Catholicism & Christianity

[Villager]

Democracies are not all they're cracked up to be.

They permit free speech, intelligent and informed discussion. To some, they are a threat.

 

[Kathryn]

Right - to some Southern Baptists free speech and intelligent and informed discussions are a threat.

Try practicing democracy at Bob Jones University.

 

[Villager]

Right - to some Southern Baptists free speech and intelligent and informed discussions are a threat.

Should the RCC be taken as seriously as the SBs, then? Is the Vatican really now as credible as Westboro?

 

[krsnaraja]

The debater wins if he/she gets to say the last words! So, who won in this religious debate on Catholicism & Christianity, between Villager & Kathryn, between Villager & Emu, between Villager & Lawrence? Why it`s Villager. Hep hep Hooray!!!

 

[Renji]

The debater wins if he/she gets to say the last words! So, who won in this religious debate on Catholicism & Christianity, between Villager & Kathryn, between Villager & Emu, between Villager & Lawrence? Why it`s Villager. Hep hep Hooray!!!

Lol, he can't even answer the posts directly... And yeah, debating isn't always about winning but elaborating one's point. Lmao.

 

[Renji]

Should the RCC be taken as seriously as the SBs, then? Is the Vatican really now as credble as Westboro?

I don't know, but your mere inventions about the church should be handled seriously.

 

[krsnaraja]

I don't know, but your mere inventions about the church should be handled seriously.

Why its Lawrence who won the debate against Villager. Simply because he got to say the last words!

 

[Renji]

Why its Lawrence who won the debate against Villager. Simply because he got to say the last words!

Shilyehamnida, this is not "the last post is the winner" type of thread isn't it? Lol

Anyway, I added you on my friends list. Hope you can approve my invite.

 

[krsnaraja]

Shilyehaminda, this is not "the last post is the winner" type of thread isn't it? Lol

Anyway, I added you on my friends list. Hope you can approve my invite.

Yes, I will! You see why I haven`t invited you my friend it`s because I don`t have in my control panel the button to invite friends.

 

[Villager]

The debater wins if he/she gets to say the last words!

Maybe the debater wins if he/she gets to say the last words before a silence, then a large number of posts that change the subject, often with photos and other space-taking devices. Maybe.

 

[Renji]

Yes, I will! You see why I haven`t invited you my friend it`s because I don`t have in my control panel the button to invite friends.

You just need to visit the profile of the user that you wanna add and you'll see on the lower right part of the profile (friend's list) the words "befriend *username". That's how easy it is to add friends.

 

[krsnaraja]

You just need to visit the profile of the user that you wanna add and you'll see on the lower right part of the profile (friend's list) the words "befriend *username". That's how easy it is to add friends.

Thank you so much my friend. We just earlier had dinner at a resto were they specialize in grilled chicken & pork. Next to the resto was a Korean resto. When we got outside, several Koreans also got outside. You know what they were taking to get them home? A Ford Expedition & a Ford Everest. They were all smiling & laughing when they got inside these cars.

 

[Renji]

..another way is to left click on my user name (for example) from a post that I started here. You'll be seeing options like "view public profile", last option is "Add *username to your contacts". That's how easy it is..

 

[Renji]

Thank you so much my friend. We just earlier had dinner at a resto were they specialize in grilled chicken & pork. Next to the resto was a Korean resto. When we got outside, several Koreans also got outside. You know what they were taking to get them home? A Ford Expedition & a Ford Everest. They were all smiling & laughing when they got inside these cars.

That's good to hear. But anyway, let's just chat on the profile visitor message about this stuff or through PM's. Because this is a friendly talk and not about your OP

 

[krsnaraja]

That's good to hear. But anyway, let's just chat on the profile visitor message about this stuff or through PM's. Because this is a friendly talk and not about your OP

Alright, my friend. After I rest for a while ( with my wife ).

 

[Renji]

I know what you mean. , I'm actually watching a horror documentary

 

[Mister Emu]

Not when the question was asked.

Nope, I quoted what I was asking about.

No more diversions, support your statement that one man did most of the translation original to the KJV.

No wonder that one cannot possibly agree with sola Scriptura if one recognises another, separate, independent authority of apparently equal status.

Good, you get it. The Church, from the very beginning has always recognised the teachings that Jesus and the Apostles gave to us but did/were not write/written down. The Church existed when there was no New Testament scripture and everything was given orally, how could a Church founded directly by the oral teachings of the Apostles agree with a scripture only stance?

From the respective statement made in post #227 on page 23.

I'm asking for the chain of logic to go from this statement:
'God's will was not passed on solely in written form'
to this statement:
'God's eternal purpose can be thwarted by a technicality'

The one doesn't simply follow the other, you must have assumptions I do not share. A belief that God's eternal purpose is to have Paul pass on God's will entirely in written form for instance.

So are we to believe that a vicar of Christ is superfluous?

No, but that he is man, just as wretched and in need of salvation as any other.

That seven exclusive sacraments are of no avail?

When someone has God truly in their hearts and serves Him, they availeth much That doesn't stop wolves in sheep's clothing from coming to harm the flock. Heresiarchs and even Popes too. We are assured not in the knowledge not that our leaders much be perfect to make sure God's Church stands, but that God has promised us that we are His Church "and the gates of hell will not prevail against it".

Why compare God's elect with the accursed?

Protestants are accursed?

We are asked to believe that all who die physically also go to hell.

By who? Not me.

There is no historic age in which it can be said that the RCC was not either coercive or corrupt; though frequently both

First couple of centuries A.D.

I merely allude to the views of some modern historians who reckon to take a wider and more objective view than the Eurocentric (and possibly Catholic-dominated) views of the past.

Interesting, because modern historians I've read say the opposite, that Catholicism helped keep civilisation in the west alive after the fall of Rome.

If they are on topic. The topic is the RCC qua Christianity. It is not any poster.

You are the one who brought the topics up.

Evidently Catholicism is not really compatible with democracies.

It doesn't have anything to do with secular political democracies... Christianity isn't a democratic institution. We are a monarchy with a king, and His name is Jesus.

 

[Villager]

The Church, from the very beginning has always recognised the teachings that Jesus and the Apostles gave to us but did/were not write/written down.

But how does one know this?

The Church existed when there was no New Testament scripture and everything was given orally, how could a Church founded directly by the oral teachings of the Apostles agree with a scripture only stance?

Because the oral lore was written down. Simple.

No

Then of what advantage is he? Why is Catholicism superior to anything else?

Or is it the same as everything else?

Protestants are accursed?

According to the RCC, they are. So how is it that the RCC is at a practical moral level similar to that of Protestants (as alleged)? Are Catholics accursed, too?

By who? Not me.

'Fraid so.

First couple of centuries A.D.

True! That was before the RCC existed, though.

Interesting, because modern historians I've read say the opposite, that Catholicism helped keep civilisation in the west alive after the fall of Rome.

Civilisation? What is that?

There was no civilisation worth the name in Europe after the fall of Rome, for about 600 years. By the time agricultural productivity grew beyond a breadline level, a small minority exploited the producers, just as the avaricious Roman patricians had done. And the Vatican was no less keen on grabbing its share than any. If that's civilisation, civilisation is disastrous for the led in this world, and disastrous for its leaders in the next– if the Bible is to be believed, and physical death leads to judgment.

You are the one who brought the topics up.

Quote?

We are a monarchy with a king, and His name is Jesus.

Not Joseph, then. Perhaps he should be told.

 

[Mister Emu]

But how does one know this?

Because it was the oral tradition that the Christian communities compared the writings to to see if they were acceptable. The acceptance of the NT is a result of oral tradition. The very notion of Sola Scriptura is self defeating because the choice of what is to be scripture is non-scriptural.

Because the oral lore was written down. Simple.

But not all of it.

Then of what advantage is he?

The Pope isn't of any special advantage. He is there because Christ declared an earthly head for the Church in Peter and those that are Peter's successors.

Why is Catholicism superior to anything else?

Because it is protected by God from falling into a level of doctrinal error that would mean it is not the Church of God anymore.

According to the RCC, they are.

Where? and in what way?

'Fraid so.

'fraid not. I said both physical and spiritual death are a consequence of sin. We die because of the original sin. We are spiritually dead because of our sins. We are made alive by Jesus

True! That was before the RCC existed, though

Catholic Church existed back then too

Civilisation? What is that?

Society, technology, literature, art, etc. I think you know what civilisation is.

Quote?

Because it's called 'Deuterocanon', for one thing. Something is either God's Word— or it's the devil's.

But their motivation is to suppress real Protestantism, that inspired democracy

Is God's word limited to the Canon and everything else the Devil's word?
Is Christianity a democracy?

Not Joseph, then. Perhaps he should be told.

He knows the Pope doesn't claim to be the King, the Pope is the King's steward.

 

[krsnaraja]

Wow! Villager & Emu are still at it. What fighting spirits these two guys have.