Difference between revisions of "User talk:NishantXavier"

Revision as of 06:22, August 5, 2020

Welcome!

Hello, NishantXavier, and welcome to Conservapedia!

I am a contributor named DavidB4. I just want to say hello and offer any assistance you might need! Also, we have some guides which might help you get started and learn your way around if you need them.

• How to edit a website like Conservapedia - An intro on how to use Wiki code (which can be very useful if you haven't edited wikis before)
• Editor Quick Reference guide - A basic intro to how things work here
• Conservapedia's Manual of style - Extensive guide of good practices for writing and editing wiki pages

Useful links

• How to edit a wiki
• CP Commandments
• CP Guidelines
• Style Manual
• Editing Etiquette
• How to create and maintain high-quality articles
• Report Problems
• List of Templates

Please take a look at our rules when you get the chance. You also might want to look at the Guidelines of editing and collaborating here.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me! Also we have a community portal where you can ask general questions, introduce yourself, or just comment. If you do post messages, please sign them by placing "~~~~" at the end of each one.
Thanks for joining our community, NishantXavier! We look forward to working with you!
--DavidB4 ^(TALK) 16:46, 16 April 2020 (EDT)

User talk:NishantXavier Archive 1

Please keep the Catholic/Protestant issues on debate pages and encyclopedia articles

Gentelemen, please keep the Catholic/Protestant conflicts on civil debate pages using well-organized debate pages. Have your arguments on those pages be as logical and well-supported as possible.

Please have encyclopedia articles dealing with Protestant/Catholic/Eastern Orthodox issues be as objective as possible. And please have their talk pages be as constructive as possible.

NishantXavier, please have your debate pages have a "Yes" section and a "No" section. Please see my reformatting of your latest debate page at: Debate: Is there a Purgatory before Judgment Day.Conservative (talk) 10:34, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

All right. I will. - NishantXavier

NishantXavier, please indent your dialogues with other users using colons and remember to sign all of your comments. I have noticed that I have had to indent your comments using colons because you did not due this. Thanks.Conservative (talk) 10:50, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

Ok. I missed to do it above. I did it now. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 10:55, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

All this excludes me cause I'm not interested in church debates. I want neutral scriptural debates. Still waiting for these knowledgeable purveyors of God's truth to engage at Debate: Explain the apparent inconsistency between Ex. 33:11 and Jn. 1:18 to establish their bona fides and authority. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 10:56, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

RobS, you can make your scriptural arguments on debate pages. You can put scriptural resources/arguments on Conservapedia's Christianity encylopedia pages (and have the talk pages of those articles be as constructive as possible).

Please keep the conflict off of NishantXavier's talk page.Conservative (talk) 11:10, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

I'm being baited into being a called an "anti-Catholic zealot" or bigot. Discussing church, rather than bible, only facilities such a set up. Bible discussions are neutral. While someone may cite a Catholic or Protestant scholar as the basis for their personal understanding of a scripture, the focus remains on illuminating scripture verses itself, and not needless emotional attachments to institutions. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 11:21, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

If your successfully being baited, there is one sure way to end this problem. Stop allowing yourself to be baited. Ultimately, you choose what to respond to and what not to respond to.Conservative (talk) 11:24, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

In the meantime, please try to stay off of NishantXavier's talk page and instead direct your efforts to creating debates pages and creating encyclopedia content.

Websites with strong web traffic have quality, user friendly content that is well-organized.

Search engines rarely give top rankings to wiki User talk pages. Why? Because they are typically a mismash of various topics and tend to be less informative. Conservapedia could use more search engine traffic. Creating debate pages and creating encyclopedia content will do that.Conservative (talk) 11:31, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

Moving your announcement of your Third Ecumenical Nicene Council 2025 article

I moved your announcement of your creation of "Third Ecumenical Nicene Council 2025" to its talk page.

The article you created lacked a Eastern Orthodox view of the event so I added this view to the article.

You know there is tension between you and RobSmith which is something I am attempting to tamp down.

Please stop using your talk page in a manner that is bound to increase the temperature of the aforementioned conflict. You must know that using your talk page to promote the Catholic view of the primacy of the Catholic Church is not going to decrease the conflict, but increase it. Thank you.Conservative (talk) 15:10, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

Feel free to create a debate page about the Essay: Third Ecumenical Nicene Council 2025 issue if you wish to debate non-Catholics about this matter. You can do so here: Debate: Will there be a Third Ecumenical Nicene Council in 2025? (see my commments below) Conservative (talk)

I did some initial investigation of this proposed gathering in Nicea in 2025.

Even a Jesuit website indicates: "The Vatican has not issued a formal statement on the patriarch’s revelation, presumably because it emerged in a private conversation between him and the pope. But, pressed for clarification by journalists, Father Federico Lombardi, S.J., described Bartholomew’s idea as “very beautiful and significant”; he presented it as an agreement “to hold a joint commemoration of the first ecumenical council held in Nicea in 325 AD.” He recalled that Bartholomew was the first to propose the idea for the recent meeting in Jerusalem commemorating the historic encounter Patriarch Athenagoras and Pope Paul VI in 1964. He emphasized, however, that the patriarch actually spoke about “a gathering” at Nicea, and did not characterize it as an ecumenical council."[1]

The National Catholic Reporter indicated in 2014: "Vatican: Too early to confirm 2025 Orthodox-Catholic summit".[2]

In a 2014 article entitled Nicea III in 2025, the American Catholic journal Commonweal indicates: "The exact nature of the planned meeting at Nicea (now Iznik, Turkey) is not known. But how could it be, over a decade in the future?"[3]

So it seems to me that the Catholic Church has not yet determined what the nature of the potential 2025 meeting will be. We don't even know if the meeting will occur.

In light of the above, I moved the article to essay space.Conservative (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

It is now at: Essay: Third Ecumenical Nicene Council 2025.Conservative (talk) 19:20, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

All right. Essay format is fine. And I know there is some uncertainty about the format, but Fr. Mark White and others, as was mentioned, are convinced it will be a Third Nicene Council. At any rate, it will certainly be an ecumenical gathering to which all Christians are invited to commemorate Nicaea. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 21:02, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

In the future, you have to separate what you want to be true, from what is a fact. I know you want there to be a meeting and you want it to be ecumenical, but there is no certainty that either will happen.

Remember, encyclopedias are meant to deal mainly with facts and not opinions. And when encyclopedias do endeavor to document opinions of various parties, they clearly state they are the opinions of a certain party or parties. Conservative (talk) 21:57, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

All right. I tried to give the perspectives of various persons on the upcoming events. Some, like Fr. White more recently, consider it a Council; others, like Fr. Lombardi, said in 2014 that it was yet unsure what kind of meeting it would be. I read the updated essay. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 23:53, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

Inviting Collaboration for articles on Popes; and on Christianity in every country

Non-debate topic. There have been about 266 Popes from Saint Peter and Pope Linus through Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis. I believe only about 10 to 20 articles so far have been created for these 266 men. So that means the scope and future potential of over 200+ future articles remains. I invite collaboration on this matter from all interested conservative posters here at Conservapedia, Catholic and non-Cath alike.

Or if someone prefers, there are over 200 countries in the world. 205. The Christianity by Country Category has just over 10 countries: https://www.conservapedia.com/Category:Christianity_by_Country So again there is scope here for research on nearly 200 future articles. Again, I invite all interested collaborators, Catholic or non-Catholic, as well as Christian or even conservative non-Christian, to work on this one. We can keep track of Global Christianity. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 21:10, 25 July 2020 (EDT)

Links to the current ongoing debates: On Existence of Purgatory, on Church Authority etc

Existence of Purgatory: https://www.conservapedia.com/Debate:_Is_there_a_Purgatory_before_Judgment_Day Christ's Church Authority: https://www.conservapedia.com/Debate:Does_the_Catholic_Church_have_the_biblical_authority_of_Christ_Himself_to_preach_and_to_teach_the_truth_forever%3F

Greatest Evangelists of the 20th Century: Pope John Paul II, Abp. Sheen, Billy Graham, Reinhard Bonnke

I want to do an Article or Essay on the Greatest Evangelists of the 20th century, whether Catholic or Evangelical. Abp. Sheen and Billy Graham, who were also good friends, are two obvious names. Pope John Paul II and Reinhard Bonnke were two other great Evangelists for Christianity. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 06:33, 27 July 2020 (EDT.

Quick note about your request to give my Christian testimony

I did as you requested in terms of giving my Christian testimony. It is at: https://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:150_Million_Souls_for_Christ_the_King#User:_Conservative.27s_testimony

Sincerely, User: Conservative.Conservative (talk) 22:32, 2 August 2020 (EDT)

Wow, Thanks a Lot, Conservative! I just read it, it looks really great! Thank you. Heaven rejoices when anyone of us gives our testimony for Christ our King!

About your life journey, I also liked Josh McDowell's general apologetics for Christianity. If you're interested specifically in Bible Prophesy, you may like this article: https://www.conservapedia.com/Prophesies_Fulfilled_by_Christ I added a list of about 25 specific prophesies, showing they were fulfilled only in Jesus Christ Our Lord and God, the Promised Jewish Messiah: "Some probability estimations

If we assume there is a 0.0001 (0.01%) chance or probability of a person fulfilling one of these prophesies by accident, what would be the probability that that person could fulfill all these prophesies? It would be at least (1/10^4)^25=1/10^100 i.e. 0.00[99 zeros]1. This incredibly low number would be the likelihood that one born in Bethlehem could be worshiped as God in every Gentile country, that one born of a Virgin would be recognized as Light of the Nations, that one born of the House of David would be God in the Flesh, that the Son of Man would be served by all tribes, that He could offer His Life as a Ransom or Sacrifice for many, and Institute a Perpetual Priesthood with a Perpetual Offering of this Mystical Sacrifice, and so on. The probability, or certainty, that He Who did this is truly God and the Messiah is = 1-(1/10^100) = (almost) 1. In other words, it is virtually certain.

https://www.conservapedia.com/Prophesies_Fulfilled_by_Christ

Parting note from IndependentSkeptic

I've only got a minute or two to say how much I appreciate your accurately informed defense of the Church and her doctrine. I remember Dataclarifier saying to me how important it is to know what the Catholic Church actually teaches, in contrast to what some say she teaches.
The most recent example is the claim here in CP articles and Debate pages that prayers for the intercession of the saints is the vile sin of necromancy and idolatry!
It's a sorry fact, that people who don't know, should be told not to believe what non-Catholics, anti-Catholics, and disaffected Catholics hostile to real Catholic doctrine and to the Magisterium, claim is the teaching of the Catholic Church in contrast to what she actually teaches. Just because it's published or posted online doesn't mean that they must be telling the truth. Whatever they either erroneously or falsely or deceitfully say is evil, sinful, pagan and "carnal-minded" about Church teaching is actually instead (as you have already mentioned) the Straw man fallacy of misrepresentation, sometimes simply because of having been told, by people they trust, falsehoods using specious reasoning, polemic, and sometimes outright deliberate deception by liars who actually know better but tell their lies anyway, they don't care.
When I myself found out what the real teaching is, I realized I had been kept from the truth about Catholicism and Orthodoxy, because everything the Church teaches in the Catechism is biblical! The gates of hell haven't prevailed against it, and she really is the pillar and foundation of the truth. Has to be—Jesus promised. Blew me away! I was really upset, and personally offended. I had been told it's the doctrine of the Devil! But it isn't! Dataclarifier said the same thing had happened to him when he decided to check out for himself what the Catholic Church actually teaches, instead of what people had told him about it, people he had trusted to tell the truth but must have been misled like he was. He couldn't believe they were actually hypocrites.
You seem to be competent to make it clear by honest truth and to "set the record straight" by sources gotten "straight from the horses mouth". Especially by pointing out (respectfully) that bad examples and scandalous behavior, even by leaders of the Church, especially when cited by historians and the news media and books using that behavior as the Ad hominem argument, by pointing out that it doesn't invalidate the truth of Catholic doctrine—just as Judas Iscariot specially chosen by Jesus and yet Satan entered him is not proof that Jesus was a false Messiah. The parable of the weeds in the field by an enemy that the owner of the field allowed to remain until harvest time is a perfect answer to the scandals in the Church. The weeds don't prove the whole field is weeds, or make the genuine wheat into weeds. To save you time, look at the following links here on CP:

• Debate: Is the Magisterium infallible?
• Debate:Does the Catholic Church have the biblical authority of Christ Himself to preach and to teach the truth forever?‎‎
• Debate: Is there a Purgatory before Judgment Day‎‎
• Debate: Infant baptism
• Investiture controversy
• "Catholic Heresies and Traditions Adopted and Perpetuated by the Roman Catholic Church in the Course of 1600 Years"

This will have to be my last edit. I put it together as fast as I could. I'm sorry I won't be able to follow up or contribute anything else any more. My respects to Liberaltears and Andy and User:Conservative too.
Thanks for your prayers. God be with you. I wish you well. May the intercessions of the Blessed Virgin Mary and Saint Thomas Aquinas and Saint John Vianney assist you, and Saint Michael protect you by the power of God. Amen. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2020 (EDT)

FWW, I took John Vianney's name as my confirmation name. I still identify with Vianney in so many respects. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 02:46, 4 August 2020 (EDT)

Simple solution: if you consider "necromancy" offensive, don't come back with this "gates of hell" stuff when somebody criticizes the church for mistaking Peter for the Rock of Christ. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q}

It's no mistake. The Greek of the New Testament indisputably shows that Peter is the rock, not Jesus: πέτρος Greek Petros as an appellative: thou art a rock, Aram. כֵּיפָא kepa. The form ὁ πέτρος is likewise common among classical writers, and that not merely in the sense of a stone, as everywhere in Homer in contradistinction to πέτρα Greek petra (see Duncan, p. 937, ed. Rost, and Buttmann, Lexil. II. p. 179), but also as meaning a rock (Plat. Ax. p. 371 E: Σισύφου πέτρος; Soph. Phil. 272, O. C. 19, 1591; Pind. Nem. iv. 46, x. 126). Jesus declares Peter to be a rock on account of that strong and stedfast faith in himself to which, under the influence of a special revelation from God, he had just given expression. According to John 1:43, however, Jesus conferred the Grecized form of the name Cephas Kepas Aram. כֵּיפָא kepa rock upon him at their very first interview (according to Mark 3:16, somewhat later); but our passage Matthew 16:18 is not to be understood as simply recording the giving of the name, or the giving of it for the second time. It is rather intended to be taken as a record of the declaration made by Jesus, to the effect that Simon was in reality all that the name, conferred upon him, implied. Consequently our passage is in no way inconsistent with that of John 1:43 just referred to, which could only have been the case if the words used had been σὺ κληθήσῃ Πέτρος.

καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ The Greek emphasis is on ΤΑΎΤῌ ταύτῃ, which points to Peter (not to Jesus, as Augustine would have us suppose), and to be understood thus: on no other than on this rock. —https://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/16-18.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dataclarifier (talk)

TLDR; I'm just saying if you don't wanna be called a necromantic, don't tell people they're going to hell for not worshipping a church that doesn't follow the bible. Seriously, from the shoulder man-to-man, I can tell you that cause I am not a Protestant - they are too polite to say what they really are thinking. Your "gates of hell" rhetoric is boasting, just as Paul describes in Romans chapters 2 & 3 and John chapter 8. Put the catechism down for a few minutes, read those chapters, and ask God for wisdom and understanding, not the Magisterium. God said in his word that he will give believers "all things" and "and whatsoever you ask for"; ask God for wisdom and understanding, not man. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 01:18, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

Whoa guys, you're fighting on the talk page again. Conservative said to stop that. Shobson20 (talk) 01:25, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

We're not fighting, I'm preaching the gospel. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 01:31, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

I beg to differ, and I think Conservative will too. You guys were doing such a good job of toning this down, now it's starting back up again. Shobson20 (talk) 01:39, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

My will is to do the will of him who sent me. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 01:43, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

RobS/Data Clarifier, please carry on respectfully in airing Catholic/Evangelical differences and disagreements. There was a complaint on that. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 02:22, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

Thanks, Independent Skeptic. You've done some great work in defending the Truth with Charity here. I hope you will pop in from time to time. You're right: most people don't know what they're attacking. If they would set themselves 100 serious hours of actually studying Catholic Doctrine in its entirety (like from the Church's Catechism) before attacking it, they would be helped. Abp. Sheen said the same as well, very few attack what the Church's Teaching really is. Many attack what they think is the Church's Teaching. St. John the Apostle, three times in the Book of Revelation, shows us that the Saints and Angels, and Martyred Souls in Heaven, pray for us on earth. That is Rev 5:8, 6:9-10 and 8:4. Elsewhere, the Lord teaches children have a guardian Angel to protect them before their Father's Face (Mat 18:10).

Rev 5:[8] "And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures, and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints: [8] "The prayers of saints": Here we see that the saints in heaven offer up to Christ the prayers of the faithful upon earth. http://www.drbo.org/chapter/73005.htm

Rev 6:[9] And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. [10] And they cried with a loud voice, saying: How long, O Lord (holy and true) dost thou not judge and revenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? http://www.drbo.org/chapter/73006.htm

Rev 8:[4] And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel.

Mat 18:[10] See that you despise not one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. http://www.drbo.org/chapter/47018.htm --NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 03:51, 4 August 2020 (EDT)

Question

Hi NishantXavier, I've got an important question. Since I unfortunately haven't set up an email for my CP account, I can't send an email to any other users who have done so. Can you see if you can contact either Dataclarifier or IndependentSkeptic? While I definitely pray for them every day, I'd really hope to be able to stay in touch with them (at least from time to time) in some way to make sure that everything's okay for them (seeing as IndependentSkeptic specified his fourth most previous edit as his last one). Thanks! —Liberaltears^{May Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!} Tuesday, 12:34, 4 August 2020 (EDT)

Our whole household has just settled down for our mid-afternoon "retirement" naps, so before I did, I looked in on NishantXavier's page, and saw your Question. I believe no email can be sent to me from CP. As far as I remember, I never set up an accessible email for my own CP account, unless submitting my email address was originally a privacy-protected requirement of CP for legitimacy at the time I first created my account; I don't remember.
At the beginning of my involvement with CP I encountered about a hundred Captcha challenges over a period of about 3 months before finally my edits were taken as a sign of legitimate activity in good faith on CP, and my contributions of created articles were later welcomed by Andy Schlafly as valuable. But that beginning was over 7 years ago. My own computer tech, a friend who helped me set up my home station, advised me 14 years ago never to divulge my email address to any public-access online site as protection against both troll harassment and vicious hacking, and to never use my computer for banking and filing personal important data; and I also a few years ago discovered online a tip on how to constantly change my IP address:

turn off your computer, disconnect the modem, unplug from the power source or turn off the power-strip (surge-protector) for 25 minutes, then plug-in/turn on the power, reconnect the modem, turn on the computer, and when the screen comes up, do a restart: the IP address that appears when you log on to the same or another site will be completely different.

Only the region of the country or the city you post from will be traceable by ordinary means. Hackers will be a different animal. That's why some form of firewall and malicious edit protection from malware, spyware, computer viruses, etc. is imperative.

I too have an important request. Please: don't use NishantXavier's talk page as a ready chat room for contact with me and IndependentSkeptic (and my elderly mother, 93). He was recently asked by another user to ask me for a response, and he honestly said he couldn't, since I was unavailable. Now you know why. (By the way, FYI, my name is Michael Paul Heart: IndependentSkeptic's name is Delwayne Royd Mullin.)

I will "pop-in", as he put it, about every 3 months to look at this page. I appreciate your concern, Liberaltears, and yours, NishantXavier. We all do. Meanwhile, I suggest you both do what Father Nelo Leto said to me in 1985 about my concern for my former New Age acquaintances: pray for them, and let the Holy Spirit deal with them, and leave it at that: you can trust Him to know what He's doing. Use that advice in your present concern for us. Be at peace and content yourself with that, at least. He is a living God, not a dead concept of human belief and wishful thinking.

Right now, it's August. I'll "pop-in" again in November. I wish you well in your studies. Pax vobis. --Dataclarifier (talk) 17:32, 4 August 2020 (EDT)

Thank you very much for replying, Dataclarifier! I understand your concerns with not wanting to converse on any talk pages here; I posted this section here after simply being too pessimistic earlier today wondering if I may never be able to get in contact with you again, especially after I had finished a load of tedious work and was becoming very lonely with a life I couldn't exactly enjoy much for the past while now. I initially wanted to tell you something important, but I suspect that doing so will get me blocked by one of the anti-Catholic editors on this site (see block log here). God Bless, and I hope your eyesight may be restored fully if not so already! —Liberaltears^{May Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!} Tuesday, 19:12, 4 August 2020 (EDT)

Hi Liberal Tears. My email address is on my One Peter Five page. Anyone who wishes can also follow me on Twitter https://twitter.com/Xavier_DMercy Are you on Twitter? If so, we can catch up there. Or else if you have any other platform to remain in touch, I'm all ears. I'm happy D/C and I/S will pop in from time to time. I'm happy to meet the people and team here and I hope we all stay in touch. NishantXavier^{For Christ the King} 02:05, 5 August 2020 (EDT)