Psycho-Babble Faith Thread 480264

Shown: posts 2 to 26 of 26. Go back in thread:

 

Lou's response to rayww's post- » rayww

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 6, 2005, at 8:23:08

In reply to My tribute to Pope John Paul, posted by rayww on April 5, 2005, at 15:08:08

rayww,
You wrote,[...Jesus will come...to the Jews and [then and {only} then] will they as a nation accept him...] and,[...Christ had to give his life...that it was part of the plan...for salvation for the whole human family...].
Are you saying any of the following?
A. God says that the jews as a nation have rejected the Jesus of your group.
B. The bible says that the jews as a nation have rejected the Jesus of your group
C. If the bible says it, then God also says it.
D. The Jesus of the group that you belong to is the same Jesus as other christian groups
E. By the jews as a nation rejecting Jesus, they have rejected the part of salvation plan of God
F. Jews as a nation are not saved because they have rejected Jesus.
G. anyone, including jews, that does not accept the death of Jesus as part of God's plan of salvation for the whole human family can not be saved.
H. a combination of the above
K. none of the above
L. all of the above
M. someting else
Lou

 

Re: My tribute to Pope John Paul » rayww

Posted by Miss Honeychurch on April 6, 2005, at 9:27:08

In reply to My tribute to Pope John Paul, posted by rayww on April 5, 2005, at 15:08:08

ray, great idea.

Pope JP II is the only Pope I have known. As a Catholic, he has been in my prayers nightly. Have you read his biography? It may make you appreciate him even more.

I have a small anecdote. As a child, I wrote to the Pope, concerned that because my parents were divorced, and even though I was a baptized Catholic, that somehow I was "less" of a Catholic.

He wrote back (or someone did anyway) and that letter was so full of love and reassurance, I carried it with me for almost a week, even slept with it under my pillow (hey, I was 12).

I feel he has done so much to begin to unite Christians and Jews. And it is my opinion, in this day and age, Christians and Jews need to unite, to preserve our Judeo Christian values and even in the interest of self-preservation.

The next Pope has HUGE shoes to fill.

 

Re: Lou's response to rayww's post-

Posted by rayww on April 6, 2005, at 9:48:19

In reply to Lou's response to rayww's post- » rayww, posted by Lou Pilder on April 6, 2005, at 8:23:08

Lou, I'll try to put as much thought into my response as you have your questions.


> rayww,
> You wrote,[...Jesus will come...to the Jews and [then and {only} then] will they as a nation accept him...] and,[...Christ had to give his life...that it was part of the plan...for salvation for the whole human family...].
> Are you saying any of the following?
> A. God says that the jews as a nation have rejected the Jesus of your group.

<<<
A young woman of our faith told a story of her great grandfather. He went to church one Sunday and then never returned again. Out of over 1000 decendants this young woman is the only living member of our church in her family. By contrast, my great grandfather remained active. As a result, there are thousands of active faithful members in mine. Another contrast, some devout members of other religions do not marry. Think of how many more devoted members there would be in the world if these fine gentlemen and ladies had families. Even God the Father had a Son. The choices made by the fathers affect the lives of their posterity. So,,,I meant, "some" Jewish leaders were responsible for the rejection of Jesus by the whole Jewish nation. I also meant that in order for prophecy to be fulfilled the first shall be last and the last shall be first to accept the Jesus of my group.

> B. The bible says that the jews as a nation have rejected the Jesus of your group
> C. If the bible says it, then God also says it.
> D. The Jesus of the group that you belong to is the same Jesus as other christian groups

<<<<<
Of course Jesus is the same. (but) We believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God, born to the Virgin Mary, and that after his birth she and her legal husband Joseph had many other children. We believe Christ lived a somewhat normal life as a child, growing grace by grace until he began his official ministry. We believe he had a for-ordained mission to be the Messiah or the Redeemer of all mankind. And, we believe he accomplished that purpose through his life and death, and then ushered in the resurrection. We believe there was no resurrection from the dead before the resurrection of Christ. We believe that Jesus did not die from the piercing of the spear or any other injury, that He caused his own spirit to leave his own body when he felt he had completed his task of suffering for all of our sins. "Into thy hands I command my spirit" was his last words to his real Father, the God of us all. We believe Jesus had the power to cause himself to be resurrected, thereby opening the gate for all to join him. Jesus is still resurrected. He has a tangible body that can be touched and felt that many have witnessed.

> E. By the jews as a nation rejecting Jesus, they have rejected the part of salvation plan of God

Are you meaning resurrection or salvation? Every person who gets born and then dies will get resurrected. Salvation is for those who work out their own, as did Jesus. This life is only a (very important) part of the whole picture. The body and mind and attitudes we die with will be ours in the resurrection. That's why we need to do what we can with what we have while we are able, which is what I assume you and I are both doing, so we're probably both OK. Everyone's time will come so be patient.

> F. Jews as a nation are not saved because they have rejected Jesus.

No. "some" Jewish leaders from a long time ago are responsible for the belief of today's nation. The Jews as a nation will one day recognize their Messiah, when he comes in Glory, whom we believe is Jesus.

> G. anyone, including jews, that does not accept the death of Jesus as part of God's plan of salvation for the whole human family can not be saved.

Yes and no. Anyone who dies without knowledge who would have accepted the Gospel of Jesus Christ, (which is the same Gospel as God's) had he known what it really was, will be resurrected to an eternal Celestial body. Are you referring to resurrection, salvation, or exaltation?

> H. a combination of the above
> K. none of the above
> L. all of the above
> M. someting else
> Lou
>

You ask questions that are difficult to answer.
without getting blocked.

Lou, the Mormons have never believed there is no salvation for the Jews as a nation. Salvation and love is a very individual thing. Christ loves you Lou. He knows your pain. He even knows your Rider. Otherwise, why would some of their words be the same?

 

Lou's reply to rayww- » rayww

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 6, 2005, at 15:29:36

In reply to Re: Lou's response to rayww's post-, posted by rayww on April 6, 2005, at 9:48:19

raywww,
You wrote,[...Jesus {is} the literal Son of God...He had a for-ordained mission to be the Messiah or the Redeemer of {all} mankind...].
Are you saying any of the following?
A. I say that because God told it to me.
B. I say that because the bible says that.
C. I say that because if the bible says that, then God says that.
D. I say that because it is the foundation of christianity.
E. a combination of the above
F. none of the above
G. all of the above
H.something else.
Lou

 

Lou's reply to rayww » rayww

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 6, 2005, at 15:45:12

In reply to Re: Lou's response to rayww's post-, posted by rayww on April 6, 2005, at 9:48:19

rayww,
You wrote,[...his (Jesus) last words to his, real Father, the God of us {all}...]
Are you saying any of the following?
A. The Father of Jesus is the only real Father
B. the father of Jesus is the crwator of all mankind
C. the Father of Jesus is the onlyy real God and all otherr Gods are not real
D. Jesus is not God the Father
E. none of the above
F. alll of the above
G. a combination of the above
H. somethingg else
Lou

 

Re: Lou's reply to rayww-

Posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 7:39:14

In reply to Lou's reply to rayww- » rayww, posted by Lou Pilder on April 6, 2005, at 15:29:36

Lou, just share a tribute.

I responded the first time to your questions. Let it rest in peace. This isn't about criticizing my belief in God. It is about sharing a tribute. Surely you can think of one good thing to say about the Pope.

Be happy.
rayww

 

Lou's reply to rayww- » rayww

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 7, 2005, at 7:56:18

In reply to Re: Lou's reply to rayww-, posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 7:39:14

rayww,
You wrote,[...responded...to you questions...]. The questions that I have requested for you to clarify in the post here are differnt from the ones in the previous post.
You wrote,[...isn't about criticizing my belief in God...]
It is not my intention to criticize your belief in God, nor do I believe that I wrote any criticism of your beliefe in your God.
You wrote,[...it is about a tribute (to the Pope)...].
Is it necessary then for you to bring in the concept of the Jews as a nation in relation to the Jesus of your group or any other group? Is it not a fact that most of the of Jews of Israel and in other countries consider that the Jesus of Christiandom is not their promised Messiah?
Lou

 

Re: My tribute to Pope John Paul

Posted by NikkiT2 on April 7, 2005, at 10:37:11

In reply to My tribute to Pope John Paul, posted by rayww on April 5, 2005, at 15:08:08

I'm not Catholic, or Christian, or anything really.. I am just me.

And, while John Paul II had many ideas that I strongly disagreed with, he was a great man. He worked tirelessly to bring nations together, to bring about Peace, to spread love.

The world is a lesser place without, and I hope that the new Pope will be able to continue his work, to bring about a more peaceful world, but also be more willing to accept new ideas in this, the 21st Century..


Nikki xx

 

Re: Lou's response - and a tribute » rayww

Posted by AuntieMel on April 7, 2005, at 10:42:49

In reply to Re: Lou's response to rayww's post-, posted by rayww on April 6, 2005, at 9:48:19

I believe John Paul II was a great humanitarian and a courageous man. Without him there would be no free Eastern Europe.

My friends in Krakow are mourning, as am I.

-----------------------------------------

Now, I've got a couple of comments - and problems with a couple of your statememts. I'll tell you my problems and give you a chance to clarify.

"So,,,I meant, "some" Jewish leaders were responsible for the rejection of Jesus by the whole Jewish nation. "

This statement implies (to me) that we Jews of today don't have the ability to think for ourselves and make up our own minds. That we are bound by ideas of 2000 years ago. If that is what you meant, nothing is further from the truth. In fact it is a requirement to study, study and study some more and make up your own mind.

"Yes and no. Anyone who dies without knowledge who would have accepted the Gospel of Jesus Christ, (which is the same Gospel as God's) had he known what it really was, will be resurrected to an eternal Celestial body. Are you referring to resurrection, salvation, or exaltation?"

This implies (to me) that ignorance is the only defense. That anyone that does study and still believes that Jesus wasn't devine has no chance.

Honest, Ray, I'm not trying to bait you here, but I feel it is entirely possible for an educated thinking person to not believe in his divinity, or any divinity at all.

 

Re: My feelings exactly. Thanks (nm) » NikkiT2

Posted by AuntieMel on April 7, 2005, at 10:44:19

In reply to Re: My tribute to Pope John Paul, posted by NikkiT2 on April 7, 2005, at 10:37:11

 

Re: Lou's reply to rayww-

Posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 11:14:03

In reply to Lou's reply to rayww- » rayww, posted by Lou Pilder on April 7, 2005, at 7:56:18

I think we both know the answers, but if you want my personal "further explanation", the House of Israel had in their records two distinct accounts of the coming of the Messiah. Some ancient leaders secretly removed references to the one, but chose to keep and believe in the other. The one they ignored was the description of him coming to be hated and scorned, and the one they kept was the description of his coming in glory to fight their battle against their enemies.
The deceiving leaders didn't tamper with the Book of Isaiah because of how it was written. The book of Isaiah is the most quoted and least disturbed of all the books in the Old Testament. (verified in Qumran discoveries of the dead sea scrolls)

The point I was trying to make in my other post was when the Messiah comes we will all recognize him. There will be no dispute as to who he is. People of my group believe this will be His "second" coming. Members of the house of Judah believe it will be his "first" coming.

People of my faith have the Book of Mormon. It is the history of one group from the house of Joseph of the House of Israel (not Judah) who were guided to what we know as the American continent in 600 BC to escape the destruction of Jerusalem. They were commanded to take with them the brass plates containing ancient records so their children would not dwindle in unbelief. Parts of these records are quoted in the Book of Mormon, which is a very brief summary of records kept by prophets on this continent over a 1000 year period. The books of Zenoc and Zenos, neither of which are in our present Old Testament and both of which testify of Christ are quoted in the Book of Mormon. http://scriptures.lds.org/query?words=zenos&scripturesearch_button=Search

Without all of the words of all of the prophets it is difficult to interpret some of the words of some of the prophets.

I for one believe in all of the words of all of the prophets, including the words that refer to "one" God. God is God Lou, can anyone dispute that?

 

Re: Lou's response - and a tribute » AuntieMel

Posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 11:27:51

In reply to Re: Lou's response - and a tribute » rayww, posted by AuntieMel on April 7, 2005, at 10:42:49

Thank-you for clarifying that for me AuntieMel. I understand your feelings and agree that it is "entirely possible for an educated thinking person to not believe in his divinity, or any divinity at all".

Testimony is a matter of faith and spirit. I can't remember the exact quote last night on CNN, something like "faith is eternal" life is temporal, or something like that. It's true, and until we learn to separate faith from folly, man will never gain a testimony of divinity.

Sorry if I offended you. My frustration dealing with requests for clarification taints my response sometimes. When I get so carried away I feel like the world's most babbling idiot. Is there a board?

 

Re: Lou's reply to rayww- » Lou Pilder

Posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 11:34:53

In reply to Lou's reply to rayww- » rayww, posted by Lou Pilder on April 7, 2005, at 7:56:18

http://scriptures.lds.org/bdh/hlynfsrl

I meant to include this reference in the former response. It clarifies who "The Holy One of Israel" is.

 

Re: Whoa, where did that come from? » rayww

Posted by AuntieMel on April 7, 2005, at 12:06:36

In reply to Re: Lou's reply to rayww-, posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 11:14:03

"Some ancient leaders secretly removed references to the one, but chose to keep and believe in the other. "

Sorry if this sounds abrasive, but - Excuse me? I've never heard this. If it was secret how do we know?

Do you have any factual text to back this up?

 

no way to answer this » AuntieMel

Posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 13:05:31

In reply to Re: Whoa, where did that come from? » rayww, posted by AuntieMel on April 7, 2005, at 12:06:36

The factual text to back it up is in the references that I just shared, unless you consider scriptures heresay and not factual. As far as I know the only way to proof something spiritual is to read it, meditate, & pray about it.

If it wasn't done in secret, it would still be there, but then we wouldn't know it wasn't there. Sorry, poor humor.

 

Re: as I thought » rayww

Posted by AuntieMel on April 7, 2005, at 14:03:29

In reply to no way to answer this » AuntieMel, posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 13:05:31

I've got no problem with you believing what you believe.

It's just that the wording implied to me it was historical fact, or something universally believed to be historical fact.

While you're at answering me, I'd love your comments on the new law they're trying to push through. I put it in politics under 'be afraid.'

 

Re: Lou's response - and a tribute

Posted by messadivoce on April 7, 2005, at 14:05:27

In reply to Re: Lou's response - and a tribute » AuntieMel, posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 11:27:51

> When I get so carried away I feel like the world's most babbling idiot. Is there a board?<

Hmm, if there is one, I shall be a charter member. Remember, no poking out of eyes! (meaning your own....it's a joke on admin....)

 

above for rayww (nm)

Posted by messadivoce on April 7, 2005, at 14:06:28

In reply to Re: Lou's response - and a tribute, posted by messadivoce on April 7, 2005, at 14:05:27

 

Charter members » messadivoce

Posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 17:19:01

In reply to Re: Lou's response - and a tribute, posted by messadivoce on April 7, 2005, at 14:05:27

of the PBI club. Yes!

 

Re: Charter members

Posted by Phillipa on April 7, 2005, at 22:47:23

In reply to Charter members » messadivoce, posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 17:19:01

I said I wouldn't post here again, but I'm confused. Can't we just pay our respects to a Great Man irreguardless of his Faith? Fondly, Phillipa

 

Re: requests for clarification

Posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2005, at 1:37:16

In reply to Re: Lou's response - and a tribute » AuntieMel, posted by rayww on April 7, 2005, at 11:27:51

> My frustration dealing with requests for clarification taints my response sometimes.

You aren't required to respond to request of any kind, you know...

Bob

 

Re: My tribute to Pope John Paul

Posted by SLS on April 8, 2005, at 7:16:26

In reply to My tribute to Pope John Paul, posted by rayww on April 5, 2005, at 15:08:08

I think Pope Paul II was a brilliant man with a good heart who saved a great many people during his term here on Earth. He changed millions of lives for the better. The world is a better place for his passing through it.

Just one opinion, of course.


- Scott

 

Of course » Phillipa

Posted by rayww on April 8, 2005, at 21:42:46

In reply to Re: Charter members, posted by Phillipa on April 7, 2005, at 22:47:23

It is so easy to get side tracked. Thankyou for the gentle reminder.

 

My thoughts on Pope John Paul

Posted by messadivoce on April 9, 2005, at 1:32:09

In reply to Of course » Phillipa, posted by rayww on April 8, 2005, at 21:42:46

I say these things because of his great faith, not just because he was a great man. I am not Catholic, but as a protestant I can appreciate how close our beliefs and values are. I admired the Pope because he held fast to his values on the santity of human life, the sanctification of marriage and his refusal to make the church "more relavant" in the 21st century. Not that I agreed with all the tenants of the Catholic church, but I do admire his steadfastness on them. To be so devoted to one's faith in the face of confict is to be admired.

I read an article in the NY Times that stated that his funeral was the largest coming together of leaders of different faiths in history. John Paul would have liked that. That was what he strove for in his life--acceptance and love of the PERSON.

Finally, I was touched to see that he was to be bured in just a plain wooden box. That is such an act of humility for someone who had the stature he had. I don't think he ever forgot that he was mortal and weak like any other human being, and I couldn't help but remember the passage of scripture that states, "dust to dust."

 

Re: My thoughts on Pope John Paul

Posted by bethesdabob on April 13, 2005, at 12:19:02

In reply to My thoughts on Pope John Paul, posted by messadivoce on April 9, 2005, at 1:32:09

In 1979 I had the great pleasure of being part of the protective security detail that guarded the Pope when he visited Washington DC.

The Pope's handlers had worked out this very strict schedule, one minute here, two minutes here, etc. His first stop was to the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception on the grounds of Catholic University. The Shrine had a large red carpet unrolled from the entrance to the curb (about 100 yds.) the sides of the carpet were roped off and there were easily over 10,000 people waiting to catch a glimpse.

As soon as the limo stopped and the Pope got out the people went nuts, at no time did the Pope's feet ever touch the carpet, he plunged right into the crowd, kissing babies, hugging children and shaking hands with many of the folks that came to meet him, those of us on his detail all feared something happening to him but the Pope had no fear.

A few years later after the Pope had been shot five times in the chest by Mehmet Agca the Pope made a visit to Fatima, where the blessed Mother had visited young children before WW I. The Pope took the five bullets that had lodged in his chest and put them in a silver box and laid them on the altar over the spot. The attempted assassination I learned took place on the date the Virgin first appeared to the children, he credits her intervention with his being alive.


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Faith | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.