Catholic End Time Prophecy

[MHz]

So can we agree that a person moral standard is tied to whom they believe God to be. Is the NT the bar for what is considered to be the right and wrong way to treat a fellow man? Strict adherence to the written word and not some contrived human loophole that allows that law to be bent even a little so a current Church or individual Christian cannot be used as a standard but they can be judged on how closely they follow His instructions.

 

[MHz]

I will accept correction if needed, but the way I understand it, the Christian discussion section is made to discuss subjects relating to the Christian faith, yet, one does not need to have Christian faith to discuss it. While respect and tolerance are to be practiced, they shouldn't get in the way of real critique. One can find aspects of the Christian faith incoherent or downright ridiculous and one has the right to say it.

Don't flip out, I just find these words being so close to each other as being a bit humerus.
"respect and tolerance are to be practiced"
"find aspects of the Christian faith incoherent or downright ridiculous"

Is there a difference in a statement such as above that alludes to some specific topic yet the naked topic is never brought forward? (specific aspects)That isn't a discussion.

 

[s_lone]

So can we agree that a person moral standard is tied to whom they believe God to be. Is the NT the bar for what is considered to be the right and wrong way to treat a fellow man? Strict adherence to the written word and not some contrived human loophole that allows that law to be bent even a little so a current Church or individual Christian cannot be used as a standard but they can be judged on how closely they follow His instructions.

I'm not sure I follow exactly what you are trying to say. But a person's moral standard need not be tied to the written word of the NT. It can be tied to the written word of modern laws but also to plain old common sense. ''Treat others as you want to be treated'' is a concept that can be found in most religions but in the end, it just makes sense.

If everyone applied that golden rule, things would be going pretty good out there... If one finds in the New Testament the inspiration to act with peaceful principles than that is awesome. But can you admit the NT is not the ultimate authority on moral conduct?

 

[captain morgan]

I will accept correction if needed, but the way I understand it, the Christian discussion section is made to discuss subjects relating to the Christian faith, yet, one does not need to have Christian faith to discuss it. While respect and tolerance are to be practiced, they shouldn't get in the way of real critique. One can find aspects of the Christian faith incoherent or downright ridiculous and one has the right to say it.

To start, I do not interpret your specific posts as derisive or abusive. My focus is really directed at other posters. That said, I apologize if you you feel that you are specifically targeted, that is not my intent.


Regarding the above quotation; to this I will agree and support whole-heartedly. Critical analysis or offering one's own personal judgment is not problematic in my eyes regardless if that judgment is positive or negative. However, there appears to be no lack of those that sit on the side-lines and forward abuse and/or insults (one poster's suggestion of 'retard' comes to mind).

As a side-note, you offer an interesting observation about "one's right to state their opinions". I have noticed that there are a number of posters that have taken a strong position (on other threads) that essentially demand respect and rights for those groups they support.

Ironic in that this same sentiment is not represented by the same posters on this thread.

 

[s_lone]

Don't flip out, I just find these words being so close to each other as being a bit humerus.
"respect and tolerance are to be practiced"
"find aspects of the Christian faith incoherent or downright ridiculous"

Is there a difference in a statement such as above that alludes to some specific topic yet the naked topic is never brought forward? (specific aspects)That isn't a discussion.

I find the faith of Jehovah's witnesses rather ridiculous. But I respect them and tolerate them as I treat them like any other fellow human beings. When they come knocking at my door on a sunday morning to preach, I will not hesitate to either politely send them away or have a discussion with them, in which I will most likely question their beliefs. If they are trying to convince me, they should be prepared to face my criticism.

I'll agree there can be lack of respect when criticism turns into mockery. And while mockery often manipulates facts, it can also be a powerful way to reveal the flaws of what is mocked. In other words, mockery is one form of criticism and if you can't take it, perhaps it is because you feel your position if vulnerable.

YouTube - George Carlin - Religion is bullshit.

 

[MHz]

God forgave us, but he sure didn't forget what we did to his son. We pissed him off big time and now the price to pay is God's constant sulking.

The anger we should be concerned about is the one that came into being way back in that last day in the garden.
Just so you know the beginning of the story God was happy to send Jesus to the cross. Now the dead could also be gathered back to God, something that Satan didn't expect (he thought he got to take them to the lake, as it turns out, it's just him and some very pissed off former angels, not much weaker individually that Satan. Now you also know how the rest of the story goes.

They are the ungodly in the early times of OT (Jude and Peter also mention them). Men (other than Adam and Eve) had never known God. To be ungodly you have to know how He is, only fallen angels would qualify when man and angel are the only available choices.

One reason for God being so violent in the OT is Christ has to be able to do those things on the day He comes to Earth as our Heavenly Judge. Man and angel will face an unstoppable force.

 

[MHz]

In other words, mockery is one form of criticism and if you can't take it, perhaps it is because you feel your position if vulnerable.

No I don't feel that way, even in the least way. Perhaps George is giving his audience what they want, if he acted pro-god the hall might be empty. Was there something specif in his show that you want to address about God or is this just another generalization?

 

[s_lone]

The anger we should be concerned about is the one that came into being way back in that last day in the garden.
Just so you know the beginning of the story God was happy to send Jesus to the cross. Now the dead could also be gathered back to God, something that Satan didn't expect (he thought he got to take them to the lake, as it turns out, it's just him and some very pissed off former angels, not much weaker individually that Satan. Now you also know how the rest of the story goes.

They are the ungodly in the early times of OT (Jude and Peter also mention them). Men (other than Adam and Eve) had never known God. To be ungodly you have to know how He is, only fallen angels would qualify when man and angel are the only available choices.

One reason for God being so violent in the OT is Christ has to be able to do those things on the day He comes to Earth as our Heavenly Judge. Man and angel will face an unstoppable force.

I appreciate your attempt to deepen my understanding of Christian faith but that post you quoted was mostly a very gentle (in my opinion) form of mockery...

 

[s_lone]

No I don't feel that way, even in the least way. Perhaps George is giving his audience what they want, if he acted pro-god the hall might be empty. Was there something specif in his show that you want to address about God or is this just another generalization?

I posted the video to demonstrate a form of criticism that uses mockery as its main tool.

Because you ask, here's a point raised by George that raises a fundamental flaw in Christian beliefs...

God supposedly loves us but creates a world in which it's possible to end up in a lake of fire? He loves us but creates a world in which eternal damnation is possible?

 

[MHz]

I posted the video to demonstrate a form of criticism that uses mockery as its main tool.

Because you ask, here's a point raised by George that raises a fundamental flaw in Christian beliefs...

God supposedly loves us but creates a world in which it's possible to end up in a lake of fire? He loves us but creates a world in which eternal damnation is possible?

That is a view held by some, when pressed for the actual verses .......nothing....not one supports that view.

As a person of the first birth (dust and breath of life) you do lose that life, called the 1st death. To die the 2nd death (lake) you have to be born of the 2ns birth, that is being able to stand before God and look right into His face. If that has not happened to a man then he cannot be sent to a place reserved for those who sin after being face-to-face with God. Fallen angels qualify, when they sinned there was never any hope of being able to repent. Man can repent or die, either one covers all sins committed while in the flesh.
The world He created was Eden, Satan's actions temporarily killed it. The new earth is going to be just like Eden, the only difference is that men will still know the about good and evil.

It is only from the new earth that eternal damnation can come from. Now George couldn't use that because there is no paradox, all you have are sober facts, not something you expect to find in a comedy club.

 

[s_lone]

That is a view held by some, when pressed for the actual verses .......nothing....not one supports that view.

As a person of the first birth (dust and breath of life) you do lose that life, called the 1st death. To die the 2nd death (lake) you have to be born of the 2ns birth, that is being able to stand before God and look right into His face. If that has not happened to a man then he cannot be sent to a place reserved for those who sin after being face-to-face with God. Fallen angels qualify, when they sinned there was never any hope of being able to repent. Man can repent or die, either one covers all sins committed while in the flesh.
The world He created was Eden, Satan's actions temporarily killed it. The new earth is going to be just like Eden, the only difference is that men will still know the about good and evil.

It is only from the new earth that eternal damnation can come from. Now George couldn't use that because there is no paradox, all you have are sober facts, not something you expect to find in a comedy club.

Why did God create angels who could fall and twist humanity away from him?

 

[MHz]

Why did God create angels who could fall and twist humanity away from him?

It would appear that they were also under some for of Law that covered being a liar and a murderer. Taking women for wives also seems to have caused some to be headed for the lake. That would still have some in heaven that make up the full 1/3 fallen ones. When they fall from Heaven they go straight to the pit, their fall is during this event that is at the time of Christ's wrath unfolding as described in the 7 vials.

Re:6:13:
And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth,
even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs,
when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

Their execution will be at the same time as Satans, they will be part of the sands of the seas that fire from God in Heaven consumes. Viewed by all of mankind that are there as going away from them as they are all within the boundaries of the land of Israel as defined for the 1,000 year reign. All the people who are in Israel at the time of the above mentioned fire came through that same fire, it purifies them, (1st death stuff) and after the 1,000 years they witness what happens if they sin or allow others to sin from this point on. At the original Sodom man was not allowed to see fire from Heaven and live to talk about it. The after effects on the area are in a few verses. At Christ's coming that same fire destroys babylon and the righteous are not harmed by this fire. They see fire from Heaven and live. At the execution of fallen angels they see fire from Heaven as something protecting them.

God made allowances for fallen angels, that is what the feiry lake is made for.
God made allowances for fallen man, grace and death cover all sins made in the flesh.

The 2nd death is a place not a condition, anyone that goes there is there in awareness of all 5 senses we have today. Their choice, if they enjoyed their activities in the flesh at the expense of others maybe they are the victims when in hell (men).

If the least in Heaven is a title not to be sought I would have to imagine that being the least in the lake is one to be sought even less.

The more important reason is that when creating Laws (rewards and punishments) there was something in place that was a way to cover anything that 'appeared to be going wrong'. Christ was God's begotten before anything at all existed, a Judge existed before Laws existed. If man fell he could be redeemed, although Angels worship Christ, God did not make Him Judge over them, that is God Himself. In the new earth some of man (greatest of men in the Kingdom of Heaven) would have authority over the least of men that are in the Kingdom of Heaven.

 

[herald]

St. Malachy's prophesy states, that, the last Pope would "reign amidst many tribulations" and then "the dreadful judge would come and destroy the city." And this is posted on the web, by the Catholic Church!

The, only, one that will reign will be The Antichrist - or, "False Christ." I guess the Catholic Church wants everyone to know that the last pope will be The Antichrist.

 

[L Gilbert]

I hope someone takes videos of the destruction of the city. It'd be more ecidence of this god's love.

Just kidding, IMO there are no gods n gremlins n goblins. So I guess that leaves me totally moralless, regardless that I am a pretty generous and helpful dood.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

What Pope hasn't reigned amidst many tribulations? The only way any of these end time prophecies are going to come true is if enough morons believe them and, believing they're doing god's work, make them happen when they otherwise wouldn't have.

 

[herald]

I have statements by the Catholic Church claiming, that, the Pope is God on earth, and Jesus Christ behind the veil of flesh. This is a "False Christ." Such statements are blasphemy!!!!!! I am willing to post these statements.

We are to worship the Triune God, alone. Anything else is false worship, and will lead to the lake of fire at the end of time.

Please read my post on "Daniel & Revelation Reveal The Antichrist," and see for yourself.

 

[Cliffy]

I have statements by the Catholic Church claiming, that, the Pope is God on earth, and Jesus Christ behind the veil of flesh. This is a "False Christ." Such statements are blasphemy!!!!!!

We are to worship the Triune God, alone. Anything else is false worship, and will lead to the lake of fire at the end of time.

Please read my post on "The Antichrist," and see for yourself.

And to a Muslim, you are the blasphemer. Who is right or is everybody wrong? To me you are all blowing smoke out your rosy red eye.

 

[herald]

If you are a student of the Scriptures, specifically Daniel and Revelation, you will see for yourself.

There is no Papacy in the Scriptures, no purgatory, no worship of Mary...and on and on. I have watched on cland and ewtn, the worship of Mary. She was a sinner, that, is why, "And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY SAVIOUR." Lu 1:46,47.

A sign of The Antichrist is "...he thinks to change times and laws." Dan 7:25. He, only, "thinks to change," because no man/institution can overrule our Creator and change His law. There was, only, one time in His Covenant - the Sabbath.

I have four statements claiming, that, the change of the Sabbath is her "mark" of authority.

I have several statements made by the Catholic Church claiming to have made the change and abolished the Sabbath. Jesus referred to Himself as "The Lord of the Sabbath." Mt 12:8;Mr 2:28;Lu 6:5.

The children of Israel, Jesus, His disciples and the New Testament Christians kept the Sabbath holy. Jesus prophesied, that, the Sabbath would be kept during The Great Tribulation, and we are not there, yet. Mt 24:20.

God spoke through Isaiah that God's children will keep the Sabbath in His kingdom:

"For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before Me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, saith the Lord." Isa 66:22,23.

 

[herald]

By the way, I am not a Muslim, I am a Christian.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Please read my post on "Daniel & Revelation Reveal The Antichrist," and see for yourself.

I've read all your posts, there's less than a hundred of them, and I see something quite different than what you intended. Either you're seriously deluded and taking a book of myths and allegories as truth, or you're breathtakingly arrogant to announce yourself as "herald" and come on as if you have some great message to deliver to all us poor unenlightened ones. Probably both, and something worse too, actually, you take altogether too much delight in reiterating what horrors await those of us who don't take you seriously.