Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of our death.
Amen

JSRG said:

I'm not sure why anyone would care what a random Catholic newspaper (from over a century ago at that) said; it means as much as a blog post does.



This one carries a little more authority than a random newspaper, though obviously hardly constitutes some kind of official declaration of the Catholic Church. Still, setting that aside, there are bigger issues with this one. In fact, it's odd you post it, given that in a previous topic I already pointed out the problems with this; one of the big ones being that "modify" is a mistranslation. This is especially problematic given you put so much emphasis on that word.

Since you apparently missed it the first time, here we go again. The below is a slightly edited version of exactly what I posted to you the last time:

Before we get into the mistranslation, I should note quite a while ago someone offered this analysis:

I did a bit of research to find some more details. First off, this is the page on which the sentence appears – I’ve highlighted the relevant phrase.

Notice that the phrase appears in italics, after a citation: “Petrus de Anchar [asserit], in consil 373, n. 3, vers.” This citation is a reference to a book by Peter of Ancarano, whose name is also spelled Petrus de Anchar. The book in question is probably Consilium, which, according to an Italian page I found, is indeed by Peter of Ancarano and is available in printed form at the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana. The book principally discusses a heresy called conciliarism.

After googling for more information about this Peter of Ancarano fellow, I think I may have found out why he seems to have said that the pope can modify divine laws. The explanation involves a case of marriage law, so bear with me.

This page contains a description of a controversy in the 1400s, when Peter of Ancarano was alive, involving two competing anti-popes. One of these antipopes refused to grant a marital dispensation to a couple who wanted to marry but were impeded from doing so because they were members of the same family by a previous marriage. The other anti-pope acted differently in a similar case invovling a couple who thought he was the rightful pope – he granted them permission to marry even though they too were impeded for the same reason the other couple was. Before he made this decision, this second anti-pope consulted Peter of Ancarano and asked him for his opinion.

Now, in this controversy some people appealed to divine law to prove that the pope could not grant a dispensation in these cases. Specifically, they appealed to Leviticus 18:16, which forbids a man to marry his brother’s wife. The couples in question were each a nobleman and his brother’s widow – they probably wanted to marry to keep an inheritance in the family. Peter of Ancarano apparently argued that the pope had the power to dispense with the law of Lev. 18:16, even though it was a divine law, because Old Testament laws don’t work in the New Covenant.

So that seems to be the context in which this claim about the pope “modifying divine law” appears: it is a reference to the pope’s power to dispense with canonical impediments arising from Levitical laws that are no longer binding in the New Testament. Not the whopper that Seventh Day Adventists appear to think it is.

This seems to add up, and clears up what it's talking about. However, there is another big problem that is not even touched on by that analysis, namely the fact that the usage of "modify" is a mistranslation to begin with.

The Latin word being translated as modify is modificare (or modifico--some dictionaries list Latin words as infinitive (modificare), whereas others use the first person singular present tense (modifico)). This is where the word "modify" in English comes from. However, meanings can shift over time, and especially when they cross languages. In Latin, modificare does not mean to modify; it means to set limits or to control or regulate. This can be easily confirmed by any Latin dictionary; see, for example, this one. Thus what this was saying, especially when viewed in the context of the above, is that the pope has authority to determine instances when divine law--the example being marriage law--does not apply. It says nothing about modifying it.

Click to expand...

You seem to be missing the point of my post.

I wasn't trying to give all the evidence of the Catholic church changing one of God's divine Law written by the finger of God.
For that we can see more here links from the catechism and pope Commandments of man or the commandments of God

Its these type of statements from Catholics over the centuries elevating them over God. As if God would had failed if it were not for the Catholic church and the Bible is their book, not the Word of God. Essentially making themselves above God.

The Bible is the book of the Catholic Church--no Catholic Church, no Bible.

Click to expand...

If you want to buy into this narrative and history, that's your choice, but its not mine or what God's Word teaches

'The Collective Works of John G. Lake'
---
Kindle ebook
- $ 2.99

Apple Sky said:

I don't know but some did. Google it.

A human tail, also known as a caudal appendage, is a rare congenital anomaly where a baby is born with a tail-like structure. These structures are typically lumbosacral coccygeal appendages, remnants of the embryonic tail that normally disappears during fetal development. While sometimes considered a throwback to earlier human ancestors, they are more accurately described as a developmental anomaly, often associated with other spinal abnormalities.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I think you may have misunderstood my post. I didn't mean that no human beings have ever been born with a mutation that results in them have a tail-like appendage. I was just saying that it can't be a throwback to an earlier stage of evolution, because God created Adam and Eve without tails. He didn't create tail-bearing animals and wait for them to lose their tails and become human. Sorry if I didn't word my post clearly.

165. Forgiveness leads to peace





Forgiveness leads to peace:

“Bearing with one another and forgiving one another, if one has a grievance against another; as the Lord has forgiven you, so must you also do.” Colossians, chapter 3, verse 13



To reconcile with the neighbour is the condition to live a life of peace and joy. Let’s continue to forgive and build lasting relationships with others, freely and smoothly on our way. Suffering itself will diminish. Even though forgiving is sometimes difficult, it’s liberating.



Let’s praise God continually. Whenever we have good dispositions of the heart with God and with the neighbour, each time it’s the Holy Spirit who lives in our heart and he motivates our actions and our sharing. He transforms the walls into fields of wheat, into generous vines. May the Holy Spirit stimulate us with his graces:

“Hallelujah! Praise God in his holy sanctuary; give praise in the mighty dome of heaven. Give praise for his mighty deeds, praise him for his great majesty!” Psalm 150, verses 1 to 2



The new American Bible, 2011-2014

Book: Watch with faith, Normand Thomas

What defines a place of worship?
- Attack on Christian youth retreat in Indonesia.
---
Mission Network News
- mnnonline.org
---
Indonesia
- 10/40 window

Lemmings

This is from the Old Testament, but I believe that we can see some parallels here from what was going on then to what is happening in our day and time. And I am going to speak of what I have witnessed in my own nation, the USA. For I have watched, from childhood to adulthood, the slow and gradual spiritual and moral decline of the church. And I have lived in 10 different cities in 5 different US states over the course of my 75 years of life, and I have been involved in Christian ministry most of my life in the church.

I grew up under the Christian & Missionary Alliance church denomination, but where the C&MA (now just called The Alliance) was not available, we also participated with other church denominations such as Presbyterian, Methodist, and Baptist, and/or non-denominational. Now, church denominations are not the church, but that is where we gathered with the church, the body of Christ, for the teaching of the Word, for Christian fellowship, for communion, for prayer, and for Christian ministry.

These gatherings of the church, some or most of them, anyway, used to be very spiritually focused on teaching the Scriptures, in emphasizing holy living and walks of faith in obedience to the Lord Jesus. Sharing the truth of the gospel with the people of the world was of upmost importance, as was being biblically literate. We used to gather twice on Sundays and every Wednesday evening, and throughout the week we had small group Bible studies in people’s homes. Following Jesus in obedience was being taught.

But in the 1950’s “the church” (overall) was talked into incorporating (merging, uniting, combining) with the state (the ungodly) and turning their gatherings into businesses to be marketed to the people of the world, just like any other business, both of which God forbids in the Scriptures. And so many of them began attending marketing seminars and reading marketing literature on how to grow their churches and on how to draw in large crowds of people from the world into their gatherings. And things went downhill.

[Matthew 21:12-13; John 2:13-17; Acts 5:27-32; 2 Corinthians 6:14-18; Philippians 3:18-19; Revelation 2-3; Revelation 13:5-8; Revelation 18:1-5]

Then, in order to attract people from the world to their gatherings they became more worldly, and marketing tricks and schemes began to take precedence over truth and righteousness. Compromises to the truth of the gospel, in order to appease human flesh and to not offend the ungodly, began to become common place. Pastors were turning into entertainers, and a small group of musicians were now “the worship team” leading the people to all sing in unison (no more hymn books) to often spiritually weak songs.

And I am giving an overall picture here, so not all of this will apply to every church congregation or gathering, but this is the big picture. The church in the USA, overall, has gone the way of the world to attract the world, and the truth of the gospel has taken a huge hit, and the purpose of the church has also taken a huge hit in a downward spiral. And so many people now who call themselves Christians are not living much differently from the people who make no professions of faith in the Lord Jesus. And God is grieved!

Now the Scriptures (Old Testament and New Testament) warn us of a day when God will judge his people (see Revelation 2-3) for their rebellion against him and his word, for diluting his gospel, and for living worldly and ungodly lives focused on self and on self-pleasure, and not on walks of obedience to our Lord and to his commands in surrender to his will, in self-denial and in dying to sin. And I personally believe that we are now beginning to see some of those judgments on my nation, the USA.


For Our Nation

Professionally recorded in Nashville, TN
Via Gerry Peters, music producer and arranger
An Original Work / September 11, 2012
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Bombs are bursting. Night is falling.
Jesus Christ is gently calling
You to follow Him in all ways.
Trust Him with your life today.
Make Him your Lord and your Savior.
Turn from your sin. Follow Jesus.
He will forgive you of your sin;
Cleanse your heart, made new within.

Men betraying: Our trust fraying.
On our knees to God we’re praying,
Seeking God to give us answers
That are only found in Him.
God is sovereign over all things.
Nothing from His mind escaping.
He has all things under His command,
And will work all for good.

Jesus Christ is gently calling
You to follow Him in all ways.

Men deceiving: We’re believing
In our Lord, and interceding
For our nation and its people
To obey their God today.
He is our hope for our future.
For our wounds He offers suture.
He is all we need for this life.
Trust Him with your life today.

Login to view embedded media
They Have Turned Their Back to God
An Original Work / July 11, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

FireDragon76 said:

Don't give it too much relevance. Tiktok and social media can amplify unusual beliefs or attitudes in ways that aren't helpful, or actually reflective of the real world. Furthermore, some people subconsciously or conscious are using Tiktok to get attention. Attention, positive or negative, gets monetized on these platforms.

I've seen alot of purple haired types at my local coffee shop, with more nose rings than my shower curtain, but, I've never met one of these "therians".

Click to expand...

According to the info I read, Therians in general don't have an appearance that distinguishes them as such.

rjs330 said:

I was wondering if you did.

Click to expand...

No you didn’t. You know I’m a massive big brain.

Fervent said:

The title reminds me of that old joke question...did you stop beating your wife?

Click to expand...

I’ve never liked that supposed conundrum; the correct answer is ‘no’.

bbbbbbb said:

Genesis 9:8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9 “I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you 10 and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth. 11 I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth.”

12 And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13 I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. 16 Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.”

Click to expand...

The first/natural waters destroyed the natural man. Per plan. The natural man has always been fated for (eventual) termination.

The fate of the 2nd man awaits is not realized until we put off the so called "mortal coil" and are "made spirits." 1 Cor. 15:42-56

Isaiah 54:
8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer.
9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.
10 For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee.

So yes, some read Jesus' Words of "as in the days of Noah" and they see DOOM and GLOOM. And it will be DOOM and GLOOM for the devil and his messengers.

But NOT for people. That is another matter altogether

JohnClay said:

You seem to be saying that the Jews before the Sadducees did believe in Heaven and Hell but I don't think the Bible supports that.

Click to expand...

Why would you think I am saying that John?
Perhaps I am not understanding what you are trying to find out.
I thought you wanted to know why the Sadducees didn't believe in the afterlife... or resurrection.

You said:

I was wondering why they didn't believe in the afterlife.

Click to expand...

How did heaven and hell get into the picture?
There is nothing in the Bible suggesting that the Sadducees didn't believe in heaven or hell. Nor that they did.
The Bible says they didn't believe in resurrection, nor angels nor spirit. Acts 23:6-8

According to secular sources, the Sadducees were known for their strict adherence to the written Torah and rejected the oral traditions of the Pharisees.
One source states Josephus, says:
The Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses; and for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers”.

What I said to you, is the reason for this is the Sadducees are made up of some of the Jews who were in captivity to Babylon. This sect, would have deviated from the Jewish teachings, because the Torah, the Prophets and Writings contain teachings on the resurrection, angels, and spirit.
According to Nehemiah, a lot of the leading Jews - priests among them, married foreign women, and their children did not know the Jewish culture... obviously because the foreign mothers educated their children in their culture.
So, that is one explanation, as well as the fact that some of the returning Jews opposed God's teachings for greedy and selfish gain.

Is that what you read?

JohnClay said:

My point was that the novel about Titan seemed to get a lot of things right, similar to your Persia, etc, example. Yet people would just believe it is a coincidence.

My quote is about apparent supernatural phenomena and God. It isn't really related to the flat earth. I've asked some atheists about the Persia/Babylon prophecies and I'll see what they say.

Click to expand...

The Bible says that God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah with fire and Sulphur.
Archaeological evidence suggests that a catastrophic event led to the destruction of ancient cities in the region. This event is believed to have caused intense heat, fire, and the release of sulfur.

What do you think atheist will say about that?
What every skeptic of the Bible will say...
"It possibly involving a meteor impact or a natural disaster, some cosmic airburst, such as an exploding meteor or comet, could have caused widespread destruction, including a high-temperature thermal pulse and a hypervelocity blast wave that devastated the area, and the Jews got confused and attributed it to some deity, and then wrote some story, and it got put in their book."
LOL

JohnClay said:

BTW what do you think about my upside down Bible and Connect 4 stories? Do you think they were coincidences and had nothing to do with some kind of God? I think their likelihood is extremely low.

Click to expand...

I didn't read about them.
Perhaps you can give a brief summary.
I can tell you though, that most things do have something to do with some kind of God, and are not coincidental.
There are two forces at work and both have interests in our lives - the God of darkness, and the God of light.

I accept the evidence that supports the truthfulness of the Bible.
So, I believe every word, as I have good reason to do so. I'm not skeptical about God and the Bible.
What it says has all proved true.

Did you know the Bible actually prophesied what we are seeing today, which is baffling officials about what to do about the world's crisis?
It's all there in the Bible... like reading today's news... yesterday.


What do you think about the increasing global crisis... their causes and impact?

FireDragon76 said:

What do you mean by "God remains the same"? this could suggest some kind of platonic metaphysics that I don't think captures the relational, dynamic nature of the Trinitarian God.

Click to expand...

In this context, I simply mean that God is God regardless of human opinions about God. What is true of Him persists regardless of how we understand Him.

FireDragon76 said:

The story of the Syrophoenician woman and Jesus' encounter with the woman at the well are good examples of the dynamic I am speaking of. God isn't a unity without distinctions, but a communion of Persons, each involved in perichoeretic movement. Perichoresis means "to make space for others", a kind of "dance", which suggests movement and dynamism, not Platonic stasis.

Click to expand...

Yes, I also oppose the Platonic idea of God's impassivity. That is not what I was getting at with my contention that God is objective.

jmldn2 said:

1. May I express that I once was a "church going christian" for years and years and years.
2. I need no excuse to say I no longer attend a brick and mortar building called a "church." That does not mean I am "taking the easy way." Nothing about the Christian life is "easy."
3. As for work, I was a nursery worker in church, Sunday School Teacher, member of many Bible Studies, took my children every Sunday, Wednesday and brought them up in knowledge of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Jesus is concerned with our Hearts/Souls and not how regularly we "work."
4. The "narrow door" is not the church building but believing in the the Lord Jesus Christ, giving Him our total trust and living as best we can by following His Way. The Pharisees and other "workers, strict followers of the Law" thought they had it down pat too.
5. I did not stop going to that building because of "frustration, etc" but I stopped going to that building whenever my step daughter (my husband's only daughter) committed suicide and NOT ONE PASTOR, LAY PERSON, came to our door to give my husband one bit of help.

The "church" is not that building, whether or not it is a big building, little building but the "church" is the Body of Christ believers.

Click to expand...

I am sorry to hear about your step-daughter. The fault in the lack of help was not the building's, but the membership of the church. Please don't imagine that all churches are the same. All the local churches of which I have been a member in my 50-plus years as a Christian had members who showed great care for one another. But I stress that none of this has anything to do with whether a particular church has its own brick and mortar building, or meets for worship in a hired hall, a private home, or even in the open air.

I suppose mine might be considered unique, in that I find the whole discussion extremely tiring and would rather just find out when it happens. My sole concern is to make sure that I eat the lamb with my walking stick in hand and my sandals on my feet.

Though I do fall into the post-mil camp, but just because I agree that the eschaton was inaugurated with the resurrection and every day since is about the inbreaking of the kingdom of God.

Bob Crowley said:

It obviously depends on the context.

Click to expand...

I've related this before but when I was still a new Christian and getting to know the pastor, he told me about an episode in his own church. This would be 40 or so years ago now.

There was a young parishioner who was riding his motorbike dangerously, stupidly. I know the pastor rode a motor bike himself in his own younger years.

So with due pastoral responsibility he warned the young bloke about his riding. He said it was obvious to everyone. I don't think I ever met this young fellow as I suspect it was about the same time I joined the church.

But the pastor said he felt a bit guilty about the way he warned him. He said he found that what he said happened and I can vouch that several of his predictions have occurred. I'm still waiting for a couple more.

What he said was "If you don't smarten up and start riding more carefully, you won't last two weeks!" He told me he buried the bike rider two weeks later to the day from warning him. He didn't last two weeks. Like he said, he found his words tended to happen.

He said he wished he'd used different terminology. He was correct in giving a pastoral warning, but unintentionally and prophetically predicted the result.

That's one case I can think of where a pastor regretted the exact wording.

That's not to say the pastor caused the chap's death. That was his own responsibility and the chances are he would have taken no notice either way.

It's a bit like the bloke sitting by the pool of Siloam for 38 years. He went around spreading word about his healing. Christ caught up with him and said ... “See, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you. The man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well."

There's an inference here that the chap may have "sinned" more and a worse thing came upon him, but Scripture is silent on the issue. Yet I think it's inferred. Otherwise why would the writer put it in there?

Christ healed him as part of His pastoral care, but he also warned him in His pastoral role.

You would think that sleeping in my Aunt Angela's room would bring me some kind of peace or comfort, but all it did was leave me feeling heartbroken because I knew that in the morning she would not be there to give me a hug.