British police staged a pre-dawn raid at a London garbage depot Friday, arresting five street cleaners in a suspected terrorist plot against Pope Benedict XVI on the second day of his state visit to Britain. A sixth person was arrested later in the day.
The Vatican said the pope was calm despite the arrests and planned no changes to his schedule. But the arrests overshadowed a major address by Benedict to British politicians, businessmen and cultural leaders about the need to restore faith and ethics to public policymaking.
The sixth man, aged 29, was arrested Friday afternoon at a home in north London, police said....
John Yurich USA wrote: none of the Popes have been the one and only ANTI-CHRIST
John Ref the Pope's theology.
"how such views affect Ratzingerâs theology of the resurrection of Christ. Certainly, he dismisses an 'earthly and material notion of resurrection' and resists defining it as a real historical event. "The Resurrection cannot be an historical event in the same sense as the Crucifixion is", he says. 'For that matter, there is no account that depicts it as such, nor is it circumscribed in time otherwise than by the eschatological-symbolical expression "the third day".'
Ratzinger brushes aside all attempts to verify the resurrection as a historical event and asserts that it was really a matter of personal experience. Christ is 'the one who died on the cross and to the *eye of faith,* rose again from the dead'. How far this is from the biblical truth of passages such as John 20:27: 'Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing'. What a contrast with the clear and faithful summary provided in the Westminster Confession: 'On the third day he arose from the dead, with the same body in which he suffered' (8:4)." (M Vogan)
Silly Billy wrote: Why do the 2 have to be mutually exclusive? Was Judas' betrayal of Jesus ordained by God or solely a product of his will? According to Peter in Acts 2.23 was Jesus' crucifixion ordained of God or was it solely a result of the actions of men? I have to wonder how you read your Bible! You should go get some education And, a word of advice, STOP blogging until you know what the heck you're talking about!
You might want to check ou revivalandreformation's blog site before coming to conclusions.
revivalandreformation wrote: I have one question for the commenters here, then I will say goodbye...for now. "Are the works of the RCC of God or of man?" In other words, are they ordained by God, or are they solely a product of man?
Why do the 2 have to be mutually exclusive? Was Judas' betrayal of Jesus ordained by God or solely a product of his will? According to Peter in Acts 2.23 was Jesus' crucifixion ordained of God or was it solely a result of the actions of men?
I have to wonder how you read your Bible! You should go get some education And, a word of advice, STOP blogging until you know what the heck you're talking about!
"For, "if these," said he, "be not great words and blasphemous: 'the Successor of Peter,' 'the Vicar of Christ,' 'the Head of the kirk,' 'most holy,' 'most blessed,' 'that cannot err;' that 'may make right of wrong, and wrong of right;' that 'of nothing, may make somewhat;' and that 'has all verity in the shrine of his breast;' yea, 'that has power of all, and none power of him;' nay, 'not to say that he does wrong, although he draw ten thousand million of souls with himself to hell'" ĂÂ "If these," said he, "and many others, able to be shown of his own canon law, be not great and blasphemous words, and such as never mortal man spoke before, let the world judge."
"And yet," said he, "is there one [note] most evident of all: to wit, John, in his Revelation, says, 'That the merchandise of that Babylonian harlot, among other things, shall be the bodies and souls of men' (Rev. 18:13). Now, let the very Papists themselves judge, if ever any before them took unto them power to relax the pains of them that were in Purgatory, as they affirm to the people that daily they do, by the merits of their Mass, and of their other trifles." (John Knox)
"And then began he to decipher the lives of diverse popes, and the lives of all the shavelings for the most part; their doctrine and laws he plainly proved to repugn directly to the doctrine and laws of God the Father, and of Christ Jesus his Son. This he proved by conferring the doctrine of justification, expressed in the scriptures, which teach that man is "justified by faith only" (Gal. 2:16; 3:11); that "the blood of Jesus Christ purges us from all our sins" (1 John 1:7); and the doctrine of the Papists, which attributes justification to the works of the law, yea, to the works of man's invention, as pilgrimages, pardons and other such baggage. That the papistical laws repugned to the laws of the evangel, he proved by the laws made of observation of days, abstaining from meats, and from marriage, which Christ Jesus made free; and the forbidding whereof, St. Paul called "the doctrine of devils" (1 Tim. 4:1-3).
In handling the notes of that beast given in the text, he willed men to consider if these notes, "There shall one arise unlike to the other, having a mouth speaking great things and blasphemous" (Dan. 7:24-25), could be applied to any other, but to the pope and his kingdom?" (John Knox)
You can claim to only be interested in scriptural proofs.Then when you're given them,you say they're inaccurate,or a waste of your time.
You can choose to believe Tim Lahaye and Jerry Jenkins if you want.But don't come here demanding Bible proof and then throwing it back into the faces of those who are trying to show you.
As far as humility,your own writings tell a different story than the one you would like for all of us to believe. How about doing some reading for yourself,the book of Revelation plainly tells all about the little horn, if you cannot see from that,then nobody apart from the Holy Spirit himself, can teach you.
Come On wrote: If you have "myriads of commenters",trying to show you truth.Then why won't you see it? And are you seriously comparing yourself to the Lord Jesus? One more,are you saying that catholics are demoniacs?
Please stick to Scripture and I will converse with you. I won't listen to man's word if man's word cannot be backed up by Scripture. Is this a foreign concept to the lot of you? Sad if it is. Yes Catholics as they are, are servants of Satan, doing his work and going to hell. Enough said. Am I equal with Jesus? In righteousness only. His righteousness, His grace, His work on the cross. I am merely a humble servant who was picked by God to be saved, not by my works or merit, but by His unmerited favour, by His irresistible grace. If these words offend you, you are in trouble!
revivalandreformation wrote: I wrote what the Bible spoke about on the anitchrist that it would be a man. I did not say it would be a certain man, such as the myriads of commenters are trying to say. I said according to Scripture it would A MAN. I cannot bring myself to use man's words especially when those words tend to fill in the lines where the Bible is silent. Criticize me, ridicule me and call me names, that's fine. Jesus was called a demoniac, and you call me a Catholic, same thing as I see it. So be it.
If you have "myriads of commenters",trying to show you truth.Then why won't you see it? And are you seriously comparing yourself to the Lord Jesus? One more,are you saying that catholics are demoniacs?
I wrote what the Bible spoke about on the anitchrist that it would be a man. I did not say it would be a certain man, such as the myriads of commenters are trying to say. I said according to Scripture it would A MAN. I cannot bring myself to use man's words especially when those words tend to fill in the lines where the Bible is silent. Criticize me, ridicule me and call me names, that's fine. Jesus was called a demoniac, and you call me a Catholic, same thing as I see it. So be it.
Mike wrote: The Holy Spirit is a substitute for Jesus?
John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
BlogSpotter wrote: Sounds a lot like your blog.It's OK to admit you're a closet catholic,you'll come out sooner or later.
Closet catholic? Ha! that's funny...don't ask don't tell I guess, huh? Much in the way of man's words, nothing in the way of Scripture...as usual. BTW what does the pope, the Copelands, Benny Hinn, Osteen, etc. have in common? They all think they are gods. So taking that into account, it looks like it could just about be anyone.
Or wrote: --- 'Vicar of Christ' - Prior to the twelfth century the popes were styled 'Vicars of Peter'. Since then they have called themselves 'Vicars of Jesus Christ'. It should be noted that the word 'vicar' means 'substitute', ie, one who takes the place of another. The Holy Spirit is the only 'vicar' of Christ. Read John 14:16,17; and 16:7,13,14. --- (Rev K. Paisley)