Pay to Pray eRosary from the Vatican

[reformed1689]

What "real" issue??
You got caught in a LIE on a subject that YOU brought up . . .

What is this lie you say I have been caught in?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Right and the Arch Bishop just made it up out of thin air....ok.... Again, the Church didn't stop it, why? That's not a lie. That's fact.

And I'm arguing against your brainwashed catholic mind. You can ignore the truth but that is on you.

Facts: Leo authorized indulgences. Indulgences are not authorized by Scripture.

WRONG.
you have failed to produce any evidence of this.
YOUR unsubstantiated accusations do NOT equal historical evidence . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

What is this lie you say I have been caught in?

That this document was written by the Pope and that HE ordered the sale of Indulgences.
Flat out out LIE.

 

[reformed1689]

That this document was written by the Pope and that HE ordered the sale of Indulgences.
Flat out out LIE.

Did I say it was written by the Pope? Please show me where, otherwise, the one lying is you.

 

[reformed1689]

WRONG.
you have failed to produce any evidence of this.
YOUR unsubstantiated accusations do NOT equal historical evidence . . .

Leo did not authorize indulgences? The church doesn't use indulgences? Really? This is just some made up fantasy of history and they don't actually exist?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Leo did not authorize indulgences? The church doesn't use indulgences? Really? This is just some made up fantasy of history and they don't actually exist?

When did I make THIS claim??
I said the Church never sanctioned the SALE of Indulgences.

Pay attention . . .

 

[reformed1689]

When did I make THIS claim??
I said the Church never sanctioned the SALE of Indulgences.

Pay attention . . .

But they sanctioned indulgences for contributions, that is the SAME difference.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Did I say it was written by the Pope? Please show me where, otherwise, the one lying is you.

YOU said that he ordered the sale of Indulgences.
That was a lie for which you were exposed.

 

[BreadOfLife]

But they sanctioned indulgences for contributions, that is the SAME difference.

WRONG.

That was an abuse.
What part of "abuse" do you not understand??

 

[reformed1689]

WRONG.

That was an abuse.
What part of "abuse" do you not understand??

Then why was a stop not put to it?

 

[reformed1689]

YOU said that he ordered the sale of Indulgences.
That was a lie for which you were exposed.

You have not proven that he did not order such. I provided a historical document that says he decreed it.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You have not proven that he did not order such. I provided a historical document that says he decreed it.

No you didn't.
Show me where HE ordered it.

The document was written by a German Bishop and NOT the Pope.

 

[reformed1689]

No you didn't.
Show me where HE ordered it.

The document was written by a German Bishop and NOT the Pope.

If the Pope did not sanction it why did he not correct it? Hmm?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Then why was a stop not put to it?

Not every detail in every diocese in every country was made known as it is today.
There was no postal service or telephone or internet or social media.

 

[reformed1689]

Not every detail in every diocese in every country was made known as it is today.
There was no postal service or telephone or internet or social media.

Ok, you are delusional and want to deny history. That's fine. Your perogative. You asked for evidence, I gave it to you. Not to mention it is a well known fact. If you want to be a brainwashed cult member, go ahead.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Ok, you are delusional and want to deny history. That's fine. Your perogative. You asked for evidence, I gave it to you. Not to mention it is a well known fact. If you want to be a brainwashed cult member, go ahead.

No, it's a well known MYTH.
Learn the difference . . .

 

[Giuliano]

Again, what in the world are you talking about? You aren't making any sense. What does that have to do with divine punishment for sin?

You said there was no punishment for the saved. So what sins would be covered by fervent charity?

 

[Giuliano]

Yes, symbols of the essential truth of the cross required for salvation. The cross itself is a symbol of the truth that Jesus died for our sins.

I agree with @Enoch111 that the use of the word "condemnation" in the KJV is unfortunate because when we read the entire verse, we see Paul saying that God judges us as a means of discipline "so that we may not be condemned with the world." This supports Romans 8:1, which states that "there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus"....

1 Cor 11: 27-32-- Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy way will be guilty of sin against the body and blood of the Lord. So a man should examine himself; in this way he should eat the bread and drink from the cup. For whoever eats and drinks without recognizing the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. This is why many are sick and ill among you, and many have fallen asleep. If we were properly evaluating ourselves, we would not be judged, but when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord, so that we may not be condemned with the world.

So why would there be a "judgment" for the believer over how "symbols" are treated? Why is he called "guilty" in that passage?

 

[Grailhunter]

punk rudeness vs geriatric rudeness!
And the Spirit of Christianity has fled the premises!
But still I am willing to pay admission.
Pass the peanuts.

 

[reformed1689]

You said there was no punishment for the saved. So what sins would be covered by fervent charity?

It is talking about how believers interact with each other.