I was employed on the Speaker's Staff of the Michigan House of Representatives in 1970, the year of the first Earth Day. Far and away, the most visible figure on Earth Day, the man who claimed to have come up with its very notion, was Ira Einhorn. He was in those days clearly a New Age superstar operating on an international level with impressive corporate backers.
The New Age historical revisionists would now have you believe that the most prominent figures were Denis Hayes and Gaylord Nelson. They have conveniently tried to distance themselves from Ira Einhorn and with very good reason: Ira Einhorn is now imprisoned for life for the murder of his New Age lover, Texas native and Bryn Mawr graduate Holly Maddux.
There is a lot of current attention given to the proposed release of one of the Charles Manson cult killers, Leslie van Houten, being approved for parole. Manson was not the only psychotic cult leader in the New Age Movement of the 1970s. Ira Einhorn had then and still now a loyal following of those who refused to believe he could perform actions he clearly earlier telegraphed he would perform.
"Psychopaths like myself emerge when societies are about to change," Einhorn told his enraptured audiences to whom he oft boasted he was a "planetary enzyme." In that same speech he proclaimed himself a "brother with Charles Manson The best place to read the about that is Steven Levy's well documented book, THE UNICORN'S SECRET: MURDER IN THE AGE OF AQUARIUS. (Page 377, mass paperback edition)..
Einhorn was fraternizing with the nephew of the Shah of Iran, "speaking to an intimate gathering sponsored by the prince" (p. 13, supra). Per Levy, Einhorn was given high academic credentials, as a fellow in the Kennedy School of Government. Einhorn even had 1970 articles publishe dby the Catholic Art Association.
We have more than Levy's impressive and still necessary reading book. I discovered that in my own library, accumulated during my years of research, I had a copy of Einhorn's post Earth Day, pre-1979 arrest book, 78-187880. It is a strange, crudely put together book from appearances, BUT, it was published by a major publishing house Doubleday & Company as a "Doubleday Anchor book." Its Libtary of Congress Catalog Card number is 78-187880 -- same as the title of the book.
78-187880 had many not so subtle hints to those who had eyes to see and ears to hear. Many swastikas are positively pictured throughout it. The New Age oft stated goals of population reduction to a maximum of 2 billion only alive by the year 2000 are contained within the covers.
Later this morning, (10 am Eastern time, 7 am Pacific time) I will be doing my regular internet radio program on TMERadio.com. We will be discussing this -- for now I'm retiring for the night and hope you will join me in the morning. Now that "Bill Nye the Science Guy" is openly calling for criminalizing "climate change deniers", we need to review both the foundations and current thrust of the radical Gaia Gang.
Does YOUR church celebrate Earth Day? Join me in later this morning and we'll talk about it.
Constance
573 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 573 Newer› Newest»Christine we are in New Teatament times... your " its in the Bible" positioning is flawed.
Now we can understand how you believe its ok to live with a man unmarried as a concubine because your position concludes that concubines are in the Bible and therefore permitted.
You cherry pick from the Old Testement to justify sin
The New Testament teaches one wife no concubines.
You are fortunate to live in New Testament times because you would in all probability have been stoned Old Testament times.
Stop preaching idolatry!
8:44 AM
Yep.
Called it what it is, is what you did!
Hymn to Gaia sung in Roman Catholic Mass, Canada
http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/when-gaia-calls-earth-godde.htm
anon 10:27
this is the sort of thing that the supposed Babylonian harlot church would never have thought of tolerating in the old days. This hymn probably slipped through
approval because it seems to merely celebrate God's creation, yet doesn't mention God though it doesn't exactly give worship and while gaia might be the legitimate Latin term (unless its Greek, I forget) there is no reason for its use in English since it is used that way to refer to a false goddess. NOTICE that it says the earth
rather than heaven is "calling us home," not in the sense of the resurrection of the dead eventually, but more like dust to dust. hmmm. very weird.
the arguments at that site about ordination format seem weak, but the way it was changed seems both unnecessary AND could lead to more changes that were important.
Fr. Gabriele Amorth Vatican exorcist has denounced the changes in the rite of exorcism making it weaker, and some will only use the older format.
Both the novus ordo and the Latin mass show that the sacrifice made is first of the bread and wine to become the Eucharist, then the Body and Blood of Christ which once provided by God is offered to HIm.
the problem with Cain was not that it was veggies. This is something apparently the Masoretes altered. the Septuagint shows that God said Cain offered right but DIVIDED it wrongly. something about the style of presentation.
Well said, 8:44 AM!
Yes, cherry pick she does! Yet it is hardly surprising she fails to follow the New Testament : she is part of a Pharisaic Old Testament style cult which is also awash with paganism (transubstantiation, etc)!
Like the RC cult, her EO cult refuses to acknowledge that all true Christians are priests and saints and that we have no need for Earthly priests as we have one High Priest, Jesus Christ, who died on the cross and therefore became the Sacrifice ONCE and said, "it is FINISHED, there is no more sacrifice. When He gave up the ghost on the cross, the separation of the Holy of Holies was rent in two, there was no longer a separation between man and God our Heavenly Father, the only One deserved of the title Holy Father for there is none like Him! The sacrifice was finished, Satan was defeated and there was and is no longer any need for sacraments and sacrifices (such things are a denial of the Cross).
Yet the EO is full of denial. When the so-called priest feigns to turn bread into the human flesh of Jesus Christ , that blaspheming 'priest' is hidden behind a veil! Utter blasphemy!
Yet, so far, despite the Jesuit infiltration of the EO cult, they have not stooped as low as to change the meaning of marriage so as to 'accommodate' Christine's ungodly 'lifestyle ' of fornication and co-habitation of of wedlock with her "Resident Seer" and unrepentant rebellious "ex" Satanist denier of Jesus Christ!
"Like the RC cult, her EO cult refuses to acknowledge that all true Christians are priests"
wrong.
the laity are the lowest level of priesthood, who offer the sacrifices of praise and prayer (and often burn incense and candles at home and light candles in church).
Where there is a HIGH Priest there are less than high priests.
The OLD TESTAMENT ISRAEL PEOPLE WERE ALSO ALL OF THEM PRIESTS IN THE SAME WAY AS
THE EO LAITY "And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. "
Ex. 19:6
which did not mean they did not have priests over the people.
in Christianity, the High Priest is in heaven in the Holy Place there. So the lesser level priest now enters the holy place in the church here, and the laity can enter the nave, while in OT Temple the High Priest only entered the holy place and the lesser level priests and levites would be in the next level out burning incense and taking the offerings and the people farther off at the door of the tabernacle. Everything ratcheted up a notch.
" "it is FINISHED, there is no more sacrifice"
The Eucharist shows forth Jesus' death until He returns. it presents His already broken flesh and shed blood. He is not recrucified.
"When the so-called priest feigns to turn bread into the human flesh of Jesus Christ , that blaspheming 'priest' is hidden behind a veil! Utter blasphemy! "
take it up with Jesus Who said to do this ritual in rememberance of Him and
who said in John 6:35-71 to eat His flesh and in verse 66 "From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with Him."
And did He say, "wait, don't throw away your salvation over a misunderstanding, I only meant it metaphorically"?
HE DID NOT.
Not a hint of qualifying it as metaphorical.
Christine, you may deny and rebel, disseminating the convoluted seeds of delusion, confusion and heresy with which you and your Cult are renown to do, yet by your fruits and those of your Cult you are known: both denying the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross and thereby denying Him as Lord and Savior!
anon 11:22
we do not deny His finished work we plug into it. and throughout history we have died rather than deny Him, and EO and the Copts and Syriac churches are doing so now due to ISIS.
you are denying His words and their context, which leaves NO room for metaphor!
And you are denying the universal understanding of the early church as shown by
second century writers, themselves the students of aged men who had heard the Apostles' teach (one definitely did, the other old enough to have done so) and who were themselves the product of the teaching of the churches founded by Apostles, and the teaching was only two generations (not in terms of 25 or 40 years but in terms of living individuals) from them.
Moreover, Christine, as a poster rightly indicated earlier, you fit most of what is warned about in the following passage:
2 Timothy 3:1-17
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, note
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.
10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, note
11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.
12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
You need to get down on your knees in truly remorseful humility and repent, stop your sinful living and ask God in Jesus Christ's Holy Name to guide you and help you find a truly Christian Church. It is not religion we all need but a living personal relationship with our Father in Heaven through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, guided by His Holy Spirit, where we truly know Him!
You need to seek deliverance from those things mentioned in the above Bible passage. As others have noted, I can only pray your conscience isn't seared already!
God help you!
anon 11:37
that has been posted three ties (at least) now, and I deny any of it fits. I have already gone through the details.
What I did (and it set the stage for joining EO several years later) was to read the BIBLE SOLA SCRIPTURA FOR REAL, not like you do, through a lens of interpretation by the heirs of luther and calvin, books you've read and your pastors, and what it says doesn't fit what you say.
you take things out of context. The early heretics did the same as you do, spiritualized lots, typologized lots, added their own ideas. AFTER enough of that it was decided not to have unauthorized street preaching or bible reading without
some oversight, because of those deceivers.
your latest deceiver (well, not as bad as Russellites and their JW and SDA downline and the Mormons) luther (who didn't go as far wrong as calvin and Zwingli) started you on a piecemeal track that results in you blaspheming the Body and Blood of Christ, and even having ideas that Paul warned was a denial of Christ, the keeping of food laws and observing Mosaic holy days! some of you here do this.
paul even complained that the church ignores these "real" holy days when the holy
days of the church are focused on Christ and His work, how is that not sliding away
from Him? Sure He observed the Torah as written not as supplemented by the Pharisees, UNTIL HE HAD FULFILLED IT as He said He came to do, not destroy but fulfill after which it passes away as HE said it would not pass away until it was fulfilled which He came to do and did.
as for the rest who don't do this, you ignore, twist, reduce the bible to bumper sticker slogans and deny what Christ warned about regarding the Last Judgement and elsewhere when HE said you have to do the will of The Father in HEaven, not just
hear but do His word, and don't just call Jesus Lord but do as He said.
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...
relics, blessed objects, gradations of elders
Also in the Bible: Hab 2:18-20
What profiteth the graven image that the maker thereof hath graven it; the molten image, and a teacher of lies, that the maker of his work trusteth therein, to make dumb idols?
Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it.
But the LORD is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him.
anon 11:47
typical. quote Scripture that is not about what I referred to. none of that refers to relics, blessed objects or gradations of elders. it is about the false gods of the heathens.
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...11:46 AM
anon 11:37 Sure He observed the Torah as written not as supplemented by the Pharisees, UNTIL HE HAD FULFILLED IT as He said He came to do, not destroy but fulfill
Here we have a flicker of truth!
Jesus did only what was shown of by the Father, nothing more nothing less. We as Christians should follow his lead, and not add the supplemented TRADITIONS that are added to the gospel by the modern day religious, Scribes and Pharisees
Dan Bryan
list the traditions you are concerned about.
He said it would not pass away until fulfilled.
He said He came to fulfill the Law
Having done so it passed away, so no circumcision as a religious issue, no food laws other than periodic fasting (food laws were permanent restrictions) no observance of Mosaic Holy Days. Galatians is all about that. Acts 15 is about that. read entire sections or whole letter at one sitting.
Jesus teaching on “eating my flesh” was obviously speaking spiritually as he clearly explains in the same chapter 6 of John in verse 63: “It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth; THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: THE WORDS I SPEAK UNTO YOU, THEY ARE SPIRIT, AND THEY ARE LIFE.” (BLE ... block letters for emphasis) Just as the RITUAL of baptism without the spirit of God profits nothing, so too does the ritual of PHYSICAL circumcision profit NOTHING, so too does the RITUAL of the eating of the “eucharist” profit NOTHING!
As to the “why” the disciples followed Him no more, it is not as the Papists would have you believe, i.e. “eating his flesh was too difficult for them to comprehend, etc.” The REAL reason was that Jesus was speaking spiritual truths (truths only given by God's sovereign grace) to those that FALSELY sought justification through RELIGIOUS RITUAL practices. The ENTIRE time Jesus spoke to them He was speaking in SPIRITUAL terms as opposed to the PHYSICAL. It is through God's sovereign grace, and that alone, that TRULY brings a lost soul to Christ: “NO MAN CAN COME TO ME, except the Father which hath sent me DRAW HIM …” John 6:44 (BLE) Jesus repeats this to these “disciples” that would soon depart from Him in this very interesting, and revealing two verses, repeating again what He declared in verse 44::
“But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that NO MAN CAN COME UNTO ME, EXCEPT IT WERE GIVEN UNTO HIM OF MY FATHER.”
John 6:64,65 (BLE)
(continued)
The people that followed Him in the above verses, were those of the same RELIGIOUS ilk that “believed on him” (in John chapter 8) BUT WERE NOT DISCIPLES of Him because they BELIEVED NOT HIS WORD!
Read this carefully ... it is Christ speaking to “believers” …
“As he spoke these words, many believed on him. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, IF YE CONTINUE IN MY WORD, THEN ARE YE MY DISCIPLES INDEED.” John 8:31 (BLE… block letters for empasis)
To these very same “believers” Jesus said that “ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” John 8:44 (BLE)
He also said to these “believers” … “HE THAT IS OF GOD HEARETH GOD’S WORDS: YE THEREFORE HEAR THEM NOT, BECAUSE YE ARE NOT OF GOD.” John 6:47 (BLE)
Rayb,
NO. you missed something.
"As to the “why” the disciples followed Him no more, it is not as the Papists would have you believe, i.e. “eating his flesh was too difficult for them to comprehend, etc.” The REAL reason was that Jesus was speaking spiritual truths "
this is why you have to read CONTEXT and ENTIRE CHAPTERS AT ONCE.
the part you cite is a basis for hope for those who have not eaten His flesh and blood but do believe in and obey Him. But in no way does it invalidate the literal meaning.
John 6:51 Jesus begins speaking of eating His flesh and Blood.
John 6:52 "how can this man give us His flesh to eat?"
John 6:53-59 Jesus reiterates His statements, saying NOTHING TO INDICATE HIS SPOKE "SPIRITUALLY," the reiteration is very literal. This in response to those
questioning how it could be.
John 6:60 "Many therefore of His disciples, when they had head this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?"
John 6:61 Jesus asked His disciples, "Doth this offend you?" Then He predicts His Ascension. Then He says what you quoted, what would be the LETTER that profiteth
nothing? probably the Torah that made meat from an animal that doesn't split the foot and chew the cut unclean, categorizing human flesh thereby as unclean.
"the words that I speak unto you," what were those words? the ones He had been preaching in the synagogue and that the disciples were upset about.
Those words, which are not only all His words but those words they were upset about are THEMSELVES, the words themselves, spirit and life, pointing to a miraculous conversion of bread and wine into Jesus Christ's Body and Blood later on as to how people could eat His flesh.
And the people DID NOT CONSIDER WHAT HE SAID WAS AN EXPLANATION that that was just "spiritual" not literal . because
John 6:66 "From that time many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with
him."
yet He didn't chase after them and say "I didn't mean it literally." Hitherto they had no trouble with His spiritual truths. Spiritual truths include transformation of bread and wine.
John 6:67, 68 Jesus asks the twelve if they would leave also, and they said they
would stay because there was nowhere else to go no one else to go to "thou hast
the words of eternal life." clearly they also were puzzled, yet He gave them no special instruction as to His meaning like He did with a parable.
Rayb,
It says His DISCPLES were upset and murmured and that "from that time many of His
DISCIPLES went back, and walked no more with Him."
Sure, continuing the walk (which these didn't) made people "disciples indeed," yet one of them continued with Him who didn't leave off his discipleship altogether till much later (Judas). But while they were with Him they were His disciples till they decided to quit.
I have spoken to countless "lost" people over the close to 40 years since becoming, by the grace of God, a believer. Over and over again, whether it is Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Catholics, apostate "protestants," etc., etc. they ALL have one thing in common, and that is, and lack of BELIEF in what God's Word clearly states.
When dealing with the "lost," the ONLY standard that we have to present is God's Word. No joining of a church, no ritualistic practice, no obedience to a religious set of rules will save a single soul! Any religion that teaches that obedience to their system will save you is preaching a false gospel.
If you are a believer, and you think Rome teaches the same gospel that is proclaimed in Scripture, you need to educate yourself to find out exactly what Rome teaches. It proclaims a sacramental system, by which, the Catholic morphs back and forth, in and out of a "state of grace." For "Venial" sins, they will spend an undetermined amount of time in their FICTIONAL/PAGAN Purgatory to suffer in fire in order to "purge" them from sins that have NOT BEEN PAID FOR! For "Mortal" sins, there is NO HOPE! Mortal sins include intentionally missing Mass, and if one dies without "confessing and paying penance" ... they are lost for eternity! If you think this is NOT in complete conflict with Christ's gospel of grace, you probably are lost yourself.
Judas was never a true disciple ... Judas was chosen from the beginning by Christ. Jesus said himself that he chose his disciples, knowing one of them was a devil (referring to Judas). This was all part of God's sovereign plan from before the foundation of the world.
Christine states:
"... he words of eternal life." clearly they also were puzzled, yet He gave them no special instruction as to His meaning like He did with a parable."
Jesus did not teach the meaning of parables to anyone other than those that were not His true disciples.
Correction to above post ... I should have said:
Jesus taught the meaning of His parables ONLY to His true disciples. To all others, He spoke in parables, without explaining the meaning to them.
rayb
"they ALL have one thing in common, and that is, and lack of BELIEF in what God's Word clearly states."
so do you. apparently you managed to believe the core essential, Jesus His death and Resurrection, but the rest or much of it you got mixed up.
"If you are a believer, and you think Rome teaches the same gospel that is proclaimed in Scripture, you need to educate yourself to find out exactly what Rome teaches. It proclaims a sacramental system, by which, the Catholic morphs back and forth, in and out of a "state of grace.""
First off I don't give a rat's ass what schismatic and mildly heretical Rome teaches. I don't care what ANY system teaches I care which system fits the Bible best and fits what is known of the early church first few centuries best. That's EO and Rome in its early days. Rome got very mechanistic being too identified with the LAtin style mentally.
Secondly, with or without sacraments you can put yourself in and out of grace by obedience to Jesus and by sinning against Him and recover by repentance.
Thirdly, if you have problems with sacraments a visible external sign of an invisible and internal grace, and God operating through material means, then it is only by the grace of God that you accept the Incarnation of God the Second PErson of the Trinity as Jesus. Because that is the A NUMBER ONE most extreme example of God operating through matter.
such an anti sacramentarian bias shows a gnostic subclinical problem on your part.
because Gnosticism denies the validity of matter denies God operates through matter, because of that usually denied Jesus' real incarnation and/or physical instead of spiritual resurrection, and of course rejected sacraments and the Eucharist as the real body and blood of Christ, usually.
Ray there is NO biblical basis for thinking Jesus didn't teach the meaning of His parables to ALL His disciples, whoever were disciples at that point.
NO BASIS WHATEVER.
you are reading that into it. ALL The Apostles including Judas got all the same information, and the same powers. (in itself reason to reject Donatism which denies a priest in sin can do a valid sacrament.)
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...
"Ray there is NO biblical basis for thinking Jesus didn't teach the meaning of His parables to ALL His disciples, whoever were disciples at that point."
"NO BASIS WHATEVER."
First, you completely misquoted me. I stated that "Jesus taught the meaning of His parables ONLY to His true disciples. To all others, He spoke in parables, without explaining the meaning to them." Which is completely true, as stated in the following:
After speaking to the "multitude" the parable of the sower, Jesus said to the multitude: "And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. And when he WAS ALONE, THEY THAT WERE ABOUT HIM WITH THE TWELVE ASKED OF HIM THE PARABLE. "And he said unto them, Unto YOU it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are WITHOUT, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them." Mark 4:9-12 Jesus then went on to explain in detail the MEANING of the parable to His true followers in verses 14-20
Christine's beliefs are so mixed up, it's just sad and actually just wrong on every level. No pure Gospel to rest the soul and heart in in her mechanical belief system that tosses the Lord's name around a bit. So it's no surprise that she is living so undone in her core. Essentially all she has is a "head faith" (and that's all over the map) with some ritual hocus-pocus tossed in, but no actual heart change that is proof of the Spirit within her being, to tell her the truth and guide her life by it, as we are all witness to here.
But I can sum up for you, Christine.
Jesus paid a debt He did not owe, because I had a debt I could not pay. That is the truth for every last one of us, you included.
Are you humble enough to place your faith in Jesus Christ alone? He is God, you know (as you have said you think He is) so can't He be trusted exclusively-to the exclusion of all others-all other anythings, then? The devil actually believes in God better than you do, but he never repented. Are you guilty before God in unrepentance before the cross of Jesus? A hard heart will prevent that from happening within you and keep you from truly knowing the One True God, leaving you with no other option but to settle for a knock off brand of "faith" such as you promote here.
Simple trust in Christ Jesus is for me to provide the sinner and Christ to provide the Savior--namely Himself. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Romans 10:13. believing in His death, burial and resurrection as the sole means of your salavtion..for with the heart man believes unto righteousness and the mouth confession is made. Romans 10:10. That does not mean reciting some stale canned prayers spoken by rote and repetition.
He is the Yes and the Amen of God with no additions or new and improved anything to supplement Who He is and What He has already done, yes from before the foundation of the world.
"Anonymous RayB said...
Christine states:
"... he words of eternal life." clearly they also were puzzled, yet He gave them no special instruction as to His meaning like He did with a parable."
Jesus did not teach the meaning of parables to anyone other than those that were not His true disciples."
the people who were puzzled and said they wouldn't leave because He had the words of eternal were "the twelve." the Apostles.
READ THAT WHOLE SECTION.
John 6:67, 68 "Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?"
to THE TWELVE He gave no explanation that this was spiritual not literal.
RayB you are rejecting the words of Christ Himself.
you are also rejecting the belief of the first few generations of the church, writing from them testifies to the Eucharist being the literal body and blood of Christ.
okay, I keep forgetting once signed into his gmail to get something he wanted printed out that puts his name on my blogger post. sorry.
Christine
To Anon @ 1:53 PM ...
I agree with your post. Here's my experience: Back when I was "in the bondage of inequity," (and "thought" I was a "Christian"), an old high school friend of mine (at that time, he was still a Catholic) called me on the phone several times and told me he was reading the Bible. He kept telling me that there was far more in it than you could ever imagine. I literally (remember ... I "thought" I was a Christian) thought he had gone nuts. Then, for whatever reason (God's grace), I was in a book store and decided to purchase a Bible and read it for myself. I was very much surprised at what was actually in it ... far different from what my liberal church had taught me. I received quite a bit of comfort from reading it. THEN, I was confronted with my sinful behavior and came under conviction (by God's Spirit). It became VERY clear to me, that, I had to make choice; either live by my own will, or God's WILL as described clearly in His Word. By God's infinite grace and mercy, I chose to follow Him, and repent of my sins, and trust in Him alone as my ONLY WAY to the Father.
There is simply NO SALVATION without grace granted repentance from our SELF-SERVING, SELF-WILL. No amount of religious sacrifice will save anyone ... only trust, faith and obedience to the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords has any saving power.
(From the Hellenic Leaders' website.)
It's not just the RC, in all fairness, the various branches of its sister cult, 'Orthodoxy' is also colluding with pagan Earth Day issues.
The Eastern Orthodox Patriarch (named by Al Gore as "the Green Patriarch"), Bartholomew I (blasphemously referred to as "His ALL Holiness") is right alongside Francis, even, according to the article, more prominent than the Dalai Lama!:
"As we celebrate earth day this year, let us not forget the important impact our Greek Orthodox leader the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople has made in the environmental movement. Many people don’t know that His All Holiness has led a tireless campaign urging the protection of the environment. For the Ecumenical Patriarch, conservation and stewardship are a philosophy and a way of life, not just a message on Earth Day. Nicknamed the “Green Patriarch” by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, he has long used his international presence to draw attention to issues that need more action, including climate change. Importantly, he issued an encyclical demanding action on climate change stating that destruction of the planet instead of working to preserve it is a sin."
"Also, since 1989, every September 1st has been a day of prayer for the protection of the environment throughout the Eastern Orthodox Church. Created by the late Patriarch Dimitrios, the tradition has since been taken over by Patriarch Bartholomew I as part of his environmental campaign. The Patriarch has also been presented with awards and recognitions for his commitment to the environment and even wrote a book on his ecological vision:"
"The Patriarch is the winner of both the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal in 1997 and the Sophie Prize in 2002, for leadership in environmental protection and sustainable development.
In 2003, Bartholomew I brought 200 scientists, journalists, and political leaders together to discuss marine preservation and the importance of halting overfishing. In the same year, he wrote the book Cosmic Grace and Humble Prayer: The Ecological Vision of the Green Patriarch Bartholomew I , detailing his ecological vision through statements and addresses made over the years, some translated to English for the first time.
In 2007, Grist put Bartholomew I in the number one slot of the top 15 green religious leaders, even higher than the Dalai Lama.
Let the Ecumenical Patriarch’s environmental movement be a motivator for all of us to celebrate and preserve the earth every day of our lives, not just once a year. It is easy to overlook the impact our daily actions have on this planet, but it is our duty to leave behind a healthy and sustainable home for future generations."
http://hellenicleaders.com/blog/celebrate-earth-day/#.VxfUcBnRak4
so how much poison do you want in your food, water and air?
rayb
since you are so concerned about sin and repentance, are you ready to repent of and apologize for lying and saying you saw an ad I never posted?
Ray B, you are absolutely right Jesus spoke spiritually when He spoke of his flesh and blood at the Last Supper. Moreover, He it was before He was crucified when this First Communion took place, so no transubstantiation possible there!
Christine, you can't believe in pagan nonsense and twisted Scripture such as the false doctrine of transubstantiation, and serve God too!
1 Corinthians 10:21
New Living Translation.
You cannot drink from the cup of the Lord and from the cup of demons, too. You cannot eat at the Lord's Table and at the table of demons, too.
3:32 PM, there's enough venom coming from you polluting the air round here!
Just so this doesn't get lost in the shuffle... (From the Hellenic Leaders' website.)
It's not just the RC, in all fairness, the various branches of its sister cult, 'Orthodoxy' is also colluding with pagan Earth Day issues.
The Eastern Orthodox Patriarch (named by Al Gore as "the Green Patriarch"), Bartholomew I (blasphemously referred to as "His ALL Holiness") is right alongside Francis, even, according to the article, more prominent than the Dalai Lama!:
"As we celebrate earth day this year, let us not forget the important impact our Greek Orthodox leader the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople has made in the environmental movement. Many people don’t know that His All Holiness has led a tireless campaign urging the protection of the environment. For the Ecumenical Patriarch, conservation and stewardship are a philosophy and a way of life, not just a message on Earth Day. Nicknamed the “Green Patriarch” by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, he has long used his international presence to draw attention to issues that need more action, including climate change. Importantly, he issued an encyclical demanding action on climate change stating that destruction of the planet instead of working to preserve it is a sin."
"Also, since 1989, every September 1st has been a day of prayer for the protection of the environment throughout the Eastern Orthodox Church. Created by the late Patriarch Dimitrios, the tradition has since been taken over by Patriarch Bartholomew I as part of his environmental campaign. The Patriarch has also been presented with awards and recognitions for his commitment to the environment and even wrote a book on his ecological vision:"
"The Patriarch is the winner of both the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal in 1997 and the Sophie Prize in 2002, for leadership in environmental protection and sustainable development.
In 2003, Bartholomew I brought 200 scientists, journalists, and political leaders together to discuss marine preservation and the importance of halting overfishing. In the same year, he wrote the book Cosmic Grace and Humble Prayer: The Ecological Vision of the Green Patriarch Bartholomew I , detailing his ecological vision through statements and addresses made over the years, some translated to English for the first time.
In 2007, Grist put Bartholomew I in the number one slot of the top 15 green religious leaders, even higher than the Dalai Lama.
Let the Ecumenical Patriarch’s environmental movement be a motivator for all of us to celebrate and preserve the earth every day of our lives, not just once a year. It is easy to overlook the impact our daily actions have on this planet, but it is our duty to leave behind a healthy and sustainable home for future generations."
http://hellenicleaders.com/blog/celebrate-earth-day/#.VxfUcBnRak4
"Christine, you can't believe in pagan nonsense and twisted Scripture such as the false doctrine of transubstantiation, and serve God too!"
really? then howcome Jesus didn't "explain" away the situation to the twelve?
and howcome the early church believed this, the second century writers report this, or do you figure this was an early error and it only your man made traditions of Calvin, Zwingli and a few heretics before them are correct?
Ray B, you are absolutely right Jesus spoke spiritually when He spoke of his flesh and blood at the Last Supper. Moreover, it was before He was crucified when this First Communion took place, so no transubstantiation possible there!
Christine, you can't believe in pagan nonsense and twisted Scripture such as the false doctrine of transubstantiation, and serve God too!
1 Corinthians 10:21
New Living Translation.
You cannot drink from the cup of the Lord and from the cup of demons, too. You cannot eat at the Lord's Table and at the table of demons, too.
(KJV)
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and the table of devils.
Mike Tinge said...
okay, I keep forgetting once signed into his gmail to get something he wanted printed out that puts his name on my blogger post. sorry.
Christine
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...
rayb
since you are so concerned about sin and repentance, are you ready to repent of and apologize for lying and saying you saw an ad I never posted?
RayB ~ You and Dan Bryan rest your case already!
If the Christina can post as the Mike Tingle.
Couldn't the Mike Tingle post as the Christina?
Couldn't the Mike Tingle posted and then deleted before the Christina saw it?
That would explain her vehement denial?
Sorry Mike Tingle you probably won't get any tonight!
Christine, I don't follow Calvin, etc, nor any Patriarch who YOUR ILK blasphemously calls, "His ALL Holiness ", nor any pope who is blasphemously called, "Holy Father", I follow Jesus Christ my Lord and Saviour God, my Holy Father God in Heaven, guided by His Holy Spirit and not by so-called 'sacrements' and the delusions of carnal and cannibal-minded blaspheming pagans such as you, Ms Erikson aka Jezabel!
anon 4:07
you may not think you follow luther, calvin, etc., but you read the Bible through the blinders pastors and authors put on you, and those people did NOT get their ideas from the Bible so much as from the prior generation of writers, going back over centuries to luther and calvin.
ANON 4:01
Mike wouldn't sell psychic services I can barely get him to check things for me to tell me what needs throwing out, some things feel a bit odd others not sure.
If that post had been made there would have been TWO deletions, because I posted a normal post then decided to wait for more information and repost later so I deleted it. There was only one deleted post not two. So everyone who said they saw the ad
LIED.
Mike can barely handle facebook he wouldn't be on a blog.
you people who scream about blaspheming pagans still haven't explained why Christians of the second century were claiming real presence, since the aged ones teaching them were taught by the aged taught by Apostles or by those converted by Apostles, and whole congregations viewed things this way and therefore cannibalism was accused by persecutors. Why would that be accused if there wasn't this Body and Blood doctrine held?
Irenaeus supports real presence so his reference to "real" flesh and blood is about flesh and blood under the form of flesh and blood, relevant to the cannibalism accusation, as distinct from flesh and blood under the form of bread and wine.
Justin Martyr also.
Ignatius died AD 107 also.
how do you explain that only heretical groups denied the real presence until calvin and Zwingli, I mean people even you would call heretical?
4:01 PM, a very plausible option but I for one, having seen the infamous ad (with its trademark lack of capitalization) believe it was Ms Erikson herself that posted it. Whether it was her directly, or her partner in sin, is orbital information. The central crux of the matter is it was posted from her account then hastily deleted by her (or Tinge) once she realized her mistake!
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...12:06 PM
Dan Bryan
list the traditions you are concerned about.
Dear Christine,
I am not a Protestant.
All religion has Tradition, some good some bad and most all bear no fruits of repentance.
I do not protest what you believe. I am not a catholic RC or EO.
I do not need your opinions of what I need to think about tradition.
I do not hold some great hope, desire, to change these institutions.
I did not come out of these institutions, so I have nothing in them and they have nothing in me.
I am equal to that of the thief on the cross ~ a sinner saved by Grace in God.
- The man was most likely not baptized
- The man did not partake in Lord’s Supper or the Eucharist, if you like.
- The man did not go to purgatory
- The man probably never paid tithes or offerings or alms.
- The man did not say the “sinner’s prayer”
- The man did not do works of cooperation, sanctification, justification, or whatever one would wish to call it.
- The man didn’t buy indulgences.
- The man did no penance.
- The man may never have gone to synagogue.
- St Peter did not greet him at heaven’s gate.
** The man did defend Jesus.
** The man did witness to the lost.
This tells me that all this tradition immaterial in the economy of God's salvation.
So for discussion I ask; In your words; Jesus didn't need the 'supplements' of the Pharisees, so who beguiled you into believing that you need them?
anon 4:26
more lies. YOU CANNOT POST BY MISTAKE TO A BLOG ON BLOGGER. it is too complicated you first land on the front page, so you know where you are. then you go to comments.
If I was doing this sort of thing, you ought to be able to find an example elsewhere. (alleged ads that are conveniently deleted don't count.)
this wasn't the first time, over a year ago I had deleted to rewrite and was accused of posting something "vile" but no details, and then deleting it.
Dan Bryan
(who also claimed falsely to have seen that ad)
you didn't answer my question. you denounce man made traditions and even in this screed ask "Jesus didn't need the 'supplements' of the Pharisees, so who beguiled you into believing that you need them? "
showing ignorance since the "supplements" of the Pharisees were details not in the Law they could beat people over the head with, or a general focus on CORRECT matters, no supplements at all, but disregarding "the weightier matters of the Law" which were "judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone." Matt. 23:23
the leaven of the Pharisees was pride and hypocrisy, far more so than altering the Law.
there is no resemblance between these things, and what you dishonestly hijack Jesus' words about to denounce in liturgical churches.
the thief was not baptized, didn't Jesus say that was necessary? apparently that can be set aside if faith is there.
all your list does not address what you think is a man made tradition, but since you bring up the thief, do you think baptism is a man made tradition?
I didn't ask what you think bout traditions, that is obvious.
I ASKED YOU TO LIST THE SPECIFIC THINGS YOU THINK ARE MAN MADE SO I CAN SHOW YOU FROM SCRIPTURE THEY ARE NOT MAN MADE.
but your weasel approach is not surprising. you are after all one of those who lied.
And you don't believe Jesus always existed coeternal with The Father, but that though divine came into existence later that The Father was alone at first.
"- The man did not do works of cooperation, sanctification, justification, or whatever one would wish to call it. "
actually, he did when he did the following:
"** The man did defend Jesus.
** The man did witness to the lost."
all the fancy names are the result of scholastic categorization.
To Anonymous @ 4:00 PM ...
Thanks be to God that has revealed the truth unto you. "If His truth be hidden, it is hidden unto those that are perishing ..."
Man, in his sinful, natural, fallen state CANNOT receive the things of the Spirit. This is precisely why sinful mankind gravitates to RELIGIOUS RITUALS that have no path to salvation, because it is all based in the flesh.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: NEITHER CAN HE KNOW THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED." I Corinthians 2:14 (Block Letters for Emphasis)
Sinful Mankind must be born again. Without the new birth, Mankind CANNOT see SPIRITUALLY. This is precisely why Jesus said: "Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the Kingdom of God." John 3:3
Without the New Birth, Man is DEAD and BLIND spiritually! But there is hope ... "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the WORD OF GOD." If you are not saved, plead with God to open your eyes ... humbly READ HIS WORD .... and ask for the truth to be revealed unto you ... before it is too late!
What was said by early Christians about Communion must be taken in its historical context. What early Christians wrote, however, was NOT in favour of transubstantiation ...
www.thecripplegate.com/did-the-early-church-believe-in-transubstantiation/
Did the Early Church Believe in Transubstantiation?
Posted by Nathan Busenitz
Today’s post is intended to answer an important question from a historical standpoint. However, it ought to be stated at the outset that Scripture must be our final authority in the determination of sound doctrine and right practice.last_supper
The word “eucharist” means “thanksgiving” and was an early Christian way of referring to the celebration of the Lord’s Table. Believers in the early centuries of church history regularly celebrated the Lord’s Table as a way to commemorate the death of Christ. The Lord Himself commanded this observance on the night before His death. As the apostle Paul recorded in 1 Corinthians 11:23–26Open in Logos Bible Software (if available):
For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.
In discussing the Lord’s Table from the perspective of church history, at least two important questions arise. First, did the early church believe that the elements (the bread and the cup) were actually and literally transformed into the physical body and blood of Christ? In other words, did they articulate the doctrine of transubstantiation as modern Roman Catholics do? Second, did early Christians view the eucharist as a propitiatory sacrifice? Or put another way, did they view it in the terms articulated by the sixteenth-century Council of Trent?
In today’s post, we will address the first of those two questions.
Did the Early Church Fathers Hold to Transubstantiation?
Transubstantiation is the Roman Catholic teaching that in the eucharist, the bread and the cup are transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ. Here are several quotes from the church fathers, often cited by Roman Catholics, in defense of their claim that the early church embraced transubstantiation.
Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 110): “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1).
Irenaeus (d. 202): “He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body.’ The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood” (Against Heresies, 4:17:5).
Continued. ..
To Anon @ 4:00 PM ...
When I stated "If you are not saved ...." I did not mean that to you personally, but in general to anyone else that might be reading that post @ 4:49 PM.
...continued from 5:01 PM
Irenaeus again: “He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (Against Heresies, 5:2).
Tertullian (160–225): “[T]he flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead).
Origen (182–254): “Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’” (Homilies on Numbers, 7:2).
Augustine (354–430): “I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ” (Sermons 227).
How should we think about such statements?
Obviously, there is no disputing the fact that the patristic authors made statements like, “The bread is the body of Christ” and “The cup is the blood of Christ.” But there is a question of exactly what they meant when they used that language. After all, the Lord Himself said, “This is My body” and “This is My blood.” So it is not surprising that the early fathers echoed those very words.
But what did they mean when they used the language of Christ to describe the Lord’s Table? Did they intend the elements to be viewed as Christ’s literal flesh and blood? Or did they see the elements as symbols and figures of those physical realities?
In answering such questions, at least two things ought to be kept in mind:
in answering such questions only one thing need be kept in mind: that heretics
"do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again"
that's pretty literal.
Continued from 5:05 PM
1. We ought to interpret the church fathers’ statements within their historical context.
Such is especially true with regard to the quotes cited above from Ignatius and Irenaeus. During their ministries, both men found themselves contending against the theological error of docetism (a component of Gnostic teaching), which taught that all matter was evil. Consequently, docetism denied that Jesus possessed a real physical body. It was against this false teaching that the apostle John declared, “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist” (2 John 7Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)).
In order to combat the false notions of docetism, Ignatius and Irenaeus echoed the language Christ used at the Last Supper (paraphrasing His words, “This is My body” and “This is My blood”). Such provided a highly effective argument against docetic heresies, since our Lord’s words underscore the fact that He possessed a real, physical body.
A generation after Irenaeus, Tertullian (160–225) used the same arguments against the Gnostic heretic Marcion. However, Tertullian provided more information into how the eucharistic elements ought to be understood. Tertullian wrote:
“Having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, Jesus made it His own body, by saying, ‘THIS IS MY BODY,’ THAT IS, THE SYMBOL OF MY BODY. There could not have been a symbol, however, unless there was first a true body. An empty thing or phantom is incapable of a symbol. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new covenant to be sealed ‘in His blood,’ affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body that is not a body of flesh” (Against Marcion, 4.40).
Tertullian’s explanation could not be clearer. On the one hand, he based his argument against Gnostic docetism on the words of Christ, “This is My body.” On the other hand, Tertullian recognized that the elements themselves ought to be understood as symbols which represent the reality of Christ’s physical body. Because of the reality they represented, they provided a compelling refutation of docetic error.
Based on Tertullian’s explanation, we have good reason to view the words of Ignatius and Irenaeus in that same light.
Continued. ..
"symbol" is not empty sign significator but EMBODIMENT.
symbolon. Until I understood this I couldn't understand why the Creed is called "the symbol of the faith." those words embody the faith.
Tertullian is open to suspicion given that he joined the montanist heretics.
and symbolon is not even used in the Gospels but another word meaning IS,
also REPRESENTS and yet Paul warns if you don't perceive the Body you eat and drink judgement against yourself.
Continued from 5:11 PM
2. We ought to allow the church fathers to clarify their understanding of the Lord’s Table.
We have already seen how Tertullian clarified his understanding of the Lord’s Table by noting that the bread and the cup were symbols of Christ’s body and blood. In that same vein, we find that many of the church fathers similarly clarified their understanding of the eucharist by describing it in symbolic and spiritual terms.
At times, they echoed the language of Christ (e.g. “This is My body” and “This is My blood”) when describing the Lord’s Table. Yet, in other places, it becomes clear that they intended this language to be ultimately understood in spiritual and symbolic terms. Here are a number of examples that demonstrate this point:
The Didache, written in the late-first or early-second century, referred to the elements of the Lord’s table as “SPIRITUAL food and drink” (The Didache, 9). The long passage detailing the Lord’s Table in this early Christian document gives no hint of transubstantiation whatsoever.
Justin Martyr (110–165) spoke of “the bread which our Christ gave us to offer in REMEMBRANCE of the Body which He assumed for the sake of those who believe in Him, for whom He also suffered, and also to the cup which He taught us to offer in the Eucharist, in COMMEMORATION of His blood“(Dialogue with Trypho, 70).
Clement of Alexandria explained that, “The Scripture, accordingly, has named wine the SYMBOL of the sacred blood” (The Instructor, 2.2).
Origen similarly noted, “We have a SYMBOL of gratitude to God in the bread which we call the Eucharist” (Against Celsus, 8.57).
Cyprian (200–258), who sometimes described the eucharist using very literal language, spoke against any who might use mere water for their celebration of the Lord’s Table. In condemning such practices, he explained that the cup of the Lord is a REPRESENTATION of the blood of Christ: “I marvel much whence this practice has arisen, that in some places, contrary to Evangelical and Apostolic discipline, water is offered in the Cup of the Lord, which alone cannot REPRESENT the Blood of Christ” (Epistle 63.7).
Continued. ..
Continued from 5:20 PM
Eusebius of Caesarea (263–340) espoused a SYMBOLIC view in his Proof of the Gospel:
For with the wine which was indeed the SYMBOL OF HIS BLOOD, He cleanses them that are baptized into His death, and believe on His blood, of their old sins, washing them away and purifying their old garments and vesture, so that they, ransomed by the precious blood of the divine SPIRITUAL grapes, and with the wine from this vine, “put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man which is renewed into knowledge in the image of Him that created him.” . . . He gave to His disciples, when He said, “Take, drink; this is my blood that is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do in REMEMBRANCE of me.” And, “His teeth are white as milk,” show the brightness and purity of the sacramental food. For again, He gave Himself the SYMBOLS of His divine dispensation to His disciples, when He bade them make the likeness of His own Body. For since He no more was to take pleasure in bloody sacrifices, or those ordained by Moses in the slaughter of animals of various kinds, and was to give them bread to use as the SYMBOL OF HIS BODY, He taught the purity and brightness of such food by saying, “And his teeth are white as milk” (Demonstratia Evangelica, 8.1.76–80).
Athanasius (296–373) similarly contended that the elements of the Eucharist are to be understood spiritually, not physically: “[W]hat He says is NOT FLESHLY BUT SPIRITUAL. For how many would the body suffice for eating, that it should become the food for the whole world? But for this reason He made mention of the ascension of the Son of Man into heaven, in order that He might draw them away from the bodily notion, and that from henceforth they might learn that the aforesaid flesh was heavenly eating from above and SPIRITUAL food given by Him.” (Festal Letter, 4.19)
Augustine (354–430), also, clarified that the Lord’s Table was to be understood in spiritual terms: “UNDERSTAND SPIRITUALLY WHAT I SAID; you are not to eat this body which you see; nor to drink that blood which they who will crucify me shall pour forth. . . . Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it must be spiritually understood” (Exposition of the Psalms, 99.8).
Continued. . .
Continued from 5:30 PM
He also explained the eucharistic elements as symbols. Speaking of Christ, Augustine noted: “He committed and delivered to His disciples the FIGURE [OR SYMBOL] of His Body and Blood.” (Exposition of the Psalms, 3.1).
And in another place, quoting the Lord Jesus, Augustine further explained: “‘Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,’ says Christ, ‘and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.’ This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; IT IS THEREFORE A FIGURE [OR SYMBOL], enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable MEMORY of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us (On Christian Doctrine, 3.16.24).
A number of similar quotations from the church fathers could be given to make the point that—at least for many of the fathers—the elements of the eucharist were ultimately understood in symbolic or spiritual terms. In other words, they did not hold to the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation.
To be sure, they often reiterated the language of Christ when He said, “This is My body” and “This is My blood.” They especially used such language in defending the reality of His incarnation against Gnostic, docetic heretics who denied the reality of Christ’s physical body.
At the same time, however, they clarified their understanding of the Lord’s Table by further explaining that they ultimately recognized the elements of the Lord’s Table to be symbols—figures which represented and commemorated the physical reality of our Lord’s body and blood.
Those looking to read more on this subject might be interested in William Webster’s helpful treatment, which can be found here. ( See website www.thecripplegate.com/did-the-early-church-believe-in-transubstantiation )
Paul says the resurrection body is a spiritual body but it is clearly physical
just a superior kind of physical.
"symbol" as I said means more in Greek of the time than in English now.
That there is a difference between flesh under the form of flesh and flesh under
the form of bread is obvious. it is miraculous therefore spiritual.
that doesn't mean not literal.
the miracle of Lanciano converted the form to human cardiac flesh.
the miracle of Cana converted water to wine visbly, if not so visibly you could have called it "spiritual."
spiritual doesn't mean not real. SUPERNATURAL not mere metaphor.
So , you see, Christine, the Early Church did NOT believe in the heresy of transubstantiation.
Therefore, YOU are the heretic here, and the heresy of transubstantiation held by the 'Orthodox' and Roman Catholic cults shows they are preaching another gospel and NOT that of Jesus Christ!
Christine, you are no educator. You are not filled with the Holy Spirit, you do not therefore know how to interpret Holy Scripture.
Holy Writ is NOT for private interpretation, which is what your Cult and the RC Cult do with there unbiblical heirarchies. Holy Scripture must be interpreted by the personal guidance of the Holy Spirit as well as by sharing with other BORN AGAIN Christians filled with the Holy Spirit. A person filled with the Holy Spirit can tell if another is or not, especially by that person's fruits.
Your fruits of unforgiveness, blasphemy, man-made traditions, hatred of your mother, fornication and co-habitation out of wedlock, lack of humility, falsely accusing, lying, delusions of all sorts and promotion of your cohabitant's demonic 'visions, etc, are not the fruit of a saved person.
You need to repent!
Here it is, plain and unvarnished. Unless I am convinced of error by the testimony of Scripture or (since I put no trust in the unsupported authority of Pope or councils, since it is plain that they have often erred and often contradicted themselves) by manifest reasoning, I stand convinced by the Scriptures to which I have appealed, and my conscience is taken captive by God’s word. I cannot and will not recant anything, for to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us. On this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.
Martin Luther
Donald James Wheal a novelist and scriptwriter has two apt sayings...
"A truth’s initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. It wasn’t the world being round that agitated people, but that the world wasn’t flat. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic."
"The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves."
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Here it is, plain and unvarnished. Unless I am convinced of error by the testimony of Scripture or (since I put no trust in the unsupported authority of Pope or councils, since it is plain that they have often erred and often contradicted themselves) by manifest reasoning, I stand convinced by the Scriptures to which I have appealed, and my conscience is taken captive by God’s word. I cannot and will not recant anything, for to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us. On this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.
Martin Luther
6:07 PM
Anon ...
When Luther made this courageous statement at the Diet of Worms, it was at a time when Rome was torturing and burning "heretics" at the stake. Luther undoubtedly was well aware of the danger that he was facing, but did not "fear" them ... but rather ... he rightfully feared Him who had the power to cast his soul into Hades." Over 500 years later, God is still blessing his faithful stand along with many others like him for their faithfulness.
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said
the miracle of Lanciano converted the form to human cardiac flesh.
Doesn't this occur every mass?
How is it a miracle?
I wonder did the faithful Lanciano's then partake?
If not why not?
It would appear that some peoples world on this blog is neither round or flat but rather square.
A box with walls of mans efforts topped with a lid of tradition vehmently shut crying away with sola scripture we have embraced our own imaginings
Good point RayB 6:39
We must never supply modern day heretics a box of matches
anon 5:47
yes they did by their own words except one person who used a phrasing to highlight supernatural presence to explain lack of visible presence and a biased heretic (protestant) spins it that way.
Luther and Calvin did their own heretic burning.
LUTHER DID NOT REJECT TRANSUBSTANTIATION merely modified it to have some bread and wine remain.
I don't buy this by tradition from a pope or a patriarch. I get it from the Bible and pick what group fits the Bible best. NO PROTESTANT CHURCH IS A 100% MATCH TO THE BIBLE ON BOTH DOCTRINE, ECCLESIOLOGY AND MINOR STUFF.
now, as for Lanciano.
THIS WAS A VISIBLE TRANSFORMATION. Before the RC went into schism in AD 1054, in the 700s there were changes developing. the use of unleavened bread instead of leavened. (both have biblical reasons, depends which message you are focused on). A visiting Byzantine or Middle Eastern priest monk was asked to perform the Eucharist in Lanciano Italy. Doubting in his heart if unleavened bread could become the Body and Blood of Christ, suddenly it became flesh and the wine five clots of dried blood.
of course this wasn't eaten.
early examination showed the blood clots separately weight the same as together, though this quality is now absent.
the flesh according to modern examination is cardiac human tissue. blood type I forget.
THE BLOOD CLOTS THOUGH DRIED AND OVER A THOUSAND YEARS OLD ARE CHEMICALLY THE SAME AS FRESH BLOOD WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE.
that's spiritual flesh and blood if you want to call it that, spiritual in the sense of supernatural.
"Holy Writ is NOT for private interpretation, which is what your Cult and the RC Cult do with there unbiblical heirarchies. Holy Scripture must be interpreted by the personal guidance of the Holy Spirit as well as by sharing with other BORN AGAIN Christians filled with the Holy Spirit. A person filled with the Holy Spirit can tell if another is or not, especially by that person's fruits. "
unmitigated nonsense.
Paul and Peter address the elders as being themselves elders, and the deacons are below the elders and the elders include bishops but not all are bishops and the only reasons bishops plural are addressed in one epistle is because it is addressed to several cities.
your pride and vainglory don't want to obey anyone or have any authority but yourself. That's why you don't like hierarchies.
the priesthood of all believers is NOT a new testament limited thing, as I showed earlier, it was true also of the Israelites a nation of priests. That is what Peter
quotes. But those priests the people who offered sacrifices of praise and prayer and worship, had over them another level of priests. Same here, but the priesthood is not Aaronic but melchizedecian.
and you are probably the same one who repeatedly scorned Christ's words to REJECT and TREAT AS A PUBLICAN AND A TAX COLLECTOR (i.e., ostracize the sonofabitch) a bad person who will not repent.
how can you say you interpret the Bible correctly when you demand forgiveness that is unconditional contrary to Jesus' words?
I do not falsely accuse, and I am not a heretic, you are. YES THE WORDS OF THE EARLY CHURCH ARE THAT THE BREAD AND WINE TRANSFORMS BUT DOES SO "SPIRITUALLY" IN THAT THE FORM OF BREAD AND WINE REMAIN BUT THE REALITY CHANGES, they explained to readers why this is not bloody flesh but seems to be bread and wine.
only a dishonest person dedicated to a notion can spin the words of those writers the way that person does. only two out of the lot say anything remotely resembling a denial of the transformation being literal but disguised. At lanciano the disguise was removed.
THE DISHONESTY YOU SHOW IS HOW YOU REPEATEDLY WILL USE BIBLICAL PHRASING TO DESCRIBE THINGS NOT BEING REFERRED TO IN THE BIBLE.
you like to sling biblical lingo at things that it wasn't describing. you are dishonest. you handle scripture like Peter says, wresting it to your own destruction.
JESUS SAID IT WAS HIS BODY AND BLOOD AND DID NOT SAY HE DIDN'T MEAN IT LITERALLY WHEN PEOPLE GOT UPSET AND LEFT. NEITHER DID HE SAY THAT TO HIS TWELVE APOSTLES WHO WERE ALSO UPSET BUT RECOGNIZED HE WAS THE TRUTH AND THEY COULDN'T LEAVE.
Oh you who are easily swayed by fables, Christine!
Who cares whether or not Luther believed in consubstantiation!
Transubstantiation (and consubstantiation, for that matter) is erroneous.
Transubstantiation is a heresy NOT believed by the early church as my posts from the crippled gate website clearly shows!
I myself was a Roman Catholic. I don't follow pastors as you suggested, Jesus Christ is my pastor. The Biblically sanctioned traditions contained entirely within the Holy Scriptures is enough for me. How about you? Do you add and take away? Of course you do!
Christine, you need to repent before you really fund out what Ecclesiastes 12 is about and it is too late!
"Transubstantiation is a heresy NOT believed by the early church as my posts from the crippled gate website clearly shows!"
ON THE CONTRARY ONLY TWO SPOKE IN EQUIVOCAL WAYS, WHICH ARE EASILY SEEN AS AN EFFORT TO EXPLAIN HOW IT CAN BE FLESH AND BLOOD AND NOT LOOK LIKE THAT.
"I myself was a Roman Catholic. I don't follow pastors as you suggested,"
YOU GOT YOUR IDEAS SOMEWHERE AND IT WASN'T FROM THE BIBLE. YOU SPOUT THE PARTY LINE OF THE PROTESTANTS OF THE CALVIN AND ZWINGLI BENT, SO YOU GOT THEIR IDEAS FROM WHOEVER CONVERTED YOU. MAYBE A STUDY BIBLE WITH DENIAL OF TRANSFORMATION OF THE BREAD AND WINE IN THE NOTES?
" Jesus Christ is my pastor."
SAME HERE. I PICKED EO BECAUSE ITS HOLY WATER IS BETTER THAN RC AND HISTORY SHOWS IT IS THE ORIGINAL AND THE PAPACY IS NOT SO SOLID BIBLICALLY. THE MAIN REASONS.
" The Biblically sanctioned traditions contained entirely within the Holy Scriptures is enough for me."
NOT REALLY, OBVIOUSLY.
" How about you? Do you add and take away? Of course you do! "
NO, BUT YOU TAKE AWAY. Paul said to obey them that have the rule over you because they have to answer for your souls and this shouldn't be a sorrowful thing for them.
right there that blows your no hierarchies out of the water.
read through all the epistles in a few days, you will find it.
Paul told the Romans he wanted to visit them to give them some spiritual gift so they would be established. obviously they weren't founded as a group of believers
by Peter's preaching. they were a fellowship but not an ordained congregation with the Apostolic blessing. Paul had been too busy not building on another's work elsewhere, to get to Rome where converts had brought the faith.
Justin Martyr is quoted about the body and blood being there after the president of the assembly prays over it.
you are desperately clinging to assumptions you read into the Bible adding to it, and ignoring or taking out what is there that doesn't fit them.
That means I don't follow Earthly pastors. I have one Pastor, one High Priest, one Prince and one King: that is Jesus Christ; and one All Holy Father, Who is my Heavenly Father God Himself!
I thank God that by His Grace and Righteousness, He is my spiritual Father and I am adopted as His son. I am both a saint and a priest as are all born-again Christians. Yet it is not of my own doing but His Righteousness for any righteousness of myself is as filthy rags, as is that of any man or woman.
To God be the glory forever and ever, Amen!
I don't know how you do it ole girl.
You're get weirder and more boring every time you post.
You serve many idols and your religion is so dead all it can talk about is blood and death.
If the Spirit of the Living Christ was within you Ms Erikson, you wouldn't obsess over this in this manner and constantly.
You're a real sick-hearted soul, utterly joyless, and have no peace within your mind...none.
Completely screwed up. (it's not your mother's fault either-it's yours)
And so proud you have to beat this to death because you believe yourself right above all and to the exclusion of all others. Nobody's that right except GOD.
How's that living in sin going for you Christine? You are no sheep of Jesus Christ, if you were then you wold know His Voice and follow Him! Moreover, you have other priests over you CONTRADICTING the Holy Scriptures! You also blasphemously refer to a mere man as, 'His All Holiness'...., what utterly abominable blasphemy!
I got my beliefs from the Holy Bible guided by the Holy Spirit. If you are right in saying my expressed beliefs tally with Luther and Zwingli then, unlike you, they must have been insspired by the Holy Spirit in towing the Biblical line here too!
Anyway, Mary Christine Erikson. I swe it is fruitless for we Christians to continue casting our pearls before you any longer as I see your intention is only to trample them underfoot!
May the Lord rebuke you and yet have mercy on you.
Speaking of old testament times, the Palmyra Arch is now set up in Trafalgar Square. There are two archived images of the arch, one veiled on the 18th, and one unveiled on the 19th. Curiously, by this morning all webcams in Trafalgar Square, and there are several, were offline.
http://www.webcams.travel/webcam/1368178444-Weather-Trafalgar-Square-London-Live-Web-Cam-London-England-London
Nice segue, omots. :^)
Yes, interesting about the webcams....
September 1: Eastern Orthodox Earth Day
Since 1989, every September 1st (the beginning of the ecclesiastical calendar) has been designated as a day of prayer for "the protection of the environment" throughout the Eastern Orthodox Church consisting of some 300 million Christians worldwide. Instituted by the late Patriarch Dimitrios of the Greek Orthodox Church, the tradition has since been shepherded by his successor Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople who has been dubbed "The Green Patriarch." Some attribute the moniker to the European press, but my sources in the church credit the epithet to Al Gore during his tenure as Vice President. Bartholomew was the first major religious leader to have initiated since 1991 various events to promote environmental protection, and Grist puts him number one above the Dalai Lama on their recent list of 15 green religious leaders. Exercising his influence on the Catholic Pope, Bartholomew in 2002 orchestrated a coming together in joint environmental efforts that witnessed the first liturgy spoken by the Greek Patriarch in Italy for over 1,000 years since the Vatican and the Orthodox Churches excommunicated one another in the Great Schism of 1054.In 2003, Bartholomew brought together 200 scientists, political leaders, and journalists on a cruise ship in the Baltic Sea to discuss marine preservation and the hazards of overfishing. "To protect the oceans is to do God's work," he said. "To harm them, even if we are ignorant of the harm we cause, is to diminish His divine creation." In July 2006, top scientists gathered at a remarkable floating symposium on the Rio Negro convened on a flotilla of boats by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in order to discuss the tipping point into desertificaiton of Amazon rainforest lands. The Patriarch recently met with Mr. Gore during the Live Earth press junket. A 2003 book Cosmic Grace, Humble Prayer: The Ecological Vision of the Green Patriarch Bartholomew I, edited by the insightful religious scholar Father John Chryssavgis, strives to connect Christian dogma with current environmental thought in an effort to bring the good green message to the faithful."
http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/september-1-eastern-orthodox-earth-day-and-the-green-patriarch.html
http://blogs.ancientfaith.com/joeljmiller/why-the-gay-marriage-debate-was-over-in-1950/
THE CHURCH FATHERS ON TRANSUBSTANTIATION
"This article is intended to be a resource showing the support for the doctrine of Transubstantiation in the Church fathers, and not a robust defense of the doctrine as defined by the Council of Trent.1 The Church fathers did not believe in a mere spiritual presence of Christ alongside or in the elements (bread and wine). This can be shown by three different types of patristic statements. The first and most explicit type is a statement that directly affirms a change in the elements. The second type is a simple identification of the consecrated species with the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Because unconsecrated bread is not called the Body, and consecrated is called the Body, this directly implies a belief that a supernatural change has taken place at the point of consecration. The third and final type is a statement which attributes or demands extraordinary reverence for the consecrated species itself, and not merely the solemnity of communion in this sacrament.
We will summarize the significance of each type of statement and add some light commentary where expedient. The appendix will contain a few brief responses to anticipated objections as well as some scholarly support for early Christian belief in this doctrine and suggestions for further reading.
I – Affirmation of Change During Consecration
II – Simple Identification of Consecrated Species as the Body and Blood
III – Demand of Extraordinary Reverence
IV – Appendix
Introduction
The claim that the Church fathers believed in Transubstantiation is not a claim that any particular father commanded a precise understanding of the doctrine as formulated by Trent. Any given Church father could no sooner express this doctrine precisely in its developed form than could any given ante-Nicene father express the Niceno-Constantinoplitan doctrine of the Trinity. Yet this does not mean either that they did not believe it, or even that it existed in mere “seed form.” The Nicene doctrine of the Trinity can be detected not only in the early Christian writings and in the New Testament, it is an unavoidable development. That is, anything other than the Niceno-Constantinopolitan doctrine of the Trinity would be contrary to the Tradition of the Church. Likewise, the affirmations that the fathers made about the Eucharist were not only compatible with Transubstantiation, they were incompatible with anything less......read entire article....
http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/12/church-fathers-on-transubstantiation/
TRANSUBSTANTIATION
Definition
"The complete change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ's body and blood by a validly ordained priest during the consecration at Mass, so that only the accidents of bread and wine remain. While the faith behind the term itself was already believed in apostolic times, the term itself was a later development. With the Eastern Fathers before the sixth century, the favored expression was meta-ousiosis, "change of being"; the Latin tradition coined the word transubstantiatio, "change of substance," which was incorporated into the creed of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. The Council of Trent, in defining the "wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the wine into the blood" of Christ, added "which conversion the Catholic Church calls transubstantiation" (Denzinger 1652). after transubstantiation, the accidents of bread and wine do not inhere in any subject or substance whatever. Yet they are not make-believe they are sustained in existence by divine power. (Etym. Latin trans-, so as to change + substantia, substance: transubstantio, change of substance.)"
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=36918
5:01, 5:05, 5:11, 5:30 and 5:30
From the comments to the article at CRIPPLE-gate:
MatthewRy • 6 months ago
"I'm glad to see Protestants reading church fathers. The author being a Protestant seeks out crumbs from the vast feast that is church fathers on the real presence doctrine. It would be very good for anyone reading this post to go seek out the passages quoted in the article and read them in the context they were written in. No one who does that will come away with the conclusions that the author came up with.
The fathers are very very clear about this doctrine. They teach what the Catholic Church teaches. Which makes sense since they were all Catholic. Not just Roman Catholic but eastern churches teach this. Oriental churches teach this. In fact all churches dating back to the time of apostles teach this.
Read the fathers. It will do you good. It will clear away the teachings of men like Calvin and Luther and other men who ignore the truth and puff up their own errors. In fact read even early reformers who also held some version of real presence.
If you don't like to read history because you are afraid of what you will see, read the bible. I find it very interesting that the only place in the whole bible where Jesus's disciples leave him because of doctrine is when he insists time and time again that the true bread from heaven is his flesh and true drink is his blood. Not a symbol. No one would leave him if he was talking about a symbol. How would that make any sense? This doctrine is so clear in the bible that it boggles my mind that the apparent bible Christians miss it!!!!
It happens of course because you read the bible through Protestant traditions of men. Putting your errors first then trying To read them into the text of the bible and the church fathers.
Just few quotes from the people that the author quotes as being against the Catholic understanding (which is the biblical understanding):
Jusin Martyr
"And this food is called among us Eucharistia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined.
For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." - (First Apology, 66)
cont...
cont..
Clement of Alexandria
"The Blood of the Lord, indeed, is twofold. There is His corporeal Blood, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and His spiritual Blood, that with which we are anointed. That is to say, to drink the Blood of Jesus is to share in His immortality. The strength of the Word is the Spirit just as the blood is the strength of the body. Similarly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, - of the drink and of the Word, - is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word.",
-"The Instructor of the Children". [2,2,19,4] ante 202 A.D.,
"The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. 'Eat My Flesh,' He says, 'and drink My Blood.' The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!",
-"The Instructor of the Children" [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D.. ,
Also it may be a shock to our protestant brothers and sisters but the church like the church fathers (doh) teach both that the eucharist is real presence and a symbol.
From the council of Trent:
"This, indeed, the most Holy Eucharist has in common with the other sacraments, that is a “symbol of a sacred thing and a visible form of an invisible grace (DS 1639)"
- See more at: http://www.catholicconvert.com...
The fathers and the church are consistent and teach the same. It takes a protestant to distort the clear teaching of the church, church fathers, and the bible. Why? Because it doesn't agree with their traditions of men!"
http://thecripplegate.com/did-the-early-church-believe-in-transubstantiation/
More comments from CRIPPLE - gate:
KPM
As Luther said,
"I would rather drink blood with a Papist than mere wine with a Zwinglian"
http://thecripplegate.com/did-the-early-church-believe-in-transubstantiation/
*************************
Christian Finne > KPM • 6 months ago
KPM, you and your romanistic friends are cannibals! Are you so
stupid that when Jesus said I am the door, that he means that he is a
door? Or what about the way, the light or the bread of life? Give me a break man, and don't be such a fool!
KPM > Christian Finne • 6 months ago
Yo Christian! Careful who you call a fool, homeboy. The majority of Protestant Christians in the world today (and all Christians throughout the history of the church) have taken Jesus' words literally here. It's a minority of Christians worldwide who don't take Christ's words regarding the supper literally. Huss, Wycliff and Luther all took Christ's words literally regarding the supper, and without these dudes, we'd still be attending church services in Latin! Certainly, you're not going to call them romanistic cannibals, stupid, and fools, are you?
Also, Christ says, "I am the door" in a couple of places, but he doesn't go out of his way to clarify that he's actually speaking literally, and not metaphorically.
Jesus doesn't say, for example, "I am the door, indeed (i.e. truly), and unless you turn my door knob and open me you can't get into heaven." However, when it comes to the supper, he goes out of his way to clarify, "My body is truly food and my blood is truly wine."
He also repeats this teaching at the Last Supper, saying "This IS my body."
What do you think Paul means when he says, "Whoever eats without DISCERNING the body and blood of the Lord is guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord"?
Does Paul say anything about it being symbolic?
There doesn't seem to be one instance in the scripture of the Lord's Supper being referenced as a symbol.
Do some reading of church history, my friend. This teaching is not "romanish" only, it is Lutheran, it is Anglican/Episcopalean, it is Methodist. Calvin believed the sacraments were sacraments and a means of grace, and not just symbols. He didn't affirm the Real Presence, but he did see them as more than just a symbol.
The only people in the history of the church to reject the sacraments in such an extreme manner are Anabaptist, Baptists, and heretical restoration movements. This isn't historic, reformation, or biblical Christianity. It's innovative. It's new. It's a-historical. It's dangerous.
http://thecripplegate.com/did-the-early-church-believe-in-transubstantiation/
Thanks Susanna (I mean Anonymous) ....
Your copy & paste Roman Catholic disinformation and propaganda is extremely helpful. Who needs the Bible ... right?
By the way, do you have any opinions other than what you have been programmed to believe by the MEN of your "church?"
Anon,11:05 AM and 11:09 AM; the matter contained in your posts and weblink has already been disproven through the posts from the website: www.thecrippledgate.com
The early Church did NOT believe in Transubstantiation as the above posts from the aforementioned website clearly have shown!
Christine, Jesus Christ said where two or three (Bible believing, Holy Spirit filled born-again Christians ) are gathered, He is there in the midst. However, this real presence of Jesus Christ in Spirit is certainly NOT what is meant by transubstantiation, which literally means the act of changing substance, i. e., the bread and wine literally become the physical flesh and blood of Jesus Christ yet appear to remain bread and wine. Transubstantiation is utter blasphemy and pagan nonsense, and goes against completely Jesus Christ's reasons for the communion!
Also, as earlier stated, Jesus Christ Himself was present at the Last Supper and it took place BEFORE His Crucifixion, also He obviously partook!
Marko, yes, interesting.
The Institute for Digital Archaeology website says the New York installation will take place in September, perfect timing as this would be just prior to our national election.
This statement appears on the IDA website:
"By using digital techniques to map and preserve monuments and other aspects of shared human history, we are able to ensure that nobody can deny history or dictate that their narrative or ideology stands above the shared story of all humanity and our shared aspiration to live together in harmony."
- His Excellency Mohammed Abdullah Al Gergawi, Minister of Cabinet Affairs and The Future, Dubai UAE, Managing Director of Dubai Museum of the Future Foundation
http://digitalarchaeology.org.uk/
The Roman Catholic "church" BEGAN in the 4th. century when Roman Emperor Constantine, after his supposed "conversion," he incorporated Roman Paganism with a mixture of Christian symbolism and began Rome's State Religion. This was all done in order to placate the Pagan Roman citizens of Constantine's time. Precisely what we have today with the modern day RCC.
All this nonsense about Roman Catholic "doctrine & dogma" from the 1st. century is just that .... nonsense! Proven by the fact that dozens and dozens of Rome's beliefs evolved, changed, and were added to over the centuries. AND, it continues to "change" as the WORLD changes. Why? Because it is what it always has been, "pleasers of men, rather than pleasers of God."
Holy Scripture Volume IV
The Ground and Pillar of Whose Faith?
(or what William Webster and David King don't tell you)
http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num49.htm
Jews were not to drink blood (Lev 3:17). The Last Supper, as has been correctly noted above, took place before the Crucifixion, which changed the nature of the Covenant. God does not contradict himself. Therefore transubstantiation did not take place on the occasion when Jesus instituted Holy Communion and said "This... is my blood." That is the precedent for all future Communions.
All the Torah prohibitions, WHICH STILL APPLY AS PER ACTS 15 APOSTOLIC COUNCIL, IT BEING FROM NOAH, on blood eating refer to that of dead animals. Or reiterate what was already about that.
The issue is, that the blood is the life, and blood is given poured out for our souls in sacrifice, OT animals NT Jesus Christ, so must not be treated as common food or carelessly. It is impossible to eradicate all blood, the Act 15 prohibition refers to "things strangled" so no exsanguination at all was done.
The blood from something living is not discussed.
Jesus was alive at the first Eucharist, and all other Eucharists were done after He came back permanently to life THEREFORE not under the prohibition.
Sabbath keeping, though maybe older than Moses, is listed as a point of a sign of the Covenant with YHWH under Moses, so is supeceded in Christ.
omots....
Interesting quote from the IDA as well. The whole idea of "digitizing" history, so it cannot be argued with, rubs me the wrong way. Digital records can be tampered with.
We are living in an age where the digital record is becoming the authoritative record, and there will be no higher authority to appeal to if that record conflicts with what you claim is real. In other words, what my own eyes and ears tell me is true will not be accepted as true if "the computer" disagrees with me.
There already exists, for most of us, two versions of ourselves - the flesh and blood one, and the "digital" one that is the sum total of all the information stored in all the computers about who we are - our medical, legal, financial and other personal records, any electronic writings we've made - emails, blog posts, comments - all combined to form a digital signature that is considered the REAL YOU. And if the flesh and blood You wants to disagree with the digital You, well then, good luck with that.
Lives can be, and probably have been, destroyed because the digital records of a person were tampered with. At the very least, I know it happens in the movies. :^)
One of my favorite movies showing this is The Net, starring Sandra Bullock.
Ray B, 11:38 A.M.
LOL If I am Susanna, then you must be the fine copy-paster of Protestant disinformation at 5:01, 5:05, 5:11, 5:20 and 5:30 and 5:39 P.M. Thank YOU!
"Christine, Jesus Christ said where two or three (Bible believing, Holy Spirit filled born-again Christians ) are gathered, He is there in the midst. However, this real presence of Jesus Christ in Spirit is certainly NOT what is meant by transubstantiation"
Those are totally separate issues. every time two or three are gathered together in His Name they are not doing the Eucharist. the TERM "real presence" is used to refer to His presence in the EUCHARIST not His presence among gathered believers.
His presence among gathered believers however is part of the basis for His realer
presence in the Eucharist if it is performed. an old tradition is that it never be done by only one a second must be present, and perhaps that derives from this.
Anonymous Anonymous said...11:57 AM
Holy Scripture Volume IV
The Ground and Pillar of Whose Faith?
(or what William Webster and David King don't tell you)
http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num49.htm
In I Timothy 3:15 the Church is referenced as the 'Pillar and Ground of Truth.
Let us look at the words of Christ to understand what is being said here:
John 14:6 Jesus saith .., I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; ......for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
John 15:26 ..... whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, ....
John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth:
John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Mat 13:23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word
I Timothy 3:15 is a typical one-liner verse, that the Catholic use to develop their whole economy of salvation as only through the Roman Church, when we see from multitudes of other scripture, that Jesus is the Pillar of Truth, and that we the hearer of the word, is the Ground of Truth, and that the Word IS the Truth. And contrary to the Catholic teaching that the Bible does not interpret itself, these verses in John does show quite the opposite.
BTW Google it! It is not some cut and paste theology, it is a study of the word.
The scriptures were abbreviated for space considerations. Go to the references yourself and read them in context.
Anonymous RayB said...11:46 AM
The Roman Catholic "church" BEGAN in the 4th. century when Roman Emperor Constantine, after his supposed "conversion," he incorporated Roman Paganism with a mixture of Christian symbolism and began Rome's State Religion. This was all done in order to placate the Pagan Roman citizens of Constantine's time. Precisely what we have today with the modern day RCC.
All this nonsense about Roman Catholic "doctrine & dogma" from the 1st. century is just that .... nonsense! Proven by the fact that dozens and dozens of Rome's beliefs evolved, changed, and were added to over the centuries. AND, it continues to "change" as the WORLD changes. Why? Because it is what it always has been, "pleasers of men, rather than pleasers of God."
The first Major SCHISM that came among the 'People of the Way' was that in 313AD with the political nationalization of the Church in Rome by the Pontifix Maximus Constantine. That schism, with its political backing and might, bullied all other People of the Way, into bowing to Rome.
Dan Bryan
Consantine did nothing of the kind. I used to believe the garbage you wrote, but I learned better.
As someone said, how could men who resisted under the worst tortures and death give in to an emperor (who in fact was awed by the martyrs there who had survived, kissed the empty eye socket of one man whose had been gouged out.
Nicea I was called to settle the arian dispute which it did but it flared up again later at times.
the canons and dogmatic definitions and even some minutes of the meetings of the great church councils can be found online, including at ccel.org a Calvinist site. go educate yourself.
kindly specify numbering each of them WHICH beliefs adding up to dozens and dozens are at issue?
Christianity in those days was not dominated by rome but by BYANTIUM were the Nicene and other councils were held.
Exactly right , 12:02 PM. No further discussion is needed on the subject.
It has been clearly shown from the writings of early Christians that EO and RC cult members love to misquote and quote out of context, both textually and historically, as well as the facts of the Lord’s Last Supper, etc, that transubstantiation is an erroneous heresy at best, yea even blatant blasphemy!
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...2:58 PM
Dan Bryan
Consantine did nothing of the kind. I used to believe the garbage you wrote, but I learned better.
And further the 2nd Schism occurred when the Romanish church split the church into two unequal parts, that of the Hierarchy with the least membership but the most power and that of the Laity, devoid of the Word but totally dependent upon the Hierarchy.
The 3rd Schism in the Roman church was that of the EO which speaks for itself.
The 4th Schism is when the Roman Church decided to excommunicate its brethren that would dare read and understand the Word independent of the Hierarchy. The 4th schism was an act of God.
The 5th Schism is that of the Jesuit creating a 'Dark Side' not unlike the New Age concepts made manifest? White Pope confessing to a Black Pope.
Or did the dark and light side concepts of the New Age come form that of the Roman Church?
anon 3:17
all that's been clearly shown is the ability of the DISHONEST to spin a couple of ambiguous statements (which were explaining howcome the flesh is there but invisible) to make EXPLICIT LITERALIST STATEMENTS out to be other than what they said.
3rd schism as you call it ignorantly was NOT of EO from Rome but Rome from EO.
the rest is garbage. did you read what I referred to St. Bishop Cyril of Jerusalem saying to his catechumens?
Using the collapse comments button I see the google queen is ruling and lording over this blog again. Same old, different day, and Constance just lets it happen.
This place is full of her merely googled beliefs to flood the whole space.
What a joke, and what a waste.
yeah, how about you people? you fill this blog month after month with your same old same old. no one is going to join your cult whatever it is. you don't like RC don't go to an RC church. you think your postings are important wisdom. anyone who can "gain" from it already has, so move over and let the other people who want to talk about new age and new world order have a break. you are wrecking this blog.
go spread your manure at http://cumbeyblogwreckers.blogspot.com and let Constance's blog have some peace. I wouldn't post so much truth if you didn't post so much lies.
1:01 PM, you viper! The information contained in the cripple gate webpage is the direct words from early those Christians cited, which YOUR Roman Pagan Cult loves to MISQUOTE! THEIR WORDS REFUTE your NONSENSE that they advocated TRANSUBSTANTIATION, they didn't (so are you accusing Tertullian et al of spreading disinformation as the webpage DIRECTLY cites them)!
So, child of the Devil, you can keep lying and jesuitically saying black is white and white is black but facts are facts and the devilish doctrine of transubstantiation which you promote is fallacy!
Anon 4:10 PM, I'm surprised her little green and gray men (in white coats) haven't "come to take her away, ha ha hee hee haha "....
She's nuttier than a squirrel's breakfast yet as bitter as rattlesnake's venom!
-anon 4:10
you are the viper. the words quoted from those writers at cripplegate are PRECISELY
THE SAME WORDS RC AND EO QUOTE.
and in those quotes there are only two that appear ambiguous, obviously out of context of explaining how this is supernatural aka spiritual hence not visibly flesh and blood.
it is you and lying spin meister at cripplegate who twist them.
READ THOSE QUOTES FROM JUSTIN MARTYR AGAIN AND WHAT PART OF BECOMES FLESH ND BLOOD AFTER THE PRAYERS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
Christine 3:49,
You are wrong.
Eastern Orthodoxy broke away from Rome.
1054 and All That
The Norman conquest of southern Italy helped touch off the Great Schism between Eastern and Western Christendom. When the Catholic Normans took over the Byzantine-Rite Greek colonies in southern Italy, they compelled the Greek communities there to adopt the Latin-Rite custom of using unleavened bread for the Eucharist. This caused great aggravation among the Greek Catholics because it went against their ancient custom of using leavened bread.
In response, Patriarch Cerularius ordered all of the Latin-Rite communities in Constantinople to conform to the Eastern practice of using leavened bread. You can imagine the uproar that ensued. The Latins refused, so the patriarch closed their churches and sent a hostile letter to Pope Leo IX.
What followed next was a tragedy of errors. In an attempt to quell the disturbance, the pope sent a three-man delegation, led by Cardinal Humbert, to visit Patriarch Cerularius, but matters worsened. The legates presented the patriarch with the pope’s reply to his charges. Both sides managed to infuriate each other over diplomatic courtesies, and when the smoke cleared, a serious rift had developed. This was not, however, the actual break between the two communions. It’s a popular myth that the schism dates to the year 1054 and that the pope and the patriarch excommunicated each other at that time, but they did not.
Orthodox bishop Kallistos Ware (formerly Timothy Ware) writes, "The choice of Cardinal Humbert was unfortunate, for both he and Cerularius were men of stiff and intransigent temper. . . . After [an initial, unfriendly encounter] the patriarch refused to have further dealings with the legates. Eventually Humbert lost patience, and laid a bull of excommunication against Cerularius on the altar of the Church of the Holy Wisdom. . . . Cerularius and his synod retaliated by anathematizing Humbert (but not the Roman Church as such)" (The Orthodox Church, 67).
The New Catholic Encyclopedia says, "The consummation of the schism is generally dated from the year 1054, when this unfortunate sequence of events took place. This conclusion, however, is not correct, because in the bull composed by Humbert, only Patriarch Cerularius was excommunicated. The validity of the bull is questioned because Pope Leo IX was already dead at that time. On the other side, the Byzantine synod excommunicated only the legates and abstained from any attack on the pope or the Latin Church."
There was no single event that marked the schism, but rather a sliding into and out of schism during a period of several centuries, punctuated with temporary reconciliations. The East’s final break with Rome did not come until the 1450s.
Attempts at Reconciliation
"Even after 1054 friendly relations between East and West continued. The two parts of Christendom were not yet conscious of a great gulf of separation between them. . . . The dispute remained something of which ordinary Christians in East and West were largely unaware" (Ware, 67).
This changed when the Byzantine Empire collapsed suddenly in 1453. A soldier forgot to lock one of the gates of the fortified city of Constantinople, and the Turks sacked the city. With the Turks in control of the capital city, the rest of the empire crumbled quickly. Under pressure from Muslims, most of the Eastern churches repudiated their union with Rome, and this is the split that persists to this day. The current Eastern Orthodox communion dates from the 1450s, making it a mere six decades older than the Protestant Reformation.
www.catholic.com/tracts/eastern-orthodoxy
So..how about you go full time to drum up some business and get off the dole doing the posting for Mike Tinge to advertise his psychic services?
Surely there's a demand for it since there are a good many out there these days who love their lies like you do.
Together you both make a real dynamic gruesome twosome, so he can "read 'em" and you can "fix 'em".
Such a deal ;) .
No, fornicating with an unrepentant " ex " Satanist, blaspheming and Gnostic Cretine, you are the Viperess herself here!
Go back and read the Cripple Gate webpage yourself, Mary quite Contrary to the truth, you rebellious parent-hating scorpion!
As the above anon has shown, you will see YOUR Cult and the RC Cult have completely removed the historical and textual context and deny the ACTUAL entire syntax of what is said by Tertullian and others, which is CONTRARY TO your false doctrine of TRANSUBSTANTIATION!
JUSTIN MARTYR -- THE FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN
CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.
"And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. " http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html
IS THE FLSH AND BLOOD OF THAT JESUS WHO WAS MADE FLESH.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-dialoguetrypho.html
CHAPTER XLI -- THE OBLATION OF FINE FLOUR WAS A FIGURE OF THE EUCHARIST.
Malachi about sacrifice being offered by gentiles is about the Eucharist
from cripplecrap
Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 110): “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1).
THT IS VERY UNEQUIVOCAL THAT IT IS THE LITERAL FLESH AND BLOOD OF CHRIST.
Tertullian (160–225): “[T]he flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead).
SAME SOURCE.
Augustine (354–430): “I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ” (Sermons 227).
http://thecripplegate.com/did-the-early-church-believe-in-transubstantiation/
IS the Body of Christ....IS the blood of Christ.
Cyprian's remark about representation is in line with the doctrine that the MATTER as well as form of the sacrament is needed to be correct, that it be wine because Jesus used wine and though RC may use white wine it should be RED wine because blood is red, and these similar to flesh and blood representatons being presented to God are then turned into Christ's Body and Blood.
non 4:57
is a wrong pictureentirely. the repudiation of the false council of Florence was immediate. it was expected by all that Rome would renounce its errors and rejoin the true church. St. Mark of Ephesus alone stood against the pressure from Byzantine emperor seeking roman and venetian help against the turks and from the roman representatives and those who signed were flogged and jailed in some cases or bitterly wept in repentance in other cases.
relations were strained all along.
Wrong Cretine! In your utter thickness you still fail to keep things in their historical context. So, as no doubt your school teachers and your longsuffering mom had to say all too often, Cretine, do it again!
The break from EO by Rome (the reverse is romanist propaganda lies like your mistranslation in the adultery exemption for divorce and remarriage not being itself adultery, you mistranslate fornication as unlawful marriages contrary to all religious and secular use of the term porneia from which we get the word pornography, art of or about whores).
began over time as the roman pope got more uppity, fasting was done on Satudays, meat from animals killed without exsanguination even blood added like blood sausage was allowed, and many other deviations. A major one was the filioque, opposed by at least one pope but validated by another.
a wrong dipute was over use of leavened and unleavened bread in the Eucharist resulting in BOTH sides engaging in sacrilege against each other's Eucharists, since there were Byzantine churches in southern Italy which had briefly been transferred by a prior emperor to constatinople jurisdiction and back again later, and latin churches in Constantinople why I don't know.
THE MIRACLE OF LANCIANO WAS PRE SCHISM AND INVOLVED AZYMES UNLEAVENED BREAD, SHOWING THE EAST WAS WRONG ON THIS ONE POINT.
this retaliatory closure of the latin churches after Rome closed the Greek churches, and the filioque were the last straw for EO, when Cardinal Humbert
placed a bill of excommunication on the altar during Holy Liturgy, and Constantinople responded in kind
(popes had been excommunicated before incl. by a council that Rome signed off on late)
and the rest of the patriarchates sided with Constantinople.
you are in schism and semi heretical.
ANON 5:31
I HAVE READ THE ORTHDOX HISTORIANS VERSION OF EVENTS. YOUR HISTORY TEACHERS HAVE ONLY READ ROME'S LIES.
Is anyone concerned about Mary Christine Erikson Aka Justina's ungodly lifestyle? It is imperative that her church elders know what sort of sinful woman they have in their congregation, wrongfully taking communion.
Give them a call, write an email, post on their website if possible, fax them, write to them and let them know just who she is, shacked up out of wedlock and having fornicated with her unrepentant rebellious " ex " Satanist and "Resident Seer" , who she advertises for. Plus her false accusations, wacky ideas of aliens needing salvation, lies, heresies, chakras, vampires, hatred of her poor passed away mom, etc.
You'd be doing her and them a favor in the long run.
Here are the details of that unfortunate place which suffers her on Sundays:
Saint Anna Eastern Orthodox Church
1001 Stone Canyon Dr
Roseville, CA 95661
Phone: 916-772-9372
Fax: 916-773-9310
Website: www.saintanna.org
Do get in touch, they're only a phone call away!
Here's another meeting place location for Saint Anna Eastern Orthodox Church just in case:
114 N Sunrise Ave Ste C1
Roseville, CA 95661
Get in touch and let them know. Why wait for someone else to do it? The more contacting them about the self-styled "infowolf " the better her chances of repentance!
my previous priest was up to speed on the matter of Mike and myself, and as I said we are celibate. which renders the whole thing moot.
meanwhile, why don't you post your own specs so I can find out and publicize dirt on you?
given the defense shown for my biological so called mother, I strongly suspect someone here is engaged in all kinds of child abuse, backing it up with Scripture out of context to brainwash the kid and/or even doing telepathic attack on the child, and child protective services need to be notified.
To commentators on the blog .
Christine seems to refuse to listen to sound doctrine.
She is living in open sin using the defence that she is a biblically a concubine.
I think all that any one can do now is pray and give the matter to God... I do not believe she can say that no one has given her the gospel its now a matter of choice on her part.
This of course does not mean that we should stop correcting her false doctrine but note that she has rejected repeated counsel and is unlikely to change without devine intervention.
I fully agree with you, 6:50 PM.
She has been refuted, rebuked, corrected and exposed and yet still she refuses to repent! She seems adamant in wearing out the saints and destroying this blog.
It may seem harsh on the surface but I think the proposal for as many people here as possible to contact her church is a good one and may lead to her repentance.
The reason, according to her, she has suspended fornicating with the man she is cohabiting out of wedlock with (as though husband and wife or concubine, according to her) is because of his heart condition... not because she is convicted it is wrong and sinful in the first place!
She accuses her mom of abusing her telepathically, the sort of delusions held by the demonically possessed. It is a sad irony that she is not a safe influence around children and so even more vital that her church elders be informed, at least for the sake of the kids!
Christine 5:19 P.M.
"from cripple crap........."
LOL!!!!!!!
Constance,
Aren't you concerned that the comments at 6:35P.M. and 6:42P.M. could leave you open to litigation for defamation of character?
I think that those comments cross a line 9:30 PM, but does it cross that one?
http://visupview.blogspot.com/2016/04/le-cercle-clerical-fascism-and.html
6:42 PM is certainly wrong in suggestion and 6:44 PM is certainly warped of mind.
This place is getting weirder every day.
Quit arguing with a Pharisee 6:42 PM.
Thanks for ruining the blog, Erikson.
You may have heard of the merger between the NYSE and EuroNet markets.
What quietly happened from there was the set up an Intercontinental Exchange ICE
Additionally, now that the EuroNet helped and facilitated the NYSE to go global, it was then spun off.
https://www.intercontinentalexchange.com/about
The globalization of these markets will create the environment of the next financial collapse to be global.
The world will clamor for an international currency after such a collapse.
No, the comments at 6:42 and the preceding comment don't cross a line at all!
There is no defamation of character, for all that has been said is information MCE has given here herself and/or carried out here by herself!
Many are exhausted and exasperated by her and her actions here. When one has an issue with another we are to tell them our issue(s) with him or her in private (this is as private as it gets, for though it is not private here yet her comments here with which the issues have arisen have not been private either), when that person persists and still refuses to listen then we are instructed to tell the matter to the church. Her church details have been provided so we can do just that, as it may bring her to repentance.
If she still doesn't listen THEN she should be treated as a heathen!
So, once again I urge you to think of her rebellious spirit and how that may be tamed through admonition and her repentance.
"then we are instructed to tell the matter to the church. Her church details have been provided so we can do just that, as it may bring her to repentance. "
that presupposes you are in the same church community. according to you, the EO isn't even Christian but part of the Babylonian harlot. that puts you in a rather
odd light.
it is you people who ruin the blog. if you wouldn't turn it into a forum for your
Hisloppian agenda and to harass people not only myself but Susanna and other RCs,
and if you wouldn't refuse rebuke and correction
and if you wouldn't scorn Scripture and history
you wouldn't be seeing all this.
If your concern is to argue with me, why not post over at http://cumbeyblogwreckers.blogspot.com instead? If you are trying to convert Susanna or anyone (which you probably are) you are not going to get anywhere.
Everyone already knows your views and arguments.
you have been refuted over and over FROM SCRIPTURE and keep at it anyway. you have been refuted from early church writers' quotes I reposted a bit back, including some that cripplecrap posted that show his spin on the other samples is wrong, and you keep at it anyway.
you are the ones ruining the blog. only you. no one else.
you are hypocrites and the pattern of your behavior points to you DELIBERATELY ruining the blog
you know how susanna and I will react. you know it is pointless. even regarding me you admit it is pointless, yet you never drop the subject. WHY?
a couple living celibately will not have a problem with RC as has happened when remarried couples want to get communion, they become celibate. I doubt it will make me trouble in the EO.
by the way, whoever posted that thing about Mike wearing a "vile" green jacket,
you sound really faggy using "vile" to refer to an aesthetic rather than a moral
issue. Are you sure you don't have a secret life needing exposure and harassing
about and reporting on to whoever?
Dan Bryan,
from that link "Today, the result is an ecosystem of markets, clearing houses, data and listings services, and technology that combine to provide transparent access to global capital and derivatives markets."
note "derivatives." that is what brought on the prior crash and helped bring on
the real estate crash. And if it weren't for the equity racket, you wouldn't have
fools trying to ramp up their property value (and taxes).
derivatives were illegal under Glass-Steagall, until Clinton got the derivatives
prohibition removed.
"Many are exhausted and exasperated by her and her actions here"
many are exasperated by YOUR actions here. Susanna, at least one RC anon probably more than one, myself, and at least one anon who has made critical remarks in
months past about your behavior. and whoever doesn't post because they can't find anything about the new age here just your behavior.
Constance suggested no more than one Christine bashing post a day, something you never honored. also has more than once called out your RC bashing behavior which is what it is. kicking me out won't solve the problem unless she kicks out Susanna and all RCs and RC friendlies also, because you will start your barrage of worthless and new age irrelevant posts on them (as you have done whenever I fell silent).
and if she did so, you would be busy scratching each other's backs about the whole subject on other blogs you read and post about here.
YOU MCE, are NOT living celebately at all. You are hooked up and shacked up with an unrepentant rebellious " ex " Satanist who is, according to you, still dabbling in the occult and is evidently possessed and yet you worship and glorify as your "Resident Seer", lauding 'his sixth sense talents'.
You have boasted about fornicating with him, and supposedly have only postponed your "concubine" 'duties' and "stuff" due to his "heart condition", and not because of conviction by the Holy Spirit! Also, you have argued that for economic reasons you are best cohabiting with him outside of wedlock! As long as he keeps bringing in those fares, huh? Your dea of celibate is nigh on that of a hooker: sell a bit here , sell a bit there...
Then there's the matter of your "ad" Ray B, Dan and others caught you out on, add that to the list of all your demonically inspired heretical nonsense here, your lying, coarse language, false accusations, quarreling spirit, and unforgiving hatred of your deceased mother.... the list goes on and on!
Now, hopefully those at Saint Anna can straighten you out once they get whiff of your postings here: I for one shall certainly make them aware of the kind of witchcraft adoring woman they have in their congregation.
Until then, I am done with you!
"YOU MCE, are NOT living celebately at all"
celibate means no sex. I have already stated that. I am engaged to him and wear a ring. most people think we are married legally. biblically we are married. you are the one with a quarrelling spirit, I stand up for the truth. you are the heretics, denying most of the faith of the church from earliest days. I do not practice witchcraft nor do I condone it. a glance at my blog http://fightthenewage.blogspot.com will show you that.
I don's lie. you or some of you anons and dan and rayb DO lie. so I think does paul.
you have no credibility with me and never did.
MCE, yet again you lie, attack the church, and implicitly spread false doctrine!
You accuse your poor deceased, no doubt longsuffering, mother of all sorts of nonsense, such as abusing you telepathically and even have gone as far as to suspect the poor lady of murder! If you had truly suspected her of such, then it is YOUR legal duty to inform the authorities. As far as I see it, through the lens of Holy Writ, the only one guilty of murder, indeed matricide, is YOU MCE because you harbor hatred and unforgiving spirit in your heart and mind towards your dear old mom (even after she has passed away) , and your delusions and mental state are NO EXCUSE!
MCE, just because people in your congregation and elsewhere don't know you're living in sin, doesn't mean it is acceptable.
Just because you wear a ring and say you're engaged (really? Yet with no intention of marrying) doesn't make your cohabiting as a "concubine" with someone you have an unrepentant history of fornicating with, ok. Just because that is on hold due to his "heart condition" doesn't make your continued shacking up with your "Resident Seer ", an unrepentant rebellious " ex " Satanist, ok either!
Mary Erikson, you certainly have been willfully connected to witchcraft! You have promoted, lauded and glorified the ' special psychic powers ' of your " Resident Seer " here, and have been exposed here before for having posted in ' magic ' forums disseminating your nonsense on tantric sex magic!
You have also been caught out posting on NAM websites promoting all sorts of nonsense and "stuff".
Moreover, who can forget your audacious and shocking " ad " you posted here!
I repeat, we fit the biblical definition of marriage, public acknowledgement of each other as belonging to each other exclusive of others, and from your perspective Roman law usus marriage (live together a year and a day and you are married) would be "shacking up" at least during the first year. Yet Paul did not
denounce this when he went into details required because his audience did not have a Jewish background and had pagan cultural baggage. Sex or no sex we are not living in sin. concubinage is a poor comparison I threw in, because a concubine apparently was some category of subordinate like a servant as well as a mate, while the primary spouse was not subordinate except as regards what was not her own property.
In California we have no fault divorce, and marriage in the west is predicated on a legal contract with vows that are the terms of that contract. no fault divorce means separate at will and remarry. the legal process prevents eligibility for bigamy charges on remarriage.
That makes ALL marriages in California essentially "shacking up." they are inherently legally potentially temporary.
"celibate means no sex. I have already stated that."
Suppose his heart condition got better. What would you do then?
having the ability to see beyond the normal range of vision is not witchcraft.
I post on NAM sites to undermine their beliefs by showing flaws in their interpretation. sooner or later I bring in points from the Bible or Jesus Christ Himself as relevant. Such as His power to stop alien abduction and block mental telepathy attacks.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/How_The_American_Neoconservatives_Destroyed_Mankind%E2%80%99s_Hopes_For_Peace/50617/0/38/38/Y/M.html
Furthermore, Mary Erikson, you have been willfully connected to witchcraft! You have promoted, lauded and glorified the ' special psychic powers ' of your " Resident Seer " here, and have been exposed here before for having posted in ' magic ' forums disseminating your nonsense on tantric sex magic, etc!
You have also been caught out posting on NAM websites promoting all sorts of nonsense and "stuff".
Moreover, who can forget your audacious and shocking " ad " you posted here... and the list goes on!
"I post on NAM sites to undermine their beliefs by showing flaws in their interpretation. sooner or later I bring in points from the Bible or Jesus Christ Himself as relevant. Such as His power to stop alien abduction and block mental telepathy attacks."
You go there because you belong there, living under the power of what you have willingly subjected yourself to in the demonic realm and not repented of your sin, so you have no truth to tell. Something has abducted your mind and blocked the truth from penetrating your heart. MCE you are blind to this.
When you supposedly speak the "truth" (your own version and evident all over this blog) your words fall to the ground and blow in the wind because there is no Holy Spirit power in them. They are words of no value or use for righteousness and good,,,,just words to excuse yourself and accuse others,,,,no Holy Spirit in such display.
The word crippled was written earlier and got me to thinking about how your posts are so lame. Crippled and empty, all huff and puff of your deeply embedded spiritual pride.
The truth of God is in no way crippled, so how about you just hobble back over the the NAM sites and stay there? Your ideas and thoughts about the Bible especially, and life in general, are crippled to high for crutches.
When you finally see the light and know the truth, then we'll talk.
Christine @ 10:16am....
Paul Craig Roberts is a dupe on the Right who spouts the same propaganda lines from Russia as RT and others like it, and ends up being the same as the dupes on the Left. The details being discussed might be different, but the message is the same: The United States was and is the bad guy, and poor Russia is the good guy. That is a myth. Another myth is that the US military / industrial complex has "restarted" the Cold War.
1. The Cold War never ended.
2. We are DISMANTLING and DOWNSIZING our military, while Russia and China are rapidly building theirs. Does that indicate in any way that we are the aggressors??? No!
3. Russia is engaged in a massive propaganda and disinformation campaign to convince the world that they are justified in all their actions, which in the past couple years have so far included the invasion of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. They have designs on pushing further into NATO territory - Poland and the Baltic states are at the top of the list.
Dr. Paul Kengor wrote an excellent book called "Dupes" in which he demonstrates how the Soviet Union duped many on the Left into becoming fellow travelers or promoters of the Soviet system and Communism. To most Americans, that was obvious.
But the Right has also been duped into supporting policies that benefit Russia as well. Someone needs to write a "Dupes 2" documenting all of those. Paul Craig Roberts would be one of them. Antiwar.com, plus many others in the Libertarian camp would be listed.
Marko,
the only way he is duped is thinking that the Moslem Brotherhood is just a charitable
operation not radical, he doesn't have an intelligence background so likely can't
comprehend how an octopus can act.
everything he says I watched happening as it unfolded over the years. mostly,
Roberts is right.
DO YOU KNOW WHO HE IS? Roberts is one of the architechts of Reaganomics, and
later realized its flaws and wrote The Failure of Laissez faire Capitalism. This
guy has more credibility with his background and experience than Nyquist.
Take the Crimea thing. I am sure you are one of those who consider it "unilaterally
annexed" as part of "Russian aggression." Here's what happened. Crimea was
originally part of Russia, until Ukrainian origin Kruschev put in the Ukraine SSR.
In the Syria situation, this is the main port for Russia to operate out of. It has
always been a strategic naval base.
Nuland (caught taped on the phone discussing who to put in charge of Ukraine and
said that the US spent $5 billion (with a B which shows fiscal incompetence or
worse in itself) to make democracy in Ukraine, i.e., destabilize the existing
democracy which already had elections and so forth.
This flares up when Russia is working in support of Assad and put its foot down
about American plans to bomb Damascus or something like that. So of course That
naval base is targeted by targeting Kiev.
But the Russian majority there were not too happy with the Nazi dominated new
government (and cover up as they may it keeps popping up including the current head
or near head of the Sovboda or however you spell it neo Nazi party) and
CRIMEA DECLARED ITSELF A SOVEREIGN SEPARATE NATION STATE
AND THEN REQUESTED RUSSIA TO TAKE IT IN AS PART OF RUSSIA
and they did.
I watched all this develop on the detailed information on the Internet and some of
it got on the lamestream media also. Its not just RT. And that deal the gentleman's
agreement verbally to not expand NATO, which was violated, has been admitted to
existing by the US after years of denying it.
I can't source all this now, but a little searching would confirm it for you. I am
repeating a few years of information from many sources as the situations developed.
your points
1. the reset was supposed to end it, ditto the fall of the Berlin Wall.
2. that is very superficial. aggression isn't done militarily until the last phase of its development. the Arab Spring and Color Revolutions are aggression being the
work of the CIA.
3.I already addressed that. Donetsk requested to be taken in by Russia, but Russia refused. not stable enough and asking for trouble.
Cretine, my 2 cents worth...
I remember a poster exposing you with ample evidence because you were dabbling in 'magic forums, promoting 'tantric sex magic', demonic 'stuff' and 'so on'.
You have the audacity to boast of your "Resident Seer " comrade in sin's 'special psychic powers' , which you claim are due to a "unique eye condition, due to gene difference"..., even going so far as to post an "ad" for him here (which you deny through your teeth, despite the reliable witness of several posters here who saw it)!
I put it to you, that Mike Tingle's heart and eye issues are of a spiritual nature testament to his dancing with demons!
Sadly, neither of you realize the wretched state of your Godless rebellious hearts and utter blindness to the truth!
"I remember a poster exposing you with ample evidence because you were dabbling in 'magic forums, promoting 'tantric sex magic', demonic 'stuff' and 'so on'."
going into forums to dig up information on individuals and/or argue with them about
the downside of all that is not a bad thing.
as for the gene angle, he inherited it from his father's grandmother and I tested
his father, without his father knowing what I was doing. Before we met I put some
blessed oil on my right arm sleeve. to normal vision it was invisible.
all that evening he kept sneaking looks at my right arm. something had his attention.
there is nothing reliable about those posters. and one of them over a year ago tried
something similar, claiming I had posted something "vile" with obscenities then
deleted it which was another total lie, I had written a normal post without
obscenities and deleted and rewrote for more content and/or presentation issues.
No one who clings to the lies of Hislop after the exposes on him can be considered
reliable. hallucinating what they want to see or lying outright, take your pick.
Sorry, Christine, but all your "observations" were based on mainly disinformation (and you are right - it's not just RT). Hence, your conclusions are incorrect.
https://toinformistoinfluence.com/2015/04/18/putins-useful-idiots/
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...8:05 AM
Dan Bryan,
derivatives were illegal under Glass-Steagall, until Clinton got the derivatives
prohibition removed.
Christine, Everyone understands the derivative issue in the last crash, but few understood that Glass-Steagall was removed to pave the way for Market Globalization. Are you suggesting we need Global Governance to in-act a Glass-Steagall type regulation?
I didn't get it from putin. the news described what happened. the history speaks
for itself. you are obsessed with the past. and partnering with dangerous
provocation that can only result in disaster for the US.
of course, if my take on Daniel 7 is correct, this is decreed to happen. that doesn't mean you as an individual have to be part of the idiocy that brings it on.
Russia's origins are more Christian than ours. and Putin has been working against
the new world order and its bankster interests. disconnecting from the petrodollar
is an essential part of that, because the NWO is hosted like a parasite by EU-US.
Hum 5:43, these two points from your post about the "Res Seer" are likely connected...huh?
"...all that evening he kept sneaking looks at my right arm. something had his attention."
"...hallucinating what they want to see or lying outright, take your pick."
Could have it been a louse escaping the untidy floor?
Dan Bryan
"Are you suggesting we need Global Governance to in-act a Glass-Steagall type regulation?"
Global Government (governance is a spin term) would only work to create more trouble
not correct it. It is also bad even if it were aiming to do right, because there
would be no way to escape bad law and bad practices if all is under one law.
we in the USA need Glass Steagall back.
other countries need to be encouraged to adopt their own versions of this.
6:04
how typical to mix statements out of context and the contexts were totally unrelated
to each other. typically dishonest.
and it was a decent restaurant.
Lol 6:04 PM. ...
I think it is definitely a demonic delusion that is causing the special "sight" of M. Singe...
You drink, brush your teeth, bathe, and even swim in koolaid MCE.
That's your backdoor way to exalt your EO church. You are full of it (I won't say what).
Putin works both ends against the middle in every sector.
By now every nation is corrupted beyond turning. Where in blue blazes have you been? On Mars?The time is nearly here and God will step in when ready.
You aren't ready yourself, while still steeped in paganism and your religion on steroids.
Get a clue, church lady, and get right with God.
Marko said...5:56 PM
Sorry, Christine, but all your "observations" were based on mainly disinformation (and you are right - it's not just RT). Hence, your conclusions are incorrect.
https://toinformistoinfluence.com/2015/04/18/putins-useful-idiots/
Dear Marko,
This article peels the onion.
The dismantling of the arch enemy CCCP was only so that the cancer contained could spread to the 4 corners of the globe.
Look at America today. The media is Pravda all over again, only owned by the corporations.
The truth was that the CCCP was a disaster not much better than Cuba.
Everyone knew it but the western socialist media ignored or outright denied it.
I traveled to Kiev, Ukraine in 1990 after the wall came down.
The place was a a hell hole. Nothing worked every thing was in disrepair. The poverty and despair was palatable, every bit as bad as the Great Depression in the USA.
Did you receive such a confirmation or reporting of this from the western media?
Ronald's 'Great Tear Down this Wall Speech' closed that chapter of Globalization as intended, bringing the Gorbachev to the American door step. It was a farce.
Look at where we are! Capitalist Socialism is making room for Global Socialism. And we are going to welcome it with open arms. Americans Love Socialism!
http://dbreflections.blogspot.com/2010/12/americans-want-socialism.html
So all the media is owned, bought and even paid for.
Now Americans can even conceive voting for an all out Socialist.
Seven Earth Day Predictions That Failed Spectacularly ....
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...6:07 PM
we in the USA need Glass Steagall back.
other countries need to be encouraged to adopt their own versions of this.
You are missing the point. My point is not spin. The markets have ALREADY been merged as have the banks. There will be no Glass Steagall unless it is Global. USA has already lost it sovereignty.
Chritine, you were well and truly exposed here for your promotion of 'tantric sex magic' in witchcraft forums.
I remember clearly seeing those exposed posts of yours... you were flaunting your occult knowledge and take in it you were NOT , as you have just claimed: "going into forums to dig up information on individuals and/or argue with them about
the downside of all that..."
You can't deny this because many here saw it and you were thoroughly exposed. However, you deny your "ad" for the "Resident Seer's" psychic services because only a handful of people noticed it before you realized your mistake and quickly removed it before it could be copied or archived, so there is now no trace of it. Yes those witnesses were honest and reliable yet after they noted your "ad" you launched a vicious campaign to try and muddy their names, starting with Dan and then swiftly falsely accusing Ray B, etc, also!
I am on to you, lady!
And Russia's "captialism" is pristine. Just like Putin's religion ;).
You should go back there and stay since you hate America, that and motherhood like Paul said one time...(and probably even apple pie). You throw America under the bus while you've got your own racket going, your own "socialism" living of off others as you do.
You are patently dishonest living like a parasite. Unwed and ungrateful.
Somebody suggested you should keep advertising your Mr.'s psychic services and go earn that dishonest buck like lots of others earning their mammon do.
Get a clue..it's all under the bus these days, but shame on you for being one to take sore advantage.
anon 6:49
the very post to that forum that was reposted here was a bunch of arguments against
this stuff being a good idea.
I have never promoted sex magic and have a particular aversion for it.
it would be nice if you'd stop all this false accusing. you may have to answer to
God for it someday.
I've been kicked off a lot of occult related forums for arguing with them and
bringing Jesus into the matter and showing how some outrageous lies they told
about Christianity in general were false.
you cannot worship God and mammon. that's money. capitalism is not the Gospel.
no economic or political system is the Gospel. freedom is a tool not an absolute
value.
"I remember clearly seeing those exposed posts of yours... you were flaunting your occult knowledge and take in it you were NOT , as you have just claimed: "going into forums to dig up information on individuals and/or argue with them about
the downside of all that...""
what I learned shouldn't be applied to denounce and argue against such things?
"what I learned shouldn't be applied to denounce and argue against such things? "
If that was your intention. There was no gist of denunciation from you in what you had written on those sites.
Moreover, one should use the Holy Bible to denounce such things. Witchcraft is not exposed to the light of truth, rebuked and refuted by merely presenting how knowledgable you are about certain areas of the demonic realm aka 'magic'!
"you cannot worship God and mammon. that's money. capitalism is not the Gospel.
no economic or political system is the Gospel."
Who said it was?
You can't fix all the really dumb things (even hateful and evil things) you say here by back tracking. Besides there are way too many of them. You posts are hard to read (so I don't), but you're not hard to read. You are a loudmouth church lady with time on your hands, living off of others, affording you all the leisure time in the world to throw everybody here under the bus. You better get things right before the hammer comes down.
anon 7:21
showing how these things backfire and in some cases showing how such backfiring
gives credibility to Christian warnings against them, is denunciation.
""you cannot worship God and mammon. that's money. capitalism is not the Gospel.
no economic or political system is the Gospel."
Who said it was?"
"And Russia's "captialism" is pristine. Just like Putin's religion ;)."
seems to equate the two issues or at least see a relationship between them.
If you had some credibility in the first place, then perhaps @ 7:11 PM.
You need a real life. Not an internet one. You're wasting your time on earth going at it like this and your christian testimony is a backfire.
Did not equate the two at all, just spoke to how bad they both are.
You're so sure Putin is a Bible believing man huh?
Are you posting from Mars?
You often misunderstand most of what others say and say things that actually create misunderstanding. What is it with you?
I told you already, you need a real life and apparently a clue.
An honest living would help too.
There was no evidence of "Christian warning" in your 'tantric sex magic' posts on those demonic forums, Chritine. It was a showing off by you as to how much you knew on the topic: that is not credible denunciation at all and certainly not a Christian approach but is that of the heathen!
Can't you see? I suggest you get away as quickly as you can (quicker than you can remove an ad) from your "ex" Satanist "Resident Seer" and urgently seek deliverance and repent.
Constance,
Do you see how crazy this blog has become?
I honestly believe, if you banned Christine from posting here, it would help her mental, physical, and spiritual health!
Please, give it strong consideration.
I thought you people were done with me? still ranting?
as for "bible believing" that is definitely what you are NOT.
Putin's belief is what the bible talks aboiut and the liturgical practices
are what God established in the Temple and were taken over by early
Christians. To this got added more concern about martyrs as able to pray
for you being closer to God.
your so called bible belief repeatedly rejects points in the Bible.
as for no "Christian warning" Jesus got brought into some posts. people need to
hear things that mean something to them. (another thing you might learn if you
actually read ALL the Bible or entire books of it at one sitting or at most two.)
here's something to chew on. https://carm.org/new-age-witness
undermining their reliance on their practices and misuse of energy and so forth
is also an important thing to do.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/299609728/Your-Chakras-Target-of-New-Age-Deception
written by Christian whose other writings are more compatible with your nonsense so
I don't care for them, but this makes the whole new age notion look very bad.
anon 7:56
I don't out of the blue to argue with you people. you bring up stuff and keep
hounding. my discussion with MArko is an entirely different subject from what
you complain of. and which I don't discuss without your prompting.
It would be nice if you would SHUT UP AND LEAVE ME ALONE. then you wouldn't hear
anything. we all know what you think. you have no credibility with anyone here
outside your little clicque. you are wasting your breath. you are causing all the
trouble.
and at least one of you denies there is a new age movement! and claims to have thrown
Constance's books in the dumpster!
Constance,
why not just delete all anti RC posts that are not criticizing individual
representatives of it like the pope but get into the harlot church and
"bible believing" vs. rome and so forth? these people contribute nothing
and make the blog crazy. They force Susanna to explain over and over for
post after post. they contribute nothing and lie yes LIE and as you can
see on this page, stooped to combining two statements from different posts
on different subjects to give a false impression.
"...stooped to combining two statements from different posts
on different subjects to give a false impression."
What different posts were they, Chritine?
anon 8:40
get a life. its on this thread read for yourself.
Really now?
Here at Whatever Erikson thinks, er, I mean, uh, at What Constance thinks, it is
the beater of *herds of dead horses who is bellowing to Constance? And hiding behind Susanna's skirt? How manipulative is that!
That's crippled too high for crutches.
Mz. Erikson, when you are banned from here, The Problem goes away.
Don't want your life plastered in front of all of our faces. But you force it on everybody. Force. It.
How weird and anti-social is that?
This blog is called What Constance thinks. About exposing the New Age ever heard of it?
Post all you want about your drivel and the miserable disconnected dots of your googled life at your own rat's nest of a disinformation station.
You desperately need us. It's not the other way around.
Chritine, you cannot provide the details of the "two posts" you claim, and no evidence of ,"combining two statements FROM DIFFERENT POSTS on different subjects...", is evident on this thread!
Therefore you have either been, "hallucinating", or "lying outright" to "create a false impression"!
Ironically, now this is combining your words from two posts to present a TRUE IMPRESSION , thereby your own mouth condemns you!
You are a liar, Ms Erikson!
Btw, I have a life, and unlike you I work! You should study the ant and do likewise!
no you are the liar. both posts are on this page. read everything and find them.
Post their times so others may find them and find them easily or forever be known for the liar you truly are!
You always waste others' time whilst you continue your nonsense. You were proven wrong earlier several times so this is your response.
Now , if those two posts in question exist, post them!
You are a liar and a witch! Ray B and Dan Bryan were right about you!
"as for the gene angle, he inherited it from his father's grandmother and I tested
his father, without his father knowing what I was doing. Before we met I put some
blessed oil on my right arm sleeve. to normal vision it was invisible.
all that evening he kept sneaking looks at my right arm. something had his attention."
that was ONE subject.
"there is nothing reliable about those posters. and one of them over a year ago tried
something similar, claiming I had posted something "vile" with obscenities then
deleted it which was another total lie, I had written a normal post without
obscenities and deleted and rewrote for more content and/or presentation issues.
No one who clings to the lies of Hislop after the exposes on him can be considered
reliable. hallucinating what they want to see or lying outright, take your pick."
that was theSECOND SUBJECT.
totally unrelated to each other. yet you combine phrases from TWO UNRELATED SUBJECTS
TO CREATE SOME IMPRESSION OR OTHER.
they were from the same post, that I forgot, BUT THEY WERE TOTALLY DIFFERENT
SUBJECTS UNRELATED TO EACH OTHER.
you are the liar, as always.
I don't force anything on anyone like again I am falsely accused of
YOU PEOPLE FORCE ME TO TALK ABOUT THINGS BECAUSE YOU KEEP DRAGGING THEM UP.
and having some ability to see beyond normal range of light even if from a demon's
effects is not a 'delusion" which by definition is something that doesn't exist
and isn't real. Frankly this looks more like the ability of cats and dogs to
see things we don't see and react to them.
WHY SHOULD I WASTE TIME TALKING TO YOU? YOU DON'T WANT ANSWERS, YOU DON'T WANT
FACTS
YOU SCORN THE BIBLE while pretending to believe it, but not when it contradicts
your false god Hislop and your teachers and YOUR SELF EXALTING PRIDE.
you set yourselves up as judges and teachers but
you have NO WITNESS
you have NO CREDIBILITY
nothing.
you think you are going to correct or rebuke me? what make you think you can
have any effect except irritation on anyone who knows history and the Bible well
enough to see through you?
everything you accuse me of is how you have acted. not me.
YOU ACCUSE WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE WORDS YOU USE.
your whole style is arrogant.
exposing the NEw Age? you are the ones keeping that from being done. I have
addressed the NEw AGe but you keep dragging up things that have nothing to do
with a post of mine and then FALSELY claim that I force the information on you
which YOU DEMANDED I SPEAK ABOUT.
you are beneath contempt.
So you have finally had to admit it: there was NEVER two posts as you connivingly claimed at all!
You are a liar and the spiritual daughter of the father of lies!
Your poor mother, Mary Ellen Parrish Erikson must have rued the day she gave birth to you on that fateful day back on June 15, 1951 in San Francisco! Dragging your sorry self back to Palo Alto and having to deal with your borderline delusions must have been no easy task for that lovable old dear! Far away from her native Missouri and the support of her beloved sister, your Aunt Frances, and the decent Presbyterian family she so dearly loved and missed!
You hate and hated her for what? For going out of her senses as you accused her of conspiring against you and telepathically controling you? The poor dear had lost her husband, your father, Elliot Morris Erikson just 13 years after bringing you into the World and had to struggle the best she could, far away from family, to make ends meet!
You never once visited her in her old age, though she stayed in Palo Alto right up until she passed away in 2003 for her only daughter, you Mary Christine Erikson, to visit and reconcile with her but you never did!
Oh no, you were way too into the occult. Her little Mary Christine, filled with unwarranted mad hate and unforgiveness for her longsuffering mother. Oh how your mother must be turning in her grave if she knew her wayward girl would end up shacked up out of wedlock, fornicating with a witch and unrepentant Satanist!
On a side note: there is NOTHING Jewish about you either! You're about as Jewish as Jackie Khan, aren't you?
YOU are the one that betrayed your dear mother and not the other way around.
According to those of your 'new faith', you have been banned from
just about every Orthodox board out there on the net!
I wonder what the elders will make of all this down at Saint Anna's Roseville? We shall have to see now won't we! Hopefully it should finally push you to truly repent and seek deliverance and a God sanctioned life!
"So you have finally had to admit it: there was NEVER two posts as you connivingly claimed at all! "
you are the conniving one, the issue was not so much two posts as
TWO TOTALLY UNRELATED SUBJECTS THAT YOU MERGED TO GIVE A FALSE IMPRESSION.
I think you are a child abuser the way you defend that trash I've described, and
you got the wrong birthdate its June SIXTEENTH not 15th typical how you people get
things wrong.
"The poor dear had lost her husband, your father, Elliot Morris Erikson just 13 years after bringing you into the World and had to struggle the best she could, far away from family, to make ends meet! "
Elliot Morris (Epsteen not Erikson) is my GRANDFATHER'S name, he had my father change his last name to avoid anti-Semitism in the business community of SF where he wanted him to be in business. My father died when I was 17 not 13.
be careful with ancestry.com you can make mistakes.
"had to struggle the best she could, far away from family, to make ends meet! "
the bitch had an inheritance from her father which she squandered, and in her arrogance was angry when a wise family friend persuaded her mother and sister to arrange that her mother's inheritance to her would go into a trust.
having been put in a psych ward in Washington DC (where she had willfully isolated herself and me and never sent me to school) she was bought to Palo Alto where she lived under her long suffering mother in law's roof, playing divide and conquer and once her mother in law's sister became a widow and she moved in with her a few blocks away proceeded to let the toilets back up and never fix them, let the water heater stop working and I had to take showers in the back patio with the hose, and let roof leaks go unrepaired except what little she could do until the place was a wreck.
the toilets didn't work, the poop piled up and crept out the bathroom door into the hall. This was because after two clearing them out, she was told that the problem was located where it was the city's responsibility so she decided they plugged up the sewer on purpose, and she wouldn't be bothered to get them to unplug it.
so the third plug up was the last and for years poop piled up in trash bags.
I remember sitting on a garbage can in the living room that was lined with plastic bag taking a dump and felt these little hands on my butt. it was the rats. they wanted to eat the poop. I suggested she stop feeding them cat food and let them clean up the house. I actually liked the rats, and was sad when they were killed. tree rats that moved into the house. probably through the holes in the roof.
yes, the city stepped in when the neighbors noticed these family groups of rats proliferating onto their properties. rats ran around in groups of about ten, which added up to a population of 200 rats. I remember seeing one lounging on a tree branch silhouetted against the night sky bright with moonlight on the clouds, its tail hanging down. kinda cute.
during all the time I lived there and later with her and Grandmama down the street, she was hounding her sister into sending her money. in addition to her allowance. and dominated Grandmama and considered that Grandmama was going crazy if she put her foot down and demanded a clean house (yeah, the bitch trashed that house too, she trashed every place she ever lived).
"You never once visited her in her old age, though she stayed in Palo Alto right up until she passed away in 2003 for her only daughter, you Mary Christine Erikson, to visit and reconcile with her but you never did! "
I lived with her most of my life till I made a few efforts to move out that didn't last, went to live with her sister for 7 1/2 months then came back and moved into a residential hotel, some years later rent was too high and moved back to Grandmama's house, by that time she had died and the bitch was running the place and when the Public Guardian had a cleanup when the bitch had to go to the hospital and then move into an old folks home for a few months then a nursing home then died (I visited her, she was on a psych med risperdol and an almost decent person as a result) the hazardous waste guy considered the back end of the house where she had lived mostly and barricaded from cleanup to be 8 on a scale of 1 to 10 of horribleness and that was after I had filled 1/2 or 1/3 of dumpster from it.
"On a side note: there is NOTHING Jewish about you either! You're about as Jewish as Jackie Khan, aren't you? "
I didn't say I was Jewish I said my father was half Jewish.
Yet you wrote:"combining two statements FROM DIFFERENT POSTS on different subjects to create a false impression".
You finally had to admit there were NO TWO SUCH POSTS! Ergo, ipso facto, you are the LIAR trying to create a false impression, Mary!
You have claimed in the past that, your mother was totally against Christianity and implied it wS due to her Jewishness! Yet, your mother was from a loving Presbyterian background with a calm life and upbringing in Missouri. .. that was until she had YOU of course!
I suspect you are the child abuser (goodness knows what goes on in that house with your "ex" Satanist co-fornicator and occult practitioner (Crowley books galore)....
Someone shall have to inform the neighbors!
"Yet you wrote:"combining two statements FROM DIFFERENT POSTS on different subjects to create a false impression".
You finally had to admit there were NO TWO SUCH POSTS! Ergo, ipso facto, you are the LIAR trying to create a false impression, Mary! "
as usual you duck the issue, which was that TWO TOTALLY UNRELATED STATEMENTS WERE CONFLATED BY YOU ON PURPOSE TO GIVE A FALSE IMPRESSON.
I FORGOT it was two segments not two posts. IT DOESN'T MATTER, ONE POST, TWO POSTS, THE ISSUE IS THE CONFLATION OF MATERIAL FROM TOTALLY UNRELATED SUBJECTS.
YOU ARE TRYING TO COVER UP FOR YOUR INCOMPETENCE OR DISHONESTY BUT YOU'VE BEEN FOUND OUT.
"You have claimed in the past that, your mother was totally against Christianity and implied it wS due to her Jewishness!"
I EVER IMPLIED THAT WAS THE CAUSE. I may have mentioned she had some weird idea
she was of some Jewish ancestry because she said her father used to put his own blood on his door posts as relevant to Passover. Basically she liked anything that got her away from Jesus the historic person and incarnate God, "the teachings of
Jesus" were okay, but she didn't really follow them. that was because when she
did get on a Jesus trip as a child, but idolized her father, who she had some sort of obsession with, she asked him if he believed in Jesus and he said he believed in the teachings of Jesus, so she backed off Jesus.
" Yet, your mother was from a loving Presbyterian background with a calm life and upbringing in Missouri. .. that was until she had YOU of course!"
I think she was the result of two different streams of latent or not so latent Ozark type "witch blood" (though they weren't from the Ozarks, just a similitude) combining from both sides of her family.
oh, I forgot to mention YOU HAVE NO SHAME. or not the right kind anyway. I assume you read what I wrote. or did you bother? just see my name and go into a blind rage?
and there are no children in this house. so you needn't worry.
" EVER IMPLIED THAT WAS THE CAUSE" should read "NEVER IMPLIED THAT WAS THE CAUSE."
Yet you wrote:"combining two statements FROM DIFFERENT POSTS on different subjects to create a false impression".
You finally had to admit there were NO TWO SUCH POSTS! Ergo, ipso facto, you are the LIAR trying to create a false impression, Mary!
You have claimed in the past that, your mother was totally against Christianity and implied it wS due to her Jewishness! Yet, your mother was from a loving Presbyterian background with a calm life and upbringing in Missouri. .. that was until she had YOU of course!
I suspect you are the child abuser (goodness knows what goes on in that house with your "ex" Satanist co-fornicator and occult practitioner (Crowley books galore).... not least , your flaunting (on witchcraft sites) your penchant for and expertise in 'tantric sex magic'!
Someone shall have to inform the neighbors!
did you read anything I wrote?
dig up the posts that prove your lies. post them here.
What ever happened to Constance Cumby's blog?
I just stopped by to read what Constance is saying, but
there's some other blog here at this address.
_ Something about the "Sordid Details of the
Life of a Grandiose Malcontent" ?
or "Demands of Grandiose Inquisitors to Hear a Malcontent's Life Hashed Over and the REsults Thereof."
http://whatisagenda21.net/how_to_fight_back.php
Tom DeWeese on how to fight Agenda 21, which is probably just as valid for Agenda
2030.
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/09/agenda-2030-translator.html
Agenda 21 on steroids UN plan to take over using various issues as an excuse.
So you admit that you're a malcontent.
That's good.
just using your words. I got good reason to be malcontented. my personal history.
the same evils on the psychospiritual level I am savvy to operating among others.
the political scene.
the new age scene.
the creeping apostasy scene.
the various things Constance and some here are malcontented about.
other things that make the world unsafe for children, pets and the various possible
victims.
none of this stuff, whether aliens, how to block occult influence, my biological so called mother or whatever these people scream about hearing about would be posted here if they weren't always challenging me on this.
I try to post something on the news about political developments I hear screams about aliens.
I try to post something about history of some heretical development now infesting the evangelical scene I hear screams about my supposed occultism.
I try to post something about corruption and new age links I hear screams about my supposed harlotry.
I try to post anything relevant to Constance's interests expressed on the latest post she makes on the front page I hear screams about my involvement with the supposed apostate Babylonian pagan liturgical church scene.
why won't these people ever shut up? when I shut up they keep on their rampages and after a while shift target to Susanna and any RC they can, before that they were after some other people years ago.
Looks to me like they don't want anything discussed here about the new age unless you redefine it as Roman Catholicism.
Constance, were are you? The blog is in critical condition!!!
Call the doctor!!!!
Help!!!!
http://www.exposingsatanism.org/showthread.php/654-Earth-Day-Agenda-21-Agenda-2030-the-Luciferian-plan
Well, yesterday WAS Earth Day. It was also cluttered by "Purple Rain" remembrances of Prince. There was great fanfare at the United Nations as the Paris Agreement was signed by 175 countries UNFCCC members. I go on the air in about 10 minutes and please join me there. I was in court for a distressed client yesterday, for the sake of my health went to bed earlier than usual last night, so have not posted the new column I expected to have here. My eyeglasses broke and I'm limited to my contacts now and so that kept me from after hours work until the frames are repaired.
I do wish the online squabbling here would stop.
Constance
http://www.green-agenda.com/science.html
Christine, 9:31 A.M.
Re:"I try to post anything relevant to Constance's interests expressed on the latest post she makes on the front page I hear screams about my involvement with the supposed apostate Babylonian pagan liturgical church scene. Why won't these people ever shut up? when I shut up they keep on their rampages and after a while shift target to Susanna and any RC they can, before that they were after some other people years ago.
Looks to me like they don't want anything discussed here about the new age unless you redefine it as Roman Catholicism."
***********************
BINGO!!!
Post a Comment