Everyone Here Needs to Read This Book

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1013922' date='Jun 28 2006, 01:41 PM']
Shucks now friend, at least use solid, stand up, Protestant resources for correcting our Catholic friends here. When I evangelize Buddhist's it doesn't do me any good if I call them Muslims. Try to thoroughly learn where they are coming from so you can reach them where they are at. These anti-catholic tracts aren't going to help you do that. Stay firmly rooted in your Bible (KJV I hope), but read their catechism as well.

And be patient. I've already been labeled "hostile" here.
[/quote]
I asked if you were berean because I googled the tract you listed.

[homeschoolmom]

What does it mean to "be Berean"? I know that the book of Acts refers to the Bereans who searched Scripture... what is "Berean" in this context?

[Church Punk]

Thats the Mother of the Living God your are talking about... please watch what you say.

[morostheos]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1013988' date='Jun 28 2006, 02:57 PM']
Only in as much as we don't need correcting as much as we are Christians I suppose. Perhaps in the spirit of that Decree on Ecumenism from Vatican II we shall learn about each others beliefs as time goes on. I've learned enough that I wouldn't dare simply consider Catholics "baptized pagans" as some more fast fingered fundies would, however there are very real differences.

A Catholic on another thread earlier considered me "hostile". I suppose I am. I want to see you all go to heaven.
[/quote]

There have been hostile people here before, and believe me, you're certainly not one of them. I enjoy your posts.

[Budge]

[quote]

I read a book by Tetlow already(messages from heaven). Full of errors and distortions like the usual anti-catholic jibberish. By the way I recieved it from him personally, free of charge.[/quote]

What errors, he was careful to cite even approved vs. unapproved apparitions.

Most of the book is based on the warnings of scripture.

I got the book right here.

Name one or two errors, lets deal with it.

[quote]Thats the Mother of the Living God your are talking about... please watch what you say.[/quote]

the apparitions are not the same person as Mary, mother of jesus who was a humble blessed lady that sought after God's will and who would never put focus on herself instead of Jesus Christ.

the apparitions are the daughter of Chaldea.

[thessalonian]

Happen to have mine here as well.

"Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this Catholic doctrine is that Christ is being re-sacrifiec daily by thousands of Catholic priests".

Christ is not being resacrificed. We do not teach that and he doesn't believe it is possible. The mass is a reeeepresentation (not to be confused with a representation) of the one sacrifice of the cross on calvary. It is that grace brought forward and applied to our lives. This is one of those same old loaves of fruitcake passed on from one Christmass to the next in Protestant "tradition" of what Catholics believe. And it is undeniably a false strawman.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

I've been reading many "anti-Catholic" books this summer in hopes of better understanding the Protestant perspective.

What I'm finding is a lot of ignorance... and perhaps some deceit. Many "former priests" claiming a background full of orthodox training at good Catholic institutions are lacking a basic understanding of Catholic principles. So, aside from suspicions of deceit, which, for now, I will give them the benefit of the doubt... there is genuinely a great deal of misunderstanding that revolves around Catholic theology, much of what is quoted from the Catechism and other authoritative sources is taken out of context and/or just plain misunderstood. You cannot read into a document what YOU want it to say, as many authors seem to be doing with papal and conciliar documents.

[Budge]

[quote]
"Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this Catholic doctrine is that Christ is being re-sacrifiec daily by thousands of Catholic priests".

Christ is not being resacrificed. We do not teach that and he doesn't believe it is possible. The mass is a reeeepresentation (not to be confused with a representation) of the one sacrifice of the cross on calvary. It is that grace brought forward and applied to our lives. This is one of those same old loaves of fruitcake passed on from one Christmass to the next in Protestant "tradition" of what Catholics believe. And it is undeniably a false strawman.[/quote]

This is what evangelicals believe of the Catholic Mass, it is NOT an error, it is how we see it.

The book of Hebrews states over and over it was to be a one time sacrifice.

I have asked Catholics this one question and NEVER gotten an answer.

[size=6]Why does Christ need his one time sacrifice RE-PRESENTED?[/size][font=Arial Black].

The Eucharist doctrine seems to require extreme doubletalk.

The Catholics online will tell me over and over....

"It is REAL BLOOD, but it really ISN'T real blood."

"And it was a ONE TIME sacrifice, that we REDO over and over and over every day. But it isn't SYMBOLIC, it a REAL sacrifice, but it isn't, but it is, but isn't."

As for the remission of sins, what part did JESUS NOT GET DONE RIGHT the first time? Im wondering...

The authors were not in error to write what they believe of the Eucharist. That is a difference in belief, not an error.

Edited June 29, 2006 by Budge

[KatS]

I found this quote from an apologist website, www.biblechristiansociety.com:

[quote]Q: Why do Catholics call Mary the Queen of Heaven? Doesn't God rebuke the Israelites in the O.T. for worshipping a false goddess called the Queen of Heaven? Should we not refer to Mary with that title, therefore, since it is the title of a false goddess?

A. In Jeremiah 7:18, God is indeed upset with the Israelites for worshipping a false goddess called the "queen of heaven". However, just because God rebuked them for worshipping the false queen of heaven, doesn't mean that we cannot pay honor to the true Queen of Heaven...the Blessed Mother.

That type of thinking would lead you to believe that just because people worship a false god that they call "god," we, therefore, should not call the true God, by that same name...God...because that's the same title the idolaters use for their god! That is faulty logic and it makes no sense whatsoever.

Again, the fact that there is a false "queen of heaven", does not lead to the conclusion that we worship a false goddess when we call Mary the "Queen of Heaven." Just as the fact that there is a false "god", does not lead to the conclusion that we worship a false god when we call our Father in Heaven, God.

And there is a true Queen of Heaven, we see this quite clearly in Revelation 12:1, "And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars..." Let's see. There's a woman...she's in Heaven...and she has a crown on her head. I could be wrong, but I don't think it's the maid! No! It is the true Queen of Heaven, Mary, the mother of the male child who is to rule the nations.

We do not worship Mary, we honor her, just as Jesus honors her. So, there is absolutely nothing wrong, from a scriptural point of view, in calling Mary the Queen of Heaven, and in honoring her just as Jesus honors her. [/quote]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1014581' date='Jun 29 2006, 12:56 PM']
This is what evangelicals believe of the Catholic Mass, it is NOT an error, it is how we see it.

The book of Hebrews states over and over it was to be a one time sacrifice.

I have asked Catholics this one question and NEVER gotten an answer.

[size=6]Why does Christ need his one time sacrifice RE-PRESENTED?[/size][font=Arial Black].[/quote]

Christ's sacrifice was once for all. However, in the Mass, that sacrifice is presented to us again and again. Don't see it as the sacrifice being repeated or replayed, think of it as the Church being transported back to Calvary. This is not at all a violation of the truth that it must be once for all.

[quote]The Eucharist doctrine seems to require extreme doubletalk.

The Catholics online will tell me over and over....

"It is REAL BLOOD, but it really ISN'T real blood."[/quote]

I don't know who told you that. It is real blood. It is real blood because it is substantially Christ's blood. However, there are no cells or plasma or platelets or anything like that. It is the substance of Christ's blood...the very being of His blood and what it is on a much deeper level than cellular biology. Further, it's not His local blood. That is to say, it's not the same blood that is at this moment coursing through the Lord's veins and arteries. If it were, then we would be cannibals, eating living flesh ripped from a locally present being. Rather, we eat supernaturally living flesh, provided by a miracle not too much unlike the miracle of the loaves.

[quote]"And it was a ONE TIME sacrifice, that we REDO over and over and over every day. But it isn't SYMBOLIC, it a REAL sacrifice, but it isn't, but it is, but isn't."[/quote]

We don't redo it, as I've already pointed out. It is symbolic, but in the full sense of the term (see my [url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=18686"]tract[/url] on the word "symbol"). It is also a real sacrifice, but not in the way that you could say we are re-sacrificing Christ. It is a sacrifice because it is linked and is indeed the same as the one sacrifice of Christ on Calvary.

[quote]As for the remission of sins, what part did JESUS NOT GET DONE RIGHT the first time? Im wondering...[/quote]

The same part St. Paul spoke about. What's lacking in Christ's sacrifice? The fact that no matter how great His sacrifice, it must still be attributed to me. I must accept it in myself. That's what the Eucharist is for.

[cmotherofpirl]

We don't redo the sacrifice, we go back to Calvery to the Sacrifice.
There is a difference.

[thessalonian]

Budge,

Your answer is incredibly inept. Read the first line of the quote:


"Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this Catholic doctrine "

He says this is Catholic doctrine! It's not! The CATHOLIC CHURCH DOES NOT TEACH IT SO STOP MAKING THINGS UP AS YOU GO TO DEFEND THIS GUY! HE DOESN"T KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

God bless

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I would like to add that Christ is not bound by time. The Mass must be celebrated because we were ordered to: "Do this in memory of me."

[MichaelF]

Budge,
I will not directly respond to your diatribes, as you are using (with malice) a argumentative technique called a "straw man" argument.

Essentially, you state [b]a deliberately skewed version[/b] of the Catholic Faith. You then demolish the aforementioned version (which is easy, as it was specifically constructed to enable you to do so) and trumpet that as a sign that the Catholic Church is wrong.

Ergo, you are a dishonest person (aka "liar").

Protestant "apologists" are well trained in this technique (isolating and exaggerating details of the True Faith), which is from the Devil.

Edited June 29, 2006 by MichaelF

[Theoketos]

I like Budge. He reminds me of Brother Adam.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Theoketos' post='1014747' date='Jun 29 2006, 07:59 PM']
I like Budge. He reminds me of Brother Adam.
[/quote]
Except that Adam was more passive...he budged.

[homeschoolmom]

I think Budge is a she... I'm sorry if I'm thinking of someone else, though.

[Budge]

[quote]une 28, 2006

The Lady of Kingdoms

I am the Lady - Mary - Mother of All Nations. You may say, "The Lady of All Nations" or "Mother of All Nations," who once was Mary. I have come precisely today in order to tell you that I wish to be known as this. Let all the children of men, of all the countries in the world- be one![1]

These shocking words were allegedly uttered by an apparition calling itself Mary in Amsterdam. Clearly this supernatural entity is alluding to a one-world society, setting itself up as the Mother of All Nations. At first this may seem like pie in the sky fantasy, but let us take a closer look and see if we can glimpse what is really going on here.

First off, it is interesting to note that Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, the New Age, and indigenous tribal religions all seem to have their own versions of feminine or ?mother' deities - a.k.a. goddess worship.

Mahayanna Buddhism has Tara "the Savioress" who encourages "a personal and enduring relationship." Tara has been described as the Divine Mother of Tibetan Buddhism.[ii]

Here's how one author describes Hinduism:

"A considerable number of goddesses are known in the earliest Hindu Scriptures, the Vedic Hymns. .No other living religious tradition displays such an ancient, continuous, and diverse history of goddess worship."[iii]

Here's yet another quote from the must read book Queen of All:

"Within the New Age and Eastern religious circles, many acknowledge the great importance and reemergence of the goddess. She has always played a major part in their beliefs and worship. And accordingly, books, like The Goddess Re-Awakening are predicting her triumphant comeback."[iv] The authors go on to extensively document these claims.

Taoism has a female deity who is literally called "the Queen Mother of the West."[v] Also, think about all of the female deities of ancient paganism. Here are a few, as named by the authors of Queen of All:

Astarte, Ashtoreth, Asherah, Ishtar, Venus, Diana, Artemis, Lilith, Minerva, Isis, Kwan-yin, Demeter, Gaia, Luna, Hectate, Aphrodite, Aurora, Shing Moo, Holy Mother, White Buffalo Calf Woman, Shakti, Hera, Innanna, Kali, Juno, Sophia, Ceres, Persephone, Our Lady, and Blessed Mother.[vi]

But where did all of these goddesses come from? Alexander Hislop's classic The Two Babylons has this to say:

"The Babylonians, in their popular religion, supremely worshipped a Goddess Mother and a Son, who was represented in pictures and in images as an infant or child in his mother's arms. From Babylon, this worship of the Mother and the Child spread to the ends of the earth. In Egypt, the Mother and the Child were worshipped under the names of Isis and Osiris. In India, even to this day, as Isi and Iswara; in Asia as Cybele and Deoius; in Pagan Rome, as Fortuna and Jupiter-puer, or Jupiter, the boy; in Greece, as Ceres, the Great Mother, with the babe at her breast; and even in Tibet, in China, and Japan, the Jesuit missionaries were astonished to find the counterpart of Madonna and her child as devoutly worshipped as in Papal Rome itself; Shing Moo, the Holy Mother in China, being represented with a child in her arms, and a glory around her, exactly as if a Roman Catholic artist had been employed to set her up."[vii]

Even more specifically, another author states "Any effort to trace the origins of the myth, legend, and lore of goddess-worship will eventually lead one back to a single historical figure---Semiramis, wife of Nimrod and queen of Babylon."[viii] Of course it was Nimrod who led the rebellion at the Tower of Babel in the centuries following the great flood. But it was Semiramis who created and was in charge of the Babylonian Religious hierarchy, which among other things included a perversion of ancient Astronomy. [ix] (Mike Oppenheimer's Gospel in the Stars suggests that man originally knew that the constellations contained the whole of the Gospel story now contained in the Bible.) For our current purposes, let us note only that Semiramis had a son named Tammuz, who she claimed was divine.[x] In fact, she claimed Tammuz was killed by a wild bore and later resurrected - implicitly seeking to fulfill Genesis 3:15. And since Tammuz was divine, Semiramis claimed to be ?Queen of Heaven' - the Queen of Heaven we read about in the Hebrew Scriptures. This idolatry infected Israel, as the prophet Jeremiah 44:17-19:

But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men? (KJV)

(See also Jeremiah 7:18, 44:25)

Ezekiel 8:14 talks about her son Tammuz:

Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the LORD's house which was toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. (KJV)

The Bible tells us plainly, The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9) and that the LORD declares the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done (Isaiah 46:10).

Nimrod and Semiramis are a picture of the last days. This couple led a worldwide empire and a worldwide religious system. Now, going back to the opening statement attributed to an apparition calling itself Mary - the Lady of the Nations - evidently there is a supernatural push reestablish this world wide system. In case you think I'm exaggerating, here's yet another quote from the same apparition:

"Unity is what [God's] people must achieve, they must be one, and over them, "the Lady of All Nations." One Community, nations, I stress these words: One Community!"[xi]

Remember, this apparition carries the approval of the several Catholic Bishops. As if all of this weren't eye-opening enough, this apparition in Amsterdam - Our Lady of Nations - "has been the most vocal in persuading the [Catholic] faithful to name her Co-Redeemer."[xii] In Roman Catholic circles this push is widely known as the fifth and final Marian dogma. (The first four dogmas are Mary as Mother of God, Ever Virgin, Immaculately Conceived, and Assumed into Heaven.[xiii] The apparition claims that it cannot reveal its true power until this final dogma is proclaimed by the Vatican.[xiv]

Remarkably, the Catechism of the Catholic Church already calls Mary "Queen over all things."[xv] In the words of Pope John Paul II himself, "The Council emphasizes that the Mother of God is already the eschatological [end times] fulfillment of the Church."[xvi] What's more:

"In the last four years, the pope has received 4,340,429 signatures from 157 countries - an average of 100,000 a month - supporting the proposed dogma [Co-Redemptrix dogma]. Among the notable supporters are Mother Teresa of Calcutta, nearly 500 bishops and 42 Cardinals, including John O'Connor of New York, Joseph Glemp of Poland and half a dozen Cardinals at the Vatican itself. Nothing like this organized petition drive has ever been seen in Rome. But then, it isn't often that Catholics beg a pope to make an infallible pronouncement."[xvii]

[size=6]How interesting it is that Isaiah 47:5 reads Sit thou silent, and get thee into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called, The lady of kingdoms. (KJV)[/size] And this verse takes place within the context of a prophecy against the Virgin Daughter of Babylon! Ancient writings tell us that Semiramis ran a brothel, but to smooth over her image she claimed to be "a virgin sprung from the sea at Nimrod's landing."[xviii] Catholicism's Queen of Heaven likewise purports to be ever-virgin.

As was the case with the first article, I have here only attempted provided a general picture and not an intensive study. Taken together, these two article have attempted to demonstrate that the religion of Semiramis and ancient Babylon may be re-manifesting itself - specifically in the form of the Roman Catholic Mary. It is very possible, perhaps even likely, that this false Spirit will unite Catholicism and Islam before uniting all of the world's religion under one powerful system. The world has been conditioned and is already crying out for the very peace and unity the various Marian apparitions are claiming they will provide - once Mary, the Queen of Heaven, the Queen of Nations, is pronounced Co-Redeemer along with Jesus. Sound ridiculous? Check out this picture of Mary hanging on the cross with Jesus![/quote]





Why does Rome worship creatures warned about in scripture?

Rome worships the LADY OF KINGDOMS.

Look at the name of this Magistierum approved Mary apparitions [actually demon]

OUR LADY OF ALL NATIONS.

[img]http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/Haarlem1.jpg[/img]

Picture of Our Lady of ALL NATIONS...warned about in scripture as the enemy.

[img]http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/images/ladynatl.jpg[/img]
[quote]
Lord Jesus Christ,
Son of the Father,
send now Your Spirit over the earth.
Let the Holy Spirit live
in the hearts of all nations,
that they may be preserved
from degeneration,
disaster and war.
May the Lady of All Nations,
who once was Mary,
be our Advocate.

Amen.[/quote][/img]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Oy...Where is Our Lady of All Nations spoken against in Scripure?

By the way, we don't worship Mary. When will you decide that Catholics know what they believe more than you do?

The trouble with your theology is that you take one verse, remove it from its context, and say that anything that sounds similar must be what it's talking about.

The passage you quote from Isaiah is a condemnation of Babylon, which, having conquered a large portion of the middle east, was hailed as the Lady of Kingdoms, implying Babylon's wealth and dignity, and God, turning Babylon over to free His people, calls her a harlot. This has nothing to do with the Catholic Church's acknowledgment of the Blessed Virgin, the Mother of God, appearing as Our Lady of All Nations, which is not an attempt to be a sort of goddess (and if she claimed to be one, the Church would most certainly condemn the apparition), but rather a religious apparition meant to say that she is Our Lady of All Nations and that, thus, her Son is Lord of All Nations. The apparition, like all true apparitions, seeks to praise Christ, something that Satan would never do.

Finally, we do not worship Mary. We hold her in high esteem, and shouldn't we? Don't you love the Mother of God? We ask her for her prayers and favors, and shouldn't we? If you had access to the Mother of God, wouldn't you ask her to pray for you? We call her the Queen of Heaven and Earth, and shouldn't we? She is the Mother of the King.

Edited July 1, 2006 by Raphael

[avemaria40]

[/b] Behold, all generations will call me blessed, For the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is His name" Luke 1:48-49[b]
Honoring Mary fulfills that Biblical prophecy. BTW, at every apparation that is truly the Virgin Mary, she is always telling us to turn towards her son, just like she does at the wedding at Cana. We DO NOT under any circumstances worship Mary, that is only for God and Our Lady would be very offended if she got more attention than God.
As for the Catholic Mass, yes, we believe in the once and for all sacrifice, however, Jesus says in John 6:53 that "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you" And He said "Take, eat this [i]is[/i] my body" Matt 26:26. We are not saying Jesus died again, we are saying He died once, but He continues to give of Himself to us in the Eucharist. Think of it as a marriage. Spouses only marry once but that does not mean they renew their marital covenant only once.