toreador

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 1,015 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by toreador

• 
  60

  Dispelling Watchtower Myths of RC Beliefs

  by Amazing in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  over the last two years, as i moved back to the catholic church, i have been confronted with objections by several people regarding certain catholic teachings.

  these concerns are almost always the same, and are founded in mythology created by the watchtower society, and some evangelical denominations.

  god can and does use fallible men to do infallible things?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Thank you for your post Jim. At least it gives me a perspective from your point of view. I look forward to your finishing your explanation for this.

  Stan: In what year did the Catholic Church institute praying to Saints? Was this a practice by early Christians shortly after the death of Christ? How can a saint hear hundreds or thousands of prayers at one time? No matter how great a saint they were, they are not omniscient nor can they answer our prayers (it is a known fact there are more prayers offered to Mary than to God by Catholics). This is seen by the statement by Bishop Liqouri “We often more quickly obtain what we ask by calling on the name of Mary than by invoking that of Jesus. She...is our Salvation, our Life, our Hope, our Counsel, our Refuge, our Help” (The Glories of Mary by Bishop Alphonse de Ligouri (Brooklyn: Redemptorist Fathers, pp. 254, 257). ///

  Part of this quote requires more time to develop my response, so I will come back to this thread. Prima facia is can appear to be offending to some non-Catholcis, especially fundamentalists who are not well educated in Catholic theology.

  That is going to be extremly tough IMO and require some special pleading. :) Tor
• 
  60

  Dispelling Watchtower Myths of RC Beliefs

  by Amazing in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  over the last two years, as i moved back to the catholic church, i have been confronted with objections by several people regarding certain catholic teachings.

  these concerns are almost always the same, and are founded in mythology created by the watchtower society, and some evangelical denominations.

  god can and does use fallible men to do infallible things?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Hi Stan (Toreador) and Mouthy,

  Stan: I will come back to address your comments as you presented above ... it may take several replies on this thread to complete. I will not reply on CC because the board owner does not like or want discussion that involves Catholic beliefs ... and the atmosphere is not conducive to calm discussion. If it changes, I will return, as I care about many good peple there. My only reason for posting there in the first place, after 9-months of being away, was to announce Tom Cabeen's interview on EWTN. The addendum link was intended to invite some to read my thread here regarding myths about Catholicism. Again, I will get back to you, and may need to do it in several responses.

  Hi Jim,

  I am not Stan, I was just interested in a response to the allegations.

  I will await your response.

  Thanks,

  Toreador
• 
  60

  Dispelling Watchtower Myths of RC Beliefs

  by Amazing in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  over the last two years, as i moved back to the catholic church, i have been confronted with objections by several people regarding certain catholic teachings.

  these concerns are almost always the same, and are founded in mythology created by the watchtower society, and some evangelical denominations.

  god can and does use fallible men to do infallible things?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Hello Jim

  Maybe you would like to comment on this post posted over on ChannelC on this forum.

  Tor

  Posted by Scorpion on Mon - May 5 - 02:17am:
  
  In Reply to: Addendum posted by JimWhitney on Sun - May 4 - 6:06pm:
  
  Thanks for the links Jim. I am not sure the information you provided though IMO could be said to dispel what you cassified as "common myths" of the Catholic Church.

  Papal infallability.
  The following statement was formally determined by the Vatican Council, Sess. IV, Const. de Ecclesiâ Christi, c. iv:

  "We teach and define that it is a dogma Divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves and not from the consent of the Church irreformable."
  ///

  Exclusively the Only True Church:

  "Catholic Book of PRAYERS" edited by Maurus Fitzgerald and published by CATHOLIC BOOK PUBLISHING CO., New Jersey. It is copyrighted 2003 and has both Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur by proper Catholic authorities. It is said to be the best selling catholic prayerbook in America now. Note the following claims on pp. 236,237, quoted verbatim:

  "The Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church is the only flock of which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is the only Shepherd. To hear the teachings of the Church and to submit oneself to its laws is to hear Jesus Christ and to obey Him. To refuse to submit to the decisions and laws of the Church is to refuse to submit to Jesus Christ. He himself has expressly said to His Apostles: He who hears you, hears Me; and he who rejects you, rejects Me; and he who rejects Me, rejects Him Who sent Me.
  ///

  Does the Catholic Church still use the above book?

  Btw, here's a press commentary about a recently issued papal document saying, in essence, that they are the only true Church:

  http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20070711/NEWS02/707110335/-1/s
  ///

  Praying to St. Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and praying to the Saints:

  There is extensive material on this subject, mainly from Catholic sources that leads me to draw the conclusion that the prayers deliverd to the Saints and Mary are a form of idolatry.

  The CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, Doubleday, 1995 (copyright 1994, United States Catholic Conference, Inc.) contains 2865 paragraphs of catholic teaching.

  It calls Mary "all-holy" at least 7 times. (493, 721, 829, 1138, 2030, 2677, 2827). Wouldn't you view this as blasphemy.

  The last part of 2677 states:

  "By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the "Mother of Mercy," the All-Holy One. We give ourselves over to her now, in the today of our lives. And our trust broadens further, already at the present momemt, to surrender "the hour of our death" wholly to her care. May she be there as she was at her son´s death on the cross. May she welcome us as our mother at the hour of our passing to lead us to her son , Jesus, in paradise."

  According to this it is Mary, not Jesus, who is in charge at death. And so it is deemed absolutely vital to invoke Mary. As "the All-Holy one" she is viewed as a goddess, and the veneration showed her here amounts to idolatry, no matter what is said to the contrary.

  Prayers are directed to Mary in a way that the Jew in OT-times and the Christian in NT-times would only direct to God and Christ. And the songs of praise are such as should only be directed to God and Christ. The situation is not very different from that prevailing in the Watchtower organization. It is claimed that the organization does not set dates, and when the hard evidence to the contrary is presented, strenuous efforts are made to explain away and even deny the obvoius.

  In what year did the Catholic Church institute praying to Saints? Was this a practice by early Christians shortly after the death of Christ?
  How can a saint hear hundreds or thousands of prayers at one time? No matter how great a saint they were, they are not omniscient nor can they answer our prayers (it is a known fact there are more prayers offered to Mary than to God by Catholics). This is seen by the statement by Bishop Liqouri “We often more quickly obtain what we ask by calling on the name of Mary than by invoking that of Jesus. She...is our Salvation, our Life, our Hope, our Counsel, our Refuge, our Help” (The Glories of Mary by Bishop Alphonse de Ligouri (Brooklyn: Redemptorist Fathers, pp. 254, 257).
  ///

  To tell you the truth, what religion you or Tom or anyone else belongs to is your choice and I am sure you have made this choice with much prayer and thought. When an individual either joins or belongs to a certain religious group, one thing I look for in the individual, if they have indeed done their homework, is to see if the person is truly being honest about their faith and what it and or the leaders teach as doctrine to be adhered too by the followers.

  More often than not I have found not just Catholics, but others who belong to a certain faith ignorant to the designs and teachings of the religion. I do not think for a moment that you, Jim, are ignorant about what the Catholic Church teaches or has taught.

  What puzzles me is that you would call these Catholic Church doctrines and teachings a Myth when the Church has indeed taught as truth the teachings of Mary and the Saints, the Only True Church, Papel infalibility, etc etc.. as is quoted above in just a few instances.

  Of course maybe this is just one of those cases with the Church of do as we say, but don't really believe all that is written by us, because at times we may contradict what we said at another time.

  What one believes spiritually is personal between them and God. Myself, I have to be honest with where I am with God and where I worship, what is and has been taught and who is doing the teaching. I have yet to find any religion that would resemble something that I would deem "God's true Church"

  I hope I have not been too forward in my response. It is nice to see you posting on this forum again Jim.

  Stan
• 
  39

  Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV

  by Nathan Natas in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .

  in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.

  posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Here is another one that really says it all with very good links in support. I dont see how the Catholics can claim they dont practice Idolatry . Very telling.

  http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index2.cgi?frames=no&board=Main&mode=Current&message=26178

  Posted by Scorpion on Mon - May 5 - 02:17am:
  
  In Reply to: Addendum posted by JimWhitney on Sun - May 4 - 6:06pm:
  
  Thanks for the links Jim. I am not sure the information you provided though IMO could be said to dispel what you cassified as "common myths" of the Catholic Church.

  Papal infallability.
  The following statement was formally determined by the Vatican Council, Sess. IV, Const. de Ecclesiâ Christi, c. iv:

  "We teach and define that it is a dogma Divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves and not from the consent of the Church irreformable."
  ///

  Exclusively the Only True Church:

  "Catholic Book of PRAYERS" edited by Maurus Fitzgerald and published by CATHOLIC BOOK PUBLISHING CO., New Jersey. It is copyrighted 2003 and has both Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur by proper Catholic authorities. It is said to be the best selling catholic prayerbook in America now. Note the following claims on pp. 236,237, quoted verbatim:

  "The Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church is the only flock of which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is the only Shepherd. To hear the teachings of the Church and to submit oneself to its laws is to hear Jesus Christ and to obey Him. To refuse to submit to the decisions and laws of the Church is to refuse to submit to Jesus Christ. He himself has expressly said to His Apostles: He who hears you, hears Me; and he who rejects you, rejects Me; and he who rejects Me, rejects Him Who sent Me.
  ///

  Does the Catholic Church still use the above book?

  Btw, here's a press commentary about a recently issued papal document saying, in essence, that they are the only true Church:

  http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20070711/NEWS02/707110335/-1/s
  ///

  Praying to St. Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and praying to the Saints:

  There is extensive material on this subject, mainly from Catholic sources that leads me to draw the conclusion that the prayers deliverd to the Saints and Mary are a form of idolatry.

  The CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, Doubleday, 1995 (copyright 1994, United States Catholic Conference, Inc.) contains 2865 paragraphs of catholic teaching.

  It calls Mary "all-holy" at least 7 times. (493, 721, 829, 1138, 2030, 2677, 2827). Wouldn't you view this as blasphemy.

  The last part of 2677 states:

  "By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the "Mother of Mercy," the All-Holy One. We give ourselves over to her now, in the today of our lives. And our trust broadens further, already at the present momemt, to surrender "the hour of our death" wholly to her care. May she be there as she was at her son´s death on the cross. May she welcome us as our mother at the hour of our passing to lead us to her son , Jesus, in paradise."

  According to this it is Mary, not Jesus, who is in charge at death. And so it is deemed absolutely vital to invoke Mary. As "the All-Holy one" she is viewed as a goddess, and the veneration showed her here amounts to idolatry, no matter what is said to the contrary.

  Prayers are directed to Mary in a way that the Jew in OT-times and the Christian in NT-times would only direct to God and Christ. And the songs of praise are such as should only be directed to God and Christ. The situation is not very different from that prevailing in the Watchtower organization. It is claimed that the organization does not set dates, and when the hard evidence to the contrary is presented, strenuous efforts are made to explain away and even deny the obvoius.

  In what year did the Catholic Church institute praying to Saints? Was this a practice by early Christians shortly after the death of Christ?
  How can a saint hear hundreds or thousands of prayers at one time? No matter how great a saint they were, they are not omniscient nor can they answer our prayers (it is a known fact there are more prayers offered to Mary than to God by Catholics). This is seen by the statement by Bishop Liqouri “We often more quickly obtain what we ask by calling on the name of Mary than by invoking that of Jesus. She...is our Salvation, our Life, our Hope, our Counsel, our Refuge, our Help” (The Glories of Mary by Bishop Alphonse de Ligouri (Brooklyn: Redemptorist Fathers, pp. 254, 257).
  ///

  To tell you the truth, what religion you or Tom or anyone else belongs to is your choice and I am sure you have made this choice with much prayer and thought. When an individual either joins or belongs to a certain religious group, one thing I look for in the individual, if they have indeed done their homework, is to see if the person is truly being honest about their faith and what it and or the leaders teach as doctrine to be adhered too by the followers.

  More often than not I have found not just Catholics, but others who belong to a certain faith ignorant to the designs and teachings of the religion. I do not think for a moment that you, Jim, are ignorant about what the Catholic Church teaches or has taught.

  What puzzles me is that you would call these Catholic Church doctrines and teachings a Myth when the Church has indeed taught as truth the teachings of Mary and the Saints, the Only True Church, Papel infalibility, etc etc.. as is quoted above in just a few instances.

  Of course maybe this is just one of those cases with the Church of do as we say, but don't really believe all that is written by us, because at times we may contradict what we said at another time.

  What one believes spiritually is personal between them and God. Myself, I have to be honest with where I am with God and where I worship, what is and has been taught and who is doing the teaching. I have yet to find any religion that would resemble something that I would deem "God's true Church"

  I hope I have not been too forward in my response. It is nice to see you posting on this forum again Jim.

  Stan
• 
  39

  Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV

  by Nathan Natas in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .

  in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.

  posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  I think there are many teachings one has to overlook to become a Catholic. Here is an interesting post from channelC

  Tor

  http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index2.cgi?frames=no&board=Main&mode=Current&message=26179

  Posted by RudPersson on Mon - May 5 - 03:11am:
  
  Reading about ex-JWs becoming catholics made me shed tears.

  I am one one of those posting here with a clear anti-catholic stance, and I have studied catholicism and the catholic church to such an extent that I refuse to accept being called ignorant by catholic ex-JWs.

  I remember Tom Cabeen posted here for me the idolatrous picture of Mary that is distributed by a certain catholic group in Holland. At the time he indicated to me that the catholic view about Mary was an obstacle for him. So I was sursprised later when I learned that he did actually join the catholic church. It was then joked that he would better close working with the JW-outfit he had been connected with so as not to prolong his agony in purgatory.

  Several other ex-JWs have indicated here that they, too, have become catholics. And from what is stated in other posts below I would not be surprised if still another conversion is due.

  That will never happen with me, I can promise. The RCC is the last big apostate church that I would like to be associated with. A movement coming with false claims is out of the question. The false claim I am thinking of here is that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, as clearly stated in par. 882 in the current catholic catecism. The equally old orthodox church rightly rejects that claim. It also rejects the roman catholic teaching about idulgencies, which teaching alone would suffice for me to reject the RCC.

  Mary idolatry - so well documented and still practiced - is what makes me most upset, however, together with making all kinds of less than Christian people "saints" in the church. Here I am thinking particularly of the 14th century Swedish "saint" Birgitta or Bridget as she seems to be called in English. She had "revelatins" from Mary and Christ making up several bulky volumes. She had a revelation - from the abyss I am sure - that the Swedish king should start a military crusade against Russia! Nice people those saints! Another pious catholic who actually ended up as a canonized special teacher in the church is Alfonso Maria de´Liguori who lived in the 18th century. His blasphemous book THE GLORIES OF MAY is still distributed with Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur in several languages. I have quoted it at length here several years ago. Liguori is honored on August 1 in the RRC calandar.

  The late pope John Paul II, undoubtedly an impeccable authority on catholicism, prayed to and praised Mary as if she was God in Guadalupe in Mexico on January 22, 1999. A plainer example of idolatry can hardly be found. I have presented this prayer verbatim here earlier. It is documented in a good RCC source.

  Maybe what happens with people who are drawn to the RCC is that they gradually fall in love with the church, not unlike the process when people are drawn to the JWs. One grows less and less dependent of facts, and at some stage no damaging facts will carry any weight whatsoever. One good example is the calculation of the Gentile Times as 2520 years. Not a few people studying with the JWs make objections when first confronted with the calculation - it is after all only the Emperors new clothes without a shred of evidence. The subject is then put aside until later, and at that later time the person is more inclined to accept the calculation, although he or she does not see the points claimed. By now that individual is more deeply in love with the Watchtower organization and WANTS it to be the true church, the true organization. Inconvenient facts are put aside and ignored.

  I have seen that process even in a former JW here in Sweden turning catholic about 10 years ago. The guy couldn´t understand why the JWs accepted everything unchallenged and yet this was the actual attitude this person came to show toward catholicism. He even withdrew from contacts with people like myself, clearly being afraid that we might present facts he would have to reject in order to go on with his Roman catholic romance. That romance is now showing signs of coming to en end.

  If I have hurt anyone here I am sorry, but I have to speak my mind like others have done also.

  Rud
• 
  365

  Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

  by Perry in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

  in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

  (intellignet design).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Here is a good one.

  10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atTSwau9fwM&feature=related
• 
  87

  What do we have to do to get Gods' Attention

  by LouBelle in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is *if* you believe in god / a god / gods.

  there are moments when i sit down and have a conversation, almost with myself, because even though i am looking up at the heavens/searching my soul, there is no answer, no supernatural feeling, it is quiet and still, but i speak the words just in case there is something listening.. if there is a god and he is all that he claims to be through all the religions on this earth, why doesn't he rule us as a god should?

  why doesn't he come on down and sort out this world?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  It is impossible for anyone with a rational mind to take you serious that I have talked too. Even religious people. Animals do NOT go willingly to the slaughter for sacrifice and no amount of wishing it is going to make it so. The facts are there, you need to get out more and see it for yourself like I have.

  No, not really. I understand your chagrin here. But I think that if you spoke with a small farmer, one who truly cares for its livestock and raises it in a moral and ethical manner, you would find out differently.

  I was born and raised on a small farm, so I know exactly what I am talking about.

  No, I only spoke the truth to you. Seriously. There's actually NO difference between us and animals... except the vessels we reside in... the bodies that we and they have... which bodies allow US greater freedom... of thought and deed... and which restrict them. If they COULD speak, they would... and we would be amazed.

  You speak as if you are doctor doolittle and you yourself CAN speak to the animals. I have been around dogs, cats, sheep, cattle, pigs etc all my life and while I have had what I call some pretty intelligent animals in my life I dont pretend they could converse with me about being willing to offer up their lives so that I can kill them to appease some sick God who wants blood sacrifice, who has no use for it.

  Death is alive... just as God and Christ are alive. Death does think and does demand things. That is why Death is called "the LAST enemy," and why Death is addressed "Where is your sting?". And why Death... whose name is Abbadon... must be controlled until he is destroyed. The Most Holy One of Israel does have SOME control over Death... which is why only the FIRSTBORN of all of Egypt had their breath taken. Death... would have taken them all .

  No.. death is something that happens. Have you ever watched anything die, even once in your life? I have, many times. If death is to be done away with it is simply that death will not happen, it will be no more.

  Did God create the chief agent of death?

  No, He did not. He created a spirit being... one of the two most beautifuls of all spirit beings, including the Son... which being, after becoming self-asorbed with his own beauty, decided he didn't like the position he had been created for... and wanted more. God wouldn't give him more, however, and so that being jumped shipped and became the chief agent of God's ENEMY... Death. The last enemy.

  I disagree, He created the angel that became Satan.

  Adam made no such bargain, nor is it even possible to do such a thing.

  No, truly. He did. He "sold" us into slavery. There is only one thing that has COMPLETE dominion over us, right now: Death. The bodies we bear are those of Death's - their is death and sin and corruption IN them. The bodies we WILL have... are those from God. In HIS image. They are incorruptible, without sin and without death IN them.

  Death was around long before any humans were here on this planet, so your hypothesis falls flat, somehow in some peculiar this is how animals or humans die. Its really quite simple, get an archaeology book are read it for yourself.

  (Smiling) The Most Holy One of Israel not only sets the rules... but honors them. Sometimes at great cost. What honorable man would set rules in his household then allow outsiders to run all over them? Death does not have a hold on God; Death is in subjection to God... and God controls Death. And you are correct: God doesn't owe a THING to Death - Adam does... and we do. GOD... has provided a PAYMENT... for Adam's error... and OUR debt. His Son, my Lord, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH.

  If death is in subjection to God AND he controls death then God sets the rules, plain and simple. A loving God would not expect billions of others to die because of one man or woman eating an apple.

  Hmmmm... try this: I have a son who ignored my warning and he is GOING to die, because that was the consquence of what he did (he ate something poisonous that had no anecdote because the only anecdate was blood... which had never been spilled before - it had never NEEDED to be spilled...). And so now, his own life... his blood... is worth nothing (cause it's got poison in it, which is why he's dying- duh!). What do do? So my other son who listened to me, who did NOT consume poison, and so whose blood IS still valuabled... OFFERS... to PROVIDE the first anecdote... to pour out HIS blood... and thus provide a TRANSFUSION... to save, at a minimum, the first son's offspring. What a son, yes? Slight problem: there are so many offspring, that the second son's going to have to give ALL of his blood. And that most probably means he's gonna die. Hmmmmm... Make sense?

  How could it make sense my friend. Are you saying if the first human was an alcoholic it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the whole human race to not be alcoholics. You dont need to answer that because we both know it isnt true any more than death was nonexistent before the first humans.

  I think if you can understand what I have written above, the rest of your post is pretty much answered by the above. If you have trouble understanding the rationality of the above, I would encourage you to possible speak with someone who could help you understand it better in person.

  Good to hear from you. You sound like a very nice individual but just a little mixed up. Nothing wrong with that, we all view things differently coming from different walks of life etc.

  Peace to you,

  Tor
• 
  87

  What do we have to do to get Gods' Attention

  by LouBelle in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is *if* you believe in god / a god / gods.

  there are moments when i sit down and have a conversation, almost with myself, because even though i am looking up at the heavens/searching my soul, there is no answer, no supernatural feeling, it is quiet and still, but i speak the words just in case there is something listening.. if there is a god and he is all that he claims to be through all the religions on this earth, why doesn't he rule us as a god should?

  why doesn't he come on down and sort out this world?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Hello Aguest, I appreciate your response to my questions. I was hoping for some honest answers to some perplexing questions I have had for a long time after leaving the JW's.

  No, it is not love, if that were the case. But, again, you assume in error. First, assuming God as that "judge," there was not the "power to forgive with simply a word." The universal LAW was that blood had to be poured out (i.e., "unless blood is poured out, there is no forgiveness of sins.") This law existed even before the earth was created. It is why Abel made animal sacrifices.

  I do not understand this at all. Are you saying there were animals sacrifices before the earth was created such as on another planer? Are you saying that God is subject to a law higher than his own. God does not make the laws?

  Second, Adam didn't ASK to be forgiven, nor did he offer a sacrifice to atone so the he could BE forgiven.

  According to you, he did not have to ask for forgiveness as God only told Adam what would happen if he ate of it. Notice what you wrote.

  Actually, this is a HUGE error: GOD... did not sentence ANYONE to ANYTHING. This error has its origin in the false believe that God "forbade" Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad. He did not. He simply WARNED them of what would happen if they did eat.

  In fact, he didn't even ACKNOWLEDGE that he had sinnned.

  You dont have to repent from a warning if that what YOU call it.

  But, in his own arrogance and refusal to be ACCOUNTABLE, Adam didn't do that... because, in HIS mind, HE didn't DO anything wrong.

  See above.

  First, the animal sacrifices were in place of human sacrifices.

  You are not making any sense to me. If I rape my neighbors wife, can I go kill his dog as a sacrifice, if his dog willingly offers himself to me to offer as a sacrifice.

  And, like Christ, the animals gave their lives willingly. For us. As they do now... when we use them for food and warmth.

  Apparently you have never been to a slaughter where cows are killed for food and to make garments out of their hide. They know dang well what's going on and they sure as heck are NOT offering themselves willingly. You are talking plain silly talk if you expect anyone to believe this you are going to have to make up something at least somewhat believable.

  Why do they do this willingly? Because UNLIKE US... they have faith in the resurrection.

  Now I know you have gone off the deep end.

  They KNOW that the Most Holy One of Israel will keep His promise to them... and restore them. UNLIKE US... they understand that THIS life... is NOT the "reality," but merely a REFLECTION of the reality.

  Now you are saying our lives are not even real and animals realize this but humans don't! Wow, this is amazing stuff.

  Second, you have been misled: It is not God who "wants" all this blood. This is simply a matter of the universal law of atonement: the life... is IN the blood. And BLOOD... atones for sin. Life... for Death. Because, "the last enemy," Death... REQUIRES lives... in order to exist.

  You speak of death as if its alive and is able to think and demand things. Has cognitive faculties. This is getting to be a very weird post to read.

  Christ is the Chief Agent of Life... God. Thus, HE leads people to LIFE - God. Satan... is the chief agent... of Death. Thus, HE leads people TO Death.

  Satan was the spawn of God as well as Adam. Do you agree? Did God create the chief agent of death?

  Like any "living" thing, in order for Death to live... it must FEED. Eat. The "food" that Death "eats"... is earthly lives. Animal, plant... human.

  Now you are creeping me out like some bad horror movie where you see zombies running around eating people, only this time you have gone even farther to say that an occurence such as death actually has the capacity to feed on plants and animals and humans. Whoever is telling you this stuff needs help.

  Adam sold himself... and his children... INCLUDING you and me... as a slave... TO DEATH.

  This is theoretically impossible. Even according to you, all Adam did was ignore a warning.

  In order to SELL something to someone, that someone has to have a PRICE. Death... has a PRICE: life.

  Impossible. It is impossible to sell or buy death, it is a thing that happens, not somethign you can buy and sell.

  Therefore, Death's PRICE... WAGE... in exchange for loosing Adam after he "knew" bad (death) was Adam's life... AND his progeny's ("I'll eat and then I'll know what it is to die - I'll know bad - but YOU promise to not hold me. In exchange, I will become YOUR servant, me AND my children"). THAT is what occurred.

  Adam made no such bargain, nor is it even possible to do such a thing.

  Problem is... Death wouldn't RELEASE Adam. The statement by Death's chief Agent, Satan, that "You will NOT die" was a LIE. Nor would Death release Adam's progeny... because Death wasn't SATISFIED with the price Adam paid! It was not ENOUGH. SOOOoooo... Death held Adam... AND HIS PROGENY... ransom.

  There you go again thinking that an occurence can think and demand something. Even if someone was dying and death was taking his life, it cannot take the life of someone standing next to him or on the other side of the world.

  However, GOD... SENT HIS SON... Christ... to PAY the ransom... so that WE can be RELEASED from Death's hold.

  So death has a hold on God and can command God to pay him. I thought God set the rules and owes nothing to anyone.

  It took Christ... because, it took a SON OF GOD to pay for everyone. Excluding Adam, whose value had now dropped, there was no one BUT Christ. For God only HAD two sons: Christ and Adam.

  What about Satan, wasn't he a son of God too?

  So it had to be a life that Death would TAKE in ransom! Adams obviously didn't do, and yours or mines certainly wouldn't.

  So paying Death by killing millions of willing animals did nothing to appease this Thing that happens called death. It. Death.... is cognizant of the fact that an equaling did not happen with this and demanded a perfect life for a perfect life it claimed? This is really getting worse as time goes on here.

  And that Son DID die... DID give his life [a ransom]. BUT... Death was not able to hold HIM.

  Well, it should have been able to hold him. It.... Death....... demanded payment, thought He got it then alas he was cheated. I would say He is definitely not going to let that go idly by. I bet he went after some plants, animals etc on a rampage!

  Praise JAH, when my Lord DID die and DID go to the world of the dead, he took the KEYS to "death and hades" with him... so that unlike Adam and US... HE was released! HE... "conquered" Death. How? By escaping Death's grip. How? By using the "keys"? What were the "keys"? FAITH... that God WOULD NOT leave him in death's grip; FAITH that God WOULD resurrrect him; FAITH that God WOULD return him to the place he had before he came here; FAITH that God WOULD thereafter exalt him as His king. And OBEDIENCE to God... so that it was GOD he slaved for... rather than doing what Adam did... and selling himself as a slave to Death.

  Faith is something a person has, not something that lives with or apart and is a separate entity any more than death is. It is certainly not a literal or physical key to anything.

  Tor wrote: If my neighbor across the street started slitting animals throats and splattering blood all around and burning the fat up on an altar to his God in his front yard, I would be just a little concerned for my safety, and wonder what is wrong with this guy or gal.

  A guest: Yes, if you didn't have a clue was to what your neighbor was doing and why. But you would probably think differently if your neighbor said to you, "I committed a crime, and the ruler of Country A is requiring my life; however, the ruler of Country B has worked out an arrangement whereby I can give the life of a chicken instead. Now, if it were me alone, I'd give Country A my life; but I've got a wife and children (or plan to), and so, I would rather give the life of a chicken."

  How does this sound for logic. I have a son who ignored my warning so he must die for this. His own life is now worth nothing, so my other son who listened to me must die to ransom the first ones offspring. Make sense. Absolutely not, yet this is your explanation of things.

  Now, okay, it could be that you're an animal rights activist, so you say, "Wait, are you saying that your life is worth more than that chicken's?" What do you think your neighbor is going to say? He's going to say, "Of course, my life's worth more than a chicken's." (Now, that is not necessarily true, of course, depending on the kind of person your neighbor is. But it's moot anyway - again, animals understand sacrifice for such purposes.

  Honestly, you have gone off the deep end with this one. Animals understand the difference between when we kill them for solely for their skin versus when we kill them to make them pay for our sins. I have a real problem with that. I grew up on a farm and killed many a chicken etc.

  They do NOT understand when they are USELESSLY slaughtered, however, like, for example, when we want to look "pretty" and so slaughter them simply for their "outer garments" (pelts).

  So how about a cow that's killed for food, but their hide is also going to be used for a leather garment to make us look good AND keep us warm. Is this cow really confused at this point??? Tell me, how does this cow know what is going to happen to all its parts before it dies???

  THAT is not sacrifice - THAT is unspeakable abuse and disregard for life. They will give their lives for us... as food... as warmth... and as sacrifices; they DON'T give them, however, for our shallow, vain aesthetic appearance. That is pure vanity, with absolutely NO benefit whatsoever.)

  Please Aguest, see above comments.

  You had God's attention... and may have it still. Had it, so much so that He sacrificed His own Son so that no more animals... or humans... needed to be sacrified. One sacrifice, from one man, to cover all sins (excluding blasphemy against the Holy Spirit), for all people, for all time. Nothing more is needed. Blood was poured out and thus sins can be atoned for.

  Again who set the price in that it had to be killing of innocent life. Who holds the cards and sets the rules. You say its not God, if so he is not all powerful.

  But some were because my Lord had not yet given HIS blood as a replacement. And why some? Because, again, only blood atones for... CLEANSES... sin.

  I cannot see myself killing an innocent animal for sins I may have committed. I cannot see making someone else pay for my sins.

  So, yes, it was paid "with the blood of bulls" and doves and goats... but only temporarily - my Lord paid for it perpetually, once... AND FOR ALL... when he later gave HIS blood.

  A lot of innocent animal life could have been spared if God had not waited a few thousand years before demanding the innocent death of his son to pay for the sins of others, wouldnt you agree?

  I hope this helps, dear Tor. I have shared it with you just as I have received it from my Lord,

  I seriously doubt you got any of this from God's son. IN all seriousness; If you are hearing voices telling you this completely wierd stuff above you may need to seek medical help.

  I wish you the very best of all things too, and may you have peace,

  Toreador
• 
  147

  Getting the forum back on track

  by Simon in

  1. forum
  2. announcements

  recently we seem to have had a few different dramas and subsequent fallout on the fourm which i feel has detracted from its purpose.

  with this in mind we have decided that we need to bring the forum back on track and as such we will be clamping down on a lot of the aggressive / insulting posts which have begun to become the norm for a few people.

  we will also be clamping down on the paranoid assusation type of comments against newbies, if someone joins the fourm and you do not believe everything they post - so what, why do we need to hound them away with shouts of troll and fake etc, just ignore them if you dont beleive them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  imposed by the one to whom Adam sold himself and his "innocent" children to: Death.

  <FONT COLOR="#0000FF">a;lkdjfaskljf;lj</FONT>
• 
  87

  What do we have to do to get Gods' Attention

  by LouBelle in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is *if* you believe in god / a god / gods.

  there are moments when i sit down and have a conversation, almost with myself, because even though i am looking up at the heavens/searching my soul, there is no answer, no supernatural feeling, it is quiet and still, but i speak the words just in case there is something listening.. if there is a god and he is all that he claims to be through all the religions on this earth, why doesn't he rule us as a god should?

  why doesn't he come on down and sort out this world?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  toreador

  Hello AGuest,

  Why did God sentence Adam AND Adam's innocent children, who did not CHOOSE to disobey God, to death, only to have to undo the curse he himself imposed in the first place? Is this not God working against his own judgement and pronouncement of a death sentence? Since when does a Just God have the innocent pay the price for the guilty? How can someone who ate a piece of fruit against someones wishes pass this one act of disobedience to millions of innocent children? Is this love if a judge has the power to forgive with simply a word require a blood payment from an innocent to pay a price for a crime they did not commit. The whole mosaic law code where millions of animals had their throats cut and their blood splattered all over the altar as a sacrifice to a God who seemed to enjoy seeing his creation kill and blood spilled doesnt make sense to me anymore. What does God want with all this death and blood as payment. Flesh and blood cannot inherit heaven. What does God need blood and the needless killing of animals as some sort of mideival primitive sacrifice? Why did they need to do it to appease God and logically how does it make God happy or put him in a forgiving frame of mind. Was it to teach us that we can confer the fault of our inherited sinful nature onto an animal or someone other human, the some other human being God own son, or himself, if trinitarian?

  If my neighbor across the street started slitting animals throats and splattering blood all around and burning the fat up on an altar to his God in his front yard, I would be just a little concerned for my safety, and wonder what is wrong with this guy or gal.

  As the title would suggest, maybe we are not killing enough animals to get God's attention. How many thousands of sheep and cattle were slaughtered at the inaugeration of Soloman's temple?

  Tor