From Sabbath TO Sunday!

Newswatch Magazine ^

[Petronski]

...you folks are evidently incapable of understanding.

I am completely incapable of understanding why I should abandon the Church founded by Christ to adopt instead your exquisitely finicky misinterpretations of Scripture.

I can lift my car ten inches with a steel jack and a steel rod.

You are trying Quixotically to dislodge 1975 years of Christian Truth with a balsa lever and a fulcrum of chalk. It's just not working, and I am incapable of understanding why I would want to join in such a foolish enterprise.

[papertyger]

Everything I have here mentioned is totally against scripture and has led to idolatry on the part of many of your membership. To say this isn't so is to deny reality.

You are not the arbiter of what defines reality.

This is an obvious one. If tradition contradicts the Word of God it is wrong.....period!

If the contradictions are so obvious, show me one!

This is what you don't get...many "Traditions" ARE the Word of God!

Catholics are not known to be students of the scriptures. This is a well known fact. It is exemplified on these very threads. Instead of answering from scripture passages we (the opposition) generally get "No we don't" or "that's not true" or "your private interpretation does not measure up" or something just as silly with no scriptural foundation in fact.

In your arrogance you ignore Catholics like me who came from the opposition and know Scripture quite well.

Often you don't get Scripture in response because you can not tell the difference between scripture and your interpretation of Scripture...as I already pointed out with regard to the Blessed Virgin.

Add to that the way you can ignore "this is my body" but shout from the rooftops"you must be born again" when there is MORE scripture for the former than the latter; is it any wonder we can't talk scripture with you?

[Religion Moderator]

In your arrogance you ignore

Do not read the mind of another Freeper. Also, do not make this thread "about" individual Freepers. That is also a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

[papertyger]

I haven’t the time to go into it at the moment....probably never will.... because you folks are evidently incapable of understanding. But I will leave you with these words....”you’re wrong!”

Dude, are you getting as tired of watching all these "victors" run away as I am?

[papertyger]

10-4!

[big'ol_freeper]

Yes, I worship Pontius Pilate

I must say, a new invention of the protestant heresies presents itself pretty regularly, but this is a spanking new one.

[safisoft]

He remained completely observant, as is evident in all of the epistles.

Petronski said: That's an interpretation.

Only to the illiterate. Paul says with his own words, in plain words with clear Greek present tense, "I AM a Jew..." I AM a Pharisee... I AM of the tribe of Benjamin..." You will find the present tense in the Greek texts, and even the Jerome's Vulgate. After all, even a whacked-out monk like Jerome can read that was main defense before the crowd in Acts 22, before Felix, and his planned defense in Rome.

Please, interpret these plain words (Do words even mean things to Catholics? How is it you can be conservative constitutionalists?):

Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the Law. (and he ain't talking "Christian Law" unless it madates circumcision on the eighth day, because that is the context) Acts 21:24

There, now you can argue with Paul and with James. In Acts 28 Paul claims complete observance. In Acts 21, James claims Paul's complete observance. To not acknowledge plain text, or to simply provide "that's your interpretation" shows the immaturity of your position.

[safisoft]

So what has preserved every protestant from erroneously making the bible an object of worship?

You think Diego1618 is Protestant? LOL!

I can't speak for Diego1618, but Protestants have their own problems, among them, following the Catholic tradition of "Sunday Sabbath."

[Petronski]

Paul says with his own words, in plain words with clear Greek present tense...

Show me the verse where he says "I remained completely observant."

Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the Law.

And what where "these reports?" False reports that St. Paul was encouraging Jews in the Diaspora to abandon Mosaic Law. To put the lie to the reports, St. Paul paid for the sacrifices required of four members of the Jerusalem community for the termination of the Nazirite vow.

St. Paul had no problem with continued observance of Mosaic law by newly converted Christians, so long as they became new Christians.

Your misinterpretation is wrong. It fails.

[Petronski]

I am embarrassed for them.

[Petronski]

In Acts 28 Paul claims complete observance.

Which verse?

[papertyger]

Let us recall why you are trying to make Paul some sort of quasi-judaizer. You have asserted all the traditions Paul spoke of in 2 Thess are subsumed into the New Testament Scripture.

All other issues aside, and they are many, that is an interpretation, BY DEFINITION, unless you can find a verse that says exactly that.

You must face the fact your problem here is existential. Either you are being intellectually dishonest, suffering from cognitive dissonance, or just plain don’t know what the word “interpretation” means.

[papertyger]

As I previously stated... a difference that makes no difference IS no difference.

[safisoft]

All other issues aside, and they are many, that is an interpretation, BY DEFINITION, unless you can find a verse that says exactly that.

Argue with Paul. If you think "completely observant" does not equal "obedient to the Law" then it is you that cannot read Greek, much less English. Let me give you a clue: we use the phrases "shomer" or "frum" which do not equal "observant" - but there is no doubt what it means to us or you. You know full well, and play coy. Obedient to the Law, a Pharisee, having done nothing against the customs of our fathers... is completely observant. Spin all you want... There are notable Roman Catholic scholars that would cringe at your assertions to the contrary.

Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the Law. Acts 21:24

"My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead." Acts 23:6

Three days later he called together the leaders of the Jews. When they had assembled, Paul said to them: "My brothers, although I have done nothing against our people or against the customs of our ancestors, I was arrested in Jerusalem and handed over to the Romans. Acts 28:17

I am sure you could argue about the "interpretation" of the pogroms or the Inquisition too. I can hear it, "It wasn't really torture..." It seems that you will do anything to defend the indefensible, as long as has to do with Catholicism.

[safisoft]

Still having trouble with English?

...but that you yourself are living in obedience to the Law...

James begins this recorded conversation with "There are myriads and myriads zealous for the Law..." and ends it with you yourself are living in obedience to the Law.... James isn't talking about OTHER people when he says "YOU, YOURSELF." Take it slowly and sound out the words if you need to... He was talk-ing... to... Paul... There, see, that wasn't hard was it?

[Petronski]

What did I ask for?

In Acts 28 Paul claims complete observance. ...What verse?

What did you give me?

James begins this recorded conversation with "There are myriads and myriads zealous for the Law..." and ends it with you yourself are living in obedience to the Law.... James isn't talking about OTHER people when he says "YOU, YOURSELF."

So I'll ask again: In what verse does Paul claim "complete observance?"

[Petronski]

I am sure you could argue about the "interpretation" of the pogroms or the Inquisition too.

The continued sneering insinuations of anti-Semitism indicate to me an appreciation of the weakness of your position.

[papertyger]

I am sure you could argue about the "interpretation" of the pogroms or the Inquisition too.

I sure can't argue with the kind of hubris that ignores the fact reading one more verse than the one quoted totally destroys the argument being made.

As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.Acts 21:25

All you have to do to prove me wrong is produce the verse that says the traditions are included in the NT scripture. Every post you make that avoids answering that exact question, shows your credibility, integrity, and intellect weaker and weaker.

[safisoft]

The continued sneering insinuations of anti-Semitism indicate to me an appreciation of the weakness of your position.

There you go again! So, is accusing someone of accusing someone of anti-Semitism ad hominem?

[Petronski]

Your posts to that effect speak for themselves. You cannot weasel out of what you wrote. Twice.