This would imply that he is specifically addressing the issue that bishops shouldn't be married more then 1 time and not so much that it is mandatory that a bishop be married.
Now this is just my interpretation against yours. My next comments are 2 quotes from the early Church fathers interpreting this precise passage
carthage397 2 years ago
The idea that the marriage is optional, and that "married only once" means "married NO MORE THAN once," or "married zero or one times," is flatly refuted by verse 5, which I have called your attention to repeatedly.
If the wannabe Bishop has never been married, then he has BY DEFINITION never demonstrated the ability to successfully rule a HOUSEHOLD in righteousness. Paul goes OUT OF HIS WAY to make that clear.
The marriage requirement is for THAT SPECIFIC REASON.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ The first quote is from St. Ambrose of Milan who baptized the great St. Augustine of Hippo, and the 2nd is by St. Jerome who translated the bible into Latin (the vulgate of St. Jerome). Both these men had say and participated in the compiling of the canon of scripture so these men are credible and one would assume they have a very clear understand of scripture and what it means. They are writing in the 4th century, just before the canon of scripture is compiled.
carthage397 2 years ago
I'm not impressed by your fourth century Church fathers. While they seem ancient to US, they were no closer to Paul in time than we are to, oh, say, Pocahontas — over a century further from Paul than we are from, oh, say, Thomas Jefferson — and you should see the debates I get into over what HIS writings meant and HIS intentions were! If we can't even know the mind of Thomas Jefferson today, how could they know the mind of Paul, barring divine revelation which your Church says was over?
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ no when it comes to the 4th Century Church fathers, to say your not impressed by them then your gonna run into alot of problems. 1. Jerome translated scripture from the Greek to Latin, so therefore he was an EXPERT on ancient Greek. He translates 1 Timothy and then writes a commentary on what it means (that a bishop doesnt have to be married but cant have more then 1 wife) and you find that unacceptable? With all respect what else do you want? seriously man. lol
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ in regards to St. Ambrose of Milan, he baptized and mentored St. Augustine, the very same St. Augustine who pushed for including the book of Revelation in the BIble! At the late 4th century council (when the bible was compiled) Augustine, inspired by the Holy Spirit, said that the Revelation of St. John was inspired.
if you are not impressed by these men who played a huge role in compiling the bible we have today then i must say in all respect your beliefs are based on straw.
carthage397 2 years ago
You believe that St. Augustine spoke from inspiration? Then that would qualify as revelation, yet the Church claims that all general revelation ceased with the Apostles, does it not?
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ also St. Augustine was guided by the Holy Spirit, inspiration and divine guidance is different from divine revelation. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit will be with his Church and guide it to all truth. Of course the Holy Spirit was guiding the council fathers on matter on matters of faith and discerning the inspired books, if he wasnt they would have screwed it up royally.
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ Ambrose of Milan's Duties of Clergy Bk 1 ch 50 ph 257. in 255 he quotes 1 Tim 3:2 and explains it saying: "But what shall I say about chastity, when only one and no second union is allowed? As regards marriage, the law is, not to marry again, nor to seek union with another wife. It seems strange to many why impediment should be caused by a second marriage entered on before baptism, so as to prevent election to the clerical office.."
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ you can see clearly that Ambrose is interpreting the text to address the issue that bishops cannot be married a 2nd time, not that they HAVE to be married. ok the next quote is from St. Jermone's Against Joviniaus bk.1 ph 34-35. This is a little long so im gonna make several comments
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ "To take the other view, if the Apostle's meaning be that marriage is necessary in a bishop, the Apostle himself ought not to have been a bishop, for he said, 1 Corinthians 7:7 Yet I would that all men were even as I myself. And John will be thought unworthy of this rank, and all the virgins, and the continent, the fairest gems that give grace and ornament to the Church....."
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ "35. The bishop, then, must be without reproach, so that he is the slave of no vice: the husband of one wife, that is, in the past, not in the present; sober, or better, as it is in the Greek, vigilant, that is νηφάλεον; chaste, for that is the meaning of σὼφρονα; distinguished, both by chastity and conduct"
so again you can see that Jerome directly interpreting the text even greater emphasizes the text does not say it is mandatory that a bishop marry.
carthage397 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The bishop, then, must be ... the husband of one wife, that is, in the past, not in the present;"
Oh, please. First off, verse 5 again. Secondly, if the Bishop has to have been married in the past but not in the present, then by definition he must either be a widower or divorced.
DIVORCE is the thing that is forbidden! That's the ONLY part of the whole chapter of I Corinthians 7 that is NOT Paul's own opinion, but an actual commandment from the Lord, BY HIS OWN EXPLICIT STATEMENT!
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
That leaves widower. So, by that statement, a prospective Bishop must have been married, and must either wait until his wife dies (hoping that he doesn't die first), or else murder her himself or have her murdered! There is no other option — except for violating the only explicit commandment from the Lord in I Corinthians Chapter 7 and divorcing her!
Methinks that Jerome wasn't thinking his logic all the way through there.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ God worked through these men to fight the heretics during the early years of the Church, they are responsible for compiling and sustaining the Bible that you hold dear, they are responsible for defending the trinity, dual nature of Christ, etc and did so by formulating doctrines. All the orthodox beliefs you hold are because of God working through these men to uphold and hand them down.
carthage397 2 years ago
What makes you think that I hold orthodox beliefs? I'm neither Catholic, Orthodox, nor Protestant (though I have been the latter).
A lot of the people the Catholic fathers condemned as "heretics" I consider closer to what the Bible actually taught than the Catholic fathers themselves were.
A lot of politics was involved in those decisions.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ do you use a 66 book bible, do you believe in the the rapture? do you believe in the 5 solas, if so your a protestant. Nowadays most protestants dont want to be called protestant they just want to be called Christian......they are still protestant whether they want to be called that or not.
carthage397 2 years ago
66-book Bible? The Bible I use has 66 books, but I do not believe that all of them are equally inspired, nor do I believe that they comprise all of God's word. There are well over a dozen books mentioned in the Bible itself, many by name, in almost two dozen references, often on an absolutely equal footing with books that ARE in the Bible. Examples include the books of Nathan, Gad, Iddo, Jasher, an Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians PRIOR TO the so-called First ("I" Corinthians 5:9), etc.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
(I've actually read a book that claims to be the Book of Jasher, though I have my doubts as to its authenticity.)
Rapture? No. Like "Trinity," that word appears nowhere in the Bible in any form.
5 Solas? No. Especially not salvation by grace alone. Matthew 25:31-46 among many others makes it quite plain that works are indeed important to salvation. Even Paul said as much in Galatians chapter 5, listing some sins and saying that those who do them shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ ok heres my question. If you dont accept the trinity and you accept extra biblical books as equal to biblical books, and if you think that the fathers made mistakes with the trinity, etc, why believe in the bible at all?
carthage397 2 years ago
First off, I'm on the verge of atheism.
Secondly, when I was still a believer, in my studies I concluded that the Father and Son were two separate beings, from, among other things, the entire 17th Chapter of John (which puts the Comma Johanneum [the only explicit mention of the Trinity doctrine anywhere] in a whole new light, even if it's authentic [its authenticity is questionable at best, as it's missing from most older manuscripts including the first two versions of the Textus Receptus).
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ ok dont be an atheist, its not logical. That everything was created from nothing by nothing. it doesnt make any sense. Christianity is a religion of mystery. There is the mystery of the incarnation, the mystery of the trinity, the mystery of the eucharist. Just because something cannot be fully comprehended by science or limited human intelligence doesnt mean it is false. There are many things that happen in nature that people dont understand or dont even know about yet
carthage397 2 years ago
"There are many things that happen in nature that people dont understand or dont even know about yet "
True, but we keep trying to learn them and eventually do. If we declared everything that we don't understand to be an unsolvable Divine Mystery, we would never have advanced in knowledge.
Note that when the Church ruled Europe absolutely (the Dark Ages), knowlege REGRESSED over a period of many centuries. We were more advanced at the time of Christ than we were centuries later.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
"ok dont be an atheist, its not logical. That everything was created from nothing by nothing. it doesnt make any sense."
You're confusing atheism (the lack of believe in any gods) with the Big Bang Theory (or, rather, the common misinterpretation of the Big Bang Theory).
The Universe, Time, etc. doesn't HAVE to have a beginning. Time having a beginning or NOT having a beginning are BOTH incomprehensible to our experience, yet one or the other MUST be true, and they cannot BOTH be true.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ sorry for the delayed response, the big bang theory works well with theism. The big bang theory was actually thought up by a Belgian Catholic Priest. IT makes not sense that everthing, especially intellegent life came from nothing and is guided by nothing. I find that illogical.
carthage397 2 years ago
Modern scientific theory does not say that everything came from nothing. It says that everything came from the singularity that expanded (not exploded — there is a difference) at the so-called "Big Bang."
I suppose that technically I'd be a Deist right now, since I believe that the Universe had a First Cause / Uncaused Causer, that being whoever or whatever initiated the expansion of the singularity.
The Big Bang itself would be the First EFFECT, NOT the First CAUSE.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ ok by something or someone had to have orchestrated this singularity that caused the big bang and put all the laws of physics into place.
Im just saying before you abandon Christianity you should read some really Christian material, Catholic material. Its very deep, philosophical, very good writings. You might be interested in the writings of Thomas Aquinas, one of the greatest philosophers of the Western World.
carthage397 2 years ago
I'm familiar with Aquinas and others. Not impressed. Logical fallacies abound (most notably using the intended conclusion as a premise, aka circular reasoning).
My problems with Christianity cannot easily be explained in 500-character chunks.
I do not accept that the First Cause necessarily had to be some sort of sapient being aware of its own existence. It only had to be whatever initiated the chain of causality.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
You see the golden gate bridge, you know that logic dictates that since it is a complex structure then it needed to be built by intelligent beings who had the skill and man power to build it. You werent there to witness the bridge being built but you assume the above.
Now you look at biological life, laws the physics, intelligent humans, how can a non-sapient, un-intelligent force create such complex/intelligent life, laws etc.
carthage397 2 years ago
Your analogy would be appropriate if Daddy Bridge could have sex with Mommy Bridge and have Baby Bridge that shares BNA (Bridge Nucleic Acid) genes from both parents along with some random mutations, and subsequent generations can mix and match these, some of which will be naturally selected and others rejected (powerful filtering process applied to random input produces order).
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
Now you look at snowflakes. The Saints won the Super Bowl so Hell froze over and 49 States got snow on the same day. Over all these States, clouds formed from RANDOM supercooled water droplets. These collected onto RANDOM dust particles. But the water droplets froze, and ice crystals formed in a hexagonally symmetrical shape. As the nascent snowflake fell, it passed through different layers of air and water droplets, which changed how the snowflake was forming, and no two formed the same way.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ yes i am aware how snow forms. I am saying that an intelligent being had to lay down the physical/biological laws for this. Why do things fall at 9.8meter per second ^2.....due to the mass of the earth you have a particular gravitational pull......ok but why, why do objects that have a larger mass have a greater pull, someone had to have orchestrated these laws and put them in place
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ science and religion donot conflict. Some of the greatest scientists were and are Catholic Priests, especially Jesuits. Thomas Aquinas has that to better understand the creator you must better understand his creation. Very logical, rational statement to me.
carthage397 2 years ago
I agree that science and religion do not inherently conflict. That said, the Judaeo-Christian religion in particular DOES conflict with directly observed science, and seriously so.
Case in point: insects have six legs, not four (Leviticus 11:20-23 [and don't forget verse 23 when posting the usual apologist attempts to explain this one away]). A rainbows is formed by sunlight being diffracted into component spectral colors, and is NOT God's BOW (as in "AND ARROW" — Genesis 9:8-17).
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
ill get to the biblical references later, i have work to do :)
carthage397 2 years ago
These snowflakes show astounding complexity and order, and we even find them beautiful, yet they're so small and fragile that rarely do we actually get to appreciate their beauty. The vast majority of snowflakes clump together, get smushed into slush (crushing the delicate crystals), and finally melt away, without a single person ever looking at them through a magnifier and appreciating their unique beauty.
Do you believe that God personally hand-carves each snowflake, ever, individually?
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
I got interrupted by an important and lengthy phone call before I could finish and post the above continuation to my post about snowflakes, and you got in before I could do so.
The point is that snowflakes are directly osberved proof that amazing structure and order can and does arise from random chaos, without any intelligent entity necessarily directing it, just from natural laws as we know them. That happened BRAZILLIONS of times during the recent Snowmageddon / Snowpocalypse. :-)
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
responding to your second comment on snowflakes, i dont agree that the complexity of snowflakes and that fact that they crash together and make mounds of snow proves in anyway that this is unguided and random chaos.
snow flakes are beautiful when seen under a microscope and snow is beautiful when it blankets a wooded landscape. There is on one had micro beauty and on the other hand macro beauty....i dont see random chaos in this.
carthage397 2 years ago
It is only we humans who find snow and tree leaves beautiful. That's in our minds, not in the reality. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and all that. And not all of us find such things beautiful. Some people hate snow, and despise the sight of it, for instance.
Tree leaves change color because the chlorophyl, a strong green dye that performs photosynthesis, fades, revealing other, weaker dyes underneath. Which dyes depend on which species of tree.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
take for instance the season of fall. the leaves are dying but they die in such a magnificent way. From close each has a different color, but when you look at a mountainside in fall you see a tapestry of beauty and color. It looks almost as if a painter created such beauty......to leave this to random chaos i believe there would be a greater chance of it looking like crap then it looking so beautiful.....and you can apply this to everything in nature.
carthage397 2 years ago
God set up the laws of nature for snow flakes to be created in this manner. The fact that they are unique and so beautiful further fortifies my belief that an intelligent being (God) orchestrated all of this beautiful and detail.
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ not really......you dont have to reiterate your knowledge of biology to me, this i not the point i am making. Im talking logic. To create intelligent beings, the Creator must be intelligent himself. Everything created comes from something bigger then itself. Im talking plain logic.
carthage397 2 years ago
I do not accept your premises. "Everything created comes from something bigger than itself"? Ants are much smaller than anthills. Beavers are smaller than beaver dams. People are much smaller than buildings and cities.
You may not use an unproven premise, nor one that we do not both accept as true. You must first prove the premise in prior logic before you can use it in subsequent logic.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
I also do not accept your premise that intelligent beings require an intelligent Creator. That just begs the question: since you believe that God is an intelligent Creator, He is by definition intelligent, and if intelligence requires an intelligent Creator, then who created HIM?
And who created HIS Creator? And who created the Creator of God's Creator? And so on, and so forth, ad infinitum.
If God's intelligence did NOT require a Creator, on the other hand, then neither does ours.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
well in human logic pertaining to nature, it is understood that for something complex to be created it must be created by a being that has the skill and intelligence to create (ex: humans creating a car or bridge). With this established it is safe to say since the universe is extremely complex and harbors intelligent and complex life, logic dictates that it must have been created by an intelligent being with the skill and knowledge to create all of this.
carthage397 2 years ago
Re: your use of the word "logic" — well, this guy says it best: /watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
"Logic" is NOT a synonym for "reason." "Logical" is thus not a synonym for "reasonable."
Logic is a formal mathematical system for determining truth. Proper logic is 100% reliable when given true premises. Proof of this? The very fact that you're reading this text! Your computer contains billions if not trillions of logic circuits, performing billions of logic operations per second.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
And not just your computer is involved. My computer, when I typed in this text. The YouTube™ computers at Google® that store and process and format it for the Web. The Internet routers between my computer and YouTube, and YouTube and your computer. And so on, and so on, and so on.
If logic were only 99.9999% reliable, your computer would crash hundreds of times a second. If logic were only 99.999% reliable, it would crash thousands of times a second, and so on.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
But for logic to be reliable, a logical argument must be BOTH valid AND sound.
Valid means that the logic is properly formed. Sound means that the premise(s) are previously proven true.
"All humans have plaid skin. You're a human. Therefore, you have plaid skin." — that is valid logic, in the form called a "syllogism." But it's unsound, because its premise is false. Thus it fails.
The "logic" used by Creationists and IDers, on the other hand, is INVALID AND unsound.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
Here's the traditional "logic" used by Creationists / IDers:
• PREMISE: If Life and/or the Universe were Created and/or Intelligently Designed, they would be very complex.
• OBSERVATION: We observe that Life and/or the Universe are very complex indeed.
• CONCLUSION: Therefore, life and/or the Universe were in fact Created and/or Intelligently Designed.
Do you agree that that is the "logic" that your side uses? It is certainly what YOU'VE been using in this discussion.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
who created the creator? this is where we come to the conclusion that the creator has always been. The creator exists outside of the rhelm of space and time, therefore the laws of space and time donot apply to the creator.
No you can say i just dont accept that, but its a hell of a lot better explanation for the complexity of life and the cosmos then saying "all of this complexity and life came from nothing and was guided by nothing"
At least the theist has a hypothesis, as opposed to nothing
carthage397 2 years ago
But if the Creator has always been, then we can just drop the Creator and say that the UNIVERSE has always been (as a singularity or whatever, but still) and not require a Creator.
Since TIME apparently started with the Big Bang, there was (mathematically, anyway) NO SUCH THING as "BEFORE the Big Bang." There was no THEN then, as WELL as no THERE there (space, too, came from it).
That doesn't mean that the singularity was in an empty void. There wasn't even an EMPTY VOID around it!
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
sorry for my bad choice of words, allow me to rephrase "everything created comes from something greater then itself" You need an adult male ant and a adult queen ant to create thousands of new ants. You need preexisting developed worker ants to create the intricate ant hill.
The point is the ants had the instinct and the skill to create the complex anthill,if the ants werent endowed with this ability then there would be no ant hill, just like humans with the golden gate and God with the cosmos
carthage397 2 years ago
Comment removed
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ we know by logic that a person who is unfamiliar with calculus cannot teach a calculus class nor can a person who has no knowledge of human anatomy be a doctor. One cannot give or teach what they dont have already. So how can intelligent/complex life be created by a force which lacks these basic traits.
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ have you ever read any catholic writings, they are so rich and so deep, philosophical as well as theological. im not saying this just because im Catholic. i can name a dozen books off the top of my head that will help you if you like. Protestant theology rejects alot of philosophy so it is very shallow, but Catholic theology is amazing, dont take my word for it, experience it yourself and read some of this stuff....you wont be disappointed.
carthage397 2 years ago
I dismissed Protestantism (all of it) some time ago as INHERENTLY illogical.
There are only two possibilities, after all: Either:
• Catholicism is true, OR
• Catholicism is false (for whatever reason, including all of Christianity being false).
If Catholicism is true, then Protestants (all of them, but not the Orthodox) are apostates.
If Catholicism is false, well, Jesus Himself said that an evil tree CANNOT bring forth good fruit.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ i agree 100% with that logic. many protestants are very good, faithful people but I believe that their theology is screwed up more or less depending on the denomination. I could recommend some good Catholic books that can help you with your journey/decision if you like. Many are spiritual, apologetic, historical, philosophical. I try to read as much as possible but i havent even made a dent with it comes to Catholic literature, nor do i even know of majority of Catholic books
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ also when it comes to the trinity, there are many references to Jesus being equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit in scripture, esp in the new testament. Matthew 28, why would Jesus tell the disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Matthew puts the 3 persons of the trinity on the same level. There isnt the word trinity but it is implied. If you want we can talk about this as well.
carthage397 2 years ago
There are also references to the Father being greater than the Son. Jesus Himself says that outright. Nothing can be greater than itself.
The Johannine Comma is the only verse that mentions ALL THREE, *AND* flatly states that they're one.
I see the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as one in PURPOSE and INTENT, but NOT one in ENTITY, ESSENCE, BEING, or IDENTITY.
There are nine U.S. Supreme Court Justices, but only one U.S. Supreme Court. That does not make the Justices some composite being.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ some of the books i would recommend arent even Catholic but anglo-catholic, but non the less very good stuff. let me know man. im leaving the office so my response will be delayed. have a nice night.
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ you should read the writings of the really early father around the turn of the 1st to 2nd centuries. they were taught by the apostles, so they have the clearest understanding of what is Christian Truth. Ignatius of Antioch was John the Apostles disciples, and he became the bishop of Antioch in Turkey, he has alot of nice writings from around 90-106AD that might interest you
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ the Catholic/Orthodox Churches use a bible with 73 books, because when the bible was compiled at the council of carthage in 397 and synod of hippo in 393 it was compiled with 73 books . Those 7 books that Catholics have that protestants dont are called dueterocanonical by us and Apocrapha by protestants. All bible had 73 books up until the 1820's when protesants circles removed the 7 which gives you the present day 66 book protestant bible (niv, kjv, etc)
carthage397 2 years ago
I'm well aware of the Apocrphya (for the record, the KJV did include them in its original printings, albeit grouped separately between the Old and New Testaments, and not placed in their logical places within the Old Testament).
I've read the Apocrypha, as I have the rest of the Bible. I found much of it quite worthwhile, and believe that it should be considered scripture. Some of it was balderdash (the extra chapters of Daniel re: Susannah, and Bel and the Dragon, for instance).
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ yeah i have the 1611 king james bible, i did a crappy video on it lol. it had the 7 books in an apendix in the middle, many other pre 1820's protestant bibles had them groupped in the back, but it wasnt until the 1820s that they were completely removed.
carthage397 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ to say the early church fathers dont know what they are talking about (especially Jerome who translated the text from the Greek and did a exegeses on it) is in all due respect illogical, any historian or archeologist would tell you that. And again i say this in all respect, im not being sarcastic or attacking you as person.
carthage397 2 years ago
I didn't say that they didn't know what they were talking about. I said that, barring revelation, they didn't know for sure what Paul actually intended, beyond what his actual words state.
The actual words of Paul say that Bishops must be, or must have been, married only once (as in never divorced — divorce would automatically indicate failure in successfully ruling a household in righteousness), having ruled a household including children in righteousness.
COMALiteJ 2 years ago
@COMALiteJ so again you have two early church fathers that played a major role in the compiling of scripture say that the text doesnt say a bishop must be married, that the emphasis is on the prohibition of a 2nd wife. This is why the Orthodox/Catholic/Apostolic Churches maintain the disciple of married clergy not being able to remarry if their spouse dies.
carthage397 2 years ago
The Marian apparitions are clearly demonic. Don't take my word for it. Brush the dust off of your Bibles and compare what the demon pretending to be Mary says and what the truth in the Bible says. You will be surprised to see they are the opposite. "Marvel not, for Satan can appear as an angel of light and deceive many."
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
@johnthreesixteen316 You are affirming things irresponsibly. I hope you seriously consider your unfounded accusations.
Enigmatik691 2 years ago
@johnthreesixteen316 please elaborate how the Marian apparitions are demonic. What does Mary say that is contrary to scripture?
carthage397 2 years ago
Comment removed
johnthreesixteen316 2 years ago
Comment removed
carthage397 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@johnthreesixteen316 i was about to respond to your medeatrix comment but you removed it, do you still want me to respond or have you retracted your statement?
carthage397 2 years ago
haha, this guy is assuming that marian appearances entail actual divine encounters. People who lack education often lack the critical means to deduce the various other possibilities that could explain such things.
What a stupid video overall, because they don't question the validity of marian apparitians and whether seh even existed or not.
jedimasterham 2 years ago
I think the stupid is you who come up with conclusions based on your opinion and without serious consideration of what is presented.
Enigmatik691 2 years ago
Enigma, try to understand something very important. This is a biased documentary because it does not include a balanced perspective. For instance, she even says at the beginning: ""how are such messages delivered or received?" The question that should be answered here is: 'are these messages actually real, and from where might they possibly originate?' What she's doing is psychological trickery; it makes the viewer feel comfortable in assuming that God exists in the first place.
jedimasterham 2 years ago
God bless all of you of the Protestant faiths that are opening up your hearts and mind to the Blessed Mother! It's truly a beautiful thing! Keep asking questions about her! And pray to her for enlightenment! God bless again!
brown8899 2 years ago 5
I as a young Catholic do not belive that you pray to Mary but you ask her to pray for you.
BunnyBee023 2 years ago 2
people, the prophesies are coming true right now, in this year. God said He would harden the hearts of people, and that He will send a delusion to people, so that they will follow after the beast. the only way to stop from being deluded is to seek God out and ask Him for wisdom and understanding to know His ways. and you have to ask Him every night, not just once or twice. get on your knees EVERY DAY, and beg for mercy, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e., wisdom and understanding. God Bless!
tti01 2 years ago
true that
cheesemonkey1990 2 years ago
i am just learning about the catholic church, and even though i am unsure about mary, you can't help but learn about padre pio, who had the stigmata for 50 years, and he was big on asking mary for intervention. there has got to be something there, and even though i grew up baptist, i know this is catching my interest. and the funny thing is, the catholic church is the first one to downplay this kind of stuff.
tti01 2 years ago 4
tti01, i read your post about rejecting materialism and it was very well put, also i read that you are learning about the catholic church and may have some marian questions. I am a devout Catholic and i know a decent amount of information, if you would like i would be happy to help answer any questions you have. take care.
carthage397 2 years ago 2
how do i give you my email addy without it showing up here?
tti01 2 years ago
Any questions you may have, please ask me. Check out my video on the brown scapular and a soon to come one on the Rosary. I also intend to do a general informative video on her. feel free to drop me a personal message with any questions you may have.
cheesemonkey1990 2 years ago
I've spent the bulk of my adult life in protestant churches and it is indeed a shame how much Mary and the saints are ignored.
Pacisdiligo 2 years ago
"Is Carolyn married?" Ooops!!
IrishStorm1 2 years ago
The one who is free of sin, cast the first stone. The biggest sin of Evangelical Christians is having rejected the mother of Christ. Evangelicals have created more than 40.000 denominations... if that is not division created by Satan itself... what is it?
MrIbelieveinGod 2 years ago
remember to test the spirits to see if they are from god. comparing what they say with scripture. satan can appear as an angel of light.
0doubt 2 years ago
Yeah, but the Catholic church is more than aware of this and are so meticulous in examining such things afterwards, even independent investigators and athiests are brought in, and even then they remain very cautious. But, you try telling that to the bigoted protestants from the US bible belt who reply to me with such hatred for Catholicism, calling Our Lady a demon from hell.
IrishStorm1 2 years ago
don't you just hate that? people are so vicious towards catholicism, even when you're simply trying to be informative, not evangelical!mary brought us jesus and through her miracles continues to do so today, so i don't see how people can be so hateful towards our respect for her.
perkypink 2 years ago 5