REBULTO DIOS DIOSAN NGA BA?

TEEWEE'S ANSWER


I WOULD SUGGEST YOU READ MORE
OH SURE WE KNOW HOW TO READ REINEE AND WE WILL NOW TELL YOU THAT READING
MUST BE INVESTIGATIVE AND MUST BE GUIDED IN CASE YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS A BIT IMPAIRED - BECAUSE LEANING ON ONES OWN UNDERSTANDING WITH THIS DEFECT WILL LEAD YOU TO PERDITION

GOD SAID "WHAT I HAVE SAID WILL NOT RETURN TO ME EMPTY AND VOID"

DID GOD CONTRADICT HIMSELF WHEN HE COMMANDED THE JEWS NOT TO MAKE IDOLS IN THE FORM OF ANYTHING -ABOVE HIM -BELOW HIM AND EVEN UNDER HIM

LET US FIND OUT-HOW REINEE UNDERSTANDS THE SCRIPTURES WITH HIS PERSISTENCE AND HIS ACCUSATIONS THAT CATHOLICS ARE WORSHIPING ACCORDING TO HIM IDOLS


COMMON OBJECTION OF NON CATHOLICS

IT IS VERY CLEAR IN THE BIBLE WHICH SAYS "therefore do not become corrupted; do not make an idol or a god carved in the form of a man or a woman"

DUET 4:16 "YOU SHALL NOT BOW DOWN TO THEM OR SERVE THEM. For I YAHWEH, YOUR God am a jealous God .... Exodus 20:5, I am Yahweh that is my name, I will not give Glory to another or my praise to graven images- Isa 42.8

Here it is very clear that God prohibits the carving of images in the form of man and woman. what God allows to be carved are those of cherubim or angels not images of Man Ex 25:18-19 , BUT GOD NEVER RECOMMENDED THOSE IMAGES TO BE WORSHIPPED


CATHOLIC ANSWER

Is the text used from Deut 4:16 that God prohibits the making of any images of man or woman, a prohibition without any condition? Or the prohibition means that the images shall not be thought of as God?

NOW READ THIS REINEE -

Because if you will say that the making of images be it man or woman is really prohibited without any condition then ....

HE COMMANDED MOSES TO MAKE IMAGES OF ANGELS OR CHERUBIMS. IF THESE ARE REPRESENTED BY IMAGES AS ALLOWED BY YAHWEH, THESE ARE IMAGES OF MEN BUT WITH WINGS AND CREATURES FROM ABOVE. SINCE THE ANGELS APPEARED BEFORE LOT WERE IN THE FORM OF MEN WHO WERE MASCULINE GEN 19:1,5-8

ALSO INSIDE THE TEMPLE OF GOD OR THE HOUSE OF GOD - WHICH JESUS SAID

"MY FATHER'S HOUSE"


I WILL DESCRIBE TO YOU THE TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM THAT EVEN JESUS DID NOT
REBUKE WITH THESE IMAGES AND EVEN CALLED IT "HIS FATHERS HOUSE"

2 CHRONICLES 3:7 "ON THE WALLS SOLOMON HAD CARVED CHERUBIMS

3:10 - IN THE HOLLIES OF HOLLIES - HE MADE TWO CHERUBIMS OF METAL AND PLATED THEM WITH GOLD

1 KING 6:29 "SOLOMON HAD ALL THE WALLS CARVED WITH CHERUBIMS , PALM TREES
AND FLOWERS

1 king 6:27 THE CHERUBIM OF THE HOLY OF HOLIES AND THEIR WINGS SO SPREAD APART THAT THEY TOUCHED BOTH WALLS

EZEKIEL 41:17-19 "from the foor to the inner part of the house, and right
around the whole wall of the inner room outside and inside , were carved
cherubims and palm trees, palm trees and cherubims alternating each, each
cherubims had two faces, the face of a man turned towards the palm tree on
one side and the face of a lion toward the palm tree on the other, all
around the house. the cherubims and palm trees were carved from the floor
to above the entrance, as also from the wall of the hall.

THIS IS THE WAY THE TEMPLE OF GOD IS DESCRIBED IN THE BIBLE FULL OF
CARVED, CHERUBIMS TREES A FACE OF A MAN AND A LION.

DAVID WAS THE FATHER OF SOLOMON WAS GIVEN THE NAME THE LION OF JUDAH

AND JESUS CALLED IT "HIS FATHER'S HOUSE" -

HIS FATHERS HOUSE WITH CARVED IMAGES? HARLAN SAID THE TEMPLE OF GOD HAS NO ROOM FOR IDOLS?


IT IS NOW CLEAR THAT IF ALL IMAGES REPRESENT FALSE GODS, THEN GOD IS THE
FIRST ONE WHO VIOLATED HIS COMMAND WHEN HE COMMANDED MOSES TO CARVE IMAGES
OF ANGELS EXO 25:18-19 AND THE IMAGE OF FIERY SERPENT NUMBER 21:8
BUT AS WE ALREADy KNOW , GOD CANNOT COMMIT ANY FAULT.

THEREFORE IT IS THE MISINTERPRETATON OF REINEE AND HARLAN WHICH LED THEM

TO ERR IN SAYING THAT ALL IMAGES REPRESENT FALSE GODS. THE SCRIPTURES
TEACHES US WHAT ARE FALSE GODS ARE:



FOR WE KNOW AN IDOL IS WITHOUT EXISTENCE. I WILL REPEAT THIS ONE
FOR THE BENEFIT OF REINEE AND HARLAN
1 COR 8:4 "can we, then, eat from offering to the idols? WE KNOW THAT
The glory and praise of God can never be given to these idols which represent nothing and which are non existent and never existed but only a creation of ones imagination.


Isaiah 44:13-20 - this man cut down a three sculpted an image which he made his GOD out of his own imagination- and made the image he created - and asked the carved image to rescue him for that very image which does not have any existence at all but a product of his very OWN imagination HE MADE A god out of it.

Our image of Jesus Christ cannot represent the invisible and the incomprehensible God. But the incarnation of the Son of God and who lived
with us HAS USHERED IN A NEW ECONOMY OF IMAGES.

PREVIOUSLY GOD, WHO HAS NEITHER A BODY NOR A FACE. ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT BE
REPRESENTED BY AN IMAGE, BUT NOW THAT HE HAS MADE HIMSELF IN THE FLESH AND HAS LIVED WITH MEN. MEN CAN NOW MAKE AN IMAGE OF WHAT THEY HAVE SEEN OF GOD
AND CONTEMPLATE TO THE GLORY OF THE LORD, HIS FACE UNVEILED.

1 COL 1:15 "CHRIST IS THE IMAGE OF THE UNSEEN GOD"

JESUS HAD BROTHERS AND SISTERS BECAUSE OF THE WORD "UNTIL" HARLAN SAID

IF JESUS HAD BROTHERS

1. WHERE WERE THEY WHEN HE WAS CRUCIFIED - THEY WERE SUPPOSE TO BE
THERE- WHY DID JESUS LEAVE HIS MOTHER TO JOHN THE APOSTLE


2. ALL THE SUPPOSED BROTHERS OF JESUS MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE
WERE IDENTIFIED AND THEIR FATHERS TOO WERE IDENTIFIED- AND IT WAS NOT JOSEPH THE SPOUSE of MARY - THE MOTHER OF JESUS

3. WHAT WERE THE NAMES OF THE BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF JESUS - THE GOSPEL WRITER DID NOT EVEN GIVE A NAME TO ANY OF HIS BROTHERS AND SISTERS-

4. TODATE NOT A SINGEL LINE COMING FROM THESE ALLEGED BROTHERS AND SISTERS
HAS COME UP NOR HAS ANYONE CLAIMED THAT HE IS A DESCENDANT OF JESUS CHRIST.
NOR WITH ANY OF THE APOSTLES.


NOW HARLAN INSISTS THAT JESUS HAD BROTHERS AND SISTERS JUST TO
SATISFY HIS OWN PERSONAL CONVICTION THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS WRONG.

HE CAN NOT EVEN GIVE A NAME OF HIS FELLOWSHIP NOR SAY WHAT THE DOCTRINES
OF HIS FELLOWSHIP ARE- HE IS TRYING TO PROVE HIS FELLOWSHIP IS THE RIGHT
CHURCH BY PROVING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WRONG.

THIS IS TYPICAL

BECAUSE HARLAN HAS ANCHORED HIS BELIEF THAT JESUS HAD BROTHERS AND SISTERS

ON JUST ONE WORD- "UNTIL"

HE CLAIMS THAT I HAVE BEEN TWISTING THE SCRIPTURES BUT COULD NOT SAY
WHAT I TWISTED.

I HAVE ASKED HIM SEVERAL TIMES WHAT I TWISTED AND HE COULD NOT MENTION EVEN ONE. ALWAYS A BLANK ACCUSATION- AND HE DOES IT MOST OF THE TIME


I ASKED HIM SEVERAL TIMES IF HIS ARGUMENT WILL ONLY BE ANCHORED ON A SINGLE
WORD "UNTIL"- WHICH IS INCONCLUSIVE-

BECAUSE HARLAN IS ALWAYS FOND OF INSISTING HIS OWN OPINION AND PUTTING A
CONCLUSION WHERE THERE IS NONE

BECAUSE HIS CONTENTION IS THAT - IT WAS AFTER THE BIRTH OF JESUS THAT MARY
AND JOSEPH HAD RELATIONS- BECAUSE OF THE WORD "UNTIL"

THEN I ASKED HIM HOW THEN WILL HE INTERPRET THE FOLLOWING VERSES


"I WILL BE WITH YOU UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD" does this mean that after the end of the world Jesus will no longer be with us??

"MICAH THE DAUGHTER OF SAUL DID NOT GIVE BIRTH UNTIL SHE DIES"- does this mean that after she dies she was able to give birth?

I ALSO GAVE ONE WHICH WAS THE RAVEN THAT NOAH SENT OUT TO SCOUT FOR A DRY LAND-



ON BOTH QUERYS HARLAN DID NOT GIVE AN ANSWER BUT KEEPS ON INSISTING HIS
UNTIL OF THE VERSE OF LUKE- THAT MARY AND JOSEPH HAD RELATIONS AFTER JESUS
WAS BORN BECAUSE OF THE WORD UNTIL-

correction : this should be read and not what is posted

MICAH THE DAUGHTER OF SAUL DID NOT GIVE BIRTH UNTIL SHE DIED, does this mean that after she died she was able to give birth to a child?

HARLAN BRAGG:

((Teewee said: MICAH THE DAUGHTER OF SAUL DID NOT GIVE BIRTH UNTIL SHE DIED, does this mean that after she died she was able to give birth to a child?))

My reply: David was Dancing before the Lord in front of the people and she came out ad insulted him.

2SA 6:20 When David returned home to bless his household, Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet him and said, "How the king of Israel has distinguished himself today, disrobing in the sight of the slave girls of his servants as any vulgar fellow would!"

Because of this she would bare no children she insulted her husband because David was her husband. Besides David seed with Bathsheba would become the new King.

2SA 6:23 And Michal daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death.

Doesn't say until just says she had no children.

Nice try tho!
God Bless!

ERICA ERICSSON :

Hi, Harlan. what teewee is trying to point out was that the word "until" meant, according to the writers of the nt with the choice of word they use, that nothing happened afterwards. it just continue to be as it was before.

if "until" means the same until we use in english that means after the appointed time something will definitely happen. but that is not the case.

Teewee gave the example of Michal. "did not give birth 'until' she died". if we understand the word using today's meaning, it means she give birth after she died. she did not give birth after she died. it is because the true meaning of the word "until" ,as used by the biblical writers, is that nothing will happen later on. the state of the person or things will forever be the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Jesus said, "I will be with you 'until' the end of time". it does not mean that when the end comes he will no longer be with us. it means, as was, as is and as will be Jesus will always be with us. the word 'until' meant a continuation, nothing ever changes since the past, the present, up to the future - forever.

Matthew 1:25
But he had no union with her "until" she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

the meaning is the same here. Joseph never had union with Mama Mary before, during her pregnancy and after the birth of Jesus.

that is the true meaning of the word as used by these writers. if we give other meaning to the word "until" then we are not faithful to the scripture. if we take things so literally then the scripture will lose its purpose.

HARLAN BRAGG:

Yes but it doesn't say until Erica it says: 2SA 6:23 And Michal daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death.

Plain and simple had no children all of her life Teewee added the word until.


TEEWEE DIEGO:


YOU KNOW HARLAN YOU NEVER MET THE ISSUE HEAD ON

WE WERE DEALING WITH THE WORD "until" AND HOW YOU APPLIED IT

ANYWAY I WILL GIVE AN ANSWER AS YOU DID


HARLAN BRAGG:


must have used different version. still the point is the word "until". find out for yourself what it really meant as intended by the writers of the gospel.

God bless, brother.


TEEWEE REPLY

YOU KNOW HARLAN - YOU CHOSE ONLY ONE VERSE TO ANSWER

AND YOU CHOSE THE VERSE THAT DID NOT HAVE THE WORD UNTIL

NOW MY BIBLE DOES NOT HAVE THE WORD UNTIL TOO- IT SAYS THAT JOSEPH DID

NOT HAVE ANY RELATIONS WITH MARY AND THAT IS IT.

BUT I DID NOT USE MY CATHOLIC BIBLE -I USED THE KING JAMES-


NOW HOW ABOUT THE VERSE THAT SAYS

"I WILL BE WITH YOU UNTIL THE END OF TIME"

YOU DID NOT ANSWER THIS ONE- 

NICE TRY HARLAN HEHEHE

SO NOW WE RESORT TO VERBAL ENGINEERING HEHEHEHEH

NICE TRY HARLAN

I WILL GIVE YOU ANOTHER NICE TRY HARLAN

HEHEHE


HARLAN BRAGG:

I know what it meant when its says Joseph took Mary home as his WIFE and he didn't have UNION or SEXUAL relations UNTIL the child was BORN

MT 1:24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

This verse is so simple and straight forward why are you trying to change its meaning? I can not understand that!

HARLAN BRAGG:

HAHAH YOU ARE STILL FAR AWAY FROM WHAT YOU UNDERSTAND

ANSWER WHAT JESUS SAID - UNTIL THE END OF TIME

TSK TSK PICK AND CHOOSE WHATEVER YOU LIKE


JUST WAIT FOR MY ANSWER

YOU GAVE AN OPINION AGAIN- THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE GOOD AT

HAHAHAHAH I WILL NOT STOP LAUGHING AT YOU

KEEP ON TRYIN MAN


ERICA ERICSSON:

we do not change the meaning. we go back to what it really meant as the writer intended to mean it. if you chose the modern meaning then stick to it, harlan.

you cannot use today's word, the translation of the original word, if you want to get to the true meaning and intent of the writer. if i say, it is raining cats and dogs the people 1000 years from now will be wrong to believe these words as they appear. if they do not go back to our time they will never get it right.
find out yourself what the word "until" really meant according to the writer. this way you do not do injustice to him and does not give another meaning to the verse.

TEEWEE DIEGO:

AFTER MY STORY THAT WILL REALLY REALLY INTIMIDATE HARLAN

I WILL GO TO THE GREEK SIDE OF IT


ERICA ERICSSON:

A brief study of the concept of "until" as used in Matthew 1:25a

"...but he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son." (NIV)

"...but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; (NRSV)

"...and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son." (NKJV)

The Greek word most often translated as "until" is eos (pronounced āōs), and is negated by ouk at the beginning of the phrase, meaning "not."

The modern-day meaning of the word "until" might lead us to think that Joseph "did not know her until..." but that he did afterwards. However, the biblical usage is quite different. In ancient and biblical usage, the word eos is used to designate a "boundary formed by a historical event."[2]

The Greek conjunction eos (till), like the Hebrew ad-ki and the Latin donec, while expressing what has occurred up to a certain period, leaves the future entirely aside"[3]

Here are some cross references to illustrate that ouk...eos it more accurately translated as "not until this important event, but still not after" (i.e. never.)

1) Note Luke 2:36-37, the story of Christ's Presentation at the Temple. The verse describes Anna the prophetess as having lived with her husband for 7 years after their marriage, and then, "she has lived as a widow until (eos) ." At the time of The Presentation of Christ she is still a widow, and will continue to be so after this. The "boundary" historical event is the Presentation of Christ.

2) Another good example of this is Acts 8:40. The verse says "Phillip.... traveled about, preaching the gospel in all the towns until (eos) he reached Caesarea" (NIV) Did Phillip the deacon preach the gospel after he reached Caesarea? Of course he did. The "boundary" historical event is Phillip the deacon's arrival in Caesarea and the word eos is used to denote the importance of this event. He preached before, until this significant event, and still after.

3) Another example is Matthew 24:21, where the use of the word (eos) as having an action as continuing into the future is actually clarified in the text: "then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until (eos) now – and never to be equaled again." This great distress has not been seen until now, and still, will never be seen again.

4) See John 5:17. Jesus is speaking: "My Father is always at work to (eos) this very day, and I, too am working." (NIV) or "My Father has been working until (eos) now..."(NKJV) "My Father is still working, (eos) and I also am working." Clearly Jesus did not mean that His Father was working only until that very day, but still. Jesus' presence on earth was a "boundary" historical event. The Father worked until that day, and still afterwards.

5) other examples: Genesis 8.7 "Noah...sent forth a raven; and it went to and fro till the waters were dried up from the earth."

Psalm 110.1 "the Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou on my right hand until I make thy enemies thy footstool."

See also Isaiah 22.15, Matt 12.20, 1 Tim 4.13, Psalm 90.2, Psalm 72.7

until does not mean something happened after. it means nothing ever happened after. so it really meant Joseph never had union with Mama Mary after the birth of Jesus. we have to be faithful as to what the writer really intend to tell us.

Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of "charitoo." It uses "kecharitomene," while Ephesians 1:6 uses "echaritosen," which is a different form of the verb "charitoo." Echaritosen means "he graced" (or bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p. 166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Harvard Univ Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p. 175).

Kecharitomene meaning "full of grace", a continuation, as always Mama Mary was full of grace, for all time.

HARLAN BRAGG:

((Teewee said: BUT I DID NOT USE MY CATHOLIC BIBLE -I USED THE KING JAMES-NOW HOW ABOUT THE VERSE THAT SAYS))

The King James is an out dated English language which was limited with its translations of words. So the bible scholars saw it fit to redo the King James with a new modern English that could be easily understood.

I mean come on now when was the last time someone said I Spank unto thee thy word or where art thou going?

Key Points
More than 100 scholars from six English-speaking countries, as well as editors and English stylists, worked on the NIV. The scholars represented more than 20 denominations.

In the 17th century, King James translators worked from the Erasmus Greek text of the New Testament. Erasmus had six Greek manuscripts from which to work. NIV translators work from more than 5,000 complete or partial manuscripts and papyri.

It took 10 years to complete the NIV translation. The process started in 1968 and finished in 1978. This does not include more than 10 years of planning before 1968.

The system for editing each book is one of the distinctive features of the NIV. The procedure was as follows:

Initial Translation Team
Intermediate Editorial Committee
General Editorial Committee
Stylist and Critics
Executive Committee (or Committee on Bible Translation)
Final Stylistic Review
Executive Committee's Final Reading
The NIV was created and is maintained with the mandate to accurately and faithfully translate the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic biblical texts into clearly understandable English.

The NIV is the most widely accepted contemporary Bible translation today. More people buy the NIV Bible than any other English-language translation.


TEEWEE DIEGO:


MY CATHOLIC BIBLE SAYS IN MATTHEW 1:25

"so she gave birth to a son and he had not had relations with her. Joseph gave him the name Jesus"

TO the JEWS -YESHUA- means -GOD SAVES- JOSEPH NOW KNEW WHO MARY WAS CONCEIVING

BUT I DID NOT INSIST ON IT- I PLAYED YOUR COURT THE KING JAMES VERSION
LATER ON I WILL GO TO THE GREEK

WHO IS JOSEPH and MARY?


MATTHEW 1:18

This is how Jesus Christ was born. Mary his mother had been given to Joseph in marriage but before they lived together, she was found to be pregnant...

"THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT"-.....I WILL REPEAT THROUGH "THE HOLY SPIRIT"

(the protestant world treat the pregnancy of Mary
as just an ordinary pregnancy as if the holy spirit can just impregnate any woman in this planet, let alone any woman can just give birth to a JESUS CHRIST, why? because it is CATHOLIC AND ANY CATHOLIC BELIEF THEY STAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD- SO TO SPEAK)

.....then Joseph her husband made plans to divorce her in all secrecy.
HE WAS AN UPRIGHT MAN, and in no way did he want to discredit her.....

WHY IN SECRET?- the secret was.. that MARY WAS PREGNANT BECAUSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT !!!!! who would ever believe a simple country lass a virgin being
pregnant because of the HOLY SPIRIT. THE WHOLE OF ISRAEL MIGHT BE LAUGHING AT YOU IF YOU SAY THIS.

PUT THIS IN THAT BRAIN OF YOURS HARLAN

and JOSEPH being an upright man married MARY so that the HARSH MOSAIC LAW
will not be imposed on Mary. She will be stoned to death.

MARY the niece of ZECARIAH - the high priest who six months ago just went in to the INNER TEMPLE only done ONCE A YEAR DURING THE FEAST OF THE DAY OF ATONEMENT- OFFERING SACRIFICE FOR THE NATION OF ISRAEL IN ATONEMENT for THEIR SINS- AND to the HIGH PRIESTS OF ISRAEL-they draw lots on who will enter this INNER SANCTUM to make an offering- this is a risky undertaking for a HIGH PRIEST who has not cleansed himself well enough might end up dead. That is why they are tied to their waste so in case he dies - he will be pulled out.

Now Mary who is pregnant and unmarried will be scandalized so much not only in Jerusalem but maybe to the whole nation of Israel being the niece of
the HIGH PRIEST of THE TEMPLE- YOU CAN NOW IMAGINE THE BIG SHAME AND SCANDAL TO THE WHOLE CLAN OF THE HIGH PRIEST ZECARIAH the father of JOHN THE baptist. The jews will be after the stoning of Mary.

the levitical line of MARY- IS "ANAWIM" - THEY ARE JEWS WHO LIVE RIGHTEOUS
AND STRICTLY OBESERVES THE LAW OF MOSES -in other words it is a PURIFIED GROUP in the LEVITICAL TRIBE-

AND GOD CHOSE THE MOTHER OF JESUS from this group.

why was Joseph contemplating to divorce Mary and in no way to discredit her?

Because of fear!!!

Joseph new that MARY now belongs to GOD ALREADY- being pregnant because of
the overshadowing of the HOLY SPIRIT - SHE WAS GOD'S PROPERTY
SHE BECAME THE SPOUSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT- SHE WAS SACRED GROUND.

and that MARY'S womb has the FIRSTBORNE- THE FIRST TO LEAVE THE WOMB
the JEWS HAD A HIGH REGARD FOR THE FIRSTBORN OF ANY WOMB- READ IN THE OLD
TESTAMENT ABOUT THE FIRSTBORN-

WHEN GOD SETTLED ON MOUNT SINAI TO MEET WITH MOSES AND ON THAT MOUNTAIN
GOD CARVED WITH HIS FINGERS SO TO SPEAK THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ON THE ROCK AND GAVE THE LAWS ON HOW THE JEWS WILL LIVE AND HIS MIGHTY NAME- AND A COVENANT- HE DECLARED THAT MOUNTAIN A SACRED GROUND.
A PRERIMETER WAS EVEN ESTABLISHED AND THOSE WHO VIOLATES THIS PERIMETER WILL DIE- AND INSTRUCTED MOSES TO EVEN TAKE OUT HIS SANDALS.

JOSEPH NEW WHAT BELONGS TO GOD BELONGS TO GOD. DID YOU GET THIS HARLAN

JOSEPH WILL NOT EVEN THINK OF WHAT HARLAN IS ALWAYS THINKING. THAT IS SEX!!

BEFORE JOSEPH WENT TO HIS PLAN OF DIVORCING MARY THINKING THAT HE WAS RIGHT.

BECAUSE MARY IS NOT ORDINARY ANYMORE FOR SHE BELONGS TO THE HOLY SPIRIT- ON
THE OTHER HAND KNOWING THE SCRIPTURES

JOSEPH NEW THAT GOD HATES DIVORCE

THE ANGEL APPEARED TO HER AND THIS IS WHAT HE SAID

MATTHEW 1:20

"JOSEPH DESCENDANT OF DAVID "DO NOT BE AFRAID TO TAKE MARY AS YOUR WIFE
SHE WAS CONCEIVED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT "

verse 21 "AND WILL BEAR A SON WHOM YOU ARE TO CALL JESUS ( GOD SAVES) FOR HE WILL SAVE HIS PEOPLE FROM THEIR SINS"

THAT WAS THE FEAR HARLAN -

THAT IS WHY JOSEPH DID NOT ENTER INTO MARY AND NEVER DID

HE WAS A RIGHTEOUS MAN- NOT LIKE YOU- YOU ONLY SAY IT AND I DONT BELIEVE IT- EVER

BUT YOU HAD NO FEAR IN YOUR THOUGHTS HARLAN THAT IS WHY I NEVER BELIEVED YOU ARE RIGHTEOUS BECAUSE YOU KEEP ON THINKING ABOUT MUNDANE THINGS IN YOUR MIND.

YOU SAY THAT YOU LOVE JESUS OH HOW YOU DECLARE THIS IN ALL YOUR POSTINGS- BUT YOU NEVER TREATED EVERYTHING IN JESUS AS SACRED-

EVERYTHING IN JESUS IS SACRED HARLAN- HIS MOTHER AND HIS FOSTER FATHER JOSEPH GIVE RESPECT WHERE RESPECT IS DUE.

S WILL RECOGNIZE YOU FOR THAT

HOW WILL YOU FEEL IF YOUR FRIEND TREATS YOUR OWN MOTHER COMING INTO
YOU HOUSE AS IF HE SEES YOUR MOTHER A FIXTURE IN YOUR HOUSE.


ONCE AGAIN I WILL REPEAT WHAT YOU HAVE NOT ANSWERED

-YOU DID NOT REFUTE ANY OF THE BROTHERS OF JESUS THAT I IDENTIFIED WHO THEIR

FATHERS ARE AND NOT JOSEPH THE HUSBAND OF MARY- YOU SAY THE BIBLE IS NOT

THAT DEEP- BUT YOU WENT TOO DEEP WITH YOUR OPINIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

-HOW ABOUT JESUS WILL NOT BE WITH US ANYMORE AND HE WILL NOT BE
WITH US AFTER THE END OF TIME- WHERE IS MY ANSWER USING YOUR ARGUMENT
TO THE VERSE- NONE- YOU PICKED AND CHOOSE AGAIN

-WHAT ARE THE NAMES OF THE BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF JESUS- AGAIN YOU SAID
THE BIBLE IS NOT THAT DEEP- BUT YOU WERE DEEP IN YOUR OPINIONS


-WHO ARE LIVING PEOPLE THAT CAN BE IDENTIFIED TODAY COMING FROM THE LINE
OF JESUS CHRIST? NO ONE HAS EVER COME UP TO CLAIM THAT JESUS WAS HIS
GRAND DAD.

-WHERE ARE HIS BROTHERS AND SISTERS DURING THE TIME OF CRUCIFIXION -WHY DID
JESUS LEAVE HIS MOTHER TO JOHN?? again YOU GAVE NO ANSWER

AND ALL ALONG YOU ANCHORED YOUR ARGUMENT ON JUST ONE WORD - "UNTIL"


"UNTIL" YOU CAN BACK UP YOUR CLAIM THAT JESUS HAD BIOLOGICAL BROTHERS AND SISTERS- YOU WILL COME OUT TO BE A STORY TELLER OF ALL TIMES
REMEMBER THE NUN THAT YOU SAID YOU ARE TRYING TO CONVERT - YOU COULD STARTED WITH THE POPE SO WE CAN EASILY VERIFY


"UNTIL" YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOUND REASONS AND LOGICAL AT THAT

"UNTIL" THEN I WILL BELIEVE YOU

HERE IS ONE BIG ADVISE- GO TO A CREDIBLE BIBLE TEACHER OR COLLEGE-
ESPECIALLY ONE THAT CAN TEACH BIBLICAL HISTORY

THAT HAS HERMENEUTICS AND CAN EXPLAIN THE EXEGIES OF WHAT THE AUTHOR WROTE

IN PLAIN READING YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE AUTHOR TRYING TO SAY.

THAT IS WHY IT IS CALLED EXEGIES- KNOW THIS FIRST

PERSONAL CONVICTIONS WILL TAKE YOU NOWHERE AND STILL END UP WITH NOTHING

ANG LUMPIA CHRISTOLOGY NI ELI SORIANO

Anonymous said...

Iisa lang ang likas na kalagayan ng isang being.

Si Cristo DIOS na nag anyong tao.

Tao ang katawan pero ang nasa loob nun DIOS.

bagong kaanib ng ADD nakausap nito. may paksa sa Pasalamat na "Kung bakit ang Panginoong JesuCristo ay tao rin"

nga pala, kung paniwala ng Simbahan ay tao rin likas na kalagayan ni Cristo at di lang DIOS, they should not debate with INCs kung paniwala nyo tao din si Cristo.

Si Cristo ay DIOS na nasa loob ng anyong tao.

kaya nung namatay ang katawan, yung Espiritu pumunta sa bilangguan ng mga espiritu (1 Pedro 3:18-19) Catholic Church believes on it also.

yung Espiritung nasa loob ng katawan, DIOS yun (Colosas 2:9)nananahan sa katawang tao ni Cristo sa lupa.

Tao yung katawan pero yung nasa loob ng katawan DIOS.

kung pinag uusapan nyo ay tunay na likas na kalagayan ni Cristo, natural DIOS siya. (original nature niya ah) naniniwala naman ang Simbahan na ang original nature ni Jesus eh DIOS.

pero nung nasa lupa, naging 2. yung katawan ay tao pero ang nasa loob ng katawan DIOS.

bagong kaanib lang nakausap nyo. may paksa sa pasalamatan na "kung bakit ang Panginoong Jesus ay tao rin"

P.S. iisa lang pinagkaiba ng Christology natin. you dont believe that God and Jesus are equal. the rest magkapareho.
January 20, 2010 12:27 PM



REPLY OF THE CATHOLICS

to: MISTER ANONYMOUS NA ADD

KAAWAY HINDI PAREHO ANG PANIWALA NATIN SA ESSENCE ,SUBSTANCE OR NATURE NG DIYOS-

PUMUNTA KA NA LANG SA KATEKISMO NAMIN AT WALA KAMING SINASABI SA LOOB AT SA LABAS

MERON KA PA KASING SA LOOB AT SA LABAS- MUKANG KENDI O LUMPIA YATA ITONG SINASABI MO-

KASI PARANG CHOCOLATE O LUMPIA SI CRISTO SA INYO- CRISPY SA LABAS AT NADUN ANG LAMAN SA LOOB-

PAANO MO NALAMAN - SA LOOB AY DIYOS- GAANO KA LALIM PAGKATAPOS NG BALAT NI JESUS ANG PAGKA DIYOS NIYA

IBIGAY MO NGA SA AKIN ANG LALIM- PARANG BUHOK LANG YAN- GAANO KAHABA ANG MAHABA 0 ANG IGSI SA MAIKSI

IBIGAY MO NGA SA AKIN ANG SUKAT NA GALING SA BIBLIA-

NASA BA ANG KALULUWA NG TAO NASA LOOB O NASA LABAS? NAKITA NA BA NI ELI KUNG NASAAN ITO

PARANG YUNG PUWIT -SIYA LANG YATA ANG TAO NA NAKAKITA NITO


SA LOOB AT SA LABAS NAMAN SA ANYO NI CRISTO- IBIGAY MO SA AKIN SAAN SA LOOB NG ANYON CRISTO ANG DIYOS

WALA TAYONG PAREHONG ARAL AT TURO-

LALO MONG PINALALA- MAS BAGUHAN KA PA YATA KAY RYAN DE LA CRUZ- O IKAW DIN YAN


KUNG HINDI MO MAIBIBIGAY- ANONG KENDI BA ITO O LUMPIA- SHANGHAI O FREASH LUMPIA

SORI FOR THE DELAY IN REPLY- DAMI LANG KASING GINAGAWA

MGA KAMANGMANGAN AT PAGMAMARUNONG NI ELISEO "DEMONYO" SORIANO

May panahon ba na wala ang Diyos Anak? (3)
MAY NAKAKAUSAP pong miyembro ng ANG DATING DAAN o ADD ang reader nating si Ozner at sinasabi raw nung kausap niya na "LITERAL na IPINANGANAK" ng DIYOS AMA ang ANAK Niyang si HESU KRISTO.

ANO po ba ang KAHULUGAN ng "LITERAL na IPINANGANAK"?

Sa ISIP NATIN, ang LARAWAN po ng NANGANGANAK ay yung BABAE na UMIIRI at NAGHIHIRAP para ISILANG ang isang BATA. Hindi po ba?

GANOON po ba ang ibig sabihin ng "LITERAL na NANGANAK?"

Kung ganyan po ang nasa isip nung ADD na kausap ni Ozner ay MALI PO ang PANINIWALA NIYA.

NAGBABATAY po kasi sila sa MALI NILANG PAGKAUNAWA sa pagiging ANAK ng DIYOS ng PANGINOONG HESUS.

At isa iyan ang ginagamit nila para sabihin na "HINDI PANTAY" ang AMA at ANAK.

TAMA po na si HESUS ay ANAK ng DIYOS. TAMA na si KRISTO ay LUMABAS MULA sa AMA.
,
Pero MALI po yung KONSEPTO na IPINANGANAK SIYA na TULAD ng sa TAO.

Sa sinasabi nung ADD na "IPINANGANAK ng AMA ang ANAK" ay tila PINALALABAS NILA na NUNG HINDI PA IPINANGANGANAK si HESUS ay "WALA PA ang ANAK."

Hindi po ba ganyan ang sa tao? May panahon na WALA PA ang ANAK at NAGKAKAROON LANG ng ANAK kapag NAKAPANGANAK NA ANG BABAE.

So, kung ilalapat iyan sa DIYOS ay pinalalabas nga ng IBA na NUNG HINDI PA IPINAPANGANAK ng AMA ang ANAK ay WALA PA ANG ANAK.

Sa nauna po nating artikulo ay tinalakay na natin ang MALING PANINIWALA na "MAY PANAHON NA WALA PA ANG ANAK."

Ang AMA, ANAK at ESPIRITU SANTO (o ang TATLONG PERSONA ng IISANG DIYOS) ay SABAY-SABAY NA UMIIRAL: WALANG NAUNA at WALANG NAHULI. Ang BAWAT ISA ay WALANG SIMULA at WALANG KATAPUSAN.

May mga tao po kasi na NALILITO sa sinabi ng Proverbs 8:22-25.

Diyan ay nagsasalita ang KARUNUNGAN ng DIYOS.

Sabi po sa 1 Corinthians 1:24, ang KARUNUNGAN ng DIYOS ay si KRISTO.

Sa Prov 8:24 ay sinasabi ng KARUNUNGAN na "Noong wala pang malalalim na dagat AKO AY INILUWAL (o IPINANGANAK) ..."

Ang SALITANG HEBREO po kasing ginamit riyan ay "KHOLALTI" (bigkas ay "CHUWL") na ang kahulugan ay IPINANGANAK.

Diyan marahil kinuha ng iba ang paniniwala nilang "LITERAL na IPINANGANAK" ng DIYOS AMA ang KANYANG ANAK.

Ayon sa STRONG'S HEBREW DICTIONARY, Number 02342, ang KAHULUGAN ng KHOLALTI (CHUWL) ay ang sumusunod:

1. to twist, whirl, dance, writhe, fear, tremble, travail, be in anguish, be pained

A. (Qal)
a. to dance
b. to twist, writhe
c. to whirl, whirl about

B. (Polel)
a. to dance
b. to writhe (in travail with), bear, bring forth
c. to wait anxiously

C. (Pulal)
a. to be made to writhe, be made to bear
b. to be brought forth

D. (Hophal) to be born

E. (Hithpolel)
a. whirling (participle)
b. writhing, suffering torture (participle)
c. to wait longingly

F. (Hithpalpel) to be distressed

Paki pansin po ang kahulugan sa Letrang D na "to be born."

Baka po nabasa ng taga-ADD ang kahulugan ng KHOLALTI at NAISIP NILA na "ABA! OO NGA! LITERAL na IPINANGANAK ang ANAK!"

Pero LITERAL nga po ba porke ginamit ang salitang KHOLALTI (CHUWL) para sa "IPINANGANAK."

HINDI po.

Paki puna po ninyo na ang LITERAL na KAHULUGAN ng KHOLALTI ay MAY KASAMANG "PAMIMILIPIT" (WRITHE = A, b; B, b; C, a; E, b).

Ang DIYOS po ba ay MAMIMILIPIT para "IPANGANAK" ang KARUNUGAN?

Ayon pa nga po sa DEFINITION E, letrang b, ay "writhing, suffering TORTURE."

Ganoon? MAMIMILIPIT po ba sa SAKIT ang DIYOS para IPANGANAK ang KARUNUNGAN?

HINDI po!

Ang PAMIMILIPIT po sa SAKIT habang NANGANGANAK ay DOON IBINIGAY ng DIYOS sa BABAE (EBA) matapos na SIYA ay MAGKASALA.

Sabi po ng DIYOS sa Genesis 3:16, "PATITINDIHIN KO ang PAGHIHIRAP ng IYONG PAGDADALANTAO at MASAKIT MONG ILULUWAL ang IYONG mga ANAK."

Sa madaling salita po ang MASAKIT na PANGANGANAK ay BUNGA ng KASALANAN.

Kung sasabihin nino man na LITERAL na IPINANGANAK ng AMA ang ANAK ay sinasabi nila na NAMILIPIT DIN sa SAKIT ang AMA nung INILUWAL NIYA ang ANAK.

Palalabasin nila na APEKTADO rin ng BUNGA na KASALANAN ang AMA.

TAMA PO BANG PANIWALAAN ang GANOON?

MALI po. Ang DIYOS ay SAKDAL LINIS at BUSILAK kaya HINDI SIYA MAMIMILIPIT sa SAKIT sa PAGSILANG sa KANYANG ANAK.

Pero kung ganoon po ay BAKIT GINAMIT ang KHOLALTI (CHUWL) para ILARAWAN ang PANGANGANAK ng DIYOS sa KANYANG ANAK?

Ginamit po iyan para MALINAW na ILARAWAN na ang ANAK o KARUNUNGAN ay NAGMULA MISMO sa AMA: DIYOS MULA SA DIYOS, IISA ang SANGKAP ng PAGKA-DIYOS at IISA ang PAGIGING DIYOS.

Ang PUNTO ay yung KATIYAKAN sa PINAGMULAN ng ANAK (DIYOS na NAGMULA sa DIYOS) at HINDI YUNG PROSESO (PAMIMILIPIT sa SAKIT).

MULI, HINDI iyan NANGANGAHULUGAN na "MAY PANAHON na WALA ang ANAK" at "UMIRAL LANG SIYA NUNG IPANGANAK ng AMA."

Ang DIYOS ANAK bilang KARUNUNGAN at KAPANGYARIHAN ng AMA (1 Cor 1:24) ay KASAMA NA ng AMA sa PASIMULA (Jn 1:1) at BAGO PA ang PASIMULA (Jn 17:5).

Ang AMA at ANAK kasi ay IISA. (Jn 10:30)

Ganoon po iyon.

GALING PO ITO KAY CONVOY

PURGATORY

PURGATORY IS AN OLD WORD COMING FROM THE EARLY LANGUAGE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, LATIN- I T MEANS TO PURGE , TO CLEAN OR TO
PURIFY-

THIS WORD CAN BE FOUND IN THE LATIN VULGATE THE FIRST BIBLE, ITALIAN AND SPANISH. AND OTHER EUROPEAN BIBLES.


"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ," (1 Cor. 3:11).

AND CHRIST LAID THIS FOUNDATION TO THE
TWELVE APOSTLES

THE APOSTLES TO THE BISHOPS

AND THE BISHOPS TO THEIR SUCCEEDING BISHOPS


"AS THE FATHER HAS SENT ME SO I SEND YOU
ANYONE WHO REJECTS YOU REJECTS THE ONE WHO SENT
ME"





REVELATION 21:27- "NOTHING UNCLEAN WILL BE ALLOWED TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF GOD"


1 CORINTHIANS 3:10
PAUL IS SAYING ,"I AS A GOOD ARCHITECT, ACCORDING TO THE

CAPACITY GIVEN TO ME , I LAID THE FOUNDATION

AND NO OTHER IS TO BUILD UPON IT-LET EACH ONE BE CAREFUL HOW HE

BUILDS UPON IT.


... PAUL IS SAYING THAT HE FOUNDED CHURCHES IN HIS MISSION TO

THE GENTILES , NOW SIMILARLY HE WILL SAY THAT HE CAN NOT LAY A

FOUNDATION ON ANOTHER MANS TEACHING IN ROME , I WILL DEAL WITH

THAT LATER IN THE BOOK OF ROMANS.


GOD IS A CONSUMING FIRE- DEUTERONOMY 4:24



VERSE 11 "

"NO ONE LAY A FOUNDATION A FOUNDATION OTHER THE ONE WHICH IS

ALREADY LAID, WHICH IS JESUS CHRIST"


PAUL IS NOW SAYING THAT THERE IS ANOTHER KIND OF FOUNDATION ,

THE ONE LAID BY JESUS CHRIST - AND WE HAVE TO BUILD ON THAT

FOUNDATION- ATOP OF THAT FOUNDATION AND NOT LAY ANOTHER

FOUNDATION BUT TO BUILD ON THAT FOUNDATION- WHAT ARE THESE


TO CONTINUE.....

verse 12

" THEN IF SOMEONE BUILDS UPON THIS FOUNDATION, ANOTHER WITH

SILVER, AND PRECIOUS STONES, OR WITH WOOD, BAMBOO OR STRAW.



PAUL IS NOW SAYING WE HAVE TO BUILD UPON THIS FOUNDATION


VERSE 13-

"THE WORK OF EACH ONE WILL BE SHOWN FOR WHAT IT IS. THE DAY OF

JUDGEMENT WILL REVEAL IT REPEAT THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT WILL REVEAL

IT, BECAUSE FIRE WILL MAKE EVERYTHING KNOWN. THE FIRE WILL TEST

THE WORK OF EVERYONE"




PAUL IS NOW SAYING ON OUR JUDGEMENT DAY WHETHER GENERAL OR

PARTICULAR JUDGMENT -PARTICULAR MEANING OUR OWN VERY PERSONAL

ON THE DAY WE MEET OUR MAKER, WE WILL FACE JESUS CHRIST.

AND THERE IS FIRE - WHERE WILL THIS FIRE COME FROM.


GOD IS A CONSUMING FIRE- DEUTERONOMY 4:24



JESUS IS GOD- HE WILL BE OUR JUDGE ON THAT DAY WE MEET OUR MAKER


VERSE 14

"IF YOUR WORK WITHSTANDS THE FIRE YOU WILL BE REWARDED"


PAUL IS NOW SAYING TO EACH ONE OF US THAT OUR WORKS WILL BE LAID

UPON THE FOUNDATION

TO BE BURNED WITH GODS CONSUMING FIRE ON THAT DAY OF OUR

JUDGMENT.OUR DEATH





VERSE 15

"BUT IF YOUR WORK BECOMES ASHES , YOU WILL PAY FOR IT REPEAT YOU

WILL PAY FOR IT

YOU WILL BE SAVED repeat YOU WILL BE SAVED , BUT IT WILL BE AS

IF PASSING THROUGH FIRE"





NOW YOU WILL NOTICE THE VERSES 3:10 TO 15 TALKS ABOUT OUR WORKS

THAT WILL BE LAID ON THAT

FOUNDATION WHICH IS JESUS HIMSELF.


PAUL IS SAYING WHAT THE VALUE OF OUR WORKS OUR LIFE ON THIS EARTH WAS - METHAPHORICALLY ARE

THESE WORTH IN GOLD- THOSE WHO LIVED A VERY HOLY AND SAINTLY LIFE ON EARTH


WORTH IN SILVER -LOWER THAT THE WORKS OF THE SAINTS AND THE

APOSTLES


WORTH IN PRECIOUS STONES- I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLAIN THIS. PRECIOUS

STONES DURING THOSE TIMES WERE NOT MUCH APPRECIATED AS TODAY

BECAUSE THE TECHNOLOGY AT THAT TIME HAS NO MEANS TO

GET THE BEAUTY FROM THIS STONES- THEY COULD NOT CUT AND POLISH

IT LIKE THEY DO TO THE

DIAMONDS OF TODAY. KAYA THIRD RATE NA PRECIOUS LANG ANG MGA ITO-

IT WAS STILL GOLD THAT

WAS THE NUMBER ONE.


HOW ABOUT THOSE WHOSE WORKS OF WOOD BAMBOO AND STRAW- THEY WILL

BURN - MEANING

YOUR WORKS DURING YOUR LIFE ON EARTH WERE NOT SO COMMENDABLE IN

THE SIGHT OF GOD. YOU COMMITED SINS THAT WILL NOT RESULT TO DEATH

YOU WILL BE SAVED ACCORDING TO THE VERSES BUT YOU WILL PAY

AS IF PASSING TO FIRE- YES MY FRIEND THAT IS PURGATORY- CALL IT

ANYWAY YOU WANT - IT IS A PLACE TO PURIFY YOU IN THE SIGHT OF

GOD.



WHY DID DAVID AND NEHEMIAH FASTED MOURNED AND PRAYED FOR THEIR

DEAD?

NEHEMIAH 1:4 NEHEMIAH FASTED PRAYED AND MOURNED FOR THE DEAD ,

1:7 FOR THE SINS OF HIS FAMILY AND HIS FATHER WHO DIED AND WAS BURIED IN THE RUINS
2:3 HIS FATHER IS DEAD AND BURIED


1 SAM 31:13 -DAVID TOOK THE BONES OF SAUL AND SON JONATHAN
2nd SAM 1:4 -SAUL AND SON JONATHAN ARE DEAD

1:11- DAVID FASTED PRAYED AND MOURNED FOR SAUL JONATHAN AND THE DEAD


SO NOW YOU WILL SEE THE JEWS REALLY PRAYED FOR THEIR DEAD

MATT 5:25-26 "YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO PRISON UNTIL THE LAST PENNY IS PAID"

matt 12:32- THERE WILL BE NO FORGIVENESS FOR THOSE WHO BLASPHEMY THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THIS LIFE OR IN THE NEXT TO COME- WHAT IS THIS TO COME??

1 peter 3:18-20 "JESUS IN HIS SPIRIT PREACHED TO THIS SPIRITS IN PRISON"- WHO ARE THEN THESE SPIRITS THAT JESUS PREACHED TO, THEY HAVE BEEN DEAD SINCE THE GREAT FLOOD- CERTAINLY THIS IS NOT HELL- SOULS IN HELL ARE
INCOMMUNICADO- ALL HOPES ARE LOST- AND CONDEMNED FOREVER AND EVER AMEN.

1 JOHN 5:16-17 - SINS THAT WILL NOT RESULT TO THE DEATH OF YOUR SOUL AND THAT IS ETERNAL DAMNATION


PAUL SAYS IN 1 COR 3:15 YOU WILL BE REWARDED- YOU WILL PAY ,AS IF PASSING THROUGH FIRE

AND HOW WILL YOU PAY??

YOU WILL PAY UP TO LAST PENNY-THE GOSPWL SAYS

THE SPIRITS IN PRISON- HAD THEY PAID AND JESUS WILL NOW TAKE THEM OUT OF THAT PRISON FOR THE PROMISE OF HIS
RESURRECTION CAN NOW BE IMPLEMENTED-


THE NEXT AGE TO COME??- IS THIS HEAVEN? CERTAINLY NOT- FOR YOU ARE PAID AND FORGIVEN IN HEAVEN

IS THIS HELL-? you can not pay anymore- you have been damned

WHAT IS THIS PLACE AWAITING FOR YOUR FORGIVENESS- THERE IS ONLY ONE PLACE - AS IF PASSING THROUGH FIRE-
FOR YOU ARE BEING PURIFIED-

REVELATION- NOTHING UNCLEAN CAN ENTER HEAVEN-

THIS PLACE OF PURIFICATION CLEANS YOU UP FOR SINS THAT DOES NOT RESULT TO DEATH-

CALL IT WHAT YOU LIKE- BUT YOU CAN NOT DENY THAT THERE IS SUCH PLACE-

AND IT IS THE MERCY OF GOD FOR A SECOND CHANCE AND NO PLACE TO GO AFTER BUT TO HEAVEN-

Post #2
Elias Arzadon Jr wroteon December 8, 2009 at 9:09am
Purgatory


Intermediate state: Purgatory. No second chances – the souls there are saved, but through fire (1 Corinthians 3:15)


“There is a purgatory, and the souls there detained are assisted by the suffrages of the faithful, but especially by the most acceptable sacrifice of the altar” (Council of Trent).


This dogmatic definition contains 3 points of faith that all Catholics are required to believe:

1. There is a purgatory

2. After death, souls suffer there for their sins

3. The living can extend assistance to such souls


There is a purgatory



Forgiveness of sin in the next – Matthew 12:32

“Under the earth” – Revelations 5:2-3; Philippians 2:10



After death, souls suffer there for their sins

“You will not come out of it till you pay the last penny” – Matthew 5:26

“Matthean Parallel” (See: Matthew 18:23-35)

“Lazarusian Incident” (See: Luke 16:19-31)

Spirits in prison – 1 Peter 3:18-20; 4:6


The living can extend assistance to such souls


Restrain not grace from the dead – Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 7:37

See: Ruth 1:8

Offerings/Sacrifice for the dead

2 Maccabees 12:38-36

“And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection” (2 Maccabees 12:43, Douay-Rheims Bible).


Fasting for the for the dead

1 Samuel 31:13;

1 Chronicles 10:12

2 Samuel 1:12


Prayer for the dead

2 Maccabees 12:44-46

“It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins” (2 Maccabees 12:46, Douay-Rheims Bible).


See: Nehemiah 1:4-6, cf. Nehemiah 2:5


Understanding Purgatory:


1. Understanding the doctrine of purgatory demands knowing the nature/attributes of God:

God is Holy (Habakkuk 1:13; Isaiah 6:3; Revelations 4:8; Leviticus 11:44

God is Just (1 John 1:9; Revelations 15:3)

God is Merciful (Psalm 116, Lamentations 3:22, Psalm 103:8)

See: Ruth 2:20

God is Love (1 John 4:8, 16)


2. Understanding the doctrine of purgatory demands a proper understanding of the concept of sin:


Gradation (degrees) of sin

Mortal Sin vs. Venial Sin (1 John 5:16-17)

WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE ONE WIFE BE IT A BISHOP OR A DEACON- 1 TIMOTHY chapter 3

WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE ONE WIFE BE IT A BISHOP OR A DEACON- 1 TIMOTHY chapter 3

Non Catholics just to attack the Catholic Church with their Bishopric and Priests

will not spare the celebacy stand that the Catholic Chruch imposed on the priesthood,

through an ECCLESIASTICAL LAW made by a POPE.

they contend that our BISHOP'S AND PRIEST MUST BE MARRIED according to what the bible said- oh yeah! let us

find out if they understood a very simple verse that only requires a minimum of intelligence -and common sense.


We must put into mind those attacking this gift of GOD to his church do not even
have bishops or priest to talk about-

Billy Graham even commented that God knows who to give this wonderful gift and will receive
it wholeheartedly.

he went further that it drains so much on the coffers of their fellowship providing for
the families of retired Pastors -sending to school their children and providing for the
upkeep of their families.

I remember watching EWTN- THE CONGREGATION OF MOTHER THERESA providing shelter and food
and care to retired , divorced and penniless pastors - what I saw was the old pastor being
hand fed by a sister- he was old and sick- he even apologized for when he was young-he said
too many things against the church that were not even true. Praise God -

"anything you did to the least of my brethren you did it unto me-Matthew 25"

Joel always quotes this- I wonder why? He is not even honest enough to say what fellowship he is
in right now- nor talk about doctrines that they have- he is always in the attack mode saying too many
things and now one by one he is being refuted and still he does not have nor answers any of the questions
that are raised or refutes that we made. I wonder too- if his fellowship does have bishops and priests
what use will you have to raise an issue when you have none of it-

Paul said you cannot give what you do not have-

why compare when you do not have it in you?

So it just boils down to their number one doctrine- as all other Anti-Catholics have as their numero uno
doctrine- validating their existence at the expense of the CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Doctrine number one- "THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THIS AND THE CATHOLIC IS THAT"- THE COMMON DENOMINATOR IN ALL OF THEM.


TIM STAPLES

a convert to Catholiscm and was an avid anti-Catholic and whose only dream in life was to be a BAPTIST PASTOR

with a wife playing the piano by the side in his chapel, told me- "I began to realize that we were all
HIDING behind the shadow of the Catholic Church" - read this in the book "SURPRISED BY THE TRUTH"

To keep us afloat we had to argue and continously argue against the CATHOLIC CHURCH-
Like Islam- all they ever wanted was the world to recognize prophet Mohammed like JESUS CHRIST who has so much

influenced the world.


1 TIMOTHY 3:1-12 "If someone aspires to the overseer's (bishop) ministry, he is without a doubt looking for a

noble task. It is necessary that the overseer be beyond reproach , "THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE"...........
AND A DEACON MUST BE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE"

THIS SIMPLY MEANS THAT IF THEY WERE ORDAINED TO THE POSITION OF BEING A BISHOP OR A DEACON AND THEY ARE
MARRIED. THAT IS THE ONLY WIFE THAT THEY WILL HAVE IN THEIR LIFETIME- IF SHE DIES- THEY CAN NO LONGER RE-MARRY

COMMON SENSE- I AM NOT A BISHOP AND A DEACON- I AM JUST A LAY PRACTICING CATHOLIC. WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS
DOES NOT CONCERN ME- DOES IT MEAN I CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE TWO THREE FOUR OR MAYBE MORE WIVES IN MY LIFE????

COMPRENDE JOEL???

NOW VERSE 6 "he must not be a recent convert, lest he become conceited........."

IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

A PRIEST CAN NOT MARRY- WHILE A MARRIED MAN CAN BECOME A PRIEST

There are many converts and clergies of various protestant sects who are married and are now priests
in the Catholic Church- one is FR RUTLER- HE IS GOOD AND HIS PHILISOPHY IS SUPERB.

The condition imposed to these converts is that they too cannot re-marry if they are widowed and they
will never be promoted to the position of a bishop.

Now - there are many many convert of the ANGLICAN CHURCH coming into the Catholic Church now and the VATICAN
had to put up a Department to study and accomodate them.

There are many bishops of the ANGLICAN CHURCH WHO ARE COMING IN TOO- millions of their members the news says.

It is for the POPE NOW TO STUDY THE MATTER ON THE BISHOPS OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

AFTERALL- HE CAN DO WHATEVER THERE IS TO BIND AND LOOSE- CHRIST GAVE HIS OFFICE THAT AUTHORITY. AMEN

THE BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF JESUS ACCORDING TO NON-CATHOLICS

THE BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF JESUS ACCORDING TO
NON-CATHOLICS- EXCEPT THE EASTERN ORTHODOXY

DID ST. MARY THE MOTHER OF JESUS CHRIST HAVE A LOT OF CHILDREN IN THE FLESH?

There is not a passage in the bible where it says Mary these are your children

nor a passage that says these are the children of Mary- you must remember that

Jesus was the only Son of Mary


Protestant will say that Joseph never had any relations with Mary until she gave birth to Jesus.

if we were to follow this argument and give a conclusion that the protestant says that Joseph had

sexual relations after Jesus was born.


Then Jesus will not be with us after the end of time-

Jesus said in Matthew 26:20 "FOR I am with you always until the end of the world"

So Jesus will not be with us after the end of time or the world . right Harlan and Joel??



The virgin is with a child and bears a son-
Isa 7:14-

"a son"- here means that the virgin will give birth to a baby boy- not a baby girl

Protestants will say - a son means one of the children-

when Jesus was an adult- here is what the Bible said:
Isnt he "THE SON" and not "a son" of but a carpenter from Nazareth?

"This gate shall be kept shut, No one will open it or go through it ,since the GOD OF ISRAEL has been through it"-

the Lord Jesus Christ will pass through it and be born in the flesh. EZ 44:2


If these men named James, Judas, Simon , and Josph were sons of Mary and brothers of Jesus then they are the
natural sons of Joseph, if their fathers was Joseph, the husband of Mary.


But we can read in the bible that there were only two persons names James.

The first James was the brother of St. John the beloved apostle, both are the sons of ZEBEDEE mAT 10:2

and the other James was the brother of Judas; these men were the sons of Alpheus ang the namw Alpheus in GREEK

IS CLEOPHAS -luke 6:15-16


Another proof based on the bible is that these men named Judas and James who are said to be the brothers of Jesus

were from a different father who is Alpheus and not Joseph.


"On entering the city , they went to the room upstairs where they were staying .

Present there were Peter ,John James Andrew ,Philip , Thomas Bartolimew ,Matthew and James son of Alpheus;

Simon the Zealot and judas, son of James" (Acts 1:13).

And as to Joseph it can be seen clearly as to whos was his mother. It was not Mary who was the mother of Jesus.


Mark the evangelist has this to say," there were also some women watching from a distance; among them were

Mary Magdalene, Mary the Mother of James the younger and Joseph and Salome" Mark 15:40


Let us remember that these women were far from the cross where Jesus was nailed.

While they were going nearer the cross , one can see that there stood Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ,at the

foot of the cross, and this other Mary the aunt of Jesus. "Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother, His mother's

sister Mary, who was the wife of CLEOPHAS, and MARY OF MAGDALENE -jOHN 19:25.


AS it is alredy said from the start that this Mary, who is the sister of the mother of Jesus, is the wife

of CLEOPHAS, which is GREEK term for ALPHEUS who is the father of James, Judas and Joseph.

Now it is clear that these men were just cousins of Jesus.not brothers who are of the same mother and father.

The old testament said that the Jews customarily practiced calling brother those of the nearest kin but not

necessarily brother in the FLESH.

ABRAHAM calls LOT who is his nephew, BROTHER. GEN 29:13-15

ST PAUL CALLS ALL HIS NEAREST RELATIVES AS BROTHERS ROM 9:3



The jews do not have a word for cousins , uncle,auntie, or GRANDFATHER-, only FATHER-AB and MOTHER-ACK

their vocabulary was very limited- that is why they adopted the GREEK writing and reading during the

HELLENISTIC PERIOD-GREEK INFLUENCE ON THEM.

Thus it was unavoidable that during the time of Jesus ,a ll cousins and realtives were also called brothers and
sisters.

And even in the masuretic manuscripts-(HEBREW) WE WILL FIND THAT ABSENCE OF VOWELS AND PUNCTUATIONS.


LUKE NOT A JEW WHO WROTE TO THE GENTILES- had to be specific- HE CALLED THE BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF JESUS

AS HIS "RELATIVES"- but on the subsequent verse we will find because this was in JERUSALEM- A JEW REPLIED

as LUKE quoted him in his gospel- "HERE ARE YOUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS"- which LUKE earlier describes as

"HIS RELATIVES"

WHILE MATTHEW A JEW WROTE IN HIS GOSPEL "the brothers and sisters of JESUS "

bOTH WERE WRITIN ON THAT SIMILAR INCIDENT IN THEIR GOSPELS


Another strong indication that Jesus had not brother in the flesh is that while Jesus was dying on the cross,

he commended his mother to St. John , the youngest apostle, And from that day on John took Mary into his own home

John 19:27, if JESUS had a younger brother why is that Jesus did not turn his Mother over to him and let them go
home because during that time Joseph his foster father was already dead. It was also customary to the Jews by Law

that the second child must take care of his widowed father or mother.


Instead he he left his mother to the care of John the apostle that he loved indicating that Jesus had no brother

nor a sister.

This is a blasphemous attack on the BLESSED VIRGIN MARY TO SAY THAT SHE HAD MANY CHILDREN IN THE FLESH

THUS SAYS THE BIBLE-