Posted on 12/31/2015 4:29:48 PM PST by NYer
That was me quoting iscool: This partial quoting habit of your is disingenuous at best and completely dishonest at worst. Here is the entire post: Last line post 769 direct quote cut an pasted with no changes or alterations: “Mary was not the mother of that celestial body...When Jesus’ human body died, his spirit returned to heaven and his soul went to Hell; Abraham’s Bosom... “
do you agree with Izzy? Yes or no, If yes please supply scriptural proof supporting Izzy's (bizarre) contention.
ThaT God can see the end from the beginning does not authorize one to assume everything in existence has been existing since the beginning of everything. Try again.
See #997 above
Excellent job...
Matthew has only 23 verses in it. I don’t suppose you have another reference for it than Matthew 2:26?
I presume you mean Matthew 2 has only 23 verses. I must have hit 6 instead of 3 by mistake. Sorry about that.
So you're challenging someone to come up with the bible verse that says exactly what I said...
HaHaHa, after all this time you still haven't learned anything about bible study...No wonder you and your religion can't understand the scriptures...If a single verse doesn't explain what you are looking for, you don't get it...That's why the bible is a complete mystery to you guys...You could throw away 99% of the scriptures and it wouldn't change your theology a whit...
If you look at post #997 you can see that biblical truth is brought together with scriptures from all over the bible...God wasn't nearly as simple as your religious leaders in putting the scriptures together yet, the scriptures are relatively simple providing you STUDY, and believe...
I am not one to quibble over differences in translations. It would drive one crazy. For example, out of the first six translations in your link, no two are identical. The message is the same, though.
See 100 below that. I need a “Yes” or a “No”, I am not interested in a thesis especially one that does not answer the question. Izzy spoke to the spirit and Soul of Jesus. Not a single one of those out of context verse specifically addresses the issue in regards to Jesus.
Of not answering the direct question with a direct answer. I guess this has to be added to the ever increasing list of questions that non-Catholics refuse to answer.
Post 997 was a waste of time and band width. It did not answer the question directly instead it slung verses out of context. Not a single on of them addressed your (bizarre) comment.
That should be post 1000
You poor thing, there is nothing that can penetrate the willful denial of Truth. #997 is all you’re going to get. You refuse to learn from others not in the catholic magic circle, so your fate is set to be ever so bad.
He cannot allow his mind to open to the Truth contained in the post #997. To do so would shake the foundations of his religion, catholiciism, and all the heresies therein which expose it as not Christianity. Have pity
Okay so you can’t answer the question. I really wan’t expecting any of the non-Catholics to be able to since Izzy’s comment was just so bizarre.
Actually you directly asked if anyone thought that this is "dead nuts 100% accurate" and in the very first sentence i rejected that status, and provided systematic examination by which one can make a qualified judgment.
Thus your objection is to my not just being like an RC which just "toss out some Scripture." Either read and consider what i wrote and show why you have a "dead nuts 100% accurate" position or perhaps drop the "vergy" personal dispute with "Izzy."
Instead, your response indicates no interest in searching out a matter like the noble Bereans did in order to ascertain the veracity of a claim, versus reliance on implicit trust in Rome to tell you what things are true and then "toss out" some Scripture to give traditions of men specious support.
Yet neither Rome nor the doctrine of SS claims that all things as clear, nor that all things must be, and sometimes the best the pope could do with heated fervent debate among RC parties was to declare a truce.
As I showed, i see that opened Heaven to all believers by His death and loosed the OT saints free after His resurrection, as well as , preached judgment to the lost, and ascended to Heaven. That He could do this while His spirit as the physical life force was with the Father to whom He had commended it would at best be inferred but unless i see more evidence then it is certainly does not warrant having the "dead nuts 100% accurate" status you asked for.
I
Now that's comical coming from you after the discussion on Mary's virginity.
But I am glad you at least recognize context is the key to understanding the Word.
You're getting there.
Pigeons got to you again I see. Your answer is in post #997. That you cannot comprehend it or will not allow it to sink into your catholicized soul is another issue.
Can you reconcile CCC 969's claim of Mary being a "mediatrix" with 1 Timothy 2:5? Do you stand with or against God? If you say 969 is correct, you deny God's inspired and inerrant word; if you deny 969, you deny Rome.
Well? You seem to be keen on unanswered questions: step up and do the right thing.
Hoss
LOL
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.