Search results

Ummmmmm, I've got news for you, Einstein: ALL words are man made, Einstein. "Trinity" is a man-made word - but it relates a BIBLICAL principal. Same with "Incarnation". "Context" is simply a rule of clarification of a situation or circumstance. Now THAT'S what I call a psychotically-verbose rant.

Yup - you're one of the "few" . . .

One of a very few . . .

I say that is incorrect. This WAS the first Mass. As for the Real Presence - if you don't believe in it, that's up to you. If you DO believe in it - then a change HAS to occur during the consecration - and it has nothing to do with Josiah's obsession with "alchemy" or Aristotle . . .

It is because of the following verse that I am even here on this forum: Exod. 20:16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." If everybody could heed this ONE verse of Scripture regarding the Catholic Church - there would be NO need for my being here . . .

Again - I don't know why you're be so evasive. Bread ISN'T flesh. If Jesus held a hunk of bread in His hands and said it was His flesh - then, at SOME point, it changed from simply being bread - even thought that offends you. Nothing to do with "Alchemy" or "Aristotle". Just the plain truth...

The "day after" Christ's 2nd coming, we will all be judged and either in Heaven or Hell.

So - by your evasive response, all I can gather is that YOU believe that the bread IS the actual Body of Christ? Is that what you are saying? If so - then you need to explain HOW the bread changed from bread to flesh. If not - then you need to explain WHY Jesus said it was. Seems to me that...

Reminds me of the Millerites (precursor to the SDA's) who thought Jesus was coming back in 1844. When he didn't come - they called it "The Great Disappointment".

Why do you keep dodging the question?? Your would-be answer is reminiscent of Bill Clinton's "What is 'Is'" excuse during the Monica Lewinsky debacle. I asked YOU to explain what Jesus meant when He held up a hunk of bread and told the Apostles that it WAS (IS) His Body. Was it bread or was it...

Ummmmm, your repeating of this fallacy doesn't make it true. It just means that you like to repeat things . . . Listen, sparky - a THOUSAND repetitions doesn't produce ONE shred of evidence.

No - tell me in your OWN words. I am not going to go to a long-winded, biased link. f you can't explain it - then you have a REAL problem.

No - those already in Heaven will come with the Lord to get the rest of us on earth. NOTHING in there about a snatching away before the coming Tribulation.

Yup - this is ALL talking about His 2nd Coming.

Christ will come back WITH His saints (in Heaven) FOR His saints (on earth) at the end. His 2nd Coming heralds the BODILY Resurrection - which includes those who have died before His Coming. That's why 1 Thess. 4:16 plainly says "... the dead in Christ will rise first." PS - STILL waiting for...

Then, by ALL means - show us . . .

John 12:1-4 is about his RETURN. It's NOT about some "magical" man-made event that comes prior to His return. As for your moronic claim about "all" Catholic doctrines being "invented" in the 4th century - please NAME one . . .

So did John Nelson Darby when he invented this clap-trap back in the 1830's. NONE of your Protestant Fathers taught or believed in this nonsense. WHY do you suppose that their ecclesial descendants started teaching it?

No, because this is a 19th century man-made invention. 1 Thess. 4:16-18 takes place at the 2nd Coming of Christ - NOT at some "magical" time before that where His people are pulled out of danger. Jesus returns ONCE - not twice . . .

Then, instead of simply denying the Scriptural evidence I presented - as is ALWAYS the case with angry anti-Catholics - please ADDRESS them. Debunk them - if you CAN. Simply calling me "hypocritical" doesn't about to a hill of beans without counter-evidence . . .