8 Taste and see that the LORD is good; blessed is the man who takes refuge in him. 9 Fear the LORD , you his saints, for those who fear him lack nothing. 10 The lions may grow weak and hungry, but those who seek the LORD lack no good thing.

Amen! And Happy Thanksgiving! :)

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 27, 2003

Answers

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

OOPS! I forgot to say that was from Psalm 34.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 27, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Jeanie,
I "tasted ... the Lord" in Holy Communion this morning.
This was infinitely more wonderful a "tasting" than all the Thanksgiving Day food-tasting. Come to think of it, "Eucharist" means "thanksgiving.

I'll pray, Jeanie, for the day to come on which you will be able to receive a valid Holy Eucharist, instead of the mere bread and wine that you now receive in your denomination of Lutheran Protestantism.

Happy Thanksgiving.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 27, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Hi Jeanie,

Welcome, and a happy Thanks Giving to you too! Jim

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), November 27, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Thanks for your kind words too, John.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 28, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Yes, the Eucharist is a special ritual for me, because it makes me ponder about the good things in my life. Thanks for the words. And happy Thanksgiving to you too! Kindest regards, David D.

-- David Dulin (ddulin@hotpop.com), November 28, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Actually JFG . . .

the first time I ever heard of communion being the actual body and blood of our Lord was from my Lutheran mom. I told her that we were having a class on the Eucharist that night in RCIA and she said . . . "well, you know, we Lutherans believe that it is the actual body and blood of Christ."

I told her that "No, it is just symbolic."

That night I want to class and they told us that . . . "well, you know that we Catholics believe that the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of our Lord."

I guess you know that I had some rethinking to do.

Leon

-- Leon (Thanks@giving.joy), November 28, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Lutherans do not believe that the former bread and wine is (becomes) the body and blood of Christ (transubstantiation). They believe that the body and blood of Christ somehow become intimately associated with the bread and wine, so that when one eats the bread and drinks the wine, one ALSO receives the body and blood of Christ (consubstantiation). However, the bread and wine, in their view, remain bread and wine. Which of course is true as far as their "Communion" is concerned. They have no valid priesthood, so nothing actually happens to the bread and wine. They receive simply bread and wine.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 28, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

Thanks for your kind words too, John.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 28, 2003. <------I didn't write that. I hate to think someone is on this board pretending to be me.

Our sacraments in the Lutheran church are valid. You may not think so, but that's too bad.

There is a wonderful job description in 1 Timothy 3. I don't see anything in there that says that someone cannot be an "overseer" if they don't belong to the RCC or are in the succession of Peter. We follow these instructions in our church. How come you don't?

1 Timothy 3

Overseers and Deacons

1Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer,[1] he desires a noble task. 2Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.

If fact, if you had followed them, I guess you wouldn't have had to endure through this child abuse scandal of late. Notice it says that the Paster/Priest/Overseer must be beyond reproach and that he can marry? If any pastor in our church dares do what the priests in your church have done, we don't cover it up and give him a new assignment! He's TOAST! We practice church discipline according to Matthew 18.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 28, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

"I don't see anything in there that says that someone cannot be an "overseer" if they don't belong to the RCC or are in the succession of Peter"

A: Well of course they can be an "overseer". What matters is the nature of what they are overseeing. Are they overseeing one of thousands of human institutions a few hundred years old? Or are they overseeing the Biblical Church of the Living God, the Pillar and Foundation of truth? If they are not in the succession of Peter, the second option is not possible.

"We follow these instructions in our church. How come you don't? In fact, if you had followed them, I guess you wouldn't have had to endure through this child abuse scandal of late"

A: Are you suggesting that child abusers are cured by marriage? Not likely, since the majority of child abusers are married men. Are you suggesting that you have any fewer child abusers, percentage-wise, in your church than the Catholic Church has? Since the incidence among Catholic priests is lower than the incidence in the general population, that too seems highly unlikely.

"Notice it says that the Paster/Priest/Overseer must be beyond reproach and that he can marry?"

A: If you had access to authoritative interpretation, you would know that this passage wasn't written as a permission to marry, but rather as a denouncement of polygamy. All early Christians came from either Jewish or Pagan backgrounds. In time, men from both backgrounds became prominent leaders in the Church, with a possibility of being ordained bishops. Many of these men brought with them some of the practices of their past religious afflilation. When Paul outlined the characteristics to look for in a potential Catholic bishop, he ruled out anyone having with more than one wife. That's the meaning of "the husband of but one wife". It did NOT mean that a potential overseer must be married. Paul himself, for one, was not, and he strongly recommended that those considering the ministry remain unmarried. (1 Cor 7:32-35) Still, married men could be considered for the ministry. That was the current ruling of the Church. Today the ruling is different. It is a ruling, a discipline of the Church concerning its priests, not a doctrinal issue. For most ordained men it is a source of tremendous grace and holiness, as well as a practical aid in serving the people of God, not an occasion of sin. If God calls a man to a ministry which calls for celibacy, God provides the graces necessary to make it happen.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 28, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

The statement stands on it's own. To deny what it says is to call God a liar. If God said so through his apostle Paul, you can be sure that he meant it. God's Word is eternal. It is holy inerrant and eternal. It never changes. Therefore doctrine should never change. To look at those verses and say that they only apply to a certain period of time in history is hypocritical. Why can't nuns be Priests in your church (another recent issue in the RCC)? It is because in the Bible God specifically says that a women has no authority over men in church and that she cannot teach a man. 1 Timothy 2 9I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. 11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Why are those words timeless but these aren't? Paul was the author of both. That's hypocritical!

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

Response to O Taste and see tjhat the LORD is good! Blessed is he who takes refuge in HIM!

No a pastor doesnt have to mary but he may. Why did God say this to paul and later change his mind? Was he wrong the first time? And yes we do follow these instructions given to Timothy from Paul regarding the OVERSEER of the church! If we have a pastor who has disgraced himself or the church we get rid of him. If he starts teaching contrary to Scripture we get rid of him and quickly! It's happened before. If he abuses a child sexually gets a divorce becomes a homosexual we get rid of him. He must be beyond reproach and respectable! And it plainly says that he MAY marry if he wishes! It never ever mentions anything concerning an "apostolic succession". Therefore our pastors are valid..... according to scripture.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

"God's Word is eternal. It is holy inerrant and eternal. It never changes. Therefore doctrine should never change."

A: Doctrine never does change in Catholicism. Catholic doctrine is divine in origin, and the Church, which is the appointed steward of the fullness of truth, does not have the authority to change it. Of course doctrine changes in Protestantism with every new denomination - about once a week for the past 450 years. The marital status of priests is not a doctrine. It is a discipline - a rule made by the Church regarding its own priesthood.

"Why can't nuns be Priests in your church (another recent issue in the RCC)?"

A: Actually it is not an "issue" at all. It is a doctrinal matter, an article of the faith, a teaching of Christ, and as such CANNOT be changed. Therefore the only issue is whether individuals will accept divine truth or not.

"I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes"

A: So, women are not allowed to braid their hair or to wear jewelry in your church?

"Why are those words timeless but these aren't? Paul was the author of both. That's hypocritical!"

A: No, it isn't. It's apples and oranges. Doctrinal teachings CANNOT change. Disciplinary decisions MUST change to meet the changing needs of the Church in a changing world.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 29, 2003.

You keep saying that it doesn't change, but it does! Everytime a pope speaks ex cathedra(sorry I cant remember the exact term but I am sure you know what I mean). For example, when my father was growing up in a Cathp;oc family, they were not allowed to eat meat on friday. Luckily they lived on the shore lime community of Branford Connecticut and my grandfather would catch fish for their dinner. Yet today eating meat on Friday's is not a sin. The poster before you (or was it u i loose track) plainly said that 2 Tim 2 is outdated that is why the church doesnt abide by those teachings!

The doctrine in my church does not change. We are faithful to God and his word. Women in my church do not vote un church matters and can hold no postion in the church that will give her spiritual authority over men including pastor or elder. We submit to our husbands and if you must know, I wear a hijab and cover my hair. My husband is the only one who can see my hair :)

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

Oh you are avoiding my question! You seem to be very good at it infact! Where in 2 Tim 2 does it say that a pastor has to be in apostolic succession of Peter?

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

I said, "The poster before you (or was it u i loose track) plainly said that 2 Tim 2 is outdated that is why the church doesnt abide by those teachings!"

And AGAIN you said it! You said plainly, " No, it isn't. It's apples and oranges. Doctrinal teachings CANNOT change. Disciplinary decisions MUST change to meet the changing needs of the Church in a changing world." But the Bible is ETERNAL! God's Word never changes! The Psalmist says in Psalm 119:

89 Your word, O LORD , is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens. 90 Your faithfulness continues through all generations; you established the earth, and it endures. 91 Your laws endure to this day, for all things serve you.

And again the Bible says to preach the Word both in season and out... that is both when it is popular and when it is not.

2 Timothy 4:2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great patience and careful instruction

Jesus said we are not of not of this world.... those who love their life in this world will lose it and those who hate it will gain eternal life. Why does the Catholic church cave in to political intrest groups? Why does doctrine change with the times when the Word of God is ETERNAL? Dont you Catholics have a cable station called the ETERNAL WORD network? What exactly does that mean to you?

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

"For example, when my father was growing up in a Catholic family, they were not allowed to eat meat on friday. Yet today eating meat on Friday is not a sin."

A: Once again you have no concept of the vast difference between doctrinal truths, which CANNOT change, and rules and regulations which can and do change as necessary. Laws of fasting and abstinence, including abstaining from meat on fridays, are rules made by the Church - just like the rules your church has governing the mode of dress of its women. The church made the rule - the church can change the rule. There was never anything intrinsically immoral about eating meat on friday. The only reason doing so was sinful was disobedience to the authority of the Church. This is completely different from doctrinal truths revealed and entrusted to the Church by God, which the Church CANNOT and does not EVER change.

"The doctrine in my church does not change."

A: No kidding. The doctrine in any one of the 20,000+ Protestant churches never changes - because whenever a group of people disagree with the doctrine, they just leave and form a new church with the doctrine they prefer. In God's Church there is neither doctrinal change nor denominationalism. That's the Church described in the Bible, because that's the Church that gave us the Bible - ONE Church united in belief and worship, across the centuries and around the world. The fact that your beliefs don't change means nothing. The problem is that the church across the street teaches doctrine that conflicts with yours, and your doctrine conflicts with that of the church you originally broke away from. That is not the will of God. It is contrary to everything the Bible tells us about the Church.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 29, 2003.

Paul,
Jeannie won't appreciate your logic; that if a faith can vary from sect to sect and person to person, despite the diversity of their denominations all claiming to follow ONLY the Word of God, and denying whatever isn't in that Word, --the plain truth of their diverse interpretations of God's Word would lead them by necessity to a God-given authority; the Church.

But instead she and the other bibliolaters just return to the Bible, which they believe is inerrant no matter how many mistaken interpretations! Why doesn't Jeannie care what the Bible is doing in the denominational communities? It misleads the ones who ought to be an elect; true believers! The devil works this deceit by way of corrupting scriptures under their very noses. WHY?

Because they will not be corrected. In the same prideful way the angels fell, Jeannie and her kind bristle at the idea that a Church was meant to teach them! Lucifer once more announcing to God, ''Better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven!''

And Jeannie mimicking:''better the Bible in total error and confusion, without any hope of unity or consensus, than to accept the Catholic faith!'' The only faith that ever preached the Holy Gospel to our blessed ancestors from antquity. Not good enough for the proud Bible-thumpers.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 29, 2003.

Jmj

Jeanie, calm down. Get a hold of yourself. You make yourself look foolish, by posting three separate, emotional messages in a row, and -- more importantly -- not making sufficient effort to understand what Paul M has told you. I'll give him a break and respond to a few things you stated.

1. "You keep saying that it [Catholic doctrine] doesn't change, but it does! Everytime a pope speaks ex cathedra (sorry I cant remember the exact term but I am sure you know what I mean). For example, when my father was growing up in a Catholic family, they were not allowed to eat meat on friday. Luckily they lived on the shore lime community of Branford Connecticut and my grandfather would catch fish for their dinner. Yet today eating meat on Friday's is not a sin."

Now scroll up to Paul's last words. He said that doctrine does not change, but disciplinary decisions must change. You brought up the abstinence from meat on Friday as an example of Catholic doctrine changing. WRONG!!! You should have realized that the once obligatory, penitential practice you mentioned was a changeable discipline -- not a doctrine, much less the most formal kind of papal doctrine of all (an "ex cathedra" definition of a dogma).

2. "The poster before you (or was it u i loose track) plainly said that 2 Tim 2 is outdated that is why the church doesnt abide by those teachings!"

Huh? No one has spoken about 2 Tim 2, above.

3. "The doctrine in my church does not change. We are faithful to God and his word. Women in my church do not vote on church matters and can hold no postion in the church that will give her spiritual authority over men including pastor or elder. We submit to our husbands and if you must know, I wear a hijab and cover my hair. My husband is the only one who can see my hair :)"

In the Catholic Church, doctrine does not change. We are faithful to God and his word. (You are not faithful, in certain ways, which results in your being a Protestant, lacking in a valid Eucharist, etc..) In the only Church Jesus founded, the Catholic Church, neither men nor women "vote on church matters." Paul M didn't ask you if you cover your hair. [It's interesting that you wear a Moslem head covering, a hijab.] Paul asked you: "So, women are not allowed to braid their hair or to wear jewelry in your church?" His point is that some of the things that St. Paul told his disciples that they had to do (or avoid doing) were disciplinary in nature -- not doctrinal -- and were thus subject to being changed by the Church over the course of the centuries.

Thus, God himself does not demand that you now cover your hair (as though that were an unchangeable, doctrinal matter). The problem is, though, that your tiny denomination was just started by some guys a few hundred years ago -- and they (and you) misinterpret the Bible in many ways, including on this matter of disciplines. You appear to be practicing a radical form of "sola scriptura," which is a false principle (non-biblical, non-historical, and non-workable).

4. "Oh you are avoiding my question! You seem to be very good at it in fact! Where in 2 Tim 2 does it say that a pastor has to be in apostolic succession of Peter?"

Once again, we have not discussed 2 Tim 2. The point Paul M made to you was that a Christian "overseer" (Greek "episkopos," from which comes the word "bishop") must be a successor of St. Peter or another apostle ... and thus nobody in your little denominations qualifies to be an overseer/bishop. Your clergy lack apostolic succession. And Paul does not have to show you the need for apostolic succession in 2 Tim 2 or anywhere else in the Bible -- because the Church that Jesus founded does not practice "sola scriptura." As the Bible itself tells us, there are Christian truths outside the Bible -- and they do not contradict the Bible.

But anyway, ordination of bishops (apostolic succession) is shown in the Bible. This is very clear in the selection of St. Matthias to replace Judas Iscariot (Acts 1), and it is clear to honest readers of St. Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus that he has appointed them as successor bishops to himself, instructing them to do the same. If you had some knowledge of non-Biblical Christian documents of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries, you'd know that the Church kept lists of the men who had received episcopal ordination, from the Apostles onward.

5. "Jesus said we are not of not of this world.... those who love their life in this world will lose it and those who hate it will gain eternal life. Why does the Catholic church cave in to political interest groups?"

The Church [capital "C"] does not "cave in to political interest groups." You must be blind not to have witnessed the ways in which the Catholic Church battles against political interests that would spread falsehood or sin. In the beginning of the abortion crisis, 1973, you and all your thousands of fellow prot denominations were on the sidelines, while only the Catholic Church fought for the babies -- even though it was not "politically correct." We don't need any lectures from the likes of you. Are you now fighting against cloning? Euthanasia? Murdering embryos through stem cell research? Attempted remarriage after divorce? Contraception? We Catholics are standing up against all these mortal sins, rather than "cave in to political interest groups."

6. "Why does doctrine change with the times when the Word of God is ETERNAL? Dont you Catholics have a cable station called the ETERNAL WORD network? What exactly does that mean to you?"

I have already explained how you have misunderstood this point. Our doctrine has not changed since the time of Jesus, the founder of the Catholic Church. Your denomination's doctrines may not have changed much over five centuries, but that isn't saying much when you started with a bunch of wrong doctrines! What good is that for you not to have changed, when your founder was a heretical 16th-century priest who abandoned seven Bible book, sloughed off some major Christian doctrines (and invented some new ones) as a starting point? [By the way, if WELS permits the use contraception, you can know right away that WELS has changed doctrine -- because prior to 1930, every Christian body condemned contraception as a deadly sin.]

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

Sorry, Paul and Gene. I worked on my reply for such a long time that you guys snuck in there before I posted. Jeanie can ignore my mention of giving you "a break." You decided not to take one! JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

What then is papal infallability? When did God give the Pope this authority? I dont see anything about it in the Bible. In fact the last words of the Bible are:

18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

The Bible never changes and God's word never changes! God doesn't change his mind! One day it is a sin to eat meat on Fridays and the next it is not. Why? This is the New Testament era and we can expect no further revelations from God. It is finished. We are in the period where we are waiting for the 2nd coming. How come the Pope recieves these revelations from God? I don't see in the Bible where it says we can expect them.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 29, 2003.

You don't see much at all in the Bible. You only imagine you see. An old rule, Dear: When you KNOW NOTHING about a subject, don't show your ignorance. Play it cool and wait while you get informed.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 29, 2003.

"What then is papal infallability?"

A: Papal infallibility is the divine assurance that whatsoever the leader of His Church declares to be binding on the faithful on earth, we can be assured that such declaration is correct and accurate, and has heavenly approval.

"When did God give the Pope this authority? I dont see anything about it in the Bible."

A: You don't? I thought the above definition would be familiar to anyone who knows the Bible. It's Matt 16:19. Note that the verse begins with the handing over of the keys - the universal symbol of AUTHORITY.

"In fact the last words of the Bible are: I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

A: In fact, it is merely coincidental that these words are the last words in the Bible, since the Bible did not exist when these words were written. It was the Catholic Church which made them the last words in the Bible. John wrote this statement as the closing words of the Apocalypse, and it is to that prophetic book alone which his statement refers. Also, the admonitions about adding to or taking away from the book does not refer to teaching additional truths which the text doesn't contain. If that were the case, it would exclude the rest of the Bible. It means that the text of the Apocalypse itself was not to be altered - an admonition which the Catholic Church later applied to all of Scripture, and which Protestants later ignored by removing Old Testament books, attempting to remove New Testament books, and adding words to the text.

"One day it is a sin to eat meat on Fridays and the next it is not. Why?"

A: Because the Church has been given authority - the keys to the kingdom - and may use that authority to make rules and regulations governing the faithful. An authority which makes a rule can change that rule by the same authority. That's why the Church cannot change doctrinal truth. Such truths came directly from the authority of God, and cannot be changed by any lesser authority.

"This is the New Testament era and we can expect no further revelations from God. It is finished. We are in the period where we are waiting for the 2nd coming. How come the Pope recieves these revelations from God?"

A: No-one claims that a simple rule regarding fasting is a "revelation from God". It is a decision by the Church, made by the authority God gave to it. Does your pastor have any authority? Do you meet at a certain time for worship? Who decided what time you would meet? Who decided the format of your worship service? Is this decision binding on the membership of your church? Could it be changed? Could someone decide to meet at a different time, or to read three scriptures instead of two? Would it take a revelation from God to bring about such a change? Or can your pastor or elders simply make such changes as they see fit, for the benefit of the body?

-- (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 29, 2003.

and you follow the Antichrist prophesied in 2 thessalonians 2!

funny, coming from somebody who came to us preaching about commandment 8, and the whatnot about saying rude things...

but that verse doesnt help. you know why? because i declare martin luther to be an unwitting precursor to the coming of the anti christ, sowing division in Gods church. so there, now the 2 thessalonians 2 applies to YOU. so be gone you servant of evil, and allow those whose church is held in special grace by God continue in peace.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 29, 2003.

2 Timothy 3 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Romans 1 16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

The Bible is all we need for Salvation! The Bible says so! Did God lie or change his mind? If so, wouldnt that mean that God isn't perfect? Obviously you think so because you adhere to the historical- critical method of biblical interpretation as opposed to the historical-gramatical method and so I guess what the pope says has more authority then Holy Scripture! The Bible is a completed revelation and we can expact no further revelation from God. It is complete! We dont need new laws given to us from the pope! And I dont see anything in Scripture that tells us that we should expect it! The office of the papacy is the Antichrist because he usurps God's authority upon himself.

2 Thessalonians 2 3Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness[1] is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 30, 2003.

"but that verse doesnt help. you know why? because i declare martin luther to be an unwitting precursor to the coming of the anti christ, sowing division in Gods church."

Either you are a complete idiot or you have never read it because it clearly says 1) that the Antichrist will come frome within the church:

4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

2) that it was at work in the day of Paul and will be until the last and final day when he is exposed by Christ

7For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

That can be none other than the office of the papacy! Not just one pope but every pope since the beginning of the New Testament era! Then when u add to it all of the counterfit miracals in the RCC, how can u deny it! Every time I hear in the news of another manifestation of Mary or yet another statue of Mary crying real tears etc I remember these verses:

9The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, 10and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing.

Why cannot you see the TRUTH? Because God is punishing you with disbelief:

10and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Everyone one knows that Satan, the great deciever, can disguise himself as even God!

2 Corinthians 11 13For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 30, 2003.

All the cleverness can't disguise your utter lack of authority. You can search the scriptures, but all you find is more darkness. You haven't any link to the holy apostles; and without them you can't know the Holy Spirit. What you parade here as wisdom is just human ostentation. Jeanne is a lost sheep far from her shepherd. We must pray for her.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 30, 2003.

I have the light of Christ! I am a baptized child of GOD! Jesus said to baptize in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit! "Get thee behind me SATAN!" Just like the serpent in the Garden, "Did God really say...?" Yes he did!

John 8 12When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

1 Peter 3 20...God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-- not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge[5] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand--with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

Salvation is for all who have faith in Christ! It is not limitied to only those who belong to the RCC! All that is required is FAITH! How dare you tell me I am not saved because I am not CATHOLIC! At least I worship GOD ALONE and not bowing down to statues of Mary praying to her or to saints or communion wafers! If anyone here is not saved it is YOU!

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 30, 2003.

Eugene you are the one who is LOST! My link to the Holy Spirit is my Baptism not the apostles. I am a Baptized child of God!

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 30, 2003.

jeanie, do you even read your bible? or do you just read chick tracts and take jack chicks word for it???

The Bible is a completed revelation and we can expact no further revelation from God.

show me, please, where IN THE BIBLE it states that God tells man that He is abandoning us... its not there.

instead God pledges that the Holy Spirit will bless His church and lead it from error, and He pledges that the gates of hell will not prevail against His. now, since we know that man cannot stand against satan without help, we KNOW that God MUST be with the church to THIS DAY!!!

even for a lutheran, you have got to be one of the most scripturally ignorant i've ever discussed religion with.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 30, 2003.

I'm not scrupturally ignorant! I know what I believe and why I believe it according to scripture. I have never seen a tract and have no idea who Jack Chick is. I only have fellowship with other WELS and only listen to what the pastors and theologians in the WELS say. I don't listen to other denominations heresies!

From "This We Believe"

9. We believe that the Bible is fully sufficientm clearly teaching people all they need to know to get to heaven, It makes them, "Wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus"(2 Timothy 3:15), and it equips them for "every good work" (2 Tomothy 3:17). Since God plan of salvation has been fully revealed in the canonical books of the Bible, we need and expect no further revelations (Hebrews 1:1-2). The church is built on the teachings of the apostles and prophets. (Ephesians 2:20)

Hebrews 1

The Son Superior to Angels

1In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

Ephesians 2 19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

I have been to ELCA churches and I gew up going to a covenant church. I have only been a WELS for 2 years now and I have never learned so much about the Bible. And there are some ex-catholics in my congregation who say the same thing! And if you remember right, that was a big part of Luther's Reformation! He was the first to translate the Bible into the language of the common man and before him all masses were in Latan. He was the first to bring God to the people!

-- Jeanie (mary_kissmiss@hotmail.com), November 30, 2003.

"I know what I believe and why I believe it according to scripture"

A: So do the 20,000 other denominations, all of which formed their beliefs the same way yours did - by unauthoritative guesswork concerning the meaning of early Catholic writings.

"I don't listen to other denominations heresies!"

A: That's really pretty unrealistic, given that you can't offer a single reason why your beliefs are any more likely to be true than their beliefs.

"We believe that the Bible is fully sufficient clearly teaching people all they need to know to get to heaven"

A: Clearly teaching? Then why does each denomination have DIFFERENT beliefs, all supposedly coming straight from the Bible? Looks to me like it isn't very clear at all.

"Since God plan of salvation has been fully revealed in the canonical books of the Bible"

A: So you place your faith on a group of writings compiled by the Catholic Church, trusting in the Catholic Church to tell you what is scripture and what is not - yet you don't trust that same Church to explain those same scriptures to you. Which is why you are trapped in the doctrinal chaos of denominationalism.

"The church is built on the teachings of the apostles and prophets"

A: Exactly right - on their teaching, not solely on their writings. The Church had the fullness of the teaching of the Apostles and Prophets long before the Bible was compiled - even before the New Testament was written. The Bible came out of the Church. The Church did not come out of the Bible.

"In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord."

A: Notice - "joined together" - in complete UNITY - even as He and His heavenly Father are joined together - not divided into thousands of conflicting denominations.

"I have only been a WELS for 2 years now and I have never learned so much about the Bible"

A: You can learn that much "about the Bible" in any denomination - but what you learn in one denomination will contradict what you learn in another. The quantity of what you learn is meaningless unless what you are learning is the truth. And you have no way of knowing that your church's teaching is true.

"He was the first to translate the Bible into the language of the common man and before him all masses were in Latan."

A: Nonsense! The Holy Catholic Church had translated the Bible into fourteen languanges before Luther was BORN. Furthermore, his own translation was so pitifully inaccurate that his own followers stopped using it within a decade. The only legacy Luther left was an incomplete Bible, with seven whole books torn out and thrown away. Fortunately his followers prevented him from trashing several New Testament books as well, or your Bible would be even more incomplete than it is. The Mass was celebrated in Latin until the middle of the 20'th century, so Luther had nothing to do with that.

"He was the first to bring God to the people!"

A: The Church had brought God to the people in unity and truth for 1,500 years before Luther's rebellion. What Luther brought to the people was heresy, dissention, division, fragmentation, and doctrinal chaos. He himself, before he died, was shocked at the damage that had already been done by his new manmade tradition.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 30, 2003.

jeanie, poor thing,

I'm not scrupturally ignorant! I know what I believe and why I believe it according to scripture

in all youre KNOWING of what you BELIEVE, you forgot one integral step... knowing the truth.

i know you recognize your own personal misinterpretations, and even back them up by chopping a few verses out of context, but you completely ignore the rest of the Bible, which clearly contradicts what you say. THAT makes you scripturaly ignorant.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 30, 2003.