Search results

Soooooo – you CAN’T show me where anybody “got me good” but you can falsely make that claim – is that it? Typical of your cowardice. As for Papal infallibility – it has absolutely NOTHING to do with clairvoyance. Look – if you want to continue being a good little anti-Catholic – at LEAST do...

Actually – that’s another LIE. I only refer to people as “anti-Catholic” when they resort to LYING about what the Church teaches. Simply disagreeing doesn’t make anybody an anti-Catholic - desperately lying does. BIG difference . . .

Please show me where he "got me good". Papal.Infallibility has ZERO to do with clairvoyance . . .

Apparently YOU are also ignorant about the definition of Papal Infallibility . . .

PERFECT answer, because it typifies the abject ignorance of most anti-Catholics. Papal infallibility ONLY pertains to matters of official teaching. Not knowing that he was being duped by his underlings doesn’t apply. Maybe YOU should do a little homework instead of embarrassing yourself any...

And, as usual - you drop by with your LIES. Tell me where did I engage in "name-callimg" on this thread??

ONE MORE TIME . . . It was an ABUSE. This means that there were people within the Church who were involved. Was EVERY person involved a parish priest?? Probably NOT. Could this information have been kept from the hierarchy? Absolutely. This was the 16th century. There were no phones...

How many times must I remind you that this was an ABUSE, not a directive??

Read post #27 . . .

And, as I’ve already stated – the Church WASN’T doing this. It was an abuse by men like Tetzel. This was NEVER a Church-mandated practice – nor was it ever endorsed by the Church. It’s funny how you conveniently refuse to address this and completely ignore my challenge to you to provide...

As long as you ignore the first three - right??

I never challenged what is written in Luther’s document. I challenge the false allegations by many based on what he wrote. Ummmmm, have you actually read through the entire document? First of all – NOT all of his “95 theses”were protests against the Church. Some of them actually AGREED with...

Good grief – here we go again . . . I was just packing for a little vacation this weekend and thought I’d have one last look at the posts on this forum before I left – and I saw this putrid pile of anti-Catholic manure. You guys have GOT to stop reading those moronic Jack Chick tracts. This...

If by faith “alone”, you mean simple belief – then you are DEAD wrong. NOWHERE does the Bible teach this in context. The Bible DOES teach that true faith = Belief + Obedience (Works)– and it teaches this explicitly (Matt. 5:1-12, Matt. 25:31-46, Gal. 5:6, James 2:14-26). PLEASE provide...

That is absolutely false. However you slice it – OSAS, Eternal Security, Eternal Assurance – this is false, man-made invention of the 16th century and is NOTsupported in Scripture. The Bible assures us that if we STOP believing and STOP being obedient - we LOSE it all (Matt. 5:13, Matt. 7:21...

This is a great verse – and it applies to those who REMAIN faithful. However – it does NOT apply to those who fall away – and the Bible is filled with examples of this. Jesus said that simply calling on His name and believing is NOT enough: Matt. 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’...

And that ALL depends on what YOU think “Faith” is. Faith is NOT simply “believing” – and Scripture is explicitly clear about that. Faith = Belief + Obedience (Works). James is adamant about this by telling his readers that just “believing” doesn’t make you any better off than the DEMONS...

Absolutely. However - YOUR asssertion that belief = salvation is Biblically unsound.

WRONG again. Simply “believing” is NOT a sign of salvation. It simply marks that you have been given the grace to believe – which is the FIRST STEP toward salvation. Salvation requires true faith – and True Faith = Belief + Obedience. James tells us in NO uncertain terms: James 2:19 You...

WRONG. Limited Atonement is the “L” in Calvin’s “TULIP”. He absolutely taught it – and it’s a FALSE and unbiblical doctrine. I suggest you look up 5-Point Calvinism . . .