Industrial Deals Beauty Best Books of the Year So Far STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc PCB for Musical Instruments Starting at $39.99 Wickedly Prime Handmade Wedding Rustic Decor Book House Cleaning TheTick TheTick TheTick  Introducing Echo Show All-New Fire HD 8 Kids Edition, starting at $129.99 Kindle Oasis GNO Water Sports toystl17_gno
Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

Mary Was Sinless -- Part VIII

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 201-225 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:33:48 PM PST
J, You are right, Jesus is responsible for building His Church on Peter the rock. Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:33:51 PM PST
Jay Runner says:
Jim,

Actually, the richest denomination with by far the best educated members who are disproportionally represented in the press and electronic media, and who have the most influence on average people in the USA by using their media positions are the Unitarian Universalists. Sorry to say.

Peace in Christ,

Jay

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:36:05 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
J Hampton says: I have shown you hundreds of times where it goes against His Word.

You have shown me your opinion. Nothing more.

"And that doesn't even count the HUNDREDS of times Bruce Wade has corrected you."

A man with no arms could count those on his fingers.

You define "contradicting the Scriptures" not as "saying 'A' when the Scriptures say '~A,'" but "saying 'A' when Scripture says nothing at all." Therefore, your claims that "most of the RCCs teachings go DIRECTLY against His Word" are simply and truly BOGUS.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:36:58 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
I hate lies. You're a liar.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:39:10 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
Atheists are the ultimate Protestants; that makes UU's the penultimate Protestants.

UU's can believe virtually ANYTHING THEY WANT, as long as it isn't orthodox Christianity.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:46:49 PM PST
Truth says:
And yet, can back up EVERY single thing I believe from His Word, can you?

You don't need to believe me, your answers lay in why most of the RCCs teachings go DIRECTLY contradict against His Word, and why all of them end up in the role that belongs to Jesus Christ alone.

Why do ALL the disputed teachings of the RCC place someone else into the role and place that belongs to Jesus Christ alone?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 6:52:22 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 3, 2012, 7:18:20 AM PST
J, You mean like that of Paul's teachings also, who claims he too can save some, and that he too is our father and that we should imitate him too! Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

Posted on Dec 2, 2012, 7:01:53 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
And the biggest lie you tell, Jim, next to "The Catholic Church's teachings contradict God's word," is "Your church forces you to believe..."

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:03:24 PM PST
Jay Runner says:
Kevin,

I know. Some congregations have New Ages classes and seances right in their meeting facilities. The only theological contraband is orthodox theology.

Peace in Christ,

Jay

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:09:36 PM PST
Truth says:
And neither one of them are lies, as we both know it is true.
You are REQUIRED to believe the things about Mary, and the RCCs teachings contradict God's Word.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:11:52 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
They also let neo-pagans use their buildings, just like St. John the Divine, the Episcopalian cathedral in NYC.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:11:56 PM PST
J, Actually, faith alone and Scripture alone are not biblical. (James 2;24, John 12:17, 1 Thessalonians 5:12). Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:15:57 PM PST
Truth says:
And don't forget the gambling in the buildings of the RCC.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:25:35 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
The proceeds go to charity, you aren't told to leave if you're "too lucky," and the people running the game don't break your legs (or worse) if you win "too much."

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 7:32:58 PM PST
Truth says:
Thanks for the stirring endorsement of gambling by your chosen denomination.

I see why, you seem to know a lot about it. You must spend a lot of time at The Meadows or Rivers Casino.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 8:22:18 PM PST
You are welcome, Faith.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2012, 8:54:21 PM PST
JEM says:
Bruce E. Wade says:
"....This implies Paul knows Peter was "Judaizing" the Gentile converts..."

Implies?????
Really???
That is YOUR conclusion, from a biased reading of the bible, and it is clearly wrong as shown in the same Galatians where "the group of James" is clearly identified as the "party of the circumcision"

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 12:22:28 AM PST
Observation: for "Kitties"
- ----- -- --- -
Owned by Kitties is Keepin' The Faith Alive says:

No, Jim, it isn't okay for Catholics or anyone to make up answers (or to agree with them) that go against the Living Word of God. Please don't lie about us.
 - -- -- -- -
San Diego suggestion:

Very simple litmus test for you to perform "Kitties".

Following two questions to be asked of any roman catholic priest.

Is the death of Christ on the Cross necessary?

Answer will be yes (since that is doctrine of rcc).

Next question to ask is death of Christ sufficient?

Answer will be no (at least that was rcc doctrine 50 years ago when I became a Christian and naturally had to leave rcc).

As did 50 of the other women in my book review here on Amazon dealing with "Four Major Cults".

Once we all accepted Christ as Savior (plus nothing) as per Jn. 3:36 (A) we naturally had to vacate rcc premises permanently.

If you do perform the above litmus test (and obtain a different answer) you know where to find me.

Since the above rcc "doctrine" was reality for the all the centuries prior to all of us older women having to leave rcc 50 years ago.

It would be interesting to know "who" changed the doctrine during the last 50 years.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 1:16:04 AM PST
Jose,

Again, not my conclusion, but that of Biblical scholars.

Grace and Peace, Brother,

S.D.G.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 2:35:25 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 6, 2015, 8:10:07 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 2:37:02 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 6, 2015, 8:10:07 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 2:41:30 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 6, 2015, 8:10:07 AM PDT]

Posted on Dec 3, 2012, 2:47:49 AM PST
Jon Astro says:
Re:K B and Raulito's dialogue in last thread. 'Jon has albeit tacitly admitted the early Church was Catholic,'..re Augustine's Eucharist as 'figure' and 'the body and blood'.,etc.,

My Minister several Sundays in the year,calls the elements 'the body and blood of Christ'. Several commentaries that are Reformed and Protestant,also refer to the elements as the body and blood of Christ. I wrote essays in the past on the Communion of the Saints,in which even I called them 'the body and blood of Christ'. The Lutherans and Anglicans make a big deal of calling them 'the body and blood of Christ'. So when dear Augie explains that he means they 'resemble' the body and blood of Christ,when he uses the literal language,Raul infers he means they are not really figurative "only",but actual flesh and blood of Christ,PLUS RESEMBLE them. The Protestants can explain,like Augie,that though they use the literal names of the the things the sacraments refer to,they are real resemblances. And they are no less Protestant for doing so. Then Augustine can refer to the elements as the body and blood of Christ,as well.But explain,as he does elsewhere(Letters 98:9),that he uses this literal language,because it is suitable to sacramental language. But as my Protestant Minister does,he explains,that the bread and wine resemble the body and blood.

Now,the 'only' caveat is brought in,to rescue the Catholic bull,from getting caught in the thickets. Says Raul,nowhere does any father say the Eucharist is "only figurative". But nowhere does my Minister,or the Protestant commentaries say,that the Eucharist is 'only' figurative either. Calvin and Luther would deny point blank,any such notion. Yet if you ask any of these,they will explain(without the 'only'),that the elements really resemble the things the sacrament refers to.The body and the blood.And in two clear places,Augustine explains that if the saying of Jesus seems to denote a crime,say eating flesh and blood,it is figurative. And in another,he says,the literal language of body and blood is spoken of the bread and wine.Yet,they resemble these,and such literal language is used in his sermons,so as to give the sacraments their significance.In the same way,infant baptism is spoken about,as if the infant is then and there committing himself to Christ.Though it is not the case.The language of the sacrament necessitates it. So too,the Protestant minister in the Presbyterian tradition,speaks over the infant,as if the infant is exercising faith,then and there. So,says Augustine,the bread and wine are spoken of as the body and blood of Christ.(Letters 98:9) I can't seem to find a Protestant who disagrees with Augie.

And Raul has not spent one grain of effort,to explain how a whole school of Catholic monks,soon after Augustine,follow his 'figurative' interpretation of the elements.They deny the literal explanation of the elements until Ratramnus,in the ninth century. The both/and is denied by these monks. As it is with Protestants today. And as there was a tension throughout Catholic history, over whether it was a re-sacrifice,or a re-presentation,with theologians differing with each other.We find that such division is evident,until right on before the Reformation,on the issue of the figurative,versus the literal interpretation. So, to suggest that Augustine held to one view,as against another,fails to be an argument that he was Catholic on this. As the Church has been long divided in the past before Trent came, and more uniformity in Catholicism could be found. Jon

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 2:58:40 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 6, 2015, 8:10:07 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012, 3:05:30 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 6, 2015, 8:10:08 AM PDT]
Discussion locked

Recent discussions in the Christianity forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Amazon Discussions Feedback Forum
1266 20 hours ago
Jesus said... "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me." John 14:6 Part Three 4526 1 minute ago
Catholic-Protestant Discussion XXXVII 9840 3 minutes ago
Last Day Biblical Prophecy is in the process of being fulfilled, the stage is being set, are you ready? Part Three 4332 6 minutes ago
elementary school teacher in Oklahoma has to panhandle for classroom supplies. 11 18 minutes ago
My Mob Pub and Coffee Shop, Parth the Thirteenth 134 24 minutes ago
Jesus' true Church today would have CURRENT REVELATION FROM GOD! 9723 33 minutes ago
Agnosticism is fake religion 610 2 hours ago
Problems with Anti-Catholicism: Who is the REAL "666"? 2567 3 hours ago
I completely understand now why Mormons aren't Christians. 8063 9 hours ago
Japanese First Lady avoided Trump by not speaking English 5 15 hours ago
Catholic-Protestant Discussion XXXVIII 29 16 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  48
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Dec 1, 2012
Latest post:  Jan 8, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers