Posted on 05/16/2008 3:19:30 PM PDT by netmilsmom
Stemming from this comment
>>I think the RCC doctrines are a product of the enemy<<
Please tell us where we stand here. Examples welcome, but I'm not sure that actual names can be used when quoting another FReeper, so date and thread title may be better.
I’m not reading any minds. She has made it clear on many occasions that she does not understand the term “co-redeemer” as proposed. I am reading her words, not her mind.
Which, or course, they were and are.
But it's a good sign those words make a person uncomfortable.
Also, making any thread "about" another Freeper is "making it personal." Discuss the issues, don't make it personal.
I noticed you offered no quote. Heed your own advice not to attribute motives. It is a violation of the rules.
In this case, the Roman Catholic catecism comes up short.
I’m not selling anything, I’m telling you what I did.
I did not attribute motives and I am not making it personal.
It is not the “Roman Catholic catecism.” It is the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Logic is the core of debate, and religion is based on faith.
Debating religion is just an arena for sniping.
For the fourth time, I gave the "PROPER REFERENCE FROM THE SOURCE," and I did not give another site quoting it. I quoted directly from the Vatican's catechism page, the catechism of your church. Yeesh.
I didn't bother linking to the site I used, and I know of no rule that says we have to link to another site every time we reference another site.
I reference the Westminster Confesion of Faith quite often, but I don't link to it every time I do so.
As for the rest of your post, we all have crosses to bear.
Duh
I do not consider those that believe salvation is found in their church as Christians no matter the religion,
So anyone that places their allegiance to Rome, in my mind, is not a Christian
431 posted on May 17, 2008 2:24:44 PM MDT by Petronski
The Holy Spirit (Ru'ach HaKodesh) descended upon the apostlesYHvH started His "church" (Ekklesia) in Deuteronomy 4:10.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
on the YHvH commanded Feast of Shavuot when they gathered
as commanded by YHvH.
No wonder the Mormons are so successful with converting Catholics
I amended in a later reply. It was (I thought obviously) not a gastronomic pronouncement.
This is a quote for St. Athanasius "On the Incarnation". Yes, more than just that quote needs to be read, and preferably the entire book. Here is the relevant chapter (see verse 3):
54. The Word Incarnate, as is the case with the Invisible God, is known to us by His works. By them we recognise His deifying mission. Let us be content to enumerate a few of them, leaving their dazzling plentitude to him who will behold.As, then, if a man should wish to see God, Who is invisible by nature and not seen at all, he may know and apprehend Him from His works: so let him who fails to see Christ with his understanding, at least apprehend Him by the works of His body, and test whether they be human works or God's works. 2. And if they be human, let him scoff; but if they are not human, but of God, let him recognise it, and not laugh at what is no matter for scoffing; but rather let him marvel that by so ordinary a means things divine have been manifested to us, and that by death immortality has reached to all, and that by the Word becoming man, the universal Providence has been known, and its Giver and Artificer the very Word of God. 3. For He was made man that we might be made God ; and He manifested Himself by a body that we might receive the idea of the unseen Father; and He endured the insolence of men that we might inherit immortality. For while He Himself was in no way injured, being impossible and incorruptible and very Word and God, men who were suffering, and for whose sakes He endured all this, He maintained and preserved in His own impassibility. 4. And, in a word, the achievements of the Saviour, resulting from His becoming man, are of such kind and number, that if one should wish to enumerate them, he may be compared to men who gaze at the expanse of the sea and wish to count its waves. For as one cannot take in the whole of the waves with his eyes, for those which are coming on baffle the sense of him that attempts it; so for him that would take in all the achievements of Christ in the body, it is impossible to take in the whole, even by reckoning them up, as those which go beyond his thought are more than those he thinks he has taken in. 5. Better is it, then, not to aim at speaking of the whole, where one cannot do justice even to a part, but, after mentioning one more, to leave the whole for you to marvel at. For all alike are marvellous, and wherever a man turns his glance, he may behold on that side the divinity of the Word, and be struck with exceeding great awe.
Believe what you want.
What great FUN it is to present partial bits of this and that to smear Catholic beliefs!
Me, I’ll stick with Saints Irenaeus, Athanasius and Thomas Aquinas over the shallow interpretation of any anonymous internet chick or dude.
I can enjoy the entire Feast in the Catholic Church, or I can stumble into the storefront of some upstart splinter denomination and get ecclesiological equivalent of a Hot Pocket.
Would it be okay for someone to say that Calvinists pray to John Calvin as long as we really, really want it to be true?
IMO you make your job a lot harder than it has to be.
If you want to engage in name-calling, most Protestant view Catholics as Mary-worshiping Pharisees who care more about man-made doctrine than the do the real word of God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.