If you think Mary remained a virgin till she died, then bet on it

[Eternally Grateful]

I don't know if you just made that up, or you read some polemic, revisionist history about the Catholic Church, but it's not often I see this level of error. I don't know what to tell you, other than try to go to a secular library and do some honest historical research. Then you can speak to the issue intelligently.

The Catholic Church is the original Church founded by Christ. We have written evidence from very early on. St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop of Antioch ordained by St. Peter, was captured by the Romans. While they were transporting him to Rome to be martyred for the faith, he wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans around 107-110 A.D., referring to the "Catholic Church," not in such a manner as if he were coining the term, but in such a manner in which he fully expected the Smyrnaeans to understand what he was talking about.

It says in paragraph 8, "Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."

See the entire letter here: https://www.orderofstignatius.org/files/Letters/Ignatius_to_Smyrnaeans.pdf

you rely on words of men, and men

I rely on God and the book HE GAVE ME

I did not make anything up. I stated what happens in real life. Imagine if Germany won WW2. History would look very much different today don't you agree?

You want to show me in the word where your doctrines are correct. I will gladly look. But otherwise, you can not prove your point..

You may be able to convince yourself. But you won't convince me.

just the fact that is was after the fall of the power of rome that the reformation took place (if the power of rome was not broken, Luther and All the others would have been executed and kept quite. and we would not have any of the things they believed in writing or in history) should convince you of this fact.. But only you can open your mind to that. I can't help you there

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hello Eg! I hope you are having a great day.

I believe I have always understood your method of coming to the Truth. But maybe I am wrong in what I believe so I should just get it straight from you. Here is what I believe is YOUR method of coming to the Truth in Scripture.

YOU read Scripture and interpret it.
YOU compare notes, thoughts, and interpretations with your fellow Christians.
YOU are wrong when YOU decide the other person is right.
After you decide that you a wrong YOU change your view.
YOU do not blindly follow the decisions of other men on this.
YOU follow YOUr own decision on this.
YOU decide if the various people that you talk to are right.
YOU don't have elders from a church that you follow and submit to.
Since YOU made the decision that YOU were wrong that means that YOU are not blindly following any man.

Is that a good summary of your method?

It does beg one question that I cant figure out: What if you change your view because someone else had a better view than you and you NOW believe you finally came to the Truth. But then 6 months later another wiser Christian comes along and changes your view again because their Truth sounded better than the Truth you just changed twice in the last 6 months. Are you comfortable that NOW you really know the Truth? Or can the Truth change again in 6 months?

Curious Mary

Better yet

what if I spent my entire life blindly following a group of people. because they said we should follow them only based on the fact they were the first church, and we should listen to them and them only

then you stand in front of Christ on judgment day and he tells you sadly he has never known you, because those men you blindly followed and NEVER questioned got it wrong. And now you have to spend an eternity in Hell because you believed these men who told you to trust them. They were Gods representatives.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hey EG,

Really? Us Catholics, and a lot of Protestant denominations, "kill Jesus over and over again every week"?

I suspect (I don't' want to put words in your mouth) you are talking about when Christians participate in communion, like He told us to do in remembrance of Him, at The Last Supper?

Do you NOT do it in remembrance of Him like He asked you to do?

Curious Mary

I do not eat food which Jesus said will give whoever eats eternal life. they will never die, never hunger, never thirst The assurance that God will raise us from the dead. and he will never lose us on a weekly basis. No I do not.

I don't MOCK God and say his flesh and blood must be crucified weekly to renew our life. because the flesh and blood we consumed the week before died. and lost its life giving properties. because it did not endure forever. like Jesus said it would.

If you would actually study John 6. instead of believing what you were told. You would see this also

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Yes EG. When one is confident that they KNOW the Truth......they kind of tend to stick to it. (John 8:32)

Some lack confidence and allow other people to change their views. Some believe that they will never KNOW the Truth. They question and mock the people that are confident in the truth because of their lack of confidence.

Mary

When your confident you are right and everyone else is wrong and no one will change your mind

then you are foolish. Because you in your view believe you have made it.

Thats just the fact, whether your catholic Baptist. Lutheran, or whatever denomination you follow.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hey EG,

I read thru your entire post and have chosen not to respond to most of it because it is the usual anti-Catholic babble that other men have written for the last 500 which is when your revolution started. You ARE repeating the lies, half-truths and revision of Christian history from OTHER MEN.

But the next to the last line of your post you say, Like I said You want to follow men, Feel free.

Yet YOU are following the lies, half-truths and revision of history FROM OTHER MEN!

You repeat 500-year-old interpretations of Scripture FROM OTHER MEN but then suggest that you came up with that interpretation yourself because YOU DON"T FOLLOW OTHER MEN!!!

Amazing that you can't see or at least admit your hypocrisy!!

See the double standard?

Anti catholic? What a joke. That is like saying because I believe there are two genders I am Anti trans or trans phobic. Thats like Saying because I believe biological males should not go into women's locker rooms or restrooms or participate in woman's sports. I am transphobic. That's like saying because I say marriage is a union of one man and one woman united in holy matrimony, I am anti gay or homophobic.

I am not anti catholic,, for one the catholic church is not the only church who believes in a Eucharistic teaching of the lords supper. So to say I disagree with their teaching on john 6 as being anticatholic is on one had in error. and on the other hand is just more catholic propaganda.. Anyone who disagrees with your church is anti catholic,


Revisions? what revisions? You cannot even walk through John 6 with me, and show me how to interpret it correctly. You did not this time, You did not all the other times we have ever spoken on this.

All you can say is I listen to men, why? Because I disagree and reject the roman churches interpretation of that passage.

Adultery is a sin, I think we can both agree with this. I assume you believe it because the catholic church told you this.

I do not believe it because the church told me this, I do not believe it because a pastor told me this. I do not believe it because any man or woman told me this

I believe it because it says so in the word of God. If anything, if I listened to anyone, it would be Moses, who wrote the words down. But even then, That would be giving Moses credit instead of God. It was God who told Moses to write down that adultery is a sin.

So when I believe adultery is a sin, I believe it because GOD TOLD ME SO.

The fact is, a catholic person (it may have been you, she used the nick Mary like you but it was in another chat room) used John 6 to prove the eucharist teaching was the true flesh and blood of Christ (using vs 53 - 58 only)

So I did what I always do

I opened the word of God. I set all of my pre-concieved notions and beliefs to the side. And I read the whole passage. I then broke the passage down to everything that Jesus said. and put them in order. and no matter how I tried. I could not make John 6 say what the person was saying to me. It did not fit.

Its not anti catholic. It is opening the word and studying to show myself approved..and not placing my belief system in the hand of any man, or taking what anyone says as gospel truth and blindly following it.

It is opening the word of God. Asking God to show me with an open mind, and determining what the passage is saying.

Marytoo (her nic) would not do this. she refused, all she would say is it was my private interpretation.. whatever. If your not going to go through a passage with someone, Don;t tell them they are wrong.. Because it is not really even YOU telling me I am wrong. It is your church..

I am not here to talk to your church, I am trying to talk to you. Will you talk? Or continue to blindly follow your church, then attack me as being anticatholic and all the other things you say

 

[Eternally Grateful]

@Eternally Grateful are you going to at least TRY to change my view and show me where Scripture supports your belief?

I have done that so many times I lost count.. many people have

 

[RedFan]

Sorry to interject the thought so late in the discussion, but WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE? Why do we care whether Mary remained a virgin after birthing Jesus? Would anything really be different in our faith depending on the answer to this apparently academic question? To me the debate seems about as relevant as the color of Mary's eyes.

 

[Marymog]

I have done that so many times I lost count.. many people have

Ummmm.....to the best of my memory (possibly) you and others have used John 14:26 and Acts 17:11 as your Scriptural proof that the Holy Spirit will reveal the TRUTH to YOU when you search Scripture. And, as I and many others have pointed out to YOU and your ilk, in John 14 Jesus was talking to the Apostles and the Apostles ONLY when he said that. If your Protestant interpretation of that passage were true then that means when someone FEELS like the Holy Spirit revealed the truth to them....then it is the Truth. About 500 years ago your Protestant fathers taught that John 14:26 applies to YOU. They then got angry when someone disagreed with them on a passage from Scripture, using that passage against them. In Acts 17 the Bereans searched what we now call OT Scripture to see if what Paul was telling them about Jesus being the Messiah was true. Once they searched Scripture the came to the Truth that Jesus was the Messiah sent by God and they joined The Church that Paul was an elder/apostle/leader of and what Paul and the other Apostles told the Bereans as being True they accepted that Truth and followed those men....Just like Scripture tells us to do (of which you reject).

Are those the passages from Scripture that you use as evidence that YOU can interpret Scripture and the Holy Spirit will give YOU the truth?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

See the double standard?

Anti catholic? What a joke. That is like saying because I believe there are two genders I am Anti trans or trans phobic. Thats like Saying because I believe biological males should not go into women's locker rooms or restrooms or participate in woman's sports. I am transphobic. That's like saying because I say marriage is a union of one man and one woman united in holy matrimony, I am anti gay or homophobic.

I am not anti catholic,, for one the catholic church is not the only church who believes in a Eucharistic teaching of the lords supper. So to say I disagree with their teaching on john 6 as being anticatholic is on one had in error. and on the other hand is just more catholic propaganda.. Anyone who disagrees with your church is anti catholic,

No, I do not see the double standard.

Yes, you are anti-Catholic because you post clear lies and biases about The Catholic Church and say derogatory things about The Church. Show me where you have done that with the Baptist, Lutherans, Methodist etc.

I KNOW that the CC is not the only Church who believes in a Eucharistic teaching of The Lords Supper. I POINTED THAT OUT TO YOU and how you and your ilk are teaching OPPOSITE of what Scripture teaches and the 2,000-year teaching of Christianity that SOME Protestants still hold onto!!!


Before you try and say that you are not anti-Catholic and don't tell lies about what Catholics believe and the history of Christiainty.....here are examples from some of your previous posts:

Your confusing fantasy from reality...The Roman Catholic Church was started by the Roman Empire. In order to keep its citizens from revolting. It added a bunch of pagan things to the church, and called them christian. The church was the state. The Pontifus Maximus (pope) was the pope of the church and the ceasar of rome. Again, You want to place your eternity in the hands of history and rome feel free...You want to base your eternity on a dictator war mongering history? Feel free....The Catholic Church as it stands today was not founded by Christ....Yes, and the Catholic Church has been persecuting christ for a few thousand years now....
Historically. Any church that was against the roman church was destroyed by the roman church, Heretics were burned at the stake, All of their books were burned or destroyed.....So it is a lie to say no other church was in existence. it would have went underground for fear of Rome.....one thing people need to remember is the roman catholic church, through the power of the roman empire, ruled the world not only through power. but through information.....We know for a fact. that any doctrines they considered as heresy, would have been shut out. Any writings, any books which would support those heresies were burned. and the heretics would be sent to a remote island to die. or murdered (they called it executed)....so if we are looking for doctrines they considered heresy (Belief that Mary was not a virgin, Belief that the bread and wine were not the flesh and blood, belief that salvation was through faith alone, and eternal security) you probably will not find it. Because the roman church rejected these doctrines.....so to use this to prove that a doctrine is in error. and not true, and no one believed it before is misleading, actually dangerous. Because this is the excuse the catholics use to convince themselves their own heresies are true.

That is just a SMALL example of your revision of Christian history and attacks against the CC and individual Catholics. So PLEASE stop revising the TRUTH...you ARE anti-Catholic!

Now, show me your posts where you said some of the same things about Protestant denominations!!

IKYW

Patient Mary

 

[Marymog]

When your confident you are right and everyone else is wrong and no one will change your mind

then you are foolish. Because you in your view believe you have made it.

Thats just the fact, whether your catholic Baptist. Lutheran, or whatever denomination you follow.

You REALLY do not realize that what you are saying is OPPOSITE of what Scripture teaches.....Do you?

 

[Marymog]

I do not eat food which Jesus said will give whoever eats eternal life. they will never die, never hunger, never thirst The assurance that God will raise us from the dead. and he will never lose us on a weekly basis. No I do not.

I don't MOCK God and say his flesh and blood must be crucified weekly to renew our life. because the flesh and blood we consumed the week before died. and lost its life giving properties. because it did not endure forever. like Jesus said it would.

If you would actually study John 6. instead of believing what you were told. You would see this also

You don't follow Scripture. I know this already.

Sooooo your men have taught you that when you do what Jesus told you to do ("do this in remembrance of me")...you are mocking God? Just because you don't understand how Jesus can give us his flesh and blood on a daily (or as you say weekly) basis, doesn't mean he can't do it. Oh ye' of little faith!!!! Soooo what is the "daily bread" that we are praying for in The Lord's Prayer?

I have studied John 6 and I accept what Jesus said in it. I accept the writings from the earliest Christians 2,000 years ago on this matter. I accept our 2,000-year Christian history. You and your ilk reject it. You accept the writings from men around 500 years ago. When Paul asked, "The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" Us Christians say YES Paul, it is. Just like Jesus said at The Last Supper, it IS his body. You and your men reject Jesus and Paul. I don't.

Keeping it real with Scripture and Christian history instead of opinions...Mary

 

[Marymog]

When your confident you are right and everyone else is wrong and no one will change your mind

I am confident that The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth....Just like Scripture says.

I am confident that The Church decides who is right and who is wrong when it comes to the Truth.....Just like Scripture says.

Therefore, I am confident that what I say is the Truth.

You, by your own admittance, do not accept that what you believe is true because, by your own admittance, someone can change your view if YOU decide what they are saying is true and what you previously believed is not true.

What you believe is on shifting sand. What I believe is built upon a rock....Just like Scripture says.

Keeping it real....Mary

 

[Marymog]

Better yet

what if I spent my entire life blindly following a group of people. because they said we should follow them only based on the fact they were the first church, and we should listen to them and them only

You blindly follow YOU....that is until someone tells you something different that YOU agree with. Then you are following what they told you and YOU determine what they told you is true.

Can you really not see.......never mind. I should stop wasting my time showing you how illogical and anti-Scriptural your beliefs are.

 

[Marymog]

When others attack rather than try to share truth just remember this verse and act accordingly !

Romans 16:17 I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them.

Titus 3:10 Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition.........

We have been rejecting Protestantism, which divided Christianity, for 500 years. To no avail....

 

[Marymog]

Sorry to interject the thought so late in the discussion, but WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE? Why do we care whether Mary remained a virgin after birthing Jesus? Would anything really be different in our faith depending on the answer to this apparently academic question? To me the debate seems about as relevant as the color of Mary's eyes.

Hello RedFan,

You ask a very good question. Would anything be different if we accept or reject that Mary was a perpetual virgin?

Do you think it was important to Mary that she remained a virgin?

My answer is, if it is important to the Mother of God, it is important to me. Can you say the same?

Respectfully Mary

 

[Marymog]

Mary naturally born without sin…False
Mary a perpetual Virgin…………..False
Mary bodily alive in Heaven……….False


Mary was naturally born in sin, of the seed of a man, just like every other Human.

She was a female and by all of accounts a Virgin, Believing, faithful, Jew.

She was betrothed to a man (Joseph) of the House of David and thereafter impregnated in her Virgin Womb, by the Power of God, with the Seed of God….by no effort of her own.

During her pregnancy, she became wed to Joseph. Joseph was told to not consummate his marriage to Mary until after the Birth of the child (and of course the Lawful waiting period of time according to Mosaic Law, after the birth of a male child.)

Thereafter there is ZERO indication or teaching, that Joseph or Mary would not consummate their marriage…

There is ZERO Scriptural indication of Scriptural teaching that Joseph was Celibate, by will or defect.

There is ZERO Scriptural indication or Scriptural teaching that Joseph and Mary would practice ANTI-MOSAIC Laws…

*That they would NOT consummate their marriage.
*That they would NOT MULTIPLY offspring.
*That Mary would REJECT her husbands sexual desires.

The PRETENSE teaching that Mary was “Naturally born” without sin and Mary “remained” a virgin during her marriage to Joseph…. IS NOT Scriptural teaching…
AND
By what IS Scriptural teaching…ALL natural born humans ARE born IN SIN.
AND
By what IS Scriptural teaching…VIRGINS…(male and female) having not been “sexually” defiled by the opposite gender ARE specifically “chosen BY God” TO serve God according to a “Specific Means”…

Mary Accomplished her EXPRESS Specific Service, and is Remembered for that!

144,000 VIRGINS of the Tribes of Israel shall ALSO accomplish their EXPRESS Specific Service.

Corrupt men….for centuries who could not Answer with accuracy…HOW God Himself could be born forth out of a human females virgin Womb, WHEN ALL humans are born IN SIN……
Not a big puzzle….While Mary’s body was born IN SIN….EXPRESSLY what was Acceptable to God, was her VIRGIN WOMB.

AND…Because Mary’s BODY WAS BORN IN SIN….She like every other Human, required a SAVIOR to forgive her SIN and SAVE her soul, which was Accomplished BEFORE her bodily Death as accounted in Scripture, IN Acts.

The SAVIOR, Christ Jesus, came to SAVE sinners…
If Mary was “without” SIN…Really? The Savior SAVED Mary (without sin)…??
FROM WHAT?

Acts 1
Acts 2


Glory to God,
Taken

Thank you for repeating the 500-year teaching of some, not all, Protestant men.

Me and my ilk choose to adhere to the 2,000-year teaching of The Church and hold fast to the traditions that were taught by word of mouth or letter.

Mary

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Ummmm.....to the best of my memory (possibly) you and others have used John 14:26 and Acts 17:11 as your Scriptural proof that the Holy Spirit will reveal the TRUTH to YOU when you search Scripture. And, as I and many others have pointed out to YOU and your ilk, in John 14 Jesus was talking to the Apostles and the Apostles ONLY when he said that. If your Protestant interpretation of that passage were true then that means when someone FEELS like the Holy Spirit revealed the truth to them....then it is the Truth. About 500 years ago your Protestant fathers taught that John 14:26 applies to YOU. They then got angry when someone disagreed with them on a passage from Scripture, using that passage against them. In Acts 17 the Bereans searched what we now call OT Scripture to see if what Paul was telling them about Jesus being the Messiah was true. Once they searched Scripture the came to the Truth that Jesus was the Messiah sent by God and they joined The Church that Paul was an elder/apostle/leader of and what Paul and the other Apostles told the Bereans as being True they accepted that Truth and followed those men....Just like Scripture tells us to do (of which you reject).

Are those the passages from Scripture that you use as evidence that YOU can interpret Scripture and the Holy Spirit will give YOU the truth?

Mary

Any excuse you will make to listen to men. and not think for yourself.

You are wrong here like you are wrong in so many areas.

Jesus told the disciples to go out and make new disciples. the things he told to the disciples would pass to their new disciples as well.


but.. You would rather listen to every excuse the roman church tells you to scare you into listening to them and them only..

If I remember right, did not the pharisees and priests use this very same tactic??

We need to learn from history. not make the same mistakes..

 

[Sigma]

The Roman Catholic Church was started by the Roman Empire. In order to keep its citizens from revolting. It added a bunch of pagan things to the church, and called them christian.

The church was the state. The Pontifus Maximus (pope) was the pope of the church and the ceasar of rome.

Rome didn't create the Catholic Church to keep people from revolting. Constantine, who was in charge of the Eastern Roman Empire, legalized the Church and adopted it as a state religion. His conversion is not the same as "creating the Church" for political reasons.

And, you think that the Pope was a Caesar?? Is this because Caesar was named the high priest of Rome? That was the pagan Rome which has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, and in fact was persecuting the first Pope's of the Church for many years. You are conflating many different terms and ideas that happened at different dates in order to fit your agenda.

Adultery is a sin, I think we can both agree with this. I assume you believe it because the catholic church told you this.

I do not believe it because the church told me this, I do not believe it because a pastor told me this. I do not believe it because any man or woman told me this

I believe it because it says so in the word of God.

Where do you think the leaders in Jesus's Church, the Catholic Church, learned to teach adultery is a sin? The Word of God. So, what you just said is asinine.

Better yet

what if I spent my entire life blindly following a group of people. because they said we should follow them only based on the fact they were the first church, and we should listen to them and them only

then you stand in front of Christ on judgment day and he tells you sadly he has never known you, because those men you blindly followed and NEVER questioned got it wrong. And now you have to spend an eternity in Hell because you believed these men who told you to trust them. They were Gods representatives.

Our eternal dwelling place is determined by how we treat others. If we live a life of sincere love towards God and others, then we will be with Him in Heaven. Jesus's Church, the Catholic Church, is made up of sinners, and thus don't feel scandalized when looking back at over two thousand years of history and learning about sins committed by its leaders and members, and remember that you are a sinner yourself.

The Catholic Church is Jesus's Church, its leaders and members sinners, and while you may not agree with or understand things taught by His leaders, you need to trust that God is in His Church and helps guide. Jesus spoke of one Church, one fold, and bringing others into it.

lol.these are individuals.

I spoke of the CHURCH..

The Catholic Christian Church is made up of individuals, or sinners.

In your view. all of the disciples killed anyone who did not agree with them, burned every article which did not support what the disciples believes, or put in prison anyone who they declaired to be a heretic.

You need to think deeper than you are.

@Augustin56 is saying humans sin, not that all humans commit the same sins because they don't. Sin is sin. It's all wrong and offensive to God. You condemn the Catholic Church and advise others to do the same, because of the sins committed by people in the Church, all the while being a sinner yourself. Is that not hypocritical?

Jesus knew the sins His apostles would commit before He even elected them, as well as the sins of every soul before they were even born, yet despite that He chose sinners to be leaders and members of His Church, the original and still existing Catholic (Christian) Church, because He also knew the good that would come out of the evil.

It seems you choose to only see or focus on the bad in the Church. Pray to be given the eyes and heart that Jesus has. Do not be scandalized at seeing sin, even within His Church, just as Jesus wasn't scandalized at seeing sin, even among His apostles. What did He do in the face of sin? He tried to detour souls from it and bring them to repentance by loving them. Praying for them. Staying loyal to and trusting of the will of God. God's will for His Church is to be one fold and bring others into it. Join His fold and use your passion and love for God to help the sinners in His Church be better, and thus become better yourself.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No, I do not see the double standard.

Yes, you are anti-Catholic because you post clear lies and biases about The Catholic Church and say derogatory things about The Church. Show me where you have done that with the Baptist, Lutherans, Methodist etc.

I KNOW that the CC is not the only Church who believes in a Eucharistic teaching of The Lords Supper. I POINTED THAT OUT TO YOU and how you and your ilk are teaching OPPOSITE of what Scripture teaches and the 2,000-year teaching of Christianity that SOME Protestants still hold onto!!!


Before you try and say that you are not anti-Catholic and don't tell lies about what Catholics believe and the history of Christiainty.....here are examples from some of your previous posts:

Your confusing fantasy from reality...The Roman Catholic Church was started by the Roman Empire. In order to keep its citizens from revolting. It added a bunch of pagan things to the church, and called them christian. The church was the state. The Pontifus Maximus (pope) was the pope of the church and the ceasar of rome. Again, You want to place your eternity in the hands of history and rome feel free...You want to base your eternity on a dictator war mongering history? Feel free....The Catholic Church as it stands today was not founded by Christ....Yes, and the Catholic Church has been persecuting christ for a few thousand years now....
Historically. Any church that was against the roman church was destroyed by the roman church, Heretics were burned at the stake, All of their books were burned or destroyed.....So it is a lie to say no other church was in existence. it would have went underground for fear of Rome.....one thing people need to remember is the roman catholic church, through the power of the roman empire, ruled the world not only through power. but through information.....We know for a fact. that any doctrines they considered as heresy, would have been shut out. Any writings, any books which would support those heresies were burned. and the heretics would be sent to a remote island to die. or murdered (they called it executed)....so if we are looking for doctrines they considered heresy (Belief that Mary was not a virgin, Belief that the bread and wine were not the flesh and blood, belief that salvation was through faith alone, and eternal security) you probably will not find it. Because the roman church rejected these doctrines.....so to use this to prove that a doctrine is in error. and not true, and no one believed it before is misleading, actually dangerous. Because this is the excuse the catholics use to convince themselves their own heresies are true.

That is just a SMALL example of your revision of Christian history and attacks against the CC and individual Catholics. So PLEASE stop revising the TRUTH...you ARE anti-Catholic!

Now, show me your posts where you said some of the same things about Protestant denominations!!

IKYW

Patient Mary

lol,

If you would look at the history of my posts. You would say the same things to Calvinists. and arminian people. and lutheran

of course they never discuss the Eucharist. so.


You have not proven anything, except that everything I have said about you is correct..

Its just like I said about the other groups. If I say something that does not agree with you. It is an attack against you and your church.

If I had to sit around and take everything a person said in disagreement as an attack on me. I would be a poor excuse for a christian. Because my faith is in myself and what I believe, not in God.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You REALLY do not realize that what you are saying is OPPOSITE of what Scripture teaches.....Do you?

Nope.

It does not say that at all

It says the opposite of what YOUR CHURCH tells you.

You are a prisoner of your church. If they are right, then you are ok. but if they are wrong. You are in extreme danger, and yet you will not admit it, because you are to afraid to open your mind.