[JennyD]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

The doctrine of papal infallibility was approved about 400 years AFTER the Inquisition...

There is PLENTY that went on that isn't in the Bible.

So Popes didn't decide that they were infallible until recently?

Tell me, was John Paul II infallible? Bendydict has contradicted him more than once. If JPII was infallible, then Bendydict is lying, no?

[Father Thomas Martin]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

The Church never put anyone to death. They just tried heretics, and if found guilty, turned them over to local authorities for sentencing.

Thus they killed them as certainly as if they had held the knife

But the Church didn't control the secular authorities' code of law & order...

Also, Pope John Paul II repeatedly acknowledged the Church's sins of that time (the torture), and prayed often for God's forgiveness...

So one pope says one thing, another another and both are infallible on matters of faith - Landover Baptist will give you consistency throughout.

The doctrine of papal infallibility was approved about 400 years AFTER the Inquisition...

I bet you wouldn't say that about Henry VIII and Elizabeth I's slaughter of us Catholics back in the 1500s...

No I would not. The papist plot was afoot, not only was it against the Crown of England but supported by the vicar of Rome for his own financial benefit.


And what about people like Thomas More, Mary Queen of Scots, Edmund Campion, etc. who were slaughtered under Henry VIII & later Elizabeth I?

See above, traitors to the Crown everyone of 'em.

I thought LBC didn't like England or the British...Weren't our nation's Founding Fathers technically "traitors to the crown" as well?

It is a custom. We have granted exceptions to priests who were already married before they became priests. In fact, the Eastern Rite Catholics (loyal to the Pope, but maintaining their rites)...most of their priests are married.

Are you going to say why the custom came about and when? Another story of avarice and greed...

What does avarice & greed have to do with it?

If Jesus is God, and Mary is His mother, wouldn't you say Mary is the Mother of God?

No, the Holy and indivisible Trinity requires no "mother".

OK, so she said yes to God, bore Jesus in her womb for 9 months, and then gave birth to Him after that...What does that make her?

If you will look in the Gospels, Jesus said "This is my blood, poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

On that one occasion may be... and the catholic church makes daily divine revelation of Our Lord's words of kindness.

Bingo! It's the unbloody ongoing sacrifice which was foretold in the Upper Room and laid down on the Cross.

I will bring up "The Case Of The Sinning Minister":

Let's say your minister became a "born-again Christian" at the age of 15. Now he is 75. In the intervening 60 years the man has lived an exemplary life. So far as he or anyone else knows, he never has committed a single serious sin. But then, at age 75, comes a change. During one horrible day, he robs a bank, deliberately runs over a cat with his car, commits adultery, blasphemes loudly in public, murders a neighbor, and then commits suicide, dying unrepentant.

My question to the Fundamentalist: Does your minister go to heaven or hell?

Hell, blasphemy is unforgivable. But you would know that, so why ask?

So there is no "assurance of salvation" as you say.

The word "satan" means adversary, obstacle. Peter was trying to interfere in Jesus' passion at the time (Jesus said "Get behind me satan"-lowercase s)

I note you're mighty keen on "re-interpretation of words as things become sticky... are you going to say anything about the translation of the word "virgin" with respect to Mary?

Looks like you take everything in the Bible literally (except when Jesus talks about the Eucharist, as in John 6)

I'll give you a nice little story of Jesus & Peter (takes place after the Resurrection)

When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
"Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Feed my lambs." 16Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. 18 I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." 19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"

That is how Jesus made Peter the first Pope, His Vicar, and Head of the Church.

That's not much to base any claim to the legitimacy of the papacy. Not much of an crystal clear employment contract is it? - Jesus didn't quite say, "OK Peter, head up the Catholic Church in Rome and call yourself pope, take on powers of infallibility and rule the Western World for profit by keeping the people ignorant and poor; a bit of brutality wouldn't go amiss either."

Some Popes had their own personal problems...But they all were chosen by God.

Remember when the young David was fleeing King Saul (who was trying to kill him), and some were trying to tell him to kill Saul? You know what David said?

"I will not smite the Lord's anointed"

John 20:21-23
"He therefore said to them again, 'Peace be to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you'. When He had said this, He breathed upon them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained'."


Then bring them up. I'm home all night...

And could you just point out where Jesus give an hereditary title to His disciples that these powers could be passed on?

Amen

Yours in The Lord,

Bathfire E

Jesus transferred the power to His disciples, His disciples to their disciples, the disciples' disciples to their disciples, and so on and so forth.

There is PLENTY that went on that isn't in the Bible.

[JennyD]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

Yes, don't you see? When it comes to the pro-life movement, we ARE on your side!

Yes, at the present moment, the Vatican's broken sundial is right once a day.

You consider this cause for jubilation?

Tell me, have your infallible Popes ever thought differently about murdering the unborn? Perhaps when the fetus was fewer than 40 days old? Hmmm?

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

Anyway, Deuteronomy 25 gives a perfectly acceptible solution for rape victims to avoid this whole mess.

Sorry, everyone, of course I meant Deuteronomy 22, specifically verses 28 and 29.

[Father Thomas Martin]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

Yes, don't you see? When it comes to the pro-life movement, we ARE on your side!

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

For rape and incest, there's always ADOPTION.

Do you know what happens to those kids? Even if they get into a good home one day they will find out they were adopted. And if they find out WHY they were put up for adoption they'll realize that they were never wanted, more than a mistake they were a forced mistake. How would that make them feel? Then they'll grow up to me more depressed dregs of society because of their origins. Huzzah!

Well, I don't often get a chance to agree with Father Martin, but I'll make the most of it. So answer this, Joo:

If a child who was born of rape is carried to term, would you suggest that we kill him or her as an infant because otherwise the child could find out about the circumstances of his/her birth and become a depressed dreg? Because the logic is exactly the same.

Anyway, Deuteronomy 25 gives a perfectly acceptible solution for rape victims to avoid this whole mess.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

The Church never put anyone to death. They just tried heretics, and if found guilty, turned them over to local authorities for sentencing.

Thus they killed them as certainly as if they had held the knife

Also, Pope John Paul II repeatedly acknowledged the Church's sins of that time (the torture), and prayed often for God's forgiveness...

So one pope says one thing, another another and both are infallible on matters of faith - Landover Baptist will give you consistency throughout.

I bet you wouldn't say that about Henry VIII and Elizabeth I's slaughter of us Catholics back in the 1500s...

No I would not. The papist plot was afoot, not only was it against the Crown of England but supported by the vicar of Rome for his own financial benefit.


And what about people like Thomas More, Mary Queen of Scots, Edmund Campion, etc. who were slaughtered under Henry VIII & later Elizabeth I?

See above, traitors to the Crown everyone of 'em.

It is a custom. We have granted exceptions to priests who were already married before they became priests. In fact, the Eastern Rite Catholics (loyal to the Pope, but maintaining their rites)...most of their priests are married.

Are you going to say why the custom came about and when? Another story of avarice and greed...


If Jesus is God, and Mary is His mother, wouldn't you say Mary is the Mother of God?

No, the Holy and indivisible Trinity requires no "mother".


If you will look in the Gospels, Jesus said "This is my blood, poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

On that one occasion may be... and the catholic church makes daily parody of Our Lord's words of kindness.
* * * *

I will bring up "The Case Of The Sinning Minister":

Let's say your minister became a "born-again Christian" at the age of 15. Now he is 75. In the intervening 60 years the man has lived an exemplary life. So far as he or anyone else knows, he never has committed a single serious sin. But then, at age 75, comes a change. During one horrible day, he robs a bank, deliberately runs over a cat with his car, commits adultery, blasphemes loudly in public, murders a neighbor, and then commits suicide, dying unrepentant.

My question to the Fundamentalist: Does your minister go to heaven or hell?

Hell, blasphemy is unforgivable. But you would know that, so why ask?


The word "satan" means adversary, obstacle. Peter was trying to interfere in Jesus' passion at the time (Jesus said "Get behind me satan"-lowercase s)

I note you're mighty keen on "re-interpretation of words as things become sticky... are you going to say anything about the translation of the word "virgin" with respect to Mary?

I'll give you a nice little story of Jesus & Peter (takes place after the Resurrection)

When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
"Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Feed my lambs." 16Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. 18 I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." 19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"

That is how Jesus made Peter the first Pope, His Vicar, and Head of the Church.

That's not much to base any claim to the legitimacy of the papacy. Not much of an crystal clear employment contract is it? - Jesus didn't quite say, "OK Peter, head up the Catholic Church in Rome and call yourself pope, take on powers of infallibility and rule the Western World for profit by keeping the people ignorant and poor; a bit of brutality wouldn't go amiss either."



* * * *

John 20:21-23
"He therefore said to them again, 'Peace be to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you'. When He had said this, He breathed upon them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained'."


Then bring them up. I'm home all night...

And could you just point out where Jesus give an hereditary title to His disciples that these powers could be passed on?

Amen

Yours in The Lord,

Bathfire E

[Homertard]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

I have a 97 acre farm, where we drive cars. It is legal, as I have driven under the guidence of an instructor. If he is not present in the car, then, yes, it is forbidden.

You have to be 17 in England to drive, without an instuctor. I am 16.

[Joo (Quarantined)]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

[quote=Father Thomas Martin;81956]For rape and incest, there's always ADOPTION.

Do you know what happens to those kids? Even if they get into a good home one day they will find out they were adopted. And if they find out WHY they were put up for adoption they'll realize that they were never wanted, more than a mistake they were a forced mistake. How would that make them feel? Then they'll grow up to me more depressed dregs of society because of their origins. Huzzah!

[Brother Temperance]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

No. They are ugly, dull, and I hate driving. That a problem?

It's acutally not legal for me to drive anyway.

In order for you to have discovered that you hate driving and you find it boring, you must have some experience of it. That means you've been driving illegally. God hates crims like you.

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

Is that because you're living in some institution?

I am glad you asked this Pastor because I was thinking the same thing. It still is no excuse. Omerta could still by a godly SUV or Hummer and hire some negriod to drive him around. Instead he just leeches off the public give away that is mass transit.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

It's acutally not legal for me to drive anyway.

Is that because you're living in some institution?

[Homertard]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

It's acutally not legal for me to drive anyway.

It is boring!

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

No. They are ugly, dull, and I hate driving. That a problem?

So instead of taking personal responsibility you would rather suck of the tit government public transit? All that does is leave you on your knees as a slave of Big Public Transit. A freeman would rather die alone and in agony face first in a gutter filled with raw sewage than take a hand out bus ride or go to a publicly subsided hospital.

[Homertard]

Re: 100% Pro-Life

No. They are ugly, dull, and I hate driving. That a problem?