A quick note: be it right or wrong. Don't think that the sda are the only ones that think the RCC is of the beast - pope=antichrist. Most all the reformers do as well. Hundreds of yrs before there was a sda church. Some promulgate this at times, some don't talk about it, but it is in there creed-beliefs. But the sda do talk about it more than any other denomination, but don't get the idea sda originated this
The difference is sda believes Sunday is the mark of the beast were as others do not.
@game11221 actually SDA's believe that sunday WILL BE the mark when it is enforced by law making people keep sunday "holy" while forcing them to work on the Lord's Sabbath day. sunday keepers do not have the mark yet.
1. @182RG if u are really interested in knowing if investigative judgment & mark of the beast teaching is true, then I can direct u to some videos that explain it. I can explain it but not in 60 seconds & not on this board. way too much to cover plus others can explain it more clearly than me.
but basically this: Jesus is bringing His reward with Him when He comes right? of course. so some form of judgement had to take place prior to His return correct? yes. it's not rocket science.
2. @182RG bible identifies RCC as 1st beast/harrlot/antichrist...there is no speculation on this, it is irrefutable. RCC herself says sunday keeping is her "mark" of authority in ecclesiastical matters. she admits & BOASTS of it. in Rev 14:11-12 those who get the mark are contrasted with those who KEEP the commandments of God & faith of Jesus. Sabbath is the 4th commandment, not sunday. RCC boasts that she changed it (shall think to change times & laws).
3. @182RG it is obvious from Rev 14: 11-12 that those who KEEP the commandments (& teach others to do so Mat 5:19) will NOT get the mark while those who break the least of the ten (pick one you think is least important) & teach others to do it Mat 5:19 WILL get the mark. it's as clear as God can make it.
your church/popes have been screaming for sunday laws for years just like EGW said they would. your current pope is calling for it. how much evidence does it take?
Please check the Vatican website for the full story on the pope endorsing evolution. It's not such a black and white concept as "pope believes in evolution".
@MrChristianBeliever Hi friend, thanks for the happy birthday wish for my daughter. I would have replied to you sooner but I just noticed it today, sorry.
Jesus/God is omniscient, correct? Jesus said something like "I know my sheep and they know me".
I agree there will be a judgement, but as far as an "investigation"? God already knows everything; He needs to "investigate" nothing.
You're the person who says do not believe if it's not in the bible - So tell me, please, chapter and verse, where scripture states Sunday worship is the mark of Satan.
@182RG friend if you really are truly interested in anything but arguing I can give you links so you can at least understand what we teach. if not, then you are wasting your time & mine.
@182RG Right on. The Seventh Day Adventists – founded 1831 AD. Founded by a man, William Miller in New York. Based on his study of the prophecy of Daniel 8:14, Miller calculated that Jesus would return to earth sometime between 1843 and 1844. This prediction is in spite of the fact that the bible says that no one will be able to predict when the Second Coming of Jesus will be (Matthew 24:36). So William Miller is a MAN who MADE this church, therefore it is a man-made church.
@avengedangel2002 you just stated something totally false. see this is how these things get started and spread like wildfire. lies like this, even unintentional ones, cause a lot of trouble.
William Miller was was a BAPTIST, NOT a SDA & he NEVER became SDA. the church was founded in 1863, NOT 1831.
now lets talk about your current and last pope...why did/do they believe in evolution?
"this is how these things get started and spread like wildfire. lies like this, even unintentional ones, cause a lot of trouble."
Interesting how you are getting defensive when @avengedangel2002 states something that you say is not correct concerning the SDA. Do you believe he is not behaving in a Christian manner?
"now lets talk about your current and last pope"
Sounds like you believe you can do this but no one else. Do you deny you are doing the same thing that you condemn?
@rusda2 ok, maybe what I posted is incorrect, if it truly is, my source wasn't reliable enough...so I ask you, who founded the SDA church, so I can rectify my mistake? I would truly like to know. This denomination sounds interesting, I would like to know more, although I will still remain a Roman Catholic. I would like to learn more about why my Protestant brothers believe what they do.
@avengedangel2002 the only problem is they were not organized until the era of the civil war, and the name wasn't chosen. Yet Jehovah's witlessness, and first day Adventists are what then? and the real question is So what? aren't all religions Man made? so is yours?
"the problem comes when people make or buy images then bow down to them either in prayer or worship."
That is not what God said; that is how you interpret scripture. Other passages tell us God did not want us bowing infront of statues believing them to be a God.
"what is your question?" 2
Why do you claim Exodus 20:4 means something other than what Exodus 32:8 and Leviticus 19:4 tell us?
What makes your interpretation infallible and everyone who disagrees with you wrong?
@MrChristianBeliever Lev 19:4 Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods: I am the LORD your God.
it says exactly the same thing as Ex 20:4...if you make an image of "Jesus", is that not an image of a "god"? yes of course & a false one as well since nobody knows what God looks like & any image of Him man makes corrupts Him in their minds. so we would be bowing to a false image of "god" which is no god at all. hence "false gods". corruption.
@MrChristianBeliever also, it would not matter if we knew exactly what God looked like and made an image of Him, it would still be idol worship if we bowed down to it because it is not God. so it doesnt matter if the idol is a perfect image of the true God or a perfect image of a false "god", the images are all false "gods" and are not to be bowed to which is worship of the image.
statues for art sake seem to be no problem except possibly misuse of God's money.
"it says exactly the same thing as Ex 20:4...if you make an image of "Jesus", is that not an image of a "god"?"
It doesn't say the same thing to me. It says the idols are God, not an image of God. Ex 32:28 says "...They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’ ...". I read this quite differently than you are reading it.
The CC does not say the idols are God and it condemns making that claim...
...When I read Exodus 26:1, Exodus 25:17-22, I see God commands the making of an idol. It does not make sense to me that God would command this if he meant what you believe he meant. There are other examples as well but as you said we cannot discuss them because we believe different things. So I must now ask:
Do you believe Christians, who believe what I believe and are guided by the HS according to you, are going to go to hell for believing God doesn't want us to worship idols?
"I ask you the same...what makes the pope & RCC the infallible source?"
Fair enough but be notified that this is the first time you have asked this question to me and I have asked you many times without receiving an answer.
I believe Christ makes the Pope and all Bishops in union with him the infallible source because that is what I read in scripture. It also tells me the HS will guide his church but individuals and misinterpret scripture. I go to the CC when I am unsure ...
...because I know I can interpret it in error. The CC is a source for me to check my understanding. I place my faith in Jesus to guide his church correctly so that I will never misunderstand what he wants me to know. I believe individuals cannot hear the HS when their hearts become hardened. I believe it is almost a miracle to get an entire council to agree on anything unless they were guided by the HS; and the CC councils always come to agreement on faith and morals.
"nothing in scripture thats for sure. catholic tradition only."
I disagree. I read that Christs church was built by him upon the apostles with Peter as the dispute resolver. I read the apostles have provided us a way to know which church is the visible church on Earth established by Christ.
This leads to another question: Are Christians who believe what I believe going to hell?
You said "the RCC is "mother" of all harlots being babylon herself...she sits on 7 hills"
That is your opinion, not fact.
Jerusalem who rejected Christ and was subsequently burnt to death. In John’s prophetic vision the city of the “Whore” will be destroyed by fire and we know that Jerusalem was completely destroyed by fire in 70 a.d.,whereas Rome was only partially burned.
The Vatican Hills are not counted among the traditional Seven Hills (Seven hills of Rome-Wikipedia)
1.@MrChristianBeliever " It is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire area of Vatican State proper is now confined. By treaty with the Italian Government certain other properties apart from the Vatican State are considered as territorial parts of the state of Vatican City. Since the founding of the Church there by St. Peter, the city of Rome has been the center of Christendom... (continued next post)
2.@MrChristianBeliever - "The city itself is the diocese of the pope as bishop of Rome." Source: The CATHOLIC Encyclopedia, edited by Robert C. Broderick, IMPRIMATUR of the Most Reverend William E. Cousins, Archbishop of Milwaukee, Nihil Obstat of the Reverend Richard J. Sklba, published by Thomas Nelson Publishers, copyright 1976, entry on Rome, pg. 529.
sorry I had to bring out the big guns but who holds more weight with you? a CATHOLIC encyclopedia with the IMPRIMATUR or wikipedia? :)
You said "she (CC) denies Jesus came in the flesh"
CCC463 Belief in the true Incarnation of the Son of God is the distinctive sign of Christian faith: "By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God." Such is the joyous conviction of the Church from her beginning whenever she sings "the mystery of our religion": "He was manifested in the flesh."
I just posted an authentic Catholic source, so yours is not.
@MrChristianBeliever RCC says He had a sinless mother...we dont have that advantage...that would make His flesh different & unfallen...unlike ours.
no, your RCc "claims" Jesus came in the flesh...but it's a different flesh. they claim the pre fall nature of Adam but the bible says the seed of Abraham (fallen flesh).
rusda2, I am just wondering, why you are part of the SDA Church, and not of another Denomination of Protestant like Lutheran, Episcopal, Presbyterian, or Calvinism, etc? Is there a certain reason?
@avengedangel2002 one very important reason is because most churches including those listed only keep the "9 commandments" when God gave 10. they are partial in the law. others, antinomians, do away with the law completely.
also most churches teach the pagan doctrine of a "god" who burns sinners forever for the sins of one 70 year lifetime...hitler was not as bad as these churches make God out to be.
there are many other reasons, but these are good examples.
@MrChristianBeliever well I actually dont believe you said it out of haste because you were much to slow to admit it. I believe you actually believed what you said. I am not saying this to be mean it's just what I saw in how you seemed to avoid the situation for a while.
And just for the record, you bonechewer you :-) I saw MrChristian's post about Mary's sinlessness minutes after it was posted, and thought to myself "Humm, I know he knows better than that" as I've seen hundreds of his posts on other channels. And if wasn't such a time consuming hassle, I'd just about bet I could find one of his past posts defending Mary's sinlessness. Pax
"I saw MrChristian's post about Mary's sinlessness minutes after it was posted, and thought to myself "Humm, I know he knows better than that...I'd just about bet I could find one of his past posts defending Mary's sinlessness. Pax"
Thank you my friend; I appreciate the vote of confidence.
Ya know, I was just thinking, I really wouldn't expect rusda to know about what goes on in our mass, especially the hymns sung on feast days such as the Annunciation. But if he had possibly ever heard of "Immaculate Mary", and was aware that every church going Catholic knows at least the first verse, he probably would have put 2 and 2 together.
@rusda2 <<<the bible says nothing about an immaculate mary
The bible also says nothing about any belief, custom, or tradition not specifically condoned or instructed within its pages being invalid or sinful. So your contention that things of that nature must be biblically based is self-disproving. Right?
Find what? Comment from MrC? Too much trouble - didn't even attempt to. But I also bet MrC knows and sings the hymn "Immaculate Mary", so he certainly knew what THAT meant.
@182RG no, what it means is I dont have to accept anything that is not taught in scripture. and immaculate mary is not taught anywhere in scripture. she said herself that she needed a Saviour. & the bible says all mankind has sinned. she is part of mankind. it's very clear.
@rusda2 <<<what it means is I dont have to accept anything that is not taught in scripture.
My first thought is that that isn't unreasonable. There are many things the Church teaches that are not required of us to believe. I think it's safe to say the church has no precise dogma on Purgatory, for example.
As far as Paul saying all have sinned - There are exceptions. Jesus, a part of mankind, certainly, but more than that, you don't suppose infants and small children have sinned, do you?
"what it means is I dont have to accept anything that is not taught in scripture."
Yet you believe and accept many things that are not in scripture. So why do you believe the things you believe such as scripture alone? And the bible says all mankind has sinned?
Babies haven't sinned, have they? Little children haven't sinned, have they? No! This is not an absolute. There are exceptions. What about John the Baptist? Did he sin?
I can't even find things I myself posted! Often even if know which channel I posted them on!
Appreciate the info on Sunday worship.
Ever hear of a short book called Seventh-day Adventism Renounced. by D. M. Canright? A former SDA elder of 20+ years claimed right up to his death in the 40s that no SDA was able to refute his 2 or 3 short chapters biblically proving Saturday Sabbath was an erroneous belief. It's on the internet somewhere now.
@182RG hey no problem, hope it helped. yes I have read some of it but it's really a ignorant book. I felt very sorry for canright after reading some about his history. his personal story is pathetic & tragic.
His arguments have been refuted so many times it's not funny. they were no more than the common arguments of the day and are still used today and are still refuted easily.
If you want to read a SDA book that destroys canrights it's called "in defense of the faith" by W.H. Branson
@MrChristianBeliever well here we go again...I also can say that I do know as much as I think I do about RCC...so I guess we are at a standoff again eh? oh well. what good is this doing? you are not willing to see anything except what the RCC has taught you. when there is doubt about doctrine, you MUST take your churches word for it. so it it really you and the Holy Spirit Whom Jesus sent or is it some man/church telling u what to believe. I could never accept RCC with it's bloody history.
Great question. Let me ask you the same thing for 10th time. What good is your video doing? I now you will not answer this one question because it will spawn a dozen or so additional questions that you will not be able to answer with anything but opinions.
If you think your video is doing good, then how can you ask me what what good is this doing?
"you are not willing to see anything except what the RCC has taught you."
@MrChristianBeliever my video is pointing out error in the catholic church...thats what it is for. of course you dont think its good because you dont like what it says. maybe I could have put it more "softly" or less in your face, but it still would have said the same thing.
@MrChristianBeliever being obedient to a man made church like RCC is not being obedient to Christ.
the RCC is filled with error, thats why I could not take it's word for anything. thats the difference between myself and catholics. we have different standards. catholic standards are church traditions & councils & commandments of men. my standard is scripture. therefore we cannot have a productive discussion. we are speaking of two different things.
"being obedient to a man made church like RCC is not being obedient to Christ."
It is you who claims the CC is man made. I believe it is Christ made. It is you who refuses to believe it. Your opinion has absolutely nothing to do with the truth. Does scripture tell you the CC is man made? When will your opinions stop and the truth start coming out of you?
"the RCC is filled with error"
You have not even mentioned a single error yet let alone many of them.
"catholic standards are church traditions & councils & commandments of men. my standard is scripture."
That is interesting. Scripture refers to the apostles (councils) teaching others and it tells us to hold fast to the traditions they teach us. Scripture never tells us that scripture is the only source for us to have as a standard.
So why do you believe your own traditions instead of scripture?
"we cannot have a productive discussion. we are speaking of two different things."
I suppose that is true. If you believe that scripture is the only source for us to know God, then you have created a new brand of Christianity that has only been around for 500 years and was not taught or believed for the first 1500 years since Christ.
You believe something that is not in scripture while claiming it is the only source of truth. Sounds to me like you believe what you want to.
"it it really you and the Holy Spirit Whom Jesus sent or is it some man/church telling u what to believe."
That is the question isn't it? I believe the Holy Spirit speaks to us individually and guides his church in all truth. It is not an either/or as you suggested. It is both as I see it.
Individuals can reject what the Holy Spirit tells them but the Church cannot as Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
Why so many different beliefs if this was not true
@MrChristianBeliever the bottom line for RCC is that if you have serious doubts about a belief you still must accept it if the church says so. that is not biblical. the church does not determine truth, the bible does and the church is to follow that truth.
"I could never accept RCC with it's bloody history."
Sins of men is not a reason to reject Christ's church. You blame his church for the sins of those men. Atheists also blame religion for all of the problems in the world.
I hope you are aware that one of the many, many reasons for the crusades was because Protestants (especially Muslims) were making false statements about the church. Kind of like what you are doing. Imagine how things would have turned out if they never did that
@MrChristianBeliever all Im saying is that I post things 99% of the time which are catholics speaking & admitting what their church believes. what good would it do for me to post only what prots say about what cathies believe? it's more credible to let them speak for themselves.
@MrChristianBeliever I am wondering...what happened to all your support cathies? there were 3 or 4 others at a time attacking me from every direction. one of them falsely accused me of deleting her comments and in typical cathy fashion she would not apologize when she found out she was wrong. she just made some conscience soothing comment about it being a "natural assumption" and let it go at that. no apology, no nothing. typical.
@rusda2 <<<what happened to all your support cathies
Oh, at least this one is still around. Sometimes it's best to let the hardest shelled antiCatholics alone and just include them in one's prayers, as only the Holy Spirit can possibly get thru to them.
But I am still waiting for you to answer if SDAs believe Sunday worship is the mark of Satan, and that all who deny the Jewish Saturday Sabbath, Catholics and nonCatholics alike, are damned.
1.@182RG we believe that when people shall be forced by law to keep the pagan sunday and forced as part of that law to work on the Holy Sabbath day, anyone who does so is breaking Gods law and will receive the mark of the beast. sunday is the mark that WILL BE enforced but no one has the mark now.
could you tell me where it says in scripture that the Sabbath is "jewish"? the sabbath was made holy at the end of creation week. no jews existed until about 2500 years later.
Maybe I misunderstood - I thought you were saying not until a law is passed requiring Sunday worship is it considered the mark of Satan. As I read what I posted, I don't think the writer mentioned anything about a law; just the simple act of participating in Sunday Sabbath is the mark. I'm going from memory, so correct me if I'm wrong.
So @182RG was correct when he asked if you were a member of SDA? I did not realize that you placed your faith in men while condemning the CC for the same. Very interesting.
"I officially retract my previous statement that you did not admit wrong. you DID admit it, my mistake & apologies to you for not seeing it before."
I accept your apology.
"Im saying I post things catholics speaking & admitting what their church believes."
2. @182RG I would be very careful what you refer to in that derogatory way as jewish because u are saved under a very "Jewish" covenant. God has only made a salvation cov with Jews Jer 31:31 & Heb 8:8. He NEVER made a salvation cov with gentiles. gentiles are ADOPTED & GRAFT into the new JEWISH cov by faith according to paul. Jesus said salvation is "of the Jews" for this very reason. New Cov is JEWISH & you cant be saved if you reject things you deem Jewish. sorry :)
Nothing derogatory was said or meant. I have nothing against Jews at all. Sometimes we even sing Jewish hymns at mass.
The Jewish Sabbath is still honored today by Jews. But they do it as it's supposed to be done. SDAs do not. You pick the day they use, but that's about it. There are very specific activities that are forbidden, yet as far as I know, SDAs totally ignore them. No cooking, no fires, no writing... the list goes on. Why only part way?
I mean Saturday Sabbath; which of course is Jewish. Recall Peter and Paul's discussion of holding Gentiles to Jewish law. And we see the early Christians meeting on Sunday in the bible, and read of Sunday "mass" in the Didache (Teachings of the Apostles) in circulation around the turn of the first century.
@MrChristianBeliever of course i am capable of being wrong about what RCC teaches...also capable of being wrong about what my own church teaches. I never said any different.
"of course i am capable of being wrong about what RCC teaches...also capable of being wrong about what my own church teaches. I never said any different"
That is all I wanted to hear. You gave the impression you believed differently.
"I actually dont believe you said it out of haste because you were much to slow to admit it"
Again I corrected myself by posting what was stated at Trent. That was not very long afterward.
@MrChristianBeliever OK friend, I just found your trent quote and re-read it...I officially retract my previous statement that you did not admit wrong. you DID admit it, my mistake & apologies to you for not seeing it before.
"somehow you could never be wrong and I could never be right"
When have I once said I could never be wrong or you could never be right? Please show me the post where I said that.
I can definitately be wrong because I am only human. You have been right on many things but only one thing concerning what the CC believes as far as I can recall.
"we found out different did we not?"
You finally realized that but I said I could be wrong a very long time ago.
"you say, referring to me, that "you spend most of your time on anti-Catholic sources"...& I have REPEATEDLY told you that my sources are 99% from catholic teachings."
And I have said people who claim to be Catholic but protest the CC have excommunicated themselves. They are not authentic Catholic sources. I posted this from an authentic Catholic source.
Your sources are not 99% Catholic. They are not even 1% Catholic. They are 0% Catholic if they conflict with authentic sources.
"my sources were 100% catholic because I was right that RCC teaches a sinless mary."
A 0% Catholic source can correctly state what the CC teaches. Just because your sources said that one thing about what the CC believes about Mary not committing any sin does not make it an authentic or even Catholic source.
"my sources are 99% from catholic teachings"
You have posted great deal of incorrect information about what the CC teaches. How can that be from authentic Catholic source?
@MrChristianBeliever you probably posted it here somewhere but with so many comments I cant find them....but did you have a question you wanted me to attempt to answer friend?
most of your messages are not showing up in my inbox I have to come here to search for them and it gets tedious to do.
@game11221 I guess Im pretty good at opening worm cans lol :) and u are correct and I firmly believe that the whole system fails miserably because...and think about this...have you ever noticed that they can never defend their position with scripture alon? it's always catechism, catechism, catechism. RCC standards and Christian standards are not the same, therefore we cannot have a good discussion b/c while we are quoting bible, they quote a man made book.
"have you ever noticed that they can never defend their position with scripture alon?"
I already have. You still have not answered my questions. Now you are begging for new questions. Why would anyone need to defend the CC teachings with scripture alone?
"RCC standards and Christian standards are not the same"
And what would be Christian standards? Do you define them?
"we cannot have a good discussion ... they quote a man made book."
@game11221 mrchristianbeliever will not answer my question directly & honestly, he just keeps throwing more junk in the pot to stir up.
he said in an earlier post that RCC "never said mary was sinless". I then posted a quote from POPE BENEDICT in 2006 that said PLAINLY that mary was SINLESS. so I asked him who was right? him? or his pope/church? he realizes he has made a huge error and doesnt know his own RCC doctrines...& wont adimt his error. he needs to ask what else he may be wrong on.
"are you bingolly1 in disguise? you act just like him."
Very interesting. I do not know who that person is. Sounds like he believes what the CC teaches and scripture teaches. (1 Cor 1:10,Eph 4:4-6,Phil 2:2,1 Peter 3:8)
"you wont answer the question you just throw more junk into the soup pot."
I did answer the question with my comment on the Council of Trent.
"how hard is it for you to admit you made a mistake and confess it? thats what real christians do"
@MrChristianBeliever No he does not agree with you, he agrees with me, the pope, the RCC & the vatican website that the RCC teaches mary was sinless. you say she wasnt and that the RCC "never said mary was sinless".
ok I am about thru fooling with you. you are very dishonest about this and wont answer my question. answer me, whos wrong, you or the pope/RCC? is mary sinless or not?
"you are very dishonest about this and wont answer my question."
I may have said the CC doesn't teach Mary was sinless but I corrected myself with my post from The Council of Trent. You are starting to sound like an angry atheist because I have not been dishonest. I did answer you question.
Its your turn. Start answering.
Do you deny that God can grant special privilege to some? (John 16:12).
Do you claim you know for certain that Mary committed sin during her life?
@MrChristianBeliever "MAY" have said? lol...now u want to deny or cast doubt on if u said it or not? u did not correct anything. u tossed in more cathy goop in the pot to confuse & cover up ur error.
when u decide to admit publicly forum that y were wrong maybe we can continue our talks. u plainly said in public here that I was uneducated/ignorant/lying about RCC belief but turns I out I knew ur faith better than u. so what else might u be wrong about? we shall see.
""MAY" have said? lol...now u want to deny or cast doubt on if u said it or not? u did not correct anything. u tossed in more cathy goop in the pot to confuse & cover up ur error."
Come on; you are being rediculous. I already told you I spoke in haste with regards to the church believing that Mary never sinned. You really want to chew this bone to death, don't you?
1.@MrChristianBeliever "You really want to chew this bone to death, don't you?"...LOL :)
thats good...gotta remember that. although bones are already dead right? :)
no I really dont, just want to make a point for u & other cathies who think I dont know what I am talking about...that its possible for cathies to be wrong about what their church teaches. I have corrected cathies quite a few times & they will run away or go silent afterward. have to give u credit for sticking it out, very nice.
2.@MrChristianBeliever just curious...when u say "mis stated" do u mean u actually believed mary was NOT sinless and were wrong, or u just made a mistake and something slipped out that you didnt actually believe?
"when u say "mis stated" do u mean u actually believed mary was NOT sinless and were wrong, or u just made a mistake and something slipped out that you didnt actually believe?"
I mean something slipped out even though I know the CC believes Mary did not commit a sin.
"I dont think u learned ur lesson yet"
I posted something incorrectly in haste. I know many Catholics believe incorrect things about what the CC teaches. What other lesson might you be referring?
When I said the CC does not teach that Mary never sinned, I mis-spoke. The CC does believe that Mary never committed a sin. I was incorrect in making that statement.
Are you finished yet?
"when u decide to admit publicly forum that y were wrong maybe we can continue our talks."
I did but you want to gloat in my statements. I finally said something that was not correct and you won't drop it. Very interesting.
@MrChristianBeliever I am not gloating friend. as I said this is just a lesson for u & cathies to be very sure before u speak saying what ur church believes and that I or other prots are wrong about what ur church believes because we may just be right & u may have to eat crow. I dont know if u like the taste of crow, but I for sure do not. thats why I try to get my info from catholic sources.
finally said something wrong? see what i mean...I dont think u learned ur lesson yet :)
"then please tell me where is the official teaching from the CCC about using images so i can read it myself."
Images? CCC2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it." The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone: ...
...Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.
CCC2130 In the OT, God ordained or permitted the making of images that pointed symbolically toward salvation by the incarnate Word: so it was with the bronze serpent, the ark of the covenant, and the cherubim.
"i accept your admission of error. I am finished. thats all I have to say about that"
Thank God.
"if I am not mistaken (and you can correct me) a person can not excommunicate themselves."
I already posted it. Let me find it:
This canon is saying that once a person willingly...embraces a heresy, knowing it to be contrary to divine and Catholic faith...they are automatically excommunicated. No ecclesiastical act is necessary and no public notice.
it's strange because I have seen videos of people who say that it was alomost impossible for them to get out of the catholic church when they wanted to be removed from membership.
"it's strange because I have seen videos of people who say that it was alomost impossible for them to get out of the catholic church"
They are not Catholics. They do not represent what the CC teaches. You have been deceieved by men. Why are you believing men while also pointing your finger at Catholics for doing the same thing?
Anyone can leave the CC at any time they want. Are you seriously trying to convince me otherwise? I am not a novice Catholic.
"u plainly said in public here that I was uneducated/ignorant/lying about RCC belief"
I did not. I have no idea what your education is but I do know that your research on anti-Catholic web sites makes that knowledge incorrect concerning what the CC teaches. What the CC believes concerning Mary never committing a sin is the only thing you have correctly stated as far as I can recall.
It appears that everything else you stated is only your opinion, not fact.
@MrChristianBeliever I meant uneducated in catholic beliefs, not education in general.
no everything I have stated was from catholic sources. and it would not make a bit of difference if it was from, as you term it, "anticatholic" sites. if what was quoted was accurate, and it was, the source makes no difference.
it's like me quoting you saying "the catholic church never said mary was sinless". it doesnt matter the source as long as it's what you really said.
"it would not make a bit of difference if it was from, as you term it, "anticatholic" sites. if what was quoted was accurate, and it was, the source makes no difference."
It does matter if what you post is not what the CC teaches as most of what you have posted and said in your video claims.
Are you really trying to justify your sources based on one of them making a single correct statement about what the CC believes?
Let us move on to the purpose of your video, shall we?
@MrChristianBeliever sorry but I have to leave now...got to make the long trip to town for some errands. maybe we will discuss this later, I dont know.
anyway, i am not out for your skin like you think. I just want you to realize that maybe you dont know as much as you think. and maybe it's also possible that I just might know plenty thats true about your RCC even tho you dont think so.
"i claim that for certain because mary herself said she needed a Saviour."
The CC teaches that Mary had a saviour. That is not an answer to my question. I asked how you can claim that Mary was not born immaculate. It is not in scripture which is your requirement to believe something is true.
The CC teaches that she was saved before she was born, so how can you claim she was not saved before she was born?
I am surprised you have stuck it out this long. I ask some tough questions that you have been unable to answer with anything other than your opinion. Without being able to answer these most basic questions, you have explained to everyone on your video how little you know about the CC.
@MrChristianBeliever your questions are not hard my friend, they are mostly none issue & useless because most have to do with catholic traditions & not the word of God.
I'm not bailing, it's my video. you prove to me how it's wrong & I will remove it. prove to me that catholics do now bow to idols/images/statues.
"one of you doesnt know what he's talking about. are you going to answer me honestly or are you going to continue posting gobbldy gook that doesnt answer the question?"
@MrChristianBeliever when you publicly & clearly admit you were wrong, and what you were wrong about, like you publicly accused me of being wrong, then we can talk.
...Now that I have answered your questions; please answer mine. Who was Paul referring in Romans when he said "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."? Was he telling the Romans that ALL Jews fell short of the Gory of God?
"I dont care what prots/cathies believe if not supported by scripture."
Evidently you do since you think you can save them. Why preach strife if you don't care? What is the point?
"You hammered me hard on this telling me how ignorant I on Mary and CC teaching"
I did indeed and my hammering was not meant towards what you believe; rather your anger at the CC. I have posted what the CC teaches concerning Mary just as you wanted to hear and from an authentic CC source...
@MrChristianBeliever quit twisting my words. I do care about catholics & I dont hate them & have said as much many times.
why cant you just answer me? you say you have but you havent. you just keep tossing out more goop that does nothing toward a real answer.
you said: "CC NEVER said mary was sinless". then i posted a quote of your POPE Benny 16 on the OFFICIAL vatican website where he said she was INDEED sinless.
One of you is WRONG...it it YOU or Ratzinger/RCC? answer me.
The Council of Trent expresses this conviction, affirming that no one "can avoid all sins, even venial sins, throughout his life, unless he is given a special privilege, as the Church holds with regard to the Blessed Virgin" (DS 1573).
Do you deny that God can grant special privilege to some? (John 16:12).
It's your turn to answer some questions instead of contstantly saying I claim the CC does not believe Mary committed any sins; when I posted otherwise.
@MrChristianBeliever you said: "I have posted what the CC teaches concerning Mary just as you wanted to hear and from an authentic CC source..."
well now you call the POPE & the VATICAN & your RCC a NON-authentic source? wow, thats incredible. how can you be loyal to a pope you think either lies or doesnt know what the RCC teaches? how can you say mary is NOT sinless when your pope says she is sinless?
What I cannot understand is how anyone can believe that God the Father placed His only-begotten Son in the womb of a woman in sin (basically in the grip of the devil) and how anyone can believe that God would give His Son over to be raised and nurtured by a woman who had tendencies to sin. That is NOT a mother worthy of Christ and that is not the mother Christ created. This is my thought, however, if you are seeking answers based on scripture, I urge you to watch my featured video. God Bless.
1. @ed2funny4 what I can't believe is how anyone can claim mary was sinless when bible says ALL have sinned. think about this:
the bible says Jesus is our example & that we should walk as He walked. how could He be our example if He had any advantages over us? if He had the advantage of a sinless mother which we do not? if He had the advantage of a "flesh" that is different than ours like RCC teaches? but He tells us not to sin when we are pulled toward it & He wasnt?
2. @ed2funny4 we all know Jesus did not sin, but the bible says He was tempted in all points as we are so that He can be merciful & understanding High Priest. How could He understand if He could not be tempted by the pull of the flesh toward sin if He had different flesh than us because He was born of a sinless mother? see what I mean? the bible is plain He had our exact same flesh. He got tired. He got hungry. He felt pain, stress, disapointment etc. all without sin to show us with His...
3. @ed2funny4 power that God can enable us to have victory over sin. again, if He had any advantage over us with a different flesh & sinless mother, His example to us is useless because we cannot hope for victory in our flesh.
4. @ed2funny4 Hbr 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh...he also himself likewise took part of the same...2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God...2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
@rusda2 Firstly, it is not a difficult thing to grasp especially if you watched the featured video I recommended on my channel. Secondly, if you think His having a sinless Mother was an advantage, what about He HIMSELF being unable to sin? When we are told to walk the path of Christ it means that we must (with the help of His grace) live His virtues, deny ourselves, and take up our cross as He did.
@ed2funny4 so you think He could not have chosen to sin? sin is a choice. thats hard for a lot of people to hear. they want to think that they have no choice. Adam and Eve were sinless...yet they CHOSE to sin.
the bible says Jesus suffered being tempted. His human flesh was the same as ours & subject to our weakness. yet He relied on His Father's power and had VICTORY in OUR FLESH. if you think there was no risk and danger for Him when He came here you are mistaken.
@rusda2 Sir, are you denying that Jesus is perfect? Jesus is both God and Man and was like us in all things except sin (which He was unable to commit). Saying otherwise would call God imperfect, which is blasphemy. As for Mary, the featured video is displayed right on my channel. Just click my channel name. It should answer some of the questions you are inquiring about.
@ed2funny4 friend, did I say that? no I did not say that. but He came here with our fleshly nature to prove to all that with God's power we can obey. of course He was perfect, He was sinless. but the fact remains He could have chosen to sin like Adam, Eve & fallen angels who were all sinless but chose to sin.
what you are saying is that Jesus did not have a free choice...thats ridiculous. I have seen your video before. very nicely put together I must say. what editing program do u use?
@rusda2 God is perfect. He can do nothing sinful. If such a thing were so, He would not be perfect then. He can neither decieve nor be decieved. "Sin is an offense against God, and God is the perfection of goodness and holiness. Jesus is fully God and fully man. As God, then, he is perfectly good and holy. As man, although he has a human will, he never stops being God. So his will is always aligned with the will of God the Father."
@ed2funny4 He didnt have a sinless mother, the bible states that ALL have sinned. sinless mary is a catholic tradition only, not biblical. all mankind including mary sinned. she even stated she needed a Saviour.
@rusda2 Thirdly, there are exceptions to Romans 3:23, which you quoted. The most important two we know are Jesus and Mary (New Adam and New Eve) and others such as infants who cannot sin since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. I ask you to watch my featured video regarding Mary, which is based on scripture, if you haven’t done so yet.
@ed2funny4 where does the bible say she was sinless? it doesnt. the "hail full of grace" argument is unbiblical and a twisting of scripture. so no, we don't KNOW that she was sinless. that just catholic speculation.
no you are wrong, we are sinners long before we know it (accountablility). just because i dont know something is a sin, does not mean i did not sin. it just means I dont know that what I am doing is wrong. but it's still a sinful behaviour.
This has been flagged as spam show
A quick note: be it right or wrong. Don't think that the sda are the only ones that think the RCC is of the beast - pope=antichrist. Most all the reformers do as well. Hundreds of yrs before there was a sda church. Some promulgate this at times, some don't talk about it, but it is in there creed-beliefs. But the sda do talk about it more than any other denomination, but don't get the idea sda originated this
The difference is sda believes Sunday is the mark of the beast were as others do not.
game11221 1 month ago
@game11221 actually SDA's believe that sunday WILL BE the mark when it is enforced by law making people keep sunday "holy" while forcing them to work on the Lord's Sabbath day. sunday keepers do not have the mark yet.
rusda2 4 days ago
@rusda2 ya i know
God Bless
game11221 3 days ago
@game11221 you too friend :)
rusda2 3 days ago
"being obedient to a man made church like RCC is not being obedient to Christ."
Honestly, if Seventh Day Adventism a manmade church, then none is.
Where in the bible does it state Sunday worship is the mark of Satan (or when such a law is passed - whichever the case)?
Where in scripture is EGW's "Investigative Judgment" described?
Did EGW state that Peter was responsible for Mary Magdalene sinning? Where does the bible say that?
Man made doctrine from a false prophet, and there's more.
182RG 1 month ago
1. @182RG if u are really interested in knowing if investigative judgment & mark of the beast teaching is true, then I can direct u to some videos that explain it. I can explain it but not in 60 seconds & not on this board. way too much to cover plus others can explain it more clearly than me.
but basically this: Jesus is bringing His reward with Him when He comes right? of course. so some form of judgement had to take place prior to His return correct? yes. it's not rocket science.
rusda2 1 month ago
2. @182RG bible identifies RCC as 1st beast/harrlot/antichrist...there is no speculation on this, it is irrefutable. RCC herself says sunday keeping is her "mark" of authority in ecclesiastical matters. she admits & BOASTS of it. in Rev 14:11-12 those who get the mark are contrasted with those who KEEP the commandments of God & faith of Jesus. Sabbath is the 4th commandment, not sunday. RCC boasts that she changed it (shall think to change times & laws).
rusda2 1 month ago
3. @182RG it is obvious from Rev 14: 11-12 that those who KEEP the commandments (& teach others to do so Mat 5:19) will NOT get the mark while those who break the least of the ten (pick one you think is least important) & teach others to do it Mat 5:19 WILL get the mark. it's as clear as God can make it.
your church/popes have been screaming for sunday laws for years just like EGW said they would. your current pope is calling for it. how much evidence does it take?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
Wouldn't you consider breaking the Sabbath by cooking or writing nearly least important? Do you do any on the Sabbath?
Planting, cooking, baking, scouring, laundering, sewing, writing (typing included), erasing, building, igniting a fire.
According to those given the Sabbath, each of these activities break it.
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG gotta go for a while now, my daughters birthday party :)
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
Don't eat too much cake and ice cream!
Please check the Vatican website for the full story on the pope endorsing evolution. It's not such a black and white concept as "pope believes in evolution".
182RG 1 month ago
@rusda2
May they have a happy birthday. Very important day for them (daughters).
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever Hi friend, thanks for the happy birthday wish for my daughter. I would have replied to you sooner but I just noticed it today, sorry.
rusda2 3 days ago
@rusda2 <<<bible identifies RCC as 1st beast/harrlot/antichrist...there is no speculation on this, it is irrefutable.
Oh puleeeze! That garbage has been refuted soundly.
And you've never answered WHY SDAs only observe Saturday Sabbath minimally, NOT according to Jewish law.
182RG 1 month ago
@rusda2
Jesus/God is omniscient, correct? Jesus said something like "I know my sheep and they know me".
I agree there will be a judgement, but as far as an "investigation"? God already knows everything; He needs to "investigate" nothing.
You're the person who says do not believe if it's not in the bible - So tell me, please, chapter and verse, where scripture states Sunday worship is the mark of Satan.
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG friend if you really are truly interested in anything but arguing I can give you links so you can at least understand what we teach. if not, then you are wasting your time & mine.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
Mostly I'm asking questions, and I thought you would be able to answer using scripture - not You Tube videos.
I would look a document or 2 showing what SDA believe, though, if you have them handy.
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG Right on. The Seventh Day Adventists – founded 1831 AD. Founded by a man, William Miller in New York. Based on his study of the prophecy of Daniel 8:14, Miller calculated that Jesus would return to earth sometime between 1843 and 1844. This prediction is in spite of the fact that the bible says that no one will be able to predict when the Second Coming of Jesus will be (Matthew 24:36). So William Miller is a MAN who MADE this church, therefore it is a man-made church.
avengedangel2002 1 month ago
@avengedangel2002 you just stated something totally false. see this is how these things get started and spread like wildfire. lies like this, even unintentional ones, cause a lot of trouble.
William Miller was was a BAPTIST, NOT a SDA & he NEVER became SDA. the church was founded in 1863, NOT 1831.
now lets talk about your current and last pope...why did/do they believe in evolution?
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"this is how these things get started and spread like wildfire. lies like this, even unintentional ones, cause a lot of trouble."
Interesting how you are getting defensive when @avengedangel2002 states something that you say is not correct concerning the SDA. Do you believe he is not behaving in a Christian manner?
"now lets talk about your current and last pope"
Sounds like you believe you can do this but no one else. Do you deny you are doing the same thing that you condemn?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2 ok, maybe what I posted is incorrect, if it truly is, my source wasn't reliable enough...so I ask you, who founded the SDA church, so I can rectify my mistake? I would truly like to know. This denomination sounds interesting, I would like to know more, although I will still remain a Roman Catholic. I would like to learn more about why my Protestant brothers believe what they do.
avengedangel2002 1 month ago
@avengedangel2002 the only problem is they were not organized until the era of the civil war, and the name wasn't chosen. Yet Jehovah's witlessness, and first day Adventists are what then? and the real question is So what? aren't all religions Man made? so is yours?
spoke777 4 days ago
@rusda2
"the problem comes when people make or buy images then bow down to them either in prayer or worship."
That is not what God said; that is how you interpret scripture. Other passages tell us God did not want us bowing infront of statues believing them to be a God.
"what is your question?" 2
Why do you claim Exodus 20:4 means something other than what Exodus 32:8 and Leviticus 19:4 tell us?
What makes your interpretation infallible and everyone who disagrees with you wrong?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago 4
@MrChristianBeliever read the commandment friend...it's very plain. do not BOW down to images.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"read the commandment friend...it's very plain. do not BOW down to images"
"what is your question?" 3
Why do you claim Exodus 20:4 means something other than what Exodus 32:8 and Leviticus 19:4 tell us?
What makes your interpretation infallible and everyone who disagrees with you wrong?
"I dont deny that God can do it. What i deny is the RCC tradition that says He did it. the bible says no such thing."
Why do you keep preaching things are not in scripture?
Then
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever Lev 19:4 Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods: I am the LORD your God.
it says exactly the same thing as Ex 20:4...if you make an image of "Jesus", is that not an image of a "god"? yes of course & a false one as well since nobody knows what God looks like & any image of Him man makes corrupts Him in their minds. so we would be bowing to a false image of "god" which is no god at all. hence "false gods". corruption.
rusda2 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever also, it would not matter if we knew exactly what God looked like and made an image of Him, it would still be idol worship if we bowed down to it because it is not God. so it doesnt matter if the idol is a perfect image of the true God or a perfect image of a false "god", the images are all false "gods" and are not to be bowed to which is worship of the image.
statues for art sake seem to be no problem except possibly misuse of God's money.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"it says exactly the same thing as Ex 20:4...if you make an image of "Jesus", is that not an image of a "god"?"
It doesn't say the same thing to me. It says the idols are God, not an image of God. Ex 32:28 says "...They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’ ...". I read this quite differently than you are reading it.
The CC does not say the idols are God and it condemns making that claim...
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
...When I read Exodus 26:1, Exodus 25:17-22, I see God commands the making of an idol. It does not make sense to me that God would command this if he meant what you believe he meant. There are other examples as well but as you said we cannot discuss them because we believe different things. So I must now ask:
Do you believe Christians, who believe what I believe and are guided by the HS according to you, are going to go to hell for believing God doesn't want us to worship idols?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever "What makes your interpretation infallible and everyone who disagrees with you wrong?"
I ask you the same...what makes the pope & RCC the infallible source? nothing in scripture thats for sure. catholic tradition only.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"I ask you the same...what makes the pope & RCC the infallible source?"
Fair enough but be notified that this is the first time you have asked this question to me and I have asked you many times without receiving an answer.
I believe Christ makes the Pope and all Bishops in union with him the infallible source because that is what I read in scripture. It also tells me the HS will guide his church but individuals and misinterpret scripture. I go to the CC when I am unsure ...
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
...because I know I can interpret it in error. The CC is a source for me to check my understanding. I place my faith in Jesus to guide his church correctly so that I will never misunderstand what he wants me to know. I believe individuals cannot hear the HS when their hearts become hardened. I believe it is almost a miracle to get an entire council to agree on anything unless they were guided by the HS; and the CC councils always come to agreement on faith and morals.
Your turn.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"nothing in scripture thats for sure. catholic tradition only."
I disagree. I read that Christs church was built by him upon the apostles with Peter as the dispute resolver. I read the apostles have provided us a way to know which church is the visible church on Earth established by Christ.
This leads to another question: Are Christians who believe what I believe going to hell?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
You said "the RCC is "mother" of all harlots being babylon herself...she sits on 7 hills"
That is your opinion, not fact.
Jerusalem who rejected Christ and was subsequently burnt to death. In John’s prophetic vision the city of the “Whore” will be destroyed by fire and we know that Jerusalem was completely destroyed by fire in 70 a.d.,whereas Rome was only partially burned.
The Vatican Hills are not counted among the traditional Seven Hills (Seven hills of Rome-Wikipedia)
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
1.@MrChristianBeliever " It is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire area of Vatican State proper is now confined. By treaty with the Italian Government certain other properties apart from the Vatican State are considered as territorial parts of the state of Vatican City. Since the founding of the Church there by St. Peter, the city of Rome has been the center of Christendom... (continued next post)
rusda2 1 month ago
2.@MrChristianBeliever - "The city itself is the diocese of the pope as bishop of Rome." Source: The CATHOLIC Encyclopedia, edited by Robert C. Broderick, IMPRIMATUR of the Most Reverend William E. Cousins, Archbishop of Milwaukee, Nihil Obstat of the Reverend Richard J. Sklba, published by Thomas Nelson Publishers, copyright 1976, entry on Rome, pg. 529.
sorry I had to bring out the big guns but who holds more weight with you? a CATHOLIC encyclopedia with the IMPRIMATUR or wikipedia? :)
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
You said "she (CC) denies Jesus came in the flesh"
CCC463 Belief in the true Incarnation of the Son of God is the distinctive sign of Christian faith: "By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God." Such is the joyous conviction of the Church from her beginning whenever she sings "the mystery of our religion": "He was manifested in the flesh."
I just posted an authentic Catholic source, so yours is not.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever RCC says He had a sinless mother...we dont have that advantage...that would make His flesh different & unfallen...unlike ours.
no, your RCc "claims" Jesus came in the flesh...but it's a different flesh. they claim the pre fall nature of Adam but the bible says the seed of Abraham (fallen flesh).
If I'm wrong feel free to correct me.
rusda2 1 month ago
rusda2, I am just wondering, why you are part of the SDA Church, and not of another Denomination of Protestant like Lutheran, Episcopal, Presbyterian, or Calvinism, etc? Is there a certain reason?
avengedangel2002 1 month ago
@avengedangel2002 one very important reason is because most churches including those listed only keep the "9 commandments" when God gave 10. they are partial in the law. others, antinomians, do away with the law completely.
also most churches teach the pagan doctrine of a "god" who burns sinners forever for the sins of one 70 year lifetime...hitler was not as bad as these churches make God out to be.
there are many other reasons, but these are good examples.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"I just want you to realize that maybe you dont know as much as you think"
But I do know as much as I think. I knew the CC believed Mary never committed a personal sin even though I stated it did not out of haste.
Are we done with this one yet? Will you answer my questions now?
I have to go to work.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever well I actually dont believe you said it out of haste because you were much to slow to admit it. I believe you actually believed what you said. I am not saying this to be mean it's just what I saw in how you seemed to avoid the situation for a while.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
And just for the record, you bonechewer you :-) I saw MrChristian's post about Mary's sinlessness minutes after it was posted, and thought to myself "Humm, I know he knows better than that" as I've seen hundreds of his posts on other channels. And if wasn't such a time consuming hassle, I'd just about bet I could find one of his past posts defending Mary's sinlessness. Pax
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG
"I saw MrChristian's post about Mary's sinlessness minutes after it was posted, and thought to myself "Humm, I know he knows better than that...I'd just about bet I could find one of his past posts defending Mary's sinlessness. Pax"
Thank you my friend; I appreciate the vote of confidence.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever
Ya know, I was just thinking, I really wouldn't expect rusda to know about what goes on in our mass, especially the hymns sung on feast days such as the Annunciation. But if he had possibly ever heard of "Immaculate Mary", and was aware that every church going Catholic knows at least the first verse, he probably would have put 2 and 2 together.
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG the bible says nothing about an immaculate mary friend, it's just catholic tradition.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 <<<the bible says nothing about an immaculate mary
The bible also says nothing about any belief, custom, or tradition not specifically condoned or instructed within its pages being invalid or sinful. So your contention that things of that nature must be biblically based is self-disproving. Right?
Find what? Comment from MrC? Too much trouble - didn't even attempt to. But I also bet MrC knows and sings the hymn "Immaculate Mary", so he certainly knew what THAT meant.
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG no, what it means is I dont have to accept anything that is not taught in scripture. and immaculate mary is not taught anywhere in scripture. she said herself that she needed a Saviour. & the bible says all mankind has sinned. she is part of mankind. it's very clear.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2 <<<what it means is I dont have to accept anything that is not taught in scripture.
My first thought is that that isn't unreasonable. There are many things the Church teaches that are not required of us to believe. I think it's safe to say the church has no precise dogma on Purgatory, for example.
As far as Paul saying all have sinned - There are exceptions. Jesus, a part of mankind, certainly, but more than that, you don't suppose infants and small children have sinned, do you?
182RG 1 month ago
@rusda2
"what it means is I dont have to accept anything that is not taught in scripture."
Yet you believe and accept many things that are not in scripture. So why do you believe the things you believe such as scripture alone? And the bible says all mankind has sinned?
Babies haven't sinned, have they? Little children haven't sinned, have they? No! This is not an absolute. There are exceptions. What about John the Baptist? Did he sin?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"bible says all mankind has sinned. she is part of mankind. it's very clear."
No it doesn't. Babies haven't sinned, have they? Little children haven't sinned, have they? No! This is not an absolute. There are exceptions.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever was he able to find one?
rusda2 1 month ago
@182RG LOL...ok, were you able to find it?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
I can't even find things I myself posted! Often even if know which channel I posted them on!
Appreciate the info on Sunday worship.
Ever hear of a short book called Seventh-day Adventism Renounced. by D. M. Canright? A former SDA elder of 20+ years claimed right up to his death in the 40s that no SDA was able to refute his 2 or 3 short chapters biblically proving Saturday Sabbath was an erroneous belief. It's on the internet somewhere now.
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG hey no problem, hope it helped. yes I have read some of it but it's really a ignorant book. I felt very sorry for canright after reading some about his history. his personal story is pathetic & tragic.
His arguments have been refuted so many times it's not funny. they were no more than the common arguments of the day and are still used today and are still refuted easily.
If you want to read a SDA book that destroys canrights it's called "in defense of the faith" by W.H. Branson
rusda2 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever well here we go again...I also can say that I do know as much as I think I do about RCC...so I guess we are at a standoff again eh? oh well. what good is this doing? you are not willing to see anything except what the RCC has taught you. when there is doubt about doctrine, you MUST take your churches word for it. so it it really you and the Holy Spirit Whom Jesus sent or is it some man/church telling u what to believe. I could never accept RCC with it's bloody history.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"what good is this doing?"
Great question. Let me ask you the same thing for 10th time. What good is your video doing? I now you will not answer this one question because it will spawn a dozen or so additional questions that you will not be able to answer with anything but opinions.
If you think your video is doing good, then how can you ask me what what good is this doing?
"you are not willing to see anything except what the RCC has taught you."
Are you certain?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever my video is pointing out error in the catholic church...thats what it is for. of course you dont think its good because you dont like what it says. maybe I could have put it more "softly" or less in your face, but it still would have said the same thing.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"my video is pointing out error in the catholic church"
Your video has done no such thing. It only points out what you want to believe.
"you dont think its good because you dont like what it says."
No, I don't think it is good because it is a lie and scripture tells us that Christians don't promote strife which is all that you are doing.
"The city itself is the diocese of the pope as bishop of Rome"
What does that have to do with Jerusalem; the “Whore” that was burnt?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"when there is doubt about doctrine, you MUST take your churches word for it."
Are Christians not required to be obedient to Christ. They must take his word for it.
Atheists claim his word is contained in a fairy tale book so they won't take it because men wrote it. Sounds a lot like what you just said.
If I want to stay Catholic, it is true that I must take the Church's word for it but not an individual priests word for it.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever being obedient to a man made church like RCC is not being obedient to Christ.
the RCC is filled with error, thats why I could not take it's word for anything. thats the difference between myself and catholics. we have different standards. catholic standards are church traditions & councils & commandments of men. my standard is scripture. therefore we cannot have a productive discussion. we are speaking of two different things.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"being obedient to a man made church like RCC is not being obedient to Christ."
It is you who claims the CC is man made. I believe it is Christ made. It is you who refuses to believe it. Your opinion has absolutely nothing to do with the truth. Does scripture tell you the CC is man made? When will your opinions stop and the truth start coming out of you?
"the RCC is filled with error"
You have not even mentioned a single error yet let alone many of them.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"catholic standards are church traditions & councils & commandments of men. my standard is scripture."
That is interesting. Scripture refers to the apostles (councils) teaching others and it tells us to hold fast to the traditions they teach us. Scripture never tells us that scripture is the only source for us to have as a standard.
So why do you believe your own traditions instead of scripture?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"we cannot have a productive discussion. we are speaking of two different things."
I suppose that is true. If you believe that scripture is the only source for us to know God, then you have created a new brand of Christianity that has only been around for 500 years and was not taught or believed for the first 1500 years since Christ.
You believe something that is not in scripture while claiming it is the only source of truth. Sounds to me like you believe what you want to.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"it it really you and the Holy Spirit Whom Jesus sent or is it some man/church telling u what to believe."
That is the question isn't it? I believe the Holy Spirit speaks to us individually and guides his church in all truth. It is not an either/or as you suggested. It is both as I see it.
Individuals can reject what the Holy Spirit tells them but the Church cannot as Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
Why so many different beliefs if this was not true
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever the bottom line for RCC is that if you have serious doubts about a belief you still must accept it if the church says so. that is not biblical. the church does not determine truth, the bible does and the church is to follow that truth.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"that is not biblical"
I disagree. If you deny what Christ's church teaches, you deny Christ himself. That is biblical.
"the church does not determine truth, the bible does and the church is to follow that truth."
The CC taught the NT before it published it. How could the CC teach untruth before it even published the NT. Your logic does not make sense.
The church does follow that truth. Scripture tells them to keep to the traditions they were taught and the CC does.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"I could never accept RCC with it's bloody history."
Sins of men is not a reason to reject Christ's church. You blame his church for the sins of those men. Atheists also blame religion for all of the problems in the world.
I hope you are aware that one of the many, many reasons for the crusades was because Protestants (especially Muslims) were making false statements about the church. Kind of like what you are doing. Imagine how things would have turned out if they never did that
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever what is your question?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"what is your question?"
I have many questions, not just one. I have posted many times. Do you need me to post them again?
"I also can say that I do know as much as I think I do about RCC"
Do you say that?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever all Im saying is that I post things 99% of the time which are catholics speaking & admitting what their church believes. what good would it do for me to post only what prots say about what cathies believe? it's more credible to let them speak for themselves.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"it's more credible to let them speak for themselves."
How can a person be Catholic if they do not believe what the CC teaches? Being Catholic means you believe what the CC teaches.
"the bottom line for RCC is that if you have serious doubts about a belief you still must accept it if the church says so."
Again, only if I wish to remain Catholic; If I wish to be a heretic, I can disbelieve it, just like atheists can disbelieve in God.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever I am wondering...what happened to all your support cathies? there were 3 or 4 others at a time attacking me from every direction. one of them falsely accused me of deleting her comments and in typical cathy fashion she would not apologize when she found out she was wrong. she just made some conscience soothing comment about it being a "natural assumption" and let it go at that. no apology, no nothing. typical.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2 <<<what happened to all your support cathies
Oh, at least this one is still around. Sometimes it's best to let the hardest shelled antiCatholics alone and just include them in one's prayers, as only the Holy Spirit can possibly get thru to them.
But I am still waiting for you to answer if SDAs believe Sunday worship is the mark of Satan, and that all who deny the Jewish Saturday Sabbath, Catholics and nonCatholics alike, are damned.
182RG 1 month ago 3
1.@182RG we believe that when people shall be forced by law to keep the pagan sunday and forced as part of that law to work on the Holy Sabbath day, anyone who does so is breaking Gods law and will receive the mark of the beast. sunday is the mark that WILL BE enforced but no one has the mark now.
could you tell me where it says in scripture that the Sabbath is "jewish"? the sabbath was made holy at the end of creation week. no jews existed until about 2500 years later.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
Did the SDAs modify their belief? This, from J White THE PRESENT TRUTH.
VOL. 1 #9 l
"WHAT IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST?
This mark is very conspicuous, in the forehead or hand, and signifies
not a literal mark, but a prominent profession, that all may see and know.
It is the mark of the beast; therefore it is a prominent point of religious
faith introduced by the Papal power, which is the observance of the first day
of the week as a holy day of rest instead of the seventh."
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG
Pertaining to the prior quote: I hate it when anticatholics cut and paste from antiCath websites, so I don't usually do it.
I searched out that quote myself.
It can be found at X spaces and ()s
w ww(.)google(.)c om/u rl?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=w eb&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&ur l=ht tp%3A%2F%2Ftemcat(.)c om%2FL-1-adv-pioneer-lib%2FMisc-Authors%2FEARLY-Facsimiles(.)pdf&ei=cLkkT67jLeLniAL97fz6Bw&usg=AFQjCNH1sTxWkD1DPNu0lAnFJZ1o47GWEA
in a PDF file showing many issues of "THE PRESENT TRUTH"
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG what modification? I see nothing different.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
Maybe I misunderstood - I thought you were saying not until a law is passed requiring Sunday worship is it considered the mark of Satan. As I read what I posted, I don't think the writer mentioned anything about a law; just the simple act of participating in Sunday Sabbath is the mark. I'm going from memory, so correct me if I'm wrong.
182RG 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"we believe"
So @182RG was correct when he asked if you were a member of SDA? I did not realize that you placed your faith in men while condemning the CC for the same. Very interesting.
"I officially retract my previous statement that you did not admit wrong. you DID admit it, my mistake & apologies to you for not seeing it before."
I accept your apology.
"Im saying I post things catholics speaking & admitting what their church believes."
They do not represent the CC.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
2. @182RG I would be very careful what you refer to in that derogatory way as jewish because u are saved under a very "Jewish" covenant. God has only made a salvation cov with Jews Jer 31:31 & Heb 8:8. He NEVER made a salvation cov with gentiles. gentiles are ADOPTED & GRAFT into the new JEWISH cov by faith according to paul. Jesus said salvation is "of the Jews" for this very reason. New Cov is JEWISH & you cant be saved if you reject things you deem Jewish. sorry :)
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 <<<in that derogatory way as jewish
Nothing derogatory was said or meant. I have nothing against Jews at all. Sometimes we even sing Jewish hymns at mass.
The Jewish Sabbath is still honored today by Jews. But they do it as it's supposed to be done. SDAs do not. You pick the day they use, but that's about it. There are very specific activities that are forbidden, yet as far as I know, SDAs totally ignore them. No cooking, no fires, no writing... the list goes on. Why only part way?
182RG 1 month ago
@182RG again friend i ask you, where does the bible ever say, even once, that the Sabbath is Jewish?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
I mean Saturday Sabbath; which of course is Jewish. Recall Peter and Paul's discussion of holding Gentiles to Jewish law. And we see the early Christians meeting on Sunday in the bible, and read of Sunday "mass" in the Didache (Teachings of the Apostles) in circulation around the turn of the first century.
182RG 1 month ago
@rusda2
I have yet to hear you say you could be wrong even though I have said I could be wrong many times.
"thats not an admission of you personally being wrong, thats a quote from the council of trent."
Well, I see it as an admission. Why would I post something in contrast to what I said if it was not an admission? What do you think others believe?
Are you capable of being wrong about what the CC teaches?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever of course i am capable of being wrong about what RCC teaches...also capable of being wrong about what my own church teaches. I never said any different.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"of course i am capable of being wrong about what RCC teaches...also capable of being wrong about what my own church teaches. I never said any different"
That is all I wanted to hear. You gave the impression you believed differently.
"I actually dont believe you said it out of haste because you were much to slow to admit it"
Again I corrected myself by posting what was stated at Trent. That was not very long afterward.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever so do you go to a mass tonight? or sunday morning services?
rusda2 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever OK friend, I just found your trent quote and re-read it...I officially retract my previous statement that you did not admit wrong. you DID admit it, my mistake & apologies to you for not seeing it before.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"somehow you could never be wrong and I could never be right"
When have I once said I could never be wrong or you could never be right? Please show me the post where I said that.
I can definitately be wrong because I am only human. You have been right on many things but only one thing concerning what the CC believes as far as I can recall.
"we found out different did we not?"
You finally realized that but I said I could be wrong a very long time ago.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever any idea who keeps marking your messages as spam? Im getting kind of tired of trying to "unspam" them...lol :)
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"you say, referring to me, that "you spend most of your time on anti-Catholic sources"...& I have REPEATEDLY told you that my sources are 99% from catholic teachings."
And I have said people who claim to be Catholic but protest the CC have excommunicated themselves. They are not authentic Catholic sources. I posted this from an authentic Catholic source.
Your sources are not 99% Catholic. They are not even 1% Catholic. They are 0% Catholic if they conflict with authentic sources.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever if I am not mistaken (and you can correct me) a person can not excommunicate themselves.
but my sources were 100% catholic because I was right that RCC teaches a sinless mary.
you keep calling me a liar on this and thats not very nice.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"my sources were 100% catholic because I was right that RCC teaches a sinless mary."
A 0% Catholic source can correctly state what the CC teaches. Just because your sources said that one thing about what the CC believes about Mary not committing any sin does not make it an authentic or even Catholic source.
"my sources are 99% from catholic teachings"
You have posted great deal of incorrect information about what the CC teaches. How can that be from authentic Catholic source?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever you probably posted it here somewhere but with so many comments I cant find them....but did you have a question you wanted me to attempt to answer friend?
most of your messages are not showing up in my inbox I have to come here to search for them and it gets tedious to do.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 DAG! You have opened up a can of worms.
I have seen some verses misplace from time to time to justify teaching. But there are some that makes one think.
I watched Dr. W Martin debate a catholic priest I did find that interesting.
Such saved by works, Mary, purgatory, est... Somethings said you would say interesting, other things said you would say WHAT
Seems to me right or wrong much depends on the meaning of the keys - rock, if cc are wrong on this there whole system fails
game11221 1 month ago
@game11221 I guess Im pretty good at opening worm cans lol :) and u are correct and I firmly believe that the whole system fails miserably because...and think about this...have you ever noticed that they can never defend their position with scripture alon? it's always catechism, catechism, catechism. RCC standards and Christian standards are not the same, therefore we cannot have a good discussion b/c while we are quoting bible, they quote a man made book.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"have you ever noticed that they can never defend their position with scripture alon?"
I already have. You still have not answered my questions. Now you are begging for new questions. Why would anyone need to defend the CC teachings with scripture alone?
"RCC standards and Christian standards are not the same"
And what would be Christian standards? Do you define them?
"we cannot have a good discussion ... they quote a man made book."
You quote anti-Catholics. Your point?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
I am finding this debate extremely interesting
game11221 1 month ago
@game11221 mrchristianbeliever will not answer my question directly & honestly, he just keeps throwing more junk in the pot to stir up.
he said in an earlier post that RCC "never said mary was sinless". I then posted a quote from POPE BENEDICT in 2006 that said PLAINLY that mary was SINLESS. so I asked him who was right? him? or his pope/church? he realizes he has made a huge error and doesnt know his own RCC doctrines...& wont adimt his error. he needs to ask what else he may be wrong on.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"are you bingolly1 in disguise? you act just like him."
Very interesting. I do not know who that person is. Sounds like he believes what the CC teaches and scripture teaches. (1 Cor 1:10,Eph 4:4-6,Phil 2:2,1 Peter 3:8)
"you wont answer the question you just throw more junk into the soup pot."
I did answer the question with my comment on the Council of Trent.
"how hard is it for you to admit you made a mistake and confess it? thats what real christians do"
I did but you have not.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever No he does not agree with you, he agrees with me, the pope, the RCC & the vatican website that the RCC teaches mary was sinless. you say she wasnt and that the RCC "never said mary was sinless".
ok I am about thru fooling with you. you are very dishonest about this and wont answer my question. answer me, whos wrong, you or the pope/RCC? is mary sinless or not?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"you are very dishonest about this and wont answer my question."
I may have said the CC doesn't teach Mary was sinless but I corrected myself with my post from The Council of Trent. You are starting to sound like an angry atheist because I have not been dishonest. I did answer you question.
Its your turn. Start answering.
Do you deny that God can grant special privilege to some? (John 16:12).
Do you claim you know for certain that Mary committed sin during her life?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever "MAY" have said? lol...now u want to deny or cast doubt on if u said it or not? u did not correct anything. u tossed in more cathy goop in the pot to confuse & cover up ur error.
when u decide to admit publicly forum that y were wrong maybe we can continue our talks. u plainly said in public here that I was uneducated/ignorant/lying about RCC belief but turns I out I knew ur faith better than u. so what else might u be wrong about? we shall see.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
""MAY" have said? lol...now u want to deny or cast doubt on if u said it or not? u did not correct anything. u tossed in more cathy goop in the pot to confuse & cover up ur error."
Come on; you are being rediculous. I already told you I spoke in haste with regards to the church believing that Mary never sinned. You really want to chew this bone to death, don't you?
"u did not correct anything."
Let me fixed again right now so you can drop it.
I mistated what I wanted to state.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
1.@MrChristianBeliever "You really want to chew this bone to death, don't you?"...LOL :)
thats good...gotta remember that. although bones are already dead right? :)
no I really dont, just want to make a point for u & other cathies who think I dont know what I am talking about...that its possible for cathies to be wrong about what their church teaches. I have corrected cathies quite a few times & they will run away or go silent afterward. have to give u credit for sticking it out, very nice.
rusda2 1 month ago
2.@MrChristianBeliever just curious...when u say "mis stated" do u mean u actually believed mary was NOT sinless and were wrong, or u just made a mistake and something slipped out that you didnt actually believe?
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"when u say "mis stated" do u mean u actually believed mary was NOT sinless and were wrong, or u just made a mistake and something slipped out that you didnt actually believe?"
I mean something slipped out even though I know the CC believes Mary did not commit a sin.
"I dont think u learned ur lesson yet"
I posted something incorrectly in haste. I know many Catholics believe incorrect things about what the CC teaches. What other lesson might you be referring?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"u did not correct anything." 2
When I said the CC does not teach that Mary never sinned, I mis-spoke. The CC does believe that Mary never committed a sin. I was incorrect in making that statement.
Are you finished yet?
"when u decide to admit publicly forum that y were wrong maybe we can continue our talks."
I did but you want to gloat in my statements. I finally said something that was not correct and you won't drop it. Very interesting.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever I am not gloating friend. as I said this is just a lesson for u & cathies to be very sure before u speak saying what ur church believes and that I or other prots are wrong about what ur church believes because we may just be right & u may have to eat crow. I dont know if u like the taste of crow, but I for sure do not. thats why I try to get my info from catholic sources.
finally said something wrong? see what i mean...I dont think u learned ur lesson yet :)
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
" I for sure do not (like the taste of the crow). thats why I try to get my info from catholic sources."
So you post many things that the CC does not teach while saying it does teach those things? Why?
ie: "Catholics will tell you that the statue they worship is a representation of the God they worship" Time Interval 0:58 to 1:10
Ignorant Catholics might say this but the CC does not teach it. Why would you say this knowing the CC does not teach it?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever "So you post many things that the CC does not teach..." I dont do that, you just keep saying I do.
"Ignorant Catholics might say this but the CC does not teach it."
then please tell me where is the official teaching from the CCC about using images so i can read it myself.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"then please tell me where is the official teaching from the CCC about using images so i can read it myself."
Images? CCC2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it." The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone: ...
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
...Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.
CCC2130 In the OT, God ordained or permitted the making of images that pointed symbolically toward salvation by the incarnate Word: so it was with the bronze serpent, the ark of the covenant, and the cherubim.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever i accept your admission of error. I am finished. thats all I have to say about that...lol :)
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"i accept your admission of error. I am finished. thats all I have to say about that"
Thank God.
"if I am not mistaken (and you can correct me) a person can not excommunicate themselves."
I already posted it. Let me find it:
This canon is saying that once a person willingly...embraces a heresy, knowing it to be contrary to divine and Catholic faith...they are automatically excommunicated. No ecclesiastical act is necessary and no public notice.
It must be willful.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever "they are automatically excommunicated" very interesting.
it's strange because I have seen videos of people who say that it was alomost impossible for them to get out of the catholic church when they wanted to be removed from membership.
rusda2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"it's strange because I have seen videos of people who say that it was alomost impossible for them to get out of the catholic church"
They are not Catholics. They do not represent what the CC teaches. You have been deceieved by men. Why are you believing men while also pointing your finger at Catholics for doing the same thing?
Anyone can leave the CC at any time they want. Are you seriously trying to convince me otherwise? I am not a novice Catholic.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rusda2
"u plainly said in public here that I was uneducated/ignorant/lying about RCC belief"
I did not. I have no idea what your education is but I do know that your research on anti-Catholic web sites makes that knowledge incorrect concerning what the CC teaches. What the CC believes concerning Mary never committing a sin is the only thing you have correctly stated as far as I can recall.
It appears that everything else you stated is only your opinion, not fact.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever I meant uneducated in catholic beliefs, not education in general.
no everything I have stated was from catholic sources. and it would not make a bit of difference if it was from, as you term it, "anticatholic" sites. if what was quoted was accurate, and it was, the source makes no difference.
it's like me quoting you saying "the catholic church never said mary was sinless". it doesnt matter the source as long as it's what you really said.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"it would not make a bit of difference if it was from, as you term it, "anticatholic" sites. if what was quoted was accurate, and it was, the source makes no difference."
It does matter if what you post is not what the CC teaches as most of what you have posted and said in your video claims.
Are you really trying to justify your sources based on one of them making a single correct statement about what the CC believes?
Let us move on to the purpose of your video, shall we?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"turns I out I knew ur faith better than u"
No, it does not. As I said I incorrectly spoke in haste. I did not mean to post it. You are wrong.
"so what else might u be wrong about?"
How about you answer some of my questions for a change?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever sorry but I have to leave now...got to make the long trip to town for some errands. maybe we will discuss this later, I dont know.
anyway, i am not out for your skin like you think. I just want you to realize that maybe you dont know as much as you think. and maybe it's also possible that I just might know plenty thats true about your RCC even tho you dont think so.
rusda2 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever
1. no I dont deny that God can do it. What i deny is the RCC tradition that says He did it. the bible says no such thing.
2. yes i claim that for certain because mary herself said she needed a Saviour.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"i claim that for certain because mary herself said she needed a Saviour."
The CC teaches that Mary had a saviour. That is not an answer to my question. I asked how you can claim that Mary was not born immaculate. It is not in scripture which is your requirement to believe something is true.
The CC teaches that she was saved before she was born, so how can you claim she was not saved before she was born?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"I am about thru fooling with you"
I am surprised you have stuck it out this long. I ask some tough questions that you have been unable to answer with anything other than your opinion. Without being able to answer these most basic questions, you have explained to everyone on your video how little you know about the CC.
Its your choice to bail now.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever your questions are not hard my friend, they are mostly none issue & useless because most have to do with catholic traditions & not the word of God.
I'm not bailing, it's my video. you prove to me how it's wrong & I will remove it. prove to me that catholics do now bow to idols/images/statues.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"I'm not bailing, it's my video"
Glad to hear it. One of your posts gave me the impression you were bailing: "I am about thru fooling with you".
"prove to me that catholics do now bow to idols/images/statues"
I already have. Do you want to go through this again? Answer my questions and you will see my proof that Catholics do bow to idols/images/statues.
"now you are calling me a liar"
I did not call you a liar. Either you are ignorant or lying. Only you and God know, not me.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever So what about it man? is your pope & church right? or are you right? was mary sinless or not?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"one of you doesnt know what he's talking about. are you going to answer me honestly or are you going to continue posting gobbldy gook that doesnt answer the question?"
I already did! Are you going to answer me?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever when you publicly & clearly admit you were wrong, and what you were wrong about, like you publicly accused me of being wrong, then we can talk.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"You hammered me hard" 2
...Now that I have answered your questions; please answer mine. Who was Paul referring in Romans when he said "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."? Was he telling the Romans that ALL Jews fell short of the Gory of God?
If so, how do you know for certain?
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
"I dont care what prots/cathies believe if not supported by scripture."
Evidently you do since you think you can save them. Why preach strife if you don't care? What is the point?
"You hammered me hard on this telling me how ignorant I on Mary and CC teaching"
I did indeed and my hammering was not meant towards what you believe; rather your anger at the CC. I have posted what the CC teaches concerning Mary just as you wanted to hear and from an authentic CC source...
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever quit twisting my words. I do care about catholics & I dont hate them & have said as much many times.
why cant you just answer me? you say you have but you havent. you just keep tossing out more goop that does nothing toward a real answer.
you said: "CC NEVER said mary was sinless". then i posted a quote of your POPE Benny 16 on the OFFICIAL vatican website where he said she was INDEED sinless.
One of you is WRONG...it it YOU or Ratzinger/RCC? answer me.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2
"quit twisting my words. I do care about catholics & I dont hate them & have said as much many times."
Be specific. I have not twisted your words. I never said you don't care about Catholics. I even posted that you do care when you said you don't care.
"One of you is WRONG...it it YOU or Ratzinger/RCC? answer me."
Given that I posted the CC believes Mary did not commit a sin according to council of Trent; I did answer you and I acknowledged it.
Now answer my questions.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@rusda2
The Council of Trent expresses this conviction, affirming that no one "can avoid all sins, even venial sins, throughout his life, unless he is given a special privilege, as the Church holds with regard to the Blessed Virgin" (DS 1573).
Do you deny that God can grant special privilege to some? (John 16:12).
It's your turn to answer some questions instead of contstantly saying I claim the CC does not believe Mary committed any sins; when I posted otherwise.
MrChristianBeliever 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever you said: "I have posted what the CC teaches concerning Mary just as you wanted to hear and from an authentic CC source..."
well now you call the POPE & the VATICAN & your RCC a NON-authentic source? wow, thats incredible. how can you be loyal to a pope you think either lies or doesnt know what the RCC teaches? how can you say mary is NOT sinless when your pope says she is sinless?
rusda2 1 month ago
@MrChristianBeliever how can you get more authentic than the OFFICIAL writings of a POPE & the OFFICIAL VATICAN website?
rusda2 1 month ago
What I cannot understand is how anyone can believe that God the Father placed His only-begotten Son in the womb of a woman in sin (basically in the grip of the devil) and how anyone can believe that God would give His Son over to be raised and nurtured by a woman who had tendencies to sin. That is NOT a mother worthy of Christ and that is not the mother Christ created. This is my thought, however, if you are seeking answers based on scripture, I urge you to watch my featured video. God Bless.
ed2funny4 1 month ago
1. @ed2funny4 what I can't believe is how anyone can claim mary was sinless when bible says ALL have sinned. think about this:
the bible says Jesus is our example & that we should walk as He walked. how could He be our example if He had any advantages over us? if He had the advantage of a sinless mother which we do not? if He had the advantage of a "flesh" that is different than ours like RCC teaches? but He tells us not to sin when we are pulled toward it & He wasnt?
rusda2 1 month ago
2. @ed2funny4 we all know Jesus did not sin, but the bible says He was tempted in all points as we are so that He can be merciful & understanding High Priest. How could He understand if He could not be tempted by the pull of the flesh toward sin if He had different flesh than us because He was born of a sinless mother? see what I mean? the bible is plain He had our exact same flesh. He got tired. He got hungry. He felt pain, stress, disapointment etc. all without sin to show us with His...
rusda2 1 month ago
3. @ed2funny4 power that God can enable us to have victory over sin. again, if He had any advantage over us with a different flesh & sinless mother, His example to us is useless because we cannot hope for victory in our flesh.
rusda2 1 month ago
4. @ed2funny4 Hbr 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh...he also himself likewise took part of the same...2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God...2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 Firstly, it is not a difficult thing to grasp especially if you watched the featured video I recommended on my channel. Secondly, if you think His having a sinless Mother was an advantage, what about He HIMSELF being unable to sin? When we are told to walk the path of Christ it means that we must (with the help of His grace) live His virtues, deny ourselves, and take up our cross as He did.
ed2funny4 1 month ago
@ed2funny4 so you think He could not have chosen to sin? sin is a choice. thats hard for a lot of people to hear. they want to think that they have no choice. Adam and Eve were sinless...yet they CHOSE to sin.
the bible says Jesus suffered being tempted. His human flesh was the same as ours & subject to our weakness. yet He relied on His Father's power and had VICTORY in OUR FLESH. if you think there was no risk and danger for Him when He came here you are mistaken.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 Sir, are you denying that Jesus is perfect? Jesus is both God and Man and was like us in all things except sin (which He was unable to commit). Saying otherwise would call God imperfect, which is blasphemy. As for Mary, the featured video is displayed right on my channel. Just click my channel name. It should answer some of the questions you are inquiring about.
ed2funny4 1 month ago
@ed2funny4 friend, did I say that? no I did not say that. but He came here with our fleshly nature to prove to all that with God's power we can obey. of course He was perfect, He was sinless. but the fact remains He could have chosen to sin like Adam, Eve & fallen angels who were all sinless but chose to sin.
what you are saying is that Jesus did not have a free choice...thats ridiculous. I have seen your video before. very nicely put together I must say. what editing program do u use?
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 God is perfect. He can do nothing sinful. If such a thing were so, He would not be perfect then. He can neither decieve nor be decieved. "Sin is an offense against God, and God is the perfection of goodness and holiness. Jesus is fully God and fully man. As God, then, he is perfectly good and holy. As man, although he has a human will, he never stops being God. So his will is always aligned with the will of God the Father."
ed2funny4 1 month ago
@rusda2 Sorry, I didn't mean to sound as if the video were mine. It actually belongs to the user: GabiAfterHours.
ed2funny4 1 month ago
@ed2funny4 He didnt have a sinless mother, the bible states that ALL have sinned. sinless mary is a catholic tradition only, not biblical. all mankind including mary sinned. she even stated she needed a Saviour.
rusda2 1 month ago
@rusda2 Thirdly, there are exceptions to Romans 3:23, which you quoted. The most important two we know are Jesus and Mary (New Adam and New Eve) and others such as infants who cannot sin since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. I ask you to watch my featured video regarding Mary, which is based on scripture, if you haven’t done so yet.
ed2funny4 1 month ago
@ed2funny4 where does the bible say she was sinless? it doesnt. the "hail full of grace" argument is unbiblical and a twisting of scripture. so no, we don't KNOW that she was sinless. that just catholic speculation.
no you are wrong, we are sinners long before we know it (accountablility). just because i dont know something is a sin, does not mean i did not sin. it just means I dont know that what I am doing is wrong. but it's still a sinful behaviour.
rusda2 1 month ago
@ed2funny4 how long is the video? and PM me the link. if it's not too long I may watch it.
rusda2 1 month ago
Where's all this other name calling I read about?
SANxJONERO 1 month ago
Or just plain stupid like I said earlier.
SANxJONERO 1 month ago