In other words, you're pulling the definition out of your hat to provide your Pharisaical attacks the patina of legitimacy.
And BTW, redoubling those attacks while repeating your casus belli for those attacks does not change the fact those attacks are rooted in Biblical silence.
I know you know the Catholic justification, but you have chosen to set that aside, ignore the fact that God did not choose to prohibit what you want prohibited, and declare your thesis authoritative in contravention of the Commandment against taking the Name of the Lord in vain.
Good luck with that.
...if you want to believe that inhabiting the plant Kolob is a warranted...
The Mormons came out of YOU, not us.
You will have to be more coherent than that if you want a meaningful exchange.
Let me refer you to your first two paragraphs from the post this one answers.
You should review the rules for the religion forum. This statement could be construed as a violation of several of them. What you have presented is not a refutation of Daniel1212's position but instead a thinly-veiled personal attack.
Oh?
Mormonism
|
Catholicism
|
What manner of absurdity is this? You think prayer is anything less than a "common fundamental practice?" Are you that desperate to argue otherwise?
And BTW, redoubling those attacks while repeating your casus belli for those attacks does not change the fact those attacks are rooted in Biblical silence.
Wrong again, as it is not simply the inexplicable silence for what is manifestly held to be a common fundamental practice, but what is said and shown to be Biblical prayer, and the immediate object of it.
I know you know the Catholic justification, but you have chosen to set that aside, ignore the fact that God did not choose to prohibit what you want prohibited, and declare your thesis authoritative in contravention of the Commandment against taking the Name of the Lord in vain.
Which is so much bombast, as i have not set Catholic justification for prayer to created beings aside, which I have abundantly refuted before by the grace of God, but which arguments you set aside, never (wisely) attempting to provide any, and instead resorted to construing the argument as prohibiting a practice simply based on lack of any example. And in refutation i never declared my argument as authoritative in the name of the Lord as if i were a pope which presumed ensured infallibility, but instead the veracity of my argument rests upon the weight of evidence for it, both negative and positive.
The Mormons came out of YOU, not us.
Yes, as you did, as in apostates, and thus the Mormons basically became like Rome, with their Prophet/popes presuming ensured veracity of office, and requiring belief in another inspired source of Divine revelation, and with a distinctive class of believers distinctively called "priests," and with more than two places in the afterlife, and even a heavenly Mother, etc
Let me refer you to your first two paragraphs from the post this one answers.
Unless you are confessing that you responded to what you did not comprehend, then you still are the only lacking coherence. As is fitting.