Pope John Paul II a step closer to sainthood

Pope John Paul II a step closer to sainthood

www.cnn.com

Rome, Italy (CNN) -- Pope John Paul II was a step closer to sainthood Saturday after Pope Benedict XVI signed a decree recognizing the late pontiff's "heroic virtues" and declaring him "venerable," the Vatican said.

A miracle attributed to Pope John Paul's intervention will have to be verified for him to be declared "blessed," or beatified. A second miracle would have to be confirmed for him to then be officially canonized, or made a saint.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.cnn.com
news.bbc.co.uk

Interesting read, especially if your religious, unlike me.

Only thing standing in the way is his beatification is confirmation of the miracle, which, BTW, what was it?

it is actually kind of exciting to see a new saint in the making.

oh, and Pope Pius XII is one step closer, too. he, too, just needs confirmation about the miracle.

The Jews (ha) want to postpone Pius's beatification, because they believe he did not do enough to stop the Jews from being killed.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 19-12-2009 by LocoHombre]

Why does this name John Paul II ring a bell to me?

And no I dont follow the Vatican all like that..

reply to post by ThichHeaded


He is credited for ending Communism in Europe, especially in his native Poland.

That why?

reply to post by LocoHombre


This is Stupid. No man has the power or ability according to the Bible to make another man a saint. This is all religious dogma for the followers of the Catholic Church who has proven roots in Paganism. These poor Catholics are being spoon fed lies and they are not encouraged to study the Bible enough to really understand the difference. That is sad.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Great point, and i agree that know man has the power to call another "god", unless they are very primitive, but, hey, pagans are better than modern day religions.

reply to post by LocoHombre


I would not say pagans are better than modern day Christians.

Many pagan religions openly slaughtered people for human sacrifice and food.

The followers of a lot of Christian religions may have been mislead through deception and do not really understand Christianity as the Disciples did in Jesus's day, but we don't go around doing things like that.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


you're right John ! .... and while we're on the subject of

misinformation spread as truth ...

... what's the deal with communion ?

...drinking the blood , and eating the flesh of a prophet ????????


shame , voodoo , shame , vampires !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by radarloveguy


That depends on who you ask. Most non Catholic Christian Churches believe it is symbolic of Christ. The Catholics actually believe that the bread and wine actually become Jesus's flesh and blood once the eat and drink it.

How yucky is that!?

I do not believe the bible teaches that this literally becomes Jesus's flesh and blood.

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by LocoHombre

 

This is Stupid. No man has the power or ability according to the Bible to make another man a saint. This is all religious dogma for the followers of the Catholic Church who has proven roots in Paganism. These poor Catholics are being spoon fed lies and they are not encouraged to study the Bible enough to really understand the difference. That is sad.

Word of advice...read the bible before you criticize.

"What you bind on Earth will be bound in heaven."

Jesus gave the Apostles the ability to speak for his bride the Church.

Originally posted by crmanager

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by LocoHombre

 

No man has the power or ability according to the Bible to make another man a saint.

Word of advice...read the bible before you criticize.

"What you bind on Earth will be bound in heaven."

Jesus gave the Apostles the ability to speak for his bride the Church.

This is true, I misspoke. But this Catholic Church does not have this power.

The Catholic Church thinks it is the sole authority to "make Saints"

In reality, all true believers who become Christians according to the Bible and therefore the same exact way the disciples led others to become Christians, they are all Saints.

The Catholics have twisted Sainthood into something you have to strive to attain - a higher form of Christianity. This is not biblical at all.

No where in the Bible does it ever talk about Christians having this type of hierarchy. You never see a disciple say to another Christan, "We need to attain Sainthood"

Now as I aid, The Catholic Church does not have this power. Why do I believe this? Because if you look in the Bible, every instance where the apostles (disciples) made someone else a convert - a Christian, they did it a different way than the Catholics believe.

The converts were made by doing two things and always these two things Only. Repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins.

This is the only way in the bible a person ever became a christian. These two things were Always The requirements that were mandatory according to the Apostles or disciples.

You can study all of the books of the new testament and see this common theme each and every time a person was made a Christian. never was it done any other way.

The Catholics do not believe in this way to become a christian. Therefore the Catholics are a false religion that we know historically was made by a combination of Christian and pagan beliefs. They cannot and do not have the power Jesus gave to his true followers.

I didn't say this at first because it was easier not to get into this deep a discussion. But I am well aware that Jesus gave this commandment, "What you bind on Earth will be bound in heaven." to his disciples.

If you take this same commandment and apply it to the above on how the disciples actually make Christians you will see my argument is not faulty - or at least that I do have strong biblical grounds for believing as I do.


[edit on 19-12-2009 by JohnPhoenix]

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


I am not religious so these technical points you are bringing up as far as precisely what the Bible says or doesn’t say, I can’t say having not read it.

A couple of things you might want to consider is that the Bible was not actually written in English and its not always easy when and where linguistics are involved to know precisely what might have been diminished or added to when selecting the closest approximate word to translate one language into another.

Another thing I think is important to consider is that Rome’s Pontificus Maximus (The highest ranking priest of the State) who also happened to be the Emperor (The highest ranking government official of the state) had the Christian Bible written by an ecumenical council he convened to write it many of whom were not born into the Christian religion but adopted it as the Emperor the Pontificus Maximus was and several of the participants to the conference were never Christians and would never become Christians. Rome wrote the Holy Christian Bible for Rome and especially for and on the order of the Pontificus Maximus of a tool of and for that Office.

That Office of Pontificus Maximus still exists to this day in an uninterrupted succession of Popes that in addition to the title of Pontificus Maximus carry the title the Vicar of Christ.

Legally by universal treaty throughout the world the Vicar of Christ is Christ’s lawful and sole official representative of Christ. In other words if you wanted to sue Jesus Christ in a lawsuit it would be the Pope who would be legally bound to show up in court on Christ’s behalf. The Pope recognized internationally to legally and lawfully be the embodiment of Christ on the planet here in the physical here and now. That treaty has been in force since the 1100’s.

So Rome did write the Bible for Rome and did so intending the Pontificus Maximus as being the sole legal editor and arbitrary power, translator, benefactor and executive of.

Additional the Holy Roman Bible has been rewritten and modified approximately 152 times since first written.

Chances are the oldest Bible hanging around the Vatican would read vastly differently than one you could book up on the book shelves at a book store or through Gideon. Chances are that a number of treaties various nations have signed with the Pontificus Maximus throughout the long centuries of the Christian Bible’s existence would be shocking to you and most other people too.

One of the things Rome did do in writing the Bible is to make it vaguely confusing enough and at times even conflicting with itself to cause purposefully for people to argue about it, and to create that need for a highest authority like the Office of the Pontificus Maximus and the Vicar of Christ to arbitrate and settle those disputes.

The Bible was written in large part employing Rome’s favorite thing in the world called divide and conquer.

Rome created the Bible to work and function as a control cult and for the Pontificus Maximus to have that ultimate control over it.

To most the Pope and the papacy seems like a antiquated relic but there is not a world leader that does not enthusiastically seek our an audience with the Pope on the Popes terms to in essence bow before him and kiss his ring.

That’s some pretty serious voodoo and power if you as me.

It’s great that you are passionate about the Bible and your religion and the deity but the reality is that source of passion as you know it in the Bible is entirely Rome’s creation and Rome has secured itself some privileges and entitlements to go along with it.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

It’s great that you are passionate about the Bible and your religion and the deity but the reality is that source of passion as you know it in the Bible is entirely Rome’s creation and Rome has secured itself some privileges and entitlements to go along with it.

Interesting View point but Rome did not write my bible.

We have the original texts of the Old testament that the Jews use and the letters to the Churches that the Disciples wrote in Greek, way before the Catholics came on the scene and wrote their bible.

Did you know that the Catholic version of the Bible is different than the one most non Catholic churches use toady?

These texts are what is used for this bible, not commissioned or tainted by any Catholic dogma. However, this translation is not perfect. Because of there are known meanings lost in translation and even bad translations, we are encouraged to study the bible along with the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old and New testaments and the meanings of the words in the original languages.These do not contradict what I have said in my post above.

Catholics are not encouraged to study this way. The Pope does not want the people to find out what is true and what is not. Their multi-billion dollar empire would be at risk.

As far as the pope being recognized as a legal representative of Christ this is foolishness. Yes, a treaty does indeed exist that says this but it is not recognized by all peoples. It has been used for centuries by the Catholic Church as a way to establish their predominance over all matters of "Christianity" - according to their belief system. This does not make them right, correct or true Christians in any since. It is merely a way to try to impose their self given power on the weaker minds of the world.

Yes, I agree.. a lot of people in government seek out popes. A testament to their meddling in Government. The fact is the catholic church has been intertwined with politics for centuries and Government is afraid to offend the catholic church. Too many Catholics that would jump up and yell heretic if the pope told them to do it.