Church

[bbyrd009]

hmm, tho a ship in harbor giving directions to the ships at sea might be more apropos here, dunno

 

[BreadOfLife]

This catholic vs. anti-catholic hate war is yours. Obviously.
I love catholics.

You'd never know it by your posts.

Besides - the anti-Catholic vs. the Catholic "war", as you call it is yours, not mine.
I merely defend that which is true and expose that which is not . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

ppl too stupid to know when to shut up is usually a comedy routine, not a forum tactic, BoD.

Funny, coming from a person who cannot defend one, single anti-Catholic remark they've made.
Speaking of comedy - it IS pretty funny how hypocritical you anti-Catholics are, though . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

near as i can tell, the two disciplines are apples and oranges

It's a shame you don't know your history - OR your Bible . . .

hmm, don't recall ever doing so, but then imo this striving for a "Christian" church appellation would necessarily exclude any church that is not Christian as possibly teaching an acceptable path from the appellate's mind, yes?

So on the one hand you want to violate or ignore Scripture that outlines Christian behavior, confession, forgiveness, etc, but on the other you want to exclude any other religion not deemed "Christian," other than Catholicism. Now, you hardly are required to make sense or even explain to me, for us to coexist; but i don't see how you even justify this to yourself?

That's because you're typical dishonest anti-Catholic.
In post #249 - you attempted to show that a Church preceded the Catholic Church, but you failed.

Anyway - who ever said that defending the truth was a violation of anything Scriptural??

 

[BreadOfLife]

I did not follow any man, but God.

No - you followed the teachings of men and rejected the teachings of God and His Church.

Some of the heretical teachings you adhere to are classic Protestant positions and others are later inventions - like your rejection of the bodily resurrection of the Body of Christ.

 

[bbyrd009]

It's a shame you don't know your history - OR your Bible . . .

That's because you're typical dishonest anti-Catholic.
In post #249 - you attempted to show that a Church preceded the Catholic Church, but you failed.

Anyway - who ever said that defending the truth was a violation of anything Scriptural??

ah, i forgot that you don't actually read anyone else's posts, i guess

 

[BreadOfLife]

ah, i forgot that you don't actually read anyone else's posts, i guess

Sure I do.
That's how, in post #251, I was able to completely destroy your feeble attempt to discredit the Church in post #249 . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

well, maybe we can at least both agree that you are a legend :)

 

[BreadOfLife]

well, maybe we can at least both agree that you are a legend

No - just a defender of truth.

 

[bbyrd009]

No - just a defender of truth.

yes, i understand. That the truth needs no defense will not be heard here i guess

 

[ScottA]

don't we have passages about running, when no one is chasing? Something like that?

Hmmm...not sure.

 

[ScottA]

You'd never know it by your posts.

Besides - the anti-Catholic vs. the Catholic "war", as you call it is yours, not mine.
I merely defend that which is true and expose that which is not . . .

You are in for a big surprise.

 

[BreadOfLife]

yes, i understand. That the truth needs no defense will not be heard here i guess

Careful - your ignorance is showing again . . .

1 Pet. 3:15
But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect

2 Cor. 10:5
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are in for a big surprise.

Actually - storing up treasures in Heaven won't come as a "surprise".

 

[ScottA]

No - you followed the teachings of men and rejected the teachings of God and His Church.

Some of the heretical teachings you adhere to are classic Protestant positions and others are later inventions - like your rejection of the bodily resurrection of the Body of Christ.

It is not I who speak but the Holy Spirit. And you are an offence to me.

 

[amadeus]

don't we have passages about running, when no one is chasing? Something like that?

Perhaps you are thinking of this young man who insisted on running even though he did not have a message to carry to the king:

"Then said Ahimaaz the son of Zadok yet again to Joab, But howsoever, let me, I pray thee, also run after Cushi. And Joab said, Wherefore wilt thou run, my son, seeing that thou hast no tidings ready?
But howsoever, said he, let me run. And he said unto him, Run. Then Ahimaaz ran by the way of the plain, and overran Cushi." II Sam 18:22-23

He even passed the other guy, but when he arrived he had nothing in his hands.

 

[101G]

And you can't point to ONE erroneous doctrine taught by the Catholic Church.

The Godhead for starters.

 

[BreadOfLife]

It is not I who speak but the Holy Spirit. And you are an offence to me.

And now you have blasphemed because the Holy spirit doesn't speak the heretical errors that you do.
It is ONLY you who is speaking . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

The Godhead for starters.

What about the Godhead is an "erroneous" doctrine?

 

[DPMartin]

And you can't point to ONE erroneous doctrine taught by the Catholic Church.

how about "Mother of God" what's the excuse for the title, oh yea that's how it translates to English, it really doesn't mean mother of God, that's big fat lie if I've ever heard one. also the "Queen of Heaven" is also more mother Mary worship, carried out and promoted in the catholic ranks, and isn't contested by the church.


no other denomination that I can think of even the Lutherans idolize and worship the "Virgin Mary". which is also a erroneous theology. She was a virgin when she had Jesus but after that she was Joseph's wife respectfully. but catholic doctrine says otherwise, seems to be for the purpose of making her goddess like in their image of her. or to appease the public need of the day the doctrine was officially adopted of pagan worship of a goddess.

its been a long time since I've been told this by the catholic church but it was in a city under roman rule that was a mecca for a popular goddess of the day and that was the place coincidentally that the hearings for the adoption of the "Mother of God" theology toke place. don't hold me to when and where I don't remember. wasn't that important to me at the time.