Free Republic

Novavax was tested against fetal cell line HEK-293

See here https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abe1502

and

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/novavax-covid-jab-linked-to-aborted-fetal-cells-through-laboratory-testing/

myocarditis was talked about before the vaccines - myocarditis does not develop from viruses

No, the anode rod will be eaten away by hard water. It must be replaced. The anode rod is sacrificial. It takes about five years for it to be corroded away - about the same amount of time as the warranty. Shocking!

Hi! If you replace the anode rod every five years, you will never need to replace the hot water heater

Not sure what you mean.

After the resurrection Jesus tells the apostles,”Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you.” When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: “Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” (John 20:21–23).

Thank you Elsie.

We are Catholic, but my children attend school at an Evangelical Christian home school co-op. I can say that my children have been treated exceptionally well. The parents and children of that school are truly wonderful.

Personal attack? Every statement I've made has been strictly about the article. I don't even know what RnMom has said about the article, so how can I attack her? The article is fair game. Now, however, I do find it personally offensive for you to suggest that my posts are uncivil. Luckily we have a record of the transcript.

I have proven it. It is up to you to show any errors of my rebuttal.

hahah. Thank you so much Elsie!

Have a great St. Valentine's day.

Why yes, I do.

Irenaeus: Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189].

No facts? Do you dispute what I wrote? I welcome your rebuttal to them.

What is the point of dissecting the article further when its opening statements are shown to be so very wrong?

It doesn't take long to watch a Protestant twist words around.

The author, John Bugay, relies heavily on a summary written by Eamon Duffy. Duffy's first quote "Irenaeus thought that the Church had been 'founded and organised at Rome by the two glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul,' is correct.

"yet for Irenaeus the authority of the Church at Rome came from its foundation by two Apostles, not one, Peter and Paul, not Peter alone." This is incorrect. For a Catholic, the authority of the Church comes from God. Nowhere does Irenaeus ever say its authority comes from Peter and Paul. Martin Luther would be proud.

Reading on a littler further, leads to another whopper:
"The tradition that Peter and Paul had been put to death at the hands of Nero in Rome about the year ad 64 was universally accepted in the second century"

This lie is too funny because Irenaeus actually calls out Eamon Duffy as a heretic back in 189 AD:
"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known to us throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times, men who neither knew nor taught anything like what these heretics rave about" (Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189]).

This article continues on with more heresy. I especially like how opinion is stated in bold, since bold type must make it true.

Very nice question.

To be clear, there is no official teaching of the Catholic Church if Jesus ate the Eucharist. Whether or not He ate it, Jesus still implemented the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

For your Old Testament verses:
Jesus has released us from the dietary laws found in the Old Testament (Mosaic Law):
"Hear me, all of you, and understand: there is nothing outside a man which by going into him can defile him; but the things which come out of a man are what defile him." And when he had entered the house, and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. And he said to them, "Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside cannot defile him, since it enters, not his heart but his stomach, and so passes on?" (Thus he declared all foods clean.) (Mark 7:14-19)

In the Gospel Jesus tells us that He will not drink again until after dies, He enters heaven, and returns.

It is pretty obvious (context) that the Eucharist isn't to be included as part of Acts 15:12-29. Jesus doesn't contradict Himself.

Sure, and to "digest" the word of God even today still can mean to read very carefully. There is no argument here, and I don't know why it is discussed.

Yes, Jesus ate Himself. No, Jesus did not sin. "I have come not to abolish the law, but fulfill it" The same arguement goes for why eating shellfish is no longer a sin.

The cases I've listed have been subjects that I have brough into the conversation since its beginning.

The verse we are discussing doesn't say "eat my flesh." Here it is in KJV "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

I put it to you: in this verse, can Jesus mean "His, (i.e. Jesus) flesh profit nothing"

With "eating the scroll" It is not clear if the phrase is meant to be taken literally or as a metaphor. I agree with you that the scroll signifies the word of God. Not God Himself. However, at the Last Supper, Jesus speaks very clearly and then eats the unleavened bread. He literally ate it.

Let's go over the verse in question again.
The first sentence is "It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing." The next sentence is "The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life"

These sentences are in this order because the the knowledge gained first one leads to the second. This isn't too big of a deal, but let's look a little closer.

What flesh could Jesus be talking about? There are only five options: 1. His living flesh 2. His corpse 3. our flesh 4. metaphorically as in "sins of the flesh" 5. the flesh of animals

Case 1. If we profit (i.e. gain) nothing from His flesh, the the Word made flesh profits us nothing. The death of His body on the cross profits us nothing. This is clearly wrong.

I think we'll agree it cannot be cases 2, 4, and 5 - they do not result in any gains for us.

case 3. makes sense

Fine. We'll take them one at a time. I don't have time to do more than that.

John 6:63 "It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life."

Here quickeneth means 'to give life to.' Your translation matches fairly well. Good.

The phrase "flesh profiteth nothing" is the key to understanding these verses. Its meaning is twofold:
1. If the people misunderstood Jesus and were to actually cut up His corpse and eat it after He had died, He's telling them they would gain nothing
2. Flesh also means our carnal desires. If the flesh refuses to be subject to the spirit and words of Christ, it gains nothing.

The Protestant error is that here Jesus is discrediting the Eucharist as His body. This is not true because if Christ's flesh had profited us nothing, He would never have taken flesh for us nor died in the flesh for us.

"The pagan rituals of the Catholic Church are only that. Pagan rituals."

Yes, Jesus the pagan:
"And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. [27] And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. [28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins." Matthew 26:26

"When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." John 20:22-23

You forgot St. Paul the pagan:
"The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?" Corinthians 10:16

Here is the Protestant mantra: "Jesus only means what He says when I say so." Right? Everyone has their own interpretation, right? Let's have 40,000+ Churches, each with its own beliefs. A-OK Remind me, what passage has Jesus handing out Bibles?

“they are the ones who wrote scripture” If you mean the New Testament authors, who must be all Catholic since there was only one Church, then yes.

“we should all thank them” I do not, thanks.

“Catholics claiming they are the only church” no, not the only church, but the only one started by Jesus.

“denouncing anyone who doesn’t belong to that organization is not saved” not entirely true. If you really are interest, see LUMEN GENTIUM paragraph numbers 14, 15, and 16.

The angel Gabriel is referred to as ‘he’, not it.

Angels have refused to serve God. Their leader’s name is Lucifer. Gabriel was not one of them.

You miss the tense.

The prefex κε is in the perfect tense — meaning the action has been completed in the past with its results continuing in full effect. The prefect tense carries with it a sense of fullness or completion.

There are other examples of the perfect tense in Scripture:

Ephesians 2:8 τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ πίστεως: καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον "For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God" The word 'saved,' σεσῳσμένοι, is perfect tense. The 'saved' continues on in full effect. Martin Luther got this one right "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God"

Matthew 4:7 ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, πάλιν γέγραπται, οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου "Jesus said to him: It is written again: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God" The word 'written' γέγραπται, is in the perfect tense also. KJV "Jesuss said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"

So Martin Luther, leader of the Protestants, is 2 out of 3 (67%). Pretty typical.

I’m trying to get you to want to receive the Sacraments. It is our job for everyone to get to Heaven. My intentions are good ones only.