The writer of Revelations is talking about THAT SPECIFIC BOOK: REVELATIONS. The bible didn’t exist then.
I read the information in your link. It’s interesting but it relies heavily on a strict interpretation of three days. There is one thing that really bothers me about this time line. Why didn’t the women go back to annoint the body on Friday? If he died on Wednesday and they didn’t have time to do it that day, and the next day was a sabbath so they couldn’t do it that day, wouldn’t they go first thing Friday morning. How nasty would that body have been on Sunday morning? The stench and decay would have been horrible.
I am using an NIV study Bible. These verses read quite differently than what you have written. Can you tell me what version you are using? Even with your version though it’s still pretty clear to me what is intended here. In verse 13 it mentions that we are forgiven all our trespasses. These trespasses would be violations of the old Law handed down by God. It then continues in verse 14 by saying that these ordinances were taken out of the way and nailed to the cross with him. This is consistent with Christ himself saying that he came to fulfill the Law in Mathew 5.
You tell me that God does not contradict himself and I agree. Christ fulfilled the old Law thus closing that covenant with God. That is why this is not a contradiction. We now live under the new Law which is what Christ taught us. But what you have stated is interesting. If I understand you correctly, God told Paul directly that no food is unclean and then let Paul eat that food and tell others to eat that food even though it was a sin. So God led these people to sin. This doesn’t make sense to me. It seems out of character for God. Do you know of anywhere else in the Bible that God told someone to sin and didn’t stop them before they committed the sin? I have to tell you, if God, the creator of the whole universe comes and tells me that something is not a sin, I’m going to believe him. Since the Bible is the word of God, I believe what he tells me in Acts 10.
Dave, I have read about the ties to pagan holidays. The arguements don’t impress me much. Easter is very simply celebrated the Sunday after the Jewish Passover feast which whether you believe it or not is when most Christians believe Christ rose. The fact that Easter falls on or near a pagan holiday is coincidental. If my daughter’s birthday happens to fall on Charles Manson’s birthday, I am not celebrating the anniversary of Charles Manson’s birth, I am just celebrating the birth of my daughter.
Dave, I was reviewing some of the posts I missed last night when I came across this one. I did what you asked. I went to Websters online and found this:
Luke 4:4 said:
wow, I learn something new every day. I had no idea that these guys denied the Trinity!! Now I know.
Which scriptures have you quoted that is supposed to be so revealing to me? You have used more catholic tradition than scripture in your arguments.
Thats hardly the truth after what I have seen here. You seem to disregard all history, especially of the early Church. Your not even protestant by some of the things you have said. Were not assuming the CC is the one and only, we have to back up and make sure you understand the basics which the mass majority of protestants accept, like Easter Sunday and the Trinity. There are passages for both, you can look on any protestant site and they will agree with us on issues like this.
We are asking a simple question here: How do you know any given book belongs in the Bible? The true Bible has 73 books not 66.
The Bible tools site is just one site owned by The Church of The Great God. It is run by its members and the information in those commentaries has been put together from other articles that relate to the subject. We do not write commentaries specifically but instead information from other articles is taken from our magazine “the forunner” and has been called the forruner commmentary. This is a very incomplete commentary but it is the best we are capable of at the momment. Information is continually being added.
I am definetaly not a protestant. Protestants are just as guilty of perverting GOds word as the catholic church is.
My reason for posting that link is to show that appenrently not all catholics feel the way you do. How are you so sure you are not in the wrong church.And your commentary on that link would be what? Do you believe it as it is written? If so, then can we break it down into an issue-by-issue discussion?
My life was taken over by WWCOG and Garner Ted Armstrong as I was growing up and then when I became a young adult. I used to get their Bible Studies at home, listened to the radio shows at night, supported their missions/ministries and I absorbed all the teachings indiscriminately.
I was young and naive and* it never occured to me that a holy man could possibly write lies about the Catholic Church or the protestant faith*, and it never occurred to me to look into his claims any further than the material which WWCOG provided… so therefore I accepted everything written by Herbert W. as the truth.
Many years later, I’m reading those same Bible studies and the same errors are still being reiterated and propagated.
Very sad.
It’s only by the grace of God that I eventually came HOME to TRUTH.
If you would like to debate the Gospel according to Garner Ted or Herbert W., please feel free to start with any one or two points.
All you have to do is provide a tiny bit of willingness, however grudging, as mine was, and God can lead you to His mercy and love. He can bring you to the fullness of truth, too - a truth that fills mind, heart and soul. Maybe you were led here for this - only God can know that, though, so I will act as if that is the purpose.
I will tell you absolutely that yes, you **will **find grains of truth in the WWCOG. Herbert W. was brilliant at taking a few simple premises and adding to them and turning them into an hour-long radio broadcast that made soooo much sense you couldn’t help but tune in every night. But, truth twisted is no longer truth. It never was and is not now and never will be.
God bless you,
Elizabeth
I think Herbert W. Armstrong may have been the first “Sola Scriptura” preacher to make it into wide acceptance. Except he certainly went outside the Holy Scriptures to create his brand of theology.
CGG:
Their Bible studies are the same old repackaged bunch of anti-Catholic, anti-Christian lies as they were many years ago. As I was reading their site, I could hear the old radio show. Sing it, Garner Ted!
)Thats not true, there are many verse regarding church authority.
This is all copied right off the link you use.
First of all Peter stands out the most of all the Apostles. He is named more than any of them and speaks with authority all over. Look at Jn21 for more on Peter being singled out.
Thats not that accurate what you are saying. For one Paul refers to Peter as “Kephas” in Pauls letters, which does mean rock not pebble. Second of all when someone has their name changed in the Bible it is a BIG deal, they are a new person with a new outlook.
This has more to do with saying that the Church is made up of many people with Jesus as the head of it. We dont dimish Christ in all this, He is rock and cornerstone. But there are also chosen leaders who hold authorities above others.
So this part admits that Peter is shown in an leadership position, I agree with that. About the “strict hierarchical” stuff, it didnt need to because they worked as a team, not every man for themself. In the council of Acts15 Peter was the primary speaker, but it was not a one man show. James was the leader of the Jerusalem church, Peter was head of the whole Church (there are many threads on this already). About summing up the conference, there was no indication that the Gentiles had to keep the Sabbath of the OT Law.
This is not about infallible. look up infallible on catholic.com searchbar. there are tons of thread on this.
Tons and tons of threads, just go to the search option.
I dont remember where, but in one of Peters books he said Scripture is not to be understood by Private Interpretation, the ones who are authorized to interpret wont let us go to the wolves.
Well, at first I could tell that I was in the right place because I simply could not enter into the Real Presence without tears. Copious tears. Sorrow, shame, penitence, love for He who saved me - a terrible sinner. Only when I had confessed my life and recieved absolution did the uncontrollable tears subside. I am still sometimes touched with them, but when I’m not, I still know that the Holy Spirit has found a willing heart in which to dwell. I guess that I don’t need tears to tell me I am home, any more.
