Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[Quix]

Thanks much for your kind reply.

God’s best to you and yours.

[Quix]

or our epistle.

You keep doing it to yourself...

Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

So what is it??? Ignorance of the word of God, or willful deception???

---

How about C . . . ignorance of the Word of God

AND

willful deception?

[Quix]

Excellent points.

Thx.

Have a blessed weekend.

[MarkBsnr]

I'd better not tell my wife...

Well...I didn't mean it THAT way. :o)

That's good, because she's standing behind me with her snub nose Ruger .357.

I'm not being obtuse here, I really do not know what you mean by the evidence not being spelled out in Scripture. How are you defining "evidence" here? Paul said many times that he was speaking truths, mysteries even, that he received from Jesus Christ.

Correct. But Paul did not lay out chronologically or in any other fashion exactly what the revelation consisted of. He lets out a phrase here, a clause there, a sentence elsewhere. John and Moses put the whole thing down in words.

These are a few I can think off the top of my head. Do these count as "evidence"?

Sure. But there is no book called "The Revelation of Paul". There is a book called the Revelation of Peter, which was ruled non Canonical, for instance, as well as other non canonical books of revelations of others. But Paul does not write such a book. Have you ever wondered why?

[Quix]

What with all the running to the mods over every little offense taken, it’s kind of hard to believe that they’re familiar with the Beatitudes.

---

NOW NOW,

You seem to be forgetting

the SACRED DOGMAS AND STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY:

THE DOUBLE STANDARD DANCE

and the

ICON OF THE MAGICSTERICAL DUPLICITY DELIGHT

The Beatitudes are only to assault Proddys with, never to bother complying with if one is worshiping the Vatican INSTITUTION and various piles of white hankys.

[metmom]

When one constructs one's own god in one's own image and keeps it on the hall stand to its head for luck when they walk by, the only thing required is whim.

Or on the lawn.....

Or the car dashboard....

[MarkBsnr]

Protestant groups tend to have the residual effects of being man-made, i.e. legalism, where they say it has to be ONLY this OR that whereas God says this AND that

Depending on the pastor. I cannot even guess at the number of my Protestant friends who have engaged in church shopping - and the greatest factor is the current standing or beliefs or actions of the current pastor.

[the_conscience]

...took the Bible, the beatitudes, all the little good stuff that is in them, from The Church.

Protestants tend to attribute these things from God, Jesus, and the economic Trinity. Describe for us why we should ascribe these things from "The Church" instead of God himself? Is God the author of the Bible or is the Church the author of the Bible? Is "The Church" somehow part of the Godhead? Is "The Church" somehow a separate being. What exactly is the nature of "The Church"?

[OLD REGGIE]

Romanist and RC were intended to be perjoratives. There is a difference. The term Protestant was coined by the Protestants, as well. Self identification. If the Church referred to itself as Romanist, that is one thing, but the fact is that the term was invented by and came into fashion with British and American anti Catholics.

"...The term Protestant was coined by the Protestants, as well."

History according to MarkBsnr? I can't find it. Can you? Proof please.

Origin of the word “Protestant”
May 31, 2008 by Kevin S.

Back in Luther’s time, Germany was ruled by princes, both Lutheran and Roman Catholic. If Charles V, the Roman Emperor, had his way, he would have forced all of Germany, including all of Europe, to remain Roman Catholic. Six of the princes who ruled Germany had already converted to Luther’s view, including its 14 Free Imperial cities. They considered themselves Evangelicals or Lutherans (or followers of Luther).

Charles V gave to order (Edict of Worms) to enforce all the German lands to remain Roman Catholic But thank God those six Lutheran princes courageously stood together, united and strong, and refused to accept this rule. They protested, made their case to demand that Lutheran lands should be free to remain Lutheran, and where the prince was Roman Catholic, that state may remain Catholic.

Then, on April 29, 1529, the six princes declared to Charles V:

“We protest before God and before men that we and our people will not agree to anything in this decree that is contrary to God, to His Holy Word, to our right conscience, and to the salvation of our souls.”

Charles V could do nothing because the princes stood up in unity for religious freedom. From then on, they were known as the Protestors or the Protestants.

ORIGIN OF THE WORD PROTESTANT

Also, your claim that "Romanist and RC" were intended to be perjoratives is also without merit. While it might be meant as a pejorative by some it is meant as shorthand by others.

Frankly, your use of the term "Protestant" is frequently meant as a pejorative while, to others, it is merely descriptive.

[OLD REGGIE]

The “some” keeps it generalized. If he had said “you are a Papist bigot” then it would have been “making it personal.”

Not unlike your response to MarkBsnr (post 1730) wherein you directly responded to a post by metmom (post 1721) and failed to ping her in your response.

"Mark, Catholics must never be offended by the utterances of the insane and toothless old goofballs because works are irrelevant and the elect are above sin and are not required to live Beatitude.

There are some who play the "generalized" game to the hilt and cry to the Moderator when their feathers are ruffled.

[Religion Moderator]

Generalized condemnations are fair play in the town square but making it personal is not.

Also, it is in good form to ping the person you are talking about.

That said, I am aware that RF posters try to finesse the guidelines. It takes effort to remove the name of the poster on the "to:" line when you hit "post reply" - so doing that and then following it with a generalized condemnation is an obvious attempt to make it personal by other means.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for those insights, dear brother in Christ!

[Natural Law]

"But saying, "utterances of the insane and toothless old goofballs", was NOT being personally insulting?"

I was of course speaking generally and hypothetically. Had I said that you or any other specific Freeper were insane or a toothless old goofball I would have been making it personal. I have to thank Quix for illustrating that nuance of the rules to me.

[OLD REGGIE]

And, since you do not like kneeling, statues, incense, altars, does that mean you would NEVER worship in a place that looked like this, right?

But you would go to any Protestant group, but not to a Church that looks like the one above, where they have the Eucharist, have icons, the Crucific, etc, is that correct?

The authors have kindly requested you tell them where you have used this image. I assume you have honored this request each time you have used it. Is that correct?

Image created by Marek and Ewa Wojciechowscy (Trips over Poland Permission is granted for use under following licenses of any images copyrighted by the authors, provided they are first uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons site from their site The copyright holders would find it nice if you would tell them where you reuse this image.

Evangelical Church of Augsburg Confession in Poland

Isn't it about time to stop playing the "gotcha" game. It should be obvious Dr. Eckleburg is not about to fall for it.

[Mad Dawg]

The authors have kindly requested you tell them where you have used this image. I assume you have honored this request each time you have used it. Is that correct?

Isn't it about time to stop playing the "gotcha" game.

What I want to know is why is a refutation a "gotcha"? If someone makes a statement which is clearly wrong, why is it a "gotcha" to show that it's wrong? If someone engages in hostile, over the top, simplistic rhetorical excess, why is it a "gotcha" to make that clear?

What is the correct way to establish a conclusive refutation of an inane statement while avoiding the dreaded and, apparently, blame-worthy "gotcha"?

Or is the term "gotcha" an accusation thrown by somebody who has just been caught out (or that person's ally) to deflect attention from being so decisively refuted, or to prove beyond a doubt that a real rational discussion was never the intention in the first place?

Or what?

[Mad Dawg]

IF you are Orthodox, the Catholics claim you are a wayward Catholic...

That's okay. They claim we're wayward Orthodox. It all comes out in the wash.

[metmom]

Do as I say, not as I do!!!

[MarkBsnr]

Can a bacterium understand Einstein?

Of course you are looking for the answer no, but, what if the bacterium is filled with the Holy Spirit???

An interesting thought. I suspect that if the bacterium was filled with the Holy Spirit to be able to understand us, it would no longer be a bacterium, just as for us to be able to understand God, we will have to be changed in similar form:

1 Peter 2: 3 3 4 His divine power has bestowed on us everything that makes for life and devotion, through the knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and power. 4 Through these, he has bestowed on us the precious and very great promises, so that through them you may come to share in the divine nature, after escaping from the corruption that is in the world because of evil desire.

Sharing in the divine nature - not that we become gods, but that we are transformed into something else that we are not.

Consider this: if the Gospel writers were all perfect in their writings, there would only be one Gospel; or else there would be four clones (or 60 or 80 clones) identically written.

You just implied that we can not know God, or what he does, or why he does the things he does...

Read the words. I said that if the Gospel writers were perfect in their writings, there would only be one Gospel, or multiple clones. Your claim does not follow from my words.

And then you chose yourself to figure out that the scriptures are imperfect because God didn't write them your way...God's not quite as logical as you, eh???

Which Scriptures did God write?

[MarkBsnr]

When one constructs one's own god in one's own image and keeps it on the hall stand to its head for luck when they walk by, the only thing required is whim.

Or on the lawn.....

Or the car dashboard....

Agreed. It's a good thing that we Catholics stay to the God of Scripture and the Church. St. Luke paved the way for the construction of icons. We follow his example.

[Mad Dawg]

Can a bacterium understand Einstein?

Of course you are looking for the answer no, but, what if the bacterium is filled with the Holy Spirit???

The Holy Spirit would have to change the nature of the bacterium qua bacterium. A bacterium is not a rational animal with a fallen reason.

For the bacterium to understand Einstein it would cease to be a bacterium or would be a new kind of bacterium.