Pope Francis's Sacrilegious Nativity Scene
#61
I think this is a most productive and fruitful conversation, but can we please do without the snark?

We are brothers and sisters in Christ seeking the truth after all.

It's quite understandable to have questions about these things.

Let's continue to help each other discern the truth in love, okay?   :heart: :)
Reply
#62
We have someone quoting a heretic website to 'prove' that the Church is in violation of Scripture, what are we supposed to do? Join the Church of Nice?
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • Pulvis
Reply
#63
(12-20-2017, 02:48 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: We have someone quoting a heretic website to 'prove' that the Church is in violation of Scripture, what are we supposed to do? Join the Church of Nice?

Absolutely not!

I would suggest making a polite reference to the heretical nature of the website and then respond to the actual intention of their argument using an approved version of Scripture.

In other words, stick to the main argument and give each other the benefit of the doubt that you are trying to find the truth.  Don't grandstand about the small details and let that railroad the main objective of the conversation into rabbit trails.

Treat each other as you would want to be treated.  Try to see things from the other's point of view.

Things like, "I see what you are saying..."
or
"It appears, and correct me if I'm wrong, that your main objection is..."
or even
"It's clear you love the Church and want to protect Her from all heresy, however..."

Then proceed to clarify with information the other may not have been privy to.

Of course y'all can do what you want, but I know that when debates get snarky it turns people off and makes them afraid to post or even join Fisheaters.  We all want to learn but don't want to be publicly degraded in the process.
Reply
#64
Sorry, but I don't suffer heretics gladly or people quoting from them in an attempt to prove the Church wrong.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • Pulvis
Reply
#65
cassini, does that mean you don't have a Christmas tree up in your house now this Advent Season for Christmas?
Reply
#66
(12-20-2017, 02:32 AM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: I think this is a most productive and fruitful conversation, but can we please do without the snark?

We are brothers and sisters in Christ seeking the truth after all.

It's quite understandable to have questions about these things.

Let's continue to help each other discern the truth in love, okay?   :heart: :)

Well said Sacred Heart Lover. It seems I have opened a can of worms that many Catholics do not want to hear or know about. For that one must be punished with words. But I am well used to it, for the truth is not always welcome. Here are some of their comments:
 
'We have someone quoting a heretic website to 'prove' that the Church is in violation of Scripture, what are we supposed to do? Join the Church of Nice?'

 'So you have no problem with things which were consecrated to pagan gods being used for Christian purposes but if it resembles a penis then its devils work?'


'Sorry, but I don't suffer heretics gladly or people quoting from them in an attempt to prove the Church wrong.'

'Cassini, does that mean you don't have a Christmas tree up in your house now this Advent Season for Christmas?'
....................................................................................................................

They denied their ad hominem ploy to undermine my opinion, now it is the turn of the author of that website I picked out at random to illustrate what the dogs in the street know; that these obelisks that came from Egypt were first hand symbols of a pagan religion condemned in the Sacred Scriptures. I had no idea he was a Protestant, but then again in certain fields such as heliocentrism and evolution Protestants are far ahead with the truth than Catholics. You see we have the personal opinions of popes to contend with in these subjects, they don't.

Tell me now that calling the author a 'heretic' is not an ad hominem ploy and I will try to believe it. Note howeverr the same posters did not even try to show where this 'heretic' got his facts wrong.
So then, let us now examine the Catholic Douay Rheims version of all the references I have mentioned in my posts and the three references the 'heretic' gave. 


3 Kings 16:31-33
[31] Nor was it enough for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nabat: but he also took to wife Jezabel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians. And he went, and served Baal [the sun god of Heliopolis], and adored him. [32] And he set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal, which he had built in Samaria, [33] And he planted a grove: and Achab did more to provoke the Lord the God of Israel, than all the kings of Israel that were before him.
 
4 Kings: 23:5-11
[4] And the king commanded Helcias the high priest, and the priests of the second order, and the doorkeepers, to cast out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels [ like the Obelisk] that had been made for Baal, and for the grove, and for all the host of heaven: and he burnt them without Jerusalem in the valley of Cedron, and he carried the ashes of them to Bethel
 
Wisdom 12, describes the pagans of the obelisks. 
[1] O how good and sweet is thy spirit, O Lord, in all things! [2] And therefore thou chastisest them that err, by little and little: and admonishest them, and speakest to them, concerning the things wherein they offend: that leaving their wickedness, they may believe in thee, O Lord. [3] For those ancient inhabitants of thy holy land, whom thou didst abhor, [4] Because they did works hateful to thee by their sorceries, and wicked sacrifices, [5] And those merciless murderers of their own children, and eaters of men's bowels, and devourers of blood from the midst of thy consecration,

Now let us see the Catholic version of the 'heretic's website. And remember, what the Scriptures say is the truth.

Douay Rheims on Exodus 23-24
[23] And my angel shall go before thee, and shall bring thee in unto the Amorrhite, and the Hethite, and the Pherezite, and the Chanaanite, and the Hevite, and the Jebusite, whom I will destroy. [24] Thou shalt not adore their gods, nor serve them. Thou shalt not do their works, but shalt destroy them, and break their statues. [25] And you shall serve the Lord your God, that I may bless your bread and your waters, and may take away sickness from the midst of thee.
 
Leviticus 26:1
[1] I am the Lord your God: you shall not make to yourselves any idol or graven thing, neither shall you erect pillars, nor set up a remarkable stone in your land, to adore it: for I am the Lord your God.' [The pillars here refer not to your ordinary pillar used by man in buildings throughout history. That would be rediculous. The pillars here are Pagan symbols of and to their false Gods.] [/url]
 
Deuteronomy 12: 3-4
[3] Overthrow their altars, and break down their statues, burn their groves with fire, and break their idols in pieces: destroy their names out of those places. [4] You shall not do so to the Lord your God: [url=http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=5&ch=12&l=5-#x]
 
This last quote is devistating when you think the popes, rather than destroy the very obelisk that stood in the centre of Heliopolis as ordered by God, but erected it in the very heart of Rome. but not only that, one pope got Bernini to actually mark out the heliocentric lines that surrounded it in Heliopolis, completing every detail of condemned Idol.
Reply
#67
(12-20-2017, 03:10 PM)cassini Wrote:
(12-20-2017, 02:32 AM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: I think this is a most productive and fruitful conversation, but can we please do without the snark?

We are brothers and sisters in Christ seeking the truth after all.

It's quite understandable to have questions about these things.

Let's continue to help each other discern the truth in love, okay?   :heart: :)

Well said Sacred Heart Lover. It seems I have opened a can of worms that many Catholics do not want to hear or know about. For that one must be punished with words. But I am well used to it, for the truth is not always welcome. Here are some of their comments:
 
'We have someone quoting a heretic website to 'prove' that the Church is in violation of Scripture, what are we supposed to do? Join the Church of Nice?'

 'So you have no problem with things which were consecrated to pagan gods being used for Christian purposes but if it resembles a penis then its devils work?'


'Sorry, but I don't suffer heretics gladly or people quoting from them in an attempt to prove the Church wrong.'

'Cassini, does that mean you don't have a Christmas tree up in your house now this Advent Season for Christmas?'
....................................................................................................................

They denied their ad hominem ploy to undermine my opinion, now it is the turn of the author of that website I picked out at random to illustrate what the dogs in the street know; that these obelisks that came from Egypt were first hand symbols of a pagan religion condemned in the Sacred Scriptures. I had no idea he was a Protestant, but then again in certain fields such as heliocentrism and evolution Protestants are far ahead with the truth than Catholics. You see we have the personal popes to contend with in these subjects, they don't.

Tell me now that calling the author a 'heretic' is not an ad hominem ploy and I will try to believe it. Note howeverr the same posters did not even try to show where this 'heretic' got his facts wrong.
So then, let us now examine the Catholic Douay Rheims version of all the references I have mentioned in my posts and the three references the 'heretic' gave. 


3 Kings 16:31-33
[31] Nor was it enough for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nabat: but he also took to wife Jezabel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians. And he went, and served Baal [the sun god of Heliopolis], and adored him. [32] And he set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal, which he had built in Samaria, [33] And he planted a grove: and Achab did more to provoke the Lord the God of Israel, than all the kings of Israel that were before him.
 
4 Kings: 23:5-11
[4] And the king commanded Helcias the high priest, and the priests of the second order, and the doorkeepers, to cast out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels [ like the Obelisk] that had been made for Baal, and for the grove, and for all the host of heaven: and he burnt them without Jerusalem in the valley of Cedron, and he carried the ashes of them to Bethel
 
Wisdom 12, describes the pagans of the obelisks. 
[1] O how good and sweet is thy spirit, O Lord, in all things! [2] And therefore thou chastisest them that err, by little and little: and admonishest them, and speakest to them, concerning the things wherein they offend: that leaving their wickedness, they may believe in thee, O Lord. [3] For those ancient inhabitants of thy holy land, whom thou didst abhor, [4] Because they did works hateful to thee by their sorceries, and wicked sacrifices, [5] And those merciless murderers of their own children, and eaters of men's bowels, and devourers of blood from the midst of thy consecration,

Now let us see the Catholic version of the 'heretic's website. And remember, what the Scriptures say is the truth.

Douay Rheims on Exodus 23-24
[23] And my angel shall go before thee, and shall bring thee in unto the Amorrhite, and the Hethite, and the Pherezite, and the Chanaanite, and the Hevite, and the Jebusite, whom I will destroy. [24] Thou shalt not adore their gods, nor serve them. Thou shalt not do their works, but shalt destroy them, and break their statues. [25] And you shall serve the Lord your God, that I may bless your bread and your waters, and may take away sickness from the midst of thee.
 
Leviticus 26:1
[1] I am the Lord your God: you shall not make to yourselves any idol or graven thing, neither shall you erect pillars, nor set up a remarkable stone in your land, to adore it: for I am the Lord your God.' [The pillars here refer not to your ordinary pillar used by man in buildings throughout history. That would be rediculous. The pillars here are Pagan symbols of and to their false Gods.] [/url]
 
Deuteronomy 12: 3-4
[3] Overthrow their altars, and break down their statues, burn their groves with fire, and break their idols in pieces: destroy their names out of those places. [4] You shall not do so to the Lord your God: [url=http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=5&ch=12&l=5-#x]
 
This last quote is devistating when you think the popes, rather than destroy the very obelisk that stood in the centre of Heliopolis as ordered by God, but erected it in the very heart of Rome. but not only that, one pope got Bernini to actually mark out the heliocentric lines that surrounded it in Heliopolis, completing every detail of condemned Idol.

Interesting thread here.  I have a couple questions, which I hope don't come across as snarky. :)  It's a character flaw I'm trying to work on.

1) I can't help but notice that in one post you mention that the obelisks should be destroyed as former objects of pagan worship, yet you say you have no issue with pillars.  Why?

2) You quote scripture passages calling for the destruction of pagan objects of worship, yet have no objection to the Roman pantheon, a former temple, being converted into a church.  Why the distinction?

3) Where do you think the line should be drawn regarding destruction of pagan artifacts?  The Vatican museum has several Roman statues, including Apollo.  Obviously these items weren't worshipped or used during Mass, and several renaissance artists were able to study and learn from them.
-sent by howitzer via the breech.

God's love is manifest in the landscape as in a face.  - John Muir

I want creation to penetrate you with so much admiration that wherever you go, the least plant may bring you clear remembrance of the Creator.  A single plant, a blade of grass, or one speck of dust is sufficient to occupy all your intelligence in beholding the art with which it has been made  - Saint Basil

Heaven is under our feet, as well as over our heads. - Thoreau, Walden
[-] The following 1 user Likes Jeeter's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#68
(12-20-2017, 03:10 PM)cassini Wrote:  This last quote is devistating when you think the popes, rather than destroy the very obelisk that stood in the centre of Heliopolis as ordered by God, but erected it in the very heart of Rome. but not only that, one pope got Bernini to actually mark out the heliocentric lines that surrounded it in Heliopolis, completing every detail of condemned Idol.
So you can't address my point about Christ fulfilling the Old Testament and the fact that Holy Church interprets Scripture, and by erecting these monuments, has obviously interpreted these verses as no longer binding? Interesting.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#69
(12-20-2017, 03:25 PM)Jeeter Wrote:
(12-20-2017, 03:10 PM)cassini Wrote:
(12-20-2017, 02:32 AM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: I think this is a most productive and fruitful conversation, but can we please do without the snark?

We are brothers and sisters in Christ seeking the truth after all.

It's quite understandable to have questions about these things.

Let's continue to help each other discern the truth in love, okay?   :heart: :)

Interesting thread here.  I have a couple questions, which I hope don't come across as snarky. :)  It's a character flaw I'm trying to work on.

1) I can't help but notice that in one post you mention that the obelisks should be destroyed as former objects of pagan worship, yet you say you have no issue with pillars.  Why?

2) You quote scripture passages calling for the destruction of pagan objects of worship, yet have no objection to the Roman pantheon, a former temple, being converted into a church.  Why the distinction?

3) Where do you think the line should be drawn regarding destruction of pagan artifacts?  The Vatican museum has several Roman statues, including Apollo.  Obviously these items weren't worshipped or used during Mass, and several renaissance artists were able to study and learn from them.

1) A pillar is not a condemned pagan symbol. As I reasoned above, the term pillar obviously refered to pagan symbols and not simpler pillars. If pillars were condemned then St John Bosco's two pillars would hardly have represented the following:
'On the top of one, there is the statue of the Immaculate Virgin, from whose feet hangs a large placard with this inscription: Auxilium Christianorum—“Help of Christians”; on the other, which is much higher and bigger, stands a Host of great size proportionate to the column and beneath is another placard with the words: Salus Credentium—Salvation of the Faithful.'

2) 'In the year AD 312 something very important happened, something which should change Roman religion forever. The emperor Constantine the Great said he had had a sign from the god of the Christians in a dream in the night before he had an important battle. Emperor Constantine won this battle and thereafter showed his gratitude to the Christian God by turning his entire empire over to this new religion.' The Roman Pantheon made a converson so to speak. No doubt all the pagan artefacts were removed leaving just the building that was turned into a church. I have no problem with this, nor with Protestant churches being consecrated to Catholic churches.

3) Pagan artefacts in Vatican museum? No doubt these were the pagans abandoned after Rome became Christian, so as museum pieces they symbolise nothing but abandoned pagan pieces. No such abandoning happened with the obelisk paganism, indeed it still exists under the guise of 'science.' 

 The obelisk and heliocentric markings in St Peter's square now represent contempt for of the anti-heliocentric decree of Pope Paul V who defined its symbolism it as formal heresy contrary to the Scriptures and all the Fathers.

And if anyone thinks it ends there they are mistaken. The way popes and churchmen fell for the heliocentrism of the pagan gods depicted in St Peter's Square would bring shame on Catholicism, and the way they wormed their way out of that 1616 decree and into the Modernism that has destroyed the Catholic Church since 1835 would never have been believed had the records been kept hidden in the secret archives. But the truth outs, it always does.

   
Reply
#70
(12-20-2017, 03:40 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(12-20-2017, 03:10 PM)cassini Wrote:  This last quote is devistating when you think the popes, rather than destroy the very obelisk that stood in the centre of Heliopolis as ordered by God, but erected it in the very heart of Rome. but not only that, one pope got Bernini to actually mark out the heliocentric lines that surrounded it in Heliopolis, completing every detail of condemned Idol.
So you can't address my point about Christ fulfilling the Old Testament and the fact that Holy Church interprets Scripture, and by erecting these monuments, has obviously interpreted these verses as no longer binding? Interesting.

The condemnations of the Father in the Old Testament are no longer binding. Roll on Sodom and Gomorrah, you have been liberated by Christ, your condemnation is no longer binding.

Are you serious?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)