Is Jesus God?

[jcrichton]

a big “no” to you, and please, read the whole explanation about trinity, just what i had posted to clearly understand it, that even the priests of the catholic churches says

"The trinity is wonderful mystery. No one understands it. The most learned theologian, the holiest Pope, the greatest saint, all are as mystified by it as the child of seven. [Martin J. Scott, S.J., God and Myself, Nihil Obstat: Arthurus J. Scanlan, S.T.D., Imprimatur: Joannies Cardinalis Farley (P.J. Kennedy and Sons, 1917), pp. 118-119].

After hundreds of years of philosophizing and theologizing and speculating, here is a very revealing statement from the Catholic Church: 'The trinity is a mystery no one understands. And how indeed could anyone understand the teaching that the three persons, each of whom is the true God, are only one? In other words how could anyone understand the teaching that one plus one plus one equal to one? What kind of teaching is that? Perhaps Jesuit priest John Walsh can give us an idea:

God, of course cannot perform an absurdity, a contradiction in terms, He cannot, for instance make two and two equal five.** [John Walsh, This is Catholicism (New York: Image Books, 19590, p. 25]"…
**

this is just one of the evidence about your trinity… just read it all, ok??

Instead of asking Christians to read anti-Christian propaganda you should listen to your alter ego and “read” the Holy Scriptures with a humble heart and mind so that the Holy Spirit may enlighten you and allow you to see the Light!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

ohh, and now you are slight learning about what trinity is, and you know what? i just search what trinity is because even i show all the proofs by picking up verses in the bible, still it cannot convince others that jesus is not god! why?? it is because of the belief of trinity!! so, you are not sure that there are a fallacy in your church?? well, now, see and think of these…!!!

You cannot convince Believers that Jesus is anything but God, because the Believers know the Good Shepherd and they follow Him rather than the enemy who comes to devour and kill the members of the Body of Christ; you should join another site, one that would include such weak “Christians” as diden and obama–they might follow your theology and begin a new worship base removed from Christ and Yahweh’s Salvific Plan!

Your fallacy is believing that man’s intellect is superior to God’s Wisdom!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

ABOUT CHRISTMAS

still, source.iglesianicristo.info/incarticles_/christmas.html

THE TWENTY-FIFTH OF December is considered by many Catholics and Protestants as Christmas day—the birthday of Christ. It is the most celebrated holiday of the year throughout the world. It has inspired men of music to create such nostalgic and soothing tunes of “Silent Night,” the jolly beat of “Joy to the World” and other familiar Christmas carols. People could not help but listen to these tunes announcing the most awaited festival of the year. Young and old, men and women, rich and poor, all anxiously breathe the Christmas spirit and eagerly participate in one way or another in the celebration of the alleged birth anniversary of Christ.

Yet amidst all merrymaking activities of the yuletide season, members of the Iglesia ni Cristo are visibly non-participants in the worldwide commemoration of the alleged birth of Jesus on December 25.

“Why?” others would surely ask. “Don’t they believe in Jesus as the Christ, our Savior? Are they not happy about the birth of the Savior? Are they not Christians? If they do celebrate their own birthdays, why not Christmas?” These questions readily arise whenever one comes to know the beliefs of the Iglesia ni Cristo regarding the December 25 date of the Nativity of Jesus.

However, our non-participation in the December 25 festivities does not mean that we are against fun and merriment; neither are we anti-social nor against fostering peace and goodwill among men. Neither are we opposed to the idea that the birth of Christ is a day of rejoicing. On the day Christ was born, angels from heaven rejoiced, saying glory to God and peace among men (Lk. 2:13-14). We are one in the belief that the baby boy born in Bethlehem who was the son of Mary is Christ the Savior.

But for valid reasons, we refrain from participating with the world in activities alien to the Gospel. Christ has nothing to do with the December 25 celebration though He is supposed to be the center of the festivities. Nowhere in the New Testament is December 25 specified as the birth date of Christ. There has never been a single statement from Jesus or from His disciples commanding the commemoration of His birth. Instead, we find extra-biblical sources for the celebration traceable to pagan festivities of which the Catholic Church is fond of adopting as its own. More so, these appeared only centuries after the establishment of the Church of the New Testament.

The First “Christmas”
"How old is Christmas day?.. One would naturally think that the anniversary of so great an event as the birth of the Son of God would have been a day of religious joy from the earliest years of the Church; but it is clear that this was not the case. There is no mention of it in any of the oldest lists of the Church festivals… In the part of the Church which follows the Latin rite the celebration of Christmas on the twenty-fifth of December was begun probably about the middle of the fourth century. An ancient tradition assigned ^that day as the probable date of the great mystery of the Nativity…"l

"The first mention of Christmas as a festival of the Church on 25 December, goes back to AD 336. It comes in the Philocalian Catalogue (354), a civil and religious calendar compiled at Rome."2

If these records were accurate, the “first Christmas” would have been held on December 25,336 A.D., i.e., more than three centuries after the birth of Christ in Bethlehem. Certainly, however, Christ had nothing to do with the date for He had ascended into heaven in the first century. Obviously, His Apostles could not be the source of the selection of the date of the Nativity in the fourth century since they all had died even before the second century.

The Biblical Account
"In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, each to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. And while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

“And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.” (Lk. 2:1-8 Revised Standard Version)
Biblical historians know so well this narrative account of the events surrounding the birth of the Savior. On this, Catholic Bible scholars have this to say:

"Origin of Date - Concerning the date of Christ’s birth the Gospels give no help; indeed, upon their data contradictory arguments are based. The census would have been impossible in winter… Authorities moreover differ as to whether shepherds could or would keep flocks exposed during nights of the rainy season."3

Are you against the Catholic Church, Christ, or December 25?

Are you seeking to convert Christians into a different faith?

If your problem is simply Dec 25, what day do you suggest that Christians celebrate as the Emmanuel’s (God-with-us) Birth Date?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Read me,

All you’ve proved in these last several posts is that you are capable of cutting and pasting. This puts you at least on par with the average 2nd grader.

If most of the other followers of this thread are like me, than they haven’t read more than a couple of lines of this drivel and moved onto the next post (or another thread).

Please observe forum rules about cutting and pasting and learn to “cut to the chase” instead. To those of us with the attention span of a tree frog, you are simply wasting your time and trying to waste ours.

…some people believe that multiplying error is demonstrative of being correct… reason does not even enter into their pretentiousness as they have already determined that they “know” everything–hey, isn’t that attributed to only God?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

again, i will say a big “no” to you…
you have said that.

"To believe that there is fallacy in the teaching of the Catholic Church is to believe that Jesus was wrong in His promises to the Church"

and now you are questioning of jesus? ohh, i wish god to forgive you. that is not the right understanding about that! it is just that the priests made your church to become not to god! or moves you to the wrong way of worshiping god, because the priests made many additions to their teachings. one proof is about the teaching of Christmas every dec25. just read it with understanding… and think of that, ok??

I think that you have the wrong understanding of the term “understanding…”

…you continue to quote sources that are anti-Christians, you continue to hold an anti-Christian theology, yet you are here seeking Christians and hoping that they listen to your flawed reasoning.

Learn what it means to Celebrate the Incarnation of the Word and you will have taken a small step towards the Father!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I agree with this statement.

But…

…then again you display your ineptitude at interpreting my words. I do not question Jesus on this matter. I trust Jesus in this matter, so to be frank with you, you’ve don’t have to ask God to forgive me for this. You may wish to ask God to strengthen your abiliity to understand the words that you read, however.

I read enough of that drivel to come up with one point.

Your author seems to speak out of both sides of his mouth. First he claims that the Church “infallibly” teaches that Jesus was born on December 25th. Then he goes on to claim that nowhere does the Church say that they know on what day this happened.

So which is it…

ummm… but isn’t politically correct to be both for something and against

…just messing with you!

People like the non-read me refuse to linger into the realm of logic, humility, and Truth!

They are masters at double speak and choosing both sides of the coin! :banghead:

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[read_me]

Read me,

Let me show you a scenario which will show you how ridiculous the author of that article on December 25th’s conclusions are:

In my area, some Christian churches feel that Halloween is a pagan celebration and they wish that their congregations would not take part in this ungodly tradition (their thoughts… not mine).

So these churches start up a “Fall Festival” on Halloween night to offer an alternative to the trick or treating.

Now, let me ask you. Are these churches adopting pagan traditions or combating them?

If the Church chose December 25th to celebrate Christ’s birth to combat pagan rituals, than I am proud of them for finding ways of pulling to weak in spirit away from such corruptible acts.

and if that is your opinion, then, go… i am just saying that christ’s birth is not in the BIBLE, that the teaching of christ’s birth every dec 25 is obviously not in the bible, and even hundred of years ago, priests prove that… so, i will ask you, will you believe a teaching that is not in the bible? and is that true that it is just one of the additions that priests a long time ago? and i just want to ask about worshiping saints, images of jesus, and others… is that what bible said? that we must worship a man-made sculptures of god??

an addition:
i just want to ask you if you know about nabucodonosor or nebuchadnezzar II’s dream…?
this is also an evidence about worshiping such idols. and these are in the BIBLE…

this is from wikipedia.

In the story, Hananiah (Shadrach), Mishael (Meshach), and Azariah (Abednego), defy King Nebuchadnezzar’s order that they bow down and worship a golden idol, a cult image of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar, in a rage, orders the boys thrown into a furnace, but they are miraculously unharmed by the flames and survive the experience unscathed. Nebuchadnezzar sees them walking around in the furnace along with an unnamed angel. After the three youths emerge, Nebuchadnezzar gives a command that anyone who speaks against the God of Shadrach, Mesahach, and Abednego will be torn apart and have his house turned into a pile of stones.

OK??? and another, why do you think the 3 person in the story…(shadrach,meshach,and abednigo) miraculously unharmed by the flames and survive the experience unscathed? and the answer is because god helped them! why?? because the 3 were loyal to god that even their life will be sacrificed. and they not followed the decree of Nebuchadnezzar about worshiping the golden idol!.. right?

 

[ready]

a big “no” to you, and please, read the whole explanation about trinity, just what i had posted to clearly understand it, that even the priests of the catholic churches says

"The trinity is wonderful mystery. No one understands it. The most learned theologian, the holiest Pope, the greatest saint, all are as mystified by it as the child of seven. [Martin J. Scott, S.J., God and Myself, Nihil Obstat: Arthurus J. Scanlan, S.T.D., Imprimatur: Joannies Cardinalis Farley (P.J. Kennedy and Sons, 1917), pp. 118-119].

After hundreds of years of philosophizing and theologizing and speculating, here is a very revealing statement from the Catholic Church: 'The trinity is a mystery no one understands. And how indeed could anyone understand the teaching that the three persons, each of whom is the true God, are only one? In other words how could anyone understand the teaching that one plus one plus one equal to one? What kind of teaching is that? Perhaps Jesuit priest John Walsh can give us an idea:

God, of course cannot perform an absurdity, a contradiction in terms, He cannot, for instance make two and two equal five.** [John Walsh, This is Catholicism (New York: Image Books, 19590, p. 25]"…
**

this is just one of the evidence about your trinity… just read it all, ok??

Sorry, but he big no is to you. Read St. Augustine who says “Unless you will have believed, you will not understand” (nisi credideritis non intelligetis) - also translated “if you will not believe, you will not continue.” I don’t have to fully understand the trinity, but I accept it so that I may understand it. Of course the trinity is so mysterious I may never fully understand it even when in heaven, but I am altogether correct, my friend, in arguing that you have to first give an assent to believing in God’s divinity to be able to understand it. The Church Father, Augustine backs my argument with his, which originated before mine without my even knowing he wrote this. I learned this fact about assent to faith being necessary in Oct. and just yesterday I read that Augustine said the same thing!

 

[read_me]

Sorry, but he big no is to you. Read St. Augustine who says “Unless you will have believed, you will not understand” (nisi credideritis non intelligetis) - also translated “if you will not believe, you will not continue.” I don’t have to fully understand the trinity, but I accept it so that I may understand it. Of course the trinity is so mysterious I may never fully understand it even when in heaven, but I am altogether correct, my friend, in arguing that you have to first give an assent to believing in God’s divinity to be able to understand it. The Church Father, Augustine backs my argument with his, which originated before mine without my even knowing he wrote this. I learned this fact about assent to faith being necessary in Oct. and just yesterday I read that Augustine said the same thing!

oh, yes! that was the answer i want to hear from you…
see? that’s whats catholics doing… they are just believing and not examining w/ understanding their own doctrines. especially defending teaching’s w/o understanding like what others and you doing. its that a doctrine?? believing one thing and the explanation you will get is “if you will not believe, you will not continue.” and also a doctrine that is a wonderful mystery and no one understands it… huhh???

 

[NotWorthy]

and if that is your opinion, then, go.

And so you completely ignore my question. Are those who create a “Fall Festival” trying to adopt the pagan practice (in their minds its pagan) of Halloween or are they trying to separate it?

That, in my understanding, is what the Church was trying to do in celebrating Christmas on December 25th. They were trying to separate the newly baptized ex-pagans from returning to their pagan rituals.

… i am just saying that christ’s birth is not in the BIBLE, that the teaching of christ’s birth every dec 25 is obviously not in the bible, and even hundred of years ago, priests prove that… so, i will ask you, will you believe a teaching that is not in the bible? and is that true that it is just one of the additions that priests a long time ago?

And I am just saying that I could care less when Jesus’ birthdate is. The Church wishes to honor Christ’s birth. We don’t know exactly when this date was. So the Church picked a date. That’s good enough for me.

and i just want to ask about worshiping saints, images of jesus, and others… is that what bible said? that we must worship a man-made sculptures of god??

If you’re going to start “shot-gunning” your questions, please start another thread. If you continue in this way of posting, my brothers and sisters are going to begin to wonder if you are simply another ignorant anti-catholic who is just shoveling out what has been poured down your throat, having no clue what you are talking about.

I wasn’t aware that Catholics worship saints, images of Christ, or turn man-made sculptures into gods. You make yourself look like a complete ignoramus when you blindly make accusations like this, my friend.

an addition:
i just want to ask you if you know about nabucodonosor or nebuchadnezzar II’s dream…?
this is also an evidence about worshiping such idols. and these are in the BIBLE…

this is from wikipedia.

In the story, Hananiah (Shadrach), Mishael (Meshach), and Azariah (Abednego), defy King Nebuchadnezzar’s order that they bow down and worship a golden idol, a cult image of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar, in a rage, orders the boys thrown into a furnace, but they are miraculously unharmed by the flames and survive the experience unscathed. Nebuchadnezzar sees them walking around in the furnace along with an unnamed angel. After the three youths emerge, Nebuchadnezzar gives a command that anyone who speaks against the God of Shadrach, Mesahach, and Abednego will be torn apart and have his house turned into a pile of stones.

OK??? and another, why do you think the 3 person in the story…(shadrach,meshach,and abednigo) miraculously unharmed by the flames and survive the experience unscathed? and the answer is because god helped them! why?? because the 3 were loyal to god that even their life will be sacrificed. and they not followed the decree of Nebuchadnezzar about worshiping the golden idol!.. right?

What has this got to do with your point? Are you claiming that Catholics are not loyal to God?

 

[ready]

CORRECTION TO LAST POST OF MINE:

oh, yes! that was the answer i want to hear from you…
see? that’s whats catholics doing… they are just believing and not examining w/ understanding their own doctrines. especially defending teaching’s w/o understanding like what others and you doing. its that a doctrine?? believing one thing and the explanation you will get is “if you will not believe, you will not continue.” and also a doctrine that is a wonderful mystery and no one understands it… huhh???

Please be patient with me. All I said was I learned (and later found that St. Augustine teaches) that an assent to faith (in God’s divinity, for example) is necessary in order to arrive at understanding (of his divinity). That could be why some of the athiests on these forums are better off being prayed for rather than endlessly being argued with; for if they refuse to give their assent to God’s divinity, how on earth are they ever going to understand it? Maybe you haven’t discovered this need for one’s assent in order for one to proceed to understanding, but what St. Augustine wrote is congruent with what I found to be the case. Believe me, I went through such a dark night of faith in Oct. I literally had to choose to believe that Jesus died for me and is part of a loving Trinity of persons and ressurected. Soon afterwards I was able to regain my whole hearted understanding of these truths (truths I had always solemnly held throughout life). In Oct. (or sometime around that time) I accepted these teachings without having anything to go by other than a loving priest-friend’s word’s imploring me to at least believe Jesus died for me. None of it made sense, but afterwards it made all the sense in the world because I had chosen to believe when I did. If I did not give my assent to believe Jesus actually died for me back then in Oct. (or around then) I’d be hopelessly lost right now in my faith.

 

[NotWorthy]

Read me,

I’m still curious to hear your answer: * If Jesus is not God, then Who is His Father?* It seems Mary was conceived by the Holy Spirit, not (Who we call) God the Father.

 

[BRB1]

Does the Catholic concept of the Trinity suggest that Jesus and the Father are identical ?

While Christ did teach he and the Father were ONE … we also see other teachings where his will was ALWAYS in submission to the Father.

The Jews taught the son is the equal of the father … and they share all things in common. However, the Son was begat. The Son became man … while the Father did not. The Son died, while the Father did not. No one has seen the Father …yet many have seen Christ. Actually, John in Revelations describes the Father … an actual viewing for him, or a vision of God ? At anyrate, the Father and Son have different divine appearances.

Christ uses language in NT to suggest the Father has more knowledge that he does. Even Genesis speaks of God and the Spirit … but, not the Son.

Also, according to Christ we can only come to the Father … via the Son. And no one comes to the Son … unless its the Father’s Will.

Christ was clearly subservient to the Father while here on earth. However, this is probably obligatory, since Christ took on human flesh and was both human & divine. Christ came as prophet, priest, and King. He also taught he existed before Abraham, but didn’t say if he had a beginning apart from the Father.

Jehovah Witnesses claim the Father existed before the Son. And that the Son was ONLY human, a creation of God, and inferior to Him. Even Christ taught that Christians would be better off with the H.S. … than if he stayed on Earth. In otherwords, Christ taught the Father and the H.S. were in some ways superior. Again, probably only limited by his human nature … so now Christ has returned to the Father, he should be the full equal of both the Father & H.S.

Catholics explain the Trinity as one Entity … in 3 persons. Clearly each person in the Trinity has a different role.

 

[read_me]

Read me,

I’m still curious to hear your answer: * If Jesus is not God, then Who is His Father?* It seems Mary was conceived by the Holy Spirit, not (Who we call) God the Father.

i thought you were religious and reading the bible… now, you were asking jesus father? is that enough the fact that the father or the creator is the only true god? and his son jesus sent him to earth just what was in the bible? and being the creator of all things, isn’t it possible or true that the holy spirit you had said was also sent by the father??

 

[read_me]

CORRECTION TO LAST POST OF MINE:

Please be patient with me. All I said was I learned (and later found that St. Augustine teaches) that an assent to faith (in God’s divinity, for example) is necessary in order to arrive at understanding (of his divinity). That could be why some of the athiests on these forums are better off being prayed for rather than endlessly being argued with; for if they refuse to give their assent to God’s divinity, how on earth are they ever going to understand it? Maybe you haven’t discovered this need for one’s assent in order for one to proceed to understanding, but what St. Augustine wrote is congruent with what I found to be the case. Believe me, I went through such a dark night of faith in Oct. I literally had to choose to believe that Jesus died for me and is part of a loving Trinity of persons and ressurected. Soon afterwards I was able to regain my whole hearted understanding of these truths (truths I had always solemnly held throughout life). In Oct. (or sometime around that time) I accepted these teachings without having anything to go by other than a loving priest-friend’s word’s imploring me to at least believe Jesus died for me. None of it made sense, but afterwards it made all the sense in the world because I had chosen to believe when I did. If I did not give my assent to believe Jesus actually died for me back then in Oct. (or around then) I’d be hopelessly lost right now in my faith.

ok^_^ i know what you trying to say, because even now it is still happening… like here in the Philippines, theres a lot here of healing priest or healing… etc. and when the patients
interview by the media (documentaries) they will say that their sickness were miraculously gone… that before they have a cancer then after consulting the said people that they claim that jesus or god gave them special powers to perform or to heal illnesses, they will say that their sicknesses are gone! how true is it? and do you know that FAITH is such powerful??? yes! many experts prove that. even though the heal of the said people truly cannot treat sickness, but it is because of faith that they believe and trust the healers…
like your experiences! it is because of FAITH to one thing how that’s made to you.
faith is so powerful, isn’t it?

 

[read_me]

from:NotWorthy
**That, in my understanding, is what the Church was trying to do in celebrating Christmas on December 25th. They were trying to separate the newly baptized ex-pagans from returning to their pagan rituals.

And I am just saying that I could care less when Jesus’ birthdate is. The Church wishes to honor Christ’s birth. We don’t know exactly when this date was. So the Church picked a date. That’s good enough for me. **

read me: okay, if that was your another opinion about following doctrines that was non-biblical or following doctrines that priests made an addition to the bible. then, go! haha

**If you’re going to start “shot-gunning” your questions, please start another thread. If you continue in this way of posting, my brothers and sisters are going to begin to wonder if you are simply another ignorant anti-catholic who is just shoveling out what has been poured down your throat, having no clue what you are talking about.

I wasn’t aware that Catholics worship saints, images of Christ, or turn man-made sculptures into gods. You make yourself look like a complete ignoramus when you blindly make accusations like this, my friend.

What has this got to do with your point? Are you claiming that Catholics are not loyal to God?**

read me: ohh, i am not the one who said this “that Catholics are not loyal to God?”
just examine what was i had posted, ok?? about worshiping idols! i just want to say that catholics are obviously worshiping the said idols… the saints, the images of jesus…
it is the images of jesus what you were worshiping and not god! it is also one of the commandments of god to us that we must worship only him!!! not the saints, not the cult images! it is just like pagans style of worshiping, right?? haha dont cover the truth! or still defend your beliefs because it is obviously you and others following the wrong doctrines of god that is in the bible!!

 

[Louie1983]

from:NotWorthy
**That, in my understanding, is what the Church was trying to do in celebrating Christmas on December 25th. They were trying to separate the newly baptized ex-pagans from returning to their pagan rituals.

And I am just saying that I could care less when Jesus’ birthdate is. The Church wishes to honor Christ’s birth. We don’t know exactly when this date was. So the Church picked a date. That’s good enough for me. **

read me: okay, if that was your another opinion about following doctrines that was non-biblical or following doctrines that priests made an addition to the bible. then, go! haha

**If you’re going to start “shot-gunning” your questions, please start another thread. If you continue in this way of posting, my brothers and sisters are going to begin to wonder if you are simply another ignorant anti-catholic who is just shoveling out what has been poured down your throat, having no clue what you are talking about.

I wasn’t aware that Catholics worship saints, images of Christ, or turn man-made sculptures into gods. You make yourself look like a complete ignoramus when you blindly make accusations like this, my friend.

What has this got to do with your point? Are you claiming that Catholics are not loyal to God?**

read me: ohh, i am not the one who said this “that Catholics are not loyal to God?”
just examine what was i had posted, ok?? about worshiping idols! i just want to say that catholics are obviously worshiping the said idols… the saints, the images of jesus…
it is the images of jesus what you were worshiping and not god! it is also one of the commandments of god to us that we must worship only him!!! not the saints, not the cult images! it is just like pagans style of worshiping, right?? haha dont cover the truth! or still defend your beliefs because it is obviously you and others following the wrong doctrines of god that is in the bible!!

Readme, you have absolutely no idea! If you did have an idea you would know that catholics DO NOT WORSHIP saints, images of jesus and cult images??? gees your digging yourself into a massive hole here. We pray through the saints, for their intercession to god! we ask for their assistance and help, they arre channels to grace and not the source of grace!

tell me readme, where does it say anywhere in the bible that something has to be in the bible for it to be true? did not st paul say that we are to believe in the written and oral traditions of the church? why did our lord breath on the disciples and give them the power to forgive/loose sins if all he wanted them to do was write the bible? did not the church come before the bible? (your answer to this will be interesting as it will test your knowledge of history and your honesty i might add)

your cutting and pasting from incorrect websites is painfully obvious! and by the way, you are trying to pose yourself as a christian but you are reading material from secular sources? huh? they would obviously have their own agenda…poor researching and poor understanding of the scriptures is all you have demonstarted here readme.

 

[NotWorthy]

i thought you were religious and reading the bible… now, you were asking jesus father? is that enough the fact that the father or the creator is the only true god? and his son jesus sent him to earth just what was in the bible? and being the creator of all things, isn’t it possible or true that the holy spirit you had said was also sent by the father??

I am religious and a reader of the bible, thank you.

I’m just curious how your (il)logic would come up with an answer.

It seem that the Holy Spirit is who conceived Jesus, according to the text. Of course, he was sent by the Father, but the Father isn’t who conceived Jesus (by my understanding of your reckoning).

 

[NotWorthy]

read me: okay, if that was your another opinion about following doctrines that was non-biblical or following doctrines that priests made an addition to the bible. then, go! haha

Read me, I don’t have a clue what you mean by this statement. Please clarify.

Haha!

read me: ohh, i am not the one who said this “that Catholics are not loyal to God?”

If you claim I worship anything other than God, than you are saying I’m not loyal to God.

just examine what was i had posted, ok?? about worshiping idols! i just want to say that catholics are obviously worshiping the said idols… the saints, the images of jesus…

And I am saying you are obviously an idiot if you think I (and all other Catholics) woship idols and saints and images of Jesus.

it is the images of jesus what you were worshiping and not god! it is also one of the commandments of god to us that we must worship only him!!! not the saints, not the cult images! it is just like pagans style of worshiping, right?? haha dont cover the truth! or still defend your beliefs because it is obviously you and others following the wrong doctrines of god that is in the bible!!

Can you show me where I worship idols, perhaps on another thread… one that is entitled " Catholics Worship Idols", but not on a thread entitled “Is Jesus God”.

Haha!

 

[Canto]

read me: okay, if that was your another opinion about following **doctrines that was non-biblical **or following **doctrines that priests **made an addition to the bible. then, go! haha

And what by chance would they be?

i just want to say that catholics are obviously worshiping the said idols… the saints, the images of jesus…
it is the images of jesus what you were worshiping and not god! it is also one of the commandments of god to us that we must worship only him!!! not the saints, not the cult images! it is just like pagans style of worshiping, right?? haha dont cover the truth! or still defend your beliefs because it is obviously you and others following the wrong doctrines of god that is in the bible!!

“whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it.” Saint Basil (CCC 2132)

“Religious worship is not directed to images themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate is as an image, but tends towards that whose image it is.” - Saint Thomas Aquinas (CCC 2132)

“Idolatry is a perversion of man’s innate religious sense. An idolater is someone who ‘transfers his indestructible notion of God to anything other than God.” (CCC 2114)