WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP!
Posted on 11/22/2004 9:35:37 AM PST by lngz78
ROTFL!
"Yeah I saw an article where you talked about deporting muslims just because their different".
Man, I thought liberals were so smart. LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR!
WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP!
Your list should be required reading for all of the nitwit dims that are screaming about our motives for being in Iraq.
Just as the dims believe in keeping the minorities down through their perpetuation of affirmative action and the welfare state, they must think it's OK to treat women as chattel, as well.
"Who do you think you are? Should we deport all Christians for what timothy Mcveigh and Adolph Hitler did? They were Christians, the proof is overwhelming!"
Prove it...
True Christianity is not a religion. It is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ based on repentance and turning from sin, water baptism to identify with his death, burial and resurrection, accepting His atonement for your personal sins and accepting Him as Lord and Savior, and being willing to confess Him before men. He is very liberating.
Ain't that cute.....
LOL! "Banned". "Band". I love it! :^D
>>The Muslim religion teaches that there is no compulsion in religion.
Right. Would wanting to keep one's head be considered a compulsion? <<
No, actually there is a point to what he says there. Islam doesn't give a cr@p about whether you believe in it or not. you'd just better act like you do, or they'll chop body parts off of you. I think a large part of the irrationality of Islamic extremists comes from the part that they believe the religioon is a bunch of cr@p.
... and it never was as perverted as a lot of people believe. For instance, the Inquisition didn't try people for openly being Muslem or Jewish. It was established to prevent Muslem infiltration into the Catholic Church at a time when Europe was trying to establish control over Iberia. Those who were openly Muslem were not considered a threat.
(To be fair, King Ferdinand of Spain did deport the Jewish population, eventually. But this was not out of Christian conviction that the Jews must convert. His stated intention was that he feared the commonfolk would launch a pogrom and he wanted the Jews exiled safely while they could. Natch, Jews don't exactly think kindly of Ferdy.)
Niiiice. Throw out the Catholics with the Nazis and McVeigh. Just so you know, it is Catholic doctrine that revelation is complete in the scriptures. (For instance, while 2 Maccabees is the plainest exposition of offering atonement, Catholics also point to 2 Peter, Revelations and the gospels.) At the time of Christ, there was only one canon that included the Mosaic books, the prophets and the writings. That canon was the Septuagint. When a Hebrew canon was formalized DECADES AFTER CHRIST, the deuterocanonicals were excluded because they depicted an imminent Messiah and the resurrection of the body. IOW, they were conclusively Christian. It was these books that Luther excluded, falsely believing that the Masoretic texts were pre-Christian.
Even so, no Catholic doctrine is based on the deuterocanonical books. In many instances, they are the plainest exposition of certain doctrines, such as sacrificial expiation, but that doctrine is found in 2 Peter, Revelations and the gospels, as well.
You can sincerely state that Catholics misinterpret the bible. That is your opinion, and it is a valid one. If you state that the Catholics add to the bible, you are a liar.
Whoops! Last minute botch and cut and paste rendered this illegible. Let me try again:
Niiiice. Throw out the Catholics with the Nazis and McVeigh. Just so you know, it is Catholic doctrine that revelation is complete in the scriptures.
As for the "added" books: At the time of Christ, there was only one canon that included the Mosaic books, the prophets and the writings. That canon was the Septuagint. (The Sadducees can be said to have had a formal canon, but it included only the books of Moses.) When a Hebrew canon was formalized DECADES AFTER CHRIST, the deuterocanonicals were excluded because they depicted an imminent Messiah and the resurrection of the body. IOW, they were conclusively Christian. It was these books that Luther excluded, falsely believing that the Masoretic texts were pre-Christian.
Even so, no Catholic doctrine is based on the deuterocanonical books. In many instances, they are the plainest exposition of certain doctrines, such as sacrificial expiation, but that doctrine is found in 2 Peter, Revelations and the gospels, as well.
You can sincerely state that Catholics misinterpret the bible. That is your opinion, and it is a valid one. If you state that the Catholics add to the bible, you are a liar.
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.