Javl;6964713:
1 ) Catholics follow the traditions of men before they do the Bible.
2 ) The Catholics follow pagan rituals.
3 ) Catholics carry the mark of the beast.
4 ) Catholics put the Pope above Christ.
These are only a few that I know of. I am sure there are many more that other Catholics can add.
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
I assume you are referring to Jude 1:9 here. I don’t see where it says Michael did not have the authority to denounce satan. He most certainly did denounce him. It says he did not dare bring slanderous accusations against him, there’s a difference. I don’t think God would bring slanderous accusations against anyone. Slanderous rumors by would be false rumors. The point of the verse isn’t to say that Michael didn’t have the authority, it’s to point out that even someone as lofty as He wouldn’t slander someone as low as the devil.then please tell me, how did Christ have the authority to denounce satan in the desert, but michael did not, when disputing over the body of moses? they cannot be the same being. Peace
CatholicLover;6965039:
All but number 3 on your list are widely held Protestant beliefs, they aren’t unique to Adventism. Number 3 isn’t entirely correct although I know what you mean to say. We believe that Sunday worship is the mark of the beast.1 ) Catholics follow the traditions of men before they do the Bible.
2 ) The Catholics follow pagan rituals.
3 ) Catholics carry the mark of the beast.
4 ) Catholics put the Pope above Christ.
These are only a few that I know of. I am sure there are many more that other Catholics can add.
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
Checking other translations, they say “reviling judgment”“judgment of railing speech”“railing accusations”
You posted this before and I find it just as rediculous now as I did then. I’ll answer you now in a way similar to when you first said this.
The greek word used is blasphēmia meaning slander, detraction, speech injurious, to another’s good name.
Catholicism doesn’t have a doctrine on unicorns, but Catholicism does have a doctrine on the celebacy of the Lord Jesus Christ e.g. the Catholic Church teaches that the Lord Jesus didn’t have a wife and children. This is not sola scripture. This is Church tradition, also known as “sacred tradition.”
Because it is ludicrous to suggest that because Adventists and Catholics agree on something that is consistent with the Bible, Adventists are following Catholic sacred tradition. It would be unreasonable for Adventists to believe that Jesus had children considering the silence of the Bible on the issue.
There really is no flawed logic there, if you stop to think about it. Both of you are correct and both of you are also wrong, and I’ll let you both figure that one out. Also, the third option is Gnosis.
it is interesting though that in Jewish tradition that there are 4 archangels. Michael, Uriel, Raphiel, and of course Gabriel. the 4 are created beings, created to serve their Creator. yhwh. Michael is not Jesus in his pre incarnate state. he is according to the rabbis, a created being. no more, no less. we can dig further into this if you would like. i for one have never made this much of a point of study, so my knowlege will be admittedly limited. others on the other hand, have. Peace
actually…the silence on the issue, would speak FOR Jesus being married and having children. remember he was called rabbi? in Jewish society back then, a rabbi was a married man with children who could rule his own house well.and a spiritual leader as well. it would actually be of note, if Jesus were not married…that being said, i accept what Church tradition says about this. the alternative would be going by what scripture says by itself, and drawing the conclusion that Jesus Was married. no-one get up in arms about this please. im just pointing out one argument, and playing devils advocate.
if a Catholic would try something like this, and rewrite the bible, there would be no hemming and hawing. they would be promptly excommunicated, as would be proper. and it is called a bible no less than 14 times on the cover and within. Peace
The guy running Conservapedia is Catholic and is trying to re-write the bible right now. He and his crew believe it is too liberal, and wish to make it more conservative. I am fairly certain he has not been excommunicated yet.if a Catholic would try something like this, and rewrite the bible, there would be no hemming and hawing. they would be promptly excommunicated, as would be proper. and it is called a bible no less than 14 times on the cover and within. Peace
The questions remains**:** By what authority do SDAs claim that Jesus was celibate and never married and had no children since it’s not spoken of in the bible?
In the interest of full disclosure there are probably 3 camps of Adventist regarding this topic, one that believes Michael and Jesus are one and the same, another that does not believe it and yet another (probably the vast majority) that hasn’t given it much thought at all.it is interesting though that in Jewish tradition that there are 4 archangels. Michael, Uriel, Raphiel, and of course Gabriel. the 4 are created beings, created to serve their Creator. yhwh. Michael is not Jesus in his pre incarnate state. he is according to the rabbis, a created being. no more, no less. we can dig further into this if you would like. i for one have never made this much of a point of study, so my knowlege will be admittedly limited. others on the other hand, have. Peace
I’ve heard this line of thought before and it seems to make sense but I can only think that something as important as Jesus having a wife and children would have been mentioned in the Bible. It’s not there so, regardless of what tradition says, I can’t conclude that He had a wife or children.actually…the silence on the issue, would speak FOR Jesus being married and having children. remember he was called rabbi? in Jewish society back then, a rabbi was a married man with children who could rule his own house well.and a spiritual leader as well. it would actually be of note, if Jesus were not married…that being said, i accept what Church tradition says about this. the alternative would be going by what scripture says by itself, and drawing the conclusion that Jesus Was married. no-one get up in arms about this please. im just pointing out one argument, and playing devils advocate.
having been married, and now by myself, i cannot see where Jesus would have found the time to do what he did, and be married…lol! Peace
By the authority every person has to read the Bible. It doesn’t say He was married so we can’t conclude that he was.The questions remains**:** By what authority do SDAs claim that Jesus was celibate and never married and had no children since it’s not spoken of in the bible?
Neither can SDAs conclude that Jesus wasn’t married with children, if the conclusion is sola scripture. Therefore, the authority of the SDA belief that Jesus wasn’t married is derived from somewhere. From where is that conclusion derived?The questions remains**:** By what authority do SDAs claim that Jesus was celibate and never married and had no children since it’s not spoken of in the bible?
CatholicLover;6967536:
I don’t speak Greek but using a Greek to English dictionary I could not find the word you used. I have a Greek translation of the verse but I cannot reproduce the way it is written. However, I did find the word in the dictionary and it meant blasphemous. When I looked up slander it was an entirely different word than you used. I wondered if you looked up the meaning of railing speech? It is used as an intransitive verb.