Search results

No - we're not ALL agreed. YOU don't have the power of life and death over ANY himan being. Only GOD does.

The only thing "unBiblical" about the Pr-Life position is YOUR refusal to accept God's truth. It's already been extabllished from Scripture that an unborn child is a person with a soul in the WOMB. Yet, like the proverbial spoiled childrom who won't listen - you still refuse to believ in God's...

First of all - get your FACTS straight. Eusebius died an old man. He was't "murdered" by the Church., Seconsly - it is fitting that you agree with Eusevius, who was aligned with the Arian Heresy of his day. The only "persecution" he endured was self-inflicted for having apparently embraced...

Ummmmm, NEWSFLASH: ROME invaded Jerusalem and DESTRYOLED the Temple in the FIRST century. Jerusalem WAS the “faithful city”. However, Apostate Jerusalem BECAME a whore (Isaiah 1:21) when she rejected Christ and colluded with t he Romans to destroy the Christians. "Drunk on the blood of God's...

Explain, Einstein. Like I said - your posts are extremely short on evidence . . .

Even Wikipedia, in ALL of its secular glory disagrees with you . . . "The Immaculate Conception is the belief that the Virgin Mary was free of original sin from the moment of her conception.[1] It is one of the four Marian dogmas of the Catholic Church.[2] Debated by medieval theologians, it...

And YE need to do your homework . . .

WRONG. This is a Christianity forum - and your complete cowardice is noted. ANYBODY who reads my post #147 - which YOU ran from a like a scared cat is bursting with Scripture. You're just NOT able to refute it . . .

WRONG. The document that YOU referenced from 1950 was the definition of the Assumption - not the Immaculate Conception, which was defined almost 100 years PRIOR to that. Ummmm, who's "LOL"-ing now??

As usual – your responses are laden with platitudes – but ZERO evidence to the contrary. Let me know when you’re ready to have a grown-up discussion where you actually have to present some evidence. Because so far – you’ve been schooled by a Catholic . . .

I do. I'm establishing the fact that you're a liar I think I've also proven that you don't have a valid refutation of the Catholic position.

And yet, you STILL cannot mount a Scriptural refutation of my arguments. Of my greatest enemy is the Bible – then PROVE me wrong using the Bible. Give me a point-by-point refutation of the exegesis I gave about Mary and the Ark in post #147.

I. THE DOCTRINE In the Constitution “Ineffabilis Deus” of December 8, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary “in the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race...

Thank you for illustrating your Scriptural ignorance. Romans 3 is NOT a reference to Mary, but a DIRECT reference to Psalm 41, which says: Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; Jesus was a man. Is HE also part of the “ALL” who have...

Tru dat. This guy is off the rails . . .

WRONG. It was defined in 1854 by Pius XI. Where is the Scripture to support my claims?? Go back and READ the post. I have you nothing BUT Scripture. It’s interesting how quickly you deemed my post to be “Total Nonsense” – yet you couldn’t actually refute a SINGLE sentence. A thousand...

To understand Mary’s Immaculate Conception, you need to first understand the OT types of Mary. For example – the Ark of the Covenant is a foreshadowing of Mary. Just as the Ark had to be blessed and purified from both the inside and outside because it carried symbols of God's power within it -...

And yet, I've NEVER heard or read a single charge that I cannot easily refute or expose as a lie.

If you want to know what the Catholic Church actually teaches - go to the Catechism. Former Catholics are some of the most ignorant people I've ever met. That's why they're "former" Catholics . . .

No - just holding you accountable for your remarks.