Difference between Catholic and Protestant.

[BreadOfLife]

KJV Matthew 6:7-8
7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

Spoken like a person who doesn't have a CLUE as to what Jesus was saying.
Allow me to educate you . . .

Jesus made this statement in Matt. 6:7, he was speaking about the nonsensical babbling of pagans to their gods – not the sincere prayers of the faithful. We read about them in 1 Kings 18:26-29, where the pagan prophets on Mount Carmel tried to invoke Baal all day long, repeatedly calling on his name and performing ritual dances.

In Matt. 26:44, Jesus prayed the EXACT SAME PRAYER three times in the Garden of Gethsemane after the Last Supper.

In the Parable of the Determined Widow in Luke 18:7, Jesus emphatically states that God hears those who keep petitioning him in sincere faith: “Will not God then secure the rights of his chosen ones who call out to him day and night? Will he be slow to answer them? I tell you, he will see to it that justice is done for them speedily.”

In Luke 18:13, the tax collector kept beating his breast and repeating, “God be merciful to me, a sinner.” This was pleasing to God.

We see in Rev. 4:8 that the angels pray the EXACT SAME PRAYER day and night without ceasing in the presence of almighty God, “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty.”

Psalm 136 goes on for 26 verses in a row, repeating the EXACT SAME PRAYER, “God's love endures forever”.

Similarly, in Dan. 3:56-88 we read the EXACT SAME PRAYER for 32 verses, which is “bless the Lord; praise and exalt him above all forever.” This is far more repetitious than a decade of the Rosary.

Could ANY of these examples be considered the “vain repetitions” that Jesus spoke against? Absolutely NOT. When reading the Old Testament, Jesus himself recited these prayers in repetition. Rom. 1:9, Rom. 12:12 and 1 Thess. 5:17 all command us to pray without ceasing. Whether they are prayers of adoration, repentance, contrition or petition - God LOVES us immensely and never tires of hearing our prayers.

So, instead of making these kids of embarrassingly idiotic claims – STUDY your Bible.

 

[amigo de christo]

TYPICAL... Repetitive, mode of operation tactics...gaslighting.
* Change what another says, then disagree with it.
* Make claims, give Scriptural “References”, that DO NOT remotely lend credence or verification of their claims.
* Old, boring, useless circle jerk, YAWN!

Its exactly what they do . exactly . but the lambs KNOW their LORD and wont be fooled by such tactics .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Thanks mate, I'm not a vegetarian and am looking forward to some sausages and mash for my dinner later..
As for Acts of the Apostles 27:34, "pray" is just another word for advise, urge, beg, exhort, beseech, all of which are used in other bible versions.

The fact that you don't see the contradiction in your argument is astounding.

Your entire argument has been that "Pay" can OBLY mean "Worship" - except, of course, for Acts 27:34 - which corroborrates the Webster's Collegiate Dictionary definition of "Ask", "Entreat", Plea", etc.

What coloe is the sky in your world?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Its exactly what they do . exactly . but the lambs KNOW their LORD and wont be fooled by such tactics .

This, coming from the guy who nervously RUNS everytime I ask you WHERE you got yout NT Canon of N Scripture.

You reject the Catholic Church and all of its teachings - uet you stake your very salvation on the CATHOLIC TRADITION of the New Testament.

Does the hypocrisy ever end with you guys?

 

[michaelvpardo]

Not all traditional reformists are uneducated funnymentalists like your pastor.

I suggest that you read the Westminster Confession of the faith at least once.

 

[michaelvpardo]

I give thorough relies to your cheap shots. (Ecclesiastes 1:13) You reply with more cheap shots. Now you use scripture to justify willful ignorance.


Nobody can correct you. Those in purgatory are ultimately saved, they are not in hell. But you have infallibly declared that they are in hell. Nobody can correct you. No amount of explanations, no amount of scripture, no amount of authentic teaching can change your core belief; you suffer from cognitive dissonance.

View attachment 26246

That's at least 3 times you have falsely equated purgatory with hell. Grow up.

So you suffer from cognitive dissonance. That would explain a lot. I thought it was just strong delusion.

 

[michaelvpardo]

I am never amazed by anti-Protestants whose rationality of what to Believe is concluded by the extent of men’s philosophical teachings and not after the limits and extents of the spiritual Word of God.

THUS......two Different standings, and continual Disagreement.

Your mind is either carnal, or renewed by the teaching of the Holy Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 2:14-16

I don't engage Roman Catholics in these conversations, but they run to defend their world view lest their carnal based faith collapse. Some of the most outspoken atheists are former priests whose unfounded faith crumbled under circumstances.
However, the arguments provide opportunity to establish a sound biblical foundation to new borns in Christ with new ears hungry for His voice. Or, at least until the Catholic apologists turn to insults and accusations and are met with derision in like manner.

4Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
Or you will also be like him.

5Answer a fool as his folly deserves,
That he not be wise in his own eyes.
Proverbs 26:4-5

You can actually observe when their foundations start to crumble. Their posts become belligerent and words become misspelled and written in confused order. It's not a goal, but a house built on sand remains unstable under pressure.
I write for those with an ear to hear, not those trapped in the bronze box of dogma.

The OP was an honest query, but the RCC apologists are incapable of giving an answer for the simple reason that they haven't experienced the light of the gospel. You can't receive what you've never heard and when it's contrary to what you've been taught by those in whom you've placed your trust, that's a huge hurdle to overcome.

As a child, I wondered why my church hung banners proclaiming "God is love" while the nuns did everything they could to inspire fear. We were conditioned to drop to our knees, or bolt onto our feet at the sound of clickers in the hands of a practiced superior. Failed or slow responses meant instant separation and maybe a sharp slap as motivation to perform. That's love ?

Let the blind lead the blind, but God will deliver His own from darkness. He's been doing that through the gospel for 2000 years. I'm just all the more grateful that the Lord's providence lead me to churches where genuine love is expressed in and outside services, and where His name and word are lifted up to His glory rather to the vanity of men.

 

[Taken]

Your mind is either carnal, or renewed by the teaching of the Holy Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

Agree.

When I see BOL posting, I picture him bowing to his statues, fumbling with his trinkets and think of this Scripture...
Pss 59
[8] But thou, O LORD, shalt laugh at them; thou shalt have all the heathen in derision.

 

[Illuminator]

I suggest that you read the Westminster Confession of the faith at least once.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith. Drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly as part of the Westminster Standards to be a confession of the Church of England, it became and remains the "subordinate standard" of doctrine in the Church of Scotland and has been influential within Presbyterian churches worldwide.

In 1643, the English Parliament called upon "learned, godly and judicious Divines" to meet at Westminster Abbey in order to provide advice on issues of worship, doctrine, government and discipline of the Church of England. Their meetings, over a period of five years, produced the confession of faith, as well as a Larger Catechism and a Shorter Catechism. For more than three hundred years, various churches around the world have adopted the confession and the catechisms as their standards of doctrine, subordinate to the Bible.
Westminster Confession of Faith - Wikipedia
The authority of The Westminster Confession of Faith is granted by the English Parliament.
"...you are Peter and upon this rock I will build my English Parliament 15 centuries from now..."

What does medieval corruption have to do with the abolition of five of seven sacraments, the move to sola Scriptura as the rule of faith over against an authoritative Church and councils and apostolic succession and episcopacy (and including a papacy as well), or the ending of the sacrifice of the mass, or the move away from transubstantiation, or the ditching of purgatory or the end of baptismal regeneration among many Protestants and even infant baptism in some camps??? What does it have to do with the cessation of the notion of the communion of saints and intercession of saints, and much of Mariology, and forensic, imputed justification vs. infused???

What does it have to do with the removal of seven previously accepted books from the Bible or the Lutheran and Calvinist drowning of Anabaptist heretics, or the mutual anathematizing of Luther and Zwingli over the issue of the Eucharist???
What does the corruption of the medieval Church have to do with Luther’s adoption of double predestination and utter rejection of free will, or Calvinist iconoclasm or the suggestion from the highest Protestant quarters to Philip of Hesse that he lie about his bigamy? Or the widespread early Protestant antipathy to philosophy and science and art?

Etc., etc., etc.

To act as if the Protestant Revolt would not have happened but for medieval problems of schism and corruption is to ignore a host of other factors, as if they were non-contributors. It’s historically ludicrous. No Catholic who knows history at all will deny that corruption of certain popes and bishops was a major factor, but to claim that some reforms of the papacy and/or the Church would have prevented the so-called “Reformation” is a position which is well-nigh unprovable, given all that occurred during that turbulent time, and how many traditional Christian doctrines were ditched by the Protestants. There was far more going on here than merely the usual intrigues of church politics and power plays.

What does getting rid of the papacy and episcopacy and apostolic succession have to do with a corrupt papacy? In other words, how does corruption lead to a conclusion of utter worthlessness, such that something can be discarded? Something is either intrinsically bad and evil or unbiblical or it is not. If it were intrinsically a bad thing, then it wouldn’t take corruption to want to get rid of it (as an evil thing is already “corrupt” anyway). If it is not intrinsically bad, then the proper response is to reform it and get it back to where it should be, not banish and abolish it. Either way, it makes no sense. So why, then, was the papacy abolished in Protestantism? This is nonsensical, incoherent reasoning.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davea...-corruption-main-cause-protestant-revolt.html

 

[michaelvpardo]

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith. Drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly as part of the Westminster Standards to be a confession of the Church of England, it became and remains the "subordinate standard" of doctrine in the Church of Scotland and has been influential within Presbyterian churches worldwide.

In 1643, the English Parliament called upon "learned, godly and judicious Divines" to meet at Westminster Abbey in order to provide advice on issues of worship, doctrine, government and discipline of the Church of England. Their meetings, over a period of five years, produced the confession of faith, as well as a Larger Catechism and a Shorter Catechism. For more than three hundred years, various churches around the world have adopted the confession and the catechisms as their standards of doctrine, subordinate to the Bible.
Westminster Confession of Faith - Wikipedia
The authority of The Westminster Confession of Faith is granted by the English Parliament.

What does medieval corruption have to do with the abolition of five of seven sacraments, the move to sola Scriptura as the rule of faith over against an authoritative Church and councils and apostolic succession and episcopacy (and including a papacy as well), or the ending of the sacrifice of the mass, or the move away from transubstantiation, or the ditching of purgatory or the end of baptismal regeneration among many Protestants and even infant baptism in some camps??? What does it have to do with the cessation of the notion of the communion of saints and intercession of saints, and much of Mariology, and forensic, imputed justification vs. infused???

What does it have to do with the removal of seven previously accepted books from the Bible or the Lutheran and Calvinist drowning of Anabaptist heretics, or the mutual anathematizing of Luther and Zwingli over the issue of the Eucharist???
What does the corruption of the medieval Church have to do with Luther’s adoption of double predestination and utter rejection of free will, or Calvinist iconoclasm or the suggestion from the highest Protestant quarters to Philip of Hesse that he lie about his bigamy? Or the widespread early Protestant antipathy to philosophy and science and art?

Etc., etc., etc.

To act as if the Protestant Revolt would not have happened but for medieval problems of schism and corruption is to ignore a host of other factors, as if they were non-contributors. It’s historically ludicrous. No Catholic who knows history at all will deny that corruption of certain popes and bishops was a major factor, but to claim that some reforms of the papacy and/or the Church would have prevented the so-called “Reformation” is a position which is well-nigh unprovable, given all that occurred during that turbulent time, and how many traditional Christian doctrines were ditched by the Protestants. There was far more going on here than merely the usual intrigues of church politics and power plays.

What does getting rid of the papacy and episcopacy and apostolic succession have to do with a corrupt papacy? In other words, how does corruption lead to a conclusion of utter worthlessness, such that something can be discarded? Something is either intrinsically bad and evil or unbiblical or it is not. If it were intrinsically a bad thing, then it wouldn’t take corruption to want to get rid of it (as an evil thing is already “corrupt” anyway). If it is not intrinsically bad, then the proper response is to reform it and get it back to where it should be, not banish and abolish it. Either way, it makes no sense. So why, then, was the papacy abolished in Protestantism? This is nonsensical, incoherent reasoning.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davea...-corruption-main-cause-protestant-revolt.html

So you haven't read it

 

[michaelvpardo]

Spoken like a person who doesn't have a CLUE as to what Jesus was saying.
Allow me to educate you . . .

Jesus made this statement in Matt. 6:7, he was speaking about the nonsensical babbling of pagans to their gods – not the sincere prayers of the faithful. We read about them in 1 Kings 18:26-29, where the pagan prophets on Mount Carmel tried to invoke Baal all day long, repeatedly calling on his name and performing ritual dances.

In Matt. 26:44, Jesus prayed the EXACT SAME PRAYER three times in the Garden of Gethsemane after the Last Supper.

In the Parable of the Determined Widow in Luke 18:7, Jesus emphatically states that God hears those who keep petitioning him in sincere faith: “Will not God then secure the rights of his chosen ones who call out to him day and night? Will he be slow to answer them? I tell you, he will see to it that justice is done for them speedily.”

In Luke 18:13, the tax collector kept beating his breast and repeating, “God be merciful to me, a sinner.” This was pleasing to God.

We see in Rev. 4:8 that the angels pray the EXACT SAME PRAYER day and night without ceasing in the presence of almighty God, “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty.”

Psalm 136 goes on for 26 verses in a row, repeating the EXACT SAME PRAYER, “God's love endures forever”.

Similarly, in Dan. 3:56-88 we read the EXACT SAME PRAYER for 32 verses, which is “bless the Lord; praise and exalt him above all forever.” This is far more repetitious than a decade of the Rosary.

Could ANY of these examples be considered the “vain repetitions” that Jesus spoke against? Absolutely NOT. When reading the Old Testament, Jesus himself recited these prayers in repetition. Rom. 1:9, Rom. 12:12 and 1 Thess. 5:17 all command us to pray without ceasing. Whether they are prayers of adoration, repentance, contrition or petition - God LOVES us immensely and never tires of hearing our prayers.

So, instead of making these kids of embarrassingly idiotic claims – STUDY your Bible.

Now here we have another example of RCC distortion of Biblical truth.

Jesus did not speak with or address pagan practices at all.
That's an outright lie. He openly stated that His ministry was to the lost sheep of Israel. He preached exclusively to Jews.
He taught the law and the prophets to Jews. When He sent out the 12 before Him, empowered to perform signs and to preach His kingdom gospel, He instructed them not to go into the way of the Gentiles, but to visit the villages or towns of Israel. He encountered a Samaritan woman and granted her request, but even then reaffirmed that His ministry was to the Jews. Even at His preparation for His last supper, his disciples brought Him news of some Greeks that wanted to speak with Him and He denied them because it was not yet their time. His ministry, and consequently His teaching was primarily for the Jews, not pagans, goyim, or Gentiles.

This nonsense is either your corruption or that of your church, but is a lie.

 

[Taken]

For someone who constantly and correctly advocates for scripture alone, you stance surprises me. Particularly as that belief... Disembodied souls in heaven... Is of Greek origin, borrowed by apostate Judaism (and quoted by Jesus in the Lazarus payable to refute their own unbelief) and bequeathed to papal Rome as a lasting legacy of her pagan roots and cherished by protestantism to reveal their reluctance to leave it's Mother's apron strings.

Scripture alone teaches .... God Created, then MAKES something applicable to what He has Created. (Ie Created AND Made)

No, I do accredit Gods Word to Greek origin or apostate Jews.

Scripture IS NEW to every single person, at some point in a persons life. How individuals react to new knowledge, especially Super natural knowledge is individually. Some Greeks/Gentiles were hesitant, so also were Jews hesitant....so are also most people hesitant to suck up something new and dive in head first... As far as what people experience, knew, guesstimated, wondered about, understood, historically is not my gauge for what I understand. I highly doubt TWO people on this forum have read, believe, studied, the EXACT same things, lengths of time, depths, etc.

Gen 2:
[7] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,
CREATED ^
and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
MADE ^ Alive.

The BODY SHALL DIE...return to dust.
The Living SOUL (with Gods Breath) saved souls departs the dead body, goes to heaven. Unsaved living souls, departs the dead body goes to hell. Both waiting for judgement.

Gods BREATH LIFE, does not DIE.
All souls BELONG to God.
The Life in all souls IS Gods Breath.
The LIFE in the BODY, is it’s BLOOD.
The Life in a MAN “MADE”, born again IS Gods Spirit.

Hell is torments, BECAUSE, LIVING SOULS are occupying Hell...
Their Senses ALL ACTIVE, Living...Hell, is dreary, dark, nothing beautiful to see, it stinks, smells like sulfur, incredibly hot without relief, nothing cool to drink or quench thirst, ears hearing the whining, complaining, screams of despair ... continually without rest...no escape...no hope of saving...no idea how long that will continue....and cannot die.

Suggest you read a couple of examples in Scripture;

About Rachel, wife of Jacob (renamed Israel), Rachel and Jacob traveling (Chap Gen 35), and Rachel delivering her son Benjamin...and Rachel dies during delivery...AND?
Gen: 35:16-20

Also for example;
Elijah visiting with a widow woman, who has a young son. The son dies, the woman is distraught, upset with Elijah.... AND?
1 Kings 17:12-24

What is your perspective, regarding Rachels body and soul? Regarding the boys body and soul?

 

[Taken]

This, coming from the guy who nervously RUNS everytime I ask you WHERE you got yout NT Canon of N Scripture.

God is the author of Scripture, men who spoke, scribes who wrote, apostles who wrote, recorders who copied, men who bound books...
Are all incidental.

Catholics scooting in on the tail end, binding books, and accrediting themselves, is arrogant.
Personally, I believe an Evangelical Protestant Organization called Gideons, having and continuing to distribute billions of Bibles, free of charge, world wide supersede all your arrogant back patting.

 

[amigo de christo]

God is the author of Scripture, men who spoke, scribes who wrote, apostles who wrote, recorders who copied, men who bound books...
Are all incidental.

Catholics scooting in on the tail end, binding books, and accrediting themselves, is arrogant.
Personally, I believe an Evangelical Protestant Organization called Gideons, having and continuing to distribute billions of Bibles, free of charge, world wide supersede all your arrogant back patting.

 

[Brakelite]

Of ALL of the antu-Catholics here

I'm not anti Catholic. Don't insult me.

I held the most hope that YOU were more intelligent because your arguments, although misled, are usually well-researched.
But, since I see that you're NOT - ONE more time, Einstein

Your sarcastically veiled attempt to compliment me is noted. You win a medal for effort. Thank you.

Definition of the word “PRAY”:
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary:
Full Definition of pray
transitive verb
1: entreat, implore —often used as a function word in introducing a question, request, or plea<pray be careful>
2: to get or bring by praying

intransitive verb
1: to make a request in a humble manner
2: to address God or a god with adoration, confession, supplication, or thanksgiving

Acts 27:34 - KJV
"Wherefore I PRAY YOU to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you".

"Pray" as wordhip or adoration is a SECONDARY definition. The PRIMARY definition simplt means to "ASK".
Jesus "ASKED" something of EVERYBODY in the verses below . . .

The English word pray according to the dictionary as you point out, means both entreat in a spiritual manner toward God, and ask in a secular manner of others. Now I would ask you to go to your biblical concordance and note the difference between the original word translated as pray, and the common word translated as ask. Let me help.
James 1:5 and James 5:14. There's a difference. Rattling off a whole heap of scripture without discernment is vain and nothing more than self aggrandizement.

 

[Illuminator]

God is the author of Scripture, men who spoke, scribes who wrote, apostles who wrote, recorders who copied, men who bound books...
Are all incidental.

This is self-defeating and illogical. Without the "men who spoke, scribes who wrote, apostles who wrote, recorders who copied, men who bound books..." we would have no certain way of knowing which scriptures were authored by God and which scriptures were fake. The Bible is a fruit of the Church, a church did not pop out of a book. The relationship between the Church and the eventual canonizing of the holy books is not an incidental relationship, but a complementary one.

Catholics scooting in on the tail end, binding books, and accrediting themselves, is arrogant.

But you have no evidence of arrogance. What's arrogant is denying Church Authority and at the same time accepting its authoritive canons of scripture. No, it's not just arrogance, it's stupidity. We are constantly accused by anti-Catholics of the CC having no authority. When commonly accepted historical facts are presented regarding Bible origins, it's called "arrogance". DENIAL of how we got the Bible, accusing us of "arrogance" is HYPOCRACY. You may find arrogance in forums, but you won't find any in the catechism.

Personally, I believe an Evangelical Protestant Organization called Gideons, having and continuing to distribute billions of Bibles, free of charge, world wide supersede all your arrogant back patting.

Catholics are free to take a Gideon Bible to Mass and follow the NT daily readings.

Protestants do, of course, accept the traditional canon of the New Testament (albeit somewhat inconsistently and with partial reluctance — Luther questioned the full canonicity of James, Revelation and other books). By doing so, they necessarily acknowledged the authority of the Catholic Church. If they had not, it is likely that Protestantism would have gone the way of all the old heresies of the first millennium of the Church Age — degenerating into insignificant, bizarre cults and disappearing into the putrid backwaters of history.​

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/05/new-testament-canon-historical-processes.html

 

[Brakelite]

Spoken like a person who doesn't have a CLUE as to what Jesus was saying.

I'll take back the medal thanks.

Allow me to educate you

No.

Psalm 136 goes on for 26 verses in a row, repeating the EXACT SAME PRAYER, “God's love endures forever”.

Wrong. Not the same prayer. Straight out praise, as with the angels in heaven, and different points recorded each time as the the reason the Lord's mercy endures forever.

Similarly, in Dan. 3:56-88 we read the EXACT SAME PRAYER for 32 verses, which is “bless the Lord; praise and exalt him above all forever.” This is far more repetitious than a decade of the Rosary.

Even your beloved Jesuit Bible doesn't have a Daniel 3 with that many verses.

Whether they are prayers of adoration, repentance, contrition or petition - God LOVES us immensely and never tires of hearing our prayers.

True. So long as they are not vain repetitions right? Remember? That was the point. And the vain part want because of the repetition itself...

So, instead of making these kids of embarrassingly idiotic claims – STUDY your Bible.

... The "claim" I was making had nothing to do with repetition, it was the vain part I was referencing. One prayer could be vain, if it's to a dead person. And Mary, and all those people you pray to are dead. They are, unless scripture tells us otherwise, still in their graves awaiting the resurrection. There is no such thing as a disembodied spirit, soul, person. As Genesis declares, Adam became a living soul, when the breath of life, the spirit, was added to the body, animating the creature. Adam, without breath, is just a dead body. And it's going to take the same action on the part of Jesus, when He comes, to give back life to those who loved Him.
David saw that. Job saw that. Isaiah see that. So did Paul. And Jesus.
KJV John 6:39-40
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

 

[Brakelite]

Jude 14
King James Version
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

You are saying scripture contradicts scripture? That Jude is declaring in that verse that Paul is wrong? Maybe the saints Jude is talking about aren't human, but angels, or, maybe this is talking about when the new Jerusalem descends upon the earth at the end of the millennium, with all the saved inside the city having been taken there 1000 years previous at the resurrection at the time of the second coming?

 

[Illuminator]

I'm not anti Catholic. Don't insult me.

If you would stop demonizing the CC with your SDA propaganda, we would stop calling you anti-Catholic.

The English word pray according to the dictionary as you point out, means both entreat in a spiritual manner toward God, and ask in a secular manner of others. Now I would ask you to go to your biblical concordance and note the difference between the original word translated as pray, and the common word translated as ask. Let me help.
James 1:5 and James 5:14. There's a difference. Rattling off a whole heap of scripture without discernment is vain and nothing more than self aggrandizement.

BofL "rattled off" ONE verse in post #623. Yes, to pray means to ask, it is not commonly translated to mean "worship", if ever. When we resort to dictionary definitions it's because anti-Catholics like to play word games.

Jesus never condemned repetitious prayer; He condemned using it to show off. People who need to show off a contrived holiness are candidates for mental health intervention. Nobody is showing off in public prayer or liturgies. The problem is the arrogant refusal to differentiate repetition from vanity, a sign of psychoses.

There are plenty of good repetitions in the Bible and your spinning won't make them go away.

 

[Brakelite]

If you would stop demonizing the CC with your SDA propaganda, we would stop calling you anti-Catholic.

BofL "rattled off" ONE verse in post #623. Yes, to pray means to ask, it is not commonly translated to mean "worship", if ever. When we resort to dictionary definitions it's because anti-Catholics like to play word games.

Jesus never condemned repetitious prayer; He condemned using it to show off. People who need to show off a contrived holiness are candidates for mental health intervention. Nobody is showing off in public prayer or liturgies. The problem is the arrogant refusal to differentiate repetition from vanity, a sign of psychoses.

There are plenty of good repetitions in the Bible and your spinning won't make them go away.

Again, the vain use of prayer I was referencing wasn't on the repetitious side, but rather the pagan roots of talking to dead people. Neither you nor BOL have responded to that. Second, of you missed BoLs post with about 60 texts you aren't following the conversation. See post 555. And again, I'm not anti Catholic. I publicize biblical and historical condemnation of Catholic teaching and practise. I have never once condemned any individual in that faith, to the contrary, have often quoted Revelation 18 which says God has people in that institution and wants them to leave.