Catholic Q & A

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
441

[quote]byukid wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]byukid wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You’re a sinner, but not a wretch? I’m jist askin. For the record I ask the Lord 100 times a day to have mercy on me a sinner.
[/quote]

Exactly 100? That sounds a bit too legalistic to me.[/quote]

http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon020.htm

and

D&C 119: 3-6
4 And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord.

D&C 43: 2-9
2 For behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, that ye have received a commandment for a law unto my church, through him whom I have appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations from my hand.
3 And this ye shall know assuredly�¢??that there is none other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, if he abide in me.
4 But verily, verily, I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him; for if it be taken from him he shall not have power except to appoint another in his stead.

D&C 76: 43-45
43 Who glorifies the Father, and saves all the works of his hands, except those sons of perdition who deny the Son after the Father has revealed him.
44 Wherefore, he saves all except them�¢??they shall go away into everlasting punishment, which is endless punishment, which is eternal punishment, to reign with the devil and his angels in eternity, where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched, which is their torment�¢??
45 And the end thereof, neither the place thereof, nor their torment, no man knows;

Maybe its legalistic when its Prayer and not legalistic when its money… Discuss…
[/quote]

Lol. You realize my first post was joking, right? And I’m confused about D&C 76 being reference. Also, referencing exmormon.org in a religious discussion is like referencing the National Inquirer in a political discussion.[/quote]

I guess the joke is that Mormonism has been criticized for being overly legalistic so coming from you, criticisms of the legalistic nature of someones practice is ironic.

And its not like referencing the Inquirer, its like referencing an ex Reagan or Clinton cabinet member who has criticisms of Republicans or Democrates.

442

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< It really kinda sucks that so many Protestants still see us as enemies. >>>[/quote]I just cannot bring myself to give up trying to communicate with you Pat. Protestants do not see Catholic people as enemies. What really sucks is all the protestants who DON’T see catholicISM as their enemy. Like they once universally did before being seduced by all this kissy faced ecumenism.
[/quote]

Why shouldn’t one denomonation of Protestantists have equal issue with each of the other 10,000+ protestant denomonations?[/quote]

36,000 ish…but who’s counting…And some do with others…There are big arguments with Calvinism vs. Arminianism[/quote]

The 35’000 or 36’000 supposed denominations is a myth and when I get a chance I will discuss it with you. And many of these “denominations” are location specific.

But I’m not protestant. I believe what the early Church believed (the one’s in the generation of the apostles).

443

[quote]forbes wrote:
Oops, guess I did it wrong:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/e-books_pdf/wtbsatcc.pdf[/quote]

It’s no a good and sound argument from the start with Peter’s confession.

IN Aramaic Peter and ‘rock’ are the exact same word.

IN Greek, you would not name a man with a feminine name, which rock is a feminine word, so it was changed to masculine.

That is why in the Aramaic the two, Peter and rock, are the same word and in Greek they are different.

444

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

“A church divided is no church at all”. This is why organized religion is not to be taken seriously, you have infinite devisions of faith with in each of the 30K+ churches them selves… You have over 30K factions of Christianity, if it was all about the core of the gospel then why the need for so many? [/quote]

God created a magnificent world with infinite variety…different races, languages, cultures, etc. Why would He insist on only one cookie-cutter religion for everyone? He(/She/It) doesn’t need one particular religion, or any religion at all for that matter, to express His will throughout His creation. All paths lead to God. Sorry to those who insist on exclusive one-upsmanship.

445

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Then they should do it.[/quote]

Oh trust me, I do. Everyday, for forgiveness of others and their conversion.

446

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

Except there is no proof that we have changed the Bible or Tradition, we still have the faith of the early Christians (just like the Orthodox). However, Protestants faith comes about in about 1500 years after Jesus. If anything your beloved Luther showed how easily the Devil can go against a mere man going against the body of Christ.

[quote]Wadda ya want me to say Chris. I do not buy ANY of the claims of the Catholic church
[/quote]

Guess you’ll have to give up that beautiful and beloved Catholic document: the Holy Bible.

447

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I just cannot bring myself to give up trying to communicate with you Pat.
[/quote]

I don’t understand, you want to communicate with us, yet you call us names.

P.S. Jesus was the biggest ecumenist, after all he did establish the one Church.

448

[quote]byukid wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You’re a sinner, but not a wretch? I’m jist askin. For the record I ask the Lord 100 times a day to have mercy on me a sinner.
[/quote]

Exactly 100? That sounds a bit too legalistic to me.[/quote]

What I find interesting is that I get accused of being a legalistic Pharisee from day to day, yet who are the ones that demand to see where it says something in the Holy Bible (they happen to be bad lawyers as well, they have one book and they can’t even get it right)?

449

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Please read the book of Hebrews and tell me that the ceremonial law was not fulfilled in Christ. The veil of the temple being rent from top to bottom alone illustrates that very thing.[/quote] It is. He taught to do this in rememberance of me… Baptise all nations (in a ceremonial format. God created the unfallen cosmos and every molecule was deemed essential and it was good, and unfallen matter leads us along the path of perfection. Why would we not use unfallen matter that he has given us to follow the path to perfection?

[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< What makes something a prayer then? >>>[/quote] The psalms are hymns to be sung, especially the ones with clear verse built into their structure. Singing is not prayer though both are worship. That is not the same thing as reciting whole prayers over and over.[quote]mertdawg wrote:Orthodox Christians never understood the rosary, I have to admit, but we do meditate on the phrase:

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God;
have mercy on me a sinner.

We strive to say it with every breath.[/quote]You’re a sinner, but not a wretch? I’m jist askin. For the record I ask the Lord 100 times a day to have mercy on me a sinner.
[/quote]

I don’t have a problem with the song Amazing Grace, but I would not use it in Church because we have other hymns that have been ordained for that. We use God inspired and traditionally accepted scripture in Church. We disagree about the definition of prayer. Almost every prayer in the Orthodox Church is sung/chanted (chant simply being the Latin root for to sing).

[/quote]

I chuckled as I read that it is not a prayer because it’s sung, I chant all my prayers (except for a few of them). And, as you know the Divine Liturgy is one long prayer to G-d…and everything is supposed to be sung/chanted.

450

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:
You know any Catholics that are okay with gay Marriage? I do.[/quote]

Yes, we call them lapsed Catholics or dissenters, or in the extreme case heretics.

[quote]
Now that the pope has openly supported the use of condoms among Hiv positive homosexual prostitutes do you?[/quote]

This is actually a misconception:

451

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< It really kinda sucks that so many Protestants still see us as enemies. >>>[/quote]I just cannot bring myself to give up trying to communicate with you Pat. Protestants do not see Catholic people as enemies. What really sucks is all the protestants who DON’T see catholicISM as their enemy. Like they once universally did before being seduced by all this kissy faced ecumenism.
[/quote]

Why shouldn’t one denomonation of Protestantists have equal issue with each of the other 10,000+ protestant denomonations?[/quote]

36,000 ish…but who’s counting…And some do with others…There are big arguments with Calvinism vs. Arminianism[/quote]

There is 1 (I’m including Orthodox here because we believe the same thing, it is just schism) Church. So…obviously if the Protestants wanted to do something on this they’d have to have themselves one Church…no. So having two Protestant Churches is too much. They lost this match a long time ago.

452

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
I guess the joke is that Mormonism has been criticized for being overly legalistic so coming from you, criticisms of the legalistic nature of someones practice is ironic.

And its not like referencing the Inquirer, its like referencing an ex Reagan or Clinton cabinet member who has criticisms of Republicans or Democrates.

[/quote]

I think the joke is that Tirib has been known to call people legalistic Pharisees before.

453

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< It really kinda sucks that so many Protestants still see us as enemies. >>>[/quote]I just cannot bring myself to give up trying to communicate with you Pat. Protestants do not see Catholic people as enemies. What really sucks is all the protestants who DON’T see catholicISM as their enemy. Like they once universally did before being seduced by all this kissy faced ecumenism.
[/quote]

Why shouldn’t one denomonation of Protestantists have equal issue with each of the other 10,000+ protestant denomonations?[/quote]

36,000 ish…but who’s counting…And some do with others…There are big arguments with Calvinism vs. Arminianism[/quote]

The 35’000 or 36’000 supposed denominations is a myth and when I get a chance I will discuss it with you. And many of these “denominations” are location specific.

But I’m not protestant. I believe what the early Church believed (the one’s in the generation of the apostles).[/quote]

So, you’re Orthodox or Catholic? I didn’t know you got confirmed! So, how you know what to believe the early Church believed?

And, if there is two denominations it is too much.

454

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if there is two denominations it is too much.[/quote]This is nothing more than Catholic semantics. There is just as much division in catholicism as anywhere else. You simply redefine it by other terms so as to escape the obvious. You’ll say “yeah but, yeah but the church has only has one teaching”. That’s fabulous except untold millions of her members do not care and believe whatever they want. Some of them so blasphemously liberal it’s scary. You know exactly what I’m talkin about. Division by any other name is just as divided.

455

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if there is two denominations it is too much.[/quote]This is nothing more than Catholic semantics. There is just as much division in catholicism as anywhere else. You simply redefine it by other terms so as to escape the obvious. You’ll say “yeah but, yeah but the church has only has one teaching”. That’s fabulous except untold millions of her members do not care and believe whatever they want. Some of them so blasphemously liberal it’s scary. You know exactly what I’m talkin about. Division by any other name is just as divided.
[/quote]

This is why it is a joke. On top of that the leaders do a he disservice by supporting A different level of behavior from Catholics in america. The major example being that over 75 percent of annulled marriages that occurs by the church happen here.

456

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:
You know any Catholics that are okay with gay Marriage? I do.[/quote]

Yes, we call them lapsed Catholics or dissenters, or in the extreme case heretics.

It appears that it is not a misconception. It appears that there is a lot of explination. The church cannot Afford to offer reasonable stances on issues that are so limited. If the explition given is correct on must assume that you have a homOsexual male prostitute that fears damnation from spreading a fatal desise to an unknowing homosexual jOhn. Do you see how rediculois it is cfor the cue h to have any opinion on this subject?

I have to say you are a good sheep for following this bs.

457

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:
You know any Catholics that are okay with gay Marriage? I do.[/quote]

Yes, we call them lapsed Catholics or dissenters, or in the extreme case heretics.

It appears that it is not a misconception. It appears that there is a lot of explination. The church cannot Afford to offer reasonable stances on issues that are so limited. If the explition given is correct on must assume that you have a homOsexual male prostitute that fears damnation from spreading a fatal desise to an unknowing homosexual jOhn. Do you see how rediculois it is cfor the cue h to have any opinion on this subject?

I have to say you are a good sheep for following this bs.
[/quote]

Are you drunk?

458

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:
You know any Catholics that are okay with gay Marriage? I do.[/quote]

Yes, we call them lapsed Catholics or dissenters, or in the extreme case heretics.

It appears that it is not a misconception. It appears that there is a lot of explination. The church cannot Afford to offer reasonable stances on issues that are so limited. If the explition given is correct on must assume that you have a homOsexual male prostitute that fears damnation from spreading a fatal desise to an unknowing homosexual jOhn. Do you see how rediculois it is cfor the cue h to have any opinion on this subject?

I have to say you are a good sheep for following this bs.
[/quote]

Are you drunk?[/quote]

sorry I have been having browser problems and posted with my iphone. It was a struggle.

It appears that it is not a misconception. It appears that there is a lot of explanation. The church cannot afford to offer reasonable stances on issues that are so limited. If the explanation given is correct one must assume that you have a homosexual male prostitutes that fears damnation from spreading a fatal disease to an unknowing homosexual john. Do you see how ridiculous it is for the church to have any opinion on this subject?

I have to say you are a good sheep for following this bs.

459

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if there is two denominations it is too much.[/quote]This is nothing more than Catholic semantics. There is just as much division in catholicism as anywhere else. You simply redefine it by other terms so as to escape the obvious. You’ll say “yeah but, yeah but the church has only has one teaching”. That’s fabulous except untold millions of her members do not care and believe whatever they want. Some of them so blasphemously liberal it’s scary. You know exactly what I’m talkin about. Division by any other name is just as divided.
[/quote]

Okay, great. So you’re judging the medicine, again, by those who do not take it. I guess I’ll start judging Calvinism by those who don’t take it. And, the difference between the Catholic Church and Protestant denominations is that the Catholic Church doesn’t say it is okay to disagree with the Church if you’re Catholic, if you’re Catholic you are required to agree with the Catholic Church’s teaching. Protestant’s just say well that is a non-essential doctrine and as long as you believe in Jesus you’re still in the invisible church.

460

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if there is two denominations it is too much.[/quote]This is nothing more than Catholic semantics. There is just as much division in catholicism as anywhere else. You simply redefine it by other terms so as to escape the obvious. You’ll say “yeah but, yeah but the church has only has one teaching”. That’s fabulous except untold millions of her members do not care and believe whatever they want. Some of them so blasphemously liberal it’s scary. You know exactly what I’m talkin about. Division by any other name is just as divided.
[/quote]

This is why it is a joke. On top of that the leaders do a he disservice by supporting A different level of behavior from Catholics in america. The major example being that over 75 percent of annulled marriages that occurs by the church happen here.

[/quote]

Lol, that just means that there is more invalid marriages in America than the rest of the world. Makes sense, we’re a bunch of self-entitled people.