Search results

Careful - your ignorance is showing again. First of all - until you can prove that people were executed for simply "looking" at Bibles - then you need to keep quiet. Secondly - it's glaringly apparent that you have NO idea what the Inquisitions were about and don't really have a grasp on the...

Nice try. Next time - make sure you have some evidence before make these kinds of false accusations. Now - can you debate the topic - or have you run out of things to say?

Ummmmm, mjrhealth's post was in response to MY post #1248 asking him to show me where I used red herrings or straw men, Einstein. Pay attention - or butt out . . .

And when YOU can show me where where I used red herrings or straw men, as you falsely accused me of - you can have a say in our conversation. So far, you have failed to show me any evidence . . .

And you can sit there and pretend that you don't see the words "VERNACULAR" and "ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF" and imagine that you have a case. There were many spurious and heavily-flawed translations going on during this time. These were not being translated from the "masses" - but from...

First of all - "veneration" of Peter has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Jesus called him "Kepha." Denial is the only reason anybody would reject this Scriptural fact. Finally - you should know better that to believe in "popular knowledge" without researching it. The plain fact of...

ALL of us are children of Satan before we are children of God. You're no exception . . . Sooooo, why would you say that people were "restricted" from reading the Bible and that's why they believed that Jesus called Simon, "Rock"??

No problem.

Hey, I didn't call Simon "Rock" - Jesus did. As for people being "restricted" from reading the Bible - you need to study your history.

The explanation is very simple - but explaining to people who refuse to seeis where it gets long-winded.

I assumed you were on a discussion/debate site to have "discussion". Apparently not.

All I ask is that you pay attention to the conversation instead of blindly posting things that have already been presented and argued.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention. The reason I mentioned Paul's reference to Peter as "Cephas" was to who that Jesus spoke ARAMAIC. So - if Jesus spoke Aramaic - then He didn't call Simon "Petros" and didn't differentiate that word with "Petra". He said "Kepha", which simply means...

Sorry - but the Scriptural language doesn't jive with your explanation. Not only is Peter called the "Rock" (Kepha) - Abraham is also called the "Rock" (Isaiah 51:1). And, by the way - Peter is not called a "small stone". Jesus didn't speak Greek to the Apostles - He spoke ARAMAIC. What Jesus...

That's NOT what I asked you. I asked you to show me where I used red herrings or straw men. If you can't do that - then maybe you shouldn't falsely accuse people . . .

Whatever revisions to the Catechism - doctrine never changes.

And, as I challenged mjrhealth to explain where I used a red herring OR a straw man - I now ask YOU to do the same. He failed - will YOU?

Good - then you can see that the "red herring" and "Straw man" comments were directed at him and not you.

Do you have him on "ignore"? That might be the issue. Whatever it is, it sounds like a technical problem.

What are you talking about?? In post #1230 - I DID back quote mjrhealth. Go back and read the post.