| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
THEY BELIEVE IN A QUARTET.
lol. You may have hit on the answer.
Strange that RCs think they find Mary all through the NT when in fact she is seldom mentioned, yet they have trouble seeing the Trinity in Paul's teaching.
INDEED.
None are so blind as those who WILL NOT see . . .
except for their fantasies from hell.
From me...And no doubt, it's what Paul was thinking while he was speaking about no man being any more special than another...I added that for the people that hope Peter is the one deserving special attention...
But what's interesting is that Paul apparently mentioned names that were influential among the churches that many were chosing to portray as the single leader of the church...
Not only was Peter's name not mentioned as being overly influential but his name was not mentioned at all as being the leader...The only name that pops us is Jesus...
And what spirit is it that teaches these Catholics to believe in this anti-Scriptural, anti-God blasphemy???
I think any solidly Biblical, Holy Spirit taught authentic Christian can readily discern that the source of such notions is from the pit.
Other than that, there’s a ‘wealth’ of sources cited from over the centuries.
. . . lots of ‘saints.’
so much for THEIR infallibility! LOL. Sigh.
Well, to be fair, there is the One...
There is only ONE priest of the order of Melchizedek. and Melchizedek is the only order standing before God.
His Name is Jesus
I had to ask.
I think James and the apostles and older men at Jerusalem would have found it rather odd to speak of Peter as their head to say nothing of Peter.
I answered it for NL, are you ignoring my response? I even gave you a link.
In any case it would be a falsehood to claim you have gotten no answer.
You crossed out two words showing you rewrote those two words, but then you inserted your own phrase to look as if the rest of the sentence were my quote.
That is used ALL OVER Free Republic to make a comment. Let's let the Religion Moderator decide, shall we?
The post in question is #1175. Eckleburg contends that is against the rules. I contend there is no intent to deceive, and that it’s clear.
Please moderate, thank you.
Sorry, forgot to ping you to 1349 and 1350.
Again, I am amazed at the huge flap that began with my comments about St. Paul.
Imagine, if you will, an adult with very little exposure to religion, and all of that from the outside, reading the Holy Bible from start to finish several times, different translations. Imagine, after getting to the Gospels, and being convicted of their truth through the very words of Christ Jesus and the narrative of His life on earth — imagine readiug about the early church in Acts — imagine then coming to St. Paul. I agree with Festus at Agrippa’s court, St. Paul was likely mad from too much learning.
Imagine then, finding that whole churches are built on ignoring the Gospels and idolizing St. Paul, as though he were more important than Jesus Christ Himself!
Frankly, I chose the Church that cleaves to the Eternal Truth of the Gospels, the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
"This passage strongly suggests that Martin Luther viewed his opinions, and not the actual Bible as the primary authority--a concept which this author will name prima Luther.
Just..... wow.....
Catholics condemning Luther for apparently (making an ASSUMPTION about his intent) viewing his opinion and not the Bible as actual authority?!?!?
This coming from the church which teaches that its tradition of men is on equal standing with Scripture and sometimes even surpasses it?!?!
This coming from a church that not only does this with the office of the pope but has done so for hundreds, almost thousands of years?!?!?!
That is beyond rich. That is mind bogglingly hypocritical.
Let's look at a Bible verse that the Catholics have mistranslated.
English Standard version- Acts 13:24... Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel.
Douay-Rheims Bible-Acts 13:24 John first preaching, before his coming, the baptism of penance to all the people of Israel.
Interlinear Study Bible Online - When John had first preached (5660) before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.
Greek: prokhrucantov Iwannou pro proswpou thv eisodou autou baptisma metanoiav panti tw| law| Israhl.
metanoiav = repentance: a change of mind, as it appears to one who repents, of a purpose he has formed or of something he has done
http://www.searchgodsword.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=acts+13%3A24§ion=0&it=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&Enter=Perform+Search
Repentance is NOT penance.
And about changing the meaning, what about the concept that Mary was always a virgin. There are verses where Jesus brothers are named and His sisters are mentioned and the Catholic church excuses that away by changing the meaning of what they claim the writers of the Gospels meant by *brother* and *sister*.
Because silly, you aren't Catholic!
Imagine then, finding that whole churches are built on ignoring the Gospels and idolizing St. Paul Mary/the pope, as though (s)he were more important than Jesus Christ Himself!
Go ahead. Provide a list of churches that idolize Paul as more important than Christ Himself and who ignore the Gospels and cite the sources for their official doctrinal position.
Sure I am, in their eyes. I was baptized one and as far as I recall, they still think that because of the they can lay claim to my life and my salvation.
BTW, because I was baptized Catholic and have dissociated myself from their church, they think that that guarantees me a place in hell as a special kind of heretic unless I repent and return to the church.
These are the same old hashed and re-hashed canards the calvinists have been spreading for decades. I wouldn’t be surprised if this self-same post hadn’t been used in the earlier religion “wars” here on FR, when it was proddy against proddy.
There is absolutely no sense in paying any attention to these self-same falsehoods. I would imagine that even the lurkers are sick of this junk by now.
Oh, no, the Catholic Church won't guarantee you a place in hell for heresy. You can do that all by yourself.
Hold it! Eckleburg stated above that crossing out words and inserting others was against the RF rules! She castigated Mark Bsnr for that!
So—you left.
I can move on from that.
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.