The "How To" Show: How To Be Controversial Finished Version (Ep. 5)

Have you ever wanted to be really controversial by saying things that are way less Nutso McCrazyface than what everyone else is saying but didn't know how?

The "How To" Show is here to help.

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Lutheran
• Satire
• pope
• antichrist
• Michele Bachmann
• liberal
• secular
• media

[AnHonestChristian]

The hypocritical liberal media criticizes Roman Catholicism for the wrong reasons the majority of the time. They have a beef with the Lutheran view of the Papacy as Antichrist because this belief stems from a Biblical worldview.

[jdswiney]

@Mackay878 If she departed from the Lutheranism, was she really a Lutheran to start with? xD

[Ken1Lutheran]

and hardly had they given up murdering those who dissented when they proclaimed that the pope is infallible.

[Ken1Lutheran]

The issue is not whether a particular pope is personally the Antichrist. While some popes have acted very much like antichrists individually--Alexander VI, Leo X, Paul IV, and whores in the city with seven hills rode rather literally on the beast at the beginning of the 10th century--it is the office itself which is the office of Antichrist. If you settle theological arguments with the stake and rack, what are you? 1215-1834.

[cburton103]

@jgrig2 I suppose you have no answer that you're willing to give as to why historians recognize the Catholic Church as the first Christian Church but you don't. If your reason for not answering is because the actual history actually supports that the Catholic Church is the first Christian Church, then you're correct. Go ahead and accept the credit for realizing this :)

[mpalenik]

@jgrig2 It has a pretty literal meaning. But if you're doctrine is based solely on scripture, then it seems rather odd that you would have actual doctrine stating not only that a particular pope is the antichrist but that somehow being the antichrist is inherited through the office of the papacy. And yes, I have seen the biblical passages Lutherans quote that supposedly support this doctrine.

[cburton103]

@jgrig2 Well then it's truly a shame that the Catholic institution you attend isn't doing a better job of giving you an orthodox education. I have heard of some instances where this happens at Catholic institutions, and it frustrates me.

However, keep in mind that those are not the orthodox Catholic positions. You can find true Catholic theology in the Catechism and in the documents of the Church.

You didn't answer my question about why historians recognize the CC as the first Christian Church

[jgrig2]

@cburton103 I am a theological student at a Catholic Institution. Speaking about what I know.

[cburton103]

@jgrig2 I brought up homosexual clergy as an example of a discussion present within liberal Presbyterianism that isn't worth bringing up because it's not considered orthodox by many Presbyterians. My point is that I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and not clouding the conversation with peripheral topics, yet you're not extending the same courtesy to me.

[cburton103]

@jgrig2 The Catholic Church never says anything officially?? We have 2000 years of official Church documents. Also, whatever portion of the Church supports this theology you speak of must be small and becoming smaller, so I'm not sure why you focus on them. I can only conclude that your interest lies in defaming the Catholic Church and not in learning what she actually teaches.

You keep putting church in parentheses. Why do historians recognize the CC as the first Christian Church but you dont?

[jgrig2]

@cburton103 I never even brought up homosexual clergy, where on earth did that come from. my entire point is that there is no theological dogma in the modern Romanist ''church''. Everything is a matter of ''interpretation'' and this is due to Vatican II and Karl Rahner. The Catholic Church officially never says anything, there are bishops who don't believe Jesus actually rose bodily from the dead, but spiritually or some other crap like that.

[cburton103]

@jgrig2 You're all about the ad hominems. Try just sticking to the points, friend.

I'm not interested in discussing what theological points people privately espouse, whether its the pope or simply a layman. There is just simply too much to know and too much speculation there. You don't see me accusing you of condoning homosexual clergy, etc., do you? It's much more objective to discuss what the Church officially teaches. If you can find it in the Catechism, I'm open to discussing it.