False Prophets the most used comeback!

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyfish58
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you PR.

If logic tells you that there will never be another true prophet, why would you bother “testing”?

.
I think you are operating under the misapprehension that testing the spirits applies to prophets.

We are commanded to test the spirits to discern whether something is in conformity to what has already been revealed, once for all, to the saints (see Jude 1:3).
 
This passage says to you that “no true prophet will teach outside of Christs church”??

.
What it means is that no true prophet will teach things outside of the faith given, once for all, to the saints.

Please note that our Scriptures proclaim that the truths of the faith were given, already once and for all, and thus no new revelation, no new prophets, no new truths, are forthcoming.
 
What it means is that no true prophet will teach things outside of the faith given, once for all, to the saints.

Please note that our Scriptures proclaim that the truths of the faith were given, already once and for all, and thus no new revelation, no new prophets, no new truths, are forthcoming.
Logic and reason would then have to say there are lots of pointless passages in the Bible 🤷

Oh that the beauty of Christs words were not limited to our feeble understanding. :confused:

What a world we could have if we did not restrict the word of God, but alas we all do this on a daily basis and we all claim this is the truth!😊

May the Love of God lift all our veils and may we all be blessed with gods Bounty. Dear friend, we all need it!

God Bless and Regards Tony
 
That’s why we have the CC to tell us when it means actually “black” when you think it reads “white”.
What we all need is Faith and Knowledge in of what is both Black and White 😉

God Bless & Regards Tony
 
What we all need is Faith and Knowledge in of what is both Black and White 😉

God Bless & Regards Tony
I don’t have a problem with that.

It’s when people disagree that we need to have a final arbiter. That’s the Catholic Church.
 
That scripture works fine with the Catholic faith in the blessed Trinity. Jesus revealed the Trinity to our humanity of Three persons. Your seer just added a 4th person that does not exist in the divine revealed Trinity.

There is only one faith, one baptism in one Lord. You offend Catholicism by introducing another gospel in the form of a tablet and interpret scripture outside the divine revelation, these scriptures came from the same body the Church. Yet you, introduce a competing 4th person to the Trinity and a new faith, tat comes from another prophet?

The testimony of God came to us in blood, water and spirit, these three give testimony of Jesus, and know one can say Jesus is LORD WITHOUT THE Holy Spirit.

A Rock is never moved by every wind of doctrine that comes too late, especially Long after Jesus revealed all things for us to know.

Our advocate comes to call our minds to these already revealed revelations. Jesus did not say he would send us a tablet or another prophet.

Peace be with you.
You are free to believe all this. 😉

Consider there are other views. God knowledge embraces all mankind, Gods Love embraces all mankind. Each person on their journey to know and to Love God.

A Catholic would have Faith they are well on the way in this journey and God bless them all. 👍

Me, I have not even started, I keep stumbling at the starting blocks 😊

God Bless and regards Tony
 
Logic and reason would then have to say there are lots of pointless passages in the Bible 🤷
I’m pretty sure "Saul went into a cave to relieve himself’ would fall into that category.

As for “lots” of them being “pointless”? Well, nope.
Oh that the beauty of Christs words were not limited to our feeble understanding. :confused:
Amen!
What a world we could have if we did not restrict the word of God, but alas we all do this on a daily basis and we all claim this is the truth!😊
And yet here you are proclaiming a truth.

Why do you reserve the right to do this for yourself, yet deny the CC this right?
May the Love of God lift all our veils and may we all be blessed with gods Bounty. Dear friend, we all need it!
Amen!

Thank goodness for the CC which provides the apocalypse for us.
 
I don’t have a problem with that.

It’s when people disagree that we need to have a final arbiter. That’s the Catholic Church.
“We need to have a final arbiter”.

That my friend we will all have to submit to 😉

It is only one heart beat away for all of us 😊

God Bless and Regards Tony
 
And yet here you are proclaiming a truth.Why do you reserve the right to do this for yourself, yet deny the CC this right?.
I deny no one dear PRmerger

I am here to share a Love of God.

If I can I would like to continue talking about the Love of God.

You in your Love with your deeds,
Me in my love with my pitiful attempts at service!

May the combination bring about a better undertaking for both of us!

God bless and Regards Tony
 
“We need to have a final arbiter”.

That my friend we will all have to submit to 😉

It is only one heart beat away for all of us 😊

God Bless and Regards Tony
God didn’t leave us to fend for ourselves here on earth without a final arbiter.
 
Hi Gabriel 🙂

If I may address a few points that you raise, in an attempt to remove misunderstandings 🙂
That scripture works fine with the Catholic faith in the blessed Trinity. Jesus revealed the Trinity to our humanity of Three persons. Your seer just added a 4th person that does not exist in the divine revealed Trinity.
Baha’u’llah was not a mere seer. He is the Person of the Father in the Blessed Trinity. He is the Return of Jesus Christ in the glory of the Father. As you can see, this is a unique and magnificent station, not a seer 🙂

He is not a 4th person, He is the First Person of the Trinity. He is the Begetter of the Holy Spirit, and He sent the Son to establish His Kingdom in the hearts of humanity.
There is only one faith, one baptism in one Lord.
Agreed fully and wholeheartedly 🙂

Baha’u’llah emphasised this with this passage:

"This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future…"
You offend Catholicism by introducing another gospel in the form of a tablet and interpret scripture outside the divine revelation, these scriptures came from the same body the Church.
Dear friend, the gospel revealed by Baha’u’llah testifies and fulfills the Gospel of Jesus in the same manner that Jesus’ Revelation fulfilled and advanced Moses’ Revelation.

May I ask you, what do you think is the role of religion in this world?
Yet you, introduce a competing 4th person to the Trinity and a new faith, tat comes from another prophet?
I am not here to compete with anyone dear friend, just to explore Truth toegther with my Catholic brothers and sisters…
The testimony of God came to us in blood, water and spirit, these three give testimony of Jesus, and know one can say Jesus is LORD WITHOUT THE Holy Spirit.
I, too say Jesus is Lord. Does my testimony of the Holy Spirit hold lesser value to anyone else on earth?
A Rock is never moved by every wind of doctrine that comes too late, especially Long after Jesus revealed all things for us to know.
Our advocate comes to call our minds to these already revealed revelations. Jesus did not say he would send us a tablet or another prophet.
In John 16, it is said:
**
“I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.**

…this clearly indicates that Jesus had not revealed the WHOLE TRUTH to mankind Himself…

** 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth.**
…this is clearly in reference to a Person rather than an entity like the Church

He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
…So if what the Spirit of Truth hears is to to be consistent it must come from ONE Individual, not a group of individuals living at the same time, because what multiple people hear are likely to reveal completely contrasting things.

14 He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine.
…why would you think Jesus needed to assure His people that “He will glorify me”?
Surely His Church would do ***nothing ***other than to glorify Him 🙂
It is clearly evident that He will be recognized by His glorification of Jesus Christ.
Why else would Jesus say such a thing?
It can also be concluded that the Spirit if Truth would reveal Himself as a Being who resides OUTSIDE the known Church in this world (although in the Kingdom, there is only one Church), otherwise, again, there would be no need for Jesus to assure us that the Spirit of Truth will glorify Him
Peace be with you.
Peace be with you too, dear friend 🙂

.
 
Sure you do, tony.

Each and every time you tell us that we are restricting the Word of God.

You cannot share a Love of God without the Truth of God.

Otherwise, what one shares is a lie.
That is fair enough 😉 I can see your point of view!

From my view, I deny no Word of Christ and I do not deny your right to believe in that Word as you wish to do. We also do not deny the foundation of the Truths you hold to as doctrine.

We do offer an alternate Interpretation.

As for the sharing of the Love of God! God is my judge, not Man 😉

"We cannot truly call on God, the Father of all, if we refuse to treat in a brotherly way any man, created as he is in the image of God. Man’s relation to God the Father and his relation to men his brothers are so linked together that Scripture says: “He who does not love does not know God” (1 John 4:8).

God Bless and Regards Tony
 
I think you are operating under the misapprehension that testing the spirits applies to prophets.

We are commanded to test the spirits to discern whether something is in conformity to what has already been revealed, once for all, to the saints (see Jude 1:3).
If it is a teaching that is in conformity with what has been revealed then it must come from somewhere?

It is obvious that this is referring to the teachings of a Prophet, unless you are telling me that the teachings of the Church may fall into the “non-conforming” category?

If we are to test something, it must be something “outside the Church” otherwise you would agree, it is not worthy of testing, yes? Unless you do not take magesterial teaching as Gospel?

In Acts 3:24, Peter clearly outlines how God, from the beginning has guided mankind, through His Prophets, starting with Samuel in ancient Israel. So we have a whole series of Prophets coming every few hundred years, and then comes Jesus, who is also referred to as a Prophet in Acts 3:22 and then you are trying to tell me that God provided no further guidance to mankind for another 2000 years through His Prophets?

Surely, this goes against any past historical evidence…and surely we need His guidance now, more than ever…

As has been clearly stated in Mark 7:6, God reveals His Will to man when Tradition becomes a barrier between God and man, something which has repetitively happened in Judaism, Christianity and Islam:
And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!
There is no doubt that God will send True Prophets to continuously guide mankind, and will do so forever and ever, for human beings will always exist, and civilization will forever advance…

If I may share with you some of my thoughts on this. In Matthew 7, it is written:
Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! – Matthew 7:7-10.
I thought about this passage, for the first time ever, as more than a comforting reference to God’s love. Can you imagine having several children, yet showing only one of them your love? Would you feed, clothe, and educate one child, while the others went hungry, naked, and ignorant, or were doomed to cobble together scraps of food, clothing, and knowledge, not from you directly, but from your favored child? If a human parent really did those things, most of us would consider him a criminal. Yet, I had believed that this was the way God behaved.

I had to ask myself: Would God give the Bread of Life to only one favored people and give stones to all others? Would He send His Word to only one nation at one time in all the history of the world, and allow false prophets to claim all others? If I believed Christ’s word, then the answer was a resounding “no”. It seemed clear from Jesus’ words and deeds that, as Peter said, “…God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.”

May have been taught that Jesus’ was the last revelation from God until the end of all things. Yet who among us can imagine that a human parent would speak to his child once when he was quite small, then utter nothing more and offer no further guidance or words of love until the child was on his death bed?

If we, who are imperfect, know how to give good gifts to our children, how much more so does the God Christ revealed know how to give gifts to those who ask?
 
That is fair enough 😉 I can see your point of view!

From my view, I deny no Word of Christ and I do not deny your right to believe in that Word as you wish to do. We also do not deny the foundation of the Truths you hold to as doctrine.
And I deny no Word of Bahaullah, as long as it conforms to the Truth, given once for all, to the Church.

His teachings may be very nice. It’s where he declares himself to be divine that I say:

 
If it is a teaching that is in conformity with what has been revealed then it must come from somewhere?
Sure.
It is obvious that this is referring to the teachings of a Prophet, unless you are telling me that the teachings of the Church may fall into the “non-conforming” category
Your teachings here are not that of a Prophet, Servant.

I test them against the canon of what was revealed, once for all, and where it is in conformity to the Truth, I say 👍

But, no, you are not a Prophet. As if.
If we are to test something, it must be something “outside the Church” otherwise you would agree, it is not worthy of testing, yes? Unless you do not take magesterial teaching as Gospel?
No. When you say, “We must love our brothers and sisters!” that is not something “outside the Church”.

I tested what you said, and say: yep. That’s true.

Your teaching of loving our brethren is not outside the Church at all.
 
you missed this part: Thus, from your letter We learn that in your dioceses an abuse has become common: namely, that marriages between Catholics and non-Catholics, without any previous dispensation from the Church and without necessary precautions, are dignified with priestly blessing and sacramental rites. It must be clear to you how deeply We are affected by this, especially since We perceive that once this license with regard to mixed marriages was introduced, it became widely disseminated. This in turn resulted in a rapidly spreading deadly indifference toward religion in your great kingdom, once so preeminent in the glory of the Catholic faith. Let us not be mistaken: We would scarcely have overlooked this practice if it had been known to Us earlier. This was the reason for Our silence. In the past the Apostolic See granted no dispensation whatsoever for entering such mixed marriages without the necessary preliminary conditions and without the customary regulations.

the apparant evil was in the marriages not going through church approval first. They aren’t evil just because they are outside of the faith but were done without proper preparation.
Dear vsedriver.

The evil was indeed that the marriages were not going through church approval first, but the reality is that the Church was not giving its approval at that time, so the couple had no other choice available to them.

May I ask you, given the circumstances of this encyclical by Pope Gregory, I agree with Vouthon’s post that this may very well have been a pastoral matter and only had relevance to a specific region of the world (maybe)…

Given the current status of teaching in regards to Catholicism now calling interfaith marriages ok, wouldn’t you say that this is a relativisation of Truth?

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top