I just converted to Catholicism, ask me anything.

Author: Oldschoolpancakedummy

Posts

Total: 69
#31
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
Bones: What argument convinced you of Gods existence?

I can't say any one particular argument convinced or even keeps me convinced. Cumulatively though I would say all the arguments put together are enough to satisfy someone looking for that kind of thing. I think God can be sought both rationally with the mind and experientially with the heart.

What attracted me was the historicity of the Catholic Church. Whether one agrees with the Church or not, it's incredibly old. That type of antiquity is lacking in so many expressions of Christianity today.
Judaism is older than Catholicism. If you were looking for an antiquated religion there are so many out there.
#32
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
Why do you think that giant miracles like Elijah calling down fire and the parting of the Red Sea don't happen anymore?
#33
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@K_Michael
Why do you think that giant miracles like Elijah calling down fire and the parting of the Red Sea don't happen anymore? 

76% of population in Israel use cellphones. They would miss events like what you mentioned because they are too engrossed in their phones. So it is not like it doesn’t happen anymore. No one pays any attention to them anymore. They can always read about it in the news if it is important.
#34
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Shila
I'm sorry, but no. I am not accepting "miracles still happen but no one notices them because of cellphones" as an answer. First of all, we got nearly 2000 years without geological scale miracles before cell phones were invented, and second, even people who are engrossed in their phones look up, especially if we're talking something as big as destroying a city with fire and brimstone or turning rivers into blood. That's not even bringing in the other 24% that don't have them, or satellite imagery recording the event.
#35
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@K_Michael
I'm sorry, but no. I am not accepting "miracles still happen but no one notices them because of cellphones" as an answer. First of all, we got nearly 2000 years without geological scale miracles before cell phones were invented, and second, even people who are engrossed in their phones look up, especially if we're talking something as big as destroying a city with fire and brimstone or turning rivers into blood. That's not even bringing in the other 24% that don't have them, or satellite imagery recording the event.
People with cellphones are dominating the airwaves. Anything interesting is immediately caught on camera and broadcast to social media.

Something as big as destroying a city with fire and brimstone or turning rivers into blood would be seen as Palestinian propaganda.

If Jews want to hear about miracles and  Jewish patriarchs they would attend a synagogue.

#36
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
What rite of catholicism do you follow and which version of the Vatican documents do you adhere to?

Do you have a particular theologian you prefer? Is it Aquinas? Do you like a certain systematic theology textbook you prefer?
#37
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Public-Choice
What rite of catholicism do you follow and which version of the Vatican documents do you adhere to?

Do you have a particular theologian you prefer? Is it Aquinas? Do you like a certain systematic theology textbook you prefer?
Good questions. Wonder what he thinks about Martin Luther

#38
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
What attracted me was the historicity of the Catholic Church.
You want to be part of and grounded in something that's timeless and extremely hesitant to change. I can respect that.

Personally, I think that Roman Catholicism makes a lot of unproven assumptions that it holds up as fact. So you'd have a hard time proving to me that they are "the one true church".
That being said, I think Christian denominations are largely interchangeable in that your salvation isn't contingent on what club you belong to. If turning to Catholicism revitalized your interest in Christianity, your devotion to Jesus, and your resolve to live a Godly life, then I say all the more power to you. I hope this enriches your life and your soul.
#39
Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 968
3
7
9
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
7
9
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
Hinduism is also old- older, in fact. 
#40
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
I'd delete this thread since everybody is getting so bent out of shape, but this site doesn't let you delete anything. Adios amigos.

Well that aged well. 
#41
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Yep.

One possibility is Doc, 

It was the choir boy thing that they found exciting.


Not that I believe them for a minute.
#42
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Swagnarok

--> @Oldschoolpancakedummy

What attracted me was the historicity of the Catholic Church.
Swagnarok: You want to be part of and grounded in something that's timeless and extremely hesitant to change. I can respect that.

Personally, I think that Roman Catholicism makes a lot of unproven assumptions that it holds up as fact. So you'd have a hard time proving to me that they are "the one true church". 
That being said, I think Christian denominations are largely interchangeable in that your salvation isn't contingent on what club you belong to. If turning to Catholicism revitalized your interest in Christianity, your devotion to Jesus, and your resolve to live a Godly life, then I say all the more power to you. I hope this enriches your life and your soul.
That is a very compromised response and advice.

If Martin Luther took your approach we would have only Catholics today.

Instead we have over 30,000 denominations of Christians.
#43
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
I mean, I'm saying this only with the benefit of modern conditions. Once the Catholic Church had some competition it eventually shaped itself up, but before that Europe was a continent where 99% of the population could not read the Bible and was theologically ignorant in just about every respect.

And "you can be saved regardless of which denomination you're part of" doesn't mean that all denominations tend to have equal outcomes.
Evangelicalism gets a bad rap, and *some* of that is self-inflicted, but I think that in principle it's by far the closest to being right. You're not saved by sitting in church but by actually committing your life to Christ. Evangelicals are the most dedicated to reaching non-Christians, even if the secular world hates them for it, while every other Christian group just likes to pretend that Hindus have the same shot of getting into Heaven so there's no need to hurt anyone's feelings by sending missionaries to India or Nepal.

The first step to Evangelical Christianity, of course, was Martin Luther and his Five Solae. Luther literally called his own church "evangelical", despite the significant differences between 16th century Lutheranism and modern Evangelicalism.
#44
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Swagnarok

The first step to Evangelical Christianity, of course, was Martin Luther and his Five Solae. Luther literally called his own church "evangelical", despite the significant differences between 16th century Lutheranism and modern Evangelicalism.
By challenging the basic tenets of Roman Catholicism Martin Luther started the Reformation Movement.

Martin Luther was a German monk who forever changed Christianity when he nailed his '95 Theses' to a church door in 1517, sparking the Protestant Reformation.

Who Was Martin Luther?

Martin Luther was a German monk who began the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, becoming one of the most influential and controversial figures in the history of Christianity.

Luther called into question some of the basic tenets of Roman Catholicism, and his followers soon split from the Roman Catholic Church to begin the Protestant tradition. His actions set in motion tremendous reform within the Church.

A prominent theologian, Luther’s desire for people to feel closer to God led him to translate the Bible into the language of the people, radically changing the relationship between church leaders and their followers.

#45
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
Are you quoting an encyclopedia? What was the point of that post?
#46
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Swagnarok
Are you quoting an encyclopedia? What was the point of that post?
By challenging the basic tenets of Roman Catholicism Martin Luther started the Reformation Movement.

Martin Luther was a German monk who forever changed Christianity when he nailed his '95 Theses' to a church door in 1517, sparking the Protestant Reformation.

Who Was Martin Luther?

Martin Luther was a German monk who began the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, becoming one of the most influential and controversial figures in the history of Christianity.

Luther called into question some of the basic tenets of Roman Catholicism, and his followers soon split from the Roman Catholic Church to begin the Protestant tradition. His actions set in motion tremendous reform within the Church.

A prominent theologian, Luther’s desire for people to feel closer to God led him to translate the Bible into the language of the people, radically changing the relationship between church leaders and their followers.


This should give pause to members converting to Catholicism like Oldschoolpancakedummy.

“Luther called into question some of the basic tenets of Roman Catholicism, and his followers soon split from the Roman Catholic Church to begin the Protestant tradition. His actions set in motion tremendous reform within the Church.”


#47
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
Newly confirmed Catholic. Would love any questions from anyone. 
I have an itemized list:

1. How do you justify a "Hail Mary" prayer when in 1st Timothy Chapter Two, Verse Five, it states: "for, There is one God and one mediator who can reconcile God and Humanity—the man Christ Jesus"?

2. Why do Catholics purchase and possess statues of Mary when in Exodus Chapter 20, Verses Four and Five, it states: "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me"?

3. What are your thoughts about the Audience Hall in the Vatican uncannily resembling a serpent's head?

4. What are your thoughts on Pope Ratzinger's (Pope Benedict XVI) retirement--i.e. being the first pope to retire in 600 years?

5. How do you reconcile observing Sabbath on Sundays?

6. What are your thoughts on the institutionalized pederasty plaguing numerous parishes?
#48
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Athias
I'm not a Catholic. And I am not sure whether the author is coming back or has left for good. But I will take a stab at what Catholics are likely to say in respect of your questions:


1. How do you justify a "Hail Mary" prayer when in 1st Timothy Chapter Two, Verse Five, it states: "for, There is one God and one mediator who can reconcile God and Humanity—the man Christ Jesus"?


Catholics would refer to prayer as communication between God and humanity.  Yet they would see - interestingly enough - not unlike the protestants that prayer is something we can do on behalf of other people.     The Bible commands the people of God to make intercession on behalf of others to God. Every minister - whether protestant or Catholic makes intercession on behalf of their congregations and yet this intercession is not seen as somehow interfering with the fact that there is one mediator between God and man.  

It is not prayer that is the mediator and it is not even the person we pray to who must be the mediator.  Catholics have no issue with Jesus being the mediator. Mary is in that sense - not a mediator when people pray to her - Catholics and even the Orthodox would see Mary as merely another intercessor - who will speak and pray to the mediator.  


2. Why do Catholics purchase and possess statues of Mary when in Exodus Chapter 20, Verses Four and Five, it states: "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me"? 

Catholics do not see the images as items to worship. Rather they represent in their minds and in their service - the God who is behind the image.  This is in contrast to the pagan times in the OT where such items were actually worshiped as real gods.  

3. What are your thoughts about the Audience Hall in the Vatican uncannily resembling a serpent's head? 

It isn't. It is rectangular, longer than it is wide. Take a photo with a telephoto lense and the visual field is distorted.  

4. What are your thoughts on Pope Ratzinger's (Pope Benedict XVI) retirement--i.e. being the first pope to retire in 600 years? 
Unusual but not necessarily unprecedented.  It's happened before and it will happen again. He was getting old. He had made a mess of a few things. It's better to retire than simply go on making mistakes until you die. 


5. How do you reconcile observing Sabbath on Sundays? 
It's what the early church did.  It's quite biblical. It commemorates the day Jesus rose from the dead.  And moreover - it isn't the Sabbath. In the OT the sabbath was on the 7th day of the week. Sunday is the first day of the week.  

Christians understand that when they become Christians they enter into the rest of Christ. Read the book of Hebrews.  Hence, all Christians are now in a perpetual rest from sin. And are in Christ.  The Lord's Day is not the Sabbath.  Yes, we tend to take things easier.  Yet since the Sabbath is eternally being celebrated - we have not somehow replaced it with Sunday. Sunday is the LORD's Day.  The first day - or better still the 8th day.  


6. What are your thoughts on the institutionalized pederasty plaguing numerous parishes? 

It is an abomination and ought not be tolerated. the perpetrators ought to be arrested put in prison and the keys thrown away. They ought to be derobed and sanctioned.  Parishes condoning such behaviour should be flushed out - and leadership removed - with new people put in. 
#49
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
Newly confirmed Catholic. Would love any questions from anyone. 
So what did you convert from? And why? Was it to do with marriage? Or from conviction? 
#50
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Tradesecret
Catholics would refer to prayer as communication between God and humanity.  Yet they would see - interestingly enough - not unlike the protestants that prayer is something we can do on behalf of other people.     The Bible commands the people of God to make intercession on behalf of others to God. Every minister - whether protestant or Catholic makes intercession on behalf of their congregations and yet this intercession is not seen as somehow interfering with the fact that there is one mediator between God and man.  

It is not prayer that is the mediator and it is not even the person we pray to who must be the mediator.  Catholics have no issue with Jesus being the mediator. Mary is in that sense - not a mediator when people pray to her - Catholics and even the Orthodox would see Mary as merely another intercessor - who will speak and pray to the mediator.  
One does not pray "on behalf" of other people; one prays "for" other people since the communication between God and humanity has neither been disrupted nor interrupted. Let's analyze the Hail Mary prayer:

"Hail, Mary, full of grace,
the Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou amongst women
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death. 
Amen."

Why would one ask the dead to pray for them? Why would one need the dead to pray for them? Why would one create a buffer between communications with a mediator, who himself is a buffer to God?


Catholics do not see the images as items to worship. Rather they represent in their minds and in their service - the God who is behind the image.  This is in contrast to the pagan times in the OT where such items were actually worshiped as real gods.  
You haven't answered the question. I didn't ask whether they saw them as items of worship, though I'm not convinced that they're not.

It is well known that many very early statues of Mary were actually rededicated statues of the Great Mother in the Forms in which She was worshipped in the late Classical world. The eclectic spiritual attitudes found among many Hindu and Buddhist populations today were not uncommon in the ancient West, and the Christian Church did not always discourage them too much, especially when they were struggling to win over a "pagan" population.
I asked the reason they purchase and possess statues of Mary when the Bible expressly forbids it.

It isn't. It is rectangular, longer than it is wide. Take a photo with a telephoto lense and the visual field is distorted.  
It's your argument that it does not look like a serpent's head because the pictures are taken with a telephoto lens which distorts the field? It's not rectangular; it's a trapezoid (at best, an isosceles trapezoid.) Here's a picture from the outside. Look at the curvature. Would you still maintain that it's not shaped like a serpent's head? Are you sure that it's a "distortion," and not just the adjacent walls connecting with the back wall at obtuse angles?

Unusual but not necessarily unprecedented.  It's happened before and it will happen again. He was getting old. He had made a mess of a few things. It's better to retire than simply go on making mistakes until you die. 
I know it's not unprecedented (thus my stating, "first pope to retire in 600 years.") Would you mind elaborating on these mistakes? And why did these mistakes compel his retirement?

It's what the early church did.  It's quite biblical. It commemorates the day Jesus rose from the dead.
Jesus did not resurrect on a Sunday, even if you consider the ancient Hebrew calendar. How does Jesus die on Good Friday and resurrect on the following Sunday?

Read the book of Hebrews.
I have.

Hence, all Christians are now in a perpetual rest from sin.
What does this have to do with observing the Sabbath?

Yet since the Sabbath is eternally being celebrated - we have not somehow replaced it with Sunday.
Why?

It is an abomination and ought not be tolerated. the perpetrators ought to be arrested put in prison and the keys thrown away. They ought to be derobed and sanctioned.  Parishes condoning such behaviour should be flushed out - and leadership removed - with new people put in.
What are your opinions on the reasons it has continued for so long?
#51
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
Man I wish the OP came back. I would have loved to hear what type of Catholic he was. 

I have debated and discussed Catholicism with A LOT of Catholics and one thing I learned was the religion is completely indistinguishable from a cult if you are talking to a Romanist Catholic or a Jesuit or any Catholic that largely agrees with the Latin Rite.

But not every Catholic is a Romanist, and many Catholics are not even Latin Rite catholics. So it would have been interesting to hear his answers as a new Catholic convert.

For every Catholic there's also a different idea of Catholicism, regardless of the Christian Church's actual tradition.

Oh well.
#52
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Athias
One does not pray "on behalf" of other people; one prays "for" other people since the communication between God and humanity has neither been disrupted nor interrupted. Let's analyze the Hail Mary prayer: 
We pray on behalf of people and we pray for people.  In our worship services - a presbyterian service - we have praise and confession prayer. 


"Hail, Mary, full of grace,
the Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou amongst women
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death. 
Amen."

Why would one ask the dead to pray for them? Why would one need the dead to pray for them? Why would one create a buffer between communications with a mediator, who himself is a buffer to God? 
Catholics hold to the view that Mary is not dead.  But rather alive, having ascended like Jesus.  

Others would hold to the view as in Revelation 6:9-11 that those in heaven know what is going on earth and petition on behalf of those on earth is not just a future thing but ongoing now. 

Catholics do not see the images as items to worship. Rather they represent in their minds and in their service - the God who is behind the image.  This is in contrast to the pagan times in the OT where such items were actually worshiped as real gods.  
You haven't answered the question. I didn't ask whether they saw them as items of worship, though I'm not convinced that they're not.
My purpose was to look at the substance behind the commandment not to have icons and images and to differentiate between the two.  What would convince you that they don't see them as items of worship? 

It is well known that many very early statues of Mary were actually rededicated statues of the Great Mother in the Forms in which She was worshipped in the late Classical world. The eclectic spiritual attitudes found among many Hindu and Buddhist populations today were not uncommon in the ancient West, and the Christian Church did not always discourage them too much, especially when they were struggling to win over a "pagan" population.
I asked the reason they purchase and possess statues of Mary when the Bible expressly forbids it. 
The bible forbids such items - if they are to be used as items of worship.  That is the point of the law.  Also many would see this as an OT law - for Israelites not for the entire globe.   The NT has an interpretation of scripture that is to understand all things through Christ. For example. Peter in the book of Acts - was instructed by God to eat bacon and ham. This was forbidden in the OT. Yet in the NT - since Christ fulfilled all things including the sacrifices - and this also applies to the Sabbath. 

Laws in the OT has numerous purposes. Some were for the nation of Israel - some were global. some were for just the Levites. Some were called seed laws - for the land.  


It isn't. It is rectangular, longer than it is wide. Take a photo with a telephoto lense and the visual field is distorted.  
It's your argument that it does not look like a serpent's head because the pictures are taken with a telephoto lens which distorts the field? It's not rectangular; it's a trapezoid (at best, an isosceles trapezoid.) Here's a picture from the outside. Look at the curvature. Would you still maintain that it's not shaped like a serpent's head? Are you sure that it's a "distortion," and not just the adjacent walls connecting with the back wall at obtuse angles? 
I had never heard of this until you raised it. I have never been to the Vatican and probably never will. I did do a google search and it was interesting read. Nevertheless, it does seem pretty clear that there are those who would like to paint the Catholic Church as a satan serving church and do distort images to make it appear to be that way. Other photos - pain a completely different view. 


Unusual but not necessarily unprecedented.  It's happened before and it will happen again. He was getting old. He had made a mess of a few things. It's better to retire than simply go on making mistakes until you die. 
I know it's not unprecedented (thus my stating, "first pope to retire in 600 years.") Would you mind elaborating on these mistakes? And why did these mistakes compel his retirement? 
I am not Catholic - so my views on his mistakes would be biased. I think he stuffed up in relation to the handling of child sex matters. I think he was probably corrupt.  I think he was forced to resign by some of his cardinals and others who wanted the papacy to try and restore some of its lost reputation. 


It's what the early church did.  It's quite biblical. It commemorates the day Jesus rose from the dead.
Jesus did not resurrect on a Sunday, even if you consider the ancient Hebrew calendar. How does Jesus die on Good Friday and resurrect on the following Sunday? 
Yes, he did. The NT clearly says he rose early on the first day of the week.  I also think he prob died on Wednesday - 


Read the book of Hebrews.
I have.
So you understand then. good. 
Hence, all Christians are now in a perpetual rest from sin.
What does this have to do with observing the Sabbath? 
If you read the book of Hebrews you would understand?  We are now resting in Christ. That was the purpose of the Sabbath. 


Yet since the Sabbath is eternally being celebrated - we have not somehow replaced it with Sunday.
Why?
Because Christ is our sabbath.  



It is an abomination and ought not be tolerated. the perpetrators ought to be arrested put in prison and the keys thrown away. They ought to be derobed and sanctioned.  Parishes condoning such behaviour should be flushed out - and leadership removed - with new people put in.
What are your opinions on the reasons it has continued for so long? 
The only real answer is "sin."   Probably due to the fact that the Catholic church wanted to preserve the integrity of the priesthood.  Wanted to believe its priests were above reproach.  Maybe - the focus on single priests only had a bit to do with it as well.   Maybe there was just too many opportunities and not enough accountability.  

I don't know how long it has gone on.  It certainly has existed for just as long in the other institutions in society - from Boy Scouts, schools, orphanages, sports clubs, political clubs, university clubs, bikie clubs, brothels, etc.  It sadly is part of humanity in all of its institutions - 








#53
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Public-Choice
I don't think that they were being particularly serious.


#54
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Tradesecret
Because Christ is our sabbath.  
Sabbath definition: a day of religious observance and abstinence from work, kept by Jewish people from Friday evening to Saturday evening, and by most Christians on Sunday.

You reduced Christ to a Sunday. When Christians are expected to believe Jesus is God.

You must belong to one of those cult denominations.
#55
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Tradesecret
We pray on behalf of people and we pray for people.  In our worship services - a presbyterian service - we have praise and confession prayer. 
How do you pray "on behalf" of someone when the only mediator between a person and God is Jesus? (This is explicitly stated in the Bible.)

Catholics hold to the view that Mary is not dead.  But rather alive, having ascended like Jesus.
This is an assumption based on a misinterpreted premise, i.e. Mary is the "mother of God." Mary is not the mother of God; she's the mother of Jesus's corporeal/human body, whereas God created Jesus soul/spirit.

Others would hold to the view as in Revelation 6:9-11 that those in heaven know what is going on earth and petition on behalf of those on earth is not just a future thing but ongoing now. 
Where does it state that? Wasn't it the martyrs who petitioned God?

My purpose was to look at the substance behind the commandment not to have icons and images and to differentiate between the two.  What would convince you that they don't see them as items of worship? 
The "substance" is explicitly stated, "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." Not having graven images of Mary, or even Jesus himself, would convince me that they're not items of worship.

The bible forbids such items - if they are to be used as items of worship.
No, the Bible expresses God's condemnation of such items straight out. In fact, when God commands that these items are not to worshiped, it's because God states jealousy as the reason. God provides NO CAVEAT when it comes to creating and possessing these items.

For example. Peter in the book of Acts - was instructed by God to eat bacon and ham.
Where in ACTS does it specify that Peter had to eat pig? Is the chapter to which you're referring really about Peter/Simon eating "bacon" or "ham," or his questioning God's authority, and segregating himself from those who he considered "common" and "unclean"?

Yet in the NT - since Christ fulfilled all things including the sacrifices - and this also applies to the Sabbath. 
Where does it state this?

I had never heard of this until you raised it. I have never been to the Vatican and probably never will. I did do a google search and it was interesting read. Nevertheless, it does seem pretty clear that there are those who would like to paint the Catholic Church as a satan serving church and do distort images to make it appear to be that way. Other photos - pain a completely different view. 
I've shown you two images of the Vatican's Audience Hall: (1) one of its interior design, and (2) one of its exterior design. Both look like the head of a serpent. Where is the distortion? I do believe that Catholics like an overwhelming majority of Christian denominations are being coaxed into accepting Luciferian rituals, because the Pope and the Catholic elite, I suspect, ARE LUCIFIERIANS--the pope himself being Lucifer's vicar.

I am not Catholic - so my views on his mistakes would be biased. I think he stuffed up in relation to the handling of child sex matters. I think he was probably corrupt
Not to mention his likely participation in these child-sex matters. Pope Francis does no better in handling this institutionalized pederasty, but he hasn't resigned.

Yes, he did.
No, he didn't. And you yourself have set the premise as to the reason a Sunday (morning) resurrection was not the case.

The NT clearly says he rose early on the first day of the week.  I also think he prob died on Wednesday - 
BINGO! So let's count. Jesus was hurriedly entombed before the Annual Sabbath on Wednesday evening (start of Thursday--remember days started with the evening, not midnight); So if Jesus was to resurrect in three days and three nights, the timeline would follow as such: Wednesday Sundown-Thursday Sundown (Thursday,) Thursday Sundown to Friday Sundown (Friday,) Friday Sundown-Saturday Sundown (Saturday a.k.a. Seventh Day a.k.a. Weekly Sabbath.) That means Jesus would have resurrected Saturday at Sundown (the beginning of the first day of the Week a.k.a. "Sunday.") Now if we use a different count, taking into account that Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon, then the count would start with Wednesday, meaning that Jesus would have resurrected Friday night/Saturday morning.

Note that in John 20, it states that Mary Magdeline went to the tomb early, while it was still dark, to discover that not only the stone covering the tomb had been moved but also the tomb was empty. It's also important to note that because of  Sabbath, she with Mary, mother of James, and Salome would have been forbidden from performing any labors as in gathering aromatic spices and moving the Stone which entombed Jesus's body. The Bible does not state that Jesus resurrects upon discovery of his empty tomb. Jesus himself stated when he would resurrect. And by all rational counts, that would exclude a "Sunday Morning" resurrection as we understand it. So why do Catholics observe the resurrection on Sunday--our Sundays (Sunday morning-Sunday evening)?

So you understand then. good. 

If you read the book of Hebrews you would understand?  We are now resting in Christ. That was the purpose of the Sabbath. 
I do understand. I'm not quite confident that you do. Hebrews points out that Jesus's sacrifice does not provide a substitute for keeping faith with God. I don't know from where you've gleaned this notion that the chapters somehow expresses the elimination or re-designation of the weekly Sabbath.

Because Christ is our sabbath.  
That does not answer anything. Because Catholics have still particularized and designated a "Sabbath day," which is Sunday. Since you've assumed their proxy, I'm asking, "why?"

The only real answer is "sin."   Probably due to the fact that the Catholic church wanted to preserve the integrity of the priesthood.  Wanted to believe its priests were above reproach.  Maybe - the focus on single priests only had a bit to do with it as well.   Maybe there was just too many opportunities and not enough accountability.  
Why do you think that is?

I don't know how long it has gone on.
Some accusations here in the U.S. date back as far as the 1950's; its first cited publicity was said to be in the mid-1980's. But I suspect it has gone on much longer than that.

It certainly has existed for just as long in the other institutions in society - from Boy Scouts, schools, orphanages, sports clubs, political clubs, university clubs, bikie clubs, brothels, etc.
No, much longer. But yes, the institutions you mentioned have issues with pederasty.

It sadly is part of humanity in all of its institutions - 
Saying that other institutions do it as well does not mitigate that the Catholic Church has an issue with institutionalized pederasty.

As long as you're assuming the proxy of Catholics, I have a few more questions:

  1. Why do (Catholics) celebrate the date of Jesus's birth on Christmas, December 25th?
  2. Why hasn't the Pope ordered the destruction of the Obelisk located in St. Peter's Square or the Statue of Moloch in the Colosseum?
  3. Why is the observance of  the resurrection named "Easter"?

#56
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Athias
We pray on behalf of people and we pray for people.  In our worship services - a presbyterian service - we have praise and confession prayer. 
How do you pray "on behalf" of someone when the only mediator between a person and God is Jesus? (This is explicitly stated in the Bible.)

Catholics hold to the view that Mary is not dead.  But rather alive, having ascended like Jesus.
This is an assumption based on a misinterpreted premise, i.e. Mary is the "mother of God." Mary is not the mother of God; she's the mother of Jesus's corporeal/human body, whereas God created Jesus soul/spirit. 

Others would hold to the view as in Revelation 6:9-11 that those in heaven know what is going on earth and petition on behalf of those on earth is not just a future thing but ongoing now. 
Where does it state that? Wasn't it the martyrs who petitioned God? 

My purpose was to look at the substance behind the commandment not to have icons and images and to differentiate between the two.  What would convince you that they don't see them as items of worship? 
The "substance" is explicitly stated, "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." Not having graven images of Mary, or even Jesus himself, would convince me that they're not items of worship.

The bible forbids such items - if they are to be used as items of worship.
No, the Bible expresses God's condemnation of such items straight out. In fact, when God commands that these items are not to worshiped, it's because God states jealousy as the reason. God provides NO CAVEAT when it comes to creating and possessing these items. 

For example. Peter in the book of Acts - was instructed by God to eat bacon and ham.
Where in ACTS does it specify that Peter had to eat pig? Is the chapter to which you're referring really about Peter/Simon eating "bacon" or "ham," or his questioning God's authority, and segregating himself from those who he considered "common" and "unclean"?

Yet in the NT - since Christ fulfilled all things including the sacrifices - and this also applies to the Sabbath. 
Where does it state this?

I had never heard of this until you raised it. I have never been to the Vatican and probably never will. I did do a google search and it was interesting read. Nevertheless, it does seem pretty clear that there are those who would like to paint the Catholic Church as a satan serving church and do distort images to make it appear to be that way. Other photos - pain a completely different view. 
I've shown you two images of the Vatican's Audience Hall: (1) one of its interior design, and (2) one of its exterior design. Both look like the head of a serpent. Where is the distortion? I do believe that Catholics like an overwhelming majority of Christian denominations are being coaxed into accepting Luciferian rituals, because the Pope and the Catholic elite, I suspect, ARE LUCIFIERIANS--the pope himself being Lucifer's vicar. 

I am not Catholic - so my views on his mistakes would be biased. I think he stuffed up in relation to the handling of child sex matters. I think he was probably corrupt
Not to mention his likely participation in these child-sex matters. Pope Francis does no better in handling this institutionalized pederasty, but he hasn't resigned. 

Yes, he did.
No, he didn't. And you yourself have set the premise as to the reason a Sunday (morning) resurrection was not the case.

The NT clearly says he rose early on the first day of the week.  I also think he prob died on Wednesday - 
BINGO! So let's count. Jesus was hurriedly entombed before the Annual Sabbath on Wednesday evening (start of Thursday--remember days started with the evening, not midnight); So if Jesus was to resurrect in three days and three nights, the timeline would follow as such: Wednesday Sundown-Thursday Sundown (Thursday,) Thursday Sundown to Friday Sundown (Friday,) Friday Sundown-Saturday Sundown (Saturday a.k.a. Seventh Day a.k.a. Weekly Sabbath.) That means Jesus would have resurrected Saturday at Sundown (the beginning of the first day of the Week a.k.a. "Sunday.") Now if we use a different count, taking into account that Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon, then the count would start with Wednesday, meaning that Jesus would have resurrected Friday night/Saturday morning. 

Note that in John 20, it states that Mary Magdeline went to the tomb early, while it was still dark, to discover that not only the stone covering the tomb had been moved but also the tomb was empty. It's also important to note that because of  Sabbath, she with Mary, mother of James, and Salome would have been forbidden from performing any labors as in gathering aromatic spices and moving the Stone which entombed Jesus's body. The Bible does not state that Jesus resurrects upon discovery of his empty tomb. Jesus himself stated when he would resurrect. And by all rational counts, that would exclude a "Sunday Morning" resurrection as we understand it. So why do Catholics observe the resurrection on Sunday--our Sundays (Sunday morning-Sunday evening)? 

So you understand then. good. 

If you read the book of Hebrews you would understand?  We are now resting in Christ. That was the purpose of the Sabbath. 
I do understand. I'm not quite confident that you do. Hebrews points out that Jesus's sacrifice does not provide a substitute for keeping faith with God. I don't know from where you've gleaned this notion that the chapters somehow expresses the elimination or re-designation of the weekly Sabbath. 

Because Christ is our sabbath.  
That does not answer anything. Because Catholics have still particularized and designated a "Sabbath day," which is Sunday. Since you've assumed their proxy, I'm asking, "why?"

The only real answer is "sin."   Probably due to the fact that the Catholic church wanted to preserve the integrity of the priesthood.  Wanted to believe its priests were above reproach.  Maybe - the focus on single priests only had a bit to do with it as well.   Maybe there was just too many opportunities and not enough accountability.  
Why do you think that is?

I don't know how long it has gone on.
Some accusations here in the U.S. date back as far as the 1950's; its first cited publicity was said to be in the mid-1980's. But I suspect it has gone on much longer than that. 

It certainly has existed for just as long in the other institutions in society - from Boy Scouts, schools, orphanages, sports clubs, political clubs, university clubs, bikie clubs, brothels, etc.
No, much longer. But yes, the institutions you mentioned have issues with pederasty.

It sadly is part of humanity in all of its institutions - 
Saying that other institutions do it as well does not mitigate that the Catholic Church has an issue with institutionalized pederasty.

As long as you're assuming the proxy of Catholics, I have a few more questions:

  1. Why do (Catholics) celebrate the date of Jesus's birth on Christmas, December 25th?
  2. Why hasn't the Pope ordered the destruction of the Obelisk located in St. Peter's Square or the Statue of Moloch in the Colosseum? 
  3. Why is the observance of  the resurrection named "Easter"?
I don’t see Tradesecret coming back from this level of shellacking.


#57
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Oldschoolpancakedummy
Why did you do it?
#58
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
--> @Oldschoolpancakedummy
Why did you do it?
We all want to know. You might have to beat it out of him. Hope his faith is fully baked.
#59
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
Wouldn't be the first time I beat off a Catholic. 
#60
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Wylted
--> @Shila
Wouldn't be the first time I beat off a Catholic. 

Oldschoolpancakedummy Has yet to earn your wrath. Let us see if he deserves it.