Where does the Bible say?

[theefaith]

Matthew 7:3
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

 

[Marymog]

If they immediately created 13 threads within a few days of joining, throwing their doctrines in everyone's face like they owned the place, yes. They are being openly antagonistic, I don't care WHAT they believe.

When's the last time you saw someone march into a forum and immediately start doing that stuff, and you didn't consider them to be a jerk yourself unless they were parroting your doctrines, Mary?

What sort of exclusivist *** shows up and by his actions effectively declares everyone else an idiot because his is "THEE" faith, and my heart is somehow supposed to be warmed by his presence and wowed by his intellect. As of yet, he's posted nothing of substance on this forum. Just a lot of lightweight, pitiful one-liners designed to antagonize people into responding.

Hi HIH,

I applaud you for suggesting you would feel antagonized if a new member started posting everything you agree with. I find it difficult to believe BUT I presume you are being honest.

I have never considered anyone on here to be a jerk and I have never felt antagonized.

Scripture says we are to be Christ like and spread his word (the Truth). If a Christ like person strongly believes they know/have The Truth and they want to share that Truth on this forum I don’t understand how that “effectively declares everyone else an idiot”? I have only read a handful of @theefaith postings and I haven’t seen anything wrong with them. They are straight to the point.....but nothing wrong with that in my opinion.

I don’t see how you can say theefaith hasn’t posted anything of substance. I have seen several quotations from scripture by him/her To support their position. Are you saying Scripture has no substance?

 

[Marymog]

You do know people like him set a very bad example for your denomination, yes? You have two people here who are good examples: Oz, and Philip James. Philip is kind, and Oz is both kind and very substantive in his posts. We don't always agree, but I have him on my friends list because his posts are quality. Without wanting to be insulting, yours never really do anything for me on the scholarship end, but at least you're not openly antagonistic. BOL is an utter and total moral disaster, who does nothing for your faith but drive people away from it, and this new member does nothing but antagonize, as if that's somehow going to win thinking and considerate people over.

So how is it that you think I would condone that behavior out of anyone, regardless of what they believe? You think I would condone them making what I believe look bad? You're mistaken. I wouldn't condone it in the least, so why are you?

I have privately reached out to BOL and expressed my disagreement with some of the tactics/words he uses. It distracts from the truth in his message.

I do not feel insulted at all in your summary of me. We all have different writing/debate styles. I Try to use Scripture, history and common sense in my postings. However, if you take out all the stylistic words in our writings Philip James, BOL and I are all saying the same thing. Same message, different style.

Is there a non-Catholic member on here that you consider an “utter and total moral disaster”?

Mary

 

[Hidden In Him]

I applaud you for suggesting you would feel antagonized if a new member started posting everything you agree with. I find it difficult to believe BUT I presume you are being honest.

Well certainly I'm honest.

I have never considered anyone on here to be a jerk and I have never felt antagonized.

Now here you must be kidding. People antagonize on the forums continually, including here. Our new member's latest offering to me is no different that most of the rest of his posts. There's nothing in them that has the tone of your first line; just continual antagonism, as if from the first day he set foot in this community his job was to correct me and every other non-Catholic on what sinners we all are.

Scripture says we are to be Christ like and spread his word (the Truth). If a Christ like person strongly believes they know/have The Truth and they want to share that Truth on this forum I don’t understand how that “effectively declares everyone else an idiot”? I have only read a handful of @theefaith postings and I haven’t seen anything wrong with them. They are straight to the point.....but nothing wrong with that in my opinion.

ANTAGONIZE, Mary. The key word is antagonize. I have read a bunch of his "posts," and they offer nothing of value - they don't teach like Jesus does, they don't exhort like Jesus does, they don't comfort or encourage like Jesus does. They only ANTAGONIZE, and continually, with nearly always what amounts to little more than petty little snippets of nothing. How do you not see this.

I don’t see how you can say theefaith hasn’t posted anything of substance. I have seen several quotations from scripture by him/her To support their position. Are you saying Scripture has no substance?

Mary, let me show you his typical posts, ok? You started this conversation, so you apparently want an honest answer from me.

Where does the Bible say anyone is a child of Mary accept Jesus Christ?

Here is the start of this thread. Is he offering any teaching like Jesus would? No. He is ANTAGONIZING to provoke a response. You think he is asking anyone anything? He's not, nor does he care about my opinion or anyone else's here. He wants to start a divisive thread in the name of "debate," and it doesn't matter where he posts because they are ALL like this. They are nothing more than crap-starters, as if that is somehow ministering to people "in the name of Jesus." And of course, anyone who points it out to him is a hypocrite, and has a beam in his own eye.

in Other words accept what your told and don’t question our authority!

Accusation. No scripture. No teaching. Just saying I'm afraid to honest discussions with people on matters of doctrine. Now you have known me for years. How am I someone who doesn't wish to discuss scripture? But he shows up and from Day #1 has no problems accusing me of it, because after all if I don't want to play around in his little play pen that it must only be because I don't want anyone "questioning authority" around here. If I were to even answer that honestly, what "authority" exactly is he referring to? As if there's some sort of established "Forum doctrine" around here that we've all secretly agreed on. It's just more petty antagonization, and it's what he has posted continually since joining.

All I offer is the bible

ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ so rejection of scripture is rejection of Christ?

Here's a classic. "All I offer is Bible, and you are ignorant of scripture." Now I'm ignorant of scripture because I don't want to jump in a moral sewer with him, and play a sucker to his continual antagonisms. You've been here a while, Mary. You think I am ignorant of scripture?

Just obeying the apostles as scripture says Jude 1:3

Here's his first "scriptural" offering, which establishes "once and for all" that everything that comes out of his precious little mouth is in defense of "THEE" faith. It's so educational. And edifying as well.

Grammar you mean? This ain’t second grade so there are no gold stars!

Here's a good one. Also very educational. Dripping with scripture throughout. This is typical of his posts. I could show you about 185 more of these if you like. This is usually the extent of how "substantive" his posts are. His rare attempts at actually posting something with substance will usually go unanswered if you should question him on it. Either that, or he will respond with some snotty little reply like "I just teach the Bible," or "You just want people to do what they are told" blah blah blah blah. He's either a child or he simply posts like one, which would be even worse. And I am assuming if he responds it will be with just more of the same, as if I or anyone else in this community has time to play little games with him.

I don't.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I have privately reached out to BOL and expressed my disagreement with some of the tactics/words he uses. It distracts from the truth in his message.

I get more from BOL. He's very offensive, but at least he does often come across with scripture on a far more regular basis.

I do not feel insulted at all in your summary of me. We all have different writing/debate styles. I Try to use Scripture, history and common sense in my postings. However, if you take out all the stylistic words in our writings Philip James, BOL and I are all saying the same thing. Same message, different style.

I like you, and I wish I weren't having this conversation. I confessed to Philip James in another thread that I quite honestly am not in the greatest mood lately and need to give the forums a rest. But while I have no problems with different styles and even different personalities - some more gruff and aggressive - I do have a problem with someone continually posting threads in this community that do nothing but spread divisiveness and stir up strife.

Is there a non-Catholic member on here that you consider an “utter and total moral disaster”?

Boatloads. I almost lit Enoch's @$$ on fire yesterday but I refrained. He's rude, he's almost nothing but confrontational like our "friend" here, and he falsely accuses people on a regular basis, and when you corner him on it he runs away without acknowledging he's guilty of false accusation, and then he'll do it all over again a month from now. He's not the only one. There are several rude and obnoxious people in this community, and they don't do their respective denominations and doctrinal backgrounds any favors.

So yes. There are other moral disasters at this forum, and since I am becoming one of them atm, I do believe I will bow out at this point so that when I come back I am back to being my normal polite and caring and considerate self.

My apologies again for getting a bit heated, but I happen to like this community, and I don't like it when I see people - ANY people - coming in here and immediately stirring up strife in the name of "only speaking the Bible." Even in a good mood I don't tolerate it well, from anyone.

God bless, and I hope you have a wonderful day.
I am your friend,
Hidden

 

[Marymog]

Well certainly I'm honest.


Now here you must be kidding. People antagonize on the forums continually, including here. Our new member's latest offering to me is no different that most of the rest of his posts. There's nothing in them that has the tone of your first line; just continual antagonism, as if from the first day he set foot in this community his job was to correct me and every other non-Catholic on what sinners we all are.


ANTAGONIZE, Mary. The key word is antagonize. I have read a bunch of his "posts," and they offer nothing of value - they don't teach like Jesus does, they don't exhort like Jesus does, they don't comfort or encourage like Jesus does. They only ANTAGONIZE, and continually, with nearly always what amounts to little more than petty little snippets of nothing. How do you not see this.


Mary, let me show you his typical posts, ok? You started this conversation, so you apparently want an honest answer from me.

Here is the start of this thread. Is he offering any teaching like Jesus would? No. He is ANTAGONIZING to provoke a response. You think he is asking anyone anything? He's not, nor does he care about my opinion or anyone else's here. He wants to start a divisive thread in the name of "debate," and it doesn't matter where he posts because they are ALL like this. They are nothing more than crap-starters, as if that is somehow ministering to people "in the name of Jesus." And of course, anyone who points it out to him is a hypocrite, and has a beam in his own eye.


Accusation. No scripture. No teaching. Just saying I'm afraid to honest discussions with people on matters of doctrine. Now you have known me for years. How am I someone who doesn't wish to discuss scripture? But he shows up and from Day #1 has no problems accusing me of it, because after all if I don't want to play around in his little play pen that it must only be because I don't want anyone "questioning authority" around here. If I were to even answer that honestly, what "authority" exactly is he referring to? As if there's some sort of established "Forum doctrine" around here that we've all secretly agreed on. It's just more petty antagonization, and it's what he has posted continually since joining.


Here's a classic. "All I offer is Bible, and you are ignorant of scripture." Now I'm ignorant of scripture because I don't want to jump in a moral sewer with him, and play a sucker to his continual antagonisms. You've been here a while, Mary. You think I am ignorant of scripture?


Here's his first "scriptural" offering, which establishes "once and for all" that everything that comes out of his precious little mouth is in defense of "THEE" faith. It's so educational. And edifying as well.


Here's a good one. Also very educational. Dripping with scripture throughout. This is typical of his posts. I could show you about 185 more of these if you like. This is usually the extent of how "substantive" his posts are. His rare attempts at actually posting something with substance will usually go unanswered if you should question him on it. Either that, or he will respond with some snotty little reply like "I just teach the Bible," or "You just want people to do what they are told" blah blah blah blah. He's either a child or he simply posts like one, which would be even worse. And I am assuming if he responds it will be with just more of the same, as if I or anyone else in this community has time to play little games with him.

I don't.

In an effort to see if your generalization of @theefaith was true I did a search of his/her post’s. I looked at the summary of the first 5 pages which equals 50 posts. In a LARGE majority of his/her post he/she quotes or references passages from Scripture. Some posts are summary’s of Scripture.

I don’t see this alleged “game” you are speaking of.

Mary

 

[Hidden In Him]

In an effort to see if your generalization of @theefaith was true I did a search of his/her post’s. I looked at the summary of the first 5 pages which equals 50 posts. In a LARGE majority of his/her post he/she quotes or references passages from Scripture. Some posts are summary’s of Scripture.

I don’t see this alleged “game” you are speaking of.

Mary

Mary, Post #21 is an example of the way he "quotes scripture." He's not using them to educate anyone. He uses them as a weapon to accuse others, or as a debate tactic to antagonize them. I said substantive. Any child can quote scriptures AT people to accuse them. It takes an adult to use them to educate others.

See it as you wish. I know an educator when I see one, and THAT is not it.

 

[bbyrd009]

However, if you take out all the stylistic words in our writings Philip James, BOL and I are all saying the same thing.

you all recognize someone between a Christian and Christ, and no offense but you have absolutely no business here, except to learn

 

[BreadOfLife]

you all recognize someone between a Christian and Christ, and no offense but you have absolutely no business here, except to learn

YOU'VE been perverting the Gospel as long as I've been on this forum - yet they allow YOU to to remain here.
Soooooo, who gave YOU the right to allow or forbid people to come here?

 

[Sabertooth]

Where does the Bible say anyone is a child of Mary accept Jesus Christ?

What do I win if I show you such a Scripture...?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

It doesn't say it anywhere in Scripture.
That is a post 16th century, man-made fallacy.

Believe it or not it was much earlier than that! It was formulated before the birth of the RC church at the end of the 6th Century, in the late 4th and 5th centuries, and gained much traction after that.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Believe it or not it was much earlier than that! It was formulated before the birth of the RC church at the end of the 6th Century, in the late 4th and 5th centuries, and gained much traction after that.

The Catholic Church wasn't "born" after the 6th century.
Methinks you need a history lesson . . .

1st century Bishop of antioch, Ignatius - who was a student of the Apostle John wrote 7 Letters before his martyrdom in Rome at the beginning of the 2nd century.
Here is an excerpt of his Letter to the Smyrnaeans:

Ignatius of Antioch
Follow your bishop, every one of you, as obediently as Jesus Christ followed the Father. Obey your clergy too as you would the apostles; give your deacons the same reverence that you would to a command of God. Make sure that no step affecting the Church is ever taken by anyone without the bishop’s sanction. The sole EUCHARIST you should consider valid is one that is celebrated by the bishop himself, or by some person authorized by him. Where the bishop is to be seen, there let all his people be; just as, wherever Jesus Christ is present, there is the Catholic Church (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 107]).

Here is an excerpt from Protestant historian Keneth Samples' treatise, What Think Ye of Rome?:
"Catholicism, on the other hand, is the largest body within Christendom, having almost a two‐thousand‐year history (it has historical continuity with apostolic, first century Christianity), and is the ecclesiastical tree from which Protestantism originally splintered."

YOUR turn . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

What do I win if I show you such a Scripture...?

I'll leave the Catholic Church today and join YOUR group.
Chapter and Verse, please . . .

 

[Berserk]

Where does the Bible say anyone is a child of Mary accept Jesus Christ?

Jesus implies that the Beloved Disciple is the son of Mary (John 19:26-27). If you accept the traditional view that the Beloved disciple is John the son of Zebedee, then Jesus identifies Mary as John's mother in a spiritual sense. Many take this one step further and infer that Mary is by extension the mother of the church and therefore the mother of each believer.
I reject the identification of John as the Beloved Disciple for many reasons and instead accept Jesus' brother James as the Beloved Disciple. My interpretation allows Jesus to mean what He says and say what He means. Joseph is already dead. So after Jesus' death, care for Mary becomes the duty of Jesus' oldest brother. This is confirmed by Acts 1:14 where Mary is with Jesus' 4 brothers and not John. There are many other reasons for identifying James as the Beloved Disciple, but that is a subject for another thread.

 

[Nancy]

I get more from BOL. He's very offensive, but at least he does often come across with scripture on a far more regular basis.


I like you, and I wish I weren't having this conversation. I confessed to Philip James in another thread that I quite honestly am not in the greatest mood lately and need to give the forums a rest. But while I have no problems with different styles and even different personalities - some more gruff and aggressive - I do have a problem with someone continually posting threads in this community that do nothing but spread divisiveness and stir up strife.


Boatloads. I almost lit Enoch's @$$ on fire yesterday but I refrained. He's rude, he's almost nothing but confrontational like our "friend" here, and he falsely accuses people on a regular basis, and when you corner him on it he runs away without acknowledging he's guilty of false accusation, and then he'll do it all over again a month from now. He's not the only one. There are several rude and obnoxious people in this community, and they don't do their respective denominations and doctrinal backgrounds any favors.

So yes. There are other moral disasters at this forum, and since I am becoming one of them atm, I do believe I will bow out at this point so that when I come back I am back to being my normal polite and caring and considerate self.

My apologies again for getting a bit heated, but I happen to like this community, and I don't like it when I see people - ANY people - coming in here and immediately stirring up strife in the name of "only speaking the Bible." Even in a good mood I don't tolerate it well, from anyone.

God bless, and I hope you have a wonderful day.
I am your friend,
Hidden

Wow HIH,
Have not seen you in such an off mood! But, good word and prayer is coming your way. Have a peaceful "break" and make sure you come back!
God Bless brother

 

[BreadOfLife]

BOL is an utter and total moral disaster, who does nothing for your faith but drive people away from it, and this new member does nothing but antagonize, as if that's somehow going to win thinking and considerate people over.

So how is it that you think I would condone that behavior out of anyone, regardless of what they believe? You think I would condone them making what I believe look bad? You're mistaken. I wouldn't condone it in the least, so why are you?

If you consider exposing lies and falsehoods as "morally disastrous" - then color me guilty.

I have PLENTY of charitable conversations with non-Catholics here who choose NOT to spread anti-Catholic manure around. We may disagree - but we always have civil discourse. One of my favorites is @amadeus.

However - if your intention is to make up falsehoods, myths and fairy tales about Catholic teaching - then prepare to be exposed.
Nothing "morally disastrous" about that - except for the one lying . . .

 

[Marymog]

you all recognize someone between a Christian and Christ, and no offense but you have absolutely no business here, except to learn

Hi Kiddo,

Wow....I have no business here “except to learn”???

From whom should I learn? You? Hidden In Him? How about Oz or bbyrd? Oh, wait a minute. You all teach and believe different things and argue with each other about who is right sooooooo that won’t work!

Can you see how your statement is lacking logic?.....ummmm.....no offense I hope?

 

[Sabertooth]

Where does the Bible say anyone is a child of Mary accept Jesus Christ?

It has only an improbable window for objection. (And the burden of proof would be on the improbable.)

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows:
After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph,
before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit." Matthew 1:18 NKJV

The highlighted phrase mean before they came together conjugally. "Before" means that they eventually did "come together," as expected.

"When [Jesus] had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said,

'Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works?

Is this not the carpenter’s son?
Is not His mother called Mary?
And His brothers

• James,
• Joses,
• Simon, and
• Judas?

And His sisters, are they not all with us?​

Where then did this Man get all these things?' ” Matthew 13:54-56 NKJV
​

Given the previous verse, the burden of proof would lie on those who would object that these were anyone less than conventional [half-]siblings from Joseph & Mary's conventional sex lives.

 

[BreadOfLife]

It has only an improbable window for objection. (And the burden of proof would be on the improbable.)

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows:
After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph,
before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit." Matthew 1:18 NKJV

The highlighted phrase mean before they came together conjugally. "Before" means that they eventually did "come together," as expected.

"When [Jesus] had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said,

'Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works?

Is this not the carpenter’s son?
Is not His mother called Mary?
And His brothers

• James,
• Joses,
• Simon, and
• Judas?

And His sisters, are they not all with us?​

Where then did this Man get all these things?' ” Matthew 13:54-56 NKJV​

Given the previous verse, the burden of proof would lie on those who would object that these were anyone less than conventional [half-]siblings from Joseph & Mary's conventional sex lives.

This was ALL dealt with in post #14.
Please read and respond to that post before moving on.

 

[Sabertooth]

This was ALL dealt with in post #14.
Please read and respond to that post before moving on.

It wasn't so much "dealt with" as it was disregarded.

The linguistic gymnastics for that argument are still very improbable. Would such an argument be reasonable for any other woman and her husband in history?

If nothing else, Matthew 13:55 shows that Joseph was still living with Mary when Jesus was an adult. Are we to suppose that they only played Pinochle all of those years...?