Posted on 03/26/2011 12:59:03 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
“Did ya ever wonder how an ANGEL became a saint ?”
I may have at some point.
“That is a designation of a human that was saved.”
Apparently, not always.
“that is something Catholics can not understand and never could”
Your assertions are comical.
That struck me like a ball bat upside the head, too.
SCRIPTURE DECLARES that our works of righteousness are as a used minstral rag.
That the ONLY righteousness we have ANY claim to is CHRIST’S BLOOD over us . . .
Sheesh what hubris to the max.
What hideous blasphemy the RCC seems to exalt in!
Its a shame that the truth is funny to you.
Sometimes
it SEEMS like
The RC’s hereon and elsewhere are
uhhh . . . literally hell-bent . . .
on making sure that the REALITIES OF THE RCC
displayed and demonstrated hereon
are much worse than the most outrageous Monty Python version thereof.
After arraignments and release of the first batch of discovery, which will include grand jury notes and testimony, on April 15, the government will begin putting together a second batch. The government said that batch would take longer to produce, as it will include roughly 10,000 pages of documentation, much of which will need to be redacted.
It's still in the preliminary stages from the looks of it. I see her getting criticized for the defense attorney not being notified before, and then getting criticized for notifying him. Maybe there would have been a better way of handling it, but it looks like she's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.
To deny my point that there are more Catholics than members of any other “denomination,” you say that there are more Protestants than Catholics. There would be no reason for you to say that, unless you were saying that Protestantism is a denomination.
“If and when you get around to posting anything other than errors and insults, be sure to let us know.”
Talking to yourself?
Partly because there is still anger at the Republican Party for the despicable way that they treated Catholics in the 1800s and 1900s, and partly because Catholics listened to more than the abortion message - many of them fell for the Democratic platform one more time.
However, if you look at the numbers between 2004 and 2008, Catholics moved towards the Democrats by about the same percentage as the Protestants did - it is just that the Protestants stayed just under 50%, while the Catholics moved just over 50%.
Catholics are making the trends toward the Republican Party with strong Christian values - I introduce in evidence the fact that Catholics are 67% of SCOTUS and Protestants do not occupy a single chair. And all were appointed by Protestant Presidents. Are you curious, yourself, about that? :)
Evidently you really believe what you wrote in that post.
Incredible.
Sometimes RC thought processes seem as convoluted, obtuse, mysterious & illogical as their Catechism!
“And this, in a nutshell, is the proof of the apostasy: a group of fallible, sinful humans CLAIM that they (The Roman Catholic Church) in some way — in any way — have ANY say in the standards set by Almighty God.”
Using that logic, we can’t trust the Bible, because it was written by sinful, fallible humans.
“Here’s a newsflash: God is SOVEREIGN. He and He alone has set the standard; He and He alone determines those who are saved. Man has NOTHING to say about it.”
I don’t know why that’s a newsflash. Who disagrees with that?
“As to why I put “Church” in quotations? To differentiate The True Church (all those called and regenerated) from the Roman Catholic Church that makes the claim of one true church. A false claim at best.”
Your idea of “The True Church” is a manmade invention.
“Where, in scripture, does it state that Mary was “taken” into Heaven?
Where, in scripture, does it state that Mary provides “intercession”?
Where, in scripture, does it state that Mary is an “Advocate,” “Helper,” “Benefactress,” or “Mediatrix?”
And that last one is the kicker — Mediatrix? Really? Where in scripture did God say this? So..... “
You’re acting like Sola Scriptura isn’t some man made heretical invention when you demand for things to be in scripture.
“No amount of saying, “no it doesn’t” will change the cold, hard FACT that the Roman Catholic “Church” is a false church — apostate and heretical.”
You’re opinions are cold, hard facts?
“Most proddys are allergic to whining.”
Most “proddys” are not the raving anti-Catholics who post on threads like these.
Do you think that a Catholic President would appoint a Protestant SCOTUS? Just an interesting point of conversation, IMO :)
One or the other, if disqualified as a witness no one can call him as such, no one. Hence an investigation.
“Also, when you name an opposing counsel as a witness it had darned well be about something that's going to be MEANINGFUL. If they don't have photos no one is going to be interested in a letter.”
True but calling opposing counsel is not normally possible unless they leave the case.
This defence attorney seems to be making his own problems with the judge...not a smart move, I would think.
I dunno.
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
The history tells us that the KJV was a political entity commissioned at the behest of the King (more likely one of his advisors) because the Geneva Bible was hated, and the Bishop's Bible was not very highly thought of. The translation was approved by a bought and paid for committee of Parliament.
Actually, James was busy being a public catamite, utilizing the public purse. Sir Walter Raleigh joked that King Elizabeth had been succeeded by Queen James, for instance.
The judge was obviously letting him know so they could deal with the situation.
He needed to make a decision.
And as for blowing a gasket over the fact that the prosecution and judge saw the materials before he did, well, that is going to happen, isn’t it?
How would it be physically possible for the prosecution to pull together all the materials and decide what it’s going to use and not see it FIRST???
Duh! Of course they’re going to know what they’re using before the defense finds out.
The defense lawyer is showing gross unprofessional behavior. Any lawyer who cannot control himself in the courtroom like that is too immature to be handling the case. If he’s upset, fine, he’s upset. But to rage like that and name call and hurl accusations. He’s fortunate indeed that the judge exercised more self-control than he did.
You mean answers.com is not a friend of Christianity. Can you not find a more reputable site that trashes the Church?
Sounds like a good Protestant site, but I'm having trouble getting to it.
“The judge is trying to get out of handling this one”.
If she was there surely are easier ways but it appears that the judge is the kernel of your objections.
and now I'm off for the night.
I don't know of ANY
“raving anti-[Roman] Catholics”
on FR.
A number of us Proddys are quite fiercely against the idolatries, blasphemies and outrageous heresies of the RCC and say so rather forcefully and persistently.
THAT'S quite
DIFFERENT from being against individuals who happen to choose to be identified with the RCC and own its dogma.
I realize that most RC’s on FR seem to have a genetic incapacity to distinguish between
DIFFERENT
vs
SAME
however, a valiant effort to do so is still admired for the try.
No wonder the magicsterical political power-mongers of 300-400 AD setting up the RCC couldn't distinguish that Christ was talking about the TYPE OF FAITH Peter had instead of about Peter.
Though . . . perhaps the gross error was deliberate in behalf of self-serving political power-mongering alone.
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.