Posted on 08/31/2013 3:38:44 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans
Full interview (roughly one hour) with former Roman Catholic priests Richard Bennett (website: http://www.BEREANBEACON.ORG) & Bartholomew Brewer, Ph.D, author of "Pilgrimage from Rome - A Testimony" (website: http://www.MTC.COM) and former nun Rocio Zwirner give glory to God for their exodus from the Roman Catholic Church & into the glorious grace of the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ. (Description from youtube)
It was YOU who first cast doubt on the word “profess” as it pertains to the RCC position on Muslims serving the same God. Were you not trying to imply that the RCC does not actually believe they do? That they only profess to?
Are you going to respond to post # 68?
1) You used a quote from a banned website.
2) When you said that you got the quote from the Brewer PDF that was untrue.
Care to comment?
“It was YOU who first cast doubt on the word “profess” as it pertains to the RCC position on Muslims serving the same God.”
False. I never cast any doubt on the word “profess”. I merely used it and understood it correctly. Can you say the same?
“Were you not trying to imply that the RCC does not actually believe they do?”
There was no “trying” of anything: I pointed out what Muslims profess.
“That they only profess to?”
I pointed out your errors - even though they are many and constant. Maybe you should start with basic words and definitions since they seem to be so difficult for you.
Are you going to respond to post # 68?
1) You used a quote from a banned website.
2) When you said that you got the quote from the Brewer PDF that was untrue.
Care to comment?
LOL! We post a thread about Peter Kreeft and out of norwhere appears an anti-Castholic thread. LOL!
“I think the issue is language, not meaning.”
The issue is not language, it’s meaning. Because when Augustine and us say “it is by grace,’ we do not mean “it is by obedience and submission to sacraments,” which is what you mean. We do not say it is by “freely accepting a grace that is ineffectual to make us willing,” we say, with Augustine, that it is a grace which lights upon a man and makes the unwilling willing, and preserves the weak human will to salvation, and this He does without any noting of their righteousness, whether foreseen or not, but purely by the free-gift.
“You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you. John 15:16 For if they had been elected because they had believed, they themselves would certainly have first chosen Him by believing in Him, so that they should deserve to be elected. But He takes away this supposition altogether when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Ch. 34)
The Romish system is entirely backwards, because it denies the holy scripture which Augustine here so excellently explains, and they make grace and salvation the fruit of our labor, rather than the origin of our faith, labor and fruit.
I think you should point to me Catholic doctrine which says this. Do you mean obedience to what?
Augustine was still a Bishop. He had many priests and Christians who were obedient to him, because he spoke with the authority of Bishops which is the authority of a steward of Christ.
Are you going to respond to post # 68?
1) You used a quote from a banned website.
2) When you said that you got the quote from the Brewer PDF that was untrue.
Care to comment?
“and therefore cannot be telling the truth now when you say you got this from a Brewer PDF”
I confess, you caught me. I copied from the eeevil anti-Catholic website first, and then searched for a PDF for the entire book online to quote from instead. Finding Brewer’s website small PDF, and that they were the same though not the entire book, I did not bother to recopy the material.
So, you got me big time on this one.
OK. Now, about all those Catholic priests who did more than just have a *romantic attachment* to boys, and went and acted on it.......
I sure hope to hear as much condemnation of THEM.
You wrote:
“I confess, you caught me. I copied from the eeevil anti-Catholic website first, and then searched for a PDF for the entire book online to quote from instead. Finding Brewer’s website small PDF, and that they were the same though not the entire book, I did not bother to recopy the material.”
So, in other words:
1) you used the banned website,
2) you then used another source and claimed it was the actual source when that was completely untrue,
3) you have now admitted that you posted something that was untrue and that you knew it was untrue when you posted it (i.e. your claim that you got it from the Brewer PDF was a complete fabrication on your part because you actually got it from the banned website - as you have now admitted).
“So, you got me big time on this one.”
Do you wonder - even for a second - why I believe anti-Catholic Protestants are liars? You can pass this off as no big deal, but what you did was wrong. Anti-Catholic Protestants lie. They lie often and they don’t care about being honest in regard to the Catholic Church. I’m glad you admitted that you acted falsely, but I don’t doubt for a second that you’ll just say this is no big deal. Lying is morally wrong.
“I sure hope to hear as much condemnation of THEM.”
If they show up in the thread, I’ll be happy to condemn their actions. Anti-Catholics and their stories appear as the opening thread document. Hence, the topic.
Fifty lashes with a wet noodle for you mister.....
Why only if they show up?
Did Brewer show up here for you to condemn?
But any Catholic priest who admits to molesting boys doesn’t get condemned unless he shows up....
I see....
Drop it.
I absolutely made my point. Thanks. Have a good night.
And people who have lied on this website have been banned in the past. Watching......
You wrote:
“Why only if they show up?”
Because the thread isn’t about them.
“Did Brewer show up here for you to condemn?”
Yep. His name showed up in the opening thread. The thread was about him and people like him.
“But any Catholic priest who admits to molesting boys doesn’t get condemned unless he shows up....”
If I were posting in a thread about that wouldn’t it make sense to post about that?
“I see....”
No, I don’t think you do. And it doesn’t surprise me. Next time you’re in the grocery store check out start condemning abusive Catholic priests. Oh, wait, you wouldn’t do that at the grocery store check out for no particular reason? Gee, you mean there could actually be a logical place of time to talk about certain things?
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.