G
gcharles
Guest
Revelation 21:4 He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the OLD ORDER of things has passed away.
- Status
J
jmcrae
Guest
B
Biblelove13
Guest
I guess I’m just worried / upset / scared of the Rapture because I know where I’m going
J
jmcrae
Guest
There will be no “Rapture.” There will only be the Judgement Day. If you become Catholic, your feet will be planted on the solid Rock, and you will not be moved. But stay in the shifting sands of “make it up as you go along” Christianity (including things like the “Rapture” and “New World Order” which were never heard of before now, and only recently invented by false preachers seeking to deceive and frighten the simple) and who can say where you will end up?I guess I’m just worried / upset / scared of the Rapture because I know where I’m going
Come - cling to the Rock. There is bread for all.
M
mazsa
Guest
Hello, Ken.
I’m responding to the link you provided which shows a man bowing/praying before an image of an eye. You said it doesn’t sit right with you. That’s understandable because the picture is not of a Catholic worshipping anything. The man is a follower of Cao Dai. That’s the third largest religion in Vietnam, after Buddhists and Roman Catholics. You said: " This image does not belong in the Church in my opinion." lexphoto.co.uk/albums/vie…ing%20eye.html
Just want you to know your “gut feeling” is correct. It does not belong in the Church, nor was it in a Catholic church.
The end of your journey is the beginning of your eternity.
I’m responding to the link you provided which shows a man bowing/praying before an image of an eye. You said it doesn’t sit right with you. That’s understandable because the picture is not of a Catholic worshipping anything. The man is a follower of Cao Dai. That’s the third largest religion in Vietnam, after Buddhists and Roman Catholics. You said: " This image does not belong in the Church in my opinion." lexphoto.co.uk/albums/vie…ing%20eye.html
Just want you to know your “gut feeling”
is correct. It does not belong in the Church, nor was it in a Catholic church.The end of your journey is the beginning of your eternity.
M
mazsa
Guest
Me to Ken again. 
The link you provided and that I reposted doesn’t work now. The owner “registered” it…possibly because the picture got some hits. (?) However, here’s another link about the Cao Dai religion: sacred-destinations.com/vietnam/cao-dai-temple.htm
I just checked, and this link works.
God bless us, everyone!~Tiny Tim (Dickens)
The end of your journey is the beginning of your eternity.
The link you provided and that I reposted doesn’t work now. The owner “registered” it…possibly because the picture got some hits. (?) However, here’s another link about the Cao Dai religion: sacred-destinations.com/vietnam/cao-dai-temple.htmI just checked, and this link works.
God bless us, everyone!~Tiny Tim (Dickens)
The end of your journey is the beginning of your eternity.
Q
QuickCat
Guest
The Bible teaches that we are in the “last days” of the church-age. When the last member of the Body of Christ is saved the Lord will return in the air to catch us up, and so we shall ever be with the Lord. The tribulation period [7 years] will follow, then the Lord returns to earth and establishes the earthly kingdom for Israel and the nations. The 12 apostles will sit on 12 thrones to judge the 12 tribes of Israel in this kingdom. During this time Satan is bound. At the end of 1,000 years Satan is loosed and easily gathers an army to fight again the Lord. The Lord, of course, wins and Satan is cast into the lake of fire. The great white throne judgement of the lost is next. No saved person is there to be judged. Then comes the new heaven and the new earth and eternity. BTW, Paul paints a dark picture of apostasy as this age draws to an end.
Grace and Peace,
QC
P
patrick457
Guest
As jmcrae said, we Catholics don’t really hold to the (admittedly modern) Dispensationalist idea of the Rapture where faithful Christians are spared the period of tribulation and everyone else is, well, ‘left behind’. Here are a few pages about it.I guess I’m just worried / upset / scared of the Rapture because I know where I’m going
catholic.com/tracts/the-rapture
americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac1005.asp
davidmacd.com/catholic/raptured_catholics.htm
Q
QuickCat
Guest
Sorry you don’t believe what Paul wrote in 1 Thess. 4:13-18; Titus 2:13; and 1 Cor. 15:51ff.
And, this isn’t an “admittedly modern Dispensationalist idea.” I have already shown, in previous threads on this forum, that the pre-tribulation rapture of the Body of Christ was held by the early church - Clement and others.
QC
T
tabycat
Guest
Pre-trib, pre-mill are you? :bounce::tsktsk:
P
patrick457
Guest
Actually, while premillennialism was a belief held in the early Church, it was different from Dispensationalist premillennialism. Let me just quote what I wrote a while ago:
Ah…one of my favorite topics!
Indeed, many of the Church Fathers and other various shades of early Christians expressed a premillennialist view in their writings, such as Papias, St. Victorinus of Pettau, St. Justin Martyr (though some argue that his own eschatological views were not consistent), St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, St. Melito of Sardis (as per St. Jerome’s testimony), Lactantius, and others, and even various gnostic groups and the Montanists. Justin makes it clear from early on though that the view he holds was not universal and that there was some differences in opinion, as “many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.”
The concept of a temporary earthly messianic kingdom at the Messiah’s coming was not an invention of Christianity; instead it was a theological interpretation developed within the apocalyptic literature of early Judaism. You can already see this line of thinking in some apocalyptic works like 1 Enoch (2nd-1st century BC) and 2 Esdras (post-AD 70?). Some rabbis even debated as to how long the messianic kingdom would last, with figures ranging from sixty years up to 2000 years, or whether there would even be a messianic kingdom at all. Far from being a newly-invented Christian idea, it seems that premillennialism was already alive and thriving when Revelation was still being written. This is probably what is meant by the disciples of St. John understanding Revelation in a premillennialist light: one can say that they had merely inherited their beliefs from some Jewish schools of thought.
Now that being said, early Christian premillennialism, known as historic premillennialism, and the new-fangled Dispensationalist premillennialism of Darby and his ilk - the kind you encounter today in some Protestant circles - are two different beasts. Historic premillennialism, for instance, sees no radical theological distinction between Israel and the Church, unlike Dispensationalism. It maintains chiliasm because of its view that the Church will be caught up to meet Christ in the air after a period of tribulation (notice here: **no Rapture for the believers!) and then escort Him to the earth in order to share in His thousand-year rule. Early Christian premillennialism was often bound up with the belief in sexta-septamillennialism, the view which holds that the created universe will last for only six thousand years and then will enjoy a thousand years of Sabbath rest before the end. This septamillennial scenario echoes the six days of creation and the seventh day that God rested.
There had been rising opposition to premillennialism in the Patristic period, especially in the 3rd century AD. One of the first recorded opponents to this belief was the infamous hereitc Marcion. Not just the idea of a thousand-year messianic kingdom, he in fact doubted whether there would be a Parousia at all. There was no logical place in his system for a real second coming, all because he never believed that Jesus really became human in the first place.
Another one whom we know disagreed with this idea was Origen. Through allegorical interpretation, Origen had been a proponent of amillennialism, but in some of his writings he apparently took his allegoricalism too far and completely spiritualized Christ’s second coming: “Christ’s return signifies His disclosure of Himself and His deity to all humanity in such a way that all might partake of His glory to the degree that each individual’s actions warrant.**” (Commentary on Matthew 12.30) Even Origen’s milder forms of this teaching left no room for a literal millennium and it was deemed so extreme that few actually followed it.
Dionysius, Pope of Alexandria (reigned 248-265) - himself once a student of Origen - stood against premillennialism when the chiliastic work, The Refutation of the Allegorizers written by an Egyptian bishop named Nepos, who was a strict literalist and designed the book to be a refutation of those who held allegorical interpretations of Scripture, became popular in Alexandria. With his reply, On the Promises, he argued against Nepos’s influence convincingly and with charity (he held Nepos in high regard and managed to criticize the doctrine without attacking the person!) and convinced the churches of the region of amillennialism.
We know this because the historian and bishop Eusebius of Caesarea preserved the story for us (Church History 7.24-25). Eusebius, for the record, had low regard for Papias, and attributed his premillennialism to a “misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts, not perceiving that the things said by them were spoken mystically in figures,” all because he had “very limited understanding.” (History 3.39.12-13)
P
patrick457
Guest
“Sorry you don’t believe what Paul wrote in 1 Thess. 4:13-18; Titus 2:13; and 1 Cor. 15:51ff.” Did you actually read the pages I linked to? From the second page:
The ‘Rapture text’ in Scripture
Those who propose the Rapture maintain that it is found in Scripture. From its first appearance, as we have seen, others have questioned this. What are we to think?
Written by Paul from Corinth, about 50 or 51 A.D., less than 20 years after the death of Christ, 1 Thessalonians is commonly considered the oldest book of the New Testament. It is clear that these earliest Christians were eagerly expecting Jesus’ return in glory at the end of the world. As time went on and this was delayed, two pastoral problems emerged that Paul addresses in these lines.
The first is the question of when. Paul tells them that they “know very well” that we do not know the time of the end; it will come like a thief in the night. This becomes a truism throughout the New Testament, appearing in the Synoptic Gospels (Mt 24:42,44; Mark 13:21-23, 32-33; Luke 12:39-40; 17:20-24; 21:34-35); Acts of the Apostles (1:6-7); the Letters (our passage and 2 Peter 3:9-10); and even in the Book of Revelation, not once but twice (Rv 3:3; 16:15)! Needless to say, this clear teaching has been consistently ignored by many up to the present day.
The second question seems more urgent. Since Christ’s coming was delayed, some of the community had died. Those who were left became worried: Would the dead lose out in some way at Christ’s return? Would they be at any disadvantage?
In describing Jesus’ return, Paul combines imagery drawn from two sources. From biblical apocalyptic (e.g., Daniel 7:13), he gets the coming on the clouds of heaven with the angelic trumpets. From his Greco-Roman experience, he gets the imagery of an arrival of a king on a state visit (in Greek, parousia); a joyful multitude goes out to meet him on the road and accompany him back to the city.
The dead will rise first and then we, the living, will be “snatched” up to join them in the air. Many pagan epitaphs of the time spoke of the living “being snatched” away by death. Here Paul speaks of our “being snatched” up to join the Lord and to welcome him at his return.
In the ancient world, the “air” was a scary place filled with unseen beings, many of them hostile. Together with Christ, there will be nothing to fear. Paul means this as a message of comfort and consolation for the Thessalonians. Christians do grieve the loss of their loved ones, but they should not do so “as others do who have no hope.”
The passage is about Jesus’ return in glory at the end of the world. The New Testament knows of only one such return. There is no “first” second coming!
Further, the passage says absolutely nothing about being “separated from” sinners; the whole thrust is exactly the opposite. It is about “being together with” the dead. There is no suggestion that once we meet Jesus “in the air” that he then turns around and goes back, taking us with him, to return later.
The conclusion is clear: There is no basis whatsoever in this passage for a doctrine of the Rapture. To see such a doctrine here is a complete distortion of the biblical text. If we were to examine other biblical texts often cited in support of this doctrine (e.g., Mt 24:40-41; Luke 17:34-35; Rv 3:10), the results would be the same.
“the pre-tribulation rapture of the Body of Christ was held by the early church - Clement and others.” I’d like to see quotes, in context.
G
gcharles
Guest
The Trinity is not mentioned in the bible. Jesus is God in the flesh isn’t mentioned in the bible. NWO isn’t mentioned in the bible. Think!!! George H Bush mentioned NWO 216 times. He contributed over $1 million to Illuminati causes. When we have a one world government and one world banking system. There are only three countries-Cuba, Iran and S Korea to connect ot the world banking system. When they do a total connection. What’s that scar on Obama’s head that has been confirmed as a surgical scar and he wouldn’t release his medical records.
Update on creation please read this. Remember I told you there is no speciation evolution and had some elitist comments supporting the BIG LIE!
Kolbe newsletter 8/11/2012
952 Kelly Rd., Mt. Jackson, VA 22842
Tel: 540-856-8453 E-Mail: director@kolbecenter.org
For me You have created the skies scattered with stars . . .
and all the beautiful things on earth
(St. Maximilian Kolbe)
Dear Friends of the Kolbe Center,
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Dr. Thomas Seiler, Hugh Miller, and I are about to leave for Singapore for an unprecedented opportunity to present the scientific evidence that our team of scientists has collected on the radiocarbon dating of dinosaur bones in a major scientific forum.
Please keep us in your prayers.
Before departing for Singapore, and from there for Australia and New Zealand, I would like to share some important information that I recently received from Dr. Dominique Tassot, the publisher of the excellent French journal of the Centre D’Études et Prospectives la Science (CEP). In a recent issue of the CEP journal, a reader submitted the following testimony–from a source which Dr. Tassot considers completely trustworthy. The letter has been translated into English by Mr. Claude Eon:
On October 22, 1996, the scientific community and the popular press gave an account of the message delivered by Blessed Pope John-Paul II to the general meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences gathered in Rome to discuss evolutionary theories. The main part of this message, the one little sentence that made headlines in the papers[1], is as follows:
Today (…) better knowledge leads us to see in the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis.
This sentence was immediately interpreted as approval by the Holy Father of the principle of biological evolution, in spite of the conflict between this mode of explaining creation and the very foundations of the Catholic religion. However, we now know that John-Paul II never gave this speech. He did not even meet with the members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences because the planned meeting was canceled.
This is what really happened, according to the unpublished testimony of a priest who was present:
I was a member of this symposium on evolution. Blessed John-Paul II NEVER delivered the speech attributed to him on October 22, 1996. The text, without a signature, was handed over to the members [of the PAS] without any papal audience. After the event, I questioned Father Cottier, now a cardinal. He told me he had himself written a part of the document but that a second writer had intervened, inserting his own additions into the text without showing them to him. (It was precisely the duty of Fr. Cottier, official theologian of the Papal Household, to read all the texts to be signed by the Pope.)
Consequently, the official reviewer could not carry out his mission, He was bypassed. As to John-Paul II, the confidant of his reviewer, he never read or reviewed the text!
Thus we are confronted with a text attributed to Pope John-Paul II and published under his signature in L’Osservatore Romano–but of what real merit?[2] Yet the statement deals with a question of fundamental importance, whether man is only the product of “evolution” or if man, like all that exists on earth, is actually the fruit of a special act of God’s Will (betrayed by man’s rebellion through Original Sin).
This may also explain why Pope Benedict XVI thought it right to assert the Church’s positionConsequently, the official reviewer could not carry out his mission, He was bypassed. As to John-Paul II, the confidant of his reviewer, he never read or reviewed the text!
Thus we are confronted with a text attributed to Pope John-Paul II and published under his signature in L’Osservatore Romano–but of what real merit?[2] Yet the statement deals with a question of fundamental importance, whether man is only the product of “evolution” or if man, like all that exists on earth, is actually the fruit of a special act of God’s Will (betrayed by man’s rebellion through Original Sin).
This may also explain why Pope Benedict XVI thought it right to assert the Church’s position in his enthronement homily at the inaugural Mass of his pontificate, on Sunday, April 24, 2005, in St Peter’s Square:
We are not the accidental and senseless product of evolution. Each of us is the fruit of a God’s thought. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary.
And that is not all. Here is what the Holy Father added a few months later, on November 9, 2005, after quoting from a commentary on Genesis by the fourth-century bishop St. Basil the Great:
I find that this Father’s words are of astonishing relevance when he says: “Some, deceived by their inherent atheism, imagined a universe deprived of direction and order, as if ruled by chance.” How many are those “some” today? Deceived by atheism, they believe that it is scientific to think that all is deprived of direction and order, as if ruled by chance. Throughout Scripture, the Lord wakes up man’s languid reason and tells us: “In the beginning was the Creative Word.” (“Le Cep” N° 60 July 2012, pp. 92-94).
Friends of the Kolbe Center, this letter testifies to the way that the traditional teaching of the Church can easily be subverted by anonymous activists in ecclesiastical offices who misrepresent the mind of the Pope or of the Second Vatican Council to promote ideas that are incompatible with the traditional teaching of the Church. Fidelity to the true teachings of the Church now requires the ability not only to distinguish between the authoritative and non-authoritative statements of the Pope but also to distinguish between the statements merely attributed to the Pope and those that he has actually written or said!
Let us pray that God will deliver the Holy Father from false friends, advisers, and co-workers, and give him the grace to witness boldly to “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3).
Please keep the Kolbe Center in your prayers.
Yours in Christ through the Immaculata,
Hugh Owen
Jesus said let no man deceive you. He didn’t say put your head in the sand and live in a state of denial. Satan hates you!!
Update on creation please read this. Remember I told you there is no speciation evolution and had some elitist comments supporting the BIG LIE!
Kolbe newsletter 8/11/2012
952 Kelly Rd., Mt. Jackson, VA 22842
Tel: 540-856-8453 E-Mail: director@kolbecenter.org
For me You have created the skies scattered with stars . . .
and all the beautiful things on earth
(St. Maximilian Kolbe)
Dear Friends of the Kolbe Center,
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Dr. Thomas Seiler, Hugh Miller, and I are about to leave for Singapore for an unprecedented opportunity to present the scientific evidence that our team of scientists has collected on the radiocarbon dating of dinosaur bones in a major scientific forum.
Please keep us in your prayers.
Before departing for Singapore, and from there for Australia and New Zealand, I would like to share some important information that I recently received from Dr. Dominique Tassot, the publisher of the excellent French journal of the Centre D’Études et Prospectives la Science (CEP). In a recent issue of the CEP journal, a reader submitted the following testimony–from a source which Dr. Tassot considers completely trustworthy. The letter has been translated into English by Mr. Claude Eon:
On October 22, 1996, the scientific community and the popular press gave an account of the message delivered by Blessed Pope John-Paul II to the general meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences gathered in Rome to discuss evolutionary theories. The main part of this message, the one little sentence that made headlines in the papers[1], is as follows:
Today (…) better knowledge leads us to see in the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis.
This sentence was immediately interpreted as approval by the Holy Father of the principle of biological evolution, in spite of the conflict between this mode of explaining creation and the very foundations of the Catholic religion. However, we now know that John-Paul II never gave this speech. He did not even meet with the members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences because the planned meeting was canceled.
This is what really happened, according to the unpublished testimony of a priest who was present:
I was a member of this symposium on evolution. Blessed John-Paul II NEVER delivered the speech attributed to him on October 22, 1996. The text, without a signature, was handed over to the members [of the PAS] without any papal audience. After the event, I questioned Father Cottier, now a cardinal. He told me he had himself written a part of the document but that a second writer had intervened, inserting his own additions into the text without showing them to him. (It was precisely the duty of Fr. Cottier, official theologian of the Papal Household, to read all the texts to be signed by the Pope.)
Consequently, the official reviewer could not carry out his mission, He was bypassed. As to John-Paul II, the confidant of his reviewer, he never read or reviewed the text!
Thus we are confronted with a text attributed to Pope John-Paul II and published under his signature in L’Osservatore Romano–but of what real merit?[2] Yet the statement deals with a question of fundamental importance, whether man is only the product of “evolution” or if man, like all that exists on earth, is actually the fruit of a special act of God’s Will (betrayed by man’s rebellion through Original Sin).
This may also explain why Pope Benedict XVI thought it right to assert the Church’s positionConsequently, the official reviewer could not carry out his mission, He was bypassed. As to John-Paul II, the confidant of his reviewer, he never read or reviewed the text!
Thus we are confronted with a text attributed to Pope John-Paul II and published under his signature in L’Osservatore Romano–but of what real merit?[2] Yet the statement deals with a question of fundamental importance, whether man is only the product of “evolution” or if man, like all that exists on earth, is actually the fruit of a special act of God’s Will (betrayed by man’s rebellion through Original Sin).
This may also explain why Pope Benedict XVI thought it right to assert the Church’s position in his enthronement homily at the inaugural Mass of his pontificate, on Sunday, April 24, 2005, in St Peter’s Square:
We are not the accidental and senseless product of evolution. Each of us is the fruit of a God’s thought. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary.
And that is not all. Here is what the Holy Father added a few months later, on November 9, 2005, after quoting from a commentary on Genesis by the fourth-century bishop St. Basil the Great:
I find that this Father’s words are of astonishing relevance when he says: “Some, deceived by their inherent atheism, imagined a universe deprived of direction and order, as if ruled by chance.” How many are those “some” today? Deceived by atheism, they believe that it is scientific to think that all is deprived of direction and order, as if ruled by chance. Throughout Scripture, the Lord wakes up man’s languid reason and tells us: “In the beginning was the Creative Word.” (“Le Cep” N° 60 July 2012, pp. 92-94).
Friends of the Kolbe Center, this letter testifies to the way that the traditional teaching of the Church can easily be subverted by anonymous activists in ecclesiastical offices who misrepresent the mind of the Pope or of the Second Vatican Council to promote ideas that are incompatible with the traditional teaching of the Church. Fidelity to the true teachings of the Church now requires the ability not only to distinguish between the authoritative and non-authoritative statements of the Pope but also to distinguish between the statements merely attributed to the Pope and those that he has actually written or said!
Let us pray that God will deliver the Holy Father from false friends, advisers, and co-workers, and give him the grace to witness boldly to “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3).
Please keep the Kolbe Center in your prayers.
Yours in Christ through the Immaculata,
Hugh Owen
Jesus said let no man deceive you. He didn’t say put your head in the sand and live in a state of denial. Satan hates you!!
P
patrick457
Guest
No offense, but question: why is everything so centered around the United States of America? I mean really, not being American, I can’t just comprehend this whole America-centrism manifesting itself even in theories like these. For some odd reason, most stuff of this type revolve around the US and A. Can’t be helped I guess (seeing as Catholic Answers is based on the US and a good majority of the members of this forum are American), but still.
To be honest, I think this guy would make for a better Antichrist than Bush or Obama, if his claims aren’t so (almost hilariously) outrageous. At least he’s closer - explicitly claiming to be Jesus and planning to ascend through the ranks and eventually reign over the whole world, that sort of thing.
P.S. Jesus did say to keep watch for His coming, but He did not say to don tinfoil hats or cook up a bunch of stuff based on some rather vague connections. This coming from a Noid (sorry for bringing that one up).
G
gcharles
Guest
Things are based on US because of our military. London is really the center of the Illuminati. The Rothschilds will soon be in charge of all the money in the world. They only need S Korea, Cuba and Iran to connect. Rothschilds might be known as Jews but they are Edomite/Khazars. They even trace their roots back to Turkey-home of the Khazars. They are not Israelites. In John chapet 8 these are the people Jesus called the sons of the devil-the ones of the synagogue of Satan. The antichrist will have Edomite/Khazar roots. Remember God loved Jacob and hated Esau. Rotschilds changed their name five generations ago. It was Bauer. Rothschild means red shield to honor the red child-Esau. Bishop Malachy named the next pope Peter Romanus and the Illuminati will invade the Vatican.
Also when the antichrist comes he will eventually make Bush and Obama look like boy scouts. This is after he miraculouly rises three days after he dies from a head wound. Satan himself will be in that body. He will even make Adam Weishaupt look gentle.
Also when the antichrist comes he will eventually make Bush and Obama look like boy scouts. This is after he miraculouly rises three days after he dies from a head wound. Satan himself will be in that body. He will even make Adam Weishaupt look gentle.
M
mick_tinetti
Guest
If you are looking for scientific evidence that Jesus is the “way the truth and the life” look at the history of the Shroud of Turin. It is scientifically proven physical evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. It was analyzed by experts from all applicable scientific fields. There is even a History channel special on it. Download it from the History Channel web site or watch it (in many parts) on Utube. It shows that Jesus’ Passion was truthfully and completely witnessed to in the Gospels by His Saints.
M
mick_tinetti
Guest
It is called the “True Face of Jesus.”
K
Kenny_Kamel
Guest
A reading from the first promo of Scott Hall to the WCW Fans:
"Thus says the Hulkster, when thou is in thy NWO, thou is in thy NWO 4 LIFE!!!"
http://a2.att.hudong.com/77/98/01300000092478120653981605188_s.jpg
"Thus says the Hulkster, when thou is in thy NWO, thou is in thy NWO 4 LIFE!!!"
http://a2.att.hudong.com/77/98/01300000092478120653981605188_s.jpg
J
jimmy
Guest
when your nWo, your nWo 4 life. Don’t you know that Scott Hall and Kevin Nash were two of the apostles:yup:?
G
gcharles
Guest
Patrick this is a question on the NWO. What does that have to do with the rapture. I posted a truth on speciaiton evolution written by a well respected Catholic scientist. It proves that someone put in a speech that John Paul II never said. Paul said the scriptures are God-breathed. There is no speciation.
- Status