Give Your All To . . . ? . . . . [A Rel Forum Research thread--Open]

Bible, Vultus Christi, Quix's noggin ^ | 28 APR 2010; 30 APR 2010 | Jesus, Mark Kirby & Quix

[boatbums]

For comparison's sake, try imagining the reaction from Catholics if a Protestant were to say that Mary was just experiencing severe PMS when she composed the Magnificat.

ouch...I think I just got a cramp.

[Outership]

“You may demand to have a discussion, but others may find you so unpleasant that they disagree.”

Now wait. You are here on this thread, so are you saying you want to have a discussion, or are you saying you disagree to have a discussion because you feel someone is unpleasant here? If you don’t want to have a discussion, then why did you come?

“Anyway, refusing to answer someone’s set up question is refusing to play a game wherein the other guy makes all the rules. Playing such a game would be ridiculous.”

The questions asked were:

“They why do Catholics pray to them? They must believe that they can hear us. Where is that found in Scripture?”

Where indeed is it found? How is that a setup? It couldn’t be a more straightforward question.

I take it you are a ‘no’ on the question of “Give your all to Jesus” as well?

[Alex Murphy]

If you don’t want to have a discussion, then why did you come?

One guess. Here's a hint:

[metmom]

Whoa! And if I don't? What will the proddies do? Be rude? Same-o same-o. Say naughty things about me? Yawn. Tell yet another falsehood about the Catholic Church? What's new?

No. We try hard not to sink to your level.

[mlizzy]

“We do not WORSHIP Mary, we Love her.” -- What’s with the capital L? Is it to denote a love greater than regular love? A kind of worship perhaps?

Yes, indeed! a worshiping of her Son. Whenever I'm referring to "His" Love (we Love her, as Christ Loves her), I try to remember to capitalize it. Same thing when I'm referring to Life (the Life of children through Our Creator). So the pro-life movement becomes the pro-Life movement.

[metmom]

I didn’t demand a discussion.

I merely asked someone if they wanted to take a shot at answering some questions. When he replied *No* Others and I took that as admission of defeat.

Saying that I demanded a discussion is bearing false witness.

[stfassisi]

First of all that is almost 300 years after Christ, it is not contemporary

Are you going to say the same thing about Christ's sine it did not become dogma until the Council of Nicea?

This is a false teaching because the ark was a type of Christ

What the Ark CONTAINED was a type of Christ-The Ark is a type of Mary. Christ did not birth Himself,dear Sister

The church fathers were not infallible /

And you are? They lived closer to Christ than you did and many gave their lives for Christianity. Who in their right mind would believe someone who sits on FR and cannot back up many of their beliefs with historical consistent writings?

All I ask is show using the scriptures where Jesus or any of the apostles said Mary was sinless..

There is lots of Typology on this all backed up with the Early Church Fathers

Just a few examples from scripturecatholic .com

Luke 1:39 / 2 Sam. 6:2 - Luke's conspicuous comparison's between Mary and the Ark described by Samuel underscores the reality of Mary as the undefiled and immaculate Ark of the New Covenant. In these verses, Mary (the Ark) arose and went / David arose and went to the Ark. There is a clear parallel between the Ark of the Old and the Ark of the New Covenant.

Luke 1:41 / 2 Sam. 6:16 - John the Baptist / King David leap for joy before Mary / Ark. So should we leap for joy before Mary the immaculate Ark of the Word made flesh.

Luke 1:43 / 2 Sam. 6:9 - How can the Mother / Ark of the Lord come to me? It is a holy privilege. Our Mother wants to come to us and lead us to Jesus.

Luke 1:56 / 2 Sam. 6:11 and 1 Chron. 13:14 - Mary / the Ark remained in the house for about three months.

[Judith Anne]

I merely asked someone if they wanted to take a shot at answering some questions. When he replied *No* Others and I took that as admission of defeat.

Saying that I demanded a discussion is bearing false witness.

Taking a refusal to "take a shot at answering some questions" as an admission of defeat is bearing false witness.

[Judith Anne]

No. We try hard not to sink to your level.

Making it personal is against the rules.

[Outership]

Heeheehaha! Yeah, I heard about that match! Wasn’t it Saul one, David Love? I heard David went on to win the title after a surprising upset. I tell you, that boy could send the ball right between the eyes!

Totally agreed on the Bible tweaking. Remove the context and you can distort all kinds of things out of it. For example, many times the Bible states that Christ is the Rock. But if that is ignored, then one could build a whole edifice around one intentionally misunderstood verse.

Anyway, you’ve heard about “The Ashes” by the alter right? But what the Bible doesn’t tell you is that they came by way of a googly zooter round the wicket.

[stfassisi]

The core of Romeians is doctrines of man and demon

Those who post this garbage are really the demonac

Seems to me from looking at your posts that you idolize quix and have a case of quixolatry

Please don't post me again!

[Outership]

LOL. Paul of Tarsus of course.

[Judith Anne]

If you don’t want to have a discussion, then why did you come?

That is making it personal. I do not need to explain to anyone why I am here.

“They why do Catholics pray to them? They must believe that they can hear us. Where is that found in Scripture?”

The Catechism has the answers!

I take it you are a ‘no’ on the question of “Give your all to Jesus” as well?

Imputing an answer to me is mind reading. Along with "making it personal," it is against the rules.

[Judith Anne]

What’s wrong with seeing people on the road to damnation and wanting to point them to the Gate? Is anything more important than a person’s eternal life? How can one be obsessed with such? Is any amount of concern over it too much?

Nothing. No. Easily. Yes.

[boatbums]

Oh, now....he is TOO cute, but in a nutshell, exactly why I do not swim in public pools anymore! And most private ones either!

[Outership]

LOL!

Agreed.

[stfassisi]

Any such statements by church “doctors” or “fathers” must be measured against the Scriptures

When the person doing the measuring can NOT back up their own belief with little historical interpretations of Scripture and consistency they are likely prideful modernists heretics

I would never trust you to be the measure of Scripture

[Judith Anne]

That is an absolutely adorable child!

[Outership]

Those who worship, follow, and obey the edifice that houses its center in the Vatican.

[Mad Dawg]

Okay. Let's be clear.

I
Campion said: “He’s God. He can do whatever he wants. “
Psalm 115:3 says, "Whatever he wills to do he does."
I think it is clear that if he does it, he can do it.
Therefore the verse from Psalm 115:3 implies:
Whatever he wills to do he can do.

I cannot see the difference between "whatever he wills to do he can do, and "He can do whatever he wants."

IIa
When asked to defend the proposition that God can NOT do whatever he wants, you adduce a text which says God cannot lie.
That could only be a refutation if it were agreed that God wants to lie. Otherwise you have only shown that there are some things God does not want to do and cannot do. You have NOT shown that it is not true that he can do whatever he wants.

IIb
Do you not think lying is evil? If you do think lying is evil, AND you think the text showing that he cannot lie refutes Campion, THEN can we conclude that you think God might or could want to do evil?
IF so, THEN either God is not free OR freedom can include wanting evil.
The first is interesting. The second is precisely the kind of thinking you say Protestants do not do.

So do you think God is not free? OR Do you agree that God can indeed to whatever he wants?