Search results

kyrie, Not sure what all you are referring to, but I am glad to see you back!! :)

Here's a cool story about man who is carrying a cross while walking from D.C. to Los Angles. http://www.kwch.com/content/news/Cross-country-cross-carrier-walking-for-cause-397539271.html

And thats kind of what I was getting at.

Not saying you are wrong, but if God knows everything, then how could He not know who will choose salvation?

The above posted site. If you take the time to read all of what they have posted on there, you can have all sorts of fun punching holes in their teachings, traditions, theology and doctrines!!! :) I'm going to take a few days and fully educate myself in the Catholic church and come back to you...

Quick question, why did it take all the way to 2008 for the RCC to say "oh, by the way, all Catholics should have a bible and use it."? Was it because the RCC had their followers so convinced that they were "infallible" that they trusted whatever was fed to them?

Lets keep this on topic now or I will close it. Unless you two are done and I can close it now. Thanks!!! BA

Stan, i love ya brother, but do you assert that at no point in scripture it speaks of being spiritually dead?

Im not done yet, Tom, but I gotta tell ya, its not looking good for you. So far, I can see why these books are not accepted. How you got duped into accepting them is beyond me.... I will be back with more... And to show you I'm not using anti-Catholic sources to make my conclusions, here is one...

I will. I shall return... To make sure I dont make any errors, I am doing my homework. I'll be back. LOL

What gives the RCC the authority to add to the initial 66? Keep in mind, Christianity was outlawed in Rome until after Constantine took office and became christian. Then suddenly it s a good idea to start adding books? Nearly 300 years after the crucifixion. Prior to that, you mean to tell me...

I contend that when it says "dead" in the bible, it is at times referring to spiritually dead. Not always physical.

And that being said, the point of speech ie 1st or 3rd person is everything. You are denying the 3rd person perspective based on you think it is unlikely. I still assert that is weak theology. The whole argument is based on that.

Revelation 22:19(ESV) 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. Though this speaks to taking away from the Word of God, I dont see how adding to it, after the...

Likewise, I am not a moderator for this area. Angelina will have to close it. But I have made a recommendation for her to close it. Ultimately, it is her call.

Research it, the 12 tribes are the 12 tribes of Israel. Not "could be".

Whaaaaaaa? Oh man, you cant be serious... LOL :D

I agree, this thread has run it's course. I will have it closed. God Bless, BA

I was going to type out a long response but then I read this response and it pretty much covers what I was going to say... even more so and more of an educated response than I would have had. Thanks, Oz BA

What rule is there that you cant change from the 3rd person to the first person? C'mon. That is weak, Kerwin. You cant base your argument on the likelyhood that he would not have changed the speakers perspective. You are going to need something a bit more solid than that.