Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 591269 comments on the CBC News story from Jul 10, 2007, titled Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican. In it, CBC News reports that:

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBC News.


Hamilton, Canada

#423006 Feb 16, 2013
From the ROMAN CATHOLIC NEWS from the top right hand column of this forum.

Conclaves, rituals, oaths and secrecy explained.

If I hear the word SECRECY one more time from the catholic church I am going to puke!

Fort Frances, Canada

#423007 Feb 16, 2013
1 Corinthians 13

King James Version (KJV)

13 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Fort Frances, Canada

#423008 Feb 16, 2013
Matthew Henry's Commentary

1COR. 13

Verses 1-3

Here the apostle shows what more excellent way he meant, or had in view, in the close of the former chapter, namely, charity, or, as it is commonly elsewhere rendered, love—agape: not what is meant by charity in our common use of the word, which most men understand of alms-giving, but love in its fullest and most extensive meaning, true love to God and man, a benevolent disposition of mind towards our fellow-christians, growing out of sincere and fervent devotion to God. This living principle of all duty and obedience is the more excellent way of which the apostle speaks, preferable to all gifts. Nay, without this the most glorious gifts are nothing, of no account to us, of no esteem in the sight of God. He specifies, 1. The gift of tongues: Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal, 1 Cor. 13:1. Could a man speak all the languages on earth, and that with the greatest propriety, elegance, and fluency, could he talk like an angel, and yet be without charity, it would be all empty noise, mere unharmonious and useless sound, that would neither profit nor delight. It is not talking freely, nor finely, nor learnedly, of the things of God, that will save ourselves, or profit others, if we are destitute of holy love. It is the charitable heart,

Fort Frances, Canada

#423009 Feb 16, 2013
Matthew Henry's Commentary
1COR 13
II. It is kind—chresteuetai. It is benign, bountiful; it is courteous and obliging. The law of kindness is in her lips; her heart is large, and her hand open. She is ready to show favours and to do good. She seeks to be useful; and not only seizes on opportunities of doing good, but searches for them. This is her general character. She is patient under injuries, and apt and inclined to do all the good offices in her power. And under these two generals all the particulars of the character may be reduced.

III. Charity suppresses envy: It envieth not; it is not grieved at the good of others; neither at their gifts nor at their good qualities, their honours not their estates. If we love our neighbour we shall be so far from envying his welfare, or being displeased with it, that we shall share in it and rejoice at it. His bliss and sanctification will be an addition to ours, instead of impairing or lessening it. This is the proper effect of kindness and benevolence: envy is the effect of ill-will. The prosperity of those to whom we wish well can never grieve us; and the mind which is bent on doing good to all can never with ill to any.


Fort Frances, Canada

#423010 Feb 16, 2013
IV. Charity subdues pride and vain-glory; It vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, is not bloated with self-conceit, does not swell upon its acquisitions, nor arrogate to itself that honour, or power, or respect, which does not belong to it. It is not insolent, apt to despise others, or trample on them, or treat them with contempt and scorn. Those who are animated with a principle of true brotherly love will in honour prefer one another, Rom. 12:10. They will do nothing out of a spirit of contention or vain-glory, but in lowliness of mind will esteem others better than themselves, Phil. 2:3. True love will give us an esteem of our brethren, and raise our value for them; and this will limit our esteem of ourselves, and prevent the tumours of self-conceit and arrogance. These ill qualities can never grow out of tender affection for the brethren, nor a diffusive benevolence. The word rendered in our translation vaunteth itself bears other significations; nor is the proper meaning, as I can find, settled; but in every sense and meaning true charity stands in opposition to it. The Syriac renders it, non tumultuatur—does not raise tumults and disturbances. Charity calms the angry passions, instead of raising them. Others render it, Non perperàm et perversè agit—It does not act insidiously with any, seek to ensnare them, nor tease them with needless importunities and addresses. It is not froward, nor stubborn and untractable, nor apt to be cross and contradictory. Some understand it of dissembling and flattery, when a fair face is put on, and fine words are said, without any regard to truth, or intention of good. Charity abhors such falsehood and flattery. Nothing is commonly more pernicious, nor more apt to cross the purposes of true love and good will.


Fort Frances, Canada

#423011 Feb 16, 2013
V. Charity is careful not to pass the bounds of decency; ouk aschemonei—it behaveth not unseemly; it does nothing indecorous, nothing that in the common account of men is base or vile. It does nothing out of place or time; but behaves towards all men as becomes their rank and ours, with reverence and respect to superiors, with kindness and condescension to inferiors, with courtesy and good-will towards all men. It is not for breaking order, confounding ranks bringing all men on a level; but for keeping up the distinction God has made between men, and acting decently in its own station, and minding its own business, without taking upon it to mend, or censure, or despise, the conduct of others. Charity will do nothing that misbecomes it.
VI. Charity is an utter enemy to selfishness: Seeketh not its own, does not inordinately desire nor seek its own praise, or honour, or profit, or pleasure. Indeed self-love, in some degree, is natural to all men, enters into their very constitution. And a reasonable love of self is by our Saviour made the measure of our love to others, that charity which is here described, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The apostle does not mean that charity destroys all regard to self; he does not mean that the charitable man should never challenge what is his own, but utterly neglect himself and all his interests. Charity must then root up that principle which is wrought into our nature. But charity never seeks its own to the hurt of others, or with the neglect of others. It often neglects its own for the sake of others; prefers their welfare, and satisfaction, and advantage, to its own; and it ever prefers the weal of the public, of the community, whether civil or ecclesiastical, to its private advantage. It would not advance, nor aggrandize, nor enrich, nor gratify itself, at the cost and damage of the public.
VII. It tempers and restrains the passions. Ou paroxynetai—is not exasperated. It corrects a sharpness of temper, sweetens and softens the mind, so that it does not suddenly conceive, nor long continue, a vehement passion. Where the fire of love is kept in, the flames of wrath will not easily kindle, nor long keep burning. Charity will never be angry without a cause, and will endeavour to confine the passions within proper limits, that they may not exceed the measure that is just, either in degree or duration. Anger cannot rest in the bosom where love reigns. It is hard to be angry with those we love, but very easy to drop our resentments and be reconciled.

Fort Frances, Canada

#423012 Feb 16, 2013
VIII. Charity thinks no evil. It cherishes no malice, nor gives way to revenge: so some understand it. It is not soon, nor long, angry; it is never mischievous, nor inclined to revenge; it does not suspect evil of others, ou logizetai to kakon—it does not reason out evil, charge guilt upon them by inference and innuendo, when nothing of this sort appears open. True love is not apt to be jealous and suspicious; it will hide faults that appear, and draw a veil over them, instead of hunting and raking out those that lie covered and concealed: it will never indulge suspicion without proofs, but will rather incline to darken and disbelieve evidence against the person it affects. It will hardly give into an ill opinion of another, and it will do it with regret and reluctance when the evidence cannot be resisted; hence it will never be forward to suspect ill, and reason itself into a bad opinion upon mere appearances, nor give way to suspicion without any. It will not make the worst construction of things, but put the best face that it can on circumstances that have no good appearance.
IX. The matter of its joy and pleasure is here suggested: 1. Negatively: It rejoiceth not in iniquity. It takes no pleasure in doing injury or hurt to any. It thinks not evil of any, without very clear proof. It wishes ill to none, much less will it hurt or wrong any, and least of all make this matter of its delight, rejoice in doing harm and mischief. Nor will it rejoice at the faults and failings of others, and triumph over them, either out of pride or ill-will, because it will set off its own excellences or gratify its spite. The sins of others are rather the grief of a charitable spirit than its sport or delight; they will touch it to the quick, and stir all its compassion, but give it no entertainment. It is the very height of malice to take pleasure in the misery of a fellow-creature. And is not falling into sin the greatest calamity that can befal one? How inconsistent is it with Christian charity, to rejoice at such fall! 2. Affirmatively: It rejoiceth in the truth, is glad of the success of the gospel, commonly called the truth, by way of emphasis, in the New Testament; and rejoices to see men moulded into an evangelical temper by it, and made good. It takes no pleasure in their sins, but is highly delighted to see them do well, to approve themselves men of probity and integrity. It gives it much satisfaction to see truth and justice prevail among men, innocency cleared, and mutual faith and trust established, and to see piety and true religion flourish.

Fort Frances, Canada

#423013 Feb 16, 2013

X. It beareth all things, it endureth all things, panta stegei, panta hypomenei. Some read the first, covers all things. So the original also signifies. Charity will cover a multitude of sins, 1 Pet. 4:8. It will draw a veil over them, as far as it can consistently with duty. It is not for blazing nor publishing the faults of a brother, till duty manifestly demands it. Necessity only can extort this from the charitable mind. Though such a man be free to tell his brother his faults in private, he is very unwilling to expose him by making them public. Thus we do by our own faults, and thus charity would teach us to do by the faults of others; not publish them to their shame and reproach, but cover them from public notice as long as we can, and be faithful to God and to others. Or, it beareth all things,—will pass by and put up with injuries, without indulging anger or cherishing revenge, will be patient upon provocation, and long patient, panta hypomenei—holds firm, though it be much shocked, and borne hard upon; sustains all manner of injury and ill usage, and bears up under it, such as curses, contumacies, slanders, prison, exile, bonds, torments, and death itself, for the sake of the injurious, and of others; and perseveres in this firmness. Note, What a fortitude and firmness fervent love will give the mind! What cannot a lover endure for the beloved and for his sake! How many slights and injuries will he put up with! How many hazards will he run and how many difficulties encounter!

XI. Charity believes and hopes well of others: Believeth all things; hopeth all things. Indeed charity does by no means destroy prudence, and, out of mere simplicity and silliness, believe every word, Prov. 14:15. Wisdom may dwell with love, and charity be cautious. But it is apt to believe well of all, to entertain a good opinion of them when there is no appearance to the contrary; nay, to believe well when there may be some dark appearances, if the evidence of ill be not clear. All charity is full of candour, apt to make the best of every thing, and put on it the best face and appearance? it will judge well, and believe well, as far as it can with any reason, and will rather stretch its faith beyond appearances for the support of a kind opinion; but it will go into a bad one with the upmost reluctance, and fence against it as much as it fairly and honestly can. And when, in spite of inclination, it cannot believe well of others, it will yet hope well, and continue to hope as long as there is any ground for it. It will not presently conclude a case desperate, but wishes the amendment of the worst of men, and is very apt to hope for what it wishes. How well-natured and amiable a thing is Christian charity? How lovely a mind is that which is tinctured throughout with such benevolence, and has it diffused over its whole frame! Happy the man who has this heavenly fire glowing in his heart, flowing out of his mouth, and diffusing its warmth over all with whom he has to do! How lovely a thing would Christianity appear to the world, if those who profess it were more actuated and animated by this divine principle, and paid a due regard to a command on which its blessed author laid a chief stress! A new commandment give I to you, that you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another, John 13:34. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, John 13:35. Blessed Jesus! how few of thy professed disciples are to be distinguished and marked out by this characteristic!

Omaha, NE

#423014 Feb 16, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
That ash doesn't explain those differences you mentioned. I asked whether you could explain the differences and the importance of those differences you highlighted.
The importance is which Church was described in scripture. That WAS your question, recall?

The Catholic Church resembles the scriptural church and I gave a few examples why - beliefs and practice found in scripture. None of those beliefs are held by the Church of Christ.

Omaha, NE

#423015 Feb 16, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
Hello Dan....
Catholics maintain Scripture in Mt 16:18 proves Christ built the Catholic Church, because He made Peter the first pope...
Well...guess what!!!! For Peter to be the first pope, there had to be, at that instant, a Catholic Church, or, at the very least, one before he died, thing is, there was not...
Proof: When Christ referred to the seven churches in Rev 2, He never referred to any of them as the Catholic Church...nor did He mention any church in Rome....
But...Catholics deny the truth...that is their mainstay....
There was. The Catholic Church is the church Christ established.

We're good here.

Omaha, NE

#423016 Feb 16, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we were told how Christ's church was to be organized. Remover the example of Noah and the Gopher wood? Noah was given a plan that had many exclusions in it without specifically mentioning each exclusion. The same is true for the organization of the church. We are told in the NT exactly how Christ's church is to be organized. In Biblical reasoning, that excludes man's way of organizing Christ's church.
The Catholic Church has not been given the authority to organize itself the way it has.

The NT didn't provide any instructions on how Chrit's church was to be organized.

Omaha, NE

#423017 Feb 16, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
Word for word today from our local newspaper.
......."Documents detailing the dubious fundraising pracitices of a disgraced Roman Catholic religious order called the Legion of Christ were released to the public Friday, showing how the organization took control of an elderly woman's finances and persudaed her to bequeath it $60 MILLION.
..Pope Benedicto XVI took over the legion in 2010 after a Vatican investigation determined that its founder the Rev Marcial maciel had lived a double life.
..The legion scandal is significant because it shows how the HOLY SEE wilfully ignored credible allegations of abuse against Maciel for decades, all while holding him up as a model for SAINTHOOD for the faithful because he brought in MONEY and vocations to the priesthood.
..The scandal which has tarnished the legacy of Pope John Paul II is the mose egregious example of those within the VATICAN ignorded decades of reports about sexually abusive priest because church leaders put the interests of the institution above thos of the victims.
Reverend Marciel abused children, and duped a lady out of $60 MILLION for catholic church programs.
The story is also posted today top right hand column on this forum under ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH NEWS......
Your OK with all this Dan?
Is this your way of telling me that you cannot locate anything in the Catechism to buttress your earlier claim?

Hissy fits typically let me know I won the point in question.

Omaha, NE

#423018 Feb 16, 2013
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan is spinning so fast, he forgets to actually read my post.
1... I DID write that the RCC teaches that specific persons are in Heaven. You call them saints.
2... I never wrote that the RCC teaches that a specific person is in Hell.
However, we can easily infer who they would be by RCC teachings on what was specifically required for salvation.
Did the RCC specifically teach that Thomas Jefferson was in Hell? Of course not. But according to RCC teachings at the time, Thomas Jefferson would surely be in Hell.
See Council of Trent on what was -- specifically required -- for salvation.
Dan is still playing word games.
That's a pretty long post.

Why not simply respond "I was wrong and cannot locate their teachings that tell us who is in Hell".

Omaha, NE

#423019 Feb 16, 2013
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Again Dan, if you actually read the post, you might make sense.
I asked -- "Is Martin Luther in Hell?
I then asked -- "Has the RCC changed its teachings on this situation in the past 500 years?"
Dan is left spinning because he knows the RCC has changed its most fundamental teaching (for the better IMHO) on who is eligible for salvation.
Again Dan, show us some integrity, or show me where I posted what you claim?
You asked me if the Church tells us that Martin Luther was in Hell.

They never taught that Martin Luther went to Hell.

Asked, answered. Seems sufficient on "integrity", yes?


Omaha, NE

#423020 Feb 16, 2013
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Some Catholics take pride in their "2000 years of tradition" and "unchanging teachings."
Others like Dan think the RCC began in 1965 and never heard of the Council of Trent.
Dan, the Catechism today contains a few completely opposite teachings than did the Catechism of 120 years ago or of 500 years ago.
But if they are all "perfect" teachings, which one is correct? The liberalized version you see today, or the one that was in effect for 500 years prior?
Simply find the Catechism where they teach (or taught, ever) that person X will go to Hell.

That was your premise. Instead of getting pissed at me for asking you to support your claim, simply back it up.
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#423021 Feb 16, 2013
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>NO, I dont [remember] that those were only visions of mose and lige and anyone that has read it will not read it that way either. just a devil worshipper would say something like
In verse 30, Jesus is talking with Moses and Elijah who are described as “men”. It is not in any way described as a vision or apparition.
There were times in the Old Testament that the dead were brought to life and there were times that at Jesus command there were those who were brought to life. Consequently, we are shown that God will bring the dead to life, to physical life, at ANY time to fulfill a purpose.
more from this link which provides proof that God could easily have brought my grandfather back to life to fulfill His Purpose that someday, I would preach the gospel.
Happy Sabbath !!!

Colossians 1:18

And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood,

Deuteronomy 30:12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"
Proverbs 30:4 Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and the name of his son? Tell me if you know!

John 3:31 "The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all.
John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.
John 6:42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say,'I came down from heaven'?"
John 6:62 What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!
Acts 2:34 For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said, "'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand
Romans 10:6 But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart,'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down)
Ephesians 4:9 (What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions?

John 3:13

9Nicodemus answered and said to him, How can these things be? 10Jesus answered and said to him, Are you a master of Israel, and know not these things? 11Truly, truly, I say to you, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and you receive not our witness. 12If I have told you earthly things, and you believe not, how shall you believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13And no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15That whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#423022 Feb 16, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
2Ti 4:3 ===>For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. <===
Eph 4:17 ==> This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,
Eph 4:18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:
Eph 4:19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.
Eph 4:20 But ye have not so learned Christ;
Eph 4:21 If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:
Eph 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
Eph 4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
Eph 4:24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

2Ti 4:3 ===>For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Yes and I have found that fits all denominations not jsut the ones you and cowboy deem so.

Remember I search scripture as to wether so called daoctine to be so.
That is why I can fault with all of them this is why it is referred to a Mystery Babylon.

Isn't reflections wonderful in this scenario.

United States

#423023 Feb 16, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that the word Priest and the word priest, as used in the NT, have two, distinct, and different definitions.....right????
MICHAEL wrote:
Distinct definitions. Thats not good. Here are a few more inconsistencies.
GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.
GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.
GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.
GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.
GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.
GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation.
GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.
(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience.)
....Where does the FICTION stop and where does the real TRUTH begin? UNBELIEVABLE!
Want more? got more.....
The most rudimentary Law of Physics is: For Every Action There Is An Equal And Opposite Reaction.
A more complicated Law of Physics is: E=MC^2 ... where "C" is the speed of light.
Now ... on Day One of Creation, when God said, "Let there be light." (Or, "Let there be a Big Bang.")... matter was moving MUCH FASTER than it is moving today - in fact, during the First Three Minutes of Creation - matter almost approached the speed of light. We don't know exactly how fast that was. We don't know how much time, from OUR perspective, it took for the initial expansion of the universe. We weren't there and we did not have the necessary tools to measure time. But there are theories.
E=MC^2 ... E equals M C squared - where E is Energy, M is Mass and C is the Speed of Light squared (or, multiplied by itself).
This we DO know, as per Einstein's Law of Relativity: TIME is relative to WHO you are and WHERE you are as it is occurring.
WE were not here during the first 5 *days* of creation. Therefore segments of THAT time are not relative to us. We cannot measure it - we cannot accurately conceive of it - we cannot call it anything else except what God chose to call it, and HE chose to call each segment a "Day".
From the Law of Relativity we NOW know that each of these segments were different lengths of time measuring into the Billions of Years ...
And from the Bible we know that a "day" to God, is different than a "day" is to us. Einsteins Law of Relativity describes this perfectly E=MC^2. It has even been proven in the *real world* when atomic clocks on satellites orbiting the EARTH must be recalibrated on a regular basis; since they are moving faster than the clocks on the ground they lose time. It is a fact that clocks on satellites mark time at a slower rate than clocks on the ground.
Einsteins *Law* as given by God to men who had no concept of physics and a Big Bang:
Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 ... A THOUSAND YEARS ARE LIKE A DAY ...
Maybe Dr. Gerald Schroeder (World Renowned Nuclear Physicist and Jewish Theologian) can explain it to you better than I can (if you want to know why the *sun* does not appear until day four, view part three first):

part 1:

part 2:
part 3:

Lawson, MO

#423024 Feb 16, 2013

The Scarlet Harlot

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#423025 Feb 16, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
OXBOW says.
..but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Michael says.......and I thought God was an all loving God.
Oh well!
Not only is He loving...He also dispenses judgment...

And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 1 hr Scales Off 9,423
News As ideology fades in Cuba, spirituality and pop... 15 hr L I G E R 1
News Philippines cardinal worked for peace with Muslims (Apr '14) 15 hr KristoFMYsagun 14
News St. Peter's overflows for historic day of 4 popes (Apr '14) 17 hr pazuzu 68
News Francis expects short papacy Sun KristoFMYsagun 16
News Pope's visit will change Philippines, Cardinal ... (Sep '14) May 29 KristoFMYsagun 55
News Tantingco: The Kapampangan Cardinal (Mar '13) May 29 ELIAS IBARRA 6
More from around the web