It is not in the bible.....sola scripture

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Are you sure you're Catholic?
Where in the CCC does it say to be so mean?
I have Catholic friends and I'm happy to say they're very nice.
You're impossible.
Are you sure you're a Christian?
Where in the Bible does it say that it is okay to lie?
 

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
You just responded to me - 4 times.
How can you say that you "refuse" to reply??
See.
You don't UNDERSTAND.
I said you make silly comments to which I refuse to reply.
When the COMMENT IS SILLY
(like "where does it say in the bible that it's OK to lie")
THEN I refuse to reply.

It's easy.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Read post #721
Your questions were:
I make your job easy? (Answered in Post #722)
Your job?
Who hired you, God himself?
The pope?
The Knights of Columbus?
Some priest to get you off his back?
Who?

That pretty much takes care of ALL of your inane questions.
 

Rollo Tamasi

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2017
2,317
1,512
113
73
Inverness, Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your questions were:
I make your job easy? (Answered in Post #722)
Your job?
Who hired you, God himself?
The pope?
The Knights of Columbus?
Some priest to get you off his back?
Who?


That pretty much takes care of ALL of your inane questions.
You did not answer it in post #722 as I started in post #728
You spend so much time calling people liars that you have lost track of the truth
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You did not answer it in post #722 as I started in post #728
You spend so much time calling people liars that you have lost track of the truth
Wrong - I already answered you in post #722.

As for your other lie - I've never called anybody on this forum a "liar".
I've simply pointed out where they lied - like YOU just did . . .

Let me know when you're ready to have a grown-up conversation.
 

Rollo Tamasi

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2017
2,317
1,512
113
73
Inverness, Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wrong - I already answered you in post #722.

As for your other lie - I've never called anybody on this forum a "liar".
I've simply pointed out where they lied - like YOU just did . . .

Let me know when you're ready to have a grown-up conversation.
Why?
Do you want to watch and listen?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pisteuo

tabletalk

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2017
847
384
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wrong - I already answered you in post #722.

As for your other lie - I've never called anybody on this forum a "liar".
I've simply pointed out where they lied - like YOU just did . . .

Let me know when you're ready to have a grown-up conversation.


Here's where it looks like you called Job a liar :

Post #1189, church forum, Catholic thread, July 27,2017:
Pia:

Well for one you keep accusing people of being anti Catholics, when what we are is anti men's religion and men's understandings. You don't bother me, and Jesus has been making me look in the mirror as you suggested for more than 30 years, and as I discovered, over all those years everything I THOUGHT I knew, has ended up being back the front, upside down and inside out, all wrong. But I would not have known that without Him. I tried to join 'churches' and found no life in them, I did in a few people attending, but that entire religious system, which was brought forth from the writings by men, I found to be full of self righteous people who only had a book to offer, NOT The Resurrected Christ. Why do you personalize it so? Reminds me of a lovely little joke I heard once :" A man gets to heaven and the Lord is showing him around. They come to this taller than tall wall, which seemed to surround something, so the man asks The Lord what that is about. The Lord smiles and replies :" Oh, that's for the Catholics, they like to think they are the only ones here." And that you can apply to ALL the religions out there, they ALL think they are the only ones who have the truth, but wouldn't recognize Jesus if they fell over Him. So very sad !.................Stay, leave, whatever you desire, it is entirely up to you isn't it, but just one little piece of advice, BE careful what you call from satan or wrong, as I have only shared what The Lord Himself has told me or shown me, so it's actually Him, you are saying is wrong ! Perhaps you should seek HIM.................Pia
Click to expand...

Your response:
An "anti-Catholic" is a person who LIES about the Church to make their point.
It is NOT a person who simply disagrees with Catholic teaching.

I never refer to those people of being anti-Catholics. Just those of you who lie.
Job is a textbook example of a liar and spreader of falshoods.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Mary,

Again you resort to a Genetic Fallacy. I will not continue discussions with you if you continue to do this as it is impossible to have a rational discussion when you resort to fallacies.

Did Jesus' have brothers and sisters? Yes, he did and I've given you biblical evidence for this. What did Thayer give as the meaning in his lexicon?

ἀδελφός, (οῦ, ὁ (from ἆ copulative and δελφύς, from the same womb; cf. ἀγάστωρ) (from Homer down);

1. a brother (whether born of the same two parents, or only of the same father or the same mother): Matthew 1:2; Matthew 4:18, and often. That 'the brethren of Jesus,' Matthew 12:46, 47 (but WH only in marginal reading); f; Mark 6:3 (in the last two passages also sisters); Luke 8:19; John 2:12; John 7:3; Acts 1:14; Galatians 1:19; 1 Corinthians 9:5, are neither sons of Joseph by a wife married before Mary (which is the account in the Apocryphal Gospels (cf. Thilo, Cod. Apocr. N. T. i. 362f)), nor cousins, the children of Alphaeus or Cleophas (i. e. Clopas) and Mary a sister of the mother of Jesus (the current opinion among the doctors of the church since Jerome and Augustine (cf. Lightfoot's Commentary on Galatians, diss. ii.)), according to that use of language by which ἀδελφός like the Hebrew אָח denotes any blood-relation or kinsman (Genesis 14:16; 1 Samuel 20:29; 2 Kings 10:13; 1 Chronicles 23:2, etc.), but own brothers, born after Jesus, is clear principally from Matthew 1:25 (only in R G); Luke 2:7 — where, had Mary borne no other children after Jesus, instead of υἱόν πρωτότοκον, the expression υἱόν μονογενῆ would have been used, as well as from Acts 1:14, cf. John 7:5, where the Lord's brethren are distinguished from the apostles. See further on this point under Ἰάκωβος, 3. (Cf. B. D. under the word ; Andrews, Life of our Lord, pp. 104-116; Bib. Sacr. for 1864, pp. 855-869; for 1869, pp. 745-758; Laurent, N. T. Studien, pp. 153-193; McClellan, note on Matthew 13:55.)

2. according to a Hebrew use of אָח (Exodus 2:11; Exodus 4:18, etc.), hardly to be met with in secular authors, having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, countryman; so the Jews (as the σπέρμα Ἀβραάμ, υἱοί Ἰσραήλ, cf. Acts 13:26; (in Deuteronomy 15:3 opposed to ὁ ἀλλότριος, cf. Acts 17:15; Acts 15:12; Philo de septen. § 9 at the beginning)) are called ἀδελφοί: Matthew 5:47; Acts 3:22 (Deuteronomy 18:15); ; Romans 9:3; in address, Acts 2:29; Acts 3:17; Acts 23:1; Hebrews 7:5.

3. just as in Leviticus 19:17 the word אָח is used interchangeably with רֵַעַ (but, as Leviticus 19:16, 18 show, in speaking of Israelites), so in the sayings of Christ, Matthew 5:22, 24; Matthew 7:3ff, ἀδελφός is used for ὁ πλησίον to denote (as appears from Luke 10:29ff) any fellow-man — as having one and the same father with others, viz. God (Hebrews 2:11), and as descended from the same first ancestor (Acts 17:26); cf. Epictetus diss. 1, 13, 3.

4. a fellow-believer, united to another by the bond of affection; so most frequently of Christians, constituting as it were but a single family: Matthew 23:8; John 21:23; Acts 6:3 (Lachmann omits); ; Galatians 1:2; 1 Corinthians 5:11; Philippians 1:14, etc.; in courteous address, Romans 1:13; Romans 7:1; 1 Corinthians 1:10; 1 John 2:7 Rec., and often elsewhere; yet in the phraseology of John it has reference to the new life unto which men are begotten again by the efficiency of a common father, even God: 1 John 2:9ff; ; etc., cf. 1 John 5:1.

5. an associate in employment or office: 1 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 2:13(12); Ephesians 6:21; Colossians 1:1.

6. brethren of Christ is used of,

a. his brothers by blood; see 1 above.

b. all men: Matthew 25:40 (Lachmann brackets); Hebrews 2:11f (others refer these examples to d.)

c. apostles: Matthew 28:10; John 20:17.

d. Christians, as those who are destined to be exalted to the same heavenly δόξα (which see, III. 4 b.) which he enjoys: Romans 8:29.​

Did Mary have children? Thayer's etymology of adelphos is 'a brother (whether born of the same two parents, or only of the same father or the same mother)'. Yes, she could have had children to Joseph.

What did a Jewish couple do after they were married? The traditional Jewish view of marriage was to have children after the marriage. See: Jewish views on Marriage.

Oz
You are playing word games. This nonsense has been refuted using a "Bible alone" approach.
Jesus' "Brothers" and Mary's Perpetual Virginity

It's interesting that many of today's Protestants reject Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and Bollinger's acceptance of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. Instead, they accept falsehoods that were invented in the 19th century by liberals and atheists. Before that, every Protestant church taught the PVofM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marymog

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Vows Taken by A Young Woman in Her Father's House
Numbers 30:3-5

Vows Taken by a Married Woman
Numbers 30:6-8

Vows Taken by a Widow or Divorced Woman
Numbers 30:9-15

All right: so what does all of this mean? The key is in the final section; the chapter is concerned with a woman's vows to "afflict herself," which, as the great Torah scholar Jacob Milgrom points out, was interpreted by ancient Jews as referring to fasting and/or refraining from sexual intercourse. Similar terminology is used in descriptions of the Day of Atonement, when Jews were expected to fast and refrain from sexual intercourse
(see Milgrom, Harper Collins Study Bible n. Lev 16:29; citing Targum Pseudo-Jonthan; cf. also Exod 19:15).

Once this terminology is clear, the whole chapter makes sense. It is discussing three kinds of vows:
1. Vows of sexual abstinence taken by a young, unmarried woman.
2. Vows of sexual abstinence taken by a married woman.
3. Vows of sexual abstinence taken by a widow or divorced woman.

In all three cases, the binding nature of the vow is dependent on whether the male party (whether father or husband), upon hearing of the vow, said nothing and in thereby consented to it.

In each case, if he heard the vow and accepted it, the vow is perpetually binding.
Now, what this means is that if a young Jewish woman--say, Mary, in this instance--took a vow of sexual abstinence, and her legal husband--in our case, Joseph--heard of the vow and said nothing, then the vow stands, and she is bound to keep it.

This provides a solid historical basis for Joseph and Mary having a perpetually virginal marriage: indeed, Numbers is very explicit in the final verse that if the husband changes his mind "and makes them null and void after he has heard of them," the sin will be upon him: "he shall bear her iniquity" (Num 30:15).
One can easily imagine a situation where some husbands would think better of deciding to accept such a vow! But as Matthew's Gospel tells us: Joseph was a "righteous man" (Matt 1:19), and obedient to Torah. If Mary took a vow of sexual abstinence--and her words "How can this be, since I know not man?" in Luke are evidence that she did (Luke 1:34)--and if Joseph accepted this vow at the time of their wedding, then he would have been bound by Mosaic Law to honor her vow of sexual abstinence under the penalty of sin, and Joseph would not be righteous and the Bible would contradict itself, which we know can't happen.

However implausible it may sound to a sex-saturated Western culture that a man would ever do such a thing, the fact of the matter is that the Old Testament appears to assume it as a real possibility. Indeed, the fact that an entire chapter of the Bible is devoted to it appears to suggest that vows of sexual abstinence on the part of women must have been a visible enough part of the culture that a law was necessary to deal with the situation! (This should come as no surprise to students of antiquity; consecrated virgins were part of the religious landscape of the ancient world). Should there be any doubt about this, I would suggest in passing that the reader call to mind the controversy that faced Pauline churches about young widows renegging on their vows of sexual abstinence (1 Timothy 4) and the otherwise difficult and confusing passage in 1 Corinthians about what a man should do about marrying his "virgin" (1 Cor 7:36-38). If both these texts apply to the situation envisaged in Numbers 30, then Mary's situation is anything but unique in culture.
The Sacred Page: A Biblical Basis For Mary's Perpetual Virginity?

Do you follow the Bible or the opinions of 19th century modernist liberals?
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Here's where it looks like you called Job a liar :

Post #1189, church forum, Catholic thread, July 27,2017:
Pia:

Well for one you keep accusing people of being anti Catholics, when what we are is anti men's religion and men's understandings. You don't bother me, and Jesus has been making me look in the mirror as you suggested for more than 30 years, and as I discovered, over all those years everything I THOUGHT I knew, has ended up being back the front, upside down and inside out, all wrong. But I would not have known that without Him. I tried to join 'churches' and found no life in them, I did in a few people attending, but that entire religious system, which was brought forth from the writings by men, I found to be full of self righteous people who only had a book to offer, NOT The Resurrected Christ. Why do you personalize it so? Reminds me of a lovely little joke I heard once :" A man gets to heaven and the Lord is showing him around. They come to this taller than tall wall, which seemed to surround something, so the man asks The Lord what that is about. The Lord smiles and replies :" Oh, that's for the Catholics, they like to think they are the only ones here." And that you can apply to ALL the religions out there, they ALL think they are the only ones who have the truth, but wouldn't recognize Jesus if they fell over Him. So very sad !.................Stay, leave, whatever you desire, it is entirely up to you isn't it, but just one little piece of advice, BE careful what you call from satan or wrong, as I have only shared what The Lord Himself has told me or shown me, so it's actually Him, you are saying is wrong ! Perhaps you should seek HIM.................Pia
Click to expand...

Your response:
An "anti-Catholic" is a person who LIES about the Church to make their point.
It is NOT a person who simply disagrees with Catholic teaching.

I never refer to those people of being anti-Catholics. Just those of you who lie.
Job is a textbook example of a liar and spreader of falshoods.
I never called him a "liar".
I said he was a textbook example of what a liar is - and I stand by that.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why?
Do you want to watch and listen?
A "conversation" by definition is a verbal exchange between 2 or more people.
How could I "watch" a conversation that I am having with you??

You can't be this dense, Rollo . . .
 

Rollo Tamasi

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2017
2,317
1,512
113
73
Inverness, Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
A "conversation" by definition is a verbal exchange between 2 or more people.
How could I "watch" a conversation that I am having with you??

You can't be this dense, Rollo . . .
You could always look in the mirror, but then again, I look at your avatar and I don't see a face.
You are mysterious indeed.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You could always look in the mirror, but then again, I look at your avatar and I don't see a face.
You are mysterious indeed.
Like I said - when you're ready to have a grown-up conversation about the topic - let me know.
So far, your responses have been nothing more than snarky, immature comments.