Is Pope Francis the false prophet?

#201
#201
happy-go_vol said:
The reason the sodomites need so many parades and days of recognition is that their conscience is telling them their lifestyle is not natural. They must convince themselves their lifestyle choice is normal.
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing when I saw the Irish parade in Chicago. Something unnatural about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashevolle and zeppelin128
#202
#202
utvolpj said:
There's nothing to struggle against since straight people do the same. Only difference is the religious have claimed marriage that can allow for their desires to be satisfied while preventing gay couples from doing the same. Quite the forgiveness racket you've got going on there
Click to expand...
From a Catholic perspective the primary purpose of sex within marriage is procreation. If you are not Christian you must at least agree biologically speaking the same is true. It’s therefore unnatural against the laws of God and science since two men or two women have and never will procreate. At its core it is about abhorrent, unnatural and lustful desires of the flesh.
 
#203
#203
Septic said:
Thou dost protest too much.

You sound like a guy that is struggling with competing thoughts.
Click to expand...
I am no different than someone suffering with same sex attraction in the sense I have my own sinful inclinations I struggle with. Difference is I’m not rationalizing them and trying to mainstream them
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and Rickyvol77
#204
#204
Credo said:
From a Catholic perspective the primary purpose of sex within marriage is procreation. If you are not Christian you must at least agree biologically speaking the same is true. It’s therefore unnatural against the laws of God and science since two men or two women have and never will procreate. At its core it is about abhorrent, unnatural and lustful desires of the flesh.
Click to expand...
well sure except that not all straight couples can procreate either. Do they know they're going to hell too?

Sorry I don't view procreation as any sort of reason to discriminate
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#205
#205
People dont have sex solely for procreation and that's no sin.

Benedict, the one displaced by francis, is I believe the false prophet you're looking for. He's still alive and waiting in the wings. The cabal will probably trot him back out in a few years and then I guess we can all live in terror while he preaches fire and brimstone for everyone.
 
#206
#206
Credo said:
I am no different than someone suffering with same sex attraction in the sense I have my own sinful inclinations I struggle with. Difference is I’m not rationalizing them and trying to mainstream them
Click to expand...

What is sinful about opposite sex or same sex "attractions" or "inclinations?"

Applying labels to the human condition in order to pigeonhole it into something needing salvation is just a DIY guilt trip.

Your delineation between the hetero and homo suffering is just that, yours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#207
#207
Ashevolle said:
Nothing about the Bible is explicit. It's a bunch of murky, contradictory musings by various ancient sand dwellers. I can learn as much from reading my coffee grinds at the bottom of my mug.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your valuable contributions to the conversation. You've shown yourself to be an expert on the subject, one whom we should all stop and listen to more. If there's anyone we should respect on a subject, it's the one who believes the subject unknowable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and StarRaider
#209
#209
Orange_Crush said:
Thank you for your valuable contributions to the conversation. You've shown yourself to be an expert on the subject, one whom we should all stop and listen to more. If there's anyone we should respect on a subject, it's the one who believes the subject unknowable.
Click to expand...
You are welcome, sir. Happy to help anytime.
 
#214
#214
Purple Tiger said:
Are you lumping Moses in with the lesser ones? Moses is considered the greatest prophet by the Jews.

People have been saying the Pope is the Anti-Christ since Bibles have been printed in vernacular languages. Pope Francis is a much better pontiff than his Nazi predecessor, who did absolutely nothing about child abuse.
Click to expand...


Anti-christs are people who preach a message that is against Gods teachings and laws. They have been many anti-christs through history. there will be an anti-christ that will deceive the world but he isnt the only one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#215
#215
Septic said:
What is sinful about opposite sex or same sex "attractions" or "inclinations?"

Applying labels to the human condition in order to pigeonhole it into something needing salvation is just a DIY guilt trip.

Your delineation between the hetero and homo suffering is just that, yours.
Click to expand...

From a biblical perspective, I do not believe there is any mandate against "attractions" any more than any other temptation. It is when the temptation is acted upon, in this case, its about gay sex. People want to get lost in this "attraction" business but when it gets down to it, its about 2 guys or gals f*king. Can say exactly the same for other sexual sins, like adultery and fornication. Deep friendships and relationships between same sex or multiple people is not forbidden, only when it turns into a sexual act. From a biblical perspective, ALL sex outside of marriage is sinful and marriage is exclusively between men and women.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and Rickyvol77
#216
#216
happy-go_vol said:
Anti-christs are people who preach a message that is against Gods teachings and laws. They have been many anti-christs through history. there will be an anti-christ that will deceive the world but he isnt the only one.
Click to expand...

That is complete nonsense conjured up by John Hagee and other Armageddon fear mongers like yourself who fixate on a book that is symbolic in nature and nothing more. So tell me Bible “scholar”, is John contradicting himself in the very first verse of Revelation? Was Jesus lying when he himself said that “no one knows the day nor the hour not even himself or the angels in Heaven”? Will a large beast be emerging from the sea any day now? What modern day technology do the “locusts” represent now? Is it still Apache helicopters? What person embodies the “mark of the beast” now since Hitler, Stalin, and Mao are all dead now? You should try reading the Bible every now and then and put down Left Behind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel
#218
#218
Credo said:
From a Catholic perspective the primary purpose of sex within marriage is procreation. If you are not Christian you must at least agree biologically speaking the same is true. It’s therefore unnatural against the laws of God and science since two men or two women have and never will procreate. At its core it is about abhorrent, unnatural and lustful desires of the flesh.
Click to expand...
You must be doing it wrong.
 
#219
#219
landscapingvol said:
That is complete nonsense conjured up by John Hagee and other Armageddon fear mongers like yourself who fixate on a book that is symbolic in nature and nothing more. So tell me Bible “scholar”, is John contradicting himself in the very first verse of Revelation? Was Jesus lying when he himself said that “no one knows the day nor the hour not even himself or the angels in Heaven”? Will a large beast be emerging from the sea any day now? What modern day technology do the “locusts” represent now? Is it still Apache helicopters? What person embodies the “mark of the beast” now since Hitler, Stalin, and Mao are all dead now? You should try reading the Bible every now and then and put down Left Behind.
Click to expand...

I'm not a believer. I do however accept it as good advice to carefully consider where one casts his seed. It's probably a better choice and much safer to whack off than to pick up a street walker.
 
#220
#220
landscapingvol said:
That is complete nonsense conjured up by John Hagee and other Armageddon fear mongers like yourself who fixate on a book that is symbolic in nature and nothing more. So tell me Bible “scholar”, is John contradicting himself in the very first verse of Revelation? Was Jesus lying when he himself said that “no one knows the day nor the hour not even himself or the angels in Heaven”? Will a large beast be emerging from the sea any day now? What modern day technology do the “locusts” represent now? Is it still Apache helicopters? What person embodies the “mark of the beast” now since Hitler, Stalin, and Mao are all dead now? You should try reading the Bible every now and then and put down Left Behind.
Click to expand...
Jesus said that no one knows the day, nor the hour. The then said that we should watch the seasons and respond accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#221
#221
Gandalf said:
From a biblical perspective, I do not believe there is any mandate against "attractions" any more than any other temptation. It is when the temptation is acted upon, in this case, its about gay sex. People want to get lost in this "attraction" business but when it gets down to it, its about 2 guys or gals f*king. Can say exactly the same for other sexual sins, like adultery and fornication. Deep friendships and relationships between same sex or multiple people is not forbidden, only when it turns into a sexual act. From a biblical perspective, ALL sex outside of marriage is sinful and marriage is exclusively between men and women.
Click to expand...
Thanks for making a straightforward argument against following the Bible. The very idea that I should never experience sex until I get married is a laughable premise and I feel sorry for anyone duped into accepting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel
#222
#222
Ashevolle said:
Thanks for making a straightforward argument against following the Bible. The very idea that I should never experience sex until I get married is a laughable premise and I feel sorry for anyone duped into accepting it.
Click to expand...
That's not a premise. It's a conclusion that would be based on other premises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#223
#223
Orange_Crush said:
Jesus said that no one knows the day, nor the hour. The then said that we should watch the seasons and respond accordingly.
Click to expand...

Correct, he taught them to be ready at all times for his return as he had taught in multiple parables. That his return would be like a “thief in the night”. He did not teach them to prepare for some coming military battle which he spoke against often. There is simply no Biblical evidence to support the belief that there is some apocalyptic battle looming other than the daily spiritual battle between right and wrong.
 
#224
#224
landscapingvol said:
Correct, he taught them to be ready at all times for his return as he had taught in multiple parables. That his return would be like a “thief in the night”. He did not teach them to prepare for some coming military battle which he spoke against often. There is simply no Biblical evidence to support the belief that there is some apocalyptic battle looming other than the daily spiritual battle between right and wrong.
Click to expand...
I would disagree. But you are welcome to your opinion.

In order for you to be correct that there is "no Biblical evidence" for this interpretation, you're begging the question that your interpretation is the correct one. You've bypassed an entire conversation/debate--one that's been going longer than either of us has been alive.

If it were true that there were literally "no Biblical evidence" then the entries for it in the various Biblical and theological encyclopedias would be shorter than they are. But, obviously you're the smartest person on the subject, so I'll defer to your demonstrated expertise on the subject.

Have a nice day.

PS: Jesus taught them to watch the signs and seasons, and run for the mountains in the end times, as a response to their "daily spiritual battle"? Interesting interpretation, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#225
#225
Orange_Crush said:
I would disagree. But you are welcome to your opinion.

In order for you to be correct that there is "no Biblical evidence" for this interpretation, you're begging the question that your interpretation is the correct one. You've bypassed an entire conversation/debate--one that's been going longer than either of us has been alive.

If it were true that there were literally "no Biblical evidence" then the entries for it in the various Biblical and theological encyclopedias would be shorter than they are. But, obviously you're the smartest person on the subject, so I'll defer to your demonstrated expertise on the subject.

Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

It’s very simple. You either believe the Bible contradicts itself or you don’t. You either believe Revelation was written for a persecuted group of Christians at the time or it was written for some unknown civilization 2-3k years into the future. You either take the Bible as a whole or you pull out one book in the Bible and take it completely out of context.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top