Wow. Attacking his own now, is he?
Oh, and those "indulgences" he speaks of in the Catholic Church....yeah, those were popular in the Middle Ages.
Anymore....not so much.
🙄
And please show me a Catholic "cringing in fear of the flames of Hell" and I'll gladly agree. They can do good and bad, just like any other person on the planet, and are hardly the doomed souls your meaningless rhetoric makes them out to be.
I'm not a Catholic (I used to be) but I dislike partial information that is used to needlessly bash an institution, and also a great number of (largely well-meaning) people.
......
Grow up, JIA. You can have beliefs (and you obviously do) but did Jesus really preach hatred against other doctrines? This is some of the most worthless vehemence I've seen from you yet.
😬
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Wow. Attacking his own now, is he?Oh, and those "indulgences" he speaks of in the Catholic Church....yeah, those were popular in the Middle Ages.
Anymore....not so much.
🙄
I'm not a Catholic (I used to be) but I dislike partial information that is used to needlessly bash an institution, and also a great number of (largely well-meaning) people.
......
Grow up, JIA. You can have beliefs (and you obviously do) but did Jesus really preach hatred against other doctrines? This is some of the most worthless vehemence I've seen from you yet.
😬
Hatred?!? Vehemence?!? Attack?!? Hey, wait a minute: I remember you. You are that dude who got angry with me and vowed to never talk to me again a while back. I forget what we were discussing. I think I am going to look up a Sweet Pickles yearbook because there seems to be a pattern here. I say one thing, but then I get accused of something else. I posted an article about purgatory, but then I get accused of hatred, vehemence, and attacks. Wow. I did not write that article dude. (Looks in Sweet Pickles yearbook for names).
Re: Catholicism
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[B]"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16Purgatory: Gold Mine of the Priesthood
Issue Date: November/December 1997
Much confusion exists among Protestants regarding the Roman Catholic teaching of purgatory, largely because Rome is careful not to discuss it too openly where a Protestant might hear.
Yet among Catholic people, the doctrine is a central item in the religion of fear that makes them slaves to their priests and pope. [/B]
Am I being too cynical in finding irony in one Christian posting an article (a Christian who uses Chick Tracts of all things) about how Catholic doctrine makes people slaves of the religion?
Because really one would say it is the proverbial pot calling the kettle a dark metallic color.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
What?!? I am not Catholic, I am "classified" by society as a Christian because I follow Jesus Christ. I believe in Jesus Christ. I am on my to Heaven because of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior.
Which is exactly the same for any Catholic. Catholics are classified as Christians for exactly the same reason.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Did you ever find out for sure if you were truly your mother's child? Last time we spoke I propounded that to you.
Last time we spoke I answer it twice, and so did other people, as to why, as a support to the lack of evidence for Biblical prophacy, it was not a valid or sensible argument.
But reiteration: I have a stack of evidence that shows my reasons for believing my mother is my mother is both valid, logical and as a result correct.
You have provided no evidence. Either for the accuracy for the prophesies, or for an actual reason why dozens of people would be falsifying legal documents and lying to bme about my parents. Without that your argument is sadly lacking any reason to be taken seriously.
And I like the fact that unable to debunk the terminological basis for Catholics being called Christians you go off to some other tiopic.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Last time we spoke I answer it twice, and so did other people, as to why, as a support to the lack of evidence for Biblical prophacy, it was not a valid or sensible argument.But reiteration: I have a stack of evidence that shows my reasons for believing my mother is my mother is both valid, logical and as a result correct.
You have provided no evidence. Either for the accuracy for the prophesies, or for an actual reason why dozens of people would be falsifying legal documents and lying to bme about my parents. Without that your argument is sadly lacking any reason to be taken seriously.
And I like the fact that unable to debunk the terminological basis for Catholics being called Christians you go off to some other tiopic.
Why I am trying to get you see is that in spite of all that you still have to accept that so-called evidence as fact. But you still do not truly know if the evidence was falsified, that is what I am trying to get you to concede.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Why I am trying to get you see is that in spite of all that you still have to accept that so-called evidence as fact. But you still do not truly know if the evidence was falsified, that is what I am trying to get you to concede.
Then I am afraid it is absurd. If you didn't have a God then you would be a Nihilist with that line "But really you can never know if its true or not."
I am talking validity. Evidence has a tendency to validate things. What you are saying is that the most evidenced claim (say who my biological mother is) is no better then a claim with virtually no evidence (Biblical prophesy.)
And it is madness. The world, research, anything, doesn't run that why. If it did no person could be put in jail for a crime
Murderer: "Oh, sure, you have my prints on the knife, a dozen eye witnesses, a camera recording of me beheading him, blood still on my hands now, human flesh in my stomach and a taped confession, but that doesn't mean I'm guilty. It could all be false."Detective: "Cures, your right. We will have to let you go, because it is possible the the hundreds of people could be lying and all the evidence falsified."
It. Just. Doesn't. WORK. It does not give you story any credence, in fact all the less. At least before you could blindly claim it true because the Bible said so, now your saying nothing might be true, evidence or no. But still I say again - evidence is valid. No evidence is not. Claiming that "all evidence might be wrong" is foolish, because without some actual reason to believe that...
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Then I am afraid it is absurd. If you didn't have a God then you would be a Nihilist with that line "But really you can never know if its true or not."I am talking validity. Evidence has a tendency to validate things. What you are saying is that the most evidenced claim (say who my biological mother is) is no better then a claim with virtually no evidence (Biblical prophesy.)
And it is madness. The world, research, anything, doesn't run that why. If it did no person could be put in jail for a crime
It. Just. Doesn't. WORK. It does not give you story any credence, in fact all the less. At least before you could blindly claim it true because the Bible said so, now your saying nothing might be true, evidence or no. But still I say again - evidence is valid. No evidence is not. Claiming that "all evidence might be wrong" is foolish, because without some actual reason to believe that...
You are being ridiculous now or should I say contradictory? There is more evidence for the existence (just look outside your window) of God than there could ever be for evolution (there is no evidence for evolution).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You are being ridiculous now or should I say contradictory? There is more evidence for the existence (just look outside your window) of God than there could ever be for evolution (there is no evidence for evolution).
I am being ridiculous? I am not the one claiming that claims with much evidence should be given the same amount of respect and trust as claims with no evidence. I am not the one saying that there is a chance dozens of people could be lying to me and falsifying legal documents simple to create the illusion that a well evidenced claim has no validity.
And more evidence for the existence of God then evolution?
So far the most common forms of evidence you have put forward are:
1. Bible claims
2. Bible Prophesies
3. What you Believe
4. Sites about why God is real that rely on the Bible's claims and holes in scientific theories rather then evidence supporting their own.
5. Probability.
6. Bible claims
7. Bible claims.
8. Bible claims.
And I think I am forgetting one... ah yes.
9. Bible claims.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I am being ridiculous? I am not the one claiming that claims with much evidence should be given the same amount of respect and trust as claims with no evidence. I am not the one saying that there is a chance dozens of people could be lying to me and falsifying legal documents simple to create the illusion that a well evidenced claim has no validity.And more evidence for the existence of God then evolution?
So far the most common forms of evidence you have put forward are:
1. Bible claims
2. Bible Prophesies
3. What you Believe
4. Sites about why God is real that rely on the Bible's claims and holes in scientific theories rather then evidence supporting their own.
5. Probability.
6. Bible claims
7. Bible claims.
8. Bible claims.And I think I am forgetting one... ah yes.
9. Bible claims.
You forgot one: what I have experienced (experience is not belief and belief is not experienc). I know that God is real. I would give my life to prove it if I could.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You forgot one: what I have experienced (experience is not belief and belief is not experienc). I know that God is real. I would give my life to prove it if I could.
I am fairly sure that came under point three. And of course the fact that the rest of the evidence given does not actually fulfil the critetia to well.
If I said I had experienced a moment of Nirvana during meditation a few years ago, would that be valid evidence to support the legitimacy of Buddhism over Christianity?
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I am fairly sure that came under point three. And of course the fact that the rest of the evidence given does not actually fulfil the critetia to well.If I said I had experienced a moment of Nirvana during meditation a few years ago, would that be valid evidence to support the legitimacy of Buddhism over Christianity?
I do not know I am not in your world. Who knows what goes on in your world. And no that would not fall under point three that is why I deliberately delineated the two.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I do not know I am not in your world. Who knows what goes on in your world. And no that would not fall under point three that is why I deliberately delineated the two.
Well, it is still what you believe.
And why is it "my world" - you are claiming you experiences prove God, do not my experiences prove Buddhist philosophy?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Your world makes no allowance and provision for faith.
It doesn't? Funny, I have a very open mind. If I see proof for something I would believe. I would have faith. You make it sound as if I have a ton of evidence yet I choose not to believe in God. But that is aside, it is the point of evidence -
You experience validates your God. Does my experience (you never know, it might actually have happened, and there are certainly people who have claimed it has) validate my God, or would you say it doesn't qualify as evidence?
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
It doesn't? Funny, I have a very open mind. If I see proof for something I would believe. I would have faith. You make it sound as if I have a ton of evidence yet I choose not to believe in God. But that is aside, it is the point of evidence -You experience validates your God. Does my experience (you never know, it might actually have happened, and there are certainly people who have claimed it has) validate my God, or would you say it doesn't qualify as evidence?
But I told you and o'girl, Debbiejoe (yes, I finally spelled her name right!), way back when, that it doesn't work that way. You know what I am going to locate that post. I'll be right back.