Search results

Mary I'm afraid you are incredibly confused about what's being discussed here. I hope you figure it out. Peace.

You really have quite a desperate imagination. Here, let me assist you. Translation: It doesn't matter if you call it 'discipline' or 'doctrine.' It's still error.

If an unbiblical requirement pushes you in a certain direction, it's not really a free choice.

No, I don't think you do. Once again, a man who wants to be a priest/leader, according to the RCC, must be celibate to do so whether he wants to or not. If a man can't handle this he cannot be a priest/leader. This is unbiblical. The Biblical choice is between being a celibate leader, (more...

Great. Let me know when the RCC corrects this error. Thanks.

I’ve already answered this quite extensively. See my previous posts — including the one to which you just replied.

The fact that they didn't require such a choice is plain to see for all who can read. Jesus and Paul are examples of "those to whom it is given." Now pay attention here. Your very first so-called 'pope' had a wife. So did some of the other Apostles as well as other leaders. 1Co 9:5 Do we not...

If they want to become a priest they are required to be celibate. Again, Jesus and Paul did not require such a choice. Herein Rome is in error and so are you. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see what’s plain to see. Then again, Scripture isn’t Rome’s strong suit.

You seem to have a very strange definition of "volunteer." Neither Jesus nor Paul required that a choice be made between one's natural urges and vocation as Rome does. The choice they actually invoked was between celibacy or no celibacy. It's a choice between being a celibate leader or a leader...

This Christian comedian is hilarious. Take a look.

Yes, I did. I said more than that. Lying about what I said doesn't help you save face. It does however serve to damage your credibility. Here's a link to the post in question should anyone care to see what you're leaving out. Should Priests Get Married?

I admit no such thing. You're confused.

My quotes speak for themselves -- including those by Jesus and Paul. Moses wrote during his lifetime and there's no evidence that those writings disappeared and were transmitted orally as you seem to think.

Oh I said much more than that and you know it. Nice try though.

You claimed that the Pentateuch was orally transmitted before it was written down hundreds of years later. I demonstrated that to be false. Your latest question is relevant to my reply how exactly? And what “writings” are you talking about?

You included and entire chapter as your first example so for the sake of brevity I'm only including the relevant verses. Act 10:24 And on the following day they entered Caesarea. Cornelius was expecting them and had called together his relatives and close friends. Act 10:33 So I sent for...

Compiled and narrated later, yes. Written, absolutely not. Hmm...it would appear that Moses was quite a prolific writer, huh Aspen? Observe. Joh 5:46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. Joh 5:47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my...

That's it? I asked to see the "content" of your oral tradition and documented evidence of its transmission from inspired speaker to the present. Your earliest source not only writes toward the end of the second century, which puts him about 100 years after the fact, he doesn't mention baptism in...

Inspired oral teaching was certainly valid at the time it was given, but unless it was preserved in writing it passes away with the speaker and his initial audience. If you wish to deny this, then please direct me to the content of your "oral tradition" along with documented evidence of its...