Search results

Anti-Catholic paranoia at its most moronic . . .

This is either a blatant LIE – or just more of your pathetic ignorance. I think it’s a combination of BOTH . . . At the Passover meal there are FOUR CUPS of wine that are blessed and consumed. He is NOT the High Priest according to the LAW, Einstein. He has fulfilled the Law. That’s why He...

Actually – that is just another anti-Catholic LIE. von Balthasar NEVER said that. HERE is what he wrote on the subject: "When Luther dares to equate the Roman Church with the whore of Babylon, it strikes us as the height of blasphemy. But he was not the first to coin the phrase. Similar...

And YOUR problem, as is usually the case with most anti-Catholics who refer to the 7 Churches of Revelation - is that you actually believe that they are 7 different Churches. They are the same ONE Church in 7 different locations in Turkey. Jesus established only ONE Church and prayed fervently...

I've read just about every anti-Catholic treatise on the Eucharist and Transubstantiation - and the ONLY thing I've been able to glean from them is that they are ALL an exeercise in denial and disdain for the Church. Nothing more . Explain to me how this one is ANY different . . .

No - Peter was given Authority and Primacy over the others. It's ALL there in black and white (Matt. 16:18-19, Luke 22:31-32, John 21:19-25). Look - you can angrily deny it all day long but it doesn't make it "untrue" . . .

And apparently you are once again, BLINDED by your abject ignorance of ALL things Catholic. This is a BOOK written by a priest - NOT the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Einstein. The angrier your responses get - the more pathetic they are , , , Uhhhhh, no - all uyou've done is issue denials...

Just more of your angry, pathetic lies . . . If Jesus states that it IS His Body and Blood - I believe it. YOUR lack of faith is appalling . . .

Apparently, you don't know how a debate works. YOU are the one who stated matter-of-factly that there was "no wine". Therefore, the onus is on YOU to prove it. This is "Debating 101" Einstein . . . Careful, your Scriptural ignorance is showing again . . . He could not be a priest on earth...

James absolutely was the Bishop of Jerusalem. However - he wasn't the earthly head of the entire Church. Peter was (Matt. 16:18-19, Luke 22:31-32, John 21:19-25).

It's not "my" interpretation - but that of Christ's Church - His Body. Also - I'm not sure why you misused 1 Tim. 2:5, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with what we are talking about . . .

Soooooo, Adam was WRONG when he gave Eve the title of “Mother of ALL the living”?? ALL Scripture – EVERY WORD of it is God-breathed (2 Tim. 3:16). Your point about Eve is as stupid and devoid of Scriptural understanding as your idea that Peter had no Authority. The plain fact of the matter is...

The argument isn’t “dead” because Adam called her “Mother of ALL the living”. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds as YOU were the one who tied Adam’s titling of her to Gen. 3:15. NOW, you say that the point is “dead in the water”. Make up your mind or simply admit your pathetic hypocrisy . . ...

And the commentators weren’t wrong about Eve acknowledging God’s promises - YOU are. Eve never said a WORD after the prophecy in Gen. 3:15. This has NOTHING to do with her Title as “Mother of ALL the living” - and her title had NOTHING to do with Gen. 3:15. The prophecy says NOTHING about her...

Nice try – but NO cigar. I see that you did some homework – unfortunately, it was on the WRONG subject. NOBODY is disputing that Eve had a child. NOBODY is disputing the prophecy in Gen. 3:15. YOUR problem is that Eve NEVER “acknowledged” her title of “Mother of ALL the living”. She simply...

Only because YOU consider Scripture to be “upside down” . . . (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23)

Ummmm, did you actually R*E*A*D your little link?? Although the historicity of the legend is unprovable, the modern St Thomas Christians - as they still call themselves - regard this tradition as more than a myth: it is an article of faith which underpins religious beliefs, identity and their...

No - I'm not confusing anything. There is NO actual "history" of that Ethiopian Eunuch starting a Church in Ethiopia. NOR is there and actual "history"about Thomas preaching in India. These are TRADITIONS.

First of all - your last statement is a really stupid and ignorant LIE. Please show me the verbiage in the Catechism that states that the observance of Sunday worship is based on "no Scriptural authority". PLEASE show me . . . Secondly - I've already shown you several times where the NT...

Sooooo, let me get this straight. As a Protestant - you reject Tradition as a valid form of truth - EXCEPT for when it suits your argument. HOWEVER - when Catholics appeal to Tradition - you pass it off as fanciful myth and not much more. What a giant hypocrisy. Can YOU show me in the pages...