When I learned that the Bible speaks of a restored Garden of Eden and the restoration of mankind to the perfection and endless life that Adam forfeited, I was thrilled. Who doesn't want to keep living on this beautiful earth, with our loved ones, and being able to do all the things we love to do---endlessly?
If God said to you today, "When do you want to die?" would you say "now!!"? I don't think very many people would say that.
We CAN live forever here on Earth. The Bible tells us that we can.
Matthew 5:5
Psalm 37:9-11,29
Paradise on Earth
Moderator: Moderators
-
onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 11114
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1581 times
- Been thanked: 471 times
-
onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 11114
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1581 times
- Been thanked: 471 times
Post #721
Where do you get the idea that I have even implied that "God wants only a few people" to be in Paradise? No! He wants everyone to be there, but it is up to each individual as to what they choose to do.RightReason wrote: [Replying to post 719 by onewithhim]
13 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. "Matthew 7:13-14That is my final post on this argument stirred up by RightReason. I haven't gotten any meaningful reply from him. It would be interesting to know how he interprets Matt.7:13,14.
RightReason interprets this in several ways. First, IMO, it means the road to Hell is easy, but heaven requires sacrifice, obedience, commitment, responsibility. It encourages us to not get distracted by the easy road of earthly pleasures, popularity, etc. The passage points out it isnt always easy to live according to the ways of God and many of us stumble and get lost in this vast world, but if we realize the gate is narrow that might help us stay focused. I would also put a plug in here for this passage indicating the need of Confession and Gods grace. Life can be a tough, rocky road, but with Gods help we can find our way. Again, this passage is talking about the road (IOW, the road or way to heaven is narrow " meaning there is ONE way) and not that the destination itself is narrow/small.
Nowhere would I interpret this passage to be saying God wanted only a small amount of people to be saved, most of us will go to hell, so make sure you are part of a smaller obscure church because that could mean you will be one of the few who makes it.
Also, Tammy, I am not a he. I am a woman. I am a wife and mother and didnt recognize the Catholic Church as Christs Church on earth until I was out of college. At this time, I read more books, talked to more people, spent more time in prayer and in conversation with our Lord than seems would be physically possible to have done so unless the Holy Spirit was involved. I looked into other faiths and religions and NOTHING made more sense or was more reasonable then the Catholic Church. I found time and time again every other religion/faith was an off shoot of Christs original Church. They lacked the marks of the true Church. They also werent nearly as beautiful, inspiring, or logical in their teachings.
If someone would have told me in my early 20s that I would be a practicing Catholic with 8 children who saw the beauty and truth in such Church teachings on Confession, the true presence in the Holy Eucharist, sex, marriage, contraception, heaven, etc. I would have fallen off my chair laughing. But I have realized no other Church on the planet teaches these beautiful truths and they all point to our loving, merciful, Father in heaven as their author. Life is beautiful and I am passionate about my faith because I see both the beauty and reason in my home (that is your home as well) the Catholic Church.
Peace.
Jesus said that the road is narrow, meaning, as you said, it requires sacrifice and effort, and, sadly, only a few choose to go this route. Most people choose to go on the broad way---the easy way to get through life, with not a lot of effort or sacrifice. They mainly look out for themselves, and desire immediate satisfaction.
I see you appreciate the outward beauty of the RCC and its traditions, and it's true, there is much surface beauty in the church. Apparently you haven't gone as far as looking underneath the surface and looking at what is going on in the back rooms and clandestine night-spots of the movers and shakers of the church, nor have you acquainted yourself with the history of the RCC. I asked you about the Borgias, but you didn't reply. They are a family that represents just about all of the way the popes have operated down through the centuries.
But I have realized that it is fruitless to try and reason with someone who has their mind all made up and won't listen to any other POV.
.
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #722
[Replying to onewithhim]
Heres why the Borgias are irrelevant . . .
The treasures of the Church, her Divine character, her holiness, Divine revelation, the grace of God, spiritual authority, it is well known, are not dependent on the moral character of the agents and officers of the Church. The foremost of her priests cannot diminish by an iota the intrinsic value; of the spiritual treasures confided to him." There have been at all times wicked men in the ecclesiastical ranks. Our Lord foretold, as one of its severest; trials, the presence in His Church not only of false brethren, but of rulers who would offend, by various forms of selfishness, both the children of the household and "those who are without". Similarly, He compared His beloved spouse, the Church, to a threshing floor, on which fall both chaff and grain until the time of separation. . . . it was in his time the opinion of historians that Alexander had obtained the papacy partly through money and partly through promises and the persuasion that he would not interfere with the lives of his electors while immoral writers have made only too much capital out of the salacious paragraphs scattered through Burchard and Infessura, there is no more reason now than in the days of Raynaldus and Mansi for concealing or perverting the facts of history. "I am a Catholic", says M. de. l'Einois (loc. cit.), "and a disciple of the God who hath a horror of lies. I seek the truth, all the truth, and nothing but the truth. Although our weak eyes do not see at once the uses of it, or rather, see damage and peril, we must proclaim it fearlessly." The same good principle is set forth by Leo XIII in his Letter of September 8, 1889, to Cardinals De Luca, Pitra, and Hergenrother on the study of Church History: "The historian of the Church has the duty to dissimulate none of the trials that the Church has had to suffer from the faults of her children, and even at times from those of her own ministers." Long ago Leo the Great (440-461) declared, in his third homily for Christmas Day, that "the dignity of Peter suffers no diminution even in an unworthy successor" (cujus dignitas etiam in indigno haerede non deficit). The very indignation that the evil life of a great ecclesiastic rouses at all times (nobly expressed by Pius II in the abovementioned letter to Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia) is itself a tribute to the high spiritual ideal which for so long and on so broad a scale the Church has presented to the world in so many holy examples, and has therefore accustomed the latter to demand from priests.
https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/pope-alexander-vi
Like I said, I looked deep and hard into the Catholic Church. I was not a practicing Catholic in college. I gave the same excuses you and many others do. I too at one time said things like, I can just tell my sins directly to God/who needs Confession?, Organized religion is a joke and full of hypocrites/look how corrupt the Church is, Why would anyone show allegiance to some human spokesperson for Christ? Just a bunch of old superstitious women pray the Rosary, Catholics dont know their Scripture and do things that arent in Scripture, etc, etc. Yep! I said all those things and I too believed them.
But that was before I actually looked into the Church and her teachings and why she said and did the things she did. First, I studied history, which led me to the Catholic Church. Then I knew I had to study these things the Church taught and when I stopped taking these assumed stereotypes on face value and actually learned what the Church taught I realized I was basing my opinion on a lot of false information. The truth is all that the Church does is backed by Scripture and her teachings are rich and true. I cant make you see what you dont want to see, but you are very wrong to suggest I havent looked at other points of view or at the Catholic Church for what she is. I hope it might be possible for you to at least some day be fair to Christs Church and see in her what Christ desired we would. Peace.
You brought up the passage about the narrow gate as some kind of warped support of your insistence that the Catholic Church cant be Christs Church because the Catholic Church is bigger than JWs. And I appropriately pointed out that that is not what that passage means.Where do you get the idea that I have even implied that "God wants only a few people" to be in Paradise? No! He wants everyone to be there, but it is up to each individual as to what they choose to do.
Wow, sounds almost identical to what I said it meant, so again illogical to use the verse about entering thru the narrow gate to mean the Catholic Church cant be Christs Church on earth. Like I said before that is an absurd illogical argument.Jesus said that the road is narrow, meaning, as you said, it requires sacrifice and effort, and, sadly, only a few choose to go this route. Most people choose to go on the broad way---the easy way to get through life, with not a lot of effort or sacrifice. They mainly look out for themselves, and desire immediate satisfaction.
<sigh> Yes, typical anti-Catholic rhetoric chides Catholics for supposedly being all about tradition while having no idea what is actually meant by tradition " LOL! And yes nice jab that I didnt look deeply into the Church. If you read what I said, I mentioned how I spent a great deal of time looking very much into the Church and her history. In fact, there were few other religions who could pass my history test. Most churches, like your own, came pretty late to the party.I see you appreciate the outward beauty of the RCC and its traditions, and it's true, there is much surface beauty in the church. Apparently you haven't gone as far as looking underneath the surface and looking at what is going on in the back rooms
No, they are a family that your anti-Catholic bias presents as representing the Popes thru the centuries. I think someone has been watching too many salacious tv dramas. Also, how brave to bash the history of my religion knowing I cant do the same to yours because your church has no history. But it is your lack of history in addition to faulty theology that disqualifies the JWs from serious consideration as Christs Church.I asked you about the Borgias, but you didn't reply. They are a family that represents just about all of the way the popes have operated down through the centuries.
Heres why the Borgias are irrelevant . . .
The treasures of the Church, her Divine character, her holiness, Divine revelation, the grace of God, spiritual authority, it is well known, are not dependent on the moral character of the agents and officers of the Church. The foremost of her priests cannot diminish by an iota the intrinsic value; of the spiritual treasures confided to him." There have been at all times wicked men in the ecclesiastical ranks. Our Lord foretold, as one of its severest; trials, the presence in His Church not only of false brethren, but of rulers who would offend, by various forms of selfishness, both the children of the household and "those who are without". Similarly, He compared His beloved spouse, the Church, to a threshing floor, on which fall both chaff and grain until the time of separation. . . . it was in his time the opinion of historians that Alexander had obtained the papacy partly through money and partly through promises and the persuasion that he would not interfere with the lives of his electors while immoral writers have made only too much capital out of the salacious paragraphs scattered through Burchard and Infessura, there is no more reason now than in the days of Raynaldus and Mansi for concealing or perverting the facts of history. "I am a Catholic", says M. de. l'Einois (loc. cit.), "and a disciple of the God who hath a horror of lies. I seek the truth, all the truth, and nothing but the truth. Although our weak eyes do not see at once the uses of it, or rather, see damage and peril, we must proclaim it fearlessly." The same good principle is set forth by Leo XIII in his Letter of September 8, 1889, to Cardinals De Luca, Pitra, and Hergenrother on the study of Church History: "The historian of the Church has the duty to dissimulate none of the trials that the Church has had to suffer from the faults of her children, and even at times from those of her own ministers." Long ago Leo the Great (440-461) declared, in his third homily for Christmas Day, that "the dignity of Peter suffers no diminution even in an unworthy successor" (cujus dignitas etiam in indigno haerede non deficit). The very indignation that the evil life of a great ecclesiastic rouses at all times (nobly expressed by Pius II in the abovementioned letter to Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia) is itself a tribute to the high spiritual ideal which for so long and on so broad a scale the Church has presented to the world in so many holy examples, and has therefore accustomed the latter to demand from priests.
https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/pope-alexander-vi
Pot meet kettle. Youre funny.But I have realized that it is fruitless to try and reason with someone who has their mind all made up and won't listen to any other POV.
Like I said, I looked deep and hard into the Catholic Church. I was not a practicing Catholic in college. I gave the same excuses you and many others do. I too at one time said things like, I can just tell my sins directly to God/who needs Confession?, Organized religion is a joke and full of hypocrites/look how corrupt the Church is, Why would anyone show allegiance to some human spokesperson for Christ? Just a bunch of old superstitious women pray the Rosary, Catholics dont know their Scripture and do things that arent in Scripture, etc, etc. Yep! I said all those things and I too believed them.
But that was before I actually looked into the Church and her teachings and why she said and did the things she did. First, I studied history, which led me to the Catholic Church. Then I knew I had to study these things the Church taught and when I stopped taking these assumed stereotypes on face value and actually learned what the Church taught I realized I was basing my opinion on a lot of false information. The truth is all that the Church does is backed by Scripture and her teachings are rich and true. I cant make you see what you dont want to see, but you are very wrong to suggest I havent looked at other points of view or at the Catholic Church for what she is. I hope it might be possible for you to at least some day be fair to Christs Church and see in her what Christ desired we would. Peace.
-
onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 11114
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1581 times
- Been thanked: 471 times
Post #723
[Replying to post 722 by RightReason]
Oh my goodness. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Do you actually think that that malarky about Christ's church having wicked men inside it and yet it doesn't matter....does that make sense to you? Would Christ's church really be run by evil men? You have a blurred, dark view of Christ and his standards.
He would not have any leaders in his church that are evil, like the Borgias and many other popes and their families.
Who do you think he was talking about when he said that from henceforth Satan's minions ("weeds" or "tares") would be growing right along with the true sons of the Kingdom ("wheat"), and becoming so numerous that they almost choked out the wheat?(Are you familiar with Matthew chapter 13?)
You scoff at our organization because you say that we "have no history." I beg to differ. Our organization goes back BEFORE your church started up and started teaching men's doctrines and not God's. We are part of Jesus' original congregation, and we teach only what he taught. The Scriptures say that after the Apostles died off, wolf-like men would contaminate the church with false doctrines and influence the many to go after them. (Acts 20:29,30) Who do you think they proved to be?
Jesus' original congregation was almost overwhelmed by the false Christians, and up to this time period has been almost silenced. But the Scriptures help us to see that the truth would become known once again "in the last days," or, "harvest time." (Daniel 12:4,9; Matthew 13:30, 37-40) All the false Christians will be exposed, and true knowledge will become abundant. So...we represent the oldest, truest Church, run by Christ and righteous men, never wicked like the RCC has in its ranks now and for two thousand years.
Oh my goodness. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Do you actually think that that malarky about Christ's church having wicked men inside it and yet it doesn't matter....does that make sense to you? Would Christ's church really be run by evil men? You have a blurred, dark view of Christ and his standards.
He would not have any leaders in his church that are evil, like the Borgias and many other popes and their families.
Who do you think he was talking about when he said that from henceforth Satan's minions ("weeds" or "tares") would be growing right along with the true sons of the Kingdom ("wheat"), and becoming so numerous that they almost choked out the wheat?(Are you familiar with Matthew chapter 13?)
You scoff at our organization because you say that we "have no history." I beg to differ. Our organization goes back BEFORE your church started up and started teaching men's doctrines and not God's. We are part of Jesus' original congregation, and we teach only what he taught. The Scriptures say that after the Apostles died off, wolf-like men would contaminate the church with false doctrines and influence the many to go after them. (Acts 20:29,30) Who do you think they proved to be?
Jesus' original congregation was almost overwhelmed by the false Christians, and up to this time period has been almost silenced. But the Scriptures help us to see that the truth would become known once again "in the last days," or, "harvest time." (Daniel 12:4,9; Matthew 13:30, 37-40) All the false Christians will be exposed, and true knowledge will become abundant. So...we represent the oldest, truest Church, run by Christ and righteous men, never wicked like the RCC has in its ranks now and for two thousand years.
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #724
[Replying to post 723 by onewithhim]
I must question what you actually know about Christs Church with the way you respond. Read about the lives of the Saints. See what they did and said and what eye witnesses had to say about them. This might help you get a better feel of the fruits of the Church. Men and women whose love, devotion, and commitment to Christ and His Church is undeniable. What beautiful witnesses to the faith.
They would never have trusted Charles Taze Russel and all his failed prophesies and invented theology. Because they recognized men are flawed. They chose rather to put their faith in Jesus Christ and Christ gave us His Church and promised He would remain with her. Funny how no one was teaching about Jesus as Michael the arch angel, or the non existence of hell, or a 144,000, or a literal paradise earth prior to Russel. That should concern you. To actually think Christ would have hidden His Church from us is one who does not understand Christ or trust in His words.
You will see some day that heaven is far greater than what the limited mind of Russel could concoct. Seeing the face of Christ and being with God for eternity in heaven beats even huge earthly mansions, green pastures, and unlimited sex. That might be hard for you to believe, but it is true. I think you miss the who God is and His desire for man -- you seem to be more interested in material comforts and fail to recognize Christ is our fulfillment, not horses and hot fudge sundaes.
I must question what you actually know about Christs Church with the way you respond. Read about the lives of the Saints. See what they did and said and what eye witnesses had to say about them. This might help you get a better feel of the fruits of the Church. Men and women whose love, devotion, and commitment to Christ and His Church is undeniable. What beautiful witnesses to the faith.
They would never have trusted Charles Taze Russel and all his failed prophesies and invented theology. Because they recognized men are flawed. They chose rather to put their faith in Jesus Christ and Christ gave us His Church and promised He would remain with her. Funny how no one was teaching about Jesus as Michael the arch angel, or the non existence of hell, or a 144,000, or a literal paradise earth prior to Russel. That should concern you. To actually think Christ would have hidden His Church from us is one who does not understand Christ or trust in His words.
You will see some day that heaven is far greater than what the limited mind of Russel could concoct. Seeing the face of Christ and being with God for eternity in heaven beats even huge earthly mansions, green pastures, and unlimited sex. That might be hard for you to believe, but it is true. I think you miss the who God is and His desire for man -- you seem to be more interested in material comforts and fail to recognize Christ is our fulfillment, not horses and hot fudge sundaes.
-
onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 11114
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1581 times
- Been thanked: 471 times
Post #725
God gave us physical comforts, and why? So we could enjoy them. It was His plan from the beginning for humans to live on this earth and enjoy its offerings. Nowhere in Genesis does it show that He changed His mind and suddenly, after Adam rebelled, changed humans' destination to be life in heaven. He never gave up on His original plan for mankind and this planet.RightReason wrote: [Replying to post 723 by onewithhim]
I must question what you actually know about Christs Church with the way you respond. Read about the lives of the Saints. See what they did and said and what eye witnesses had to say about them. This might help you get a better feel of the fruits of the Church. Men and women whose love, devotion, and commitment to Christ and His Church is undeniable. What beautiful witnesses to the faith.
They would never have trusted Charles Taze Russel and all his failed prophesies and invented theology. Because they recognized men are flawed. They chose rather to put their faith in Jesus Christ and Christ gave us His Church and promised He would remain with her. Funny how no one was teaching about Jesus as Michael the arch angel, or the non existence of hell, or a 144,000, or a literal paradise earth prior to Russel. That should concern you. To actually think Christ would have hidden His Church from us is one who does not understand Christ or trust in His words.
You will see some day that heaven is far greater than what the limited mind of Russel could concoct. Seeing the face of Christ and being with God for eternity in heaven beats even huge earthly mansions, green pastures, and unlimited sex. That might be hard for you to believe, but it is true. I think you miss the who God is and His desire for man -- you seem to be more interested in material comforts and fail to recognize Christ is our fulfillment, not horses and hot fudge sundaes.
I don't want to go to heaven, and I accept God's gift of this earth for us. Why do you reject this gift as something not worth much of anything? How ridiculous to think that billions of people will go to heaven to rule with Christ! What will you rule over? Can you tell me that?
Your knowledge of Charles Taze Russell is as meager as your knowledge of the popes and their evil ways. I think research into these things would give you a more accurate view than what you already have. (Imagine---a church saying "yes, we have had wicked men acting as popes, but that's OK. It's still Christ's Church!" People who swallow that can truly be called "gullible.") There is a good book written by a non-JW about Russell that would fill you in on the truth of the matter. It's called Charles Taze Russell, His Life & Times/ The Man, the Millennium and the Message, by Frederick Zydek.
I have learned a little about some of the saints, and I didn't need to research very far to understand the confusion imparted by, and the mercilessness of the Vatican. One nun, a Jew who converted to Catholicism, was imprisoned by the Nazis and wrote desperately to the pope for help. She was never answered, and she eventually died at the hands of the Third Reich. The Vatican never tried to impede Hitler's program, even though individual Catholics did, with no backing from the pope.
Even Mother Theresa was no jewel, despite her white-washed reputation. She died a confused woman who wasn't even sure that she believed in her Catholic faith any more. Did you miss that? If you did, you truly have your head in the sand. So, one of these saints was left to die, hopeless, in the hands of the Nazis (making her a saint in later years was somehow supposed to make up for that?), and the other saint I mentioned was ready to abandon her shaky faith at the end (a real example for people to follow, eh?). That's enough for me to see what the "saints" mean to the pope....not much as people, but a great way for damage-control. Does this go right over your head?
.
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #726
[Replying to onewithhim]
I will pray for you and ask for your prayers for me and with time we will know Christs established Church and the hereafter that Our Father in heaven has in store for us.
Proof that one sees and hears what they want to hear. I am afraid your account of the Popes, the Saints, and the Church are highly inaccurate and what you say about Mother Teresa could be considered slander, as it is completely false. Have you ever actually read what she herself said? She not once doubted her Catholic faith. She, like many of us, didnt always feel the presence of God. Your words and summary of the Church show your anti Catholic bigotry.I have learned a little about some of the saints, and I didn't need to research very far to understand the confusion imparted by, and the mercilessness of the Vatican. One nun, a Jew who converted to Catholicism, was imprisoned by the Nazis and wrote desperately to the pope for help. She was never answered, and she eventually died at the hands of the Third Reich. The Vatican never tried to impede Hitler's program, even though individual Catholics did, with no backing from the pope.
Even Mother Theresa was no jewel, despite her white-washed reputation. She died a confused woman who wasn't even sure that she believed in her Catholic faith any more. Did you miss that? If you did, you truly have your head in the sand. So, one of these saints was left to die, hopeless, in the hands of the Nazis (making her a saint in later years was somehow supposed to make up for that?), and the other saint I mentioned was ready to abandon her shaky faith at the end (a real example for people to follow, eh?). That's enough for me to see what the "saints" mean to the pope....not much as people, but a great way for damage-control. Does this go right over your head?
I will pray for you and ask for your prayers for me and with time we will know Christs established Church and the hereafter that Our Father in heaven has in store for us.
-
onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 11114
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1581 times
- Been thanked: 471 times
Post #727
When someone sees the hypocrisy and evil in something, why would they be called a "bigot"? Do you call Jesus a bigot because he exposed the Pharisees as to the irresponsible, selfish men that they were? I guess you would. Well, I'm in good company, I would say, if I'm a bigot.RightReason wrote: [Replying to onewithhim]
Proof that one sees and hears what they want to hear. I am afraid your account of the Popes, the Saints, and the Church are highly inaccurate and what you say about Mother Teresa could be considered slander, as it is completely false. Have you ever actually read what she herself said? She not once doubted her Catholic faith. She, like many of us, didnt always feel the presence of God. Your words and summary of the Church show your anti Catholic bigotry.I have learned a little about some of the saints, and I didn't need to research very far to understand the confusion imparted by, and the mercilessness of the Vatican. One nun, a Jew who converted to Catholicism, was imprisoned by the Nazis and wrote desperately to the pope for help. She was never answered, and she eventually died at the hands of the Third Reich. The Vatican never tried to impede Hitler's program, even though individual Catholics did, with no backing from the pope.
Even Mother Theresa was no jewel, despite her white-washed reputation. She died a confused woman who wasn't even sure that she believed in her Catholic faith any more. Did you miss that? If you did, you truly have your head in the sand. So, one of these saints was left to die, hopeless, in the hands of the Nazis (making her a saint in later years was somehow supposed to make up for that?), and the other saint I mentioned was ready to abandon her shaky faith at the end (a real example for people to follow, eh?). That's enough for me to see what the "saints" mean to the pope....not much as people, but a great way for damage-control. Does this go right over your head?
I will pray for you and ask for your prayers for me and with time we will know Christs established Church and the hereafter that Our Father in heaven has in store for us.
What I have posted is backed up by facts. Some people have trouble with facts because they have blinders on. I repeatedly read Mother Theresa's last words, as they were in most of the news media. She was pitiful. If you looked further into what she did in India, you would find out that she liked to see those poor people suffer, because it made them "more like Jesus," because he suffered. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Please don't bother praying for me. I pray to Jehovah, the Most High, the God of the universe, and He is taking care of me, thank you.
.
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #728
[Replying to onewithhim]
Unlike the rest of the world, she saw Jesus in prostitutes and according to the worlds standards the unlovable. What she could offer these poor suffering souls was to let them know they mattered. She gave them dignity, when no one else would touch them with a 10 foot pole. Unfortunately a lot of people like yourself do not understand the simple act of simply giving someone a hug who hasnt been touched in years. That is what Mother Teresa did. What hatred toward Christs Church must someone have to need to see what she did as pitiful? That is a kind of hatred I will never understand.
And now I am forced to pray for you even more.
This is very sad to hear. Anyone that would call Mother Teresa pitiful truly did not get her. The point you obviously miss is she lived by the words, Whatever you do for the least of your brothers, you do unto me. This helped her see Jesus in the poorest of the poor. She was able to see Jesus in those that the world rejected and turned away. That is very different from wanting to see people suffer. You must obviously want to see bad in her to see her in such a way. Many hated her devotion and commitment because she was a beautiful witness to the faith. They didn't like knowing that her love was for Christ and His Catholic Church.What I have posted is backed up by facts. Some people have trouble with facts because they have blinders on. I repeatedly read Mother Theresa's last words, as they were in most of the news media. She was pitiful. If you looked further into what she did in India, you would find out that she liked to see those poor people suffer, because it made them "more like Jesus," because he suffered. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Unlike the rest of the world, she saw Jesus in prostitutes and according to the worlds standards the unlovable. What she could offer these poor suffering souls was to let them know they mattered. She gave them dignity, when no one else would touch them with a 10 foot pole. Unfortunately a lot of people like yourself do not understand the simple act of simply giving someone a hug who hasnt been touched in years. That is what Mother Teresa did. What hatred toward Christs Church must someone have to need to see what she did as pitiful? That is a kind of hatred I will never understand.
And now I am forced to pray for you even more.
-
tam
- Savant
- Posts: 6882
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
- Has thanked: 386 times
- Been thanked: 356 times
- Contact:
Post #729
Without speaking as to yours and owh's exchange, these are not the words that He said. His words to the sheep who are invited into the Kingdom are these:Whatever you do for the least of your brothers, you do unto me
'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
He answered this way to the sheep because - at the time Christ returns with His Kingdom - the sheep did not know that they had done good to Him. They have to ask - at the time Christ returns with His Kingdom - "When did we do these things for you, Lord?"
(Not saying anything against MT or any help she gave anyone; just clarifying the words that my Lord actually said. Because there is meaning to His words just as He said them.)
Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #730
[Replying to tam]
Are you serious? What is so different with my paraphrasing. It is the same point, is it not?
Jubilee Bible 2000
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brothers, ye have done it unto me.
American Standard Version
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.
Mother Teresa knew what alot of people don't. If we know someone hungry or in need of love we ought to see them as if Jesus Himself is the one hungry or in need of love and reach out to them, which is exactly what MT did. Not everyone can see Christ in the "unloveable" but she could and did. We all could take a lesson from her. I would say your comment is petty, but actually it just simply doesn't make sense.
Are you serious? What is so different with my paraphrasing. It is the same point, is it not?
Jubilee Bible 2000
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brothers, ye have done it unto me.
American Standard Version
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.
Mother Teresa knew what alot of people don't. If we know someone hungry or in need of love we ought to see them as if Jesus Himself is the one hungry or in need of love and reach out to them, which is exactly what MT did. Not everyone can see Christ in the "unloveable" but she could and did. We all could take a lesson from her. I would say your comment is petty, but actually it just simply doesn't make sense.
