All about Seventh Day Adventists and Catholics

[BTTG]

I gave you a secular site. Did you visit that?

Here’s another one: newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Pope_Damasus_I

And here’s another: books.google.com/books?id=WlNfJC6RveAC&pg=PA361&lpg=PA361&dq=%22pope+damasus%22+encyclopedia&source=bl&ots=TnmvnTFIrV&sig=2IGabmNDw8yUweys3CsxRvK-v6s&hl=en&ei=HSD4TdCNOIKcgQeGr8yMDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCYQ6AEwATgU#v=onepage&q&f=false

Note: all are secular sources.

**Response - Thank you for the references.

I encourage you to further research on Pope Damasus, I may be warned by the authorities of this site if I include examples of his ancestor, moral and religious life

written with love**

 

[PRmerger]

**Response - Thank you for the references.

I encourage you to further research on Pope Damasus, I may be warned by the authorities of this site if I include examples of his ancestor, moral and religious life

written with love**

BTTG, are you under the impression that the Church teaches that its popes are impeccable and are NOT sinners?

Do you know that our very first pope did the most offensive thing, not once, but three times?

It sounds as if you’re saying this: Pope Damasus was a sinner–immoral and irreligious–and therefore the Church did NOT infallibly declare the canon of Scripture!

If that is your proposition, what do the 2 have to do with each other?

And if that’s your proposition and you’re claiming that the Church did NOT get it right in declaring the canon of Scripture, what books do you believe are NOT inspired?

 

[Pythons]

BTTG:

His Humanity Subject to Death
Paul emphasized this point when he described how Jesus “was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:8). Notice that it was only after He was made in fashion as a man that He could become “obedient to death.” His divinity was not subject to death, therefore He could not live here and die as God.

Back up BTTG - several posts back I quoted your prophet Ellen White - where she explicitly said…
…That God risked loosing His Son ETERNALLY and that this risk was realized PRIOR to Christ coming to earth ( Incarnation ).
…If Christ - PRIOR to Incarnation - risked His “FUTURE” eternal existence by accepting the ‘assignment’ to try and save humanity.
…That means had Christ failed “HE” ( Christ ) would CEASE TO EXIST from the point of failure into ETERNITY.

I’ve already demonstrated,according to SDA theology, Christ’s Divinity was 100% The Father’s “ON LOAN” to Christ…
…Therefore - you have the audacity to boldly affirm that Christ’s Divinity was not subject to death.
…Thinking that somehow your affirmation is going to give you a “pass” for Orthodoxy in this area.
…It’s too late for that because we know what you really mean by your statement.

…Is that Divinity CAN’T die because only The Father is Divine in the ultimate sense.
…So if Christ FAILED the Divinity “in Him” would simply go back to the Father.
…No More Christ but God’s still around! ( somone give me a vomit bag )!

I hate to be the one to break it to you that Ellen’s MULTIPLE affirmations that Christ was putting His FUTURE ETERNAL EXISTENCE at steak…
…PRIOR to leaving heaven to be born of the Blessed Virgin.
…Is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile with what you just said in the paragraph I quoted above.
…Unless you pour-in the completely alien concepts of what The Son is.

Catholics immediately recognize that as “the teachings of Antichrist”.

1 John 2,22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son

If you accept that Jesus IS the Christ you must accept the following.

Ephesians 1,4
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children BY Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will

This fundamental truth is repeated so many times in Sacred Scripture you should seriously take a step back…
…And gasp in outright horror at just where Ellen White’s most maggoty anti Biblical teachings have stranded you.
…You are rejecting crystal clear Scriptures that even Martin Luther and your general run of the mill Fundie Baptist accept.
…I pray you eventually begin to realize the actual theological area you are in here.

You do realize that by rejecting that The Father PREDESTINED that Salvation would come THROUGH His Only Son…
…Is both rejecting The Father & The Son - it’s a textbook rejection.

Your “proofs” about why Christ had to come in a “sin nature” have all easily been answered with multiple Scriptures…
…And after all the posts inbetween my confirmed quotes of Ellen White you continue to ignore what Ellen White said about “Christ”.

These are not very good Jedi mind tricks you are attempting to put over on us…
…They may indeed work on an SDA forum but not here.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Church is made up of sinners… We are all sinners. John Paul II had very serious weaknesses of his own.

The Church is not the author of salvation or the way of salvation. The Church is a mother nurturing with Christ through the sacraments that can be fully administered, irregardless of the behaviors of an errant, individual minister.

The Church is our guide who points the way to salvation, but is not an end in herself.

People have to separate the sacraments and apostolic faith from its ministers, and must study context in light of papal pronouncements.

One must also separate big T–Tradition from small, ecclesial traditions or small t pronouncements that reflect a certain age or condition. Context is the key…and it always involves dates and documentation.

So many times people pull out pronouncements with spin and without context.

 

[barboza21]

I do not believe the "women " is Mary. I do agree that the “women” represents the church=God’s people.Yes, today God’s people are called spiritual Israel.

I do not believe that the vision reads about mother Mary, and that Mary is in heaven. But that is another topic for another day. The “church” as we agree is God’s people, then Mary cannot be the “women” for thus Mary in this verse would mean the “mother of God”, which we know too that this could not be. As a side note, the Pagans had goddesses which were called " queen of heaven".

I do agree with your above statements… the church is the bride…feminine

I see this verse as describing Jesus being born and the loud cry and the pain was in reference to the transgression of God’s people and the truth of God’s word had fallen.

I believe the “fleeing into the wilderness” was a prophetic period of time which is 1,260 years. As per your comment on Rev 11:2, who are the two witnesses that prophesy for 1,260 days?

In Rev. 12:13, the dragon , as we agree was cast to the earth at the cross. And yes, I agree God protects her ( church) during the 1,260 days ( years). You are correct in your scriptures above on how God protected His people in the OT, however vs 13 is talking about “after” the dragon “persecuted” Jesus, the women fled into the wilderness for 1,260 days/years. Therefore, the 1,260 days/years comes after the cross.

The women is the “church”, or “God’s people”, then I don’t think the offspring, or I like the better word of “remnant”, can be Jesus, or His disciples. The remnant of the church are those that keep the ten commandments that were handed down to Moses and they that have the "testimony of Jesus’= spirit of prophecy.

Do you know who the “women”/ “great harlot” is in Rev 17 ?

thanks for the discussion

written with love

I could not have said it better:

The Woman in Revelation 12 is part of the fusion imagery/polyvalent symbolism that is found in the book. She has four referents: Israel, the Church, Eve, and Mary.

She is Israel because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars. These symbols are drawn from Genesis 37:9–11, in which the patriarch Joseph has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers), which bow down to him. Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel.

The Woman is Eve because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus.

Finally, the Woman is Mary because she is the mother of Jesus, the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (19:11–16).

Because the Woman is a four-way symbol, different.aspects of the narrative apply to different referents. Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s Assumption). Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with which the serpent has his primary conflict.

Conversely, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent. Mary did not experience literal pain when bringing forth the Messiah, but she suffered figuratively (the prophecy that a sword would pierce her heart at the Crucifixion). Eve did not ascend to heaven. And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

(TAKEN FROM CATHOLIC.COM, THE WOMAN OF REVELATION 12, JAMES AKIN)

I know you don’t believe that the woman is Mary. Given the above explanation, which are you in disagreement with and why? Do you believe the woman is Eve, and Israel, or is it only the church?

The two witnesses in Rev 11:3 represent the Church’s witness to Israel and, more specifically,her conviction that the law and the prophets bear witness to Christ. So understood, the fate of the two witnesses symbolize the rejection of the gospel of the unbeliveing Israel (11:10), as well as the Church’s conformity to Christ in his dying, rising, and exaltation (11:7, 11-12). Some see the witnesses as two historical individuals, either as the unkown artyrs or as the two fiures from the OT, such as moses and elijah or enoch and elijah.
The actions of the witnesses recall those of Moses and Elijah: they “shut the sky” (11:6; 1 kings 17:1); they turn water “into blood” (11:6; Ex 7:20); they are taken up to “heaven” (11:12; 2 kings 2:11); and they give “testimony” to Jesus (11:7; Lk 9:28-31).

In your understanding, what where those 1,260 days/years? what happened during that time and what other scripture verses do you base it on?

Why isn;t the offspring of the woman Jesus? Rev 12:5 says She (THE WOMAN) brought forth a male child (JESUS), one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and his throne.
and why is it not the disciples? did they not keep GOD’s commandments? Were they not worthy? In your opinion, who was it then that kept God’s commandments? In that case, did the disciples not have the “testimony of Jesus”? Who better than them who actually talked/learned with Him?

I find it curious how you say “The remnant of the church are those that keep the ten commandments that were handed down to Moses and they that have the “testimony of Jesus”= spirit of prophecy.”
When scripture doesn’t say moses, it says the commandments of God. It is as if you are reassuring me that the commandments being talked about here are the exact 10 that God gave to Moses. I feel like you are specifically thinking about the Sabbath here.

Question: Do you believe we are still under Moses Law? I don’t. Let me knw what you thnk.

 

[barboza21]

Do you know who the “women”/ “great harlot” is in Rev 17 ?

thanks for the discussion

written with love

Now for the whore nd the beast.

The woman known as the whore of Babylon is said to be the great city (17:18), a title given earlier to the city where Jesus was crucified (11:8). The beast, havng 7 heads and 10 horns, was earlier described as the beast of the sea (13:1) and appears to be the Roman Empire, with its capital city Rome represented by 7 hills (17:9).
Sinful cities are sometimes described as harlots in the bible. On two occasions, this is said of a pagan metropolis, one being Tyre (Is 23:17) and the other Nineveh (Nahum 3:4). However, the chrge is proverbially made against Jerusalem for her spiritual promiscuity with pagan nations (Is 1:21; Jer 2:20; Ezek 16:1-25; 3:1-4, 11, 30).

Do we agree?

 

[barboza21]

Response - If I am understanding this discussion correctly, Catholics believe they wrote the NT as per the authors of Matthew, Mark, Luke, Peter, etc. I believe the aforementioned were “Christians”, followers of Christ and were of the “church” of Christ. Yes, you could also say they belonged to the “catholic church”, regarding the Greek word for “Catholic” as “universal”. In saying that, Paul, Matthew, etc., I believe, did not belong to the “Catholic church” as we know it today. They belonged to the universal church, the one church, the Christian church, who were in acceptance to the whole work of Christ, in which Christ is the head of the church then and now.Therefore, Peter, Paul, John, etc,. were Christians and not of the Catholic denomination at their time.

written with love.

BTTG,

How do we “know it today”? “It” being the CC?
What universal, one, and chrstian church is that?

Was there not already a church in the NT times? YES.
Which church was that??
You might say it didn;'t have a name. that it was the church of God. That it was a chirstian church. TRUE.
However, did that church remain nameless until today? Because without argument that church must still be around today, right? Jesus said I will be with you until the end of times. Where is that church?

Around the year A.D. 107, a bishop, St. Ignatius of Antioch in the Near East, was arrested, brought to Rome by armed guards and eventually martyred there in the arena. In a farewell letter which this early bishop and martyr wrote to his fellow Christians in Smyrna (today Izmir in modern Turkey), he made the first written mention in history of “the Catholic Church.” He wrote, “Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church” (To the Smyrnaeans 8:2). Thus, the second century of Christianity had scarcely begun when the name of the Catholic Church was already in use.

So once the NT church obtained its name, then you can very well say the writers of the church are of that same name.

IF the NT church had later been called Adventist, then you would be saying today that the writers of the NT (the members of the Advenstist chuch) were Adventists as well… Make sense??

 

[barboza21]

BTTG,

I know you are a very busy person.

Take your time in replying to my posts, including the ones from last week.
I don;t want to pressure you, but I’d hate to miss out on our previously started conversations.

Thanks!

God be with us.

 

[KathleenGee]

BTTG,

What do you think of Catholics?

 

[barboza21]

In Rev. 12:13, the dragon , as we agree was cast to the earth at the cross. And yes, I agree God protects her ( church) during the 1,260 days ( years). You are correct in your scriptures above on how God protected His people in the OT, however vs 13 is talking about “after” the dragon “persecuted” Jesus, the women fled into the wilderness for 1,260 days/years. Therefore, the 1,260 days/years comes after the cross.
written with love

Revelation 12:6 - the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which she is to be nourished for 1,260 days.
Revelation 12:8-9 - he was defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. 9And** the great dragon was thrown down**, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.
Revelation 12:13 - And **when the dragon saw **that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child.
Revelation 12:14 - the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle so that she might fly from the serpent into the wilderness, to the place where she is to be nourished for a time, and times, and half a time.

First, the child is born. Then the woman flees. Then the dragon is cast down. When the dragon realizes he has been cast down, he persecutes the woman, not Jesus. Then it says again that the woman flees to that same place for the same amount of time. 1260 days, 3.5 years, 3 1/2 times. Persecution times because 3 1/2 is half of 7. seven being the number of perfection.

 

[Pythons]

barboza21,

What is your understanding of the theological ramifications of Post # 170 in this thread?
…And do you see how those beliefs could warp ones understanding of the Apocalypse St. John wrote.

 

[KathleenGee]

Hmmmm…did I post this before on this thread?

The Great Harlot resides on the City with 7 Hills…that could be Jerusalem, Rome, or Athens.

The Vatican is on flat land, across the river…

Forget history. Look at geography. The harlot can’t be us?!!

 

[Pythons]

KathleenGee, I’ll ask you the same question I asked barboza21…
…What type of damage to you think subscribing to the things mentioned in post #170 would have.
…On an individuals view of the Book of Revelation?

 

[KathleenGee]

First, St. Peter warns us never to interpret the Word of God privately. God has always made himself known to a gathering of people with a tradition to discern truth from false.

Essentially, what I am seeing in that post is faulty reasoning concerning the divinity of Christ, which for Christianity was finally formalized at the Council of Nicea in the 300’s. The Holy Spirit did not leave us orphans.

The SDA’s can have their ecclesiastics and hierarchy but the Catholic Church cannot. There is a tremendous distrust on their part to perceive any credibility in regards to the Catholic Church in its early history. Fundamentalists convert to Catholicism but admit their anti-Catholic indoctrination have brought about a real struggle in finally coming to the fullness of faith in Christ’s church.

They also have a very difficult time separating the humanity of Christ’s ministers and ecclesiastics from their own sins. The Church is comprised of sinners and only Jesus Christ is without sin. They expect perfection day after day, year after year since Christ’s death and resurrection.

Revelations is essentially about us persevering in Christ to the end. When we stand firm before the world, nurtured on His Body and Blood, we stand with Him to affirm His life, death, and resurrection, and the defeat of evil in this world. Revelations speaks of trials of churches; you see the same behaviors and problems in maturing parishes. You see the warning over the lukewarm and who have everything in this world…a religion of being nice.

Unfortunately, Christianity is not about being right. Our righteousness is found in the grace of faith in Christ alone. And we are also affirmed to deny ourselves, pick up the cross, to see value in suffering, and serve Him in those around us.

It is not good to spend one’s energies affirming one’s righteousness over another.
Unfortunately, if the Catholic Church did not exist, then the Restorationist churches coming out of America in the 1830’s and so on, would not have quite the momentum they have.

True faith is not about you, me, or they being right. It is about Jesus Christ, and living in relationship with Him for the rest of our days on this earth, and in hopes we will be with Him in the next.

 

[BTTG]

BTTG, are you under the impression that the Church teaches that its popes are impeccable and are NOT sinners?

Do you know that our very first pope did the most offensive thing, not once, but three times?

It sounds as if you’re saying this: Pope Damasus was a sinner–immoral and irreligious–and therefore the Church did NOT infallibly declare the canon of Scripture!

If that is your proposition, what do the 2 have to do with each other?

And if that’s your proposition and you’re claiming that the Church did NOT get it right in declaring the canon of Scripture, what books do you believe are NOT inspired?

**Response - I really don"t want to divulge into a different topic. Just a quick question… is the Pope infallible? **

 

[BTTG]

The Church is made up of sinners… We are all sinners. John Paul II had very serious weaknesses of his own.

The Church is not the author of salvation or the way of salvation. The Church is a mother nurturing with Christ through the sacraments that can be fully administered, irregardless of the behaviors of an errant, individual minister.

The Church is our guide who points the way to salvation, but is not an end in herself.

People have to separate the sacraments and apostolic faith from its ministers, and must study context in light of papal pronouncements.

One must also separate big T–Tradition from small, ecclesial traditions or small t pronouncements that reflect a certain age or condition. Context is the key…and it always involves dates and documentation.

So many times people pull out pronouncements with spin and without context.

Response - Agree with your comments. That is why I believe the Bible is the only authority. The doctrines of a denomination have to be proven with scripture, not what our forefathers said.

written with love

 

[PRmerger]

**Response - I really don"t want to divulge into a different topic. Just a quick question… is the Pope infallible? **

No he is not. His office, as the vicar of Christ and Bishop of Rome, when it is used to speak on an area of faith and morals, is infallible.

And, he is never ever-sinless, or impeccable.

In fact, the pope goes to confession regularly I am told. Why would he need to do that if he were impeccable?

It seems that you are confusing impeccability with infallibility.

So any references to the alleged sins of Pope Damasus are irrelevant. We know he was a sinner. Just like St. Peter was a sinner.

Still not sure if you bring this up in reference to the Councils of Hippo and Carthage as if to say that his sinfulness negates anything decreed by these councils?? Is that your point?

 

[PRmerger]

That is why I believe the Bible is the only authority. The doctrines of a denomination have to be proven with scripture, not what our forefathers said.

written with love

And yet, this is not based on Scripture.

You have succumbed to a man-made tradition* that someone told you is true*, but cannot be proven with any Scripture verse.

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by BTTG
That is why I believe the Bible is the only authority. The doctrines of a denomination have to be proven with scripture, not what our forefathers said.

written with love

Care to show me ONE verse where Jesus explicitly taught Scripture-Alone will be the ONLY authority?

 

[BTTG]

I could not have said it better:

The Woman in Revelation 12 is part of the fusion imagery/polyvalent symbolism that is found in the book. She has four referents: Israel, the Church, Eve, and Mary.

She is Israel because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars. These symbols are drawn from Genesis 37:9–11, in which the patriarch Joseph has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers), which bow down to him. Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel.

Response- I agree that the “women” is Israel, but spiritual Israel. In Rev. 12, I believe the women does not represent literal Israel, but spiritual Israel = God’s people = represented by the church. Rev. 12 starts with the birth of Jesus. Verses 2-5 cover the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. This is why I believe the woman is not representing literal Israel of the past, but spiritual Israel after the birth of Christ.

The Woman is Eve because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus.

Response - I am not sure what you meant by “20:2”. I see the “women” in Gen. 3:15 as “the woman”=church, “your seed”=Satan and “her seed”=Jesus.

Finally, the Woman is Mary because she is the mother of Jesus, the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (19:11–16).

Because the Woman is a four-way symbol, different.aspects of the narrative apply to different referents. Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s Assumption). Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with which the serpent has his primary conflict.

Conversely, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent. Mary did not experience literal pain when bringing forth the Messiah, but she suffered figuratively (the prophecy that a sword would pierce her heart at the Crucifixion). Eve did not ascend to heaven. And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

Could you provide scriptures in which Mary did not experience literal pain at birth? and also that “Eve did not ascend to heaven” ? thank you.

(TAKEN FROM CATHOLIC.COM, THE WOMAN OF REVELATION 12, JAMES AKIN)

I know you don’t believe that the woman is Mary. Given the above explanation, which are you in disagreement with and why? Do you believe the woman is Eve, and Israel, or is it only the church?

Previously answered above.

The two witnesses in Rev 11:3 represent the Church’s witness to Israel and, more specifically,her conviction that the law and the prophets bear witness to Christ. So understood, the fate of the two witnesses symbolize the rejection of the gospel of the unbeliveing Israel (11:10), as well as the Church’s conformity to Christ in his dying, rising, and exaltation (11:7, 11-12). Some see the witnesses as two historical individuals, either as the unkown artyrs or as the two fiures from the OT, such as moses and elijah or enoch and elijah.
The actions of the witnesses recall those of Moses and Elijah: they “shut the sky” (11:6; 1 kings 17:1); they turn water “into blood” (11:6; Ex 7:20); they are taken up to “heaven” (11:12; 2 kings 2:11); and they give “testimony” to Jesus (11:7; Lk 9:28-31).

continued in next post