Skip to main content

Monsignor Frederick M. Dolan: Betting on the afterlife

Monsignor Frederick M. Dolan: Betting on the afterlife

Comments

  1. I have a few points for the monsignor:

    "Even those who are “convinced” of their final end must have a bit of lingering doubt."

    Why?

    "Both positions ultimately require an act of faith..."

    No. Only one does.

    "That attitude requires quite a leap of faith to conclude that humans are just flesh, bones and chemicals. How can chemicals produce such immaterial concepts as eternity and love?"

    When you understand that you don't yet understand everything, and that maybe you never will -- and that not understanding does not diminish your capacity to live your own life as fully as you wish within your capabilities -- such questions will become less important because the "answers" will not matter.

    "The human psyche was wired at the factory for infinity."

    So says the purported owner's manual, anyway, if your particular model comes with a manual. Problem is, that manual was written by people with earthly agendas. Nobody ever heard of planned obsolesence?

    "A betting man would not want to ignore that clue."

    Ah, but a betting man often places his money on a hunch, rather than on facts or logic. And we know what is said about a betting man and his money...

    ReplyDelete
  2. The article I understand. Most of the comments made no sense to me, until I read your quoting of Stuart Chase the American economist and thinker.

    He said as you quoted in your article: “For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”

    Most of the commenters are so hot about fantasizing Benedict the devil, that they really get exercised about it and may need to be exorcised because of it.

    One old dog was trying to make hay about Josef Ratzinger's consripted membership in the Hitler Youth in his teens, though he refused to attend meetings, because of the family faith.

    Another way of saying Chases's quote is: "Don't confuse me with facts. My minds made up."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Are you talking to me or to the author of the article? 'Cause you lost me...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lady Janus:

    I was commenting to Father Tim on the article. I don't think that your comment was present at the time I started to make mine.

    However, I did find your comments interesting.

    Your comment about the owner's manual is one worthy of thought. I am loathe to respond, as whatever I say now, Small Town Guy will come prancing in on his fundamentalist charger and want to re-spin.

    Oh, what the hay!!

    If the earthly manual you are referring to is the bible, which some people refer to as the operators manual, as you may have noticed, earthly agendas have a lot to do with it apparently.

    The problem is not with the manual, but with its readers. We are human and tend to read only the instructions that we want to read, and ignore the rest. We also fail to read the FAQ's, preferring to write our own FAQ's that fit more into how we want the manual to be understood.

    The manual did not exist in available printed form until after 1450, since all reproductions had been done by hand prior to that. Somehow in the early days of the faith, the people grasped the truth without having it in printed form.

    But, now we have lots of versions of the bible around, with these books in and these books out, and we have confusion abounding.

    The owner's manual is actually written on our hearts, at least all that we need to know for salvation. As Christians we believe that, because we believe that Jesus Christ was the living word of God, and He said that He and the Father would take up residence in our hearts, if we invited them in.

    I am embarrassed to participate in something that looks like a "I am holier than you" scripture whipping session. Since holiness is largely about humility, claims of that nature are in fact antithetical. Besides, they tend to scare off anyone who is actually asking sensitive questions, and is interested in an answer from the heart.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Without the Bible and the truth in it that salvation is by faith alone in Christ, there is nothing but eternal damnation. You can scoff at quoting the Bible, but this is an indication of a serious spiritual problem. Religion without God's revelation to man is false religion.

    "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isaiah 8:20

    ReplyDelete
  6. Who knows what happens after death? Whatever it is should have no bearing on how you live your life here. If you let it, you are not making yourself a better person, simply succumbing to religious blackmail and that is personally degrading.

    ReplyDelete
  7. STG:

    God Bless You, Brother, but Blah, Blah, Blah.

    I am writing a series of articles over at my blog about what the Catholic Church believes.

    I will start with the bible, since that is a first principle of Christianity. I will deal with sola scriptura in the second part on the bible. I will then share what the Church teaches about justification/salvation.

    http://freethroughtruth.blogspot.com/2010/04/what-do-we-catholics-believe-chapter-1.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. "The problem is not with the manual, but with its readers. We are human and tend to read only the instructions that we want to read, and ignore the rest. We also fail to read the FAQ's, preferring to write our own FAQ's that fit more into how we want the manual to be understood."

    That's a very astute observation. But if you've ever seen manuals written by transliterationists -- in the argot sometimes known as "Franglish" -- you'll understand what I meant by a problem with the manual, itself. You even referred to the different versions of it, and that's what I meant. But you do make some really good points about a lack of comprehensive understanding of some of the instructions within. Most people would rather have a beer. And sometimes, it shows.

    "Without the Bible and the truth in it that salvation is by faith alone in Christ, there is nothing but eternal damnation."

    Wayne, do you really expect to make an impact with that on someone who does not accept the core premise? "Eternal damnation" means nothing. Try again?

    Reddog, entire civilizations were built -- and thrived -- by those who lived only for the afterlife. The Mayans, the Aztecs, the ancient Egyptians, to name but a few. They had their time and then they disappeared to make room for the next civilizations. We look back at them from our own lofty position on the pyramid of evolution and think, "Wow! were they dumb!" But they weren't dumb; they were simply living in their own time, with their own understanding of their universe as it unfolded for them. Such "dumb" civilizations gave us higher mathematics, engineering, agriculture, husbandry, irrigation, and a whole host of other techniques for making our own lives easier.

    So they had the idea -- which we now know to be untrue -- that the heart was the center of thought. Or they couldn't connect the wheel with the paved road, even though they invented both. Puzzles their civilizations missed were brought forward and some of them have been solved by ours. And in turn, what we ourselves miss will be solved by future civilizations. And hopefully, one of those puzzles that will hopefully be solved is what -- if anything -- happens after death.

    Such is the cycle of life and civilizations.

    That particular puzzle does not engage me, and it seems that you are likewise unconcerned with it, or you've got your own answer already and that satisfies you. But other are not satisfied, and they do choose to engage in a way that makes sense to them. And as long as they don't try to rope me into making the journey with them, shackled to their itinerary, what would I gain by making fun or scorn of them? It's their choice, isn't it?

    What do you gain?

    ReplyDelete
  9. You think I don't know what the RCC teaches and believes. Here are just a few of the unbiblical practices of the RC church:
    Enforced celebacy (1 Timothy 4:3).
    Trying to re-enact Christ's sacrifice (the Mass)when Christ offered Himself once for all. (see Hebrews chap 9, 10, 11)
    Sacrament of Penance (priests do not have the power to remit sins. There is no earthly priesthood in the New Testament. Believers receive remission of sins when they believe in Christ. (Acts 13:38,39)
    Worship of Mary (Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Exodus 20:3)
    Making of images (Exodus 20:4.)
    Granting of annulments (annulments are not talked about in the Bible. It is purely an RCC invention. Yet the RCC meddles in the marriage business to the nth degree)

    ReplyDelete
  10. MBrandon,

    Yes, I have saved your blog page and did read it. To be fair, I will read through it again. I can see a number of areas where we would not agree, but that is what blogs are all about. I don't think your history of the Bible is correct for one thing. You say it came from the RC church. In fact, the Roman Catholic church did not exist as we know it in the first few centuries. Local churches existed in different areas, but there was no Pope in Rome. A head bishop or Pope was not recognized until quite a bit later. The RCC gradually evolved. Evidence of this is the New Testament itself. The early church started as described in the Acts of the Apostles and does not even mention a Pope or headquarters in Rome. The Papacy is not mentioned in the N.T. It evolved gradually and it appears it was a grab for earthly power over all churches.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lady Janus,

    "Wayne, do you really expect to make an impact with that on someone who does not accept the core premise? "Eternal damnation" means nothing. Try again?"

    I don't expect it will have any impact with you. I believe the core premise is that the Bible is God's inspired revelation to mankind. I could probably argue that till the cows come home from different angles, but you will not receive it unless the Holy Spirit reveals it to you. (ref 1 Corinthians ch2)

    There is a website called 100 fulfilled Bible prophecies. You can see it at:
    http://www.100prophecies.org/

    Fulfilled Bible prophecies are a clear indication that the Scriptures are from God.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Lady Janus and reddog:

    I find that I am enjoying your comments, as I see that you are both using your intellect to increase your knowledge, and follow your path.

    I see why Father Tim enjoys what you have to say, even if it conflicts with our shared beliefs. I am sure that we can enjoy a dialogue.

    As for me, I will attempt to get over my petulance. Please excuse me. I sometimes don't engage my brain before my mouth or my fingers get moving.

    Now, if we can only stop the noise from the cheap seats.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "I don't expect it will have any impact with you."

    But you continue to talk as if you do. That's not communication; it's platitude.

    "...but you will not receive it unless the Holy Spirit reveals it to you."

    And that's a cop-out. Lazy. Not to mention showing a tendency to do a completely human thing -- blame someone else for your own shortcomings. And conveniently enough, the "somebody" you're blaming does not exist in my world, so you're "safe."

    Have I got that about right?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Pretty well put, Lady Janus. By Jove, I think you got it.

    I don't think platitude is the correct word though, but I get your concept. I think the more descriptive word is brow beating, but that's just my opinion.

    You raise another interesting point, that I think serves well.

    I tend to look askance at Wayne's approach to trying to convert you, to save your soul from the eternal damnation of hell's fire, as it were, in his jargon.

    I know the jargon. I used to do the same thing in earlier days. I hope that that was at a time of spiritual and emotional immaturity, and that I am generally past it. I p?ssed off a lot of friends and relatives in my earlier born again Catholic Christian days.

    It was kind of like trying to put a dress on a pig. It ticks off the pig, and doesn't do anything for the person holding the dress either. Nothing meant by that line BTW :)

    So, in my view, I am not responsible for what you think and believe, and I am not responsible for your salvation (whether or not you believe in it). I am responsible for working out my salvation, which I believe in, and am responsible for every word that comes out of my mouth or off my keyboard.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Lady Janus,

    "And that's a cop-out. Lazy. Not to mention showing a tendency to do a completely human thing -- blame someone else for your own shortcomings. And conveniently enough, the "somebody" you're blaming does not exist in my world, so you're "safe."

    Have I got that about right?"

    Well, yes, there might be some laziness involved. I hope I'm not blaming anyone for anything. But, the point is not everyone believes. I can give you good reasons why you should, but I can't force you or anyone to believe anything. Faith is a gift of God and He gives it to whom he wills. MB will probably be annoyed at this but salvation is not in the power of man to earn. God gives the elect salvation by His sovereign grace (unmerited favour). The RC religion has devised a complex system whereby man can earn his own salvation through following various rituals and good works.

    But this is not how it works.
    "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." Ephesians ch1 vs 4 to 6.

    "And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;" Ephesians ch2 vs1.

    "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Ephesians ch2 vs 4 to 7.

    So it is God who does the saving, not man. He does this according to the good pleasure of his will. Because he is God, he is accountable to no one. We can only praise Him who is before all and above all.

    ReplyDelete
  16. MBrandon,

    "I p?ssed off a lot of friends and relatives in my earlier born again Catholic Christian days."

    You still have an aversion to biblical statements or anyone quoting scripture which would raise alarm bells with any bible believer. Care to explain how you became a christian? What do you believe about Christ?

    ReplyDelete
  17. "I tend to look askance at Wayne's approach to trying to convert you, to save your soul from the eternal damnation of hell's fire..."

    Is THAT what he's trying to do? Seriously? LOL! I guess I'm just not paying atention, then, or I woulda told him he's got a better shot at convincing the pope to become a Moonie.

    "I hope I'm not blaming anyone for anything."

    Well, you were passing the buck to your "Holy Spirit." The inference is pretty bold and blatant -- I'm not changing my thinking because it isn't doing enough to make me change.

    "Faith is a gift of God and He gives it to whom he wills."

    And there you do it again. You want me to "have" something, but you can't give it to me (more correctly, I refuse to accept it), so you rationalize that it's because God isn't doing his job and giving it to me personally. There is absolutely no room in your thoughts for the idea that I'm not accepting it because it's not right for me and I don't want it or need it -- that I have a full and terrific life without that which you hold so dear. You don't understand my not wanting what you treasure, so there must be something "wrong" somewhere...and you decide it must be that God's not giving it to me, rather than my saying no thanks. After all, in your world, nobody says no to God.

    But I don't live in your world.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Lady Janus,

    "After all, in your world, nobody says no to God."

    That is not what I believe.

    It seems we are chasing our tails with this. I don't expect anybody to drop what they believe and suddenly believe something I tell them. That would be extremely presumptuous on my part. And it would be a rare thing. So it is no suprise.

    No, I don't think there is something wrong somewhere. Everything is unfolding as God planned it. Whether you believe it or not, God is still in control of everything. Only God knows what tomorrow may bring.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Wayne:

    I appreciate your fervor for the Word of God. If you want to know about me and my faith, you can look at all of my postings on my own blog.

    http://freethroughtruth.blogspot.com/

    If I thought that quoting scripture would assist in the discussions with the other commenters, I would quote scripture.

    I am more interested in trying to understand their comments, and in accepting them as they are. Because Lady Janus, reddog, and I disagree about a number of things provides opportunities to learn new things, and to make new friends.

    I am inclined to take the advice of that famous fictional philosopher of the mid 20th century film screen, Polyanna, who said: "If we look for the good in people, we will surely find it."

    At the time, she was speaking to a fire and brimstone preacher, who was determined to beat the scriptures into the heads of his congregation. He was having no effect on his congregants, other than to turn them off.

    Jesus left us two commandments, the first to love God completely and totally, and the second to love our neighbour as we love ourselves.

    How I live out the first one, is to a large extent between me and Him.

    How I live out the second one is what others see in me. I have a tendency to display both impatience and irritability, which shows up from time to time in my commenting, and which I work at daily to overcome.

    My inclination with you is to allow this I & I to shine forth, because I find your intimations, and statements to be obnoxious.

    But, dear brother in Christ, I will hold my tongue (fingers), and thank God for you instead.

    If you want to comment here on this blog, it would be best if the comments were on topic. But, go ahead and swing at me on my own blog. I am sure you can find lots of Catholic stuff to poke at.

    God Bless You, Small Town Guy.

    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  20. MBrandon,

    "Wayne:

    I appreciate your fervor for the Word of God. If you want to know about me and my faith, you can look at all of my postings on my own blog."

    Michael, I asked you a simple question about what you personally believe about Christ but you have so far evaded answering by referring me to your bloq. I had a look at your bloq and it appears to be thousands of words (maybe tens of thousands) of writings of different RC writers on various topics to do with the RCC. These do not appear to be your own writings and so they do not answer the basic question about what you yourself believe about Christ.

    The Bible in the Epistle of 1 John chap.4 tells us to "test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." 1 John ch4 vs 1

    I will not press you for any further answers or discussion.

    I can see we are on a completely different wavelength, and as far as I can tell you have no interest in biblical truth. So we are not going to get anywhere or reach any agreement with this.

    You believe you have all the truth with the RCC and anyone such as myself who would dare to question or even enquire about what you believe or what the RCC claims, is to be scorned out and rejected as a heretic.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I cannot tell Wayne, whether you are hard of hearing (reading) or hard of listening (understanding).

    If, for example, as I have been doing for quite some time now, I put something on my blog that someone can write better than me, then I believe it in all likelihood, unless for some reason I was trying to get a response from someone. I don't recall that I have done that in matters of faith, though I might have in matters of human rights, which was where my blog started.

    However, if it is doctrinal, and is in accord with the RCC, I agree with it. I have also read a lot of doctrinal things over the years from the other Christian writers and denominations.

    It is not productive for me as a Roman Catholic to think that the RCC is a smorgasbord. It is a take it or leave it faith, for me, and I pray about everything I hear, read and write.

    You may have noticed that I post a lot of Max Lucado writings, because I regard him highly as a man of faith. We probably disagree on some matters, as you and I do, but what I have posted of his, I agree with. Sometimes I comment on what he has said, if I think it would be appropriate for my readers. But, usually, (really almost always) it is sufficient to stand on its own.

    I try to do my research before I post something.

    Jesus Christ is my personal Lord and Saviour. PERIOD. I have been in love with Him for many, many years now, and over time I have gotten a bit better at returning the love He has given me, none of which I deserved, including dying on the cross for me.

    I believe that if I was the only person on the face of the earth, Jesus would still have come to earth for me. He would have been born, and would have eventually allowed (required) me to nail Him to the cross, which I basically did anyway by my sinfulness. I would have mocked Him on the cross probably, since I would have nailed Him there. Then I would have had to take Him down, put Him in a tomb, and go back 3 days later to see that He had in fact risen from the dead. After that, because I am very hard of listening myself, and hard of understanding, I would probably have had to put my fingers into His wounds as Thomas did, to prove to myself that He had in fact risen from the dead.

    I have been baptised in the Holy Spirit, and try to operate in the gifts that I was given. On occasion, I have been privileged to pray with people who have received healing of ailments, physical or mental. I have periodically been given words of knowledge to share with others, and prophecies and/or visions from time to time as well. I have the gift of tears, which is very embarrassing some times when it happens, but humbling. I pray in tongues often.

    I have been loathe to share this with you, because it is not germane to the topic upon which we are attempting to comment. Secondly, you have been very critical, not inquisitive about the Catholic Church.

    You may question all you want, but your bed side manner sucks, my friend. I don't usually inquire of someone while bashing their faith.

    I have no scorn for you. In fact, I believe that you are a brother in the faith. I do not call you that with derision. I do not reject you as a heretic. The thought never crossed my mind. It would not be productive.

    I am not sure that it is necessary for me to talk about ME. It is more important to live Me in my faith.

    Consequently, these last few days, particularly, I have been reading and commenting on the points made by reddog, and Lady Janus, and have chosen to amend my attitude, because I was being confrontational with them, which is also not productive. I am trying to accept them for who they are, and read what they write, and respond if I have something interesting or meaningful to say.

    I don't know if that is clear enough for you. I hope that it may be.

    God Bless You, Brother.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "I don't expect anybody to drop what they believe and suddenly believe something I tell them."

    Then how about you stop telling and start interacting?

    "Whether you believe it or not, God is still in control of everything."

    And I am God. And Goddess. Yes, all of them.

    "Michael, I asked you a simple question about what you personally believe about Christ but you have so far evaded answering by referring me to your bloq."

    It seems to me, that in referring you to his blog, he is telling you that the answer to your question is much more than a simple one-sentence eye-bite. What anyone feels personally about anything core to his being will inevitably take up more time and space than you have the ability to process. And I think you know this. There is no "basic" when it comes to core beliefs, and you know this, also.

    "I can see we are on a completely different wavelength..."

    Unfortunately, I don't think you "see" anything of the kind, because you're not looking at it. Or even for it. What you're looking at is the next little diversion you're going to throw into the arena.

    Everyone believes he has all the truth. And everyone is correct. For himself.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Wow. 22 comments to a posting Father Tim. That's got to be a record for "Where the Rubber Hits the Road."

    Too bad, they have nothing to do with the original post, whatever that was.

    Thank you Lady Janus for your support.

    We all do not have to agree on things, but it is beneficial to listen (read) with an open mind, and comment if appropriate.

    My preference is to develop friendships with people who I meet in the web space, to learn new things, and to hone my own values.

    I have friends on this earth, who do not see eye to eye with me, but we respect each other for being thinking, feeling human beings. I am interested in expanding that base of people.

    ReplyDelete
  24. LOL! The original post was on the "afterlife" -- whatever that is. I'm still waiting for someone to get back to me on that.

    ReplyDelete
  25. MBrandon,

    Since you answered the original question with a biblical answer when you said "Jesus Christ is my personal Lord and Saviour. PERIOD. I have been in love with Him for many, many years now, and over time I have gotten a bit better at returning the love He has given me, none of which I deserved, including dying on the cross for me", I will ask you a supplementary question.

    You might also then tell me how you can support a religious system which teaches contrary to what you have just said.

    The Baltimore Catechism No.2 says on p.18 Q.83
    "Why did Christ suffer and die?" Ans. "Christ suffered and died for our sins."

    So far, so good, right?

    Then the next question says:
    84. Q. "What lessons do we learn from the sufferings and death of Christ?"
    Ans. "From the sufferings and death of Christ we learn the great evil of sin, the hatred God bears to it, and the necessity of satisfying for it."

    How must this "satisfying for it" be made? The answer is given in other parts of the Catechism.

    One way is the Mass.
    "265 Q. Is the Mass the same sacrifice as that of the Cross? Ans. The Mass is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross."

    So would you agree that the Mass is meant to offer a sacrifice to God for the satisfaction (atonement) of sins? If you believe it is, how do you reconcile that with your statement that you made that you believe Jesus died for your sins on the cross?

    What about Baptism? The Catechism says:
    152 Q. What is Baptism?
    Ans. Baptism is a Sacrament which cleanses us from original sin, makes us Christians, children of God, and heirs of heaven.

    Do you believe that Baptism cleanes a person of original sin? If so, what does Christ's sacrifice on the cross do then?

    What about the Sacrament of Penance? If Christ died on the cross and made a complete atonement for your sins, why is it necessary to confess to an earthly priest, receive penance and absolution in order to be forgiven?

    And what about Purgatory when souls alledgedly go to finish their satisfaction for sins? Did not Christ's death on the cross atone for all sins? Or do you believe all these other things are necessary to atone for sins?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Lady Janus,

    "And I am God. And Goddess. Yes, all of them."

    With all due respect, may I ask where you got that idea and what do you mean?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Sorry Wayne.

    I am done responding to you.

    You are committed to what you believe, and insist on brow beating me with it.

    Go kick your cat. I am not interested in being your whipping boy.

    Have a nice life.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I have a feeling whatever I say which does not agree with your RC beliefs, you would consider it as "brow-beating". I am not here to bless you in false religion in order to be accepted as a "nice guy", but I am commanded by God's Word to make the truth known. Maybe I am not gifted as a diplomat and fall short of skills in communicating, but I believe what I have spoken is true. If I am guilty of anything, it is probably that I am too blunt.

    Sometimes the truth hurts a little. We all need to be corrected, myself especially in many ways. I meant no ill will. But if you can't defend what you follow and do not wish to discuss it any further, I have no choice but to acquiesce to that.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "With all due respect, may I ask where you got that idea and what do you mean?"

    Very likely the same place, generally speaking, that you get all your ideas. What do you think I mean? And why do you ask?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wayne. Listen up, bud: This blog is a place for the discussion of ideas and philosophies not necessarily our own. It is not your personal soapbox where you get to practise your sales pitch. None of us is in a buying mood, anyway. Tim is being awfully patient with you, but you've worn out Michael's tolerance; and I am at the edge of mine.

    You speak only for yourself, You do not speak for me or anyone else. So kindly cut with the "we all" crap, wouldja? You don't own the "truth."

    But don't kick your cat. I, personally, will take issue with you if you abuse an animal.

    8^D Couldn't resist, Michael...

    ReplyDelete
  31. Wayne:

    If you want to attempt to communicate with me, it will have to be off line from this blog.

    I am not sure we can get past your spiritual arrogance, but it is worth the try.

    My email is mbrandon8026@rogers.com.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Lady Janus:

    I was not telling him literally to kick his cat. At least, I hope he did not take it that way.

    I can see the error of my ways in counseling our friend to commit a feliney (felony).

    I could have taken the approach in this article, but it was too circuitous. I was taking a more direct route.

    http://www.lafayettechurchofchrist.org/html/kicking_your_cat.html

    :)

    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  33. Lady Janus,

    'Wayne. Listen up, bud: This blog is a place for the discussion of ideas and philosophies not necessarily our own. It is not your personal soapbox where you get to practise your sales pitch. None of us is in a buying mood, anyway. Tim is being awfully patient with you, but you've worn out Michael's tolerance; and I am at the edge of mine."

    MY, my, I don't know what I said to you to get you going like this this morning LJ. I thought at an earlier point you were more tolerant than you seem to be right now.

    Quite true this space if for discussion of ideas, etc. It is also a religious website where religious ideas are thrown out there. They can be dissected from one's own point of view, which is what I have done I think.

    Tim run this website open to all kinds of opinions, not opinions that only agree with his viewpoint or that only agree with MB or your own. Once you start dissecting opinions and cutting out those you disagree with, you might as well pack it in and quit. You are only going to hear comments you agree with. I don't think Tim wants this to be a mutual back-scratching blog. If everyone who comes here agrees with everyone else, why even bother wasting your time reading and commenting. Is your self-confidence in what your believe so low that you need to only hear like-minded people encouraging you on? Are you looking for a shrink to tell you carry on, you're doing great, keep a stiff upper lip. You are right; everybody is right.

    Can you not bear to hear contrary opinions, including contrary religious viewpoints? Isn't that what freedom of religion and freedom of speech is all about?

    I sometimes do express my beliefs using the Bible which is legitimate. If MB or you doesn't think it is legit, what can I say? Don't be so darn intolerant this morning. Get a good cup of coffee, sit back and take a deep breath and enjoy your life more. Enjoy the fact you have other thinkers out there in cyberland who will contribute even if you don,t agree with them. At least alternate ideas and beliefs are there.

    ReplyDelete
  34. MBrandon,

    "I am not sure we can get past your spiritual arrogance, but it is worth the try."

    I appreciate the fact you are willing to accomodate my spiritual ignorance to some extent. I understand your accomodation does have it's limits though. I know I do have spiritual ignorance in many ways. That is one of my serious problems. But I have given my spiritual shortcomings and ignorance to Jesus and asked Him to deal with it. He is my Saviour and has promised in His Word to be with me always. I know He has forgiven me as He promised in His Word, but still I do fail Him in different ways. (the world, the flesh, and the devil are always at work) I also continue to study His Word as that is directed to me and He promised to teach me through it. Hopefully I will grow. Nobody is perfect except Jesus. I love Him as my Saviour. He knows my failings I am sure. I pray for strength to resist anything that would offend Him. He is merciful and gracious to forgive those who come unto God by Him. I rest on His mercy and grace. Praise Him.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Lady Janus,

    You said you are a God (or Godess) correct? What does that mean?

    MB said you claimed you were a witch (or Witch) somewhere. Is that true? What does that mean?

    ReplyDelete
  36. MBrandon,

    I have made a note of your email address. I don't normally communicate by E-mail with people on the internet. We are constantly warned against that because we don't know what we might be getting into. I will keep it handy. If is seems appropriate at some point, it can be done.

    If you want to discuss anything with me, that can also be done through another chat site called sermonaudio.com if you let me know on here.

    Be warned, your RC religion will be challenged on that site by several people who have some knowledge of the Bible because it is a Reformed forum. A few are former RCs. It is also used by some Baptists. Comments appear on it instantly without being censored. If they are abusive they may be removed by the moderator. The moderator does not normally intervene in discussion. There are also 250,000 sermons on countless topics and doctrines available on the same site.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "I was not telling him literally to kick his cat."

    I know; that's why I included the emoticon: 8^D Print-only is woefully inadequate for satire and irony...

    "They [one's own religious ideas] can be dissected from one's own point of view, which is what I have done I think."

    That's not how it comes off. You appear to keep trying to sell everyone on your own outlook. And you have been told in various ways that that will not fly. You could start with eliminating the biblical quotations and start speaking your own thoughts without the "authority" of someone else's words. None of us accepts that "authority."

    "You said you are a God (or Godess) correct?"

    Nope. Not correct. What I said was: "And I am God. And Goddess. Yes, all of them."

    What do YOU think it means?

    "MB said you claimed you were a witch (or Witch) somewhere. Is that true? What does that mean?"

    He didn't "claim" it; he simply repeated information he got directly from my blog.

    Again...what do you think it means?

    ReplyDelete
  38. So Brother Wayne:

    I get up at 5:00 am every morning, and go to my Church, and pray the Divine Office with 3 Holy Ghost filled RC brothers of mine. They challenge me with the challenges of life and faith, as I do them. 2 of the 3 I have journeyed most of my days of deep faith with.

    Now, you invite me to go online to get my ?ss whipped by some of your fellow fundy's who really know nothing about the Catholic Church, except what they have learned from other fundy's, and think they know from reading scraps about the RC Church. (You have demonstrated no interest in knowing what you do not claim to know already).

    I don't like hanging around RC's who think they have all the knowledge that there is about our Church, and about those terrible Fundamentalists, and worse the Baptists. In fact, I have so avoided them as to be able to say I don't even known any of them anymore.

    So, I would do this why? Because I am a masochist? Nope, that won't really fly with me.

    The thing is Brother, I don't have to prove my faith to anyone, except God. He alone knows my heart, and my mind, both far better than I do, and a heck of a lot better than you do.

    If I were to communicate with you in any forum, and I told you the only way that I will at this point in time, it would be to share thoughts about matters of faith. That is a bilateral sharing.

    I have no idea how you get off thinking you have the full deposit of faith, and that claiming to know what others think and believe is in your job description.

    I have had enough of your one sided sharing. Here's a tip or two. If you have in mind to bring someone to a place that you are at, you better be very sure that where you are at is the end point, which Bud you are not.

    We are all on a journey to the foot of the Cross. No one of us is there yet, or we would be out of here. You know nothing about any other person's path to there, and have displayed nothing but spiritual arrogance.

    If you have been evangelizing lately on this blog, you should be fired. Because a good Evangelist, like the rest of us has two ears and one mouth. The proportion is important, and should be mirrored in how much you listen and how much you speak.

    Finally, if you think you have a right or responsibility to tell others how to live their faith, you should take a tip from our Master. He didn't do that.

    I told you earlier that when I was "born again" I was on fire for the Lord, and had to share my faith with everybody I met. In that I p?ssed off a lot of my own family. Some of those relationships have never been able to be healed, and I don't blame them for being p?ssed with me. I had no right to assume how God was dealing with any one of them.

    It took a number of years, and some strong words from friends who were more mature spiritually, to bring me into line.

    ReplyDelete
  39. MBrandon,

    How were you born again? What was the experience you had?

    I think you mentioned the Pentecostal experience of receiving the Holy Ghost. Did you know that Pentecostal doctrine of christians seeking the Baptism of the Spirit conflicts with the teaching in the Bible? The Bible teaches all genuine believers have the Holy Spirit. "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." 1 Corinthians Ch12 vs13.

    The Pentecostal or charismatic experience of receiving the "Baptism of the Spirit" with the evidence of speaking in tongues is unbiblical. This verse shows that all christians have the Holy Spirit. There is no second baptism of the Spirit. The tongues mentioned in Acts were actual languages, not what we hear today in charismatic circles or pentecostal churches. That phenomena ended when the apostolic age ended. If was alledgedly revived just over a hundred hears ago by the pentecostal movement and has crept into the RCC. I think that is what you are speaking about.

    If you are going to hurl personal insults around, you might consider that is not a sign of the fruits of the Spirit. "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." Galatians ch5 vs22,23.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Lady Janus,

    "You could start with eliminating the biblical quotations and start speaking your own thoughts without the "authority" of someone else's words. None of us accepts that "authority."

    My faith rests upon what the bible teaches because that is God's Word. He is in control of the universe and I respect His Word. He is the one I serve; not you. So no I cannot acquiese to your demands. What you believe and accept is your business. What I believe and say is mine. We will all be judged one day and have to give an account of ourselves.

    I don't think we are going to get anywhere with this discussion. You go your way, and I'll go mine and I'll make my comments as I please to whom I wish.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Wayne, I wasn't asking you not to accept whatever authority you wish, I was simply asking you to put it into your own words instead of quoting them from somewhere else. Is it because you don't know how?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Lady Janus,

    The actual verse is infinitely greater than my own words. I can give the general idea, but my own words have no authority. For example, When God gave the ten commandments to Moses, he said "And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

    That is from Exodus chap. 20. I could not adequately put that in my own words. It has much more meaning if the actual verses are quoted. You see my meaning?

    ReplyDelete
  43. The book "The Pied Piper of the Pentecostal Movement" by the Bible Baptist Church, Nashua, N.H. USA 03061, author Wilson Ewin is an eye-opening expose of what is behind thee spiritual power of the new world order.

    If you believe the Pentecostal movement to be a work of God, you need to read this book. Anybody who is familiar with Bible prophecy should know perilous times are prophesied. A final world empire is forming which is a political, financial, and religious empire.

    The book says in the preface "Shortly, the entire globe will plunge into the awful abyss of Satan's kingdom as he is allowed to exercise power over 'all kindred, and tongues, and nations'"(Revelation 13:7)

    This one-world empire which is currently being built is of concern to Bible-believing christians. There are many who have been swallowed up in this world religious movement and are being used by Satan's spiritual web. At some point mankind will be locked in slavery to this one-world government and finally every living creature will be required to bear the mark "without which no man might buy or sell". Revelation 13:11-18

    This author warns a main player in this one-world religious scene is the spirit-fired crusade known as Pentecostalism.

    The immediate issue which supporters of pentecostilism will raise is their claim that the movement is of God. This book demonstrates that the opposite is the case. One characteristic the book points out with evidence is the pentecostal movement's ecumenical nature. It unites with many organizations which reject the Bible as their authority. It relies heavily on claims of charismatic experiences. Basic bible doctrine is thrown out or not considered important in favour of charismatic experiences such as the tongues-speaking movement, slain in the spirit, and "baptism in the spirit". This movement has close similarity to mysticism which is spoken of by the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians ch14: 32,33. The occult had penetrated the church causing instability and an unsettled state.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Wayne, I am not interested in "authority," especially an "authority" that has no jurisdiction with me. If I wanted to read quotes, I could open my bible and read them for myself.

    I am interested in seeing your own personal thoughts. In your own words. Period.

    ReplyDelete
  45. This morning, things came into perspective for me, and so I wrote the following post that I have just inserted on my own blog site.



    http://freethroughtruth.blogspot.com/2010/04/i-live-with-saint.html

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

 

Canadian Euthanasia Information

The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/Newsletters/Newsletter108(May2010)(RGB).pdf Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/HowTheyVoted.pdf On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/2010SeminarFlyer(RGB)(LetterFormat).pdf The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/05/att