No authority!

[Ronald Nolette]

thou art forgiven

the terms weren’t settled!

YOu are much kinder than Blazer Wolfe!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Your disdain of the Catholic Church is not the isue.

YOU made statements about Alexander Hislop's heavily-debnked scck-piece, "The Two Babylons" such as "and yet His work cannot be refuted!" and "Hislop wrote an excellent TOME called the Two Babylons" that I am holding you accountable for.

I have given you THREE debunked "facts" from his book, the name of a book written by on of his former disciples that debunks ALL of Hislop's book - as well as the name of the website he runs apologicing for having been part of the lies spawned by Hislop.

So far - all YOU'VE done is keep claiming that Catholics are idolators - but you haven't been able to defend th indefensible Hislop..

Yes.

Now I am holding you accountable for "heavily debunked". Find me the sources implied in "heavily debunked" that are not Catholic. One would expect Catholic scholars to debunk a diatribe against their doctrines and practices.

It is an excellent work! Rome has adopted numerous pagan practices that all trace back to Mystery Babylon!

And no I have not said that Catholics are idolaters. If a Catholic prays to Mary or the saints or the angels (and yes they do pray to them) then yes they are practicing idolatry!

If you wish start a thread about Hislop and I will join you there. Just PM me when you have so I can look for it. Otherwise this is getting way off topic.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Recognizing symbolism isn't allegory. And the fourth beast is pagan Rome. Pagan Rome isn't coming back.


How much information do you require for me to prove this? I have written screeds of posts and articles on the above... Four specific criteria... That the Papacy/RCC fulfilled, including the symbolic times, time, and half a time. So, how much do you need to know? I could write one long post on each of those criteria.

YTOu should read your bible more and your screeds less!

The fourth beast is Imperialism that started with Rome and is still alive and well today!

If one looks at the dan.2 Statue, the Daniel 7 beasts, the Olivet discourse and Rev. 1-14&17 one clearly sees that the fourth beast "kingdom" goes through several iterations. Remember these kingdoms are connected to Jerusalem and are the times of the Gentiles!

1. The time, times and half a time is the 42 moinths of the reign of the antichrist prior to Jesus return to earth. It also corresponds to the time Jesus called the great tribualtion in the Olivet discourse after the antichrist enters the holy place (the abomination and Pauls man of lawlessness)

2. Rome was the start of the fourth beast kingdom, it still lives today. It started as teh Roman Empire.

Then it became the two legs of Daniels statue- when Imperial Rome split into two separate empires. That split lives today. In the east it stayed inConstantinople until it moved north to Imperial Russia! In the West it migrated from Rome to Germany (the HRE of the Germanic Nations) France (the HRE if the Frankish nations) Spain, then England and now in the US All were/are imperialistic. It will one day evolve intoa one world govt.:

23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

DEvours the Whole earth! Not a symbolic or allegorical earth! Rome never conquered the whole world, the known world or even th eknown civilized world!

From this one world govt. The ten kings (rulers) arise who will govern the earth. It is interesting that teh Club of Rome in the 80's had a timeline map showing a 1 world govt. and ten "governors" to rule the world.

24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

The eleventh is diverse from the ten. the ten are called kings! Not kingdoms! so the eleventh is a king! not a kingdom!

What is your definition of your interpretation of the time, times and dividing of time seeing as you call it metaphorical. What is its literal meaning. If it is not what would have been understood then and today by those who see this as 3 1/2 years that correspond to Daniel 9 and many places in REvelation?

 

[theefaith]

YOu are much kinder than Blazer Wolfe!

true, true, of course true!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yes.

Now I am holding you accountable for "heavily debunked". Find me the sources implied in "heavily debunked" that are not Catholic. One would expect Catholic scholars to debunk a diatribe against their doctrines and practices.

It is an excellent work! Rome has adopted numerous pagan practices that all trace back to Mystery Babylon!

And no I have not said that Catholics are idolaters. If a Catholic prays to Mary or the saints or the angels (and yes they do pray to them) then yes they are practicing idolatry!

If you wish start a thread about Hislop and I will join you there. Just PM me when you have so I can look for it. Otherwise this is getting way off topic.

Do you even bother to READ the posts?

I gave you the name of a PROTESTANT minister, Ralph Woodrow and his book, "The Babylon Connection?" that debunks ALL of Hislops manure. This isn't a "Catholic" source.

Go back a nd READ the posts, where I already gave you all of this information - MORE than once . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Do you really think the mods and the members here are stupid?

Do you really believe that you can hide the FACT that when you teach what your bible says......we are "born again by water", and now you say that we are "saved through water", that you are not teaching that water saves?

Listen deceiver.....saying that God saves through water, is "baptismal regeneration" that you teach and that your bible teaches, and that your cult teaches".

So, saying that "God saves" yet, defining how is by WATER, is a clever lie, but, a lie nevertheless.

NO - but I think YOU are.
Time to PROVE you wrong again . . .

The Catechism of the Cathoolic Church is online - and available for ignorant anti-Cathooics like yourself to find out exactly what we teach.
Here is what the Church teaches about the Waters of Baptism:
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua),4 and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration THROUGH WATER in the word."5

1219 The Church has seen in Noah's ark a prefiguring of salvation by Baptism, for by it "a few, that is, eight persons, were saved THROUGH WATER":14

- the phrase "BY Water" cannot be found ANYWHERE in the paragraphs concerning Baptism in the Catechism.
YOUR turn . . .

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Do you even bother to READ the posts?

I gave you the name of a PROTESTANT minister, Ralph Woodrow and his book, "The Babylon Connection?" that debunks ALL of Hislops manure. This isn't a "Catholic" source.

Go back a nd READ the posts, where I already gave you all of this information - MORE than once . . .

Cite the posts numbers where you actually listed points debunked! I don't care if Wilson is catholic or protestant! Was he given ex-cathedra infallibility in his writings?

Once again if you wish to focus on Hislop start a new thread!

 

[Paul Christensen]

That is your false conclusion. BoL said no such thing. Forensic justification or imputed righteousness is a perverted doctrine invented by Martin Luther because he was mentally ill and angry with the pope.
Psalm 51:1-2 – O God, blot out my transgressions, wash me thoroughly from my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.
This cleansing requires an inner change of heart. Many Protestants believe that we are so depraved that God only covers our sins up by declaring us righteous (imputing Christ’s righteousness to us). The Catholic (and Scriptural view), however, is that God is powerful enough to blot out our sins and remove them. The view that God just declares us righteous by “covering us up,” denigrates the role of the Holy Spirit in our lives, who continues the work of Christ through His work of justification and sanctification (infusing His grace into souls and changing the inner person).
read more here
That may be true but most Protestants are influenced by Calvin, they just won't admit it. Guaranteed salvation, invented by Calvin, is a case in point. We are 100% guaranteed salvation after we are dead and with God, not before.
That's not an excuse to bear false witness with stupid insults (i.e. idolatry) and misrepresentations, but we don't hold anti-Catholics accountable because invincible ignorance gets them off the hook.

Of course, your response is characterised by subtlety and methological aspects of the central argument that carries with it weight when it is balanced by theories which are either refutable or irrefutable as the case may be. What could have value is the mention of variables that accentuate the positive in the matter at hand. What is especially significant is the force of opinion that could either support or not support the basic premise which shows some clarity about the issue mentioned. Of course, there is the opposite view which must be taken into account which having been stripped of jargonised terminology, brings greater clarity to the overall picture, which those of sufficient intelligence can work out to their full satisfaction.

 

[justbyfaith]

Perverted doctrine would be the kind of doctrine that gives people an excuse to sin by telling them that they are going to struggle with it and that there is no deliverance. That is what you teach...

That is your false conclusion. BoL said no such thing. Forensic justification or imputed righteousness is a perverted doctrine invented by Martin Luther because he was mentally ill and angry with the pope.
Psalm 51:1-2 – O God, blot out my transgressions, wash me thoroughly from my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.
This cleansing requires an inner change of heart. Many Protestants believe that we are so depraved that God only covers our sins up by declaring us righteous (imputing Christ’s righteousness to us). The Catholic (and Scriptural view), however, is that God is powerful enough to blot out our sins and remove them. The view that God just declares us righteous by “covering us up,” denigrates the role of the Holy Spirit in our lives, who continues the work of Christ through His work of justification and sanctification (infusing His grace into souls and changing the inner person).

First of all, it is not my false conclusion that I am not preaching perverted doctrine but that @BreadOfLife, in preaching that sin is inevitable, is preaching perverted doctrine.

Secondly, there are quite a few verses in the Bible that teach imputed righteousness.

Most of them in Romans 4. For, that is the chapter of imputed righteousness.

We are 100% guaranteed salvation after we are dead and with God, not before.

Jhn 5:24, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is <already> passed from death unto life.

That's not an excuse to bear false witness with stupid insults

Use the quote feature and bring up any post where I have leveled against anyone a "stupid insult".

I have not; because I don't bear that kind of (bad) fruit.

Perverted doctrine would be the kind of doctrine that gives people an excuse to sin by telling them that they are going to struggle with it and that there is no deliverance. That is what you teach...

I teach that we can have freedom (John 8:31-36) and victory (1 Corinthians 15:57) in Christ.

That is the least perverted that one can get...

WRONG.
You're being dishonest again because that's NOT what the Catholic Church teaches.

Unlike YOU - we simply understand what John was saying when he wrote:
1 John 2:1
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

And notice that that verse says, "IF anyone does sin..." not "WHEN anyone does sin".

the inevitability of sin is a false doctrine and heresy.

If the Catholic Church doesn't teach it...well, good for the Catholic Church...but it seems to me that you yourself taught it in posts above this one.

If you can show me a person who doesn't sin - I'll give you a million dollars.

You won't pay up...because I don't think that you have a million dollars...but the answer is easy...Jesus Christ Himself! For is not Jesus Himself the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity?

Sin also lives in your mind - the things you think about. I've never met a person who can honestly say that they NEVER have an impure thought or NEVER harbors any sort of malice towards anybody.

I won't say that I have never had an impure thought; but I can say that the sin of malice has been absolutely eradicated from my heart since receiving Jesus as my Lord and Saviour...and that impure thoughts have become far and few between since receiving Jesus as my Lord and Saviour.

That's NOT what Heb. 10:14 is saying - you have perverted that verse.
Heb. 10:14
For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are BEING MADE HOLY.

You have done what many do, and what was prophesied that many would do, in 2 Timothy 4:3...you have heaped for yourself a teacher in the translators of other Bibles than the kjv to tell you what your itching ears want to hear as concerning that verse...

The kjv renders it,

Heb 10:14, For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

And, even if the rendering is that they are being made holy, this can be interpreted by the understanding that in 1 John 1:7, the Greek bears out that if we walk in the light as He is in the light, the blood of Jesus Christ continually cleanses us from all sin...

So then, if we are being continually cleansed of all sin as new sin comes in from the outside, we are continually being made perfectly holy.

You cannot be "perfect" is you are still being made holy. You would ALREADY BE completely holy.

See above.

Also, there is no possibility of anyone becoming a true saint in your theology...so I think that you have departed from true Catholic dogma on this one.

Our salvation is NOT possible without OUR cooperation with God's grace.

If that is what you are saying - then, WELCOME to Catholic theology . . .

A broken clock is right two times a day. I would say to Catholic theology, welcome to the truth on this subject matter.

For it is not Catholic theology that is the determinant; but the truth of holy scripture that determines what we believe as Protestants.

Of course, our cooperation with God's grace is simply in that we place our faith in Jesus for salvation.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Cite the posts numbers where you actually listed points debunked! I don't care if Wilson is catholic or protestant! Was he given ex-cathedra infallibility in his writings?

Once again if you wish to focus on Hislop start a new thread!

First of all - ONLY mentioned Hislop because YOU brought him up and touted his book as "irrefutable".

Secondly - for the FIFTH time - the Book I told you about that debunks ALL of Hislop's manure is by PROTESTANT minister, Ralph Woodrow (not "Wilson") called, "The Babylon Connection?". The reason it is important that he is a Protestant is because YOU accused me of using "Catholic sources" against Hislop's book.

Finally - from post #440 - here are THREE points made from Woodrow's book that debunk Hislop's claims:

He actually DID his research, whereas, Hislop simply invented the things he wrote - such as:
- Claiming that the pagan Roman state religion prior to Christianity worshipped a central Mother Goddess.
They NEVER HAD a central Mother goddess.

- That Jupiter was called "Jupiter-Puer".
This is where Catholics allegedly get thet "worship" of Peter ("Puer").

- That the pagan goddess Semiramis married her son, Nimrod.
She lived centuries AFTER Nimrod, and could NOT have been his mother, NOR could she have married him.

You need to pay closer attention on a debate site . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I won't say that I have never had an impure thought; but I can say that the sin of malice has been absolutely eradicated from my heart since receiving Jesus as my Lord and Saviour...and that impure thoughts have become far and few between since receiving Jesus as my Lord and Saviour.

Unfortunately, as you have PROVEN on this forum - the sin of bearing FALSE witness hasn't been eraducated in you . . .

And notice that that verse says, "IF anyone does sin..." not "WHEN anyone does sin".
the inevitability of sin is a false doctrine and heresy.
If the Catholic Church doesn't teach it...well, good for the Catholic Church...but it seems to me that you yourself taught it in posts above this one.

You won't pay up...because I don't think that you have a million dollars...but the answer is easy...Jesus Christ Himself! For is not Jesus Himself the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity?

You have done what many do, and what was prophesied that many would do, in 2 Timothy 4:3...you have heaped for yourself a teacher in the translators of other Bibles than the kjv to tell you what your itching ears want to hear as concerning that verse...

The kjv renders it,

Heb 10:14, For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

And, even if the rendering is that they are being made holy, this can be interpreted by the understanding that in 1 John 1:7, the Greek bears out that if we walk in the light as He is in the light, the blood of Jesus Christ continually cleanses us from all sin...

So then, if we are being continually cleansed of all sin as new sin comes in from the outside, we are continually being made perfectly holy.

See above.
Also, there is no possibility of anyone becoming a true saint in your theology...so I think that you have departed from true Catholic dogma on this one.

A broken clock is right two times a day. I would say to Catholic theology, welcome to the truth on this subject matter.

For it is not Catholic theology that is the determinant; but the truth of holy scripture that determines what we believe as Protestants.

Of course, our cooperation with God's grace is simply in that we place our faith in Jesus for salvation.

As for the rest of your nonsense - we have debated this ad nauseam in the past.

YOUR problem - and there are MANY - is that you enforece your own eisegesis on Scripture instead of properly exegeting it.
The plain fact is that NOWHERE in the context of Scripture do we find the idea that Christians are guaranteed that they won't sin - and I have proven it time and again. This man-made perversion was bor after the 16th century Protestant Revolt and has NEVER been a teaching of the historic 2000 year-old Christian faith.

I suggest that you stop QUOTING Scripture until you have studied it and understand what it is saying . . .

 

[Illuminator]

No one has authority to read or study scripture for himself and form his own doctrine!

We must be taught by the church of Christ!
Lk 1:4 instructed:
Matt 28:19 church of apostles commanded to teach all nations:

It is becoming ever more clear that those who run the American Psychological Association (APA) are suffering from a mental breakdown. It is now promoting “relationship anarchy,” as well as other dysfunctional behaviors. To the APA, about the only deviant sexual behavior that is left in American society is what most of us would call normal heterosexual monogamous unions.

Its descent is traceable to 1975 when it decided to support the position of the American Psychiatric Association declaring that homosexuality was not a mental illness. That determination, which was reached in 1973, was not based on any new scientific empirical evidence; rather, it was made following years of bullying by radical gay activists.

The APA is on a tear. Earlier this year it made a strong political statement attacking men [read: heterosexual men]. It opined that a pernicious “masculine ideology” has overtaken society and must be rooted out. What are the contents of this ideology? “Anti-femininity,” which is to say the normal male tendency not to identify with effeminate men. It also includes such dangerous attributes as “achievement.” Evidently, it does not see the sexism in this statement (it implies that women are not achievement oriented).

The latest APA endorsement of polygamy and swinging (and my favorite, the all-inclusive “relationship anarchy”) was announced this month as part of the APA’s “Non-Monogamy Task Force” program; it says it is promoting “inclusivity.” It has not yet endorsed bestiality (which is no doubt a tribute to the animal rights folks), but who knows what lies beyond the bend? That may be next. Isn’t that what “inclusivity” is all about?

Ten years ago a book was released by three psychologists, Nicholas Cummings, William O’Donohue, and Janet Cummings, titled Psychology’s War on Religion. I contributed the chapter, “The War on Catholicism.”

I quoted Freud as saying “my real enemy” is “the Roman Catholic Church.” I also detailed Jung’s pathological hatred of the Catholic Church. Many other wizards in the field who shared the same bias were discussed as well. Make no mistake about it, there is a direct line between this kind of thinking and the APA’s embrace of “relationship anarchy.”

Let’s face it, the APA leadership is actively pushing the radical gay agenda, the goal of which is to eradicate the cultural basis of Western civilization, namely the Judeo-Christian ethos. Their ideology is so entrenched that they are unable to see the psychological and social damage that is done to everyone, especially women and children, when a sexual ethic based on restraint is destroyed. And have they not learned of the body count attributed to lethal sex practices?

The APA is not a scientific body—it is an activist organization in service to sexual libertinism.
APA IS HAVING A MENTAL BREAKDOWN – Catholic League

 

[justbyfaith]

Unfortunately, as you have PROVEN on this forum - the sin of bearing FALSE witness hasn't been eraducated in you . . .

Neither you nor I have proven any such thing.

The plain fact is that NOWHERE in the context of Scripture do we find the idea that Christians are guaranteed that they won't sin -

Sure we do.

1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv), Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), 1 John 3:9;

1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, 1 John 2:6;

Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, 1 John 2:10;

1 John 3:6, 1 John 2:17;

Romans 6:6 (kjv), Colossians 2:11 (kjv), (NLT).

All of these scripture verses are in the immediate context of the scripture verses that surround them.

- and I have proven it time and again.

No, you surely have not proven any such thing.

As a matter of fact, I have proven the opposite with such things as the scriptures that I have referenced above.

 

[Illuminator]

Neither you nor I have proven any such thing.
Sure we do.

1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv), Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), 1 John 3:9;

1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, 1 John 2:6;

Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, 1 John 2:10;

1 John 3:6, 1 John 2:17;

Romans 6:6 (kjv), Colossians 2:11 (kjv), (NLT).

No, you surely have not proven any such thing.

As a matter of fact, I have proven the opposite with such things as the scriptures that I have referenced above.

Christian perfection is possible; such people are usually called directly by God followed by signs and wonders. We have instant coffee, instant potatoes, instant cup-o-soup, but we don't have instant justification. Faith is necessary, but that is just the beginning of a life long process.
The verses you presented are a mix of predestination to grace, and predestination to glory.
Eph. 1:5 There are two types of “predestination,” to grace and to glory. In this verse, Paul is teaching about predestination to grace, which means becoming a Christian.

1 Pet. 1:1-2 – Paul teaches about being destined by God for obedience to Christ. This is another example of predestination to grace. But there is also predestination to glory.

Rom. 8:29-30 – Paul also writes that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. Now Paul is writing about predestination to glory, which means not only becoming a faithful Christian during our lives, but persevering to the end by conforming our will to Christ’s will.

1 Cor. 15:49 – Paul writes that we are conformed in His image at the resurrection, when we shall bear the image of the man of heaven. These are the people who were predestined to glory.

Rev. 3:5 – Jesus warns that He can blot out the names that are in the book of life. This refers to those currently, not ultimately, justified (those who are predestined to grace, but not to glory).

Eph. 1:5; 1 Peter 1:2; Rom. 8:29-30; 1 Cor. 15:49 – therefore, predestination is either to grace (which we could lose) or to glory (which we cannot lose). As alluded to above, some non-Catholics confuse the definition of “predestination” (which means God knows what we will do before we do it) and “predetermination” (the erroneous belief that God determines what we will do). But God does not author evil. We choose evil by our own freewill.

Ezek. 18:23-24, 32 – God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Our death is our freewill, failing to respond to His grace. God does not predetermine certain people to hell. God also does not predetermine certain “elect” people to heaven. We all, as God’s children, have been given the grace we need to be saved, but we can decide to reject God’s grace. (a stupid thing to do)

If you say you never sin, congratulations. You have attained perfection.

 

[justbyfaith]

Christian perfection is possible; such people are usually called directly by God followed by signs and wonders.

John the Baptist was one who did not have signs and wonders attached to his ministry who was nevertheless filled with the Holy Ghost and whom I believe had the second benefit (2 Corinthians 1:15) of entire sanctification (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv)).

If you say you never sin, congratulations. You have attained perfection.

My saying that I never sin wouldn't be the deciding factor. It would be if I have actually ceased from sinning. And if I have, my attitude would be that I still have room to grow (Philippians 3:12-15). I would not say that I have no sin if I were truly perfected (1 John 1:8; Job 9:21 (kjv), Isaiah 42:19 (kjv), John 9:41); I would be unaware of the fact that I had attained to it.

 

[Illuminator]

Cite the posts numbers where you actually listed points debunked! I don't care if Wilson is catholic or protestant! Was he given ex-cathedra infallibility in his writings?

Once again if you wish to focus on Hislop start a new thread!

Hislop taught the Christian Trinity had pagan origins, and the cross is a pagan symbol. Most of the members here don't agree with Hislop's brain-washing lunacies.

The idea that icons were introduced by Roman paganism by Constantine is a myth developed by Alexander Hislop in his Two Babylons. In fact, it was Islam that forbade icons a millennia before Hislop invented his myths.

It was the Muslim Abd al-Jabbar was the first to propagate these myths in his “Critique of Christian Origins,” which is considered the first Islamic history on Christianity in the late tenth century. Without knowing that the author is Muslim, quoting some of al-Jabbar writings is similar to what anti-Constantine Messianic and Evangelicals say:
read more here

Is Catholicism Pagan? | Catholic Answers

Is The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop Reliable Book Review (onthecheese.com) authored by an evangelical.

Jehovah's Witnesses' periodical The Watchtower frequently published excerpts from it until the 1980s.[20] The book's thesis has also featured prominently in the conspiracy theories of racist groups such as The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord[21] and other fringe groups.[22]​

The Two Babylons - Wikipedia​

 

[Behold]

The Catechism of the Cathoolic Church ....(W
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, Through (WATER) Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration THROUGH WATER in the word."5

= 1219 The Church has seen in Noah's ark a prefiguring of salvation by Baptism, for by it "a few, that is, eight persons, were saved THROUGH WATER":14 - the phrase "BY Water" cannot be found ANYWHERE in the paragraphs concerning Baptism in the Catechism.
YOUR turn . . .

Your "cult of the virgin" Bible, says.......as you have quoted many times....>"Born Again BY water".
So, now you are trying to deny your own bible that produced your water cult...

And what is even more shown as your continuing dishonesty, is that while you are denying that you came to me wtih the Noah verse, explaining to us that this proves that "water saves", you now deny you did that....

And now, you have posted this...."""in "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration THROUGH WATER """"

And that is explaining that your "cult of the Virgin", teaches what you just said, it does not teach.
So, you are denying your own Churches doctrine, in the same post where you post the water baptism regeneration lie.

So, you are denying it, while posting it , = self deceived while while trying to deceive.

You are posting that a person enters the Spirit of God as born again, by water, and through water, while denying what you just posted ,= your church's false doctrine.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Neither you nor I have proven any such thing.

I absolutely have - on numerous occasions.

Sure we do.
1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv), Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), 1 John 3:9;
1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, 1 John 2:6;
Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, 1 John 2:10;
1 John 3:6, 1 John 2:17;
Romans 6:6 (kjv), Colossians 2:11 (kjv), (NLT).

All of these scripture verses are in the immediate context of the scripture verses that surround them.

WRONG.
NONE of them are guarantees.

Jude 1:24, 1 John 3:7 are words of encouragement about not sinning.
2 Peter 1:10 says to make make every effort to be without sin.
1 John 3:3 is about the HOPE we have – NOT a guarantee.
1 John 2:6 is about not living a life of willful sin – NOT about never stumbling.
1 John 2:10 is conditional, live in the light.
1 John 3:6 is conditional, IF you remain in Him.
1 John 2:17 is conditional, IF you do His will – and ALWAYS do it without fail.

NONE of these are guarantees That you won’t ever sin again.
Even your cherry-picked verses fail to prove your point . . .[/QUOTE]

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your "cult of the virgin" Bible, says.......as you have quoted many times....>"Born Again BY water".
So, now you are trying to deny your own bible that produced your water cult...

And what is even more shown as your continuing dishonesty, is that while you are denying that you came to me wtih the Noah verse, explaining to us that this proves that "water saves", you now deny you did that....

And now, you have posted this...."""in "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration THROUGH WATER """"

And that is explaining that your "cult of the Virgin", teaches what you just said, it does not teach.
So, you are denying your own Churches doctrine, in the same post where you post the water baptism regeneration lie.

So, you are denying it, while posting it , = self deceived while while trying to deceive.

You are posting that a person enters the Spirit of God as born again, by water, and through water, while denying what you just posted ,= your church's false doctrine.

A couple of things, Einstein . . .

First pf all - the phrase in the Latin Vulgate from 1 Pet. 3:20 is "sunt per aquam".
This translates as "THROUGH Water" - just like the Catechism. The Douay-Rheims is only ONE translation - and by no means the one "official" version. If anything - it's the Latin Vulgate from which the Douay is translated.

Remember, Einstein - English is NOT the only language in the world . . .

Seondly - as I have schooled you on numerous occasions - "Cult of MAry" or "cult" of whatever refers ONLY to those who have a certain devotion. "Cult" in this sense simply means "devotion" - not "mind-controlling sect". That is a much LATER definition.
The Catholic Church has never been refrred to as the "Cult of Mary".

Repent and PRAY for forgiveness for all of the LIES you perpetuate on this forum . . .

 

[theefaith]

Christian perfection is possible; such people are usually called directly by God followed by signs and wonders. We have instant coffee, instant potatoes, instant cup-o-soup, but we don't have instant justification. Faith is necessary, but that is just the beginning of a life long process.
The verses you presented are a mix of predestination to grace, and predestination to glory.
Eph. 1:5 There are two types of “predestination,” to grace and to glory. In this verse, Paul is teaching about predestination to grace, which means becoming a Christian.

1 Pet. 1:1-2 – Paul teaches about being destined by God for obedience to Christ. This is another example of predestination to grace. But there is also predestination to glory.

Rom. 8:29-30 – Paul also writes that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. Now Paul is writing about predestination to glory, which means not only becoming a faithful Christian during our lives, but persevering to the end by conforming our will to Christ’s will.

1 Cor. 15:49 – Paul writes that we are conformed in His image at the resurrection, when we shall bear the image of the man of heaven. These are the people who were predestined to glory.

Rev. 3:5 – Jesus warns that He can blot out the names that are in the book of life. This refers to those currently, not ultimately, justified (those who are predestined to grace, but not to glory).

Eph. 1:5; 1 Peter 1:2; Rom. 8:29-30; 1 Cor. 15:49 – therefore, predestination is either to grace (which we could lose) or to glory (which we cannot lose). As alluded to above, some non-Catholics confuse the definition of “predestination” (which means God knows what we will do before we do it) and “predetermination” (the erroneous belief that God determines what we will do). But God does not author evil. We choose evil by our own freewill.

Ezek. 18:23-24, 32 – God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Our death is our freewill, failing to respond to His grace. God does not predetermine certain people to hell. God also does not predetermine certain “elect” people to heaven. We all, as God’s children, have been given the grace we need to be saved, but we can decide to reject God’s grace. (a stupid thing to do)

If you say you never sin, congratulations. You have attained perfection.

jn 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.