Please forgive if this comes off as a foolish question.

reddogs · Feb 22, 2008

Pythons said:
That isn't true reddog, you may see something and not understand it. If you would be so kind as to cite some examples of Catholic Teachiing from Scripture / Tradition to support this I would certainly look at it.

Lets start with the basics, the “Assumption” of Mary...

"...This dogma (a teaching of the Church that requires belief on the part of all Catholics) states that Mary, body and soul, was taken by God into heaven as the course of her life on earth was completed. Pope Pius XII proclaimed this event to be a doctrine on November 1, 1950. Some wonder whether there is anything in the Bible about this event since they cannot recall the word “Assumption” being used. As a matter of fact, there is no such word “Assumption” in the Scriptures. And for some people, unless the exact word is in the Bible, it can’t really be called God’s revealed truth.
However, what we have in the Church, besides the Scriptures, is the Sacred and Spirit-inspired Tradition of the Church regarding some of its most basic teachings. The doctrine of Mary’s Assumption is based on what is called a theological conclusion because of other indirect references to it in the Scriptures. For example, at the Annunciation (celebrated March 25th, nine months before December 25th), the Angel Gabriel declared Mary to be “full of Grace” and “God’s highly favored daughter” (Lk 1:28). Mary conceived Jesus, the Son of God, by the power of the Holy Spirit as a consequence of accepting God’s plan for her. Further, when Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth, who herself was pregnant with John the Baptist, she addressed Mary with the words, “Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Lk 1:42). All these biblical statements led the Church to conclude that because of her role as Mother of the Messiah, Mary would be preserved from original sin and its consequences. Her freedom from sin was accomplished by reason of Jesus’ foreseen redemptive death on the cross. As such it would not be possible for Mary, whose womb carried the Son of God, to suffer the corruption of the body that all people experience after death..."

http://www.americancatholic.org/e-News/FriarJack/fj081304.asp

RND · Feb 22, 2008

Pythons said:
That isn't true reddog...

What isn't true? His cite?

"From the very beginning, and before time began, the eternal Father chose and prepared for his only-begotten Son a Mother in whom the Son of God would become incarnate and from whom, in the blessed fullness of time, he would be born into this world."

Is there any scripture that at all makes this statement clear and unambiguous?

Pythons · Feb 22, 2008

What isn't true? His cite?

"From the very beginning, and before time began, the eternal Father chose and prepared for his only-begotten Son a Mother in whom the Son of God would become incarnate and from whom, in the blessed fullness of time, he would be born into this world."

Is there any scripture that at all makes this statement clear and unambiguous?

Yes RND, his cite does not demonstrate his previous assertion that the Catholic Church has elevated Mary above Christ and Im fairly sure we will be waiting a very, very long time before we see such a cite. But you know this.

Lets look at the quote here a little bit and compare it with

Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was MANIFEST in these last times for you. 1 Peter 1,20

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the LAMB SLAIN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. Apoc 13,8

Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, my council shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure. Isa 46,10

Yes guys, the Catholic Church indeed says that prior to Adam and Eves creation and obviously the foundation of the world that God know what, when, where and how the WHOLE PLAN of SALVATION was going to EXACTLY happen and if you claim to be Bible believing then that would necessitate God knew EXACTLY what MOTHER .

RND · Feb 22, 2008

Pythons said:
Yes RND, his cite does not demonstrate his previous assertion that the Catholic Church has elevated Mary above Christ and I’m fairly sure we will be waiting a very, very long time before we see such a cite. But you know this.

Click to expand...

Was RD's cite untrue? I think that's what I asked. RD's quote was this:

Well lets just say the Catholic Church elevates Mary ceaselessly above Jesus Christ, its almost as if He is a afterthought.......

Click to expand...

I agree that his cite does indeed points this out. All of us were chosen at some point in time to be a part of the plan of salvation.

But RD's point was that Mary is elevated by the RCC above Jesus. My question was in relation to the context of the text I quoted that seems to "elevate Mary above Christ." Her veneration in these two sentances is what I was referring to.

Let’s look at the quote here a little bit and compare it with…

“Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was “MANIFEST” in these last times for you”. 1 Peter 1,20

“And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the LAMB SLAIN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD”.
Apoc 13,8

“Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, my council shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure”. Isa 46,10

Yes guys, the Catholic Church indeed says that prior to Adam and Eve’s creation and obviously the “foundation of the world” that God know what, when, where and how the WHOLE PLAN of SALVATION was going to EXACTLY happen and if you claim to be Bible believing then that would necessitate God knew EXACTLY what MOTHER.

Click to expand...

We are all part of God's plan of salvation and all of us have roles that we play in the part of that salvation. Mary gave birth to Jesus. But that doesn't elevate her above anyone else that has played a role, no matter how big or small, in the plan of salvation. When you disagree with this point RD's point will be proven.

What Biblical evidence is there that the mother of Christ was chosen when the Catholic church asserts she was chosen? None of the verses you quoted suggest that Mary (or you and I for that matter), was with God and Jesus before the foundation of the world.

God knew His plan of salvation before the foundation of the world, that is not to say He knew every participant in the plan of salvation.

The assertion by the church seems to suggest that Mary had always existed with Christ and with God. That was the of the discussion I was making.

Pythons · Feb 25, 2008

quote error

Pythons · Feb 25, 2008

RND said:
Was RD's cite untrue? I think that's what I asked. RD's quote was this

If you think RDs citation demonstrates that the Catholic Church always elevates Mary above Christ I can easily see why you also believe in things like the human Christ and the Divine Christ. Im fairly certain The SDAs reading this thread do as well. Given your wording I would have expected you would produce something in your view that would at the very least implicitly imply Mary was always elevated above Christ. As it stands, the last two sentences ascribe Marys freedom of sin to Jesus redemptive death. A theme that will be common in everything related to the IC.

[ quote=RND;43836012] We are all part of God's plan of salvation and all of us have roles that we play in the part of that salvation. Mary gave birth to Jesus. But that doesn't elevate her above anyone else that has played a role, no matter how big or small, in the plan of salvation. When you disagree with this point RD's point will be proven. [/quote]

Ok, I take it that youve moved on from always elevated above Christ to elevated above anyone else. Everyone has a place in the plan of Salvation and if you insist in establish a pecking order I refer you to 1 Corinthians chapter 12 that teaches that there are different kinds of service but the same Lord and that there are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all people. Your issue appears that as the foot you are jealous of the hand. In case you didnt catch this, Im disagreeing with your point. Or in a different way, if you accept SDAism to be the true path and by your preaching SDA doctrines manage to convince a person to go all the way and join the Church then you, RND in the flesh, have a place in the plan of salvation (important to note I do not think SDA doctrine is correct). Now, are you going to say that you are the foundation because everyone is the same? Foolish sounding, isnt it. Oh, BTW, when you disagree Scripture my point will be proven.

RND said:
The assertion by the church seems to suggest that Mary had always existed with Christ and with God. That was the of the discussion I was making.

The Catholic Church asserts nothing of the kind nor ever has. Seems to suggest is a longs ways away from the truth.

RND · Feb 25, 2008

Pythons said:
If you think RD’s citation demonstrates that the Catholic Church always elevates Mary above Christ I can easily see why you also believe in things like “the human Christ and the Divine Christ”. I’m fairly certain The SDA’s reading this thread do as well. Given your wording I would have expected you would produce something in your view that would at the very least implicitly imply Mary was always elevated above Christ. As it stands, the last two sentences ascribe Mary’s freedom of sin to Jesus’ redemptive death. A theme that will be common in everything related to the IC.

I asked if RD's cite was untrue, that's all. Is the tidbit of information provide by RC true or untrue?

RND said:
We are all part of God's plan of salvation and all of us have roles that we play in the part of that salvation. Mary gave birth to Jesus. But that doesn't elevate her above anyone else that has played a role, no matter how big or small, in the plan of salvation. When you disagree with this point RD's point will be proven.

Ok, I take it that you’ve moved on from “always elevated above Christ” to elevated above anyone else. Everyone has a place in the plan of Salvation and if you insist in establish a pecking order I refer you to 1 Corinthians chapter 12 that teaches that there are different kinds of service but the same Lord and that there are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all people. Your issue appears that as the foot you are jealous of the hand. In case you didn’t catch this, I’m disagreeing with your point.

See Matthew 20:1-16

Or in a different way, if you accept SDAism to be the true path and by your preaching SDA doctrines manage to convince a person to go all the way and join the Church then you, RND in the flesh, have a place in the plan of salvation (important to note I do not think SDA doctrine is correct). Now, are you going to say that you are the foundation because everyone is the same? Foolish sounding, isn’t it. Oh, BTW, when you disagree Scripture my point will be proven.

John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

I believe the Gospel and Words of Jesus are the only way to salvation, not the SDA church. This is much different than what the Catholic church teaches.

"Do not hold aloof from the Church; for nothing is stronger than the Church. The Church is thy hope, thy salvation, thy refuge." - St. John Chrysostom, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series I, Vol. IX, Introduction to the Two Homilies on Eutropius, Homily II.

"He who thinks he can remain a Christian by his own efforts, deserting the institutional bonds of the visible hierarchical Church, is deceiving himself. The fact remains that God established His Church as a bridge over which we must pass, leading from our unhappy lot to His salvation." - Pope Paul VI, Mystici Corporis, PTC:1022 ff. 59, (quoted in Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 4: "The Book of Christians", Chapter 1: "Only Catholics Can Be Christians").

"[It is error to believe that] Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." - Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors), Issued in 1864, Section III, Indifferentism, Latitudinarianism, #15.

What I believe about the SDA church is they do not teach error the way ALL other denominations, especially the Catholic church does.

The Catholic Church asserts nothing of the kind nor ever has. “Seems to suggest” is a longs ways away from the truth.

Well, if they came right out and said it it would be seen as the hertical statement it really is, but when vield and coutched in piety it is none the less heretical.

"...From the very beginning, and before time began, the eternal Father chose and prepared for his only-begotten Son a Mother in whom the Son of God would become incarnate and from whom, in the blessed fullness of time, he would be born into this world.

The Son was not begotten until He was born on Earth. There are no scriptures that reveal Jesus was "begotten" in Heaven but rather it is simply that God (Jesus) was always with God. See John 1 1:4.

If we break down the statement from above it is saying , "Before time began God chose and prepared Jesus' mother." There again is no scriptural evidence that would support when Mary was made, or when she was chosen. If Mary was a created being in Heaven before time began she would obviously have come before either Adam and Eve. Again, nothing in scripture supports such a conclusion.

1 Cor 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit.

Pythons · Feb 26, 2008

RND said:
I asked if RD's cite was untrue, that's all. Is the tidbit of information provide by RC true or untrue?

It’s true that Mary was “assumed” into heaven.

Matthew 20, 1- 16 is referring to the now historical fact that the heathen would accept Christianity before the Jews would. Example,

“Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the gentiles”. Act 13,46

Those who were last would be first.

RND said:
John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

I believe the Gospel and Words of Jesus are the only way to salvation, not the SDA church. This is much different than what the Catholic church teaches.

"Do not hold aloof from the Church; for nothing is stronger than the Church. The Church is thy hope, thy salvation, thy refuge." - St. John Chrysostom, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series I, Vol. IX, Introduction to the Two Homilies on Eutropius, Homily II.

"He who thinks he can remain a Christian by his own efforts, deserting the institutional bonds of the visible hierarchical Church, is deceiving himself. The fact remains that God established His Church as a bridge over which we must pass, leading from our unhappy lot to His salvation." - Pope Paul VI, Mystici Corporis, PTC:1022 ff. 59, (quoted in Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 4: "The Book of Christians", Chapter 1: "Only Catholics Can Be Christians").

"[It is error to believe that] Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." - Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors), Issued in 1864, Section III, Indifferentism, Latitudinarianism, #15.

I’m in 100% agreement with John 14,6 and all the quotes you listed are in 100% agreement with it as well.
Here is where your practical application does not match what you say you believe. Ellen said the SDA Church had authority from God to correctly transmit Bible doctrine and to maintain it’s purity , even that whatever discipline or bulls the GC of the SDA Church did or issued on earth was RAFIFIED in heaven (this is straight out of your church manual). The SDA Church believes that she has been given authority from God to interpret the Bible “correctly” and make sure the individuals SDA’s are feed “correct doctrine”and logic demands that if that is what’s believed then Adventists have a Magisterium. You say that is much different than the Catholic Church teaching, I’m not buying it, it’s Roman Catholic to the very core of it’s being.

As far as your different quotes that the say the Church is what transmit the correct knowledge of God, of course they say that. Remember, it’s the Church that reflects the manifold wisdom of God and the Church that is the pillar and foundation of the truth which is exactly what Ellen White said it was in quotes from your own church manual. I didn’t disagree with any of Ellen’s ideas about the authority that the Church has, just that she has the WRONG church inheriting it. 2000 plus years to late.

“His intent was that now, THROUGH THE CHURCH, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities of the in the heavenly realms”. Eph 3,10

“If I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the Church of the living God, WHICH IS THE PILLAR AND FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH.” 1 Tim 3,15

RND said:
What I believe about the SDA church is they do not teach error the way ALL other denominations, especially the Catholic church does.

Of course you do, you exercise your own private interpretation and judgement against the Catholic Church because your own Church teaches you that the Magisterium of the Seventh-day Adventist Church has correctly transmitted the truths of Sacred Scripture. You don’t think the SDA doctrines are in error because you agree with them. If I’m allowed to remain here I intend to put that belief to the test.

RND said:
Well, if they came right out and said it it would be seen as the hertical statement it really is, but when vield and coutched in piety it is none the less heretical.

That’s how the SDA Church has instructed you to see it.

RND said:
The Son was not begotten until He was born on Earth. There are no scriptures that reveal Jesus was "begotten" in Heaven but rather it is simply that God (Jesus) was always with God. See John 1 1:4.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” Jn 1

“God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ”. (Fundamental belief #4 of 28 of the SDA Church)

God the eternal Son BECAME incarnate in Jesus Christ According to the Magisterium of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and that necessitates that the Son (the Word) was always the Son exactly like the Scriptures say.

God the Father is not the cause of the Son because the Word was with the Father and the Word was God. In other words, the 2nd Person of the Trinity, or Godhead as you prefer to call it has never had a beginning because He always existed. In the Creed, us Bible illiterate Catholics say “begotten NOT made” because God the Father did not “create” or “make” the Word because God is the Being who cannot NOT exist. “The word” in human understanding is a thing that is generated from the person doing the talking so when the Bible says “The Word” was with God in the beginning and the Word was God then the 2nd Person of the Trinity was the Son from an eternal generation. This must be where you get the whole “the human Christ and the Divine Chirst thing? An issue we certainly need to revisit.

RND said:
If we break down the statement from above it is saying , "Before time began God chose and prepared Jesus' mother." There again is no scriptural evidence that would support when Mary was made, or when she was chosen. If Mary was a created being in Heaven before time began she would obviously have come before either Adam and Eve. Again, nothing in scripture supports such a conclusion.

Mary was a Child of Adam who was created by her human father. Read the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 1 and notice that the term “begat” is used all the way through until it reaches “And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ”.

As the Scriptures have already informed you, the Plan of Salvation was already worked out before the foundation of the world. God knew to the second when Mary was going to be born. It sounds like you would like to talk about the IC. We can always go into that later after we fully discuss the Godhead (Trinity)

“Then said Mary unto the Angel, how shall this be, seeing I know not a man”?

“Which he had promised before, by his prophets, in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was MADE TO HIM OF THE SEED OF DAVID, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH”. Romans 1

Mary is “of the house of David” because Joseph DID NOT CONTRIBUTE or “begat” Jesus as Matthew plainly states. Mary was “conceived” by her BIOLOGICAL Parents, according to the flesh and as she “would be” the Mother of God she, as a special Grace from God was preserved from the stain of original sin which is why the Angel Gabriel uses KECHARITOMENE in Luke 1:28 which shows a completeness with a permanent result.

Mary was born a Child of Adam so stop attempting to claim she was floating around with the trinity until her time to appear on earth was due. Prepared simply means what the Scriptures openly say, that the plan of salvation was PREPARED prior to the foundations of the earth.

RND said:
1 Cor 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit.

Has nothing to do with Mary and everything to do with Christ contrasted with Adam. You trying to take a run at Mary because she is also described as the new Eve?
Let’s just stick with sorting out why you believe the way you do about the Godhead and the 2nd Person of the Godhead before we jump all over the map of historic Christian Doctrine.

RND · Feb 26, 2008

Pythons said:
Its true that Mary was assumed into heaven.

Mathew 20:1-16 says nothing about asumption, the assumption of Mary, or anyone else for that matter.

Is there any specific scripture that you can produce that unequivocally states Mary was or would be assumed before anyone?

Matthew 20, 1- 16 is referring to the now historical fact that the heathen would accept Christianity before the Jews would. Example,

Sure, but it doesn't say anything about being taken into magically into Heaven.

Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the gentiles. Act 13,46

Those who were last would be first.

Again, nothing here about "assumption."

Im in 100% agreement with John 14,6 and all the quotes you listed are in 100% agreement with it as well.

2 Ti 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Doesn't seem to indicate performing "blind obedience" to a mortal man and fallable church.

Here is where your practical application does not match what you say you believe. Ellen said the SDA Church had authority from God to correctly transmit Bible doctrine and to maintain its purity , even that whatever discipline or bulls the GC of the SDA Church did or issued on earth was RAFIFIED in heaven (this is straight out of your church manual). The SDA Church believes that she has been given authority from God to interpret the Bible correctly and make sure the individuals SDAs are feed correct doctrineand logic demands that if that is whats believed then Adventists have a Magisterium. You say that is much different than the Catholic Church teaching, Im not buying it, its Roman Catholic to the very core of its being.

Again, you are confusing the usage of a church manual that states how to run a church with indoctrination.

As an Adventist I am free to make up my own mind.

As far as your different quotes that the say the Church is what transmit the correct knowledge of God, of course they say that. Remember, its the Church that reflects the manifold wisdom of God and the Church that is the pillar and foundation of the truth which is exactly what Ellen White said it was in quotes from your own church manual. I didnt disagree with any of Ellens ideas about the authority that the Church has, just that she has the WRONG church inheriting it. 2000 plus years to late.

Again, I as a Christian, am free to make up my own mind as to what I think and what I understand about scripture. No one in my church, at anytime, has told what to think or how to think.

Adventist's leave that to the Catholics.

His intent was that now, THROUGH THE CHURCH, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities of the in the heavenly realms. Eph 3,10

You bet. A church isn't a building or a set of mortal rulers that claim ownership over the thoughts and understanding of the masses. A church is made up of the "called out" believers.

Whether I belonged with the SDA church or belonged to no church I would still be my own man, thinking about scripture from what I have learned, not from what some guy in a fish hat told me to think.

If I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in Gods household, which is the Church of the living God, WHICH IS THE PILLAR AND FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH. 1 Tim 3,15

Without the individual members of the church there is no foundation for the building.

Of course you do, you exercise your own private interpretation and judgement against the Catholic Church because your own Church teaches you that the Magisterium of the Seventh-day Adventist Church has correctly transmitted the truths of Sacred Scripture. You dont think the SDA doctrines are in error because you agree with them. If Im allowed to remain here I intend to put that belief to the test.

No, I actually believe what I do about the Catholic church from the revelations I received at a prophecy seminar about a month or two after I began attending the SDA Church.

No one at the GC contacted me.

Thats how the SDA Church has instructed you to see it.

No, that how I see it and have seen it for quite a while.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Jn 1

Click to expand...

God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. (Fundamental belief #4 of 28 of the SDA Church)

God the eternal Son BECAME incarnate in Jesus Christ According to the Magisterium of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and that necessitates that the Son (the Word) was always the Son exactly like the Scriptures say.

That's exactly what I said. Jesus became the begotten Son when He was born on earth. Before that, He had always existed with the Father. He was not born in Heaven but on earth.

God the Father is not the cause of the Son because the Word was with the Father and the Word was God. In other words, the 2nd Person of the Trinity, or Godhead as you prefer to call it has never had a beginning because He always existed. In the Creed, us Bible illiterate Catholics say begotten NOT made because God the Father did not create or make the Word because God is the Being who cannot NOT exist. The word in human understanding is a thing that is generated from the person doing the talking so when the Bible says The Word was with God in the beginning and the Word was God then the 2nd Person of the Trinity was the Son from an eternal generation. This must be where you get the whole the human Christ and the Divine Chirst thing? An issue we certainly need to revisit.

Jesus wasn't born in heaven, He was always with the Father. The great "I AM."

There is no issue here unless of course you believe like the Mormons and the Jehovah Witnesses.

Mary was a Child of Adam who was created by her human father. Read the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 1 and notice that the term begat is used all the way through until it reaches And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

We're all children of Adam or haven't you heard? What point are you trying to make here? Mary was a regular human being just like the rest of us.

As the Scriptures have already informed you, the Plan of Salvation was already worked out before the foundation of the world. God knew to the second when Mary was going to be born. It sounds like you would like to talk about the IC. We can always go into that later after we fully discuss the Godhead (Trinity)

Just because God knew the plan of salvation ahead of time and knew the characters he planned to carry it out, did not guarantee that it would work out exactly as planned. Because to suggest otherwise is to suggest that we are all just mere robots, wind-up toys that God uses for palor trick and fun n' games.

Bottom line is that just because God knew all the things He knew does not mean that Mary was created and lived in heaven with Jesus and that she was born on earth before Jesus was.

To believe that would be to have a firm grasp on Mormonism and Watchtower Society teqaching.

Then said Mary unto the Angel, how shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Yes, I know the story. Notice Mary didn't say anything about knowing all of this before hand?

Which he had promised before, by his prophets, in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was MADE TO HIM OF THE SEED OF DAVID, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH. Romans 1

Promised to whom? Mary?

Mary is of the house of David because Joseph DID NOT CONTRIBUTE or begat Jesus as Matthew plainly states. Mary was conceived by her BIOLOGICAL Parents, according to the flesh and as she would be the Mother of God she, as a special Grace from God was preserved from the stain of original sin which is why the Angel Gabriel uses KECHARITOMENE in Luke 1:28 which shows a completeness with a permanent result.

Actually, Mary represents the church because her lineage was from the Levites. Mary was of the House of Levi. This way Jesus was represented as King and Preist.

Mary was born a Child of Adam so stop attempting to claim she was floating around with the trinity until her time to appear on earth was due. Prepared simply means what the Scriptures openly say, that the plan of salvation was PREPARED prior to the foundations of the earth.

We're all children of Adam and Mary WAS NOT in heaven with Jesus and God before she came to earth.

Has nothing to do with Mary and everything to do with Christ contrasted with Adam. You trying to take a run at Mary because she is also described as the new Eve?

That's my point. It has nothing to do with Mary. It has everything to do with Christ. Mary, BTW is not the "new Eve." because Eve was not Adam's mother. Eve was Adams wife. Mary was Jesus' mother.

Lets just stick with sorting out why you believe the way you do about the Godhead and the 2nd Person of the Godhead before we jump all over the map of historic Christian Doctrine.

Hey, suit yourself. I'm just using scripture to elevate Jesus and minimize Mary.....just the way she would have wanted it.

Pythons · Feb 27, 2008

RND said:
Mathew 20:1-16 says nothing about asumption, the assumption of Mary, or anyone else for that matter.

Is there any specific scripture that you can produce that unequivocally states Mary was or would be assumed before anyone?

Your exact words were if “RD’s cite was untrue, that’s all”. You then offer Matt 20,1-16 as a rebuttal to my observation that you had obviously moved away from saying the Catholic Church always elevates Mary over Christ to saying that the Catholic Church elevates Mary over anyone else.
RESOLVED: The Catholic Church does not elevate Mary over Christ.
You then attempt a Jedi mind trick and try to talk about your concerns with the Immaculate Conception / assumption and your odd notion that Mary somehow pre-existed with the Trinity and even more odd, your insistence that Catholicism teaches it.

RND said:
2 Ti 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Doesn't seem to indicate performing "blind obedience" to a mortal man and fallable church.

Hardly blind obedience and certainly not a fallible Church but as the IC, this can be addressed after we are done with the subject of this thread.

RND said:
Again, you are confusing the usage of a church manual that states how to run a church with indoctrination.

As an Adventist I am free to make up my own mind.

The SDA Church manual has the 28 fundamental beliefs, history of the church, Sabbath keeping and a section dealing with nearly every common aspect of a person’s life. It’s the SDA version of the Catholic Code of Canon Law and the Catechism, COMBINED.

The SDA church manual is explicit in that it reflects what the individual Seventh-day Adventist is to believe and backs Adventist General Conference Authority with Quotes used by 2000 plus years of Catholic history. The statement you made in relation to this fact shows with great velocity just how catholic your church is in it’s theology and how embarrassed or horrified you are to admit it.

RND said:
Again, I as a Christian, am free to make up my own mind as to what I think and what I understand about scripture. No one in my church, at anytime, has told what to think or how to think.

Adventist's leave that to the Catholics.

Yeah, provided your courage lacks their convictions and that would mean you didn’t really believe them that much wouldn’t it. I wonder if that was what Victor (founder of the Davidians), the Brinsmead Brothers and Desmond Ford thought prior to being BM’d out of church membership. What you just said in so many words is that you believe the SDA Church but by golly if you did happen to find something Amis you can make your own mind up and reform Church doctrine because it doesn’t jive with the Scriptures or just leave and start your very own Church that teaches the Bible truth.

RND said:
You bet. A church isn't a building or a set of mortal rulers that claim ownership over the thoughts and understanding of the masses. A church is made up of the "called out" believers.

Whether I belonged with the SDA church or belonged to no church I would still be my own man, thinking about scripture from what I have learned, not from what some guy in a fish hat told me to think.

You mean “true believers” and to be a true believer you must be first told the truth then believe it. Otherwise the Scriptures warnings about false prophets and doctrines of demons would be so much wasted paper. Your argument on this one sounds exactly like Korah’s and we know what happened to him and those who had a like mind.

RND said:
Without the individual members of the church there is no foundation for the building.

“Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, BUILT ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES AND PROPHETS, WITH CHRIST JESUS HIMSELF BEING THE CHIEF CORNERSTONE”. Eph 2,19

According to Scripture, the household of God is “The Church” and its foundation is the Apostles and Prophets with Christ being the Chief cornerstone. Matthew 16:18 means exactly what Catholicism has always said it did. Christ did build His Church on the Apostles and they transmitted true doctrines because the Holy Spirit guided them into the truth. This is proven in Acts 15 and every subsequent Council of the Catholic Church and I’m looking forward to sharing these things with you after we complete the Trinity discussion and the Person of the Son, our Lord and God Jesus Christ. Believe me, after we are in agreement on the Trinity and the incarnation of the Son, everything will fall into place like dominoes.

RND said:
No, I actually believe what I do about the Catholic church from the revelations I received at a prophecy seminar about a month or two after I began attending the SDA Church.

No one at the GC contacted me.

Certainly you do. I’ve attended two Revelation seminars hosted by the Seventh-day Adventists in Seattle and hope to be able to discuss this very important issue with you after we clear this thread. I hope you know we are not done with the Trinity yet.

RND said:
That's exactly what I said. Jesus became the begotten Son when He was born on earth. Before that, He had always existed with the Father. He was not born in Heaven but on earth.

I know that is what you said, that’s why I brought it to your attention. The Seventh-day Adventist Church Fundamental belief # 4 states that,

“God the ETERNAL SON” ----B E C A M E----- incarnate in Jesus Christ”

The 2nd Person of the Godhead has “always” been the Son and that is why Catholicism calls Jesus the Son from eternal generation and that is why the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists call him God the “eternal Son” before he was INCARNATED.
You keep insisting that the Son was not begotten until He was born on earth and I keep telling you that’s impossible because we know that

A) From the Scriptures that the Son is begotten from an eternal generation from the Father.

B) That God cannot not exist

C) Genealogy in Matthew says Jesus is from the house of David via Mary because Joseph DIDN’T BEGAT Jesus.

D) God didn’t create Jesus because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

There is absolutely no way out of this RND, you are in violation of SDA fundamental doctrine and this misunderstanding is the most serious of all misunderstandings, we are going to stop talking about Mary right now until this is cleared up because the Trinity is what everything hinges on in Christianity, everything!

I am so sorry I’ve been sarcastic at times in this thread and I hope you will forgive me for that and stick this through until we are done. At this point Mary is a side issue and not worth discussing. She will still be fine when we get to her so lets stay right here.

I’m not certain about Adventism but in Catholicism the Trinity “is” everything. With you saying Jesus was begotten is the same thing as telling me Jesus was created?

Jon0388g · Feb 27, 2008

Pythons said:
Im not certain about Adventism but in Catholicism the Trinity is everything. With you saying Jesus was begotten is the same thing as telling me Jesus was created?

Hi Pythons,

Sorry to interrupt, but I was just wondering: You seem to know quite a lot about the Adventist Church, are you a former-Adventist, or just well researched?

This isn't a loaded question btw.

Jon

reddogs · Feb 27, 2008

Pythons said:
Your exact words were if “RD’s cite was untrue, that’s all”. You then offer Matt 20,1-16 as a rebuttal to my observation that you had obviously moved away from saying the Catholic Church always elevates Mary over Christ to saying that the Catholic Church elevates Mary over anyone else.
RESOLVED: The Catholic Church does not elevate Mary over Christ.
You then attempt a Jedi mind trick and try to talk about your concerns with the Immaculate Conception / assumption and your odd notion that Mary somehow pre-existed with the Trinity and even more odd, your insistence that Catholicism teaches it.

Hardly blind obedience and certainly not a fallible Church but as the IC, this can be addressed after we are done with the subject of this thread.

The SDA Church manual has the 28 fundamental beliefs, history of the church, Sabbath keeping and a section dealing with nearly every common aspect of a person’s life. It’s the SDA version of the Catholic Code of Canon Law and the Catechism, COMBINED.

The SDA church manual is explicit in that it reflects what the individual Seventh-day Adventist is to believe and backs Adventist General Conference Authority with Quotes used by 2000 plus years of Catholic history. The statement you made in relation to this fact shows with great velocity just how catholic your church is in it’s theology and how embarrassed or horrified you are to admit it.

Yeah, provided your courage lacks their convictions and that would mean you didn’t really believe them that much wouldn’t it. I wonder if that was what Victor (founder of the Davidians), the Brinsmead Brothers and Desmond Ford thought prior to being BM’d out of church membership. What you just said in so many words is that you believe the SDA Church but by golly if you did happen to find something Amis you can make your own mind up and reform Church doctrine because it doesn’t jive with the Scriptures or just leave and start your very own Church that teaches the Bible truth.

You mean “true believers” and to be a true believer you must be first told the truth then believe it. Otherwise the Scriptures warnings about false prophets and doctrines of demons would be so much wasted paper. Your argument on this one sounds exactly like Korah’s and we know what happened to him and those who had a like mind.

“Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, BUILT ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES AND PROPHETS, WITH CHRIST JESUS HIMSELF BEING THE CHIEF CORNERSTONE”. Eph 2,19

According to Scripture, the household of God is “The Church” and its foundation is the Apostles and Prophets with Christ being the Chief cornerstone. Matthew 16:18 means exactly what Catholicism has always said it did. Christ did build His Church on the Apostles and they transmitted true doctrines because the Holy Spirit guided them into the truth. This is proven in Acts 15 and every subsequent Council of the Catholic Church and I’m looking forward to sharing these things with you after we complete the Trinity discussion and the Person of the Son, our Lord and God Jesus Christ. Believe me, after we are in agreement on the Trinity and the incarnation of the Son, everything will fall into place like dominoes.

Certainly you do. I’ve attended two Revelation seminars hosted by the Seventh-day Adventists in Seattle and hope to be able to discuss this very important issue with you after we clear this thread. I hope you know we are not done with the Trinity yet.

I know that is what you said, that’s why I brought it to your attention. The Seventh-day Adventist Church Fundamental belief # 4 states that,

“God the ETERNAL SON” ----B E C A M E----- incarnate in Jesus Christ”

The 2nd Person of the Godhead has “always” been the Son and that is why Catholicism calls Jesus the Son from eternal generation and that is why the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists call him God the “eternal Son” before he was INCARNATED.
You keep insisting that the Son was not begotten until He was born on earth and I keep telling you that’s impossible because we know that

A) From the Scriptures that the Son is begotten from an eternal generation from the Father.

B) That God cannot not exist

C) Genealogy in Matthew says Jesus is from the house of David via Mary because Joseph DIDN’T BEGAT Jesus.

D) God didn’t create Jesus because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

There is absolutely no way out of this RND, you are in violation of SDA fundamental doctrine and this misunderstanding is the most serious of all misunderstandings, we are going to stop talking about Mary right now until this is cleared up because the Trinity is what everything hinges on in Christianity, everything!

I am so sorry I’ve been sarcastic at times in this thread and I hope you will forgive me for that and stick this through until we are done. At this point Mary is a side issue and not worth discussing. She will still be fine when we get to her so lets stay right here.

I’m not certain about Adventism but in Catholicism the Trinity “is” everything. With you saying Jesus was begotten is the same thing as telling me Jesus was created?

Lots of statements of 'you are this or that' but not much else of substance my brother.......

RND · Feb 27, 2008

Pythons said:
I hope you know we are not done with the Trinity yet.

That may be, there will be plebty of more discussions regarding the Godhead, but as for me continuing this conversation with you, I will gladly bow out at this time.

I have play ring-around-the-rosary enough at this point and I'm not to keen with your tone and attacks.

You seem to have come to our thread with a specific purpose. I will leave you to them and I will continue to believe what I believe ..editted..

Revelation 17:4 & 5
4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: 5 And upon her forehead [was] a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Pythons · Feb 27, 2008

Not a former Adventist but thanks to the volume of used book stores in Seattle I've got several EGW books, QOD and have been interested in Theology for years. I'm a just a regular guy I guess who reads and thinks about this stuff alot. Several years ago I was on a Catholic debate team.

If RND believes Jesus was not begotten until He was born on earth then does that not violate established SDA belief?

I quoted directly from the General Conference Website and used Sacred Scriptures as my reasoning for saying he was in violation so I'm not sure what other "substance" you could expect from me. I would love to use Catholic Quotes on this but I know RND would not accept that so I have to use SDA quotes and Scripture.

I'll take a pointer

reddogs · Feb 27, 2008

Pythons said:
Not a former Adventist but thanks to the volume of used book stores in Seattle I've got several EGW books, QOD and have been interested in Theology for years. I'm a just a regular guy I guess who reads and thinks about this stuff alot. Several years ago I was on a Catholic debate team.

If RND believes Jesus was not begotten until He was born on earth then does that not violate established SDA belief?

I quoted directly from the General Conference Website and used Sacred Scriptures as my reasoning for saying he was in violation so I'm not sure what other "substance" you could expect from me. I would love to use Catholic Quotes on this but I know RND would not accept that so I have to use SDA quotes and Scripture.

I'll take a pointer

You debate well, but thats not what being a Christian is all about or Christ would not have kept silent when he was questioned in front of the learned Jewish teachers, scribes and priests.

Pythons · Feb 27, 2008

reddogs said:
You debate well, but thats not what being a Christian is all about or Christ would not have kept silent when he was questioned in front of the learned Jewish teachers, scribes and priests.

For my part I am sorry if my style caused RND to remove himself from this discussion. That certainly was not my objective. I wanted to answer some questions and as Jesus called it, "reason together".

I am sincere and do not have an agenda other then trying to show why I believe the way I do and provide a reason for it. I looked at some fairly disgusting images posted in this thread but did not respond to one of them. I tried to say on topic.

RND · Feb 27, 2008

Pythons said:
If RND believes Jesus was not begotten until He was born on earth then does that not violate established SDA belief?

No. To believe the opposite would be to believe Jesus was "born" in Heaven. Jesus was not "born" in Heaven, He always existed with the Father.

As I mentioned, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jesus was "born" of God or a created being. Adventists believe that Jesus was born on earth but always existed with the Father.

4. Son:
God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God's power and was attested as God's promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things. (John 1:1-3, 14; Col. 1:15-19; John 10:30; 14:9; Rom. 6:23; 2 Cor. 5:17-19; John 5:22; Luke 1:35; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:9-18; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4; Heb. 8:1, 2; John 14:1-3.)

Jesus, the Majesty of heaven, the royal King of heaven, laid aside His royalty, left His throne of glory, His high command, and came into our world to bring to fallen man, weakened in moral power and corrupted by sin, aid divine. . . . {AH 481.1}

His name shall be called Immanuel, . . . God with us." "The light of the knowledge of the glory of God" is seen "in the face of Jesus Christ." From the days of eternity the Lord Jesus Christ was one with the Father; He was "the image of God," the image of His greatness and majesty, "the outshining of His glory." It was to manifest this glory that He came to our world. To this sin-darkened earth He came to reveal the light of God's love,--to be "God with us." Therefore it was prophesied of Him, "His name shall be called Immanuel." {DA 19.1}

By coming to dwell with us, Jesus was to reveal God both to men and to angels. He was the Word of God,--God's thought made audible. In His prayer for His disciples He says, "I have declared unto them Thy name,"--"merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,"--"that the love wherewith Thou hast loved Me may be in them, and I in them." But not alone for His earthborn children was this revelation given. Our little world is the lesson book of the universe. God's wonderful purpose of grace, the mystery of redeeming love, is the theme into which "angels desire to look," and it will be their study throughout endless ages. {DA 19.1}

Before Christ came in the likeness of men, he existed in the express image of his Father. He thought it not robbery to be equal with God. Nevertheless he voluntarily emptied himself, and took the form of a servant. He was the incarnate God, the light of heaven and earth. In him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Yet he was born in a stable, in Bethlehem of Judea. He was the son of Mary, supposed to be the son of Joseph, and he grew up as any other child. His earthly life was one of self-denial and self-sacrifice. "The foxes have holes," he said, "and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head." {YI, December 20, 1900 par. 4}

He [Christ] laid aside His royal robe and kingly crown and clothed His divinity with humanity, that He might stand among the human family as one of them.--Ms 115, 1902, p. 8. {17MR 29.1}

The majesty of heaven stepped down from His royal throne, gave up His authority as Commander in the heavenly courts, laid aside His kingly robe and crown, and clothed His divinity with humanity, that He might take on Himself the weakness of human nature. This He did that He might give men an example of true humility. {17MR 29.6}

RND · Feb 27, 2008

Only on an Adventist web forum, that specifically talks about Adventists beliefs and doctrine, can an Adventist be accused of flaming for expressing their personal beliefs obtained through study and teaching.

I would like to offer this. As a Catholic, or any other denomination, if you are offended by someone of the Adventist faith calling the RCC the "harlot of Babylon" I suggest you leave the forum.

As an Adventist, based on my study and beliefs, I wish to express this POV here, I am more than entitled.

Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 Compared

A Woman Rides The Beast
(Revelation 17)

Religious Identity
The harlot is seen as one who demands a religious role.

Apostasy. A harlot is a symbol of a religious system in apostasy or rebellion against God. It is a church system with wrong teachings that ignores the word of God. It has formed an illegal union with another authority and is guilty of spiritual adultery.
The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah." ... "How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers. (Isaiah 1: 1, 21.)

As they were increased, so they sinned against me: therefore I will change their glory into shame. They eat up the sin of my people, and they set their heart on their iniquity. And there shall be, like people, like priest: and I will punish them for their ways, and reward them their doings. For they shall eat, and not have enough: they shall commit prostitution, and shall not increase: because they have left off to take heed to the Lord. Prostitution and wine and new wine take away the heart. My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declares to them: for the spirit of prostitution has caused them to err, and they have gone prostituting from under their God. (Hosea 4: 7-12. )
Authority of God. The harlot sits over many waters. This represents a church exercising the authority of God over many people.
... the great harlot that sits upon many waters. (Revelation 17: 1)

It is God who is supposed to sit over many waters and rule nations.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Genesis 1: 2)
Give to the Lord the glory due to his name; worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness. The voice of the Lord is upon the waters: the God of glory thunders: the Lord is upon many waters. (Psalm 29: 2-3)

Harlot Priest. The Harlot is pictured as a disobedient priestess.
Gold, Purple, Red ... the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold ... (Revelation 17: 4)

Notice the description of the garments of the true priests, and the colors contained within them. Compare these descriptions to the description of the colors of the clothing worn by the Great harlot.
Gold, Purple, Red, Blue. And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, and his sons, that he may minister to me in the priest's office. And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen. (Exodus 28: 4-5)
Notice that the harlot is missing the color blue. What color does this represent?

Blue Law. And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue: And it shall be to you for a fringe, that you may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the Lord, and do them; and that you seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which you use to go prostituting: That you may remember, and do all my commandments, and be holy to your God. I am the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: I am the Lord your God. (Numbers 15: 37-41)
So, what we see is the symbolism that the Great harlot represents a false priestly role, that is lacking the Law of God. It does not include all of God's ten Commandment Law and the result is prostitution.
Antichrist. The harlot and the beast are portrayed together as the Antichrist, or a rival of Christ.

Omnipresent Nature. The beast claims to exist in all time and have the power of resurrection. It has this power because it came back to life after it "is not".
... mystery of the woman, and of the beast.. ... beast that was, and is not, and yet is ... (Revelation 17: 7-8)
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, said the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. ... I am the first and the Last and the Living One; and I was dead, and behold I am alive forever, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. (Revelation 1: 8, 17-18)
Jesus, at the beginning of Revelation, declares Himself to be the one which is, and which was and which is to come. In direct opposition, the Beast power claims to be the "beast that was, and is not, and yet is". Jesus claims to have the keys, but notice also that the pope claims to hold the triple keys. These are the keys of Heaven, Hell and Purgatory. He thinks that he controls where you go.

Many Daughters. The Harlot is the mother of many daughter churches that have followed in her sin. ... The Mother of Harlots ... (Revelation 17: 5)
Remember, women in symbolic Bible prophecy, represent Churches. So the "Mother Church" has other churches that have come out of her, that have her characteristics still in them. The "Mother Church" has influenced her "daughters" to also become harlots. They apostatize from their proper relationship to Christ (God) and became guilty of prostitution with the world and idolatry.
Political Identity
The harlot is seen as one who controls people and political powers of the whole world.

Mystery Name. The Harlot has the Mystery of the Beast written on her forehead. The mystery number is 666.
and on her forehead, a name was written, a mystery, "Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots and of the Abominations of the Earth". (Revelation 17: 5)
And he causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:" "Here is wisdom. Let him that has understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred sixty and six. (Revelation 13: 16, 18)
We learned in our study of Revelation 13 what it means to have the mark of the beast written on ones forehead. It is to mentally ascribe to and agree with the beast, to be committed to the Beast's authority.

Unknown Name. Revelation 19: 12 describes Christ as having an unknown name.
Mystery of God. This is the Gospel. Specifically, it is the process by which God will write His name on our foreheads. The mystery of the woman is the process by which she writes her character on the people of Babylon.

Global. The Harlot is identified as a great city with global influence.
The woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth. (Revelation 17: 18)
Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains upon which the woman sits. (Revelation 17: 9)
It is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire area of Vatican Sate proper is now confined. The Catholic Encyclopedia (Thomas Nelson, 1976), s.v. "Rome."

Lebesgue · Feb 27, 2008

Barking up the wrong tree.

RND, as much as I disagree with the Catholic Church on several points of doctrine I do NOT think they are the "harlot" nor are the Protestant denominations "daughters of the Harlot".

One of the things that really bothered me when I used to be SDA was the way the SDAs I knew would almost talk as if they are the ONLY Christians and the Catholics bashing really bothered me.

I DO NOT like that the Catholic Church has a "Pope" but if you really think about it you SDAs have your OWN "Pope", Ellen White and she still reigns from the grave 92 years after her death.

I Do NOT like that the Catholic Church worships Miriam, she was only a human. We should worship Y'shua, NOT His mother.

Shalom,

Lebesgue

RND · Feb 27, 2008

Lebesgue said:
Barking up the wrong tree.

RND, as much as I disagree with the Catholic Church on several points of doctrine I do NOT think they are the "harlot" nor are the Protestant denominations "daughters of the Harlot".

One of the things that really bothered me when I used to be SDA was the way the SDAs I knew would almost talk as if they are the ONLY Christians and the Catholics bashing really bothered me.

I DO NOT like that the Catholic Church has a "Pope" but if you really think about it you SDAs have your OWN "Pope", Ellen White and she still reigns from the grave 92 years after her death.

I Do NOT like that the Catholic Church worships Miriam, she was only a human. We should worship Y'shua, NOT His mother.

Shalom,

Lebesgue

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. The Bible calls the harlot church a harlot, and even worse, "The Mother of All Harlots." As for "barking up the wrong tree" you may want to check which tree you're in.

Rev 17:4
And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: 5 And upon her forehead [was] a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

The Anti-Christ Slideshow

The point is I believe this passage of scripture is speaking of the paganism and idolatry of the RCC that has infected all of Christianity. I'm entitled to my beliefs as an Adventist on an Adventist forum. If you don't like it, you are free to leave. If I expressed this POV on a Catholic forum here they would be free to ask me to leave and they would be free to report me.

No one goes into another man's house and tells him how to make dinner. If you don't like what's 'cooking' here find another place to eat.

Please forgive if this comes off as a foolish question.

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Member

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency