White Protestant Nationalists still hate Catholics

[ESay]

In the early 20th Century, they mocked Catholics. But I think thats what I noticed that they still hate Catholics. Or maybe not Catholics but the Pope and the Catholic Church. They mock the Catholic Faith. Joe Biden is only the second Catholic President of the USA, and one was assassinated before J.F.Kennedy.

As religion becomes less relevant the sectarian tensions will lessen. The world will be a better place for it.

As the religions wane and the bad things of it you do not like are less relevant, so do the good things. The good things that kept the prices of everything to do very low.

Bullshit. Check out Belfast if you want to see the effects of sectarianism.

The division in Belfast isnt so much about the religion, but a way more about the ethnicity.

No , I think you have it the wrong way round. But I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Well, the Catholics consider themselves as the Irish and want to be a part of the Rep of Ireland; the Protestants want to be a part of the UK. That is more about a political division than a religious one per se. Religion doesn't play too significant role in today's Europe. But historical and political disagreements do.

That is how I perceive it, at least. I can't offer more reasonable explanation, I am afraid.

 

[LittleNipper]

I think a difference between a Christian and a Catholic is how they live their religion. I feel that Christians are very much up front with their beliefs. Catholics tend to shelf their views. Or lets say that a Christian has primarily one view ---- while a Catholic likely has a personal view and a social view. In other words, the Christian kid is likely the one who raises his hand in class and questions the validity of gay marriage during Social Studies, while a Catholic classmate mutters, "Oh, here we go again..."

A little bit too upfront all the time. When I think about born again, and Christ took all of our sins I almost puke.

Well, see ---- perhaps you are not saved. I feel that Christ is the most important thing we have. Do you believe that or not?

I was saved but I don't believe in JC anymore, unless you mean Julius Caesar.

Those stupid people knock on my door and said I wasn't saved. And that was not the only experience I had with those stupid people.

Sorry, but I don't find losing one's salvation is an option. One is either saved or not saved. If someone decides to chuck it all away for whatever reason, then it is unlikely that individual was ever saved at all. Simply put, salvation isn't a bed of roses with everything going perfectly swell in this lifetime. There are going to be trials and tribulations, and frankly all Christians should be well aware of this fact. People who believe that once a Christian everything is going to be sweet and lovely are in for a rude awakening. People are not stupid. Oh, someone may say something someone else doesn't wish to hear, but that is the thing discussions are made of. I'm sorry that you feel as though your were somehow disrespected; however, GOD likely sent them your way. There is nothing worse than living a lie or believing one thing but finding out later your were headed in the wrong direction. Alter boys and choir members don't go to heaven because they are appreciated by the bishop for the job they do. Salvation is a very intimate thing ---- one will know it when it happens. Things are simply never the same again.

That was 10 years ago, no one comes to my door and says I'm not saved because they are stupid. Well I started listening to sermons from Prots, Evans, Fundies, and reading the history of the eras :


For I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his Captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers: the manner of the cure was this: he put a ring that had a root of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniack: after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils: and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more: making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or bason full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it; and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man.

Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book VIII

chapter 2-paragraft 5, sec 6

Is this your Jesus??
War of the Jews, Book VI, Chapt 5, 3

But, what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a

husbandman, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very

great peace and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one to make

tabernacles to God in the temple, (23) began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a

voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house,

a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" This was

his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However, certain of the

most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the

man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any thing for

himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but still went on with the same words

which he cried before. Hereupon our rulers, supposing, as the case proved to be, that this was a

sort of divine fury in the man, brought him to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till

his bones were laid bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears,

but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke of the whip his

answer was, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator)

asked him, Who he was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no

manner of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty, till Albinus took

him to be a madman, and dismissed him. Now, during all the time that passed before the war

began, this man did not go near any of the citizens, nor was seen by them while he said so; but

he every day uttered these lamentable words, as if it were his premeditated vow, "Woe, woe to

Jerusalem!" Nor did he give ill words to any of those that beat him every day, nor good words to

those that gave him food; but this was his reply to all men, and indeed no other than a

melancholy presage of what was to come. This cry of his was the loudest at the festivals; and he

or was it really Emperor Vespasian?

Vespasian, the new emperor, having been raised unexpectedly from a low estate, wanted something which might clothe him with divine majesty and authority. This, likewise, was now added. A poor man who was blind, and another who was lame, came both together before him, when he was seated on the tribunal, imploring him to heal them,3 and saying that they were admonished in a dream by the god Serapis to seek his aid, who assured them that he would restore sight to the one by anointing his eyes with his spittle, and give strength to the leg of the other, if he vouchsafed but to touch it with his heel. At first, he could scarcely believe that the thing would any how succeed, and therefore hesitated to venture on making the experiment. At length, however, by the advice of his friends, he made the attempt publicly, in the presence of the assembled multitudes, and it was crowned with success in both cases.4

C. Suetonius Tranquillus, Divus Vespasianus, chapter 7

www.perseus.tufts.edu

I think Paul is Josephus and there might of been a walking talking preacher man named Jesus but most is made up fables.

Satan has a way of trying to confuse people. He did it in the garden to Adam & Eve.

 

[LittleNipper]

You can't go from being spiritually born to unborn - in the same way that a baby can't go from being physically born to going back into the womb. This, to me, is one of the biggest problems with Catholics. Many seem to not understand the basics of salvation.

"Once "saved" always "saved" may be perplexing to Catholics. "Saved" isn't a word commonly used. Catholics think more in terms of redemption, and that Christ is our salvation. The reason Christ is our salvation is his way is obedience to the Father. When we fail in this, our sins are forgiven. Catholics do believe in one baptism where one enters into the Body of Christ (Christ is our salvation, our Way of life).

Jesus mentioned that those who just pay lip service, "Lord-Lord" will be told, "I never knew you. I believe it was John, in Revelation, who noted dire consequences for those who turned from Christ, denied him, to save their own life. Then there is the case of Judas. There is the Parable of the Ten Virgins, all of whom started out just fine, but some who ended up getting locked out. Jesus talks of the narrow way, and "Once saved always saved" seems far from that narrow way.

Just as the physically born can go from being very healthy to doing things that make them quite unhealthy works in our spiritual life as well. We can go from being spiritually healthy to being spiritually unhealthy, and I do not see how "Once saved always saved" prevents that. Catholics believe life in Christ and walking in His way is the only way to maintain spiritual health. Baptism is our beginning, our entrance into the Body of Christ who is our Way, our Truth, our Life.

"Once saved always saved" in comparison to that is...perplexing.

If a person truly trusted in Christ, then he cannot lose his salvation. He will lose rewards and experience serious consequences in this life, sometimes even the sin unto physical death, but since our salvation is based on the finished work of Christ, we are kept by the power of God and His sovereign work. Several passages stress this.

Romans 8:32-39 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 Just as it is written, “For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The emphasis here is that nothing—no condition or person, and this would include the person himself—can separate the believer from God. The conditions listed include height and depth which would certain have application to the depths of falling away even in unbelief.

We need to recognize that when someone abandons their faith, this is really the result of a process of sin. If we could lose our salvation, then in the final analysis, we would be saved by not sinning or by works.

Another passage that bears on this is 2 Tim. 2:10-13.

10 For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. 11 It is a trustworthy statement: For if we died with Him, we shall also live with Him; 12 If we endure, we shall also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us; 13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

We need to recognize that when someone abandons their faith, this is really the result of a process of sin.

Whose truth? Yours or GOD's

 

[Penelope]

I think a difference between a Christian and a Catholic is how they live their religion. I feel that Christians are very much up front with their beliefs. Catholics tend to shelf their views. Or lets say that a Christian has primarily one view ---- while a Catholic likely has a personal view and a social view. In other words, the Christian kid is likely the one who raises his hand in class and questions the validity of gay marriage during Social Studies, while a Catholic classmate mutters, "Oh, here we go again..."

A little bit too upfront all the time. When I think about born again, and Christ took all of our sins I almost puke.

Well, see ---- perhaps you are not saved. I feel that Christ is the most important thing we have. Do you believe that or not?

I was saved but I don't believe in JC anymore, unless you mean Julius Caesar.

Those stupid people knock on my door and said I wasn't saved. And that was not the only experience I had with those stupid people.

Sorry, but I don't find losing one's salvation is an option. One is either saved or not saved. If someone decides to chuck it all away for whatever reason, then it is unlikely that individual was ever saved at all. Simply put, salvation isn't a bed of roses with everything going perfectly swell in this lifetime. There are going to be trials and tribulations, and frankly all Christians should be well aware of this fact. People who believe that once a Christian everything is going to be sweet and lovely are in for a rude awakening. People are not stupid. Oh, someone may say something someone else doesn't wish to hear, but that is the thing discussions are made of. I'm sorry that you feel as though your were somehow disrespected; however, GOD likely sent them your way. There is nothing worse than living a lie or believing one thing but finding out later your were headed in the wrong direction. Alter boys and choir members don't go to heaven because they are appreciated by the bishop for the job they do. Salvation is a very intimate thing ---- one will know it when it happens. Things are simply never the same again.

That was 10 years ago, no one comes to my door and says I'm not saved because they are stupid. Well I started listening to sermons from Prots, Evans, Fundies, and reading the history of the eras :


For I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his Captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers: the manner of the cure was this: he put a ring that had a root of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniack: after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils: and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more: making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or bason full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it; and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man.

Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book VIII

chapter 2-paragraft 5, sec 6

Is this your Jesus??
War of the Jews, Book VI, Chapt 5, 3

But, what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a

husbandman, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very

great peace and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one to make

tabernacles to God in the temple, (23) began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a

voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house,

a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" This was

his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However, certain of the

most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the

man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any thing for

himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but still went on with the same words

which he cried before. Hereupon our rulers, supposing, as the case proved to be, that this was a

sort of divine fury in the man, brought him to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till

his bones were laid bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears,

but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke of the whip his

answer was, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator)

asked him, Who he was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no

manner of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty, till Albinus took

him to be a madman, and dismissed him. Now, during all the time that passed before the war

began, this man did not go near any of the citizens, nor was seen by them while he said so; but

he every day uttered these lamentable words, as if it were his premeditated vow, "Woe, woe to

Jerusalem!" Nor did he give ill words to any of those that beat him every day, nor good words to

those that gave him food; but this was his reply to all men, and indeed no other than a

melancholy presage of what was to come. This cry of his was the loudest at the festivals; and he

or was it really Emperor Vespasian?

Vespasian, the new emperor, having been raised unexpectedly from a low estate, wanted something which might clothe him with divine majesty and authority. This, likewise, was now added. A poor man who was blind, and another who was lame, came both together before him, when he was seated on the tribunal, imploring him to heal them,3 and saying that they were admonished in a dream by the god Serapis to seek his aid, who assured them that he would restore sight to the one by anointing his eyes with his spittle, and give strength to the leg of the other, if he vouchsafed but to touch it with his heel. At first, he could scarcely believe that the thing would any how succeed, and therefore hesitated to venture on making the experiment. At length, however, by the advice of his friends, he made the attempt publicly, in the presence of the assembled multitudes, and it was crowned with success in both cases.4

C. Suetonius Tranquillus, Divus Vespasianus, chapter 7

www.perseus.tufts.edu

I think Paul is Josephus and there might of been a walking talking preacher man named Jesus but most is made up fables.

Satan has a way of trying to confuse people. He did it in the garden to Adam & Eve.

There is no Satan, you use the bible (one of my favorites collection of books) as the books you only read. The bible while its true in parts are fables mostly. There is evil and good, light and dark, and evil likes the dark.

 

[Penelope]

You can't go from being spiritually born to unborn - in the same way that a baby can't go from being physically born to going back into the womb. This, to me, is one of the biggest problems with Catholics. Many seem to not understand the basics of salvation.

"Once "saved" always "saved" may be perplexing to Catholics. "Saved" isn't a word commonly used. Catholics think more in terms of redemption, and that Christ is our salvation. The reason Christ is our salvation is his way is obedience to the Father. When we fail in this, our sins are forgiven. Catholics do believe in one baptism where one enters into the Body of Christ (Christ is our salvation, our Way of life).

Jesus mentioned that those who just pay lip service, "Lord-Lord" will be told, "I never knew you. I believe it was John, in Revelation, who noted dire consequences for those who turned from Christ, denied him, to save their own life. Then there is the case of Judas. There is the Parable of the Ten Virgins, all of whom started out just fine, but some who ended up getting locked out. Jesus talks of the narrow way, and "Once saved always saved" seems far from that narrow way.

Just as the physically born can go from being very healthy to doing things that make them quite unhealthy works in our spiritual life as well. We can go from being spiritually healthy to being spiritually unhealthy, and I do not see how "Once saved always saved" prevents that. Catholics believe life in Christ and walking in His way is the only way to maintain spiritual health. Baptism is our beginning, our entrance into the Body of Christ who is our Way, our Truth, our Life.

"Once saved always saved" in comparison to that is...perplexing.

If a person truly trusted in Christ, then he cannot lose his salvation. He will lose rewards and experience serious consequences in this life, sometimes even the sin unto physical death, but since our salvation is based on the finished work of Christ, we are kept by the power of God and His sovereign work. Several passages stress this.

Romans 8:32-39 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 Just as it is written, “For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The emphasis here is that nothing—no condition or person, and this would include the person himself—can separate the believer from God. The conditions listed include height and depth which would certain have application to the depths of falling away even in unbelief.

We need to recognize that when someone abandons their faith, this is really the result of a process of sin. If we could lose our salvation, then in the final analysis, we would be saved by not sinning or by works.

Another passage that bears on this is 2 Tim. 2:10-13.

10 For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. 11 It is a trustworthy statement: For if we died with Him, we shall also live with Him; 12 If we endure, we shall also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us; 13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

We need to recognize that when someone abandons their faith, this is really the result of a process of sin.

Whose truth? Yours or GOD's

Nothing can be further from the truth, you insinuation atheists' are bad people and sinful.

 

[LittleNipper]

Now as to the parable of the 10 virgins, perhaps the parable is a continuation of the previous chapter and in that case actually reflect the nation of Israel ----- please note the following: Part 37 - Matthew 25:1-13 The Parable of the Ten Virgins by Thomas Ice

Yes, I wonder where did the Islam get virgins in paradise. Do you think that might be it??

First, it is well known that Muhammad could neither read or write. Muhammad didn't write the Quran. Muhammad did hear various Bible stories and apparently mixed up what he heard or heard what had already been confused. So, I see no reason not to imagine that the parable of the 10 virgins somehow was distorted, either by him or through him. The Quran was written about 120 years after Muhammad's death.

 

[LittleNipper]

I think a difference between a Christian and a Catholic is how they live their religion. I feel that Christians are very much up front with their beliefs. Catholics tend to shelf their views. Or lets say that a Christian has primarily one view ---- while a Catholic likely has a personal view and a social view. In other words, the Christian kid is likely the one who raises his hand in class and questions the validity of gay marriage during Social Studies, while a Catholic classmate mutters, "Oh, here we go again..."

A little bit too upfront all the time. When I think about born again, and Christ took all of our sins I almost puke.

Well, see ---- perhaps you are not saved. I feel that Christ is the most important thing we have. Do you believe that or not?

I was saved but I don't believe in JC anymore, unless you mean Julius Caesar.

Those stupid people knock on my door and said I wasn't saved. And that was not the only experience I had with those stupid people.

Sorry, but I don't find losing one's salvation is an option. One is either saved or not saved. If someone decides to chuck it all away for whatever reason, then it is unlikely that individual was ever saved at all. Simply put, salvation isn't a bed of roses with everything going perfectly swell in this lifetime. There are going to be trials and tribulations, and frankly all Christians should be well aware of this fact. People who believe that once a Christian everything is going to be sweet and lovely are in for a rude awakening. People are not stupid. Oh, someone may say something someone else doesn't wish to hear, but that is the thing discussions are made of. I'm sorry that you feel as though your were somehow disrespected; however, GOD likely sent them your way. There is nothing worse than living a lie or believing one thing but finding out later your were headed in the wrong direction. Alter boys and choir members don't go to heaven because they are appreciated by the bishop for the job they do. Salvation is a very intimate thing ---- one will know it when it happens. Things are simply never the same again.

That was 10 years ago, no one comes to my door and says I'm not saved because they are stupid. Well I started listening to sermons from Prots, Evans, Fundies, and reading the history of the eras :


For I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his Captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers: the manner of the cure was this: he put a ring that had a root of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniack: after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils: and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more: making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or bason full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it; and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man.

Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book VIII

chapter 2-paragraft 5, sec 6

Is this your Jesus??
War of the Jews, Book VI, Chapt 5, 3

But, what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a

husbandman, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very

great peace and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one to make

tabernacles to God in the temple, (23) began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a

voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house,

a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" This was

his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However, certain of the

most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the

man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any thing for

himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but still went on with the same words

which he cried before. Hereupon our rulers, supposing, as the case proved to be, that this was a

sort of divine fury in the man, brought him to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till

his bones were laid bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears,

but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke of the whip his

answer was, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator)

asked him, Who he was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no

manner of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty, till Albinus took

him to be a madman, and dismissed him. Now, during all the time that passed before the war

began, this man did not go near any of the citizens, nor was seen by them while he said so; but

he every day uttered these lamentable words, as if it were his premeditated vow, "Woe, woe to

Jerusalem!" Nor did he give ill words to any of those that beat him every day, nor good words to

those that gave him food; but this was his reply to all men, and indeed no other than a

melancholy presage of what was to come. This cry of his was the loudest at the festivals; and he

or was it really Emperor Vespasian?

Vespasian, the new emperor, having been raised unexpectedly from a low estate, wanted something which might clothe him with divine majesty and authority. This, likewise, was now added. A poor man who was blind, and another who was lame, came both together before him, when he was seated on the tribunal, imploring him to heal them,3 and saying that they were admonished in a dream by the god Serapis to seek his aid, who assured them that he would restore sight to the one by anointing his eyes with his spittle, and give strength to the leg of the other, if he vouchsafed but to touch it with his heel. At first, he could scarcely believe that the thing would any how succeed, and therefore hesitated to venture on making the experiment. At length, however, by the advice of his friends, he made the attempt publicly, in the presence of the assembled multitudes, and it was crowned with success in both cases.4

C. Suetonius Tranquillus, Divus Vespasianus, chapter 7

www.perseus.tufts.edu

I think Paul is Josephus and there might of been a walking talking preacher man named Jesus but most is made up fables.

Satan has a way of trying to confuse people. He did it in the garden to Adam & Eve.

There is no Satan, you use the bible (one of my favorites collection of books) as the books you only read. The bible while its true in parts are fables mostly. There is evil and good, light and dark, and evil likes the dark.

If evil exists, there is Satan at work. If good exists, there is GOD at work.

 

[LittleNipper]

In the early 20th Century, they mocked Catholics. But I think thats what I noticed that they still hate Catholics. Or maybe not Catholics but the Pope and the Catholic Church. They mock the Catholic Faith. Joe Biden is only the second Catholic President of the USA, and one was assassinated before J.F.Kennedy.

As religion becomes less relevant the sectarian tensions will lessen. The world will be a better place for it.

As the religions wane and the bad things of it you do not like are less relevant, so do the good things. The good things that kept the prices of everything to do very low.

Bullshit. Check out Belfast if you want to see the effects of sectarianism.

The division in Belfast isnt so much about the religion, but a way more about the ethnicity.

No , I think you have it the wrong way round. But I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Well, the Catholics consider themselves as the Irish and want to be a part of the Rep of Ireland; the Protestants want to be a part of the UK. That is more about a political division than a religious one per se. Religion doesn't play too significant role in today's Europe. But historical and political disagreements do.

That is how I perceive it, at least. I can't offer more reasonable explanation, I am afraid.

It's likely best that the Cathedral of Notre Dame caught fire when it did. Perhaps it should be allowed to crumble into the dust. It doesn't seem to stand for much in Europe today anyway ------ does it?

 

[Penelope]

Now as to the parable of the 10 virgins, perhaps the parable is a continuation of the previous chapter and in that case actually reflect the nation of Israel ----- please note the following: Part 37 - Matthew 25:1-13 The Parable of the Ten Virgins by Thomas Ice

Yes, I wonder where did the Islam get virgins in paradise. Do you think that might be it??

First, it is well known that Muhammad could neither read or write. Muhammad didn't write the Quran. Muhammad did hear various Bible stories and apparently mixed up what he heard or heard what had already been confused. So, I see no reason not to imagine that the parable of the 10 virgins somehow was distorted, either by him or through him. The Quran was written about 120 years after Muhammad's death.

They must of figured men would have their way with virgins in heaven. I think Jews wrote the Quran, like all the books of the bible were wrote by Jews.

 

[Penelope]

I think a difference between a Christian and a Catholic is how they live their religion. I feel that Christians are very much up front with their beliefs. Catholics tend to shelf their views. Or lets say that a Christian has primarily one view ---- while a Catholic likely has a personal view and a social view. In other words, the Christian kid is likely the one who raises his hand in class and questions the validity of gay marriage during Social Studies, while a Catholic classmate mutters, "Oh, here we go again..."

A little bit too upfront all the time. When I think about born again, and Christ took all of our sins I almost puke.

Well, see ---- perhaps you are not saved. I feel that Christ is the most important thing we have. Do you believe that or not?

I was saved but I don't believe in JC anymore, unless you mean Julius Caesar.

Those stupid people knock on my door and said I wasn't saved. And that was not the only experience I had with those stupid people.

Sorry, but I don't find losing one's salvation is an option. One is either saved or not saved. If someone decides to chuck it all away for whatever reason, then it is unlikely that individual was ever saved at all. Simply put, salvation isn't a bed of roses with everything going perfectly swell in this lifetime. There are going to be trials and tribulations, and frankly all Christians should be well aware of this fact. People who believe that once a Christian everything is going to be sweet and lovely are in for a rude awakening. People are not stupid. Oh, someone may say something someone else doesn't wish to hear, but that is the thing discussions are made of. I'm sorry that you feel as though your were somehow disrespected; however, GOD likely sent them your way. There is nothing worse than living a lie or believing one thing but finding out later your were headed in the wrong direction. Alter boys and choir members don't go to heaven because they are appreciated by the bishop for the job they do. Salvation is a very intimate thing ---- one will know it when it happens. Things are simply never the same again.

That was 10 years ago, no one comes to my door and says I'm not saved because they are stupid. Well I started listening to sermons from Prots, Evans, Fundies, and reading the history of the eras :


For I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his Captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers: the manner of the cure was this: he put a ring that had a root of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniack: after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils: and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more: making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or bason full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it; and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man.

Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book VIII

chapter 2-paragraft 5, sec 6

Is this your Jesus??
War of the Jews, Book VI, Chapt 5, 3

But, what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a

husbandman, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very

great peace and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one to make

tabernacles to God in the temple, (23) began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a

voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house,

a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" This was

his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However, certain of the

most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the

man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any thing for

himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but still went on with the same words

which he cried before. Hereupon our rulers, supposing, as the case proved to be, that this was a

sort of divine fury in the man, brought him to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till

his bones were laid bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears,

but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke of the whip his

answer was, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator)

asked him, Who he was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no

manner of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty, till Albinus took

him to be a madman, and dismissed him. Now, during all the time that passed before the war

began, this man did not go near any of the citizens, nor was seen by them while he said so; but

he every day uttered these lamentable words, as if it were his premeditated vow, "Woe, woe to

Jerusalem!" Nor did he give ill words to any of those that beat him every day, nor good words to

those that gave him food; but this was his reply to all men, and indeed no other than a

melancholy presage of what was to come. This cry of his was the loudest at the festivals; and he

or was it really Emperor Vespasian?

Vespasian, the new emperor, having been raised unexpectedly from a low estate, wanted something which might clothe him with divine majesty and authority. This, likewise, was now added. A poor man who was blind, and another who was lame, came both together before him, when he was seated on the tribunal, imploring him to heal them,3 and saying that they were admonished in a dream by the god Serapis to seek his aid, who assured them that he would restore sight to the one by anointing his eyes with his spittle, and give strength to the leg of the other, if he vouchsafed but to touch it with his heel. At first, he could scarcely believe that the thing would any how succeed, and therefore hesitated to venture on making the experiment. At length, however, by the advice of his friends, he made the attempt publicly, in the presence of the assembled multitudes, and it was crowned with success in both cases.4

C. Suetonius Tranquillus, Divus Vespasianus, chapter 7

www.perseus.tufts.edu

I think Paul is Josephus and there might of been a walking talking preacher man named Jesus but most is made up fables.

Satan has a way of trying to confuse people. He did it in the garden to Adam & Eve.

There is no Satan, you use the bible (one of my favorites collection of books) as the books you only read. The bible while its true in parts are fables mostly. There is evil and good, light and dark, and evil likes the dark.

If evil exists, there is Satan at work. If good exists, there is GOD at work.

Evil is evil , does not have anything to do with a fallen angel.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

In the early 20th Century, they mocked Catholics. But I think thats what I noticed that they still hate Catholics. Or maybe not Catholics but the Pope and the Catholic Church. They mock the Catholic Faith. Joe Biden is only the second Catholic President of the USA, and one was assassinated before J.F.Kennedy.

As religion becomes less relevant the sectarian tensions will lessen. The world will be a better place for it.

As the religions wane and the bad things of it you do not like are less relevant, so do the good things. The good things that kept the prices of everything to do very low.

Bullshit. Check out Belfast if you want to see the effects of sectarianism.

The division in Belfast isnt so much about the religion, but a way more about the ethnicity.

No , I think you have it the wrong way round. But I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Well, the Catholics consider themselves as the Irish and want to be a part of the Rep of Ireland; the Protestants want to be a part of the UK. That is more about a political division than a religious one per se. Religion doesn't play too significant role in today's Europe. But historical and political disagreements do.

That is how I perceive it, at least. I can't offer more reasonable explanation, I am afraid.

The protestants in the north were imported by the brits from Scotland. They are hardcore presbyterians who see the pope as satans representative.
Its such a fucked up place. Their political parties divide on religious lines, there is one minor party that welcomes both religions and they are very much fringe.
The troubles grew out of civil rights abuses by the prods which affected the catholic population. Housing,education and employment were better if you were a proddie. The police were predominantly proddie and the catholics had a bad time of it - because they were catholic not because they were left or right wing.
If the two sides had no differences whatsoever religion would still split them.

 

[danielpalos]

...they merely, doth protest too much. Is it any wonder they are protestants.

 

[ESay]

In the early 20th Century, they mocked Catholics. But I think thats what I noticed that they still hate Catholics. Or maybe not Catholics but the Pope and the Catholic Church. They mock the Catholic Faith. Joe Biden is only the second Catholic President of the USA, and one was assassinated before J.F.Kennedy.

As religion becomes less relevant the sectarian tensions will lessen. The world will be a better place for it.

As the religions wane and the bad things of it you do not like are less relevant, so do the good things. The good things that kept the prices of everything to do very low.

Bullshit. Check out Belfast if you want to see the effects of sectarianism.

The division in Belfast isnt so much about the religion, but a way more about the ethnicity.

No , I think you have it the wrong way round. But I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Well, the Catholics consider themselves as the Irish and want to be a part of the Rep of Ireland; the Protestants want to be a part of the UK. That is more about a political division than a religious one per se. Religion doesn't play too significant role in today's Europe. But historical and political disagreements do.

That is how I perceive it, at least. I can't offer more reasonable explanation, I am afraid.

It's likely best that the Cathedral of Notre Dame caught fire when it did. Perhaps it should be allowed to crumble into the dust. It doesn't seem to stand for much in Europe today anyway ------ does it?

Notre Dame is a part of history and architecture. Prominent part. So, I dont understand your point.

 

[ESay]

In the early 20th Century, they mocked Catholics. But I think thats what I noticed that they still hate Catholics. Or maybe not Catholics but the Pope and the Catholic Church. They mock the Catholic Faith. Joe Biden is only the second Catholic President of the USA, and one was assassinated before J.F.Kennedy.

As religion becomes less relevant the sectarian tensions will lessen. The world will be a better place for it.

As the religions wane and the bad things of it you do not like are less relevant, so do the good things. The good things that kept the prices of everything to do very low.

Bullshit. Check out Belfast if you want to see the effects of sectarianism.

The division in Belfast isnt so much about the religion, but a way more about the ethnicity.

No , I think you have it the wrong way round. But I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Well, the Catholics consider themselves as the Irish and want to be a part of the Rep of Ireland; the Protestants want to be a part of the UK. That is more about a political division than a religious one per se. Religion doesn't play too significant role in today's Europe. But historical and political disagreements do.

That is how I perceive it, at least. I can't offer more reasonable explanation, I am afraid.

The protestants in the north were imported by the brits from Scotland. They are hardcore presbyterians who see the pope as satans representative.
Its such a fucked up place. Their political parties divide on religious lines, there is one minor party that welcomes both religions and they are very much fringe.
The troubles grew out of civil rights abuses by the prods which affected the catholic population. Housing,education and employment were better if you were a proddie. The police were predominantly proddie and the catholics had a bad time of it - because they were catholic not because they were left or right wing.
If the two sides had no differences whatsoever religion would still split them.

Well, I understand your reasoning, but cant accept it fully. I think the main division lies in ethnicity and historical issues.

 

[DGS49]

The lack of religiosity in Western Europe is stunning. The French, Germans, Italians, etc., look at religion as a historical curiosity, providing nothing more than a cornucopia of architectural and artistic masterpieces that are nice to look at, and an attraction for tourists. The only people attending Mass are old "white-hairs" and young mothers with young kids...and American visitors, of course.

The most interesting thing about "white protestant" hatred of Catholics is the continued pattern of the quickly vanishing Episcopal Church of doing things that make them more and more revolting to Catholics, thus permanently eliminating the possibility of a religious rapprochement - which appeared to be in the cards 25 years ago. Now I see they are keen to consecrate a "trans-man" as a Bishop.

How revolting.

 

[zaangalewa]

Someone hates me and my best friends? ... Aha ...

 

[surada]

There is a much, much larger gulf between the lay Catholic, and the Catholic leadership, than there is between the protestant leadership and it's flock.

The Pope and the leadership of the Catholic Church is hopelessly corrupted. It has been since at least WWII, though not all popes have been, the finances have been in the gripe of the NWO.

And, since this has been the case, the leadership has fallen more, and more into the clutches of evil, till now, alas, the seat of Peter belongs to the Prince of Darkness.


For more information on this. . .

Look into Pope John Paul's warning on to the last prophecy of Fatima and the what these liar's would sooth say about it after. And study the prophecy of the popes.

"Because of the seriousness of its contents, in order not to encourage the world wide power of Communism to carry out certain coups, my predecessors in the chair of Peter have diplomatically preferred to withhold its publication. On the other hand, it should be sufficient for all Christians to know this much: if there is a message in which it is said that the oceans will flood entire sections of the earth; that, from one moment to the other, millions of people will perish... there is no longer any point in really wanting to publish this secret message. Many want to know merely out of curiosity, or because of their taste for sensationalism, but they forget that 'to know' implies for them a responsibility. It is dangerous to want to satisfy one's curiosity only, if one is convinced that we can do nothing against a catastrophe that has been predicted." He held up his rosary and stated "Here is the remedy against this evil. Pray, pray and ask for nothing else. Put everything in the hands of the Mother of God." Asked what would happen in the Church, he said: "We must be prepared to undergo great trials in the not-too-distant future; trials that will require us to be ready to give up even our lives, and a total gift of self to Christ and for Christ. Through your prayers and mine, it is possible to alleviate this tribulation, but it is no longer possible to avert it, because it is only in this way that the Church can be effectively renewed. How many times, indeed, has the renewal of the Church been effected in blood? This time, again, it will not be otherwise. We must be strong, ... we must entrust ourselves to Christ and to His holy Mother, and we must be attentive, very attentive, to the prayer of the Rosary."[33]

Three Secrets of Fátima - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New World Order? Are people still playing that game. There was a NWO under Alexander, another under Napoleon etc.

 

[Jets]

Speaking as a Catholic, I could care less what Christian nationalists think...

 

[Penelope]

You can't go from being spiritually born to unborn - in the same way that a baby can't go from being physically born to going back into the womb. This, to me, is one of the biggest problems with Catholics. Many seem to not understand the basics of salvation.

"Once "saved" always "saved" may be perplexing to Catholics. "Saved" isn't a word commonly used. Catholics think more in terms of redemption, and that Christ is our salvation. The reason Christ is our salvation is his way is obedience to the Father. When we fail in this, our sins are forgiven. Catholics do believe in one baptism where one enters into the Body of Christ (Christ is our salvation, our Way of life).

Jesus mentioned that those who just pay lip service, "Lord-Lord" will be told, "I never knew you. I believe it was John, in Revelation, who noted dire consequences for those who turned from Christ, denied him, to save their own life. Then there is the case of Judas. There is the Parable of the Ten Virgins, all of whom started out just fine, but some who ended up getting locked out. Jesus talks of the narrow way, and "Once saved always saved" seems far from that narrow way.

Just as the physically born can go from being very healthy to doing things that make them quite unhealthy works in our spiritual life as well. We can go from being spiritually healthy to being spiritually unhealthy, and I do not see how "Once saved always saved" prevents that. Catholics believe life in Christ and walking in His way is the only way to maintain spiritual health. Baptism is our beginning, our entrance into the Body of Christ who is our Way, our Truth, our Life.

"Once saved always saved" in comparison to that is...perplexing.

If a person truly trusted in Christ, then he cannot lose his salvation. He will lose rewards and experience serious consequences in this life, sometimes even the sin unto physical death, but since our salvation is based on the finished work of Christ, we are kept by the power of God and His sovereign work. Several passages stress this.

Romans 8:32-39 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 Just as it is written, “For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The emphasis here is that nothing—no condition or person, and this would include the person himself—can separate the believer from God. The conditions listed include height and depth which would certain have application to the depths of falling away even in unbelief.

We need to recognize that when someone abandons their faith, this is really the result of a process of sin. If we could lose our salvation, then in the final analysis, we would be saved by not sinning or by works.

Another passage that bears on this is 2 Tim. 2:10-13.

10 For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. 11 It is a trustworthy statement: For if we died with Him, we shall also live with Him; 12 If we endure, we shall also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us; 13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

We need to recognize that when someone abandons their faith, this is really the result of a process of sin.

Whose truth? Yours or GOD's

Mine naturally, there is no God.

 

[seaofnails]

Many people have different reasons for disliking Roman Catholic people.

But - there are very good people and also very bad people in all organizations, religions, and all races and civilizations.

I am convinced that there is substance and proof that the Roman Catholic System - and Roman Catholic Core Principles and Goals are truly evil and deceptive.

But my feelings are not hatred or resentment for the Catholic individual

I simply point out the fact that the Roman Catholic political system is complete perversity and harmful to itself and to others even outside of Roman Catholicism.