Zone1 It's virtually impossible for Protestants to understand Catholicism

[ding]

Symbolically. I already gave the scriptures that proves my point. I have yet to see one verse that disproves all my points.

41 verses you dismissed based upon parsing the bible to fit your purpose.

 

[DudleySmith]

It proves Peter being in Rome was written about back in antiquity and was not opposed when it was written. It's way more evidence than you have for your belief. You have nothing but conjecture. I have written unopposed accounts that say Peter was in Rome.

Just 'Tradition', i.e. hearsay, not from any witnesses, nor anything in cannon, except some self-serving Vatican invented 'Apocrypha'.

 

[Cougarbear]

41 verses you dismissed based upon parsing the bible to fit your purpose.

LOL! 41? Nice made up number.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

well, I'm not one to get hung up on words and splitting hairs.

Whatever you call them, they are NOT Catholic. Only Catholics know what it's like to be Catholic.

All Christians are somewhat Catholic or however you may want to put it because all "churches" derived from the Original, namely the Catholic Church. But they didn't stay faithful to that Church, and so they are all protesting the CC

The Catholic cult wasnt the first church no matter how many times you tell yourself that.

It sprang up just a few years after the Church of God and slowly adopted paganism in order to build a following. It is not the true Church of God

 

[ding]

LOL! 41? Nice made up number.

John 6:25-66 is 41 verses. And you dismiss them for no other reason than what Jesus said to do offends you. The ones Jesus told that to were offended too so they left Jesus. It's all in those 41 verses you dismiss.

 

[ding]

Just 'Tradition', i.e. hearsay, not from any witnesses, nor anything in cannon, except some self-serving Vatican invented 'Apocrypha'.

It's more than you have. You have nothing but conjecture and innuendo. I have those written texts.

 

[Cougarbear]

John 6:25-66 is 41 verses. And you dismiss them for no other reason than what Jesus said to do offends you. The ones Jesus told that to were offended too so they left Jesus. It's all in those 41 verses you dismiss.

I don’t dismiss anything. I proved my points and now you try to deflect. Typical debate loser

 

[zaangalewa]

zaangalewa's opinion. Not the opinion of God. I am not sure what God's opinion is. Mortal humans need to be humble and not act like they are God.

Weird. Extremely weird. I am wrong because I don't know god's "opinion" (whatever this could be) - but you are right because you also don't know gods "opinion". I said never any Christians baptized dead people - that's one reason why the Mormons are no Christians. And I said also the Mormons are made from Joseph Smith and that I see in this man only a spiritual charlatan. For Mormons is Joseph Smith their head - so they are not Christians. I could also take a look what others say - but I did not do so because this makes not a big sense. This two reasons are enough for me to say that Mormons are not Christians.

 

[K9Buck]

The Catholic cult wasnt the first church no matter how many times you tell yourself that.

It sprang up just a few years after the Church of God and slowly adopted paganism in order to build a following. It is not the true Church of God

Claiming that today's church in Rome is the same today as it was when it was originally founded is like saying that today's U.S. government is the same as the one created in 1776.

 

[zaangalewa]

I’m following the Bible reading it word for word.

And you do not understand what you read.

You are changing it adding your own philosophy.

One stupid empty phrase after another stupid empty phrase. One man alone is not able to be as stupid as you play to be.

Exactly what Isaiah warned against. Using your own philosophy mingling it with scripture when it fits your narrative. Or, you just ignore the scripture like with James or Pau and Peter with the fact preaching and baptism goes on with the dead. And, the Bible says God only reveals his secrets to his servants the prophets. Not Popes. Not you. (Amos 3:7). It’s you that butchers the Bible.

No no no no no. You butcher the bible and use it like Thor's hammer. I never did do so. I let speak her on her own in the hope she will make a string shake.

 

[ding]

I don’t dismiss anything. I proved my points and now you try to deflect. Typical debate loser

41 verses.

 

[zaangalewa]

Political?

You have absolutelly not any idea what you try to speak about when you try to speak about the Holy Catholic Church, isn't it?

Are you having a brain fart? I’m applying biblical scripture while you are inserting philosophies of man mingled with your own opinions.

-----
The little girl looks at me and raises her index finger in a lecturing manner: "You should be nice to us children, children are the future of the world!", turns around and runs towards the patio door.

WE ARE ALL LOST!!!!!
----
source: Wir sind alle verloren: 14 Erlebnisse, bei denen man nur mit dem Kopf schütteln kann

 

[zaangalewa]

Oh by the way Sinnead O'Connor - Shane McGowan came. Have a lot of fun. I'll miss you.

 

[DudleySmith]

It's more than you have. You have nothing but conjecture and innuendo. I have those written texts.

Yes, because demanding someone prove a negative is necessary for those who have zero actual proof of their claims.

 

[ding]

Yes, because demanding someone prove a negative is necessary for those who have zero actual proof of their claims.

You started off this exchange by stating a negative.

But if what you said were true then others would have disputed Ignatius of Antioch, Dionysius of Corinth, Irenaeus, Gaius, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, The Little Labyrinth, The Poem Against the Marcionites, Eusebius of Caesarea, Peter of Alexandria, Lactantius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Optatus, Epiphanius of Salamis, Pope Damasus I, Jerome and Augustine when they said Peter went or was in Rome.

 

[DudleySmith]

You started off this exchange by stating a negative.

Nah.

But if what you said were true then others would have disputed Ignatius of Antioch, Dionysius of Corinth, Irenaeus, Gaius, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, The Little Labyrinth, The Poem Against the Marcionites, Eusebius of Caesarea, Peter of Alexandria, Lactantius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Optatus, Epiphanius of Salamis, Pope Damasus I, Jerome and Augustine when they said Peter went or was in Rome.

So prove no one disputed the 'tradition'. Seems I see all kinds of disputes over it, and still no evidence Peter ever even left the city of Jerusalem for that matter. Nowhere in the NT does it state Rome was the central church, and nowhere does it say Peter ever went there, yet we know there were churches being founded left and right, and James was bishop. You keep dropping names already discussed, so obviously you've run out of arguments. there isn't even a mention of a bishop in Rome in the 1st century, much less in the Apostles' times.

Again, even all the Catholic sources make a point of saying' according to tradition'; they never say it's a fact Peter went to Rome and was a bishop there.

 

[ding]

Nah.


So prove no one disputed the 'tradition'. Seems I see all kinds of disputes over it, and still no evidence Peter ever even left the city of Jerusalem for that matter. Nowhere in the NT does it state Rome was the central church, and nowhere does it say Peter ever went there, yet we know there were churches being founded left and right, and James was bishop. You keep dropping names already discussed, so obviously you've run out of arguments. there isn't even a mention of a bishop in Rome in the 1st century, much less in the Apostles' times.

Again, even all the Catholic sources make a point of saying' according to tradition'; they never say it's a fact Peter went to Rome and was a bishop there.

Why are we still discussing this? My position hasn't changed. You want to cast aspersions on the Church, get in line. The list is long and undistinguished.

I rest easy knowing... If the world hates us, keep in mind that it hated Jesus first.

 

[zaangalewa]

... and James was bishop ...

Is this James Iacobus Zebedaei? It is very plausible that Jacob (=James) was apostle on the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal). So where was he bishop?

 

[1miseryindex]

All throughout scripture we see God meeting people where they are, and then patiently drawing them to him. Just because someone is seeking God in a way that does not meet your approval, does not mean that God will not find them. Instead, He says he leaves those who have found Him and goes in search of the lost.

I read one of your posts elsewhere in which you say that when Jesus died, he redeemed the entire world.

ha ha.. what a joke. Have you looked around lately, at current events and trends?

trannies here.. other perverts there, baby killing still legal and people bending themselves into a pretzel to keep it legal

No, Jesus redeems one individual at a time (or would if people would let Him)

 

[1miseryindex]

The Catholic cult wasnt the first church no matter how many times you tell yourself that.

It sprang up just a few years after the Church of God and slowly adopted paganism in order to build a following. It is not the true Church of God

sorry, I have read history

Then there are those pesky things called my personal experiences in life, which you don't have a clue about.

But still, you can act like you know everything about everything, to your heart's content. It's a free country

Well, it was until 2020.