Friday, September 29, 2006
Foley, as chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, had introduced legislation in July to protect children from exploitation by adults over the Internet. He also sponsored other legislation designed to protect minors from abuse and neglect.
"We track library books better than we do sexual predators," Foley has said.
Posted by KaleJ at 9/29/2006
Thursday, September 28, 2006
I was taken aback after reading the Guest Opinion by Keith Lockitch on birth control. He seems shocked that conservatives endorse “abstinence only” sex-ed. This philosophy is the only one where there is a 0% chance of pregnancy, STD’s, and promotes an environment of true freedom for teens to make decisions about relationships that are not skewed as a result of sexual attachment. As a parent, I expect my child to rise to a high standard of character. What parent would say to their teenager, “OK, we’re going out for the night, the fridge is stocked full of beer, your friends are due over in an hour and we won’t be back until . Oh, by the way, we think underage drinking is wrong, so do not drink the beer.” It makes no sense. And neither does telling our teens we don’t believe in premarital sex, but at the same time handing them condoms.
Mr. Lockitch also stated that there is overwhelming evidence for the safety of the “morning-after” pill. My questions to him are: Safe for whom? Where is the evidence? We know it’s not safe for the newly conceived human, and as for the mother…
Well, Keith was right about a few things. First, it is true that conservatives are against irresponsible sexual indulgences and mindless promiscuity. Second, there IS something deeper underlying the antagonism to birth control, but all of his assumptions are either partially or completely flawed.
In order to fully understand Christian sexuality you have to realize that Christian marriage is based on sacrificial giving. This means that it is an indirect reflection of the Trinity where as the love between the Father and the Son is so great that it is manifested in a third person, the Holy Spirit. God blesses man with this indirect image of Himself by allowing a husband and wife to be partakers in the creation of a new life. This is further reflected in Christ’s love for His church. So the marriage covenant mirrors Christ.
Christ gave Himself to us freely (without coercion), totally (not withholding any part of Himself), and was life-giving (through his cross and resurrection we were granted salvation). So as a husband and wife come together in marriage. They come together freely, totally (not withholding any part of themselves including their fertility), and are life-giving (open to new life).
So, the attitude in Christian marriage is not one of selfish pleasure, but is one of self-giving pleasure. Is it not virtuous for a husband to be patient with his wife and put her needs above his in the marital embrace? Is it not virtuous for a wife to give herself to her husband, to put the wanderings of her mind aside to focus on him? Believe me, giving is much more rewarding and is the root of happiness.
Keith ignores the fact that we are both spiritual and physical beings. If you neglect one part or separate one from the other, disorder erupts. If you see sex as just a function of the human body resulting in selfish pleasure and a possible clump of developing human cells, you can justify any heinous act from rape to abortion.
What Christian conservatives ARE concerned about is discerning to what extent Keith’s pursuit of happiness will violate the right to life of tiny human beings. For example: one component of the birth control pill is to make life inhospitable to a newly conceived baby. The IUD will cause an early abortion if implantation occurs. Most of the hormonal forms of birth control have abortifacient properties. When in doubt ask your physician for a copy of the section of the PDR (physicians desk reference) pertaining to the particular type of contraception you’re using.
Keith was right about one more thing. Sexuality is a response to personal values whether they are of a Godly religion or a religion of no God (Ayn Rand Institute). His quote is palatable with inserts from me: “for a couple (man and wife), in a serious committed (permanent), romantic (not essential, but a bonus) relationship (marriage covenant), sex is a celebration of their love, an expression in the form of intense physical pleasure of the joy that each partner (scratch “derives from” add “gives to”) the other.
Mr. Lockitch, I must disagree with you on one last point. Our war on contraception is not a “declaration of war on the pursuit of happiness”, it IS a declaration of war to defend the right to LIFE, then liberty, then the pursuit of happiness, because without life, the other TWO do not exist.
Kids always want to know “why?” “Why can’t I have a sleepover?” “Why can’t I wear this shirt to choir practice?” “Why can’t I watch this movie?”
And some parents feel they have to explain everything. But there are some things you just can’t explain. You can’t argue why you allow a bathing suit that only covers x percent of the body but won’t allow that short and tank top that actually cover quite a bit more. You can’t explain (or at least I can’t) why certain colors go together, why certain clothes are appropriate at a funeral, or why certain music fits with certain words or situations. You just get a feel for it. (Or, if you’re a music director at a Catholic parish, you don’t get a feel for it. But that’s another subject.)
Parents are in the business of creating taboos — giving kids a sense of propriety and teaching to observe the right kind of expectations.
Posted by KaleJ at 9/28/2006
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/27/2006
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/26/2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/26/2006
Monday, September 25, 2006
Friday, September 22, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/22/2006
Thursday, September 21, 2006
"There's no doubt that the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions have been preserved," McCain said
Posted by KaleJ at 9/21/2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/21/2006
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/20/2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
All of which is simply beside the point, since nothing the pope has ever said comes even close to matching the vitriol, extremism and hatred that pour out of the mouths of radical imams and fanatical clerics every day, all across Europe and the Muslim world, almost none of which ever provokes any Western response at all. And maybe it's time that it should: When Saudi Arabia publishes textbooks commanding good Wahhabi Muslims to "hate" Christians, Jews and non-Wahhabi Muslims, for example, why shouldn't the Vatican, the Southern Baptists, Britain's chief rabbi and the Council on American-Islamic Relations all condemn them -- simultaneously?
But if stray comments by Western leaders -- not to mention Western films, books, cartoons, traditions and values -- are going to inspire regular violence, I don't feel that it's asking too much for the West to quit saying sorry and unite, occasionally, in its own defense. The fanatics attacking the pope already limit the right to free speech among their own followers. I don't see why we should allow them to limit our right to free speech, too.
Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe, newly installed as the Archbishop of Naples presided for the first time at the celebration of the city's patron saint, who died in the persecutions under Emperor Diocletian. A vial containing the preserved blood of the martyr was brought into the sanctuary. After the Gospel was read, the cardinal told the congregation that "the blood is starting to melt." The announcement drew warm applause.
Monday, September 18, 2006
Benedict's main point and few have noted this is that the West, unless it recovers a vision of God, cannot engage in a fruitful dialogue with the other great cultures of the world, which have a basic religious conviction about reality. Among these great cultures, of course, is Islam. His entire talk is focused on this point.
Let us consider very carefully what Benedict does with regard to Islam in this speech. First, he focuses on one very specific point in the Emperor's long dialogue with the Persian, the issue of jihad, or holy war. He writes: In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: There is no compulsion in religion. It is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat.
Now, the first striking thing we note here is that Benedict is citing the Koran. Rarely in the history of the papacy (if ever I am not aware of other cases) has a Pope of Rome cited the Koran in a public address, and in a positive way. I say "in a positive way" for Benedict here, like the Emperor himself, evidently agrees with the verse of the Koran which says "There is no compulsion in religion."
The second striking thing we note is that Benedict characterizes this passage of the Koran as "one of the surahs of the early period," a period "when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat." What is Benedict doing? He is setting up his argument that this passage has more authority for Islam (because it is earlier) than the later passages which seem to contradict it, and call for compulsion in religion. In an oblique way, he is inviting Muslim theologians to undertake a type of textual criticism of their own sacred scripture, the Koran, to uncover its deepest meaning.
Islamic countries also asked the U.N. Human Rights Council to examine the question of religious tolerance. Malaysia's foreign minister, Syed Hamid Albar, said Benedict's apology was "inadequate to calm the anger."I think we have a winner here in the stupidest quote in reaction to Pope BXVI's speech. Of course it is "inadequate to calm the anger" when the Muslim leaders keep calling for more anger and violence. And any apology will be inadequate to quell faked emotions.
And as Dom has noted, the Pope wasn't apologizing anyway.
his statement was inaccurately translated. He did not say he was “deeply sorry” as the official Vatican statement . What he actually said to the crowd was vivamente rammaricato or “greatly distressed.” In other words, as I said above, he wasn’t apologizing.The Curt Jester reveals why we see all these preprinted signs at the "spontaneous" demonstrations.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/16/2006
Friday, September 15, 2006
"What happened in Rwanda, it will happen here," said Sheik Abdullah
Muhammad Ali, who fled here from a nearby village seeking the safety
that he hoped the presence of about 200 African Union peacekeepers
would bring. But the Sudanese government has asked the African Union
to quit Darfur rather than hand over its mission to the United
Nations. "If these soldiers leave," Sheik Ali said, "we will all be
"Darfur: Waiting for the slaughter"
Rasha Ibrahim Adam and her children may be about to die - just as she
thought they had all escaped to safety.
The 38-year-old mother of four children is one of the latest to flee
the bombs from the Sudanese government that have dropped on their
homes. Today, she finds herself in one of the dusty, benighted refugee
camps that litter the region of Darfur. She sits in her once bright
red tob - a wrap-around dress - that has been faded by the sand-laden
wind that blows across al-Salaam camp on the edge of the town of
She was one of the 50,000 people who swelled the scorched camps for
the "internally displaced" in the past month - bringing to about 2.5
million the number of children, women and men now homeless in a
conflict that has dragged on for three years without an end seemingly
in sight. Until now, that is. Because an end is in sight for the
Darfur camps - where at least 300,000 black African farmers have been
slaughtered by the Khartoum government and its Arab proxies, the
Janjaweed militia, whose name means "devils on horseback". One of
those who died was Rasha's husband, Adam.
It could be an end so terrifying, it defies the imagination.
"Annan issues stark message to Security Council about impending
catastrophe in Darfur"
Mr. Annan said the UN and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) will
have to drastically scale back their humanitarian operations in Darfur
unless the security situation improves.
"Can we, in conscience, leave the people of Darfur to such a fate? Can
the international community, having not done enough for the people of
Rwanda in their time of need, just watch as this tragedy deepens?" he
"Food crisis looms in North Darfur"
On Wednesday, NRF rebels clashed with government forces south of
Tawilla. An Antonov plane and two helicopter gunships reportedly
bombed Dobo Al Umda Dobo and Dobo Al Madrasa town and the surrounding
villages. The number of casualties is unknown.
"If a United Nations force is not deployed soon, something much worse
is going to happen here," the SLM/A commander added.
"Rebels Say They May Abandon Darfur Pact"
Abdulrahaman Abdallah, a commander of the rebel group's military
police, said that without a strong international force here, "the
government will go back to its strategy, which is genocide, and
inevitably we will go back to the bush."
"The late pope John Paul II spent over 25 years to build bridges and links with the Muslim community. He showed the world that its perception of Islam was false and that we are peace-loving people," it said."If we want to sit down and compare the history of violence committed in the name of the Catholic Church and violence committed in the name of Islam, that would take a long time," Ingrid Mattson said.
"We have 500 years of inquisition, the counter-reformation, the crusades... All religions have been used for violence. None has been excluded, including Judaism," she continued.
Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.
Stop saying we are violent or we will beat you up or kill you.
And in Turkey, the ruling party likened the pontiff to Hitler and Mussolini and accused him of reviving the mentality of the Crusades.
This one is my fabulous. Actually admitting how childish the Cartoon Riots were.
"The declarations from the pope are more dangerous than the cartoons, because they come from the most important Christian authority in the world — the cartoons just came from an artist," said Diaa Rashwan, an analyst in Cairo, Egypt, who studies Islamic militancy. [emphasis added]
"He has a dark mentality that comes from the darkness of the Middle Ages. He is a poor thing that has not benefited from the spirit of reform in the Christian world," Kapusuz told Turkish state media. "It looks like an effort to revive the mentality of the Crusades."
As for the bishop emeritus of Autun, Raymond Seguy, he has already qualified his words. Rejecting the term "conversion," he declared to France Presse: "I did not say that Brother Roger abjured Protestantism, but he showed that he subscribed fully to the Catholic faith."
From a Protestant background, Brother Roger undertook a step that was without precedent since the Reformation: entering progressively into a full communion with the faith of the Catholic Church without a "conversion" that would imply a break with his origins
Whoever speaks of "conversion" in this respect has not grasped the originality of Brother Roger's search.
There was never anything hidden about this undertaking of Brother Roger's. In 1980, during a European meeting in Rome, he spoke these words publicly in St. Peter's Basilica, in the presence of Pope John Paul II: "I have found my own identity as a Christian by reconciling within myself the faith of my origins with the mystery of the Catholic faith, without breaking fellowship with anyone."
Thursday, September 14, 2006
If nothing else it shows they are actually reading the polls. House Democrats Unveil Election-Year Bill Claiming to Reduce Abortions. Perhaps this will inspire the Republocrats to re-evaluate their pro-life platform and firm it up a bit.
Posted by KaleJ at 9/14/2006
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/13/2006
(This is my response to the 60 questions from the UPCI website that I wrote several years back. Their original answers are in Italics. My answers are in blue.)
1. Is the word Trinity in the Bible? No.
And neither is the term Oneness.
2. Does the Bible say that there are three persons in the Godhead? No.
1 John 5:7 speaks of the three in heaven, and these are one. That is the summit of the Trinity.
3. Does the Bible speak of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Yes.
4. Do these titles as used in Matthew 28:19 mean that there are three separate and distinct persons in the Godhead? No, they refer to three offices, roles, or relationship to humanity.
The continual use of the word three in scripture makes it hard to reconcile the Oneness position. God had more that three roles, Creator, Redeemer, Judge, Father, Councilor….
5. Does the Bible use the word three in reference to God? Only one verse in the entire Bible does so-I John 5:7. It speaks of the Father, the Word (instead of Son), and the Holy Ghost, and it concludes by saying, "These three are one."
Does the UPCI contend that because this verse is the only one specifically referring to the word three, that it is invalid? Because there is no explanation for the Oneness position, do they just ignore this verse? This cannot be reconciled to a belief in Oneness, but it is not a problem for belief in the Trinity. God is one, yet there are three distinct persons. The Word is the Son (see John 1:14) and the Holy Ghost cannot be merely a force. These three are all in heaven.
6. Does the Bible use the word one in reference to God? Yes, many times. For example, see Zechariah 14:9; Malachi 2:10; Matthew 23:9; Mark 12:29, 32; John 8:41; 10:30; Romans 3:30; I Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; I Timothy 2:5; James 2:19.
Not an issue, God is one. That is very clear throughout the Bible and in Trinitarian theology.
7. Can the mystery of the Godhead be understood? Yes. Romans 1:20; Colossians 2:9; I Timothy 3:16.
Romans speaks of those who see the beauty of creation, but fail to recognize the creator. Your translation puts the word Godhead into Romans 1:20 that aren’t there in other translations. Colossians states that “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead corporeally;” This again is consistent with our theology that Jesus was fully God and fully man. Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. In Timothy, St. Paul speaks of the great mystery of godliness and that God was manifest in the flesh.
8. Has the Christian only one Heavenly Father? Yes. Matthew 23:9.
9. Then why did Jesus say to Philip, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:39)? Because Jesus is the express image of God's person. Hebrews 1:3. The Greek word for personin this verse literally means "substance."
Express image of God’s substance? So was he merely an image of God? No, again this fits perfectly into Trinitarian theology. God the Son is the complete and eternal Knowledge God the Father has of himself. Furthermore, in John 6:46 we read “Not that any man hath seen the Father; but he who is of God, he hath seen the Father.” Would that contradict John14:9? And how does it reconcile with verse 28 of that chapter where Jesus says “my Father is greater than I.”? Jesus is saying to Philip, why do you continue to seek signs? I do the will of the Father, we are in union with one another. So stop seeking signs and believe.
10. Does the Bible say that there are two persons in the Godhead? No.
Because there are not two.
11. Does the Bible say that all the Godhead is revealed in one person? Yes, in Jesus Christ. II Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:19; 2:9; Hebrews 1:3.
Yes, God is revealed in the humanity of Jesus. Jesus is the not a mere prophet who God decided to ransom for our sins, but He is God himself.
12. Is the mystery of the Deity hidden from some people? Yes. Luke 10:21-22.
Yes we must approach God in humility lest our own pride blind us. A literalist reading of tract 12 conflicts with #7.
13. Who is the Father? The Father is the one God, particularly as revealed in parental relationship to humanity. Deuteronomy 32:6; Malachi 2:10.
Father also as the one eternal source from which everything proceeds.
14. Where was God the Father while Jesus was on earth? The Father was in Christ. John 14:10; II Corinthians 5:19. He was also in heaven, for God is omnipresent.
How does this reconcile the Oneness concept. If God was in Christ, how could he be in heaven? Does not the pastor in the “Rightly dividing the Word” tape set teaches that in Matthew 28:18 Jesus was granted all power on heaven and earth, and he claims that if Jesus had all the power on heaven and earth, there could be no other holding the power? And I say to this pastor, who GAVE all this power to Jesus? If not for the Father in heaven there could be no action of giving.
15. Did the prophet Isaiah say that Jesus would be the Father? Yes. Isaiah 9:6; 63:16.
Using the word Father for Jesus in this context shows his parental (fatherly) love. And if chapter 63 is speaking of Jesus, how does this reconcile with the UPCI belief that Jesus did not exist prior to his earthly birth? Read verse 17 and 12, if Jesus made [Israelites] and led Moses, he must have pre-existed his human birth. Nowhere in the New Testament is the word “father” used as a reference to Jesus. But he is referred to as “the Son” over 200 times.
16. When God said, "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26), was He speaking to another person in the Godhead? No. Isaiah 44:24; Malachi 2:10.
Read John 1:1-3. The Word was WITH God, the same was in the beginning WITH God. Is this another contradiction in scripture? Not if we believe in one God which we do.
17. How many of God's qualities were in Christ? All. Colossians 2:9.
Whoa! All of God’s qualities are in the human Jesus? What about question 14 claiming God is omnipresent? Jesus was physically located in a remote area of Judea for most of his life. Don’t leave out the word corporeally. And what about infinite, eternal… Jesus’ humanity had a beginning. I would say this exegesis is not very sound, but reaches to insert meaning that is not there.
18. How may we see the God who sent Jesus into the world? By seeing Jesus. John 12:44-45; 14:9.
We have covered that; Jesus is God dwelt among us. God in his essence is spirit and cannot be seen.
19. Does the Bible say that Jesus is the Almighty? Yes. Revelation 1:8
Once again, Jesus is God. The Alpha and Omega. That is true according to our beliefs.
20. Whom do some designate as the first person in the Trinity? God the Father.
21. Whom do some designate as the last person in the Trinity? The Holy Ghost. But Jesus said that He was the first and last. Revelation 1:17-18
Very poor exegesis. Jesus is the Beginning and the End. Furthermore, this proves the eternal existence of Jesus. Another stretch to prove the Trinity false.
22. How many persons did John see sitting on the throne in heaven? One. Revelation 4:2.
First, Rev 4:2 doesn’t mention any “persons” but simply “one” seated on the throne. And back to 1 John 5:7, there are three. So who are the other two? Well in Rev 5:6 John sees (apparently for the first time) a Lamb standing as though it had been slain. And where is this Lamb? Some translations have it between the throne and the four creatures. The Douay Reimes has the Lamb in the midst of the throne, the creatures and the ancients.
23. If Jesus is the first and the last, why did God say in Isaiah 44:6 that He was the first and the last? Because Jesus is the God of the Old Testament incarnate.
So are there two Gods? God is one, yet Jesus existed in the Old Testament.
24. Did Jesus tell Satan that God alone should be worshipped? Yes. Matthew 4:10
25. Does the devil believe in more than one God? No. James 2:19.
26. Does the Bible say that God, who is the Word, was made flesh? Yes John 1:1, 14.
And in John 1:1, the Word was WITH God. In John 1:2, He was in the beginning WITH God. John 1:14, …glory as of the only Son from the Father.
27. For what purpose was God manifested in the flesh? To save sinners. Hebrews 2:9, 14.
28. Was Jesus God manifested in the flesh? Yes. I Timothy 3:16.
29. Could Jesus have been on earth and in heaven at the same time? Yes. John 3:13.
So the Son of Man descended from heaven? The evidence points to Jesus pre-existing his human birth. And the portion of 3:13 “who is in heaven.” is not in all ancient texts. Yet even this does not shake my belief in the Trinity. God’s ways are beyond our ways, and He is beyond our understanding.
30. Does the Bible say that there is but one Lord? Yes. Isaiah 45:18; Ephesians 4:5.
31. Does the Bible say that Christ is the Lord? Yes. Luke 2:11.
32. Does the Bible say that the Lord is God? Yes. I kings 18:39; Zechariah 14:5; Acts 2:39; Revelation 19:1.
33. How could the church belong to Jesus (Matthew 16:18) and yet be the church of God (I Corinthians 10:32)? Because Jesus is God in the flesh.
Yes to all above, and what Church is it that has existed since 33 AD?
34. Will God give His glory to another? No. Isaiah 42:8.
Nope, only one God.
35. Was there a God formed before Jehovah, or will there be one formed after? No. Isaiah 43:10.
No, Jesus is eternal, begotten, not made. One in being with God.
36. What is one thing that God does not know? Another God. Isaiah 44:8.
Very evident throughout scripture.
37. What is one thing that God Cannot do? Lie. Titus 1:2.
And in his Word, He states there is three in heaven, and these three are one. That doesn’t work mathematically or logically, so is he lying? No, there are three persons, but one God.
38. How many Gods should we know? Only one. Hosea 13:4.
39. How many names has the Lord? One. Zechariah 14:9.
Does changing the word ‘names’ to ‘titles’ or ‘offices’ reconcile this verse for the UPCI? If you want to get into names, then his one name isn’t Jesus but Yahweh.
40. Is it good to think upon the name of the Lord? Yes. Malachi 3:16.
Many of the early church fathers pondered his name, and many have come to understand the same concept that has been taught for almost 2000 years.
41. Does the Bible say that God alone treads upon the waves of the sea? Yes. Job 9:8
42. Why, then, was Jesus able to walk upon the Sea of Galilee (Matthew 14:25)? Because He is God the Creator. Colossians 1:16.
Jesus is the Creator. In Genesis, it says “let us” make man…. But Jesus as Creator is not the same as Jesus as God the Father. John 1:3 states all things were made through him.
43. Is God the only one who can forgive sin? Yes. Isaiah 43:25; Mark 2:7.
44. Why, then, could Jesus forgive sin in Mark 2:5-11? Because He is God the Savior.
Amen. That proves the Jehovah Witnesses are faulty in their disbelief of the Trinity also.
45. Is Jesus the true God? Yes. I John 5:20.
46. If God and the Holy Ghost are two separate persons, which was the Father of Christ? Matthew 1:20 says that the Holy Ghost was the Father, while Romans 15:6, II Corinthians 11:31, and Ephesians 1:3 say that God was the Father. There is no contradiction when we realize that God the Father and the Holy Ghost are one and the same Spirit. Matthew 10:20; Ephesians 4:4; I Corinthians 3:16.
If you claim the Holy Spirit was the physical father, then there must be at least two separate beings. That is false! The Holy Spirit is the messenger. In Trinitarian theology, all are equal.
47. When Paul asked the Lord who He was, what was the answer? "I am Jesus." Acts 9:5.
48. When Stephen was dying, did he call God Jesus? Yes. Acts 7:59.
49. Did Thomas ever call Jesus God? Yes. John 20:28.
50. How could Jesus be the Savior, when God the Father said in Isaiah 43:11, "Beside me there is no Savior?" Because "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself." II Corinthians 5:19.
51. Does the Bible say that Jesus was God with us? Yes. Matthew 1:23.
52. Did Jesus ever say, "I and my Father are one?" Yes. John 10:30.
The answer in scripture to all these is an obvious yes.
53. Can it be proved scripturally that Jesus and the Father are one in the same sense that husband and wife are one? No. The Godhead was never compared to the relationship of a husband and wife. Jesus identified Himself with the Father in a way that husband and wife cannot be identified with each other. John 14:9-11.
I am in the Father as I am in you and you are in Me. So we can be in Jesus just as he is in the Father. No, the marital union is different from the unity of the Father and Jesus. Theirs is a unity of love and purpose and being. The marital union has some of the aspects, but the family is an imperfect example of the Trinity. From the love of a father and mother proceeds forth a new person. In the Trinity, the love of the Father and Son is so complete, it IS an eternal person (not person in the human person aspect.) Nothing on this earth is a perfect example of God but there are many things that reflect the image of God.
54. Does the Bible say that there is only one wise God? Yes. Jude 25.
55. Does the Bible call the Holy Ghost a second or third person in the Godhead? No. The Holy Ghost is the one Spirit of God, the one God Himself at work in our lives. John 4:24; I Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19; 12:13.
56. Can Trinitarians show that three divine persons were present when Jesus was baptized by John? Absolutely not. The one, omnipresent God used three simultaneous manifestations. Only one divine person was present--Jesus Christ the Lord.
Only one divine human was present, but God is evident in three personally distinct ways. This tract refers to three manifestations, not three beings, but three separate persons. This seems to compromise the Oneness concept. So how does the UPCI still claim there are not 3 persons (manifestations?) This ties it all together with 1 John 5:7. There are three, and these three are ONE. That is Trinitarian theology in a nutshell.
57. Then what were the other two of whom Trinitarians speak? One was a voice from heaven; the other was the Spirit of God in the form of a dove. Matthew 3:16-17.
58. What did the voice say at Jesus' baptism? "Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Mark 1:11. As the Son of God, Jesus was the one God incarnate.
59. Does the Bible say that God shed His blood and that God laid down His life for us? Yes. Acts 20:28; I John 3:16. God was able to do this because He had taken upon Himself a human body.
60. The Bible says that God is coming back with all his saints (Zechariah 14:5) and also that Jesus is coming back with all his saints (I Thessalonians 3:13). Are two coming back? No. Only one is coming back--our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. Titus 2:13.
*Taken from the Word Aflame Tract "60 Questions on the Godhead with Bible answers" #6125
The 60 answers do little to prove the Trinity is a false doctrine and even less to prove that the UPCI has the fullness of the faith. For me and my family, we will follow the Church that Jesus founded on the Rock and promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against her. And one final point, if the UPCI wishes to prove the Trinity is an invention of the early Catholic Church, then the UPCI will have to use documents other than the Bible. The New Testament which the UPCI and other Protestants so graciously accept from the Catholic Church was gathered and canonized by the Catholic Church in 382 AD after the doctrine of the Trinity in 325 AD. So if you wish to take the Bible as the inspired Word of God, then one must accept that God guided his Church in teaching faith and morals also. For Jesus wants his flock to be of one shepherd and said He would send the Spirit to guide her in ALL truth.
Posted by KaleJ at 9/13/2006
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Saw this on the Crowhill blog. Looks like something to be enjoyed on all those occasions with your Catholic buddies. Perhaps it would be a good ecumenically also. Imagine a non-Catholic having a free drink and thinking, well his beer tastes good, he can't be all bad. No after-taste, they don't offer it in a "lite" version, perhaps there is something to the Catholic faith.
Include a little papal trivia, Matthew 16:18 and definitions of infallible on the bottles would be a tasty treat also. But just remember Jesus handed Peter the keys to the Kingdom, not the keys to the car after Peter after the wedding feast a Cana.
via the Curt Jester
Posted by KaleJ at 9/12/2006
The BBC's Sola Odunfa in Lagos says the forfeited assets include 23 bank accounts in various names; shares in leading Nigerian banks; houses and land in the most sought-after parts of Lagos and Abuja; schools in Abuja and a variety of motor vehicles.
Our correspondent says Mr Akanni, who was a Pentecostal Church pastor in Abuja, was eulogised at his death for being a patriotic and selfless Nigerian.
Posted by KaleJ at 9/12/2006
Friday, September 08, 2006
“It is one of the most inhumane, brutal, shady practices going on in the U.S. today,” said Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y., a sponsor of the ban.
Sweeney argued that the slaughter of horses is different from the slaughter of cattle and chickens because horses, such as Mr. Ed, Secretariat and Silver, are American icons.
“They’re as close to human as any animal you can get,” said Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C.
“The way a society treats its animals, particularly horses, speaks to the core values and morals of its citizens.”
Critics of the practice made an emotional appeal, showing photographs of horses with bloodied and lacerated faces, the result of being crammed into trailers destined for slaughterhouses.
Sep. 08 (CWNews.com) - Italian police are seeking help from the American FBI in an effort to decode secret message which, they believe, Mafia boss Bernardo Provenzano may have hidden in a family Bible.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
"This program has helped us to take potential mass murderers off the streets before they have a chance to kill," the president said.
the questioning of these detainees has provided critical intelligence information about terrorist activities that has enabled officials to prevent attacks, including with airplanes, within the United States. Other attacks thwarted through intelligence gathered in the program include a planned strike with an explosives-laden water tanker on U.S. Marines at Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, an attack with car and motorcycle bombs on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, and a plot to fly passenger planes into London's Heathrow Airport or Canary Wharf, Bush said.
"Today's shift in policy follows the sad legacy of five years during which this administration abused our Constitution, violated our laws and most importantly failed to make America safe."
Posted by KaleJ at 9/06/2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/06/2006
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Posted by KaleJ at 9/05/2006
Fr. Christopher Layden, said that he’s not surprised by people’s desire to confess their sins, but said that what the Catholic Church offers is even more profound. “There is something cathartic about revealing ourselves to another in individual, especially when that individual is acting in the person of Christ. We need to hear that we are forgiven, and Christ offers that in a very real and personal way.”
Posted by KaleJ at 9/05/2006