'If the Catholics got hold of the full facts about Xenu, does this mean they'll get more market share?"'

We could talk about many things and I am willing. These subjects are very touchy with many people. If I talk about them I may be stoned by Mormons. I have found that many of them are pretty clueless about deep scripture. Very nice people and many spirit driven but doctrine not so much. For I feel the church just glosses over many things trying to be a big net.

I sort out what is truth by the witness of the Holy Ghost. I have little that has been witnessed. The rest is hard work. I believe in the power of God. If He wants me to receive a message I will. Scripture or not.



Let me ask you, do you carry a cross on your back?



I have no problem with that belief. It is however different than my beliefs.



Since you take things quite literal then tell me what these mean?

2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2Pe 1:14 Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath showed me.
2Pe 1:15 Moreover I will endeavor that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance.

Rev 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
Rev 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
Rev 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

You said: "At the supper of the Lamb, which I participate in at every Mass, there is the Blood of the Lamb in the Cup."

So using Rev 19 let me ask a couple of questions.

1. John was in heaven when he saw the supper of the lamb. Are you in Heaven each Sunday?
2. Can you show me the fine linen your were given in heaven?
3. Can you describe to me how you were called to the supper?

Hi Madeleine,

It is true that not all of sacred scripture was canonized. Therefore, we do not have everything which was considered Sacred Tradition in our Bibles.

That reminds me, can you explain to me why the Catechisms delete the second of the Ten Commandments, and then split the tenth commandment into two separate commandments in order to keep the same number of ten commandments?

Okay, back to responding to your comments..... The Hebrews did not write down a great deal of their sacred oral traditions until after Christianity was established. One example is the Kabbalah. Before the Kabbalah was written, few Jews were taught the esoteric doctrines contained in this tradition. Only the learned and those who have gained a spiritual perception of their beliefs are taught from the Kabbalah. Within the Zohar, which is part of the Kabbalah, you can find the following quote:

"The souls must re-enter the Absolute, from whence they have emerged. But to accomplish this end they must develop the perfections; the germ of which is planted in them. And if they have not developed these traits in this one life, then they must commence another, a third, and so forth. They must go on like this until they acquire the condition that allows them to associate again with God."

As you can see, the Jews had secret teachings which were not taught to everyone. Also, the above quote indicates that this portion of the secret knowledge was a belief in reincarnation. There are sections in the NT which allude to the Apostles and the Pharisees having this same knowledge, which Jesus never corrected anyone on. Yet the RCC does not believe in reincarnation; in fact, you cannot find a section for reincarnation in the Catholic Encyclopedia which explains why the RCC does not believe in it. When books and epistles were being considered for canonization, the Bishops carefully withheld anything written which indicated that reincarnation was actually something many of the Early Church Fathers believed in.

It is not unusual for us to find in the NT that Jesus taught knowledge to the Apostles which they were not allowed to teach to all members of the church. Paul specifically taught the church in Corinth that they were not yet ready to be taught "meat". I think he could have been referring to the secret knowledge which the Apostles had been taught. Indeed, Jesus told the Apostles that He had not revealed everything He knew to them; but only that which His Father had told Him to reveal. It would be the Holy Ghost who would reveal Truth to individuals once Father deemed that the individual was ready for more Truth. So, neither the OT or the NT reveal all Truth.



Yet, Jesus was not actually cutting off pieces of His flesh, nor draining His blood for man to eat and drink - even though He was with them when He taught them about the Sacrament. In fact, we know that the Paschal Lamb was symbolic of the Christ who was to come. The Hebrews had always been taught, since they received the Law from Moses, that they were NEVER to drink the blood. Why would God change and decide that it would be necessary for mankind to drink blood once Jesus had finally come in the flesh, been crucified, and Resurrected? It is SYMBOLIC!!!



I beg to differ with you here, as well. One of the core issues of the Great Schism of 1054 AD between the Eastern Orthodox churches and the church of Rome was over this very concept. The Leader of the Eastern Orthodox churches even excommunicated the Pope in Rome; and the Pope excommunicated the Leader of the Eastern Orthodox churches. Today this issue still divides them.

The idea that the bread and wine actually become the flesh and blood of Christ was NOT a sacred tradition. It "became" sacred tradition when the Pope decided to call it such - which, as you can see, was long after Jesus and the Apostles walked the earth.

Therefore, without the personal witness and confirmation of Truth from the Holy Ghost, I am not quick to believe that sacred written or oral tradition which is taught to us automatically means that the tradition is correct, or that we understand those traditions correctly. The Jews in Jesus' day, knew their written traditions. I do not doubt that the Pharisees, scribes, and the Sadducees knew their oral traditions. Yet they crucified our Savior. Their knowledge of both written and oral traditions failed them in much the same way as I see that written and oral traditions have failed you.



Inasmuch as I do believe that the Gospels are sacred to the believer, I place my dependence for being guided to the Truth held within them to the Holy Ghost. He is the witness on the physical earth of all spiritual Truth. God does not "exist" in a book; He is a living God, Jesus is our living Savior, and the Holy Ghost is living to witness and confirm Truth to us today....here and now.

Blessings,

jo

Madelene, you remind me of Albion. You people clam to hold to the sacred scriptures, at least as long as it agrees with your man made dogmas. Can you understand this English translation?

"YOU ARE GODS AND ALL OF YOU ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE MOST HIGH."

I agree gdemetz, it's amazing how man can interpret the scriptures to serve our own selfish purposes. For example:

Which Joseph interpreted as "go and get yourself many wives and concubines".

Yet the wives of Jacob were fine. You might want to rethink that thinking of yours.

See the thread about polygamy.
You may find that God of yours is a bit inconsistent in tems of giving instructions out...

God is very consistent. It is man that is all over the map. If God tells you to marry a few wives then do so. If God says don't marry then don't marry. What we should be doing is listening to Him. It is when we do our own thing that we get into trouble.

Amen again, FrankTalk! Too bad many here think they are smarter than God, or want to listen to others who think are smarter than God!

Okay, but Prophets listened to him and heard two different, contradictory things.
1. Polygamy is a commandment
2. Polygamy is abonimable

Wish He'd make His mind up...

The idea of a confused God ruling the universe worries me a little. What if he/ she decided to changes the rules of physics? Nothing would work.

Why is it that man needs to place God in a box? We all say we are individuals and want to be treated as an individuals. Yet when it comes to God all of that goes away. You change your position and state we must all be treated the same. But there is nothing in scripture that tells us that everyone will be treated the same. Scripture does just the opposite. The gifts from God vary from person to person. We are all born into a wide range of environments. The testing of us is chosen based on what we as an individual can handle. Our souls are all unique. Our bodies are vastly different from each other. Wake up. Read what is there.

So when God tells you to wipe out a village and kill all of the people in it , you should do it. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)

Yes

So if next October, President Monson got up and said that members of the church should go out and kill all homosexuals you would go over to Shulem's house and kill him?

The abominations which David and Solomon committed before the Lord were not in the act of polygamy itself; but rather what they specifically did which the Lord had commanded them NOT to do:

1 Kings 11:1-10 (KJV) (emphasis is mine)

1 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites:

2 Of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.

3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.

4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father.

5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.

6 And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father.

7 Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.

8 And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods.

9 And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel, which had appeared unto him twice,

10 And had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods: but he kept not that which the Lord commanded.

Also, see 2 Samuel chapter 11 where David has an affair with Bathsheba who was then married to Uriah. . David arranges for the death of Uriah and spills innocent blood.

God is not being contradictory. As usual, it is man who screws up.

Blessings,

jo

Jo,

Are you saying that God did not (does not) approve of polygamy?

Son of Ishmael,

Yes AND no; it depends upon whether polygamy is a commandment at the time man is practicing polygamy. Additionally, during times when it is a commandment, the boundaries which God sets up need to be followed in order for His purposes for the commandment to be fulfilled. If man steps outside of those boundaries, then he commits sin. Sin is an abomination to God.

Blessings,

jo

You may confuse God with President Monson but I do not.

Why would anyone worship a god who asks for the wholesale massacre of innocents?