- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by tacoandlettuceJesus died on the cross. St Peter was crucified too according to tradition. St Paul writes that he had been stoned and driven from cities several times and one time shipwrecked. He also complains of a constant pain, which he tells can only glorify God. It seems that God makes suffer those He loves.
Sorry, but NO ONE deserves to be crutched by some wheelchair, or restraint of any sort, nor does ANYONE deserve pain, sickness, dis-ease, NOR death! Amen
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by Conrau KIndeed the way of the cross is not guaranteed to be pleasant. I believe the prosperity gospel is incorrect to say the least. God does not guarantee anything except peace even in the storm.
Jesus died on the cross. St Peter was crucified too according to tradition. St Paul writes that he had been stoned and driven from cities several times and one time shipwrecked. He also complains of a constant pain, which he tells can only glorify God. It seems that God makes suffer those He loves.
Manny
28 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by menace71This is preCisely correct, it's the thought that something is unclean that makes it so, or vice versa...
18And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him,
19because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)
20And He was saying, That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles th a blood transfusion to save his life he would not have transgressed in anyway.
Manny
There is nothing either good or bad,
but thinking makes it so.
--W. Shakespeare
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by menace71Amen
Indeed the way of the cross is not guaranteed to be pleasant. I believe the prosperity gospel is incorrect to say the least. God does not guarantee anything except peace even in the storm.
Manny
Be still and know that I am God
Psalms 46:10
King James Version
28 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayok Kelly, you believe what you want, the principle is clear enough to me, indeed, the Bible does not mention smoking tobacco but i am reasonable enough to know the principle is there, for not only does the scripture contain a prohibition to abstain from blood, whether through diet or any other means, it attaches a healthy countenance with abstention, a fact that you cannot deny , regardless of whether you wish to see the principles or not. To me in my own mind, the matter is quite clear, abstain from blood!
Again, diet.
Kelly
28 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by tacoandlettuceour friend think of one is an advocate of Christ's teaching only, he refuses to recognise the validity of other scripture which at times leaves him with rather strange beliefs for he cannot put the constituent parts together so as to form a whole. What is evading him at present is that there is a difference between not understanding the import of a teaching due to lack of clarity on the teachers part and not wanting to understand on the part of the recipients.
He certainly is one to think of! lol
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by galveston75That would make religions like the Catholics very mad and would put him to death again for his exposing not only the Catholics but all other false religions.
I like the word "claim." Actually if Jesus were to come back to earth as a human the same result would happen to him as the first. He would condemn the falseness of religions and again would tell his followers to "Preach the Good News of the Kingdom" like he did the first time. That would make religions like the Catholics very mad and would put him to de ...[text shortened]... ligions.
As a whole most all religions do not follow Jesus's command to do that. Why not?
You are just being provocative. I know many Catholics who spend hours before the tabernacle simply out of their desire for Jesus and faith that he is truly present there. I don't think you know about Catholicism or how authentic their religious faith is.
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by Conrau Ki just had to laugh in the video link you posted when the Pope himself stated that he had been chosen, 'a humble worker in the vineyard of the lord', indeed, what was he referring to? any ideas?
[b]That would make religions like the Catholics very mad and would put him to death again for his exposing not only the Catholics but all other false religions.
You are just being provocative. I know many Catholics who spend hours before the tabernacle simply out of their desire for Jesus and faith that he is truly present there. I don't think you know about Catholicism or how authentic their religious faith is.[/b]
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt seems clear enough. Why do you have to have such a sneering attitude towards other Christians? It is not as if the Pope harbours any deliberate hatred against you.
i just had to laugh in the video link you posted when the Pope himself stated that he had been chosen, 'a humble worker in the vineyard of the lord', indeed, what was he referring to? any ideas?
28 Sep 10
8 edits
Originally posted by Conrau Kif it seems clear enough to you then could you provided a clear explanation without recourse to the obligatory ad hominem? The Pope admires us, he said as much to his cousin. I also reject your accusation of sneering which has connotations of contempt for indeed i harbour no such feelings with regard to other Christians nor the Pope.
It seems clear enough. Why do you have to have such a sneering attitude towards other Christians? It is not as if the Pope harbours any deliberate hatred against you.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI do not see what needs clarification. He said at the time of his election that he had been called to a be humble worker in the Lord's vineyard. What he obviously meant is that the papacy has a central role in the life of the church and that he will try to serve this role with humility. What could be the source of confusion?
if it seems clear enough to you then could you provided a clear explanation without recourse to the obligatory ad hominem? The Pope admires us, he said as much to his cousin.
We have addressed this issue before. It is highly unlikely that the Pope called this random relative after decades of separation. In her words, however, the Pope did not say that he admired the JWs. That is simply your persistent misrepresentation.
28 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Conrau Kfirst of all, he has made a reference to 'Christ's vineyard', and being a student of scripture i immediately wondered what this could mean, in that context? was it referring to his pastoral work within the church? exclusively among Catholics? or others too? If indeed he was a Christian and carrying on Christ's work, why was i not a recipient of it? being a poor sinner? surely i need him more than the already faithful? You see if one is going to make statements with reference to scripture is it not obligatory that we try to ascertain what it means?
I do not see what needs clarification. He said at the time of his election that he had been called to a be humble worker in the Lord's vineyard. What he obviously meant is that the papacy has a central role in the life of the church and that he will try to serve this role with humility. What could be the source of confusion?
We have addressed this issue ...[text shortened]... the Pope did not say that he admired the JWs. That is simply your persistent misrepresentation.
The Pope digs us, its you who cannot bring yourself to say it.