Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

Congratulations Dave, What is written above was d...

2012-05-26T16:22:42.830-04:00

Congratulations Dave,

What is written above was driven out of pure merciful grace, and not of your own. It should be promoted and espoused as a work of the Church ,as a micro catechism of charity and true eccumenism that has come of age.
This can be surmised as a message of the spiritual maturity of a 2000 year old church comprised of individually fallen men but inspired by God through unity to the Sacred Heart of Christ pierced at the cross. Simply put, its a lesson of Divine Mercy. Thank you dear brother!

2012-05-26T16:19:06.651-04:00

This comment has been removed by the author.

Hi Brian . Part two . First he explains why the d...

2012-05-25T06:36:06.196-04:00

Hi Brian .

Part two .
First he explains why the dead are called sleeping in the bible . Because our Lord can raise a dead person more easyer than we could wake a sleeping person .So the same person could be called dead ( for us ) and sleeping ( for the Lord ) .
The about praying to saints and the saints praying for us and so on . If you remember that in the bible , whether old or new testament , many many times , angels appeared to many prophets and also in the new testament , many times angels appeared and spoke with Zachariah for example , with the blessed virgin Mary , with our Lord Jesus Christ Himself in Ghetsemany . And also after the resurrection of our Lord , angels appeared and spoke with Simon Peter , with Philip , with John...In fact most of the times it was an angel speaking with John in the apocalypse ( book of revelation ). Now If the angels know what is hapening on earth ( in fact our Lord Jesus who is the truth and never lie said so , when he said that the children`s angels always see the face of God ) and also there is joy in heaven over one repented sinner more than 99 who did not need too ) and so on. Now , we are promised that we will be like angels in heaven , and our God disputing with those which denied the resurrection of the dead , said that God is the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob , now He is the God of the living not of the dead .
So 1-angels know what is hapening on earth . 2-Angels do appear to people and speak and listen to them . 3-we will be like angels . 4-the saints are alive not dead . 5-Abraham knew exactly what was hapening on earth . 6-Moses and Elijah appeared with our Lord during the transfiguration . 7-all the verses which Dave quoted for you from the old and new testament .8-We are all members of the one body of Christ which is the Church . 9-if one members suffers the whole body suffers with it , if one body is glorified the whole body rejoices . 10-Love is stronger than death , the only reason why the saints are saints is because of their faith hope and love and the greatest of all is love which will be forever .
I could continue but i have said enough on the communion of saints .

Now about soul sleeping and so on . Here again ( and Dave could correct me or criticise me on this if i am wrong plz ) when we speak about those which departed from this life to the next , we must always remember something very very important . We exist in time , heaven and hell are in eternity. Eternity means timeless and endless . So from our point of vue , resurrection and judgement will take place in the future , but for those which are in eternity , everything is now for them . this is how we can understand and explain 1 Thess and 1 Cor 15 and so on .I dont think that i can explain this thing more than i did . At least i hope that i did not cause you to be more confused than before and GOD BLESS YOU .

Hi Brian . I would like to quote a part of saint ...

2012-05-25T06:35:33.504-04:00

Hi Brian .

I would like to quote a part of saint Augustine`s homelie on John 11:1-54.
"And after that He says unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleeps; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep." It was true what He said. To his sisters he was dead, to the Lord he was asleep. He was dead to men, who could not raise him again; but the Lord aroused him with as great ease from the tomb as one arouses a sleeper from his bed. Hence it was in reference to His own power that He spoke of him as sleeping: for others also, who are dead, are frequently spoken of in Scripture as sleeping; as when the apostle says, "But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you sorrow not, even as others who have no hope." 1 Thessalonians 4:13 Therefore he also spoke of them as sleeping, because foretelling their resurrection. And so, all the dead are sleeping, both good and bad. But just as, in the case of those who sleep and waken day by day, there is a great difference as to what they severally see in their sleep: some experience pleasant dreams; others, dreams so frightful that the waking are afraid to fall asleep for fear of their recurrence: so every individual sleeps and wakens in circumstances peculiar to himself. And there is a difference as to the kind of custody one may be placed in, who is afterwards to be taken before the judge. For the kind of custody in which men are placed depends on the merits of the case: some are required to be guarded by lictors, an office humane and mild, and becoming a citizen; others are given up to subordinates; some, again, are sent to prison: and in the prison itself all are not thrust together into its lowest dungeons, but dealt with in proportion to the merits and superior gravity of the charges. As, then, there are different kinds of custody among those engaged in official life, so there are different kinds of custody for the dead, and differing merits in those who rise again. The beggar was taken into custody, so was the rich man: but the one into Abraham's bosom; the other, where he thirsted, and found not a drop of water. Luke 16:22-24

10. Therefore, to make this the occasion of instructing your Charity, all souls have, when they quit this world, their different receptions. The good have joy; the evil, torments. But when the resurrection takes place, both the joy of the good will be fuller and the torments of the wicked heavier, when they shall be tormented in the body. The holy patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, and good believers, have been received into peace; but all of them have still in the end to receive the fulfillment of the divine promises; for they have been promised also the resurrection of the flesh, the destruction of death, and eternal life with the angels. This we have all to receive together; for the rest, which is given immediately after death, every one, if worthy of it, receives when he dies. The patriarchs first received it— think only from what they rest; the prophets afterwards; more recently the apostles; still more lately the holy martyrs, and day by day the good and faithful. Thus some have now been in that rest for long, some not so long; others for fewer years, and others whose entrance therein is still less than recent. But when they shall wake from this sleep, they shall all together receive the fulfillment of the promise.

I just found out due to a thread cited here in com...

2012-05-23T09:27:57.468-04:00

I just found out due to a thread cited here in comments:

creavsevolu.blogspot.fr/2012/02/bora-zivkovic-geocentrism-physical-age.html

A commenting guest - a rarity so far - has had the friendliness to post a link to:

christian-wilderness.forumvi.com/t39-stationary-earth

where that link was provided.

Rest of you: Aldrin and Irwin were freemasons.
2012-05-23T09:25:02.236-04:00
Rest of you: Aldrin and Irwin were freemasons.

http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/spacemason/

Hi Roberto . Everything you wrote was correct exc...

2012-05-22T00:45:06.199-04:00

Hi Roberto .
Everything you wrote was correct except my name , it`s مارون

nadia, Sungenis is not Mrs but Mr. Robert is a man...

2012-05-21T04:25:41.046-04:00

nadia, Sungenis is not Mrs but Mr. Robert is a man's name.

قلت الحق منيح, يا مرون. ريتني آلتاقك في يوم بي لبن...

2012-05-21T02:50:01.000-04:00

قلت الحق منيح, يا مرون. ريتني آلتاقك في يوم بي لبنان. / 'Ilit il-Ha'' mniiH, ya Maroun. Reitenii ilté'ak fi yawm bi Libnén. :P (You spoke the truth well, Maroun. I'd like to meet you one day in Lebanon. :P)

PS: Please correct the Arabic of this Canadian student.

Typical blind person. Amazing how these murderers ...

2012-05-21T01:18:04.832-04:00

Typical blind person.
Amazing how these murderers try to convince themselves that they are not killing a humanbeing , because he is still dependent on the mother...So????????? even after they are born , infants still depend on their parents or on other people to survive . Does this mean that just because they depend on someone to survive and live , then they are not humanbeings? What kind of a nonsence is this ?
Hey mr atheist , what about a retarded person ? probably according to you they are not humanbeings also because they depend on other people ?
The end does not justify the mean mr Tim . You said that people can chose to have an abortion for the well being and for the benefit of the mother and father and also the baby himself . So , the end is wellbeing and your mean is killing and because killing is wrong then your argument falls apart and is refuted .
That`s the problem nowadays with utilitarianism and edonism , the pursuit of happyness at any cost, and what kind of happyness,at what price?
So Tim , according to you , the Nazis were correct when they decided to kill those whom they did not consider humanbeings?They also thought and taught that they were doing what they were doing for the common good and for the wellbeing of the Nazis .
By the way Tim , abortion causes daily more than 130000 killings .And why do you support an idea or ideology and when someone wants to use the same argument or ideology against you , then all hell breaks loose? For example , Dave was telling you , for the common good of all , we can and should kill atheists , and you were so upset , why may i ask?it is only a taste of your own medicine .Even if you try to invent 100000000000000 reasons why it`s not the same , we can still invent 30000000000000000 why it is . And even though the reasons are different , we can still do with you whatever we see fit and good for the common good .
Do you realise how stupid your argument is?
I doubt that you will understand what Dave was trying to tell you, still , we are responsible for what we tell you and not for what you understand .
Please stop being pro death .I know that you said this : I don't think abortion is a "good thing". I would never encourage someone to use it as a toy or to use it as a form of birth control . The same pro choice nonsence which in the end is nothing else but pro death .This is what you are saying , i would never kill my own baby , but if someone wants to do it then i respect their choice . The choice to kill sir ? If you are not pro life , then you are pro death .Whether you like it , accept it or not , but you are an infanticide and proud of it .The victim sir are the infants , you should protect their rights to live and not the right to kill them . Please , even though you are an atheist , please repent .

2012-05-19T23:01:03.811-04:00

This comment has been removed by the author.

orthodox:very strange topic for some catholic site...

2012-05-19T21:44:45.077-04:00

orthodox:very strange topic for some catholic site. Everyone knows the trurh about september the 11 and the Kubrick Apollo, everyone know the Bible's imperative that we must always tell the truth:

nd when great multitudes stood about him, so that they trod one upon another, he began to say to his disciples: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2 For there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed: nor hidden that shall not be known. 3 For whatsoever things you have spoken in darkness shall be published in the light: and that which you have spoken in the ear in the chambers shall be preached on the housetops.
in afganistan were killed mothers and babies recently, your Leon Paneta said - very sorry, but other incidents like this one are possible to happen...
Surely, our church fathers - Vasilios Megas (Basil the Great)and the others believe in Genesis, chapter 1, which ingludes geocentrism, young cosmos, the earth including etc.
this mrs Sungenis only said things, which are obvious. I don't know well the catholic mind, but it is supposed to be christian - telling thruth, believing in the Scripture. If some jew is killing someone and I react, this is not antisemitism.
If someone is gnostic, why mrs Sungenis is gnostic too? Is my english not good enough?
Nadia Karagiozowa, WARNA, BULGARIA

Yes, I did! Thanks for informing me about this. :-...

2012-05-19T17:30:21.534-04:00

Yes, I did! Thanks for informing me about this. :-)

I hope I am getting this correct... Your posted co...

2012-05-19T17:26:49.778-04:00

I hope I am getting this correct...
Your posted comment says, "...book of Job (which is usually considered of a later date than Samuel and Chronicles)..."

I believe that you meant "of an earlier date"...perhaps similar to the way Job is listed in this link:
http://rosemck1.tripod.com/bible.html

The Ubiquitous wrote: Judging by his reaction thr...

2012-05-19T12:55:43.086-04:00

The Ubiquitous wrote:

Judging by his reaction throughout and especially at the end, it doesn't seem like he got that at all.

Perhaps it is partially a question of format. Facebook does not do well with these tributaries of argument. We really have to force folks to stay on topic.

I am divorced from the situation, so I don't really know. However, from principle, it is sometimes the right thing to humble ourselves and apologize, even if we were 100 percent in the right. To use an analogy: It did us no good to insist Galileo suffered house arrest when the thrust of the argument was not one punishment or another but any punishment at all, and something similar with the Inquisition. If memory serves, the Pope apologized for both anyway.

The Ubiquitous wrote: ... and how not to say them...

2012-05-19T12:51:07.265-04:00

The Ubiquitous wrote:

... and how not to say them?

It is true I did but skim what you wrote, and that it did leave a bad taste in my mouth. I imagine more casual, less favorable readers would have had a even worse reaction. This is, perhaps, my point.

Suppose, then, it is not a matter of content but of form: What is a better way to use the format to your favor? Long, long comments do not suit a Facebook thread. Short and pithy is better, and makes it easier to stay on topic. This much is essential, especially given the Facebook character limit and lack of even rudimentary formatting.

I am divorced from the situation, so I don'...

2012-05-19T12:49:25.735-04:00
I am divorced from the situation, so I don't really know. However, from principle, it is sometimes the right thing to humble ourselves and apologize, even if we were 100 percent in the right.

I did virtually apologize (or at least state faults) twice:

"My criticisms, on the other hand, were directed solely towards bad arguments or unwillingness to interact with opposing arguments, not at persons (as my opponents are now doing). If they did spill over a little bit to persons, it was not my intention, and I apologize if so. My intention is always to attack bad reasoning and arguments."

"I agree that I was too forceful at first, in retrospect. It was bad tactically, and in terms of charity. . . . The analogy I used (killing of atheists), though it is logically analogous to your treatment of the preborn, was too extreme of an example for me to expect it to work in dialogue. Pamela did much better in that respect, with her excellent reductio analogy of slavery."

If Tim had started to soften a little at the end when I wrote that, we could have actually broken through the impasse. But instead he decided to say I was deliberately dishonest, and blocked me.

So I think the contrast in attitudes is clear. I acknowledged the mistakes I had made, but denied that this proved I was an arrogant ass by nature, because that is simply not the case. My biggest faults that I struggle with lie in quite different areas. :-)

Forget winning the argument, as important as it is. How does this not undermine our ultimate cause?

I have already explained all that. Your demands are excessive and you are missing many important factors here, as I think I have shown.

You say I should apologize. I did, twice. You say I should explain the reductio. I did, twice. You got the person wrong who wanted comments removed, but then miss important aspects of the ethics of such things, that are already public.

You don't seem to realize that I am very often writing in terms of pedagogy and educational purposes: to show how to interact with various outlooks hostile to Christianity. This has value in itself. It's a great benefit of the Internet, that stuff like this can be read by many hundreds.

I wouldn't even waste time with this farce of a discussion if it was just me and him. The moment the insults began it would have been over. But because it is public it can be a teaching moment and an illustration of how not to argue; of what positions not to take . . .

No problem! I'd have to see more of what woul...

2012-05-19T04:40:08.291-04:00
No problem!

I'd have to see more of what would be required, and it would probably be a flat rate: something like $100 or $50 if it isn't too difficult. 4:38 AM here! Nite!

It takes a certain temperament. All is by God'...

2012-05-19T04:38:16.041-04:00
It takes a certain temperament. All is by God's grace. What He calls us to do, He enables us to do:

Philippians 2:13 for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

Taking insults is part of the life of any evangelist and apologist. If someone has a particularly hard time with that, then I'd say he is likely (almost certainly) not called to be a full-time apologist (or even a part-time one). He or she wouldn't last a week. He'd be miserable.

But we can defend ourselves, too. Cardinal Newman did (Charles Kingsley: Apologia). St. Paul did (his trial). John Wesley did, against numerous falsehoods spread around about him (I just did a book of his quotes). Turning the other cheek is not an absolute requirement in all situations (if so, Paul didn't know it).

Like I said, my big faults that I struggle with lie in very different areas: fortunately not directly connected to apologetics at all.

I do not mean to belabor this, good sir, so forgiv...

2012-05-19T04:32:04.050-04:00
I do not mean to belabor this, good sir, so forgive me my incessant nagging.

Oh, and incidentally --- if someone were to commission from you a tract, what would you charge? As in, what is your time worth to put together, say, a summary of early Church history that would fit in a three-fold flyer?

(Nor are you arrogant. I wonder, even so, at how c...

2012-05-19T04:28:37.431-04:00
(Nor are you arrogant. I wonder, even so, at how casually you can throw off the insults and tenor of these hatreds! Perhaps it is a question of acclimation and my naif tenderness, but I would worry for my sake and all those who saw me that I did not give glory to truth.)

Augustine is not a near match but a mere parallel....

2012-05-19T04:25:38.069-04:00
Augustine is not a near match but a mere parallel. You are not ignorant.

But replace "ignorant" with "the appearance of arrogance" and it has roughly the same meaning as what I say.

I would be haunted by my folly in defending the fa...

2012-05-19T04:24:03.059-04:00
I would be haunted by my folly in defending the faith, my intransigence, my critical mistakes. If I cause any of these to sin, it would be better that a millstone ...

As Augustine wrote, if regarding the interpretation of Genesis:

... we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

I've said about all I can say on this, at grea...

2012-05-19T04:23:14.468-04:00
I've said about all I can say on this, at great length. We won't fully agree. In the end it is my burden. If people think ill of me, they will.

I have determined that it is worthwhile to post the exchange as it is. I have no problem if some people think I did badly, because I partly agree with them.

The foolish thing would be to have an illusion that we are somehow perfect in a discussion and could never do any better in any respect. There is always room for improvement. That's what it means to be a human being.

But we don't cease doing an important thing because we aren't able to do it perfectly.

I post it warts and all, and let the pieces fall where they may.

The truly arrogant person would never do what I've done here, either: post a piece with tremendous insults lobbed at him by three people, then engage in this lengthy self-analysis with a guy on "my side" where I transparently interact (in public) with about a dozen more criticisms. Arrogant people don't do that! I majored in sociology and psychology. I know a little bit about human behavior.

I have said I screwed-up in some ways. But I leave it for all to see anyway. No profoundly arrogant person would act in such a manner. He would be too proud to let that be public at all, and would take it down (or at least the parts where he feels he didn't do well).

But I leave it up, because I never have the illusion that I am flawless and perfect in my apologetics in the first place.

It is what it is. I post all of it without editing our portions, for people to make up their own minds.

There is more to the trivium than grammar and l...

2012-05-19T04:14:51.262-04:00
There is more to the trivium than grammar and logic. It matters as much, especially online, how a thing is written.

Yes! I agree completely, which is why I said that I screwed-up in some respects. The apologist knows as much as anyone that he is a flawed human being and far from perfect (see, e.g., C. S. Lewis' "Apologist's Evening Prayer").

So I admitted that, but I don't agree that the flaws I exhibited prove I am all these terrible things that three persons in the thread claimed I was. Those are lies.

Criticizing specific shortcomings is one thing; to go on to sweeping character judgments and judging of heart and motivation quite another.

I don't claim to be perfect! What I do is put up these dialogues with the complete transcript of both parties, warts and all.

People can see my heart, if they look close enough; what motivates me. I have always maintained that a person who has a besetting sin of arrogance would never be a full-time apologist, because we are routinely lambasted and personally insulted (in public), and the truly arrogant person would never put up with all that: not for the pay I get!! :-)

He might do it for riches or fame, but I have neither of those. I have to live like a pauper; I have to endure insults on a weekly basis; sometimes daily. Many many people would not do that, whether they are prone to arrogance or not (I know, because I've had people say many times, "how do you put up with all that? I could never do it!").

We put up with it because we know it is part of the package, and God gives us the grace to do so as part of our vocational ability that He has given us. We must do what we're called to do, including the bad stuff.

It doesn't really bother me that much. It certainly doesn't, personally. What disgusts me is how such attacks ruin dialogue: a thing I care very deeply and passionately about.

I detest THAT (sabotaging of good discussion). I don't detest at all the people who do it.

A person prone to resentment would not last a month as a full-time apologist. I don't struggle with that; never have. And it's good to not have that problem, in a profession that inevitably involves plenty of personal attacks.

I'll go to bed tonight not giving one thought to all I've been accused of in this discussion. It's all part of the game of apologetics. You just can't let it bother you, as an apologist. And it doesn't.

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

Congratulations Dave, What is written above was d...

Hi Brian . Part two . First he explains why the d...

Hi Brian . I would like to quote a part of saint ...

I just found out due to a thread cited here in com...

Rest of you: Aldrin and Irwin were freemasons. 2012-05-23T09:25:02.236-04:00 Rest of you: Aldrin and Irwin were freemasons.http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/spacemason/

Hi Roberto . Everything you wrote was correct exc...

nadia, Sungenis is not Mrs but Mr. Robert is a man...

قلت الحق منيح, يا مرون. ريتني آلتاقك في يوم بي لبن...

Typical blind person. Amazing how these murderers ...

orthodox:very strange topic for some catholic site...

Yes, I did! Thanks for informing me about this. :-...

I hope I am getting this correct... Your posted co...

The Ubiquitous wrote: Judging by his reaction thr...

The Ubiquitous wrote: ... and how not to say them...

I am divorced from the situation, so I don'...

No problem! I'd have to see more of what woul...

It takes a certain temperament. All is by God'...

I do not mean to belabor this, good sir, so forgiv...

(Nor are you arrogant. I wonder, even so, at how c...

Augustine is not a near match but a mere parallel....

I would be haunted by my folly in defending the fa...

I've said about all I can say on this, at grea...

There is more to the trivium than grammar and l...

Rest of you: Aldrin and Irwin were freemasons.
2012-05-23T09:25:02.236-04:00
Rest of you: Aldrin and Irwin were freemasons.

http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/spacemason/