Home - List All Discussions

Hey Catholics!

by: sheri

http://www.catholicvote.com/cv_homepage_theater_live.swf
This video is awsome! They sent it from PFL. Wouldnt it be great to get it on local tv?

reply from: scopia1982

I am a Catholic and this ad almost brought me to tears.

reply from: MC3

I'm NOT Catholic and it DID bring me to tears. This spot should be on every television set in America 50 times a day until this brain-dead country wakes up. I'll assure you that God is not going to judge us over tax policy or the cost of gasoline or any of the other issues we find so important. But if we think we can continue to slaughter the babies He creates and do so without consequence, we are certifiably insane. Today, the unborn pay the price for abortion and, one day soon, we will pay the price for allowing it. And that's a guarantee.

reply from: scopia1982

I showed this to my husband who just converted last year to Catholicism and he is a rabid Obama supporter. He says there are other issues to be concerned about other than just abortion. He thinks "abortion is reprehensible" but we need to reduce the need first. I have tried for the past 3 years to get him to understand why I am so passionate about this issue because of what happened to me 8 years ago. We went to a Rachel's Vinyard retreat in March of 2007. When we got home it was like he thought I got my "closure" and now it was time to put it behind me and go on with our lives. But I will never get closure. Now with this election getting closer we argue and fight about it almost everyday, very heated at times. I tell him a good Catholic should not support a candidate that supports not just abortion, but also infanticide. He says Obama supports the majority of Catholic social teaching, so its ok to vote for him. I admire the Archbishop of Denver for advising Biden and other like minded Catholics from taking communion as long as they support abortion, no matter how small of degree that support may be. I told my husband he shouldnt present himself, because by supporting Obama he is out of communion with what the church teaches. Lets just say that ended in another very nasty argument.

reply from: yoda

Great video, and I'm not Catholic either.
There's something about the website, however, that is giving me fits trying to link it. For whatever reason, it won't work on Delphiforums.

reply from: sheri

Scoty, I will pray for your husband so he can see how his vote effects the preborn, dont give up!

reply from: lukesmom

FANTASTIC! It is time we stood up and were counted. I've sent this on to all my fellow Catholics plus...

reply from: galen

i too sent this to all the Catholics on my list....

reply from: 4given

How frustrated you must be! I have faced the same battles with the company I keep. Your spouse understands first hand the suffering and pain of abortion. Is he aware of the Freedom of Choice Act that would lift restrictions on abortions through all 9 months? What about the Infant Born Alive Act that if done away with, would deny medical attention, food and attention to a child that survives an abortion? Is he aware of Barack Obama's view on the lesser- the voiceless? I don't understand what kind of being would deny life-saving measures to any that was suffering, nor can I grasp the reckless dismemberment of any being- especially on another's whim- Sure, there are issues, but none quite compare to the blood shed every 20 or so seconds for elective, selfish reasons. We are at war with ourselves- as a Nation. If Obama is so brazen about his beliefs on abortion, what will come down in regard to the handicapped and elderly? Pray for your husband. Pray for this country. Pray for our leaders. Pray for our future generations- those killed as you read and those that will fight for them. Is your spouse aware of the procedures? Any bit of information- pictures, stages of development, it may help him prioritize. I ache for you. I understand the battle. Keep on. Educate him.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Was it a major issue before you married? Or did it only come up afterward?
Just curious.
A person should make sure they are in agreement on important major issues before marrying. A hushand and wife will be going down the same path together and need to be in agreement on major fundamentals. The Bible says, "Can two walk together lest they are in agreement?" The ox and mule should not plow together (a parable about personal relationships, not animals). Believers and unbelievers should not be yoked together. (A yoke is what they put about the necks of oxen and mules as they plow, as they do their work.)
The Bible says that once married, the believing spouse is not to leave the unbeliever. Biblical advice needs to be acted on before a decision is made or legally binding contract is entered into. Just as the creation of a conceived human life causes an irreversible legal contract for the parents to meet the newly created human beings needs; marriage is irreversible. A conceived child's life is irreversible, but killer minded selfish people are quick to rip up the contract they have made befoire God to care for the little boy or girl in the womb.

reply from: scopia1982

We never talked about it and we should have. I didnt tell him what happened to me with my forced abortion because I was too ashamed of myself. He kept asking me why I suddenly embraced this issue after our son was born. After alot of badgering on his part I told him the truth. Even to this day I still partially blame myself, maybe if I had fought harder maybe if I had ran away faster. Instead I froze in fear and to this day I cant forgive myself. But he is part of the pre RoevWade generation and it is hard to convince them how passionate this issue is to us who are prolife and born after it.

reply from: BossMomma

While I'm not Catholic or pro-life I definately hope McCain/ Palin wins. Obama winning would be the equivilent of making Brad Pit president, no experience, no sacrifice and, no clue.

reply from: churchmouse

What a wonderful, fabulous ad. Wow. I am not Catholic and it brought me to tears. I only wish protestant denominations would also follow in their footsteps.
If every pastor, Priest, Rabbi, Cleric stood up across America for the unborn and put the pressure on government and our elected officials, Roe would be overturned. I have no doubt.
scopia said,
As long as people partake in sex sin.....the pregnancy rate will not go down. Abortion is down because its now more acceptable to have sin outside marriage and have children out of wedlock.
I know exactly how you feel, I feel that pain. I go through the same thing with mine. He is not a Christian and does not understand what the big deal is. He thinks abortion is wrong but a womans choice. I tell him there is no moral difference between his position and being pro-abortion. He is a Republican and will vote McCain but its not because of pro-life views but because he feels Obama is dangerous and not who he says he is. He also feels the Democrats are soft on defense and they ignore the fact that basically the world is out to get us.
You need to stand firm on what you believe, pray and give it all to God. you are planting the seed, its up to God.
Have you showed him scriptures? Of course you have........no Christian can be pro-choice, its impossible.
We should send this not only just to Catholics but to all those that love Christ and keep His commands. EVERYONE SHOULD SEE THIS VIDEO.
Godslaw said,
That is why we should marry someone who is equally yoked. I was not a walking Christian when I got married and my husband whose parents are Jewish, grew up going to a Methodist school. He said he did believe in God and at the time, that was all I needed to hear. yea right.......So when I became born again....we really butted heads. Christ changes you. And for some time he was not willing to see and tolerate the changes. That was almost nine years ago and he has mellowed.
We dissagree on a lot, but my pastor like you said, once told me that even though my husband was not saved, I still was commanded to be a faithful wife. I am planting seeds........some are beginning to sprout.
This also is biblically correct. At times I have felt like leaving, its tough. God has seen me through it however.

reply from: scopia1982

churchmouse said:"What a wonderful, fabulous ad. Wow. I am not Catholic and it brought me to tears. I only wish protestant denominations would also follow in their footsteps.
If every pastor, Priest, Rabbi, Cleric stood up across America for the unborn and put the pressure on government and our elected officials, Roe would be overturned. I have no doubt."
I think the part of this video that made me cry was where it stated the part that Catholic immigrants had in building and fighting for this nation. Because we were persecuted without mercy and the degree of discrimination we have faced. I mean th over all message itself is clear and meaningful, but even today especially where I live in the buckle of the Bible Belt we still have people that hate us and slander us. Few History books give us credit for the part we have played in the forming of this nation.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Isn't it sad that fellow Christians (non-Catholics) think that other Christians (Catholics and anyone "not of their faith") are somehow "bad" because of their different beliefs?
My ancestors came to this country to escape persecution from the state religion of that time, and I will never forget what they went through. (They were Mennonites.) And we wonder why this country is going to hell (pardong the pun) - infighting among Christians is a terrible thing.

reply from: scopia1982

Isn't it sad that fellow Christians (non-Catholics) think that other Christians (Catholics and anyone "not of their faith") are somehow "bad" because of their different beliefs?
My ancestors came to this country to escape persecution from the state religion of that time, and I will never forget what they went through. (They were Mennonites.) And we wonder why this country is going to hell (pardong the pun) - infighting among Christians is a terrible thing.
I agree RML. It is sad. The Mennonites and the Amish are about the most peaceful, forgiving group of Christians.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

I'm sure you heard about the actions of the Plain community here in Lancaster County following the murders of the schoolchildren a few years ago. It amazed me that so many people were NOT familiar with the Biblical concept of forgiveness. I am so accustomed to these concepts because it is how I was raised, but people from around the world responded with surprise that such a horrible action could be so quickly forgiven.
They would have forgiven the murderer even if he had NOT killed himself.

reply from: scopia1982

Yes I heard that on the news,they are very good people.

reply from: churchmouse

Well I am a Christian. I dont belong to a denomination, I dont believe I have to. I believe the Bible is the Word of God, so I belong to a church full of people from all walks of life that simply believe Jesus is who He said He was, God in the flesh.
I have a lot of family that are Catholics. I am really bewildered at how many people when I ask them if they are Christians say, "Yes, but I am Catholic."
The Bible says that all believers will be saved. it does not say that a particular denomination will make it. Jesus was clear who would make it.
I have also been looked down by many Catholics I know....they say unless I cave in and join their Church, I am not saved. Unfortuntely it works both ways.
I think anyone that believes in Christ and accepts Him is....saved by faith. Thats the promise that Christ gives us anyway.
I agree. They live in communities that live in the Word and have given up the "worldly life" to follow Christ. They practice what they preach in love and simplicity.
What comes to mind for me is the forgiving example of the Amish..."Love your enemies and pray for those that persecute you." When Charles Roberts that milkman broke into West Nickle Mines schoolhouse and shot the little Amish girls dead was a sad, tragic day. A few days later these Christians demonstrated the greatest love a human possibly could.....they forgave the gunman and reached out to his family. Can you imagine?
The Bible says mourn with those who mourn and that is what they did. The gunmans with and children mourned with the parents of the little ones killed.
I don't look at demoninations.....I look at a persons heart and where its at. And if they love and follow Christ, I dont believe it matters who or what they are or belong to.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

A truly awesome video. It stresses that some issues are more important than others. Life and family more important than gas prices and pollution. However, this video is falling on ears that don't hear. The economy is number one to most. People vote based on how fat their wallet, 401K and savings account are. Obama has jumped to the head of the pack because people are holding Bush and the Republicans responsible for the near financial collapse of our economic system. We are experiencing an event that could result in a collapse worse than the Great Depression.

reply from: scopia1982

I am so sorry that happened to you. There are some that think that way, but we as a general rule don't prosyltize. If one wants to join is they have to come to us. Sadly I still think persecution more on the part of Fundamentalist Christians against Catholics is more prevelant. I cannot count how many times I have had Chick Tracts thrown in my face. I have never seen such hate filled literature in my life, against Catholics, Mormons, Muslims and anyone else who does not fit into their little box. Jack Chick was blessed with wonderful artistic talents, such a shame he had to waste them spreading hate and lies, hence profaning the Gospel of Christ.
I

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Well I am a Christian. I dont belong to a denomination, I dont believe I have to. I believe the Bible is the Word of God, so I belong to a church full of people from all walks of life that simply believe Jesus is who He said He was, God in the flesh.
I have a lot of family that are Catholics. I am really bewildered at how many people when I ask them if they are Christians say, "Yes, but I am Catholic."
The Bible says that all believers will be saved. it does not say that a particular denomination will make it. Jesus was clear who would make it.
I have also been looked down by many Catholics I know....they say unless I cave in and join their Church, I am not saved. Unfortuntely it works both ways.
I think anyone that believes in Christ and accepts Him is....saved by faith. Thats the promise that Christ gives us anyway.
I agree. They live in communities that live in the Word and have given up the "worldly life" to follow Christ. They practice what they preach in love and simplicity.
What comes to mind for me is the forgiving example of the Amish..."Love your enemies and pray for those that persecute you." When Charles Roberts that milkman broke into West Nickle Mines schoolhouse and shot the little Amish girls dead was a sad, tragic day. A few days later these Christians demonstrated the greatest love a human possibly could.....they forgave the gunman and reached out to his family. Can you imagine?
The Bible says mourn with those who mourn and that is what they did. The gunmans with and children mourned with the parents of the little ones killed.
I don't look at demoninations.....I look at a persons heart and where its at. And if they love and follow Christ, I dont believe it matters who or what they are or belong to.
Because of the extreme power Catholics held, the Inquisition, etc., many Protestants look at the papacy as being sinister. Many Protestant's look to Revelation and Daniel. In making a comparison they look at several items. Was the Catholic Church the Image of the Beast? Roman Catholics did have their nation state the same as the Roman Empire Beast. Were people put to death for not worshiping the image? Certainly, those not worshiping the Papacy were persecuted and put to death for being heretics, therefore bad citizens of the Beast. Did the executed include those trying to obey God, those going by the book? Most certainly. Was the Catholic Church in a fornicating relationship? Involved in man's government before the coming marriage to the true Messiah of God's Government? Did the Roman Catholic Papacy terrorize for 1260 years as prophesied? This does agree with the period that the Papacy exerted great power. Besides being the suspected Image of the Beast or the Harlot to the Beast; was the Papcy itself the small horn that replaced the three earlier horns of the beast. Some argue that the Vandals, Heruli (Odacer's government) and Ostrogoths are the three horns that ruled the beast before the small horn of the Papacy; the little horn was to have influence over the seven succeeding horns of the Roman Empire. Although, it seems that under the final horn of the Beast, the Roman Empire's final days, the Roman Empire shall hate the Harlot and seek to destroy her; just reward for her past harlotry. Daniel said the little horn would wear out the saints and think to make alterations in times and in law, they (the saints) would be given into his hand for a time, times and half a time (1260 years). Certainly, the Papacy changed the calendar, Holy Days and God's law. They claimed they had Peter on their side! They did wear out the saints for 1260 years. The Catholics hunted down the saints, burning whole villages and destroying the residents of valleys seeking a place in the wilderness away from the Papcy's reach.
Yes, Catholics often look down on Protestants as not being in the "True Church" founded, allegedly, by Peter. And Protestants fear the murderous iron clad rule of the Papcy that resulted in torture and death for the "bad heretical citizens" that denigrated the Pope.

reply from: sheri

I dont know, i think of certain heratics these days (Palozi, Biden Kerry, etc) and kind of pine for the good old days....
You seem to have a lot of distaste for the church encouraging executions, how do you square this with your belief in the death penalty? If the Church were to whole sale endorse the use of the death penalty wouldnt that be like a step backward in history?

reply from: churchmouse

You hit the nail on the head. It will fall on deaf ears thats for sure. I was in Sams the other day and at the checkout counter I had an interesting conversation with this lady and a few check out people. One of the things I was purchasing was The Obama Nation, by Jerome Corsi.

The lady said, "Oh you like Obama"....I said no that this was a book that really exposed the type of person he really is and that I could not vote for anyone who was pro-abortion. Another guy said, "What do you mean."

I said that Obama was a pro-abort and told them his voting record and views on abortion. The lady got ticked off and said that basically what i said was a lie. I said excuse me that I was not lying. The guy said he thought I was right but didnt know. I told her to investigate it and she said she would although she really really liked him. I asked her if she was for abortion and she said no. I asked her if she was a Christian and she said yes. I told her to search the scriptures for what God felt about life and I told her on her break to go look at the book I was buying and read it.
She had no idea what Obamas record was. The look on her face when I said he was pro-abortion, pro-PBA and voted against lifesaving measures for a child that makes it through a botched abortion, was one I will never forget.
People will vote for Obama because they dont know any better, because they are ill educated on the issues and simply because they dont care what changes are made.
scorpia said,
Like I said, the scriptures say anyone that confesses Christ as his/her personal Savior will go to heaven.
But it is the Catholic Church that takes the stance that non-Catholics are not saved. I went to a CC and I wanted to take Communion. My friend said I couldnt because I wasn't Catholic. Gee would Christ turn anyone away that loved him?
http://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2006/08/can-non-catholics-be-saved.html
I had to google to see what Chick tracts were. I think they are horrible the way they are presented from what i can see.

reply from: scopia1982

During the Reformation there is enough blame to go around on both sides. The Protestants did their share of burning people alive for withcraft and heresy. Germany during that time would be a great example of this. The Protestants were just as Anti-Semetic as Catholics at that time. Do a google search on quotes from Martin Luther. In Britian during the time of ElizabethI better known to Catholics and those on the mainland of Europe as Bloody Bess persecuted and burned Catholics alive. It was during her reign that the unlawful British take over of Ireland started. For the next 400 years Catholics lost their right to practice their faith openly, peasants were oppressed by the English landowners and Catholics lost their rights to property. Only a Protestant in a mostly Catholic family could inherit. John Paul II apologized and acknowledged the atrocities committed by those in the Church. I have yet to see a Protestant cleric do the same. Jesus founded the Catholic Church by saying to Peter "upon this rock I shall build my church" Jesus didn not build a church literally on a rock. Peter means rock and it was too Peter that Christ entrusted the building of his church. Peter was the first pope. The Catholic Church has endured for the past 2000 years despite all of the atrocities and schisms. Other than the Eastern Orthodox, the same cant be said of the Protestants whose many denominations I cant even count. But I do see Protestants as fellow Christians. And the reason that you cant take communion in the Church is because Protestants are not in unity with Rome and dont accept the doctrine of transubstination. The only non Catholics are the Orthodox because they do accept the doctrine of transsubstination. That means that Christ is present in the host and the wine.

reply from: mcgowan

...The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill is bound to gain enough votes. The number of politicians in the British Parliament who defend life is not big. Prime Minister Gordon Brown is in favour of the bill and he has the support of another very influential scientific, medical lobby. The Labour Party members will keep the party line while voting. There are three cabinet ministers who are Catholics: Ruth Kelly, Secretary of State for Transport, Des Browne, Secretary of State for Defence and Paul Murphy, Secretary of State for Wales. Ruth Kelly has already said that she is not going to support the bill that contradicts her conscience and she will probably hand in her resignation. But the decisive majority of the ruling Labour Party will vote 'yes'...
----------------
ruth kelly handed in her resignation yesterday.
[she's a member of Opus Dei]
http://sunday.niedziela.pl/artykul.php?nr=200409&dz=spoleczenstwo&id_art=00105
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7634546.stm
-------------
a catholic school has just declined to offer hpv vaccines to its pupils.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7634979.stm
apart from the moral issues - my understanding is that the vaccine is only effective against some strains of cervical cancer and there may be unkown side-effects.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/casenotes_20080916.shtml

reply from: scopia1982

In the good ole days they would have been excommunicated. It bothers me that they defile the Body of Christ by presenting themselves for Communion and support abortion. But the American Council of Bishops have said to deny them communion would be an unwarranted intrusion in politics, violating the seperation of church and state. I admire the Archbishop of Denver for speaking out and saying Biden should not present himself for communion. It seems that since Vatican II the church has gotten lax in this department sadly.

reply from: mcgowan

------------
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com

reply from: scopia1982

Thank you mcGowan for the link, I havent got to look at it throughly yet. Maybe I should apply my last post to the USA. I have thought of repatriating to Ireland, but $$$ is the obstacle for that.

reply from: mcgowan

according to someone on yesterday's moral maze - dominica is having its constitution written by the vatican.
[i linked to the programme in another thread.]
i don't know much whether this is true (it seems implausible); in fact, i don't know much about dominica at all.

reply from: churchmouse

Hey I am not denying that Catholics get bashed by some unChristian Christians. A lot of tragic things have happened in the name of Christianity thats for sure. There are differences that many non-Catholics feel Catholics do that are not scriptural and vice versa. Catholic tradition and biblical revelation conflict with each other.
Could you cite scripture on this one please. Jesus does not come close to saying this.
Well it makes one wonder whether the basic theologies of Protetantism and Catholicism are compatable doesnt it? Because there are major differences on the roles scripture play, tradition, salvation, justification, papal infalibility and then the exaltation of Mary between the two faiths.

Where did Jesus say that a believer can't take Communion. Again could you give some scriptures to back this up? I want to read where Christ denys me.
If you are a true and loyal Catholic then dont you have to do and believe what they tell you to believe? And if you do that, then you have to believe that I am not saved. How can you then look at me as a fellow Christian? Hasn't the church always taught that there is only one true church -Rome-and that those outside cant be saved since they are not members nor do they take the sacraments which the church says procures salvation.
You talk about the numerous denominations.....(I do not belong to one) and there are many......but if you look at Rome its not entirely what it used to be either. After Vatican II many nondoctrinal changes happened, also interpretations of traditional doctrine to make the church more diverse.
I believe like I said that as long as people acknowledge God and His Son Jesus, it doesnt matter what they believe or practice as long as it aligns with the Bible. Both Catholics and Protestants have different beliefs in relation to their faith.
Take Biden and Obama. Both are pro-abortion and clearly the Catholic Chruch stands on the Truth on that one so they are wrong.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

I am NOT Catholic, so I would never attempt to take Holy Communion at Mass. It definitely has to do with the fact that, as far as I am personally concerned, it would not please God for me to partake of Communion in a church whose beliefs are vastly different from my own. It would be disrespectful.
Likewise, I doubt that many Catholics would feel comfortable taking Communion in a Protestant church.
I have several Catholic relatives and the only time we take Communion together is at an Episcopalian service.
Any comment from you Catholics out there?

reply from: CharlesD

Almost?
No almost here.

reply from: CharlesD

Well, I'll be darned, something we agree on. I'd better check the weather forecast for hell, see if a cold front is moving in.

reply from: scopia1982

"Could you cite scripture on this one please. Jesus does not come close to saying "this.
That has nothing to do with Scripture. This was part of the many laws enacted by the English Protestants when they occupied Ireland. It was the inrent to disenfranchise Catholic landowners

"Where did Jesus say that a believer can't take Communion. Again could you give some scriptures to back this up? I want to read where Christ denys me."
Do you accept the Eucharist as sybmolic or that literally the host and the wine become the actual blood and body of Christ? We believe the latter and so do the Eastern Orthodox. Protestants left the Church and are no longer in communion with Rome. That is why you cannot take Communion in a Catholic church and that is why I can not take Communion in your Church. We are not in Unity.
"If you are a true and loyal Catholic then dont you have to do and believe what they tell you to believe? And if you do that, then you have to believe that I am not saved. How can you then look at me as a fellow Christian? Hasn't the church always taught that there is only one true church -Rome-and that those outside cant be saved since they are not members nor do they take the sacraments which the church says procures salvation. "
The Church teaches that Jesus saved all regardless of religion. So a person in the middle of the Amazon who has never heard the Gospel if he lived a good life will go to heaven. We view the Protestant Churches as our seperated brethern. We pray that one day all Christians will be in unity. So thats how I can say I see Protestants as my brothers and sisters in Christ. This are Vatican II teachings that were for the better.
I

reply from: scopia1982

Catholics are not allowed to take Communion in a Protestant Church. We can take Communion in an Eastern Orthodox Church if no other Catholic Church is accessible, we will admit Orthodox Chrisitans, but we urge them to abide by the dictums of their own Church.

reply from: MC3

RiverMoonLady,
Neither am I Catholic but I do have a comment for you.
You said, "it would not please God for me to partake of Communion in a church whose beliefs are vastly different from my own."
Since when did someone who supports the legalized wholesale slaughter of children who God creates care about what pleases God? If you can't see the disconnect from reality in that, you're more ignorant than I thought. And the possibility of that boggles the mind.

reply from: scopia1982

God gives us free will and sometimes we us that freewill to make the wrong choice.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You mean God has a law on the books like this:
11 Children, Including Family of 9, Abandoned
Thursday, September 25, 2008
E-Mail Print Share:

AP
Aug. 22, 2008: A sign designating the Alegent Health Emmanuel Medical Center as a safe haven is seen in Omaha, Neb.
Aug. 22, 2008: A sign designating the Alegent Health Emmanuel Medical Center as a safe haven is seen in Omaha, Neb.
OMAHA, Neb. - Eleven children ranging in age from 1 to 17 were left at hospitals Wednesday under Nebraska's unique safe haven law, which allows caregivers to abandon youngsters as old as 19 without fear of prosecution.
Nine of the children came from one family. The six boys and three girls were left by their father, who was not identified, at Creighton University Medical Center's emergency room. Unrelated boys ages 11 and 15 also were surrendered Wednesday at Immanuel Medical Center.
The law, which went into effect in July, initially was intended to protect infants. In a compromise with senators worried about arbitrary age limits, the measure was expanded to include the word "child," which wasn't defined. Some have interpreted this to mean anyone under the age of 19.
At least 14 children have been abandoned under the state's safe haven law since it took effect.
Todd Landry, director of Health and Human Services' division of Children and Family Services, said that in nearly every case, the parents who left their children felt overwhelmed and had decided they didn't want to be parents anymore. None of the kids dropped off so far has been in danger, Landry said.
RelatedStories
Nebraska Safe-Haven Law Permits Parents to Abandon Teens The children surrendered Wednesday are OK, said Kathie Osterman, spokeswoman for the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services. She didn't know why they had been abandoned. Further details weren't immediately available.
Nebraska was the last state in the nation to adopt a safe-haven law. Under previous law, a parent who abandoned a baby could have been charged with child neglect or abandonment, both misdemeanors, or child abuse, a felony.
State Sen. Arnie Stuthman said he introduced the bill intending to protect infants. In a compromise with senators worried about arbitrary age limits, the measure was expanded.
Abandoning teenagers was not the original intent of the law, Stuthman said Thursday.
"People are leaving them off just because they can't control them," he said. "They're probably in no real danger, so it's an easy way out for the caretaker."

reply from: churchmouse

RiverMoonLady said, "I am NOT Catholic, so I would never attempt to take Holy Communion at Mass. It definitely has to do with the fact that, as far as I am personally concerned, it would not please God for me to partake of Communion in a church whose beliefs are vastly different from my own. It would be disrespectful.
Likewise, I doubt that many Catholics would feel comfortable taking Communion in a Protestant church.
I have several Catholic relatives and the only time we take Communion together is at an Episcopalian service.
Any comment from you Catholics out there? "
The CC doesnt think you should take communion either because you are pro-abortion.
It's not about what we think however its what God says is right. And the sacraments are for believers where ever they are. Its not about the church its about the heart of the believer and his or her relationship to God.
For some its more about what the Church says than what scripture actually says.
I mean lets stop tip toeing around here and cut to the chase........
Catholics are not allowed to take communion in protestant churches because they do not think they are Christians and saved. The same reasons they dont want the unsaved to take at their Church. This comes from Rome.
___________________________________
And I must say MC3 you hit the nail on the head with this one.
You said, "it would not please God for me to partake of Communion in a church whose beliefs are vastly different from my own."
Since when did someone who supports the legalized wholesale slaughter of children who God creates care about what pleases God? If you can't see the disconnect from reality in that, you're more ignorant than I thought. And the possibility of that boggles the mind."
So true.

reply from: scopia1982

Churchmouse that is not the current teaching what you are talking about is PreVaticanII. The current teaching as I understand it as a lay person is that Protestants are Christians like us, but there Churchs are imcomplete or only get part of the way CHrist intended it. Some are Bible centered with no liturgy or ritual. Others are about form and ritual with little or no Scripture involved. In the Catholic mass we read a passage from the OT, andpassage from an epistle from the NT and a passage from the Gospels.Our MAss is organized and ritualistic. We are both Scriptural and ritualistic. All believers, including non catholics are considered "saved" Christ came to save all of humanity not just Catholics.

reply from: churchmouse

Pre-vatican? How about what is scriptural what God says? Church changes views?....The WORD IS THE SAME TODAY AND IT WAS BACK WHEN GOD BREATHED IT INTO ITS AUTHORS. Sin is sin is sin. It can be nothing different than how God said it is.
Sorry.....the theif on the cross did not belong to a Church, did not ever get baptized, and never had he taken the sacraments. And Christ said he would make it.
A relationship with Christ is not about denomination, not about customs or rituals.....its about accepting Christ and doing what He commands. Never does he say......that we need church membership to be saved. We are saved by faith in Christ only.
If all non Catholic believers are saved......then why cant we take communion in a Catholic Church? Do you think if Christ was there......and that is what Catholic believe right........he would turn anyone away?

reply from: churchmouse

xena.......curious God doesnt say anything against pedipelia........do you think God would condone that? Do you?
Is pediphelia ok?

reply from: sweet

please read my quote below
(from King James Bible)

reply from: sweet

"If men...hurt a woman WITH CHILD...he shall be surely punished...and he shall pay..."(Exodus 21:22)King James Bible
this quote is unmistakably clear, 'cut and dry.'

reply from: sweet

Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her , and yet no mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exo 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

So, after you finish adding to the scriptures, it says you only get fined if "(mother or child)" dies, but if "(mother or child)" dies, you forfeit your life? Even you can't be that dense... The "mischief" referred to in this passage is obviously harm to the mother. If the child dies, the culprit pays a fine. If the mother dies, it's "a life for a life," and the culprit is killed.
Deu 4:2 Ye shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall ye take from it, that ye may keep the commandments of Jehovah your God which I command you.
Deu 12:32 Everything that I command you, ye shall take heed to do it; thou shalt not add thereto, nor take from it.
Pro 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
sweet is correct. It is you who has misinterpreted these verses concernedparent. They say if the woman is hurt and the fruit of her womb comes out the assailant shall be charged with a fine. However, if there is any mischief, such as the baby or mother's death, then the assailant shall pay with his life.

reply from: scopia1982

CM I am a lay person if you wont to know more in depth either contact the priests of the local Catholic parish in your area or I recommend that you go to local Library and check out a book Called Catholicism for Dummies. The main reason that you cannot take communion is because Protestants dont acknowledge the REAL prescence of Christ himself IN the bread and wine , even though he himself said he was when he commissioned the Eucharist at the last supper. It is not a doctrine of the Church to tell other Christians that if they are not not"saved" if they are not Catholic. Now in the case of a Protestant marrying a Catholic, the non Catholic does not have to make an agreement to raise the child Catholic. In the Catholic Church baptism is a sacrament of initation it is through baptism that we are redeemed from original sin, but salvation depends upon our ongoing conversion or growth in faith as Paul said we work out our salvation with fear and trembling, I m not sure where but I will look it up and get back to you. I have explained every thing to the best of my knowledge. I am not a theologian so I would recommend you check out a copy of Catholicism for Dummies. It is written for layman to understand.
Added: CM I found the verse :Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Phillipians 2:12 KJV

reply from: sweet

Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her , and yet no mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exo 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
MISCHIEF=death/injury of mother or child

reply from: sweet

Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her , and yet no mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exo 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
FRUIT DEPART FROM HER=baby comes out (alive/injured or dead)

reply from: sweet

Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her , and yet no mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exo 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
FRUIT DEPART FROM HER=baby comes out (alive/injured or dead)
MISCHIEF=(death/injury of mother or child)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
apparently, if man hurts a pregnant woman, he gets punishment-whether there is injury or death or not. this is pregnancy insurance similar to car insurance - the person at fault pays whether there is injury or death or not.

reply from: churchmouse

Again the thief on the cross was never baptized and he will spend eternity with Christ. I'll look into it further...thanks.
"Added: CM I found the verse :Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Phillipians 2:12 KJV"
Yes, I believe this means that the entire church (all believers) was to work together to rid themselves of the divisions and differences that was going on at the time. Paul wasn't there anymore and the Phillipians had to be careful to obey Christ by doing what was right. That can be related to us as well. We need to be careful how we conduct ourselves while we walk in Christ. That means living and believing what is scriptural.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You are the one "adding" to the scriptures. Fruit departing from a woman means the fetus has come out of the birth canal. It says nothing about the child dying in that verse. The one that caused harm to the woman and premature birth is to pay a fine. If, however, mischief arises from the harm to the woman or premature birth, the offender is to pay with his life for any life that is lost. Both the mother and child have life.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You are the one "adding" to the scriptures. Fruit departing from a woman means the fetus has come out of the birth canal. It says nothing about the child dying in that verse. The one that caused harm to the woman and premature birth is to pay a fine. If, however, mischief arises from the harm to the woman or premature birth, the offender is to pay with his life for any life that is lost. Both the mother and child have life.
I see concernedparent has added or filled in the details himself on the saying "fruit depart". It seems cp is suggesting that term means died rather than or in addition to giving birth.
Many other Religious authorities have "filled in the blanks" and come up with conclusions that are wrong. For example, the Bible already has Passover as the day Jesus was crucified as the Passover Lamb and the Wave Sheaf offering (the offering of the first of the firstfruits of harvest to God to be accepted for us on the Sunday morning after Passover) as the day Jesus ascended to God's throne to be accepted for mankind.
Yet, man has come up with "Good Friday" as the day Jesus was crucified and "Easter" as the time of Christ's resurrection. It turns out both dates are wrong. Jesus was crucified on Passover day in the middle of the week in the particular year it took place. The Bible says it was in the middle of the week, and that both the High Sabbath and regular weekly sabbath preceded his presentation before the throne. The resurrection, at the end of the regular Sabbath was on Saturday night, not Sunday morning.
But, Sunday worship was already in (and had been for centuries) and authorities tried to make the Biblical timeline fit the traditions they wanted. Yes, Jesus said, they set aside the law so they can replace it with their own traditions; the traditions of man. An add for a book:
You already know Jesus. Here's what you don't Noah ...
Find out what you've been missing in the Bible all these years
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 27, 2008
12:51 am Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
If someone is a Christian, no doubt he or she is well aware of Jesus Christ.
But how well do Christians really know their own Bible?
Guess on which day the Bible says Jesus died.
Believe it or not, the Good Book doesn't mention Friday, and even more surprisingly, while the Bible says Jesus rose from the grave, it does not say it occurred Sunday morning. Remember, Jesus' followers found an empty tomb then.
But don't feel bad if you've always assumed otherwise. Like countless millions of people, you've just been misinformed, misled or even (dare we say) lied to about what the Bible actually says.
In a stunning new investigation, WND's executive news editor Joe Kovacs goes on a mission to help both Christians and non-Christians alike find out what the Bible really contains, and what it doesn't.
Another example of the Religious authorities getting it wrong is Colossians 2:16-17. Members of a Gentile commmunity began keeping the Sabbaths, New Moons and Holy Days. The Bible says these days are prophecies of major events in God's Spiritual agenda. For example, Jesus served as the Passover Lamb on Passover Day, the Church first received the Holy Spirit on the day called the Firstfruits of Harvest, or Pentecost. The Sabbath represents Christ's reign and work during which man shall rest from his work of building his civilization. Gnostics were telling Church members they had to humble themselves on these days by "touch not, taste not, handle not". Paul said they did not have to fast on these days, a sort of false humility. Paul said to let the Body of Christ (the Church) decide how to observe these days. Paul said they should let no man judge them in respect to eating or drinking (fasting) on the Holy Days.
The subject matter is Gnosticism, Paul said the members of the Body of Christ did not need to submit to such self-effacing humilities.
Yet, some authors have added to the words of the Bible. They put the word "mere" in front of the word "shadows"as follows regarding the Holy days; "These things are a mere shadow of things to come...." Not only do they add the qualifier mere to discount the value of the Holy Days, but they argue that Paul is talking about whether one should even observe the Holy Days, not merely about how the days are kept (fasting, false humility, Gnosticism).

reply from: Draiocht

So Sweet, women that aren't knocked up are fair game for men to beat up, right? That's what your precious scripture sounds like to me.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You are the one "adding" to the scriptures. Fruit departing from a woman means the fetus has come out of the birth canal. It says nothing about the child dying in that verse. The one that caused harm to the woman and premature birth is to pay a fine. If, however, mischief arises from the harm to the woman or premature birth, the offender is to pay with his life for any life that is lost. Both the mother and child have life.
I see concernedparent has added or filled in the details himself on the saying "fruit depart". It seems cp is suggesting that term means died rather than or in addition to giving birth.
Many other Religious authorities have "filled in the blanks" and come up with conclusions that are wrong. For example, the Bible already has Passover as the day Jesus was crucified as the Passover Lamb and the Wave Sheaf offering (the offering of the first of the firstfruits of harvest to God to be accepted for us on the Sunday morning after Passover) as the day Jesus ascended to God's throne to be accepted for mankind.
Yet, man has come up with "Good Friday" as the day Jesus was crucified and "Easter" as the time of Christ's resurrection. It turns out both dates are wrong. Jesus was crucified on Passover day in the middle of the week in the particular year it took place. The Bible says it was in the middle of the week, and that both the High Sabbath and regular weekly sabbath preceded his presentation before the throne. The resurrection, at the end of the regular Sabbath was on Saturday night, not Sunday morning.
But, Sunday worship was already in (and had been for centuries) and authorities tried to make the Biblical timeline fit the traditions they wanted. Yes, Jesus said, they set aside the law so they can replace it with their own traditions; the traditions of man. An add for a book:
You already know Jesus. Here's what you don't Noah ...
Find out what you've been missing in the Bible all these years
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 27, 2008
12:51 am Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
If someone is a Christian, no doubt he or she is well aware of Jesus Christ.
But how well do Christians really know their own Bible?
Guess on which day the Bible says Jesus died.
Believe it or not, the Good Book doesn't mention Friday, and even more surprisingly, while the Bible says Jesus rose from the grave, it does not say it occurred Sunday morning. Remember, Jesus' followers found an empty tomb then.
But don't feel bad if you've always assumed otherwise. Like countless millions of people, you've just been misinformed, misled or even (dare we say) lied to about what the Bible actually says.
In a stunning new investigation, WND's executive news editor Joe Kovacs goes on a mission to help both Christians and non-Christians alike find out what the Bible really contains, and what it doesn't.
Another example of the Religious authorities getting it wrong is Colossians 2:16-17. Members of a Gentile commmunity began keeping the Sabbaths, New Moons and Holy Days. The Bible says these days are prophecies of major events in God's Spiritual agenda. For example, Jesus served as the Passover Lamb on Passover Day, the Church first received the Holy Spirit on the day called the Firstfruits of Harvest, or Pentecost. The Sabbath represents Christ's reign and work during which man shall rest from his work of building his civilization. Gnostics were telling Church members they had to humble themselves on these days by "touch not, taste not, handle not". Paul said they did not have to fast on these days, a sort of false humility. Paul said to let the Body of Christ (the Church) decide how to observe these days. Paul said they should let no man judge them in respect to eating or drinking (fasting) on the Holy Days.
The subject matter is Gnosticism, Paul said the members of the Body of Christ did not need to submit to such self-effacing humilities.
Yet, some authors have added to the words of the Bible. They put the word "mere" in front of the word "shadows"as follows regarding the Holy days; "These things are a mere shadow of things to come...." Not only do they add the qualifier mere to discount the value of the Holy Days, but they argue that Paul is talking about whether one should even observe the Holy Days, not merely about how the days are kept (fasting, false humility, Gnosticism).
Like the subject matter says, "Hey Catholics!" - see above. Protestants are the offspring (children) of Catholism, since they have nearly the same beliefs (they come from the authority of the Catholic Church) the above applies to them also.

reply from: sweet

thanks. you have given some very interesting details...let's remember that people are on different levels in their walk (as far as the details go)...i'm working on fine tuning my knowledge in many details. by the way, doesn't Saturday night always equal Sunday morning--because every night (evening) begins the next day? in other words, Saturday night =Sunday morning.

reply from: sweet

YES...everyone else is too! that's exactly why my 'precious scripture' teaches TRUTH on living just and right.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

thanks. you have given some very interesting details...let's remember that people are on different levels in their walk (as far as the details go)...i'm working on fine tuning my knowledge in many details. by the way, doesn't Saturday night always equal Sunday morning--because every night (evening) begins the next day? in other words, Saturday night =Sunday morning.
My day and calendar I get from Genesis 1. Genesis 1:5 "....The evening and the morning were the first day." The first day of the week starts at sundown Saturday night. Jesus ate the Passover meal on Passover Day (Tuesday night) and was crucified on Wednesday (still Passover day). They hurried to bury Jesus before the High Sabbath began (Wednesday at sundown), as a Holy Convocation and fast from work takes place at that time (First Day of Unleavened Bread). Genesis 1:14 "...Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years."
Based on Genesis 1:14, I believe we are to use the sun and moon to mark time measurements such as days, months, years and to mark when Holy days or prophetic events are to take place. We do use the orbit around the sun to mark a year. We previously used a new moon to mark the start of a new month (every 28 plus a fraction days). Catholics and the Roman Empire decided to go with 28 to 31 day months instead of the 28 day lunar month. Catholics and Romans decided to end and start days in the middle of the night instead of ending a day at sunset.

reply from: sweet

You are the one "adding" to the scriptures. Fruit departing from a woman means the fetus has come out of the birth canal. It says nothing about the child dying in that verse. The one that caused harm to the woman and premature birth is to pay a fine. If, however, mischief arises from the harm to the woman or premature birth, the offender is to pay with his life for any life that is lost. Both the mother and child have life.you are exactly correct.

reply from: sweet

Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her , and yet no mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief (death/injury of mother or child) follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exo 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
FRUIT DEPART FROM HER=baby comes out (alive/injured or dead)
MISCHIEF=(death/injury of mother or child)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
apparently, if man hurts a pregnant woman, he gets punishment-whether there is injury or death or not. this is pregnancy insurance similar to car insurance - the person at fault pays whether there is injury or death or not.
**ANYTHING IN PARENTHESIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION**

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You know nothing of Jewish law, historically or otherwise. If the woman was struck, and it caused her to go into labor, no harm would have been done, and there would be no fine, unless the child was stillborn as a result. No fine was levied if the child survived, since the father would then not have been deprived of his progeny, which is the offense for which the fine was levied in the verse in question.
In reality, this was not only true of an unborn child, but applied for 30 days after birth! For the first 30 days after birth, the child was not considered to be a person!
If you caused the death of a newborn, it was not "murder" according to Hebraic law.
You really should read the articles I posted. If you read and understood them, it would clear this up for you...
The Catholics and Protestants have gotten things so completely wrong; they are now teaching a bunch of pagan doctrines and traditions of men rather than what is in the Bible. So why would the Hebraic traditions or Jewish law be any better?
I believe Holy (perfect) men wrote down the Bible at or near the time that the events took place. Moses and an author shortly after Moses compiled many of these early records. Faithful men were careful to duplicate every jot and tittle when making copies.
I do not believe the records were transmitted orally and that multitudes of people had a hand in the books of the Bible. I have no plans of giving any credence to Jewish or Hebraic traditions. They may know less about the Bible than the Protestants and Catholics.

reply from: CharlesD

The whole point is that the scripture acknowledged the unborn as someone with rights and whose injury or death was punishable by law. We could learn from that.

reply from: churchmouse

You know enough bickering for crying out loud over little stuff that does not matter. The important thing is the gospel not what day of the week we worship or who knows more about this and that. Who here has PERFECT UNDERSTANDING? Not me that's for sure. Biblical scholars and theologians have been at odds over this stuff and it just does not matter in the long run. We should worship Him at ALL TIMES.
No one can fulfill the law perfectly that is why Christ came. God has revealed what He wants us to know.
I believe God is not so concerned with what "religion" we identify ourselves with-the word religion doesn't even occur once in the entire Hebrew Scriptures-as much as with what we believe and how we live. PEOPLE ARE BORN JEWISH AND GENTILE BUT IN ORDER TO BECOME A CHRISTIAN THEY MUST BE BORN ANEW. This new faith comes from accepting and putting your faith in the Messiah the Christ. Its about a living relationship with Him. Through physical birth you are either a Jew or Gentile....through spiritual birth you BECOME A FOLLOWER OF JESUS CHRIST. Being born into a Christian home does NOT make you a Christian. It is only when someone completely identifies himself with the Messiah, Jesus that he becomes Messianic or Christian. The ultimate question then is not who knows the most "stuff" its not whether you're Jewish or Gentile, but whether you are of the Messiah or not.
We should never forget however.......that Jesus is the JEWISH Messiah, the one spoken about in our Hebrew Bible. And for Jews, believing in Him is the most Jewish thing they can do. Yeshua came into the world that we ALL might be saved and brought into a relationship with Him.....but He came first and foremost for his own Jewish people. It was only when they rejected him as a nation that his message was taken to the Gentiles who embraced Him. So then Christianity in its root form is actually Jewish, or as some modern scholars have expressed, another of the first century Judaisms. IMO although its important for some what we call ourselves, its what we believe that is important. I'm not a Protestant......I am not a Jew.........I am not a Catholic......I am a CHRISTIAN, a follower of the ONE THAT BEARS THE NAME CHRIST.
Worship on Sunday? Monday? Wednesday? Makes no difference to God when He is worshipped.
CharlesD said, "The whole point is that the scripture acknowledged the unborn as someone with rights and whose injury or death was punishable by law. We could learn from that."
Amen to that.

reply from: churchmouse

This woman was Greek and Matthew calls her a Canaanite, her ancient ancestors were enemies of Israel. Matthews Jewish audience would have immediately understood the significance of Jesus helping this woman. The disciples asked Jesus to get rid of her because she was bothering them. They showed no compassion for her needs. At this time Jesus was in Gentile territory. What Jesus was saying here was that Jews were to have the first opportunity to accept him as the Messiah because God wanted them to present the message of salation to the rest of the world. Jesus really was not rejecting her....... He may have wanted to test her faith or he might have wanted to use the situation as another opportunity to teach that faith is available to all people.

reply from: churchmouse

Nowhere in the Bible is it stated Christ died to procure something for God. It is written the reason Christ came to earth was to give Himself as a sacrifice for sinful mankind. The Father, out of His infinite love for mankind sent His Son into this world to pay a ransom of infinite value for the purchasing of man's redemption and deliverance from death to life, from hell and wrath to heaven and glory.
Christ came for all mankind.

reply from: CharlesD

Yes, Christ came to pay the penalty for all sin. As Paul said, I 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. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written:

The righteous will live by faith.''- Romans 1:16-17
So yes, first for the Jews, then for the Gentiles. The payment made was the just penalty for rebellion against God, the penalty that should be ours to pay. I am thankful that it was paid in my stead.

reply from: scopia1982

"I believe Holy (perfect) men wrote down the Bible at or near the time that the events took place. Moses and an author shortly after Moses compiled many of these early records. Faithful men were careful to duplicate every jot and tittle when making copies."
The only perfect man to walk the Earth was Christ. Do you believe that he was fully God and fully man? THe Bible was written by men inspired by God.
"I do not believe the records were transmitted orally and that multitudes of people had a hand in the books of the Bible. I have no plans of giving any credence to Jewish or Hebraic traditions. They may know less about the Bible than the Protestants and Catholics"
You sound Anti Semitic. During their early History the Jews told their history and laws orally. Their are plenty of learned scholars today both Protestant and Catholic that know about the bible. Did you know that Martin Luther wanted to remove the epistle of James because it says that faith without works is dead and that Reformers took out 7 books of the OT because they were written in Greek , instead of Hebrew? The other motivation was because in the book of 2nd Maccabees validates the Catholic teaching on purgatory. You can look it up on Bible Gateway.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

So, all Jews are wrong? Is that what you are saying? Even despite the fact that they KNOW about Jesus but believe that he is NOT the Messiah for whom they wait?
Your view is parochial and prejudiced.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Mat 15:21 Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
Mat 15:22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
Mat 15:23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mat 15:24
(Darby) But he answering said, I have not been sent save to the lost sheep of Israel's house.
(DRB) And he answering, said: I was not sent but to the sheep, that are lost of the house of Israel.
(ISV) But he replied, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the nation of Israel."
(KJV) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
(KJV+) But1161 he3588 answered611 and said,2036 I am not3756 sent649 but1508 unto1519 the lost622 sheep4263 of the house3624 of Israel.2474
(KJVA) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
(YLT) and he answering said,
I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.'
It is true that originally only the Israelites were called and those who became part of their family. Jesus was sent to work with the Israelites. After Jesus' death, it was revealed to Peter and Paul that salvation was being opened to the Gentiles also. Paul was nearly stoned just for suggesting that Gentiles were being called by God and were heirs of salvation. A mob did want to stone Paul to death when they thought he brought a Gentile into the Temple (which he hadn't).

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Christ "fully" God? Jesus said his Father was greater than him. Jesus always obeyed and did what pleased the Father. The Father and Son are two seperate entities. In the same way that Jesus prayed we would all be one, Christ is one with his Father. We can be one with the Father, Son and our brethren also. That means we have a common purpose and mindset; we move as one body to get things done. Jesus said it was written that we are gods. He said this when he was to be stoned for saying he was the Son of God. We also are sons of God. We are as distinct and seperate from the Father as Christ is seperate and distinct from the Father. There is no thing called a Trinity.
Living faith requires being a doer of the word. Taking action based on what you believe is living faith. The evil anti-semitic Martin Luther said the epistle of James was a house of straw. I understand that not only did Martin Luther want James expunged from the Holy Scriptures, but Luther's own German translation is accused of "adding" to Gods words. The wicked Martin Luther wrote a letter that we could commit murder a thousand times a day and still be "saved" if our faith was stronger. What vain words. Martin Luther was one of Satan's ministers. Martin Luther was in favor of some very harsh treatments against Jews, I believe including burning their residences. Martin Luther was evil. He wanted to add and subtract from the Bible. He wanted to put lawlessness as the main theme of the Bible; like Satan said, being lawless ain't no problem, you shall not surely die. That is what Martin Luther's version of Grace says.

reply from: churchmouse

Yes, the ones that deny Christ. A lot of people just know about Christ. So what? Because you know Christ does not mean you are saved in the sense that Christ talks about being saved.
You think I am parochial and prejudiced......but what are you? When you tell someone they are wrong......you imply that there is a right. Who is right? You?
If you say yes, then arent you to.....prejudiced?

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Christ "fully" God? Jesus said his Father was greater than him. Jesus always obeyed and did what pleased the Father. The Father and Son are two seperate entities. In the same way that Jesus prayed we would all be one, Christ is one with his Father. We can be one with the Father, Son and our brethren also. That means we have a common purpose and mindset; we move as one body to get things done. Jesus said it was written that we are gods. He said this when he was to be stoned for saying he was the Son of God. We also are sons of God. We are as distinct and seperate from the Father as Christ is seperate and distinct from the Father. There is no thing called a Trinity.
Living faith requires being a doer of the word. Taking action based on what you believe is living faith. The evil anti-semitic Martin Luther said the epistle of James was a house of straw. I understand that not only did Martin Luther want James expunged from the Holy Scriptures, but Luther's own German translation is accused of "adding" to Gods words. The wicked Martin Luther wrote a letter that we could commit murder a thousand times a day and still be "saved" if our faith was stronger. What vain words. Martin Luther was one of Satan's ministers. Martin Luther was in favor of some very harsh treatments against Jews, I believe including burning their residences. Martin Luther was evil. He wanted to add and subtract from the Bible. He wanted to put lawlessness as the main theme of the Bible; like Satan said, being lawless ain't no problem, you shall not surely die. That is what Martin Luther's version of Grace says.
I like to think "outside the box". That is, I'm not limited by prepackaged solutions. I don't like many of the ideas of men. The laundry list includes the prepackaged solutions offered by the Pope, Martin Luther, Muhammad, Hitler, Mao, Lenin, Darwin, etc. When I say, "The package these guys offers stinks", does that justify the followers of these men oppressing me or taking my head? Or do I need to be politically correct and say the required thing, in many cases; "Yeah, sure, that's great for you, whatever you say."
The people I named all have destructive and dangerous ideas. Something must be said against each man's proposals. Or do we say, "Let's saddle up our war horse and ride beside Muhammad and go chop off a few infidel's heads for the sake of Allah!"

reply from: CharlesD

Yes, and rightly so. There is nothing wrong with being prejudiced. We have made that out to be a bad word, when in reality it depends on what you are prejudiced against. If you favor one thing over another, you are prejudiced. I like green beans more than broccoli. I guess that makes me prejudiced as well.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Yes, and rightly so. There is nothing wrong with being prejudiced. We have made that out to be a bad word, when in reality it depends on what you are prejudiced against. If you favor one thing over another, you are prejudiced. I like green beans more than broccoli. I guess that makes me prejudiced as well.
Nothing wrong with being "narrow minded" on the life issue also. Pro-Choicers say,"Just look at all the opportunities that open up if you can accept crushing in the skull of a partial birth abortion child." I'm bigoted against Pro-Choice ideas. I just will not get off the narrow way and enter a broad path of possibilities. Life is a narrow Way. Getting off the narrow path and trying multitudes of other various possibilities leads to death. Abortion has immediate death and destruction consequences.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Yes, the ones that deny Christ. A lot of people just know about Christ. So what? Because you know Christ does not mean you are saved in the sense that Christ talks about being saved.
You think I am parochial and prejudiced......but what are you? When you tell someone they are wrong......you imply that there is a right. Who is right? You?
If you say yes, then arent you to.....prejudiced?
No, not prejudiced. I believe that EVERYONE is free to worship however and whomever they please. The Jewish religion is far older than Christianity, and I respect their beliefs as much as I respect your right to believe whatever you want.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics