E
Eden
Guest
Temples? We do not refer to church as “temples”. They are called “churches”.
The Church is 1 billion strong. It’s univeral, it’s alive and it’s growing.
www.catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0005.html
Kujo313's Assertions About Catholic Marian Beliefs (Isis!?...Goddess!?)
- Status
The Church is 1 billion strong. It’s univeral, it’s alive and it’s growing.
www.catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0005.html
L
LilyM
Guest
Makes me suspicious - calling churches ‘Temples’ is an extremely basic mistake for a supposed former Catholic to make. Probably never saw the inside of one either way.
E
Eden
Guest
LilyM said:
I think Kujo once said he goes to something called “The Full Gospel Temple”. That must be why he is using this term, although it emphasizes again just how much his understanding of the Church has been influenced by Pentacostalism.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
It is so disheartening when one tries to speak the truth in love and is not heard.
Kujo, God loves you and so do we.
We’re all imperfect. . .but that doesn’t mean that we just “give up” and “shut up”. It doesn’t mean that because I personally sin that I cannot (in charity) recognize sin in someone else. To recognize a sin does not mean that I judge the one sinning–it means merely that I recognize sin, meaning “an offense against God”. God will be the judge of all sin, not me.
So if I see you–or anybody else–committing an offense against God (let us call this offense “X”), I am not “judging you” when I state that you have done “X”.
In fact, according to the Bible, if we see our fellow men doing “X”, or any other offense against God, and we do NOT tell them that they are doing “X”, WE will be held guilty ourselves.
So that you understand, I hope, more clearly, here is an example.
You can say to me, “I think that you are wrong about this doctrine (call it “A”) because. . .(whatever).”
That is perfectly fine. I can then respond, “Well, I think that “A” is correct because. . .(whatever).”
We’ve both made our opinions clear in a reasonable and nonjudging way, right?
Now, if either you or I go on with, “No, what you REALLY think is this, and it’s stupid, you’re stupid, your religion is stupid”. . .THAT is where we get into offense against God through lack of charity and through false witness, untrue and unkind speech.
To consistently tell another person that he has in essence LIED, when that person has in fact given verbal and written evidence that he is saying something he believes is TRUE, is an offense, is it not?
Kujo, WHY you have said some of the things you have, calumnies against the Virgin, unkind remarks about other people, doesn’t enter the picture. I am not judging you. I am simply as a fellow Christian telling you that certain actions of yours, in regards to unkind and untrue speech, are offenses against God, without in any way impugning you as a person. This in no way causes me to think of you as less of a person. Your worth and dignity are equal to any other person’s worth and dignity.
If I or others have sinned in our thoughts, words, or actions against God, we are deeply sorry and beg forgiveness.
Kujo, God loves you and so do we.
We’re all imperfect. . .but that doesn’t mean that we just “give up” and “shut up”. It doesn’t mean that because I personally sin that I cannot (in charity) recognize sin in someone else. To recognize a sin does not mean that I judge the one sinning–it means merely that I recognize sin, meaning “an offense against God”. God will be the judge of all sin, not me.
So if I see you–or anybody else–committing an offense against God (let us call this offense “X”), I am not “judging you” when I state that you have done “X”.
In fact, according to the Bible, if we see our fellow men doing “X”, or any other offense against God, and we do NOT tell them that they are doing “X”, WE will be held guilty ourselves.
So that you understand, I hope, more clearly, here is an example.
You can say to me, “I think that you are wrong about this doctrine (call it “A”) because. . .(whatever).”
That is perfectly fine. I can then respond, “Well, I think that “A” is correct because. . .(whatever).”
We’ve both made our opinions clear in a reasonable and nonjudging way, right?
Now, if either you or I go on with, “No, what you REALLY think is this, and it’s stupid, you’re stupid, your religion is stupid”. . .THAT is where we get into offense against God through lack of charity and through false witness, untrue and unkind speech.
To consistently tell another person that he has in essence LIED, when that person has in fact given verbal and written evidence that he is saying something he believes is TRUE, is an offense, is it not?
Kujo, WHY you have said some of the things you have, calumnies against the Virgin, unkind remarks about other people, doesn’t enter the picture. I am not judging you. I am simply as a fellow Christian telling you that certain actions of yours, in regards to unkind and untrue speech, are offenses against God, without in any way impugning you as a person. This in no way causes me to think of you as less of a person. Your worth and dignity are equal to any other person’s worth and dignity.
If I or others have sinned in our thoughts, words, or actions against God, we are deeply sorry and beg forgiveness.
J
Joe_Monahan
Guest
Just an aside, “temple” is the proper term for the churches in which we of the Eastern and Oriental Catholic Churches, as well as our Orthodox brethren, worship.
Joe
L
LilyM
Guest
Joe Monahan:
… you learn something new every day. Thanks for setting us straight on that one.
There ya go
… you learn something new every day. Thanks for setting us straight on that one.
E
Eden
Guest
Joe Monahan:
As Kujo was once Latin Rite Catholic, I would guess he was basing his use of the term “temple” on his Pentecostal beliefs though.
Thanks for the info.
As Kujo was once Latin Rite Catholic, I would guess he was basing his use of the term “temple” on his Pentecostal beliefs though.
M
MrS
Guest
further, for Kujo’s information… Luther’s definition of Church was “…a place where we worship God, and the Sacraments are duly administered…”
Only the Catholic Church, which Luther abandoned, can duly administer the sacraments… all seven… and not reduce two (baptism and marriage) to simple ordinances, and trash the others.
Only the Catholic Church can fulfill Jesus’ directives in the Mass, and priestly ordination… and numerous other practices that remind us of our Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier through the very vehicles He gave us (most notibly, His Mom).
K
kujo313
Guest
“all your friends in Heaven DID die” physically, yep. Souls in Heaven, ok.
From the posts that I’ve been reading from some Catholics, I guess that if I don’t accept Mary as my “mother”, then I’m denying the deity of Jesus. THAT’S what one of the replies said.
When I hear of God being my “Father”, I don’t think “mother”. When I hear of God being a “King”, I don’t think of “queen”. Instead, I take it as God trying to better explain Himself to a carnal world that cannot fanthom God at all.
Instead of disecting the Bible and trying to “read between the lines”, I just take His Word at face value.
God is like a Father, a King, a Vine, a Shephard, a Teacher, a Healer, etc. I could go on and on.
Other posts that I got was that Mary and the saints point the way to Jesus even when He said He’ll never leave us and He now lives INSIDE us.
If everybody is pointing the way to Jesus, why not just go to Jesus in the first place?
God Bless you.
M
MrS
Guest
kujo313 said:
does that include John 6???
R
RyanL
Guest
Kujo,
Since you’re apparently a Scriptural oracle, I’d like you to exegete the following verses for me:
Wanna’ take another stab at that whole “the Bible barely mentions Mary” bit? I can go on for a long time more with Mary references…try reading 2 Sam 6 against Luke 1…
God Bless,
RyanL
Since you’re apparently a Scriptural oracle, I’d like you to exegete the following verses for me:
Who is “the woman”?
Who is “the woman”?
Who is the “woman”?
Who is the “woman”?
Who is the woman who is blessed among all other women?
Wanna’ take another stab at that whole “the Bible barely mentions Mary” bit? I can go on for a long time more with Mary references…try reading 2 Sam 6 against Luke 1…
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, right? God’s holy word has lots of coincidences that really don’t mean anything, right?
God Bless,
RyanL
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Kujo, do you believe that God is eternal? I bet you do.
Do you believe that God is unchanging? I bet you do.
Do you believe that Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary and became man? I bet you do.
OK then. If God is eternal and unchanging, and He sent Jesus to us through the Virgin Mary, then when do you suppose that He STOPPED sending Him? If God is eternal and unchanging, and brought Christ to us through Mary, when did God CHANGE and make Christ NOT brought to us through Mary?
Bottom line is, God is still bringing Christ to us through Mary. It was good enough for Him once–and for ALL time. Just as Jesus’s sacrifice on the Cross was ONCE and for ALL time, and it is STILL bringing each and every one of us salvation.
This does not diminish Christ in any way, since He CHOSE Mary as His Mother. It does not “elevate” Mary to deity status, again, she was CHOSEN as Mother of God BY God, she did not “earn” this or choose it herself. It is a simple acknowledgment of God’s grace and mercy in giving us His Son and reflects God’s infinite wisdom in choosing a Mother for His Son and for all humanity. Mary’s grace was that she perfectly conforms to the will of God–not the will of men. Thus she will not become “less” than what she is because some men try to “make” her “less.”
Do you believe that God is unchanging? I bet you do.
Do you believe that Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary and became man? I bet you do.
OK then. If God is eternal and unchanging, and He sent Jesus to us through the Virgin Mary, then when do you suppose that He STOPPED sending Him? If God is eternal and unchanging, and brought Christ to us through Mary, when did God CHANGE and make Christ NOT brought to us through Mary?
Bottom line is, God is still bringing Christ to us through Mary. It was good enough for Him once–and for ALL time. Just as Jesus’s sacrifice on the Cross was ONCE and for ALL time, and it is STILL bringing each and every one of us salvation.
This does not diminish Christ in any way, since He CHOSE Mary as His Mother. It does not “elevate” Mary to deity status, again, she was CHOSEN as Mother of God BY God, she did not “earn” this or choose it herself. It is a simple acknowledgment of God’s grace and mercy in giving us His Son and reflects God’s infinite wisdom in choosing a Mother for His Son and for all humanity. Mary’s grace was that she perfectly conforms to the will of God–not the will of men. Thus she will not become “less” than what she is because some men try to “make” her “less.”
R
Roman_Catholic_1
Guest
This has been one of the worst theological beatings I have ever seen someone take, and yet kujo still comes back with same tired misconceptions. I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to answer his questions, you have further strengthened my faith in Christ and in His Church.
God Bless you all, and that includes kujo.
God Bless you all, and that includes kujo.
M
Magicsilence
Guest
Not sure why, but you ignored my post again.
Do you know how to reply?
If you are sure that what you are saying is Truth, what have you to fear by replying?
Magicsilence:
Do you know how to reply?
If you are sure that what you are saying is Truth, what have you to fear by replying?
V
valient_Lucy
Guest
I have a question for Kujo.
You argue that because of the similarities between Isis and the Virgin Mary, the Church’s teachings about Mary are false and simply borrowed from Ancient Egyptian religion.
However, according to Ancient Egyptian religion, Osiris was killed (by his brother Set) and then ressurected. Does this mean that the Death and Resurrection of Christ did not actually happen, but were simply motifs borrowed by the Gospel writers, and therefore false?
You use Ancient Egyptian myths to deny the Catholic teachings about Mary. Why not take the next logical step and deny the Divinty of Christ and his Death and Resurrection?
You argue that because of the similarities between Isis and the Virgin Mary, the Church’s teachings about Mary are false and simply borrowed from Ancient Egyptian religion.
However, according to Ancient Egyptian religion, Osiris was killed (by his brother Set) and then ressurected. Does this mean that the Death and Resurrection of Christ did not actually happen, but were simply motifs borrowed by the Gospel writers, and therefore false?
You use Ancient Egyptian myths to deny the Catholic teachings about Mary. Why not take the next logical step and deny the Divinty of Christ and his Death and Resurrection?
S
SemperJase
Guest
Kujo at best does not understand history. Latin was the language that most literate people could read. Keep in mind that most people could not read at all. But if you could read, you read Latin.
So to claim that the bible was in Latin to keep people from reading the bible is just plain silly.
T
TobyLue
Guest
And you know what? Five will get you ten that Kujo will go to some other forum, or to another thread, and say “Catholics Worship Mary”. That’s why I posted earlier accusing him of worshiping a book and telling him that no matter how much he denies it he still worships a book to see how he feels. If Kujo is still out there…. (as Yoda would say) worship a book you do.
Y
YahShuaMessiah
Guest
Church Militant:
I find the above difficult to accept. Wouldn’t a more plausable and Christian deduction be made that God, throught the indwelling Holy Spirit of the writers, gave the writers not only the knowledge but instruction as to what to write? The writers held the pen(feather/whatever) but the Spirit is what made the men write what God wanted them to write?
Plus, is this deduction backed with any sort of proof? That indeed the writers of the two Gospels you refer to, went to Mary for information in order to write the Gospels. I find this more an example of “Mary Worship” than anything else I have read. I say this with all charity. But to undermine the power of the Holy Spirt - to move the writers of those Gospels - to pen what God wanted them to pen, but instead give the credit to Mary?
I believe that is why the proof that the Bible is God’s word is so evident, that things are so consitently correct - outside man’s logic or reason.
How about, God. The Holy Spirit?
I find the above difficult to accept. Wouldn’t a more plausable and Christian deduction be made that God, throught the indwelling Holy Spirit of the writers, gave the writers not only the knowledge but instruction as to what to write? The writers held the pen(feather/whatever) but the Spirit is what made the men write what God wanted them to write?
Plus, is this deduction backed with any sort of proof? That indeed the writers of the two Gospels you refer to, went to Mary for information in order to write the Gospels. I find this more an example of “Mary Worship” than anything else I have read. I say this with all charity. But to undermine the power of the Holy Spirt - to move the writers of those Gospels - to pen what God wanted them to pen, but instead give the credit to Mary?
I believe that is why the proof that the Bible is God’s word is so evident, that things are so consitently correct - outside man’s logic or reason.
K
kujo313
Guest
Which part of John 6 are you referring to?
28 Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”
That’s it? That’s all you have to do? Check the exact meaning of the word “believe” where our Lord said it. It won’t just mean “believe” as we know it for demons “believe” in Jesus; they know He exists.
35 And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.
Without Jesus, you shall surely die. He, alone, is our High Priest. Because of Him, we are no longer bound to Levitical law.
1 Peter 2
4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.
23 He (Jesus) was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. 25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
*Overseer - episkopos
The later technical term Episcopal has come to refer to the idea that church and religious authority resides in the collective responsibility of bishops rather than in the community as a whole or in a single figure like a pope.
We ALL are priests with one High Priest: Jesus!
Old Covenant: limited access (priest), continual offering, forgiveness earned, available only to some, priest lived alone (could not marry)
NEW Covenant: limitless access!, conclusive offering (One for all), freely forgiven, available to “whosoever”, the High Priest lives within you!
K
kujo313
Guest
Also, it is written, that Jesus, after defeating the grave, openly explained the Scriptures concerning Himself. ALL of the Scriptures.
Could it be that Jesus told the writers of the Gospels His story?
- Status