"Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal."RM: Thanks for the reminder.
Mark:
I've enjoyed debating you.
However, I'm afraid this tread is about worn out.
Perhaps another time.
Until then,
Take care!
Posted on 07/11/2008 5:54:33 AM PDT by Between the Lines
"Scripture & Tradition must be accepted & honored w/equal sentiments of devotion & reverence. CCC 82" --Petronski's tagline
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with [their] lips, but their heart is far from me.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, [as] the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Mark 7:6-9 [Jesus speaking]
Don't worry about my forgiveness.
I bet that explains certain traditions among priests.
What loose innuendo is this?
You just can’t beat the Catholic Church for holding grudges. The Reformation was 300-400 years ago. The same event that my wife’s priest called a “scandal”
Not according to the Christian Brothers who ran the Catholic school I attended in New Orleans. It was church doctrine in those days and I have seen little that suggests that has changed.
As I explained to another FReeper who questioned that, I was being generous and giving the church credit for a modicum of modernization.
***”The Apostles and the writers of the Epistles serve as witnesses enough for me and for Bible Believers.”
But only because of the authority of the RCC, right?***
The Church gets its authority from Jesus. The NT Scripture writers testify to that authority. If you would dismiss this, then to be consistent you must dismiss the entire Bible.
***”You did not. Would you please restate your position?”
(Oh yes I did!)
Ok, lets go over it again.
You said: “Interesting. I thought that the man who is condemned to hell is sent there immediately.”
To which I replied: “When I wrote condemned I meant hell bound, something that was plainly obvious.”***
Go back a couple of posts. I was asking what you meant by the condemned man not being able to follow Jesus. Do you mean literally, or spiritually? I didn’t get the point that you were trying to make.
***”You mean without the tinfoil hat?”
NO!
NEVER TAKE OFF YOUR TINFOIL HAT!
THE ALIEN MIGHT STEAL YOUR ABILITY TO REASON!
(I was too late, wasn’t I...)***
Oh, Lord, not another one.
***When I use the terms RCC and Catholic Church, I am not referring to any distinguishing differences.
(i.e. I’m using the two names interchangeably)***
They are not interchangeable.
***To learn what the meaning of ‘edifice’ is, follow these three easy steps:
1: Go to Google.com
2: Enter the word ‘edifice’ into the search box.
3: Press the enter key, or click the search button.
4: After the page loads, click the link called ‘definition’ in the top right area of the page; it will look like: edifice [definition].
5: Read.
This should give you some basic definitions of the word ‘edifice’***
I am not asking for Google’s definition. I am asking for yours.
***
“Exactly so: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Peter and Paul had some too, as I recall. How many pages has your Bible been reduced to?”
I think the real question is, how many pages has your bible been expanded to?***
Expanded? Does your Bible not contain the Gospel of Jesus or the writings of Peter and Paul? Impressive. The Church has set the canon and we are instructed to neither add nor remove anything from that. There are not many Protestants courageous enough to admit that they have removed Scripture, or else approve of the removal. Congratulations.
***”I’m not interested in your feelings.”
Haha!
I’ve found me a nerve!***
Not really. I am just not interested in your feelings.
***”We only have the witness of the Holy Spirit. Sorry if it will not suffice. Who is your witness by the way?”
The Holy Spirit is an excellent witness.
Would you like to do the honors and call it to testify?***
Are you calling the Holy Spirit ‘it’?
Mark 3:
28
Amen, I say to you, all sins and all blasphemies that people utter will be forgiven them.
29
But whoever blasphemes against the holy Spirit 11 will never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an everlasting sin.”
You have a fascinating theology. Would you care to expand upon it?
"The Church gets its authority from Jesus. The NT Scripture writers testify to that authority. If you would dismiss this, then to be consistent you must dismiss the entire Bible."According to you, the bible is just another church document.
"Go back a couple of posts. I was asking what you meant by the condemned man not being able to follow Jesus. Do you mean literally, or spiritually? I didn’t get the point that you were trying to make."See, this is what you get for taking your tinfoil hat off.
"Oh, Lord, not another one."Hey, I warned you to not take off your tinfoil hat!
"They are not interchangeable."Tough.
"I am not asking for Google’s definition. I am asking for yours."Do I look like a dictionary?
"Expanded? Does your Bible not contain the Gospel of Jesus or the writings of Peter and Paul? Impressive. The Church has set the canon and we are instructed to neither add nor remove anything from that. There are not many Protestants courageous enough to admit that they have removed Scripture, or else approve of the removal. Congratulations."In case you haven't noticed, I don't give a hoot what a group of men in Italy have to say. ;)
"Not really. I am just not interested in your feelings."Yep, theres a nerve there.
"Are you calling the Holy Spirit ‘it’?"No, if I was, I would have used quotes like you did.
"You have a fascinating theology. Would you care to expand upon it?"I'd love to, but I doubt your ability to understand me.
***”The Church gets its authority from Jesus. The NT Scripture writers testify to that authority. If you would dismiss this, then to be consistent you must dismiss the entire Bible.”
According to you, the bible is just another church document.
Documents testifying of the authority of their author is no testimony at all.***
And your point is? What is your view of the 72 books of Scripture?
***I never said that a man who was hell bound could not fallow Jesus around.
I merely said that walking around with Jesus would not profit a hell bound man.***
What if that man would repent, believe and be baptized? Or do you believe in predestination?
***”They are not interchangeable.”
Tough.
I’m using them interchangeably.***
It’s difficult to debate with someone who changes the meanings of words as much as they change their theology. I may, for instance, claim that my cat is a dog and structure my arguments accordingly. Words have meanings and exact words have exact meanings within the context of the sentence or paragraph.
***”I am not asking for Google’s definition. I am asking for yours.”
Do I look like a dictionary?***
When you use words, you may have a meaning for them in your mind that differs from the orthodox. We have one example above and, I suspect, are about to encounter others.
***”Expanded? Does your Bible not contain the Gospel of Jesus or the writings of Peter and Paul? Impressive. The Church has set the canon and we are instructed to neither add nor remove anything from that. There are not many Protestants courageous enough to admit that they have removed Scripture, or else approve of the removal. Congratulations.”
In case you haven’t noticed, I don’t give a hoot what a group of men in Italy have to say. ;)***
What does your Scripture consist of?
***”Are you calling the Holy Spirit ‘it’?”
No, if I was, I would have used quotes like you did.
I was only referring to it in general.***
You may wish to reread your post.
***”You have a fascinating theology. Would you care to expand upon it?”
I’d love to, but I doubt your ability to understand me.
It requires the ability to think for your self to comprehend it.***
But obviously not to construct it.
"And your point is? What is your view of the 72 books of Scripture?"It doesn't matter what I think.
"What if that man would repent, believe and be baptized? Or do you believe in predestination?"LOL!
"It’s difficult to debate with someone who changes the meanings of words as much as they change their theology. I may, for instance, claim that my cat is a dog and structure my arguments accordingly. Words have meanings and exact words have exact meanings within the context of the sentence or paragraph."How does 'the monstrosity that the pope wants control of' sound?
"When you use words, you may have a meaning for them in your mind that differs from the orthodox. We have one example above and, I suspect, are about to encounter others."Picky!
"What does your Scripture consist of?"Sorry, haven't ever written any.
"You may wish to reread your post."Don't have time. (much to busy)
"But obviously not to construct it."How would you know?
***”And your point is? What is your view of the 72 books of Scripture?”
It doesn’t matter what I think.***
Aside from avoiding any sort of bona fides, that is absolutely true.
***As long as they are church documents, they will only be church documents.
(Nobody gets to create their own proof of authenticity, especially not political entities.)***
What fresh new heresy are you promoting? Or is it only a rerun of the thousands previously created?
***”What if that man would repent, believe and be baptized? Or do you believe in predestination?”
LOL!
Do you even remember what my original point was?***
I read the words that you have posted.
***”It’s difficult to debate with someone who changes the meanings of words as much as they change their theology. I may, for instance, claim that my cat is a dog and structure my arguments accordingly. Words have meanings and exact words have exact meanings within the context of the sentence or paragraph.”
How does ‘the monstrosity that the pope wants control of’ sound?***
It sounds like somebody failed freshman English.
***”When you use words, you may have a meaning for them in your mind that differs from the orthodox. We have one example above and, I suspect, are about to encounter others.”
Picky!***
High school freshman English.
***”What does your Scripture consist of?”
Sorry, haven’t ever written any.***
Nor read.
***”You may wish to reread your post.”
Don’t have time. (much to busy)***
Much too busy for spelling, grammar or cogent thought either.
***”But obviously not to construct it.”
How would you know?***
I have little children who play at being adult. I have a toddler that plays at being four years old. Simple arithmetic progression. I’ll let you know when the goldfish position comes up.
"Aside from avoiding any sort of bona fides, that is absolutely true."Is that like a bona fide DIY drivers license?
"What fresh new heresy are you promoting? Or is it only a rerun of the thousands previously created?"LOL!
"I read the words that you have posted."Now that is just sad.
"It sounds like somebody failed freshman English."Nope, never failed any sort of class.
"High school freshman English."Not exactly.
Unless your God, you wouldn't know."Sorry, haven’t ever written any.""Nor read."
"Much too busy for spelling, grammar or cogent thought either."(Shall I ping the RM so he can slap your wrists?)
"I have little children who play at being adult. I have a toddler that plays at being four years old. Simple arithmetic progression. I’ll let you know when the goldfish position comes up."Whats your IQ?
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
"Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal."RM: Thanks for the reminder.
***Mark:
I’ve enjoyed debating you.
However, I’m afraid this tread is about worn out.***
We never really got down to debate level, my friend.
***Perhaps another time.
Until then,
Take care!***
Thanks for the thoughts. You too.
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.