Posted on 10/28/2011 6:59:29 AM PDT by markomalley
Oh, and don’t forget, it was us fallible men who were cautioned to “search the scriptures daily to see if these things be true”. The scriptures being the only source to infallible truth after all.
Which would still makes you very fallible.
Yes it does. Thus the need to rely only on God’s infallible word found in scripture. Obviously being a fallible man I know not to rely on the fallible men in pointy hats in Rome.
You know what? I’m just going to continue to post my “adequately sourced material”, ACCORDING TO THE RM, and you can wail and gnash all you want. I’ve got the time and the adequately sourced materials to produce LOADS of posts on the RCC. Don’t like it? Take it up with the RM. If the RM says it’s adequate, it’s adequate. Suck it up, buttercup.
No problem, we've seen this garbage before. Your "Bible Study" group must have quite a collection.
Do be careful though. Garbage is allowed on Open Threads up to very broad limits, but it's possible you can slip up and, accidentally of course, click on a banned website and repost their material en masse after slight cleansing.
I think that might become a tad obvious violation of the rule's intent on banned sites.
Sorry, sell your fallible opinion elsewhere. We’re all stocked up here.
"but it's possible you can slip up and, accidentally of course, click on a banned website and repost their material en masse after slight cleansing."
. I'm going to continue to post as you said was "adequate sourcing", RM. With acknowledgments, author's name, chapters, and page numbers. If that isn't good enough, that's all I can do. Just be ready to be spammed near death by those who want a link to a website that doesn't exist. An unfortunate situation caused by the inability to comprehend that there is no website or link to be given. Just acknowledgments of the sources used.
Before you do, you might want to read the entire profile page of the Religion Moderator. There's more to it than you seem to wish. It also has a paragraph that includes:
Certain sources have been determined to monger hatred and are forbidden. Sources that link to those sources are also forbidden.
If you wonder why this is so, just ask the RM.
Truer words were never spoken.......
Should have said “fallible man” so you’d keep your exemption.
As every student of rhetoric knows who ever controls the language controls the argument and we see a daily drumbeat to control the word usage and word definitions and limit them to a Protestant or a semi-literate English vernacular when discussing Catholic doctrine and theology. Don't give into it.
The term "cult" is a perfect example. Protestants use it as a pejorative when it has a rich and deep meaning within Latin and Catholic doctrine. Cult, from the Latin Cultus, meaning to care, to nurture, to educate, or to worship. It is where we derive words such as culture, cultivate, colony, cultrate, and difficult. None of those are inherently bad.
Even by the pejorative definitions, Christianity as a whole began as a cult. Within Catholicism there are venerative dedications* to saints and holy persons called cultus. Don't permit the ignorance of others to alter your language.
(*Preemptively, Catholicism, both Eastern and Latin Rite, distinguish between worship (Latin adoratio, Greek latreia [λατρεια]) which is offered to God alone, and veneration (Latin veneratio, Greek doulia [δουλεια]), which may be offered to the saints. Hyperdoulia is a special veneration offered to Mary.)
"Mary...should inspire all who cooperate in the Church's apostolic mission for the REBIRTH OF HUMANITY..The Church journeys through time..along the path ALREADY TRODDEN BY THE VIRGIN MARY." - Pope John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio, 86,92.
"The Koran..has many passages concerning the Blessed Virgin. First of all, the Koran believes in her Immaculate Conception and also in her Virgin Birth...Mary, then, is for the Moslems the true Sayyida, or Lady. The only possible serious rival to her in their creed would be Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed himself. But after the death of Fatima, Mohammed wrote: "Thou shall be the most blessed of all the women in Paradise, AFTER MARY." - Fulton J. Sheen, "Mary and the Moslems," The World's First Love (Garden City Books, 1952); see also Malachi Martin, The Keys of this Blood: The Struggle for World Dominion Between Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev and the Capitalist West (Simon and Schuster, 1990), p. 285.
And speaking of Fatima, how about this peace plan offered by the "apparition"?
"Say the Rosary every day to obtain peace for the world..Pray, pray, a great deal, and make sacrifices for sinners, for many sould go to Hell because they have no one to make sacrifices and pray for them..God wishes to establish in the world the devotion to MY IMMACULATE HEART. If people DO WHAT I TELL YOU, many souls will be saved and there will be peace." -Our Lady of Fatima's Peace Plan from Heaven (Tan Books and Publishers, 1983), inside back cover.
"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication." - God. The Book of Revelation, Chapter 17, verse 4.
There is the way for all cults to unite, through Mary. Watch for Mary apparitions to increase EVERYWHERE. - Source: smvoice. My opinion, post #who knows yet.
Excellent point again, thanks.
Thanks for your concern. But I will trust that the RM KNOWS what is an adequate source and what is not. As I do not link to anything, and do not receive anything from websites, I cannot be of help in your concern.
Very good development that benefits the whole world as well.
Sorry, I don’t do links or websites. Please give your acknowledged source, author, title, chapter, and page number.
Yes, you said that, and that would be a clever dodge – well, if it weren't so obvious. It's all from your Bible Study Class which doesn't use the interweb either, I'm guessing.
It will be all coincidental if this thread becomes the equivalent of a banned site with your "LOADS of posts."
But then, perhaps it will turn out that I have a much higher estimation of the Moderator's intelligence in enforcing the intent of the Forum Rules.
You're doing links and websites right now.
This isn't going to work for you if you can't be less obvious than this.
So now you are attempting to scare the RM into believing that my posts, which are adequately acknowledged and credited, ACCORDING TO THE RM, will result in “the equivalent of a banned site”? You don’t seem to get it. The RM gave his/her approval of my sources. I will always give my sources. If I did not, that would be a problem. Insanity, I tell you, pure insanity with wailing and gnashing. In order to keep the message from the forefront. I am asking you one more time: prove it or shut up about it. I have received the only approval I need: the RM’s. If that changes, then we will take it from there. In the meantime, if you don’t like my posts, or my acknowledgments and credits given, don’t read them, or find a way to refute the message. It’s not the sources you despise, it’s the message.
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.