>
> jw
>
>
> >On 25 Feb 2004 07:31:39 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >wrote:
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >>>
> >>>Q: Would you allow an atheist who knew sign language to interpret
your
> >>>pastor's sermon to the deaf?
> >>
> >>No. The atheist would be welcome in the service, as an observer. But
> >>non-believers may not participate in a service. There is no "common
> >>bond" of the Holy Spirit to motivate them to behave.
>
>
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >
> >What if he was the only person who knew how to speak sign language?
> >>>
> >>>Q: Would you allow a mentally ill street person who speaks to
himself
> >>>in loud voices to sit on the front row during Sunday services?
> >>No. NO one is permitted to disrupt services.
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >
> >>No. NO one is permitted to disrupt services.
> >Do you gag all the babies?
> >
> >>>Q: Would you allow an AIDS-infected homo with lesions to sit in the
> >>>pew next to your child with a cold?
> >>No. His need for wor****p does not supersede the church's need
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >
> >Still sacrificing people to the need of the Church?
> >>>
> >>>Q: Would you allow a smoking section in your fellow****p hall?
> >>Of course not. Smoking is an obvious sin.
> >>Those who come to church cannot sin IN church.
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >
> >Really? How do you prevent that since some thoughts
> >are considered sin by you?
> >
> >
> >>What silly questions!
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >
> >>>Q: Would you allow an illegal alien who hasn't bathed in weeks to
sit
> >>>in front of you during services?
> >>In the churches I have attended, I believe the answer would be "no,
> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
> >>>
> >>>Now, we hope your ignorant minds are finally satisfied with the
truth.
> >>>If you have read this article and you are unsaved, kindly SHOO!
> >>>
> >>> Is this what you call the house of God?
> >
> >>jw Yes we call this the house of God.
> >
> >?????????????????????????
> > In the mind of Christ,
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >**
> >A preacher is the blind
> >leading the blind...
> >
> >The Last Church
> >http://www.thelastchurch.org
> >michael@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >alt.religion.thelastchurch
> >alt.religion.the-last-church
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________________
___
___
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestud
y,alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
Subject: Re: Explanation
Message-ID: <rmvt30l09995io2n0c58si8b42qnrvodu0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <99un305td2cb0avghsvam4qhqrc0vi8lhg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<MPG.1aa6042179945533989cb4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kvjo309n6sjcnm0mgd38mq11dhmf3m83ei@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<40jq305jvaipcqhnu9amtrd57gb6p0lnt8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<tmvq30l40l0b6hojm3hie7v1fhnqj3o5ur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<nb3r3014afo5iitf6g818vnve8bd1i0deh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 22
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 08:23:14 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!crtntx1-
snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!
news.glorb.com!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!
cyclone.bc.net!news.alt.net!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506921
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282070 alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel:159594 alt.religion.christian.pentecostal:293981
x-no-archive:yes
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:09:12 GMT, The Last Church
<bleahcim49@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On 26 Feb 2004 05:09:50 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>>When you can find some sincerity, and if you ever come up with some
>>sincere, serious questions, come back.
>
> What is on the bottom of your shoe?
Looks like the s* you're trying to feed the group.
jw
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestud
y,alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
Subject: Re: Explanation
Message-ID: <oovt309him2pkg04su16napilnstlb3llv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <99un305td2cb0avghsvam4qhqrc0vi8lhg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<MPG.1aa6042179945533989cb4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kvjo309n6sjcnm0mgd38mq11dhmf3m83ei@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<40jq305jvaipcqhnu9amtrd57gb6p0lnt8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<tmvq30l40l0b6hojm3hie7v1fhnqj3o5ur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <Mzx%b.9835$yZ1.8037
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 134
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 08:24:50 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!cyclone.austin.rr.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!
feed3.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!newsfeed.news2me.com!sn-xit-02!sn-
xit-01!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506922
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282071 alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel:159595 alt.religion.christian.pentecostal:293983
x-no-archive:yes
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:03:24 GMT, " Didymos" <me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"jw @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>" <john_weatherly47<no> wrote in message
>news:tmvq30l40l0b6hojm3hie7v1fhnqj3o5ur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> x-no-archive:yes
>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:32:55 GMT, The Last Church
>> <bleahcim49@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >On 25 Feb 2004 07:32:27 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>>And YES, ALL sinners are WELCOME in the Church. That's WHY the
Church
>is
>> >>>THERE.
>> >
>> >That is not what you said before.
>> >
>> I do not respond well to people who try to think up "trick" questions
>> with which to "fool" people and find "loopholes" and "exceptions".
>>
>> Your "exceptions" are not difficult to answer, but you'd merely think
>> up more exceptions.
>>
>> Not to mention that you dishonestly CHANGED the content/context of
>> your questions AFTER I answered. That is dishonest.
>>
>That is a hoot . . . .John W. complaining about someone else's
dishonesty .
Not HALF as funny as you're going to look trying to prove I am lying
in court.
Hehehehehehe.
jw
>. . .
>
>> When you can find some sincerity, and if you ever come up with some
>> sincere, serious questions, come back.
>>
>>
>> jw
>>
>>
>> >On 25 Feb 2004 07:31:39 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >wrote:
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >>>
>> >>>Q: Would you allow an atheist who knew sign language to interpret
your
>> >>>pastor's sermon to the deaf?
>> >>
>> >>No. The atheist would be welcome in the service, as an observer. But
>> >>non-believers may not participate in a service. There is no "common
>> >>bond" of the Holy Spirit to motivate them to behave.
>>
>>
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >
>> >What if he was the only person who knew how to speak sign language?
>> >>>
>> >>>Q: Would you allow a mentally ill street person who speaks to
himself
>> >>>in loud voices to sit on the front row during Sunday services?
>> >>No. NO one is permitted to disrupt services.
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >
>> >>No. NO one is permitted to disrupt services.
>> >Do you gag all the babies?
>> >
>> >>>Q: Would you allow an AIDS-infected homo with lesions to sit in the
>> >>>pew next to your child with a cold?
>> >>No. His need for wor****p does not supersede the church's need
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >
>> >Still sacrificing people to the need of the Church?
>> >>>
>> >>>Q: Would you allow a smoking section in your fellow****p hall?
>> >>Of course not. Smoking is an obvious sin.
>> >>Those who come to church cannot sin IN church.
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >
>> >Really? How do you prevent that since some thoughts
>> >are considered sin by you?
>> >
>> >
>> >>What silly questions!
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >
>> >>>Q: Would you allow an illegal alien who hasn't bathed in weeks to
sit
>> >>>in front of you during services?
>> >>In the churches I have attended, I believe the answer would be "no,
>> >>>A: No! Unsaved are NOT welcome!
>> >>>
>> >>>Now, we hope your ignorant minds are finally satisfied with the
truth.
>> >>>If you have read this article and you are unsaved, kindly SHOO!
>> >>>
>> >>> Is this what you call the house of God?
>> >
>> >>jw Yes we call this the house of God.
>> >
>> >?????????????????????????
>> > In the mind of Christ,
>> > Michael
>> >
>> >
>> >**
>> >A preacher is the blind
>> >leading the blind...
>> >
>> >The Last Church
>> >http://www.thelastchurch.org
>> >michael@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >alt.religion.thelastchurch
>> >alt.religion.the-last-church
>>
>>
>>
>________________________________________________________________________
____
>___
>> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
>http://www.uncensored-news.com
>> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
><><><><><><><><>
>>
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestud
y,alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
Subject: Re: Explanation
Message-ID: <srvt30t1j973k6rvf2h1s3cgia9a2vnvkc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <99un305td2cb0avghsvam4qhqrc0vi8lhg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<MPG.1aa6042179945533989cb4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kvjo309n6sjcnm0mgd38mq11dhmf3m83ei@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<40jq305jvaipcqhnu9amtrd57gb6p0lnt8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MPG.1aa7435232a0dfa9989cc1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 37
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 08:31:08 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!crtntx1-
snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!
news.glorb.com!prodigy.com!pd7cy2so!pd7cy1no!shaw.ca!news.alt.net!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506923
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282072 alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel:159596 alt.religion.christian.pentecostal:293984
x-no-archive:yes
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 23:42:46 -0600, DOC <DOC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>In article <40jq305jvaipcqhnu9amtrd57gb6p0lnt8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, bleahcim49
>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sez in this lil' ole news'froup...!
>> >>And YES, ALL sinners are WELCOME in the Church. That's WHY the
Church is
>> >>THERE.
>>
>> That is not what you said before.
>>
>It was ME who posted that, FYI................ and I stand behind it.
And I agreed wholeheartedly.
The problem arose when the question, "Would an atheist be welcome in
a Christian church?" ("Yes") morphed into "Would your church allow an
atheist to serve in a position of responsibility?" The answer to THAT
question (a TOTALLY different issue) would be "No."
That would be tantamount to a Christian theologian asking a Muslim
congregation if he could get up and conduct a Christian evangelical
gospel service (including preaching a gospel message) in the mosque.
The answer would be, "Of COURSE the Christian theologian would be
welcome to attend a Muslim service; however, of COURSE the Christian
would NOT be permitted to preach a gospel message in the mosque."
(Now I do not know if a Christian would actually be permitted to
attend a service in a mosque; I merely created a metaphor.)
jw
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!news-out.visi.com!
petbe.visi.com!news.octanews.net!ash.uu.net!bassoon.i-cable.com!rain.i-
cable.com!not-for-mail
From: "Raymond" <NOSPAM-rwknapp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestud
y,alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal
Subject: Re: Explanation
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 21:24:10 +0800
Organization: I-CABLE Communications Ltd.
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <403f4874$1_3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <99un305td2cb0avghsvam4qhqrc0vi8lhg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<MPG.1aa6042179945533989cb4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kvjo309n6sjcnm0mgd38mq11dhmf3m83ei@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<40jq305jvaipcqhnu9amtrd57gb6p0lnt8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <MPG.1aa7435232a0dfa9989cc1
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <srvt30t1j973k6rvf2h1s3cgia9a2vnvkc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.83.110.90
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 218.253.57.100
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506976
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282088 alt.religion.christian.calvary-
chapel:159599 alt.religion.christian.pentecostal:293993
"jw @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>" <john_weatherly47<no> wrote in message
news:srvt30t1j973k6rvf2h1s3cgia9a2vnvkc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> x-no-archive:yes
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 23:42:46 -0600, DOC <DOC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >In article <40jq305jvaipcqhnu9amtrd57gb6p0lnt8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, bleahcim49
> >@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sez in this lil' ole news'froup...!
> >> >>And YES, ALL sinners are WELCOME in the Church. That's WHY the
Church
is
> >> >>THERE.
> >>
> >> That is not what you said before.
> >>
> >It was ME who posted that, FYI................ and I stand behind it.
>
> And I agreed wholeheartedly.
>
> The problem arose when the question, "Would an atheist be welcome in
> a Christian church?" ("Yes") morphed into "Would your church allow an
> atheist to serve in a position of responsibility?" The answer to THAT
> question (a TOTALLY different issue) would be "No."
>
> That would be tantamount to a Christian theologian asking a Muslim
> congregation if he could get up and conduct a Christian evangelical
> gospel service (including preaching a gospel message) in the mosque.
>
> The answer would be, "Of COURSE the Christian theologian would be
> welcome to attend a Muslim service; however, of COURSE the Christian
> would NOT be permitted to preach a gospel message in the mosque."
> (Now I do not know if a Christian would actually be permitted to
> attend a service in a mosque; I merely created a metaphor.)
>
I was invited to attend a service in a mosque while in the Philippine and
even teach them how to use one gong to get many musical sounds out of it,
instead of using the I think ten they used. The Christians asked me not
to
go, as they said to play the gong in that mosque would be a form of
wor****p
to that religion. So I turn the invite down. I sure I could of went,
as I
and the Hajji their leader were friends and would talk about God and the
things God did in the Christian faith. Now a unbeliever would not be
aloud
to Mecca and attend any services in their "holy city".
> jw
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________________
___
___
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
>
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!news3.optonline.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!
news-peer0-test!btnet!ctb-nntp1.saix.net!not-for-mail
From: hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Steve Hayes)
Newsgroups: alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.end-
times.prophecies,alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.ch
ristian
Subject: Re: Christians persecute too!
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:47:11 GMT
Organization: The South African Internet Exchange
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <403dfb98.264646042@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <511a49a.0402230503.63225085@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <c1dfq1$h46
$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <qu2dnSugZZPOf6fdRVn-jw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<403AEB13.184F00A4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <403b080d.71197591@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<0k2o309i0slpcs6r89ke19ltqi16qrludk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <403c2c5e.146042381
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <4eno30pejankpg7h75grn2ca4no8us85mu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<403c8b5a.170362002@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <3k5r30dr7o6krgccs9s4bgvpui8bb53in4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Reply-To: hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tpr-ip-nas-1-p104.telkom-ipnet.co.za
X-Trace: ctb-nnrp2.saix.net 1077850316 23236 155.239.184.104 (27 Feb 2004
02:51:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
27 Feb 2004 02:51:56 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
times.prophecies:20041 alt.bible:838517
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506846 alt.religion.christian:1352560
On 26 Feb 2004 06:46:11 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>x-no-archive:yes
>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 03:32:15 GMT, hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Steve Hayes)
>wrote:
>
>>On 25 Feb 2004 08:40:41 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>x-no-archive:yes
>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:46:03 GMT, hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Steve Hayes)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 25 Feb 2004 02:37:29 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>x-no-archive:yes
>>>>>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 10:20:09 GMT, hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Steve
Hayes)
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:11:36 GMT, Tom McCafferty
<burnaby2celista@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Now they are back to persecuting Jews.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>A few years ago they persecuted anyone who read fictional books
about witchcraft and
>>>>>>>wizardry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Can you give some specifics - dates, times, places?
>>>>>
>>>>>It's more pervasive than that. Those who oppose America's concrete
>>>>>solid sup****t of the Palestinians/Arabs OVER the Jews (that's
MILLIONS
>>>>>of people, including suicide bombers, those who bombed the WTC, and
>>>>>the MANY who continue to express hatred for Jews in American today.
>>>>
>>>>Sorry, you've lost me there.
>>>>
>>>>Who's persecuting whom?
>>>>
>>>>Are you saying Christians are persecuting suicide bombers? Or
Christians are
>>>>suicide bombers persecuting Jews? Or what?
>>>
>>>I'm saying, if you missed it, that Arabs historically hate the Jews
>>>and those who defend the Jews. When Osama knocked down the WTC, he
>>>announced he had done it to the infidel Americans for sup****ting the
>>>hated jews. He also declared a world-wide jihad. A jihad against
>>>Americans and all those who sup****t Israel or America. What many have
>>>forgotten or missed to begin with was that the jihad included
>>>Christians, whom he named.
>>
>>So are you saying, if I missed it, that Osama is a Christian?
>>
>>In what way are Christians doing the persecuting?
>
>I don't play. Play with someone else. I take this genocide stuff VERY
>seriously..
You chose to play -- now give specifics - dates times, places of
Christians
persecuting.
So far you've made vague allegations, and then given a lot of stuff about
Muslims.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
uk
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.religion,alt.religion.apologetics,alt.religion.christian,al
t.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.anabapt
ist.brethren,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.bibles
tudy
Subject: Re: The Dilemma of Brigham Young University
Message-ID: <31ht30hf2njc03fc5s0fi6hcvv0jg7jtdk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <%BXQb.27387$zj7.7968@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<102qk0pboj5tpbb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <BC549E83.18DE0%JSANCHEZ258
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <4039f542_8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<MPG.1aa42283781472ce989c97@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<53c9f9a4a1f8d653cc4d22e6a461ce11@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 39
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 04:13:27 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!crtntx1-
snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!
news.glorb.com!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!
cyclone.bc.net!news.alt.net!feed.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.apologetics:134261 alt.religion.christian:1352637
alt.religion.christian.20-something:51409
alt.religion.christian.adventist:94217
alt.religion.christian.anabaptist.brethren:17060
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506856
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282045
x-no-archive:yes
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:33:23 GMT, "Pastor Frank" <pf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>"DOC" <DOC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1aa42283781472ce989c97@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In article <4039f542_8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, ugly@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sez in this
>> lil' ole news'froup...!
>> >
>> > Mormons are a goofy bunch.
>> > Fill up other planets with "spirit babies."
>> > God lives on the planet Kolob and was once mortal as we are.
>> > Jesus and Satan are brothers.
>> > Ask the Mormons about the "Pearl of Great Price." They don't pass it
out
>> > free as they do the Book of Mormon.
>> > Mormonism is a cult. No doubt about it.
>> Ask 'em about their 'one eternal round' also....... and of course, the
>> 'burning bosom' syndrome.....
>>
> Mormonism is a dynamic denomination / cult, for everyone elected a
>"prophet" can add and/or subtract from the belief system. That's why
it's
>very hard to pin down exactly what LDS believes. For instance their Book
of
>Mormon says, that Christ is God incarnate, yet LDS preachers deny this
and
>say, that Christ is no more than the Son of God, which is also the
position
>of JWs and Iglesia ni Christo.
The Mormons even have made a MAJOR change/"correction" to their Book
of Mormon in the last 30 years. I have a copy, printed in 1982, in
which Alma 7:10 says Jesus was born in Jerusalem. Pick up a modern
copy and it says he was born in Bethlehem.
jw
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.religion,alt.religion.apologetics,alt.religion.christian,al
t.religion.christian.20-
something,alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.anabapt
ist.brethren,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.bibles
tudy
Subject: Re: Are You Saved?
Message-ID: <nqht305b1l244grn2r1fttbupfjc0mknhs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <UMV_b.8668$aT1.4563@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<103q40jgiqlbp31@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 27
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 04:26:41 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!crtntx1-
snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!
news.glorb.com!news-spur1.glorb.com!news.alt.net!feed.uncensored-
news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.apologetics:134262 alt.religion.christian:1352651
alt.religion.christian.20-something:51410
alt.religion.christian.adventist:94220
alt.religion.christian.anabaptist.brethren:17061
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506863
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282050
x-no-archive:yes
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:14:06 -0500, "ZenIsWhen"
<ZenIsWhen@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"Lance S. Ferm" <cultbuster@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:UMV_b.8668$aT1.4563@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Yep!
>I distanced myself from insane religion and its zealots a LONG time ago!
Good! So you aren't entangled in false religion and you can still
come to God, unless those demons got you first! But find a
knowledgable person like me, and they/I can cast those nasty demons
out!
let me know!
jw
>
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.lutheran,alt.religi
on.christian.presbyterian,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: Masons taking over Roman Church?
Message-ID: <slst30doi1ksqc046h8kgt6qo4a7tpv9sg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <F7B%b.35478$%d3.3137000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <c1mr0q
$1j9u9o$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news3.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 46
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 07:33:22 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!diablo.voicenet.com!news.alt.net!feed.uncensored-news.com!
news3.uncensored-news.com!news3.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.christian.lutheran:66655
alt.religion.christian.presbyterian:196230 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832266
x-no-archive:yes
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:23:01 +0100, Daniel Hoehr
<dhoehr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>Raul Goulden wrote:
>> I saw in an interview Mel Gibson did that he has
>> problems with the Roman Catholic Church because
>> it is being taken over by the Masons.
>>
>> What is he talking about?
>
>He is talking about the old conspiracy theory that the masons have
>undermined the RCC (Vatican II) and are now taking nover the Church.
>This is quite typical of a traditionalist, but not only traditionalist
>believe that.
A quick question, if you don't mind. And one you can answer without
going into any detail. During the various Masonic rituals, do Masons
ever have occasion to kneel down or bow facing Eastward?
Thanks for your answer in advance!
jw
>
>Thhe origin is that freemasonry was banned by the Church a few years
>after the foundation of the Premier Grand Lodge in London (1717).
>Since then masonry has been accused of all sorts of things, e.g. devil
>wor****p, anti-Catholic sonspiracy, etc, etc....
>
>I was myself a mason for some years and I have never seen any
>conspiracy against the Catholic Church. Masons are encouraged to
>practice their religion (be it Christianity in all its various
>denominations, Judaism, Islam, whatever).
>
>> RG
>>
>>
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-
service1.ext.raytheon.com!cyclone.swbell.net!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!
216.196.106.144!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!
border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.news2me.com!
newsfeed.icl.net!proxad.net!fr.ip.ndsoftware.net!npeer.de.kpn-
eurorings.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.de!t-
online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Daniel Hoehr <invalid@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.lutheran,alt.religi
on.christian.presbyterian,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: Masons taking over Roman Church?
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:55:50 +0100
Organization: T-Online
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <403F0616.22D50334@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <F7B%b.35478$%d3.3137000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <c1mr0q
$1j9u9o$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<slst30doi1ksqc046h8kgt6qo4a7tpv9sg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1077871703 02 14465 GkadGLf1TFu+OM+ 040227
08:48:23
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
VIzY5aZAQeop1a6sZYLtrPo4Y0OxPsv0rj1bmd5zVl5hIhEefaUTUS
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [de]C-CCK-MCD DT (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
alt.religion.christian.lutheran:66665
alt.religion.christian.presbyterian:196240 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832286
"jw
>
> x-no-archive:yes
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:23:01 +0100, Daniel Hoehr
> <dhoehr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Raul Goulden wrote:
> >> I saw in an interview Mel Gibson did that he has
> >> problems with the Roman Catholic Church because
> >> it is being taken over by the Masons.
> >>
> >> What is he talking about?
> >
> >He is talking about the old conspiracy theory that the masons have
> >undermined the RCC (Vatican II) and are now taking nover the Church.
> >This is quite typical of a traditionalist, but not only traditionalist
> >believe that.
>
> A quick question, if you don't mind.
Not at all.
> And one you can answer without
> going into any detail.
I have no problems going into detail.
> During the various Masonic rituals, do Masons
> ever have occasion to kneel down or bow facing Eastward?
Yes, every time an obligation is said, the candidate kneels in front of
the master's pedestal. Actually, he kneels in front of the Bible, places
his hands on the Bible and says his obligation (which usually consists
of saying that he will keep the secrets of that degree -- a password, a
sign and a handshake -- and that he will do his best to work for the
benefit of mankind and society, etc, etc...). The master's pedestal in
usually in the east. Well, it is said to be the east. Whether it is
really the east, I don't know. Symbolically...
AND, every time a candidate a prayer is said at the beginning of a
ceremony, the candidate kneels down as well and faces east.
There is also a third occasion, namely when it is announced that a
member of the lodge has passed away, those in the lodge face east,
kneels on their seats with one knee and observe a minute of silence.
> Thanks for your answer in advance!
Maybe I have forgotten something, but that should be about it. There
are, of course, different masonic ceremonies and rituals, depending on
the country you're in, in the USA on the State you're in and there are
also local varieties. Usually good libraries have masonic rituals.
Should you ever be in London, UK, go to Great Queen Street, where you
can have a guided tour of Freemasons' Hall. In the souvenir shop you can
actually purchase masonic rutual books and regalia, whether you're a
mason or not. There are some shops in Great Queen Street that have that
kind of stuff on sale.
I hope I could help,
Daniel
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!cyclone1.gnilink.net!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!p01!
fed1read04.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Iconoclast" <icono@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.lutheran,alt.religi
on.christian.presbyterian,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
References: <F7B%b.35478$%d3.3137000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <c1mr0q
$1j9u9o$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<slst30doi1ksqc046h8kgt6qo4a7tpv9sg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: Masons taking over Roman Church?
Lines: 49
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <zCK%b.19739$aZ3.10394@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:53:51 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.3.54.120
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fed1read04 1077900831 68.3.54.120 (Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:53:51
EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:53:51 EST
Organization: Cox Communications
alt.religion.christian.lutheran:66691
alt.religion.christian.presbyterian:196264 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832419
"jw @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>" <john_weatherly47<no> wrote in message
news:slst30doi1ksqc046h8kgt6qo4a7tpv9sg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> x-no-archive:yes
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:23:01 +0100, Daniel Hoehr
> <dhoehr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Raul Goulden wrote:
> >> I saw in an interview Mel Gibson did that he has
> >> problems with the Roman Catholic Church because
> >> it is being taken over by the Masons.
> >>
> >> What is he talking about?
> >
> >He is talking about the old conspiracy theory that the masons have
> >undermined the RCC (Vatican II) and are now taking nover the Church.
> >This is quite typical of a traditionalist, but not only traditionalist
> >believe that.
>
> A quick question, if you don't mind. And one you can answer without
> going into any detail. During the various Masonic rituals, do Masons
> ever have occasion to kneel down or bow facing Eastward?
>
>
> Thanks for your answer in advance!
>
> jw
> >
> >Thhe origin is that freemasonry was banned by the Church a few years
> >after the foundation of the Premier Grand Lodge in London (1717).
> >Since then masonry has been accused of all sorts of things, e.g. devil
> >wor****p, anti-Catholic sonspiracy, etc, etc....
> >
> >I was myself a mason for some years and I have never seen any
> >conspiracy against the Catholic Church. Masons are encouraged to
> >practice their religion (be it Christianity in all its various
> >denominations, Judaism, Islam, whatever).
> >
> >> RG
Have you ever noticed that almost every church building is constructed
such
that the front of the "sanctuary" is East of the congregation. I noticed
this a few years back and have noted that out of literally hundreds of
churches, I have yet to see one where this is not true.
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-
01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: trees40 <trees40xxx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.lutheran,alt.religi
on.christian.presbyterian,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: Masons taking over Roman Church?
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:13:34 -0600
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <403F88CE.9050106@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2)
Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F7B%b.35478$%d3.3137000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <c1mr0q
$1j9u9o$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<slst30doi1ksqc046h8kgt6qo4a7tpv9sg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <zCK%b.19739$aZ3.10394
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
56
alt.religion.christian.lutheran:66699
alt.religion.christian.presbyterian:196272 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832461
Ours is South.
Iconoclast wrote:
> "jw @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>" <john_weatherly47<no> wrote in message
> news:slst30doi1ksqc046h8kgt6qo4a7tpv9sg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>x-no-archive:yes
>>On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:23:01 +0100, Daniel Hoehr
>><dhoehr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Raul Goulden wrote:
>>>
>>>>I saw in an interview Mel Gibson did that he has
>>>>problems with the Roman Catholic Church because
>>>>it is being taken over by the Masons.
>>>>
>>>>What is he talking about?
>>>
>>>He is talking about the old conspiracy theory that the masons have
>>>undermined the RCC (Vatican II) and are now taking nover the Church.
>>>This is quite typical of a traditionalist, but not only traditionalist
>>>believe that.
>>
>>A quick question, if you don't mind. And one you can answer without
>>going into any detail. During the various Masonic rituals, do Masons
>>ever have occasion to kneel down or bow facing Eastward?
>>
>>
>>Thanks for your answer in advance!
>>
>>jw
>>
>>>Thhe origin is that freemasonry was banned by the Church a few years
>>>after the foundation of the Premier Grand Lodge in London (1717).
>>>Since then masonry has been accused of all sorts of things, e.g. devil
>>>wor****p, anti-Catholic sonspiracy, etc, etc....
>>>
>>>I was myself a mason for some years and I have never seen any
>>>conspiracy against the Catholic Church. Masons are encouraged to
>>>practice their religion (be it Christianity in all its various
>>>denominations, Judaism, Islam, whatever).
>>>
>>>
>>>>RG
>>>
>
>
> Have you ever noticed that almost every church building is constructed
such
> that the front of the "sanctuary" is East of the congregation. I
noticed
> this a few years back and have noted that out of literally hundreds of
> churches, I have yet to see one where this is not true.
>
>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Subject: Re: RCC Examined-10
Message-ID: <kt1u301uo26sd4hkrimodajdkovnhrll55@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <H5U_b.2816
$ax2.116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <iPU_b.6313$ZV1.24@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ol6o305rubkcung6ckmr8iqj8tu2dbcp2b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vfmo301vrl1tf0fc5raqju5lec24mrsmc9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3niq30hc99141sj007c1379j47s790j55n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mb2r30h22mpsaj6qdha1gvrejqirns75p5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5b3r30tst2n0am6e63qi07l7e80ur7dncf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 197
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 09:02:19 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!news3.optonline.net!pd7cy1no!shaw.ca!news.alt.net!
feed.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-
news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506932 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832293 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282074
x-no-archive:yes
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:10:46 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On 26 Feb 2004 05:52:57 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>x-no-archive:yes
>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:25:20 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 25 Feb 2004 08:15:38 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>x-no-archive:yes
>>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:52:04 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:41:02 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Alberich" <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:52:23 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>> >news:IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> >> RCC Examined-10
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Confession
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> The Baltimore Catechism defines confession as "the telling of
our sins
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>> >> an authorized priest for the purpose of obtaining
forgiveness."
>>>>>>> >> Catholicism stresses that priests have the power and authority
to
>>>>>>forgive
>>>>>>> >> sins without even asking God!(1) Forgiveness involves the
assigning of
>>>>>>> >> penance, punishments in the form of good works, a certain
number of
>>>>>>> >> prayers, fastings, or abstinence from certain pleasures as a
token of
>>>>>>> >> repentance. Priests can forgive the guilt of mortal sins, but
cannot
>>>>>>remit
>>>>>>> >> the penalty which must be paid through the performance of good
works
>>>>>>which
>>>>>>> >> he chooses to prescribe. Under penalty of committing a mortal
sin,
>>>>>>every
>>>>>>> >> Roman Catholic is required to go to confession at least once a
year.
>>>>>>> >> However, the Bible gives no sup****t for private (auricular)
confession
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>> >> a priest for receiving the forgiveness of sins. Furthermore,
this
>>>>>>practice
>>>>>>> >> didn't originate until the 5th century and wasn't officially
made
>>>>>>> >> compulsory until the Fourth Laterin Council in 1215 A.D. Even
the
>>>>>>Catholic
>>>>>>> >> Bible challenges the concept of Catholic confession on the
grounds that
>>>>>>no
>>>>>>> >> mortal man possesses the power to forgive or absolve sins, and
clearly
>>>>>>> >> reveals that God alone can forgive sins; "WHO CAN FORGIVE SINS
BUT ONLY
>>>>>>> >> GOD?" (Mk. 2:7, C.R.V.). No priest has the authority to
forgive sins
>>>>>>but
>>>>>>> >> "the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (Matt.
9:6,
>>>>>>> >> J.B.V.).
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> By establi****ng a priest as the official forgiver of sins, the
Catholic
>>>>>>> >> Church usurps Christ's exclusive position and authority to act
as the
>>>>>>> >> mediator between God and man: "For there is only one God, and
there is
>>>>>>> >> only one mediator between God and mankind, himself a man,
Christ Jesus"
>>>>>>(I
>>>>>>> >> Tim 2:5, J.B.V.; see also Heb. 8:6; 9:15). The Bible further
declares
>>>>>>> >> that, "if any one should sin, we have our advocate with the
Father,
>>>>>>Jesus
>>>>>>> >> Christ, who is just" (I Jn. 2:1 J.B.V.).
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> The Scriptures also teach that each individual Christian has
the
>>>>>>privilege
>>>>>>> >> of going directly to God for forgiveness: "but if we
acknowledge our
>>>>>>sins,
>>>>>>> >> then God. . .will forgive our sins and purify us from
everything that
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>> >> wrong" (I Jn., 1:9, J.B.V.). Even Peter confirmed that men
receive the
>>>>>>> >> remission of sins directly from Christ not through priests:
"all who
>>>>>>> >> believe in Jesus will have their sins forgiven through his
name" (Acts
>>>>>>> >> 10:43, J.B.V.;see also Acts 13:38, 39).
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Gee, the Bible says followers of Christ can't forgive sins, huh?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >(John 20:21-23 NIV) Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As
the Father
>>>>>>has
>>>>>>> >sent me, I am sending you." {22} And with that he breathed on
them and
>>>>>>said,
>>>>>>> >"Receive the Holy Spirit. {23} If you forgive anyone his sins,
they are
>>>>>>> >forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Anyone care to explain that away?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let me try to see if I understand their argument (see JW, I
>>>>>>> listen...): That means that Jesus says that if you forgive Bob
his sin
>>>>>>> against you, then Bob is forgiven as far as you are concerned.
If Bob
>>>>>>> forgives Joan, then Joan is forgiven. *But*: You cannot forgive
Bob
>>>>>>> for sins he commits against Joan!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My problem with this is that it seems to be pretty much common
>>>>>>> sense--was Jesus really telling us that it's okay to forgive
people?
>>>>>>> Did He believe that we really thought that we should hold a
grudge
>>>>>>> until he mentioned that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alberich
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Exactly, you've explained it away in the way Protestants do. The
other
>>>>>>thing they do is they say that this refers to the ability to
"proclaim"
>>>>>>God's forgiveness to believers and His unforgiveness to
unbelievers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm not Catholic. However, I recognize this as *a* way God confers
>>>>>>forgiveness. I recognize two other ways:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. We can confess them to each other (James 5), which is actually
kind of a
>>>>>>subset of John 20.
>>>>>
>>>>>Believe it or not, this is how the Catholics first approached
>>>>>Confession. It was a group thing, wherein you had to confess your
>>>>>sins to the entire community, in the theory that what you did
affected
>>>>>all. This was morphed into a period of priestly confession (but
only
>>>>>one per life--thus called the Era of Deathbed Confessions), and
>>>>>finally became the sacrament Catholics recognize today.
>>>>
>>>>Right. Because the way Jesus commanded wasn't good enough.
>>>
>>>What? That pretty open-ended command in John 20?
>>
>>Still looking for "loopholes" I see.
>
>No...reading the "plain meaning" of the words.
>
>
>> How do we get from the veil being torn asunder top to bottom to give
>>us direct access to God with no intermediary, to confessing to a
>>priest? The confessing to a priest sews the veil right back together
>>and puts us on the wrong side. AGAIN.
>
>Oh? So Jesus was just saying nothing im****tant that somehow got put
>into the Bible?
>
>
>>That's a HUGE leap, and systematic theology (if you've ever heard of
>>that) says it's bunk!
>
>I really don't think so. Some ****tions of Protestant theology may say
>it's bunk.
>
>
>>IOW, what YOU suggest defies the whole Bible.
>
>Now you simply overstate things.
>
>
>>There's a REASON we have an entire 66 book Bible.
>
>You mean a whole 73-book Bible with all books being complete?
>
>
>>So we can
>>verify/compare and be sure it's all compatible. The torn veil gives
>>us DIRECT access to God. We have NO need of a priest.
>
>Nor, then, a church, or even gathering "two or more" at one place.
The text neither says nor hints at that. AGAIN, you violate
systematic theology.
And I grow increasingly weary of you continuing to argue rather than
meditate on my POV and the scriptures I present in sup****t. ALL you
are doing is getting a NOTION of what I said and then da****ng to your
A or the Catechism for a rebuttal.
I do not debate.
jw
>
>
>>And I won't give them power/authority God didn't.
>
>Fine with me.
>
>
>Alberich
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
From: jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Subject: Re: RCC Examined-10
Message-ID: <hb2u301a9nchfdjllj0uhv1o4n6do2pqiq@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <H5U_b.2816
$ax2.116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <77lo305o3q4n12me0d28buvo7is4akr1mt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<epiq309sl8um9p39v9in7vu3eedbh61rr0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<nq2r30pmodcjaos06s38m359ht57tudt8j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<gu3r30hv9a65ckfo3ia3dcphulokrkhgqj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.uncensored-news.com
Lines: 367
X-Comment: NOTICE: Uncensored-News.Com does not condone, nor sup****t,
spam, illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Re****t-Abuse-To: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html#13
X-T.O.S.: http://www.uncensored-news.com/terms.html
Date: 27 Feb 2004 09:49:03 GMT
Organization: Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!pd7cy1no!shaw.ca!
news.alt.net!feed.uncensored-news.com!news.uncensored-news.com!
news.uncensored-news.com!not-for-mail
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506933 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832298 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282075
x-no-archive:yes
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:30:19 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On 26 Feb 2004 06:01:56 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>x-no-archive:yes
>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:28:24 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 25 Feb 2004 08:02:06 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>x-no-archive:yes
>>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:16:53 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:52:23 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> RCC Examined-10
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Confession
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Baltimore Catechism defines confession as "the telling of our
sins to
>>>>>>> an authorized priest for the purpose of obtaining forgiveness."
>>>>>>> Catholicism stresses that priests have the power and authority to
forgive
>>>>>>> sins without even asking God!(1) Forgiveness involves the
assigning of
>>>>>>> penance, punishments in the form of good works, a certain number
of
>>>>>>> prayers, fastings, or abstinence from certain pleasures as a
token of
>>>>>>> repentance. Priests can forgive the guilt of mortal sins, but
cannot remit
>>>>>>> the penalty which must be paid through the performance of good
works which
>>>>>>> he chooses to prescribe. Under penalty of committing a mortal
sin, every
>>>>>>> Roman Catholic is required to go to confession at least once a
year.
>>>>>>> However, the Bible gives no sup****t for private (auricular)
confession to
>>>>>>> a priest for receiving the forgiveness of sins. Furthermore, this
practice
>>>>>>> didn't originate until the 5th century and wasn't officially made
>>>>>>> compulsory until the Fourth Laterin Council in 1215 A.D. Even the
Catholic
>>>>>>> Bible challenges the concept of Catholic confession on the
grounds that no
>>>>>>> mortal man possesses the power to forgive or absolve sins, and
clearly
>>>>>>> reveals that God alone can forgive sins; "WHO CAN FORGIVE SINS
BUT ONLY
>>>>>>> GOD?" (Mk. 2:7, C.R.V.). No priest has the authority to forgive
sins but
>>>>>>> "the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (Matt.
9:6,
>>>>>>> J.B.V.).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By establi****ng a priest as the official forgiver of sins, the
Catholic
>>>>>>> Church usurps Christ's exclusive position and authority to act as
the
>>>>>>> mediator between God and man: "For there is only one God, and
there is
>>>>>>> only one mediator between God and mankind, himself a man, Christ
Jesus" (I
>>>>>>> Tim 2:5, J.B.V.; see also Heb. 8:6; 9:15). The Bible further
declares
>>>>>>> that, "if any one should sin, we have our advocate with the
Father, Jesus
>>>>>>> Christ, who is just" (I Jn. 2:1 J.B.V.).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Scriptures also teach that each individual Christian has the
privilege
>>>>>>> of going directly to God for forgiveness: "but if we acknowledge
our sins,
>>>>>>> then God. . .will forgive our sins and purify us from everything
that is
>>>>>>> wrong" (I Jn., 1:9, J.B.V.). Even Peter confirmed that men
receive the
>>>>>>> remission of sins directly from Christ not through priests: "all
who
>>>>>>> believe in Jesus will have their sins forgiven through his name"
(Acts
>>>>>>> 10:43, J.B.V.;see also Acts 13:38, 39).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gee, the Bible says followers of Christ can't forgive sins, huh?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(John 20:21-23 NIV) Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the
Father has
>>>>>>sent me, I am sending you." {22} And with that he breathed on them
and said,
>>>>>>"Receive the Holy Spirit. {23} If you forgive anyone his sins, they
are
>>>>>>forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Anyone care to explain that away?
>>>>>
>>>>>Let me try to see if I understand their argument (see JW, I
>>>>>listen...): That means that Jesus says that if you forgive Bob his
sin
>>>>>against you, then Bob is forgiven as far as you are concerned. If
Bob
>>>>>forgives Joan, then Joan is forgiven. *But*: You cannot forgive Bob
>>>>>for sins he commits against Joan!
>>>>
>>>>Correct!
>>>>>
>>>>>My problem with this is that it seems to be pretty much common
>>>>>sense--
>>>>
>>>>I agree. NOW.
>>>>
>>>>was Jesus really telling us that it's okay to forgive people?
>>>>Not exactly. HE was telling us that, as of His declaration (He IS
God,
>>>>remember? God, with the power and authority to forgive sin.), we had
>>>>the power WITHIN our selves (how did it get there?) to forgive.
>>>>
>>>>What Alberich is suffering from is 2,000 years old hind-sight. Simply
>>>>because we take that fact for granted, does NOT mean the Jews did for
>>>>several thousand years, or that the apostles/disciples did in their
>>>>time.
>>>>
>>>>If one studies "forgiveness" and "repentance" all the way back to
>>>>Genesis, we find that forgiveness/repentance weren't available or
>>>>sufficient merely by going to the guy you got mad at and punched out.
>>>>You might say to him the next day, "I'm sorry, forgive me!" However,
>>>>that did NOT square things with God, and an animal had to be
>>>>sacrificed to pay for that sin. (Sounds like Alberich has forgotten
>>>>about OT sacrifice to me) And one didn't just go to the temple daily
>>>>to sacrifice and gain forgiveness. It was complicated.
>>>>
>>>>Jesus' as of His coming and providing His blood (and in anticipation
>>>>of that event) said, " I now provide you DIRECTLY the power to
forgive
>>>>those sins.
>>>
>>>Okay. Assume this is true.
>>
>>"Assume this is true..." ?????
>>
>>That is what the text says! AGAIN, have you NEVER heard of systematic
>>theology? You must make your "understanding" of the passage fit with
>>all related text in the entire Bible.
>
>If you want to go with plain meanings, John, explain John 6!!!
>
>
>> If Jesus directly gave all of us the
>>>power to forgive one another's sins, He made *us* gods.
>>
>>THAT is what is called "REASON" superseding REVELATION. IOW, if it
>>doesn't make sense to you, feel free to disregard it.
>
>No...if it doesn't make sense to me, I question it.
Yep. A lot of things in the Bible don't make sense to those who are
peri****ng (the unsaved). And you have yet to give any sort of
testimony (required by God) to prove that you ARE born again. If you
AREN'T born again (Holy Spirit filled--He is the teacher), a LOT of
stuff in the Bible won't make sense.
The Lord knows
>how people think.
Yes, He does. He knows how Christians think, He knows how Jews think;
He knows how Muslims think, and He knows how atheists think. He also
knows how pretenders think (that is, those who claim Him as their own,
but who are lying or fooling themselves) I believe YOU fall into that
final category.
Ergo, He'll make revelation so that we can actually
>*understand* it.
The Bible and revelation are a closed book to unbelievers. And MANY of
your misunderstandings and non understandings and rebuttals indicate
that the Holy Spirit does NOT indwell you. HE, you see, is the
teacher. And as much as you rip into non-Catholics, there's an
interesting phenomenon world-wide. I can hop a plane in Seattle and
fly to Jamaica, THOUSANDS of miles away, and I'll go to the nearest
Baptist church and find other born again believers with whom I will
agree on 95% of all things Biblical and 98% of all things related
directly to Christianity. I'll hop back on that plane and fly to
China, and locate an underground Chinese Christian church (the REAL
Chinese Christians), and I'll quiz them. Same #s as above.
IOW, anywhere on the PLANET I go and find those who say, "Yes, I'm a
non-RCC, non-Pentecostal born again Christian (each word a critical
word) and find myself 98% in agreement with them. The Holy Spirit is
teaching us virtually the same thing. Without it being God, that just
isn't possible.
And I do not mean "What day should we wor****p? Sabbath or Sunday?"
"Should we use wine or grape juice in our services?" "Did Jesus
actually create wine or grape juice?" "Were the 1st C Christians
REALLY drinking fermented wine AT CHURCH?" Those are
"non-essentials."
If I ask one of these Jamaican or Chinese Christians, "Do you pray to
Mary?" I'll get "OF COURSE not!"
(I have a Russian Orthodox friend, and when I asked him, he laughed.
"You've been talking with too many Roman Catholics", he said.)
If I ask those same Christians, "Do you have "statues" in your church?
Do you kneel before them in prayer?" I'll get, "First of all, statutes
of the "saints" in church are actually called "idols." And they're
forbidden."
etc
If the non-RCC Christians are merely heretics who have left the "true
faith", the "First Church", how come we've NEVER met, NEVER studied
together, yet in ALL key areas of doctrine AND theology, we agree?
The Holy Spirit is teaching us!
Thereby proving that YOU are the odd-man-out.
You do not consider the Holy Spirit and the Bible (our two most
im****tant teachers) the final authority. Anything stamped "Rome
Approved" is your authority; IOW, MEN, not God.
Else, why would your rules keep changing? MY rules haven't changed
since I was 5 years old and was aware that there WERE rules.
What good would it be otherwise?
What good is it to follow men RATHER than God? And I point out again
that you CONTINUE to refuse to back up your "faith" with a TESTIMONY.
Meaning you fool only you.
>
>>God can do anything He wants. He can give us the power to forgive
>>those who sin against us. (check the Lord's Prayer)
>>I also said that we must #1 gain the forgiveness/repent to people we
>>sin against, AND repent/gain forgiveness from God.
>>BOTH!
>>You seem only to retain those details that you feel you can argue
>>against.
>
>No...but I don't discuss those things we *agree* on. That only seems
>self-congratulatory.
>
Sidestep.
>
>>And AGAIN, I grow tired of the endless debate.
>
>Endless?
SEEMINGLY endless debate.
jw
>
>
>>You may find the Bible a fun topic of "discussion/debate"; I don't.
>>And it's my choice when I see ongoing resistance to what I see as "The
>>Truth" to disengage.
>
>Fair enough. Good bye.
If I see an intelligent question / remark, I may rejoin you. But at
this time, I see it a waste of energy. I have not swayed you one
millimeter.
I am here seeking those who are thirsty for the gospel. You believe
you were "born again" your first week on this earth.
AC 2:21 And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.'
How does a newborn "...call on the name of the Lord..."?
---> 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common.
( How does a newborn "believe"?)
45 Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had
need.
46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts.
They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere
hearts,
47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord
added to their number daily those who were being saved.
AC 4:12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no
other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
NOT Rome, NOT the pip, NOT John Paul II, NOT Mary, "Queen of Heaven",
NOT Pete
The Lord Jesus Christ.
AC 11:11 "Right then three men who had been sent to me from
Caesarea stopped at the house where I was staying. 12 The Spirit told
me to have no hesitation about going with them. These six brothers
also went with me, and we entered the man's house. 13 He told us how
he had seen an angel appear in his house and say, `Send to Joppa for
Simon who is called Peter. 14 He will bring you a message through
which you and all your household will be saved.'
A passage YOU probably LOVE! Yet if we apply "systematic theology"
(making each passage conform to the others, when possible)
Comparing v 14 above with the passages above it, the meaning becomes
clear here.
Acts 11:14 He will bring you a message through which you and all your
household will be saved.'
The Holy Spirit (who knows all things) OBVIOUSLY knew that all the
members of the household to which He was sending Peter were all OLD
ENOUGH TO BELIEVE.
And THAT interpretation fits all the FACTS we have about that
occasion. Otherwise, why would the Holy Spirit have ALREADY insisted
several times previously that BELIEVERS are "saved." It does NOT say,
"believers and their children."
Another comment is made here, in a different ****tion of the same
passage, that proves the falseness of the RCC teaching.
AC 10:9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey
and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He
became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was
being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and
something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four
corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as
reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him,
"Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."
AC 10:14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten
anything impure or unclean."
AC 10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call
anything impure that God has made clean."
You claim that "purgatory" is required to "cleanse" us from our sins.
You reject the cleansing Christ perfected with His blood on the cross.
The Holy Spirit told Peter (your pope, chuckle)
AC 10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call
anything impure that God has made clean."
And I tell YOU, Alberich:
AC 10:15 "...Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."
Your continued demonstrated ignorance of the Bible and of Grace and
salvation is appalling and disgusting. Even when the Truth is pointed
out to you in black and white, as above, you CONTINUE to dodge and
prefer the teachings of men.
You continue to proclaim that we "need" the A. What is so precious a
teaching in the A that isn't AMPLY covered in the 66 book non-Roman
Bible?
Answer: NOTHING.
If I'm wrong, and you can prove that there is VITAL teaching in the A,
let's hear it!
One of the rules for canonizing the 66-book Bible we use (there HAD to
be SOME way to determine which books were worthy; there were MANY more
than we used that were available) is that each book we used was
required to teach something VITAL to the message, a truth that was
found in no other book.
THAT's how we kept the text pure. How did YOUR "scholars" keep the
text pure? Or did they even try?
Comparing your Bible with ours, there simply isn't anything missing
from ours.
And, frankly, as a professional writer with MULTIPLE awards for my
writing, the A--the few passages I've read--reads like a bad novel.
jw
>
>Alberich
_________________________________________________________________________
______
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><>
<><><><><><>
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!
news01.roc.ny.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Subject: Re: RCC Examined-10
Message-ID: <0c0v30t9m23lj8jj4l42ijufgmikr6oh7q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <H5U_b.2816
$ax2.116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <77lo305o3q4n12me0d28buvo7is4akr1mt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<epiq309sl8um9p39v9in7vu3eedbh61rr0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<nq2r30pmodcjaos06s38m359ht57tudt8j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<gu3r30hv9a65ckfo3ia3dcphulokrkhgqj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<hb2u301a9nchfdjllj0uhv1o4n6do2pqiq@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 320
X-Complaints-To: abuse-news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
52616e646f6d49564104652d5f607991e8f7ffae4273cbfca4f876b627879d38d8f9800b4
ddbacb365f661f1720b8854a9c168f9c8f5acf462cb2b3aacd027070b330952f5e3d87f00
764b5cc8c1bdfdca1e557a8ef165c978d86930a835891e
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward ALL headers so that we may
process your complaint properly.
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:57:41 GMT
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:57:41 GMT
alt.religion.christian.baptist:507050 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832455 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282140
On 27 Feb 2004 09:49:03 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>>What Alberich is suffering from is 2,000 years old hind-sight.
Simply
>>>>>because we take that fact for granted, does NOT mean the Jews did
for
>>>>>several thousand years, or that the apostles/disciples did in their
>>>>>time.
>>>>>
>>>>>If one studies "forgiveness" and "repentance" all the way back to
>>>>>Genesis, we find that forgiveness/repentance weren't available or
>>>>>sufficient merely by going to the guy you got mad at and punched
out.
>>>>>You might say to him the next day, "I'm sorry, forgive me!"
However,
>>>>>that did NOT square things with God, and an animal had to be
>>>>>sacrificed to pay for that sin. (Sounds like Alberich has forgotten
>>>>>about OT sacrifice to me) And one didn't just go to the temple daily
>>>>>to sacrifice and gain forgiveness. It was complicated.
>>>>>
>>>>>Jesus' as of His coming and providing His blood (and in anticipation
>>>>>of that event) said, " I now provide you DIRECTLY the power to
forgive
>>>>>those sins.
>>>>
>>>>Okay. Assume this is true.
>>>
>>>"Assume this is true..." ?????
>>>
>>>That is what the text says! AGAIN, have you NEVER heard of systematic
>>>theology? You must make your "understanding" of the passage fit with
>>>all related text in the entire Bible.
>>
>>If you want to go with plain meanings, John, explain John 6!!!
>>
>>
>>> If Jesus directly gave all of us the
>>>>power to forgive one another's sins, He made *us* gods.
>>>
>>>THAT is what is called "REASON" superseding REVELATION. IOW, if it
>>>doesn't make sense to you, feel free to disregard it.
>>
>>No...if it doesn't make sense to me, I question it.
>Yep. A lot of things in the Bible don't make sense to those who are
>peri****ng (the unsaved). And you have yet to give any sort of
>testimony (required by God) to prove that you ARE born again. If you
>AREN'T born again (Holy Spirit filled--He is the teacher), a LOT of
>stuff in the Bible won't make sense.
Let me be blunt: You commit two heresies with this "I know I'm saved"
stuff. First, we are judged *after* we die. Second, *God* judges,
not man. So to say that *you* know *now* what will happen, you usurp
God in both time and place. Enough of it.
> The Lord knows
>>how people think.
>
>Yes, He does. He knows how Christians think, He knows how Jews think;
>He knows how Muslims think, and He knows how atheists think. He also
>knows how pretenders think (that is, those who claim Him as their own,
>but who are lying or fooling themselves) I believe YOU fall into that
>final category.
As I believe you are. Else why do you usurp his place as I mention
above?
>Ergo, He'll make revelation so that we can actually
>>*understand* it.
>
>The Bible and revelation are a closed book to unbelievers. And MANY of
>your misunderstandings and non understandings and rebuttals indicate
>that the Holy Spirit does NOT indwell you.
Baloney, John. What you mean is that "You disagree with me, and since
I think I'm right, I *must* say that you don't have the Holy Spirit.
If you did, how could we disagree? After all, I'm not willing to
admit that *I* could be mistaken"
>HE, you see, is the
>teacher. And as much as you rip into non-Catholics,
"Rip into?" This, in my opinion, is the most ripping-into-est post
I've done. Why? Because I'm sick of non-Catholics assuming that they
are right without even the *possibility* that they are wrong. They
are so bloody blinded by their own ego and the *desire* to be right,
that they can't see where they are inconsistent.
>there's an
>interesting phenomenon world-wide. I can hop a plane in Seattle and
>fly to Jamaica, THOUSANDS of miles away, and I'll go to the nearest
>Baptist church and find other born again believers with whom I will
>agree on 95% of all things Biblical and 98% of all things related
>directly to Christianity. I'll hop back on that plane and fly to
>China, and locate an underground Chinese Christian church (the REAL
>Chinese Christians), and I'll quiz them. Same #s as above.
Good for you. And I guarantee you the same if I fly to Jamaica or
China to talk with real Catholics. So what does that prove?
>IOW, anywhere on the PLANET I go and find those who say, "Yes, I'm a
>non-RCC, non-Pentecostal born again Christian (each word a critical
>word) and find myself 98% in agreement with them. The Holy Spirit is
>teaching us virtually the same thing. Without it being God, that just
>isn't possible.
Teaching you virtually the same thing??? Do you want a list of all
the differences you have?
>And I do not mean "What day should we wor****p? Sabbath or Sunday?"
>"Should we use wine or grape juice in our services?" "Did Jesus
>actually create wine or grape juice?" "Were the 1st C Christians
>REALLY drinking fermented wine AT CHURCH?" Those are
>"non-essentials."
Oh...I see. Narrow down "the Essentials" to two or three topics that
you know you agree on--percentage of agreeement shoots up!
>If I ask those same Christians, "Do you have "statues" in your church?
>Do you kneel before them in prayer?" I'll get, "First of all, statutes
>of the "saints" in church are actually called "idols." And they're
>forbidden."
Too bad that there are so many ignorant Christians, then, that don't
know the difference between "statues" and "idols."
>etc
>
>If the non-RCC Christians are merely heretics who have left the "true
>faith", the "First Church", how come we've NEVER met, NEVER studied
>together, yet in ALL key areas of doctrine AND theology, we agree?
>The Holy Spirit is teaching us!
You don't! And, if you knew your Bible as well as you said, you'd
*know* that the Holy Spirit *isn't* guiding *all* of you!!! Do you
know the section, or shall I point it out to you?
>You do not consider the Holy Spirit and the Bible (our two most
>im****tant teachers) the final authority. Anything stamped "Rome
>Approved" is your authority; IOW, MEN, not God.
Baloney.
>Else, why would your rules keep changing? MY rules haven't changed
>since I was 5 years old and was aware that there WERE rules.
No? How many "Churches" have you been through in that time?
>What good is it to follow men RATHER than God? And I point out again
>that you CONTINUE to refuse to back up your "faith" with a TESTIMONY.
>Meaning you fool only you.
Meaning that I do not pray in the streets as do the hypocrites to show
*their* salvation. I seem to recall something similar to *that*
somewhere in the Gospels...
>>>God can do anything He wants. He can give us the power to forgive
>>>those who sin against us. (check the Lord's Prayer)
>>>I also said that we must #1 gain the forgiveness/repent to people we
>>>sin against, AND repent/gain forgiveness from God.
>>>BOTH!
>>>You seem only to retain those details that you feel you can argue
>>>against.
>>
>>No...but I don't discuss those things we *agree* on. That only seems
>>self-congratulatory.
>>
>Sidestep.
Truth. Or you want I should start a post about how our God really and
truly (really!) is the God of Moses. Then you can post underneath
that: "I agree!"
>>>You may find the Bible a fun topic of "discussion/debate"; I don't.
>>>And it's my choice when I see ongoing resistance to what I see as "The
>>>Truth" to disengage.
>>
>>Fair enough. Good bye.
>
>If I see an intelligent question / remark, I may rejoin you. But at
>this time, I see it a waste of energy. I have not swayed you one
>millimeter.
>
>I am here seeking those who are thirsty for the gospel. You believe
>you were "born again" your first week on this earth.
>
>
> AC 2:21 And everyone who calls
> on the name of the Lord will be saved.'
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of
heaven, but he who does the will of my Father in heaven" (Mat.
7:19-21).
"You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe
that, and tremble!" (Ja. 2:19).
(Too bad Luther didn't get *that* excised, too, eh?)
> AC 11:11 "Right then three men who had been sent to me from
>Caesarea stopped at the house where I was staying. 12 The Spirit told
>me to have no hesitation about going with them. These six brothers
>also went with me, and we entered the man's house. 13 He told us how
>he had seen an angel appear in his house and say, `Send to Joppa for
>Simon who is called Peter. 14 He will bring you a message through
>which you and all your household will be saved.'
>
>
>A passage YOU probably LOVE! Yet if we apply "systematic theology"
>(making each passage conform to the others, when possible)
>Comparing v 14 above with the passages above it, the meaning becomes
>clear here.
>
>Acts 11:14 He will bring you a message through which you and all your
>household will be saved.'
>
>The Holy Spirit (who knows all things) OBVIOUSLY knew that all the
>members of the household to which He was sending Peter were all OLD
>ENOUGH TO BELIEVE.
>
> And THAT interpretation fits all the FACTS we have about that
>occasion. Otherwise, why would the Holy Spirit have ALREADY insisted
>several times previously that BELIEVERS are "saved." It does NOT say,
>"believers and their children."
>
>Another comment is made here, in a different ****tion of the same
>passage, that proves the falseness of the RCC teaching.
>
> AC 10:9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey
>and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He
>became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was
>being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and
>something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four
>corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as
>reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him,
>"Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."
>
> AC 10:14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten
>anything impure or unclean."
>
> AC 10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call
>anything impure that God has made clean."
>
>You claim that "purgatory" is required to "cleanse" us from our sins.
>You reject the cleansing Christ perfected with His blood on the cross.
>
>The Holy Spirit told Peter (your pope, chuckle)
>
> AC 10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call
>anything impure that God has made clean."
>
>And I tell YOU, Alberich:
>
> AC 10:15 "...Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."
>
>Your continued demonstrated ignorance of the Bible and of Grace and
>salvation is appalling and disgusting. Even when the Truth is pointed
>out to you in black and white, as above, you CONTINUE to dodge and
>prefer the teachings of men.
>
>You continue to proclaim that we "need" the A. What is so precious a
>teaching in the A that isn't AMPLY covered in the 66 book non-Roman
>Bible?
>
>Answer: NOTHING.
>
>If I'm wrong, and you can prove that there is VITAL teaching in the A,
>let's hear it!
So the criteria is now "do we need it?" Funny--I thought that a large
part of it was "Divine inspiration." See, if God wanted it in, it
would be in. But no: You'd rather tell God, "Gee, thanks Lord, I
*like* Sirach and all, but, well, I don't feel I *need* it."
>One of the rules for canonizing the 66-book Bible we use (there HAD to
>be SOME way to determine which books were worthy; there were MANY more
>than we used that were available) is that each book we used was
>required to teach something VITAL to the message, a truth that was
>found in no other book.
These rules are baloney.
>THAT's how we kept the text pure. How did YOUR "scholars" keep the
>text pure? Or did they even try?
Your "rules" were afterthoughts and, at that, are poorly constructed.
They can't account for the Books found in your Bible.
(And by the way--who is this "we?" Is there an overarching central
authority for non-Catholics that gave them the Bible? Or did *every*
*single* non-Catholic Church come up with its own Bible???)
>Comparing your Bible with ours, there simply isn't anything missing
>from ours.
It's really too bad you feel that way.
>And, frankly, as a professional writer with MULTIPLE awards for my
>writing, the A--the few passages I've read--reads like a bad novel.
Well, that's a good criteria! We all know that Exodus doesn't read
like a spaghetti western and that Psalms doesn't seem like bad poetry
that a 16-year-old would write. Isaiah is clearly schizophrenic. And
Song of Solomon? Don't even start me on that.
Alberich
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
washdc3-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!ngpeer.news.aol.com!
feed1.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!
news.octanews.net!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!
corp.supernews.com!NewsWatcher!user
From: +r@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(€ R.L. Measures)
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Subject: Re: RCC Examined-10
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 03:51:04 -0800
Organization: srk
Message-ID: <+r-2702040351040001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <H5U_b.2816
$ax2.116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <iPU_b.6313$ZV1.24@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ol6o305rubkcung6ckmr8iqj8tu2dbcp2b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vfmo301vrl1tf0fc5raqju5lec24mrsmc9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3niq30hc99141sj007c1379j47s790j55n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mb2r30h22mpsaj6qdha1gvrejqirns75p5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5b3r30tst2n0am6e63qi07l7e80ur7dncf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kt1u301uo26sd4hkrimodajdkovnhrll55@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
User-Agent: NewsWatcher-X 2.2.3b2
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
26
alt.religion.christian.baptist:506957 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832321 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282081
In article <kt1u301uo26sd4hkrimodajdkovnhrll55@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, jw
<john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> x-no-archive:yes
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:10:46 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> >On 26 Feb 2004 05:52:57 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>x... ...
> >>So we can
> >>verify/compare and be sure it's all compatible. The torn veil gives
> >>us DIRECT access to God. We have NO need of a priest.
> >
> >Nor, then, a church, or even gathering "two or more" at one place.
>
> The text neither says nor hints at that.
** As I recall, the text says something like: where two or three are
gathered together ... ... ... .
>...
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!news.he.net!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!216.196.106.144!
border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!
nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.ctc.net!
news.ctc.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:58:44 -0600
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:58:38 -0500
Subject: Re: RCC Examined-10
From: "Raymond E. Griffith" <tiffirgrReverse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Message-ID: <BC64E16E.44D105%tiffirgrReverse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <H5U_b.2816
$ax2.116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <iPU_b.6313$ZV1.24@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ol6o305rubkcung6ckmr8iqj8tu2dbcp2b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vfmo301vrl1tf0fc5raqju5lec24mrsmc9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3niq30hc99141sj007c1379j47s790j55n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mb2r30h22mpsaj6qdha1gvrejqirns75p5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5b3r30tst2n0am6e63qi07l7e80ur7dncf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kt1u301uo26sd4hkrimodajdkovnhrll55@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Lines: 260
NNTP-Posting-Host: 166.82.145.21
X-Trace: sv3-ItBy4
+dWAMrUhlwsVXu0dUkfKj3YQDFMd0fX3R6DksHky4wY6RKA7b9cU6w8XYGgpF9ci2LsUlvnxb
B!
DUQzzTXlnxmSZGG07OyVwj9XwpuZx4KgaYyZC0FPYVPcBbjSj2BX7qi4BFh65zoaw0LFEoDGM
yQm!SrL4yTdU
X-Complaints-To: abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
alt.religion.christian.baptist:507026 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832421 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282119
in article kt1u301uo26sd4hkrimodajdkovnhrll55@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
jw @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> at
john_weatherly47<no wrote on 2/27/04 4:02 AM:
> x-no-archive:yes
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:10:46 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>> On 26 Feb 2004 05:52:57 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> x-no-archive:yes
>>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:25:20 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 25 Feb 2004 08:15:38 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> x-no-archive:yes
>>>>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:52:04 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:41:02 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Alberich" <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:52:23 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>>> RCC Examined-10
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Confession
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Baltimore Catechism defines confession as "the telling of
our
>>>>>>>>>> sins
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> an authorized priest for the purpose of obtaining
forgiveness."
>>>>>>>>>> Catholicism stresses that priests have the power and authority
to
>>>>>>> forgive
>>>>>>>>>> sins without even asking God!(1) Forgiveness involves the
assigning
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> penance, punishments in the form of good works, a certain
number of
>>>>>>>>>> prayers, fastings, or abstinence from certain pleasures as a
token of
>>>>>>>>>> repentance. Priests can forgive the guilt of mortal sins, but
cannot
>>>>>>> remit
>>>>>>>>>> the penalty which must be paid through the performance of good
works
>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>> he chooses to prescribe. Under penalty of committing a mortal
sin,
>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>>> Roman Catholic is required to go to confession at least once a
year.
>>>>>>>>>> However, the Bible gives no sup****t for private (auricular)
>>>>>>>>>> confession
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> a priest for receiving the forgiveness of sins. Furthermore,
this
>>>>>>> practice
>>>>>>>>>> didn't originate until the 5th century and wasn't officially
made
>>>>>>>>>> compulsory until the Fourth Laterin Council in 1215 A.D. Even
the
>>>>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>>>> Bible challenges the concept of Catholic confession on the
grounds
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>> mortal man possesses the power to forgive or absolve sins, and
>>>>>>>>>> clearly
>>>>>>>>>> reveals that God alone can forgive sins; "WHO CAN FORGIVE SINS
BUT
>>>>>>>>>> ONLY
>>>>>>>>>> GOD?" (Mk. 2:7, C.R.V.). No priest has the authority to
forgive sins
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>> "the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (Matt.
9:6,
>>>>>>>>>> J.B.V.).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> By establi****ng a priest as the official forgiver of sins, the
>>>>>>>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>>>> Church usurps Christ's exclusive position and authority to act
as the
>>>>>>>>>> mediator between God and man: "For there is only one God, and
there
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> only one mediator between God and mankind, himself a man,
Christ
>>>>>>>>>> Jesus"
>>>>>>> (I
>>>>>>>>>> Tim 2:5, J.B.V.; see also Heb. 8:6; 9:15). The Bible further
declares
>>>>>>>>>> that, "if any one should sin, we have our advocate with the
Father,
>>>>>>> Jesus
>>>>>>>>>> Christ, who is just" (I Jn. 2:1 J.B.V.).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Scriptures also teach that each individual Christian has
the
>>>>>>> privilege
>>>>>>>>>> of going directly to God for forgiveness: "but if we
acknowledge our
>>>>>>> sins,
>>>>>>>>>> then God. . .will forgive our sins and purify us from
everything that
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> wrong" (I Jn., 1:9, J.B.V.). Even Peter confirmed that men
receive
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> remission of sins directly from Christ not through priests:
"all who
>>>>>>>>>> believe in Jesus will have their sins forgiven through his
name"
>>>>>>>>>> (Acts
>>>>>>>>>> 10:43, J.B.V.;see also Acts 13:38, 39).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gee, the Bible says followers of Christ can't forgive sins,
huh?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (John 20:21-23 NIV) Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As
the
>>>>>>>>> Father
>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>> sent me, I am sending you." {22} And with that he breathed on
them and
>>>>>>> said,
>>>>>>>>> "Receive the Holy Spirit. {23} If you forgive anyone his sins,
they
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anyone care to explain that away?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let me try to see if I understand their argument (see JW, I
>>>>>>>> listen...): That means that Jesus says that if you forgive Bob
his sin
>>>>>>>> against you, then Bob is forgiven as far as you are concerned.
If Bob
>>>>>>>> forgives Joan, then Joan is forgiven. *But*: You cannot forgive
Bob
>>>>>>>> for sins he commits against Joan!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My problem with this is that it seems to be pretty much common
>>>>>>>> sense--was Jesus really telling us that it's okay to forgive
people?
>>>>>>>> Did He believe that we really thought that we should hold a
grudge
>>>>>>>> until he mentioned that?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alberich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exactly, you've explained it away in the way Protestants do. The
other
>>>>>>> thing they do is they say that this refers to the ability to
"proclaim"
>>>>>>> God's forgiveness to believers and His unforgiveness to
unbelievers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not Catholic. However, I recognize this as *a* way God
confers
>>>>>>> forgiveness. I recognize two other ways:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. We can confess them to each other (James 5), which is
actually kind
>>>>>>> of a
>>>>>>> subset of John 20.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Believe it or not, this is how the Catholics first approached
>>>>>> Confession. It was a group thing, wherein you had to confess your
>>>>>> sins to the entire community, in the theory that what you did
affected
>>>>>> all. This was morphed into a period of priestly confession (but
only
>>>>>> one per life--thus called the Era of Deathbed Confessions), and
>>>>>> finally became the sacrament Catholics recognize today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right. Because the way Jesus commanded wasn't good enough.
>>>>
>>>> What? That pretty open-ended command in John 20?
>>>
>>> Still looking for "loopholes" I see.
>>
>> No...reading the "plain meaning" of the words.
>>
>>
>>> How do we get from the veil being torn asunder top to bottom to give
>>> us direct access to God with no intermediary, to confessing to a
>>> priest? The confessing to a priest sews the veil right back together
>>> and puts us on the wrong side. AGAIN.
>>
>> Oh? So Jesus was just saying nothing im****tant that somehow got put
>> into the Bible?
>>
>>
>>> That's a HUGE leap, and systematic theology (if you've ever heard of
>>> that) says it's bunk!
>>
>> I really don't think so. Some ****tions of Protestant theology may say
>> it's bunk.
>>
>>
>>> IOW, what YOU suggest defies the whole Bible.
>>
>> Now you simply overstate things.
>>
>>
>>> There's a REASON we have an entire 66 book Bible.
>>
>> You mean a whole 73-book Bible with all books being complete?
>>
>>
>>> So we can
>>> verify/compare and be sure it's all compatible. The torn veil gives
>>> us DIRECT access to God. We have NO need of a priest.
>>
>> Nor, then, a church, or even gathering "two or more" at one place.
>
> The text neither says nor hints at that. AGAIN, you violate
> systematic theology.
Whose systematic theology does he violate? Yours? You might consider that
you are violating the systematic theology he adheres to.
>
> And I grow increasingly weary of you continuing to argue rather than
> meditate on my POV and the scriptures I present in sup****t.
Whoa! And people call *me* arrogant! As if your precious POV is the right
one by default! Heh.
John, I have seen people use the Scriptures to sup****t almost everything
at
one time or another.
If I am going to do much meditating, though, it will be on the Scripture
itself and not on your point of view.
> ALL you
> are doing is getting a NOTION of what I said and then da****ng to your
> A or the Catechism for a rebuttal.
As you are doing with them? Pot and Kettle, John?
>
> I do not debate.
Nor do you learn, unfortunately. 'Tis a pity.
You have a problem that you do not wish to address. The Canon was decided
by
men, not by God. Men are fallible. The protestant exclusion of the
deutero-canonical books may be an error. The inclusion of them may be an
error. Or perhaps there are some which should be included, but not all.
For example, Jude (a canonical book) quotes directly from the Book of
Enoch
(a non-canonical book). Interesting? Or how about this? We have two
epistles
from Paul -- surely inspired -- that have been lost. One of these is
mentioned in 2 Corinthians. It was a letter to that church falling
between
the books of 1 and 2 Corinthians. If it were found today, would you be
willing to include it in Scripture? Or how about the letter to the church
at
Laodicea (see Colossians 4:16). If that one were to turn up and be
authenticated, would you include it as Scripture? Paul thought enough of
it
to command that the church at Colosse read it!
Now is your own POV so im****tant that truth cannot penetrate it, or that
understanding why others do what they do is completely irrelevant?
Raymond E. Griffith
>
> jw
>
>
>>
>>
>>> And I won't give them power/authority God didn't.
>>
>> Fine with me.
>>
>>
>> Alberich
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________________
___
__> _
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
> http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
>
========
Path: be1.texas.rr.com!newsfeed3.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!
crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!
easynews!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!
news01.roc.ny.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Newsgroups:
alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christia
n.roman-catholic,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy
Subject: Re: RCC Examined-10
Message-ID: <qtvu305snnf7ep3s8a4rvotnigpcm2cdkt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
References: <IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <H5U_b.2816
$ax2.116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <iPU_b.6313$ZV1.24@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<ol6o305rubkcung6ckmr8iqj8tu2dbcp2b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<vfmo301vrl1tf0fc5raqju5lec24mrsmc9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<3niq30hc99141sj007c1379j47s790j55n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<mb2r30h22mpsaj6qdha1gvrejqirns75p5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<5b3r30tst2n0am6e63qi07l7e80ur7dncf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<kt1u301uo26sd4hkrimodajdkovnhrll55@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 216
X-Complaints-To: abuse-news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
52616e646f6d49564104652d5f607991e8f7ffae4273cbfca4f876b627879d38d8f9800b4
ddbacb365f661f1720b88541dca298fd521c59424aa7bcbb0b04adfd28595c0cd3c314de1
4ec17e7107289fb3239f15c29b23ef55fa1e05d1fd1dac
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward ALL headers so that we may
process your complaint properly.
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:40:36 GMT
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:40:37 GMT
alt.religion.christian.baptist:507045 alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic:832448 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:282138
On 27 Feb 2004 09:02:19 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>x-no-archive:yes
>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:10:46 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>On 26 Feb 2004 05:52:57 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>x-no-archive:yes
>>>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:25:20 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 25 Feb 2004 08:15:38 GMT, jw <john_weatherly47<no>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>x-no-archive:yes
>>>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:52:04 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:41:02 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Alberich" <Alberich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:gp4o30hbcpakqosadvbjmsb3hsob0sr81n@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:52:23 GMT, "Chris"
<vze235xx@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >"IKnowHimDoYou" <IKnowHim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> >news:IKnowHim-2402040910580001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> >> RCC Examined-10
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Confession
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> The Baltimore Catechism defines confession as "the telling of
our sins
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>> >> an authorized priest for the purpose of obtaining
forgiveness."
>>>>>>>> >> Catholicism stresses that priests have the power and
authority to
>>>>>>>forgive
>>>>>>>> >> sins without even asking God!(1) Forgiveness involves the
assigning of
>>>>>>>> >> penance, punishments in the form of good works, a certain
number of
>>>>>>>> >> prayers, fastings, or abstinence from certain pleasures as a
token of
>>>>>>>> >> repentance. Priests can forgive the guilt of mortal sins, but
cannot
>>>>>>>remit
>>>>>>>> >> the penalty which must be paid through the performance of
good works
>>>>>>>which
>>>>>>>> >> he chooses to prescribe. Under penalty of committing a mortal
sin,
>>>>>>>every
>>>>>>>> >> Roman Catholic is required to go to confession at least once
a year.
>>>>>>>> >> However, the Bible gives no sup****t for private (auricular)
confession
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>> >> a priest for receiving the forgiveness of sins. Furthermore,
this
>>>>>>>practice
>>>>>>>> >> didn't originate until the 5th century and wasn't officially
made
>>>>>>>> >> compulsory until the Fourth Laterin Council in 1215 A.D. Even
the
>>>>>>>Catholic
>>>>>>>> >> Bible challenges the concept of Catholic confession on the
grounds that
>>>>>>>no
>>>>>>>> >> mortal man possesses the power to forgive or absolve sins,
and clearly
>>>>>>>> >> reveals that God alone can forgive sins; "WHO CAN FORGIVE
SINS BUT ONLY
>>>>>>>> >> GOD?" (Mk. 2:7, C.R.V.). No priest has the authority to
forgive sins
>>>>>>>but
>>>>>>>> >> "the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"
(Matt. 9:6,
>>>>>>>> >> J.B.V.).
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> By establi****ng a priest as the official forgiver of sins,
the Catholic
>>>>>>>> >> Church usurps Christ's exclusive position and authority to
act as the
>>>>>>>> >> mediator between God and man: "For there is only one God, and
there is
>>>>>>>> >> only one mediator between God and mankind, himself a man,
Christ Jesus"
>>>>>>>(I
>>>>>>>> >> Tim 2:5, J.B.V.; see also Heb. 8:6; 9:15). The Bible further
declares
>>>>>>>> >> that, "if any one should sin, we have our advocate with the
Father,
>>>>>>>Jesus
>>>>>>>> >> Christ, who is just" (I Jn. 2:1 J.B.V.).
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> The Scriptures also teach that each individual Christian has
the
>>>>>>>privilege
>>>>>>>> >> of going directly to God for forgiveness: "but if we
acknowledge our
>&g |
