JW's came to my door today....

[Rightlydivide]

Uh, the Bible wasn’t assembled officially until 300+ years AFTER the death and resurrection of Jesus.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Absolutly not, I am poking fun at the absurdity of a literal and non metaphorical interpretation of the passage.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

I never said I was infallible, where did you get that from?
They taught about John 6 on Pentecost in 33 AD? Wow, I though most scholars thought it was more like 27 AD and I did not see anything in Acts that covers this topic…interesting, where did you get your information on what happened in…33 AD you said?

Uh, Mr Catholic Answer Man, St Paul’s letters (and some from Clement and others) are the earliest records of what was to be taught and believed as Jesus instructed the Apostles to do so (Apostolic Succession? You’ve heard of this, surely??)

The Church has never used Holy Scripture to be the how-to guide on how to be a Christian. That is a Protestant invention. In the 1500s no less.

Look to St Paul’s letters.

Of course you know which ones, you are, after all, Mr Catholic Answer Man.

Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

They are not scripture because the Catholic Church later conferred it on them, they were scripture the minute the words appeared, shall I quote the first Vatican Council for you?

Let’s have your quote, rightlydivide.

And if it were “scripture the minute the words appeared” (was this by magic, rightlydivide?) then what about the variations among the manuscripts?

Like the two endings to the Gospel of St Mark?

Robert

 

[Rightlydivide]

Uh, Mr Catholic Answer Man, St Paul’s letters (and some from Clement and others) are the earliest records of what was to be taught and believed as Jesus instructed the Apostles to do so (Apostolic Succession? You’ve heard of this, surely??)

Paul never had hands laid on him by anyone other than a simple disciple. He was not made an apostle by an apostle laying hands on him but by God alone. Clement…you mean…this?

The part where the local church gets to decide who is the leadership and not somebody from Rome?

“Those therefore who were appointed by them, or afterward by other men of repute with the consent of the whole Church,”

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

What you know is not much, friend.

Your arrogance belies your true nature here: you are trolling for ‘converts.’

You made the asinine comment about what the Church “may or may not have taught” me. Gee, if they taught me that then where is it, rightlydivide? That was the question (you can read, too, right?)

And if they did not teach me that (you KNOW so much) where is it so I can read it.

I gave you the Catechism as a resource. Of course you know nothing about the Church. All you think is that you ‘can be all things to all people’ in your twisted attempt to cull converts at CA.

Hit and run, rightlydivide, its you MO.

Go in peace.

Robert

 

[Rightlydivide]

Let’s have your quote, rightlydivide.

And if it were “scripture the minute the words appeared” (was this by magic, rightlydivide?) then what about the variations among the manuscripts?

Like the two endings to the Gospel of St Mark?

Robert

but because,
being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
they have God as their Author,
and were as such committed to the Church.

They have God as their author.

 

[Rightlydivide]

So I am arrogant and a troll…nice

You made the asinine comment about what the Church “may or may not have taught” me.

asinine…nice…

Gee, if they taught me that then where is it, rightlydivide? That was the question (you can read, too, right?)

And if they did not teach me that (you KNOW so much) where is it so I can read it.

I gave you the Catechism as a resource. Of course you know nothing about the Church. All you think is that you ‘can be all things to all people’ in your twisted attempt to cull converts at CA.

I know more than you so far anyone who is reading will see. As much as some people on here? Heavens no, but you, yes, I do.

Hit and run, rightlydivide, its you MO.

Go in peace.

Robert

Not running Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Paul never had hands laid on him by anyone other than a simple disciple. He was not made an apostle by an apostle laying hands on him but by God alone. Clement…you mean…this?

Look, now you are judging who is a “simple apostle” and who gets it “by God alone.”

Gee, it must be in your tradition, rightlydivide, which dates from…the 1500s I’m guessing.

Now, as to Rome. You might as well bring up Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria: the four original main Churches.

Which one has evolved and grown over the centuries? Even you can figure this out.

You’re beef is being told what to do by someone who might know more than you. That is where the ‘infallible’ charge comes from: you lecture us on what you think the Scripture says and ignore the history and development of the growing Church over the centuries.

Do you think we should go back to having our state Legislatures vote for the US Senators? Or denying women the right to vote?

After all, the Constitution didn’t say we could do this!

Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

They have God as their author.

As usual, you didn’t address my questions.

That’s your MO (hit with an arrogant statement condemning the Catholic Church and then run to another tangential remark)

This is the second time, do you understand now?

Rbt

 

[Rightlydivide]

No, that is what scripture teaches Robert

Gal 1:1 ¶ Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead

Gee, it must be in your tradition, rightlydivide, which dates from…the 1500s I’m guessing.

The Bible…see above quote.

Now, as to Rome. You might as well bring up Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria: the four original main Churches.

Which one has evolved and grown over the centuries? Even you can figure this out.

Pick your own arguments with the Orthodox, I have no dog in that fight

You’re beef is being told what to do by someone who might know more than you. That is where the ‘infallible’ charge comes from: you lecture us on what you think the Scripture says and ignore the history and development of the growing Church over the centuries.

I have not ignored history, I speak fluent history…

Do you think we should go back to having our state Legislatures vote for the US Senators? Or denying women the right to vote?

I hate political quizzes…is this from the Libertarian Worlds smallest quiz…anyway I vote no on both.

After all, the Constitution didn’t say we could do this!

Robert

I do not mix my constitution and my Bible usually, see Alan Keyes or Pat Buchannan for that please.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

So I am arrogant and a troll…nice

It’s nice when you put two contradictory statements in one post.

Hurt to be called arrogant and then “I know more than you so far anyone who is reading will see.”

I defer to you Infallibleness.

Robert

 

[Rightlydivide]

As usual, you didn’t address my questions.

That’s your MO (hit with an arrogant statement condemning the Catholic Church and then run to another tangential remark)

This is the second time, do you understand now?

Rbt

God is their author, it was not magic, it was God, what was your questiona again?
Oh yes, calling me arrogant again…nice.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Hurt…did you just say “hurt”
Put down the Air Supply CD’s man, you are not “hurting” me. And of course I am not arrogant and yes…I do know more than you about Catholicism…for what it is worth.
And…I am not infallible.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Paul never had hands laid on him by anyone other than a simple disciple

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Yes but scripture was scripture the minute is was written because God is the author of scripture…that is your beliefs Robert, that part I concur with. They are not scripture because the Catholic Church later conferred it on them, they were scripture the minute the words appeared, shall I quote the first Vatican Council for you?

To refresh your memory.

And I asked: give me the Vatican I quotation.

You hitteth and runneth away.

Robert

 

[Rightlydivide]

To refresh your memory.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Let’s have your quote, rightlydivide.

And if it were “scripture the minute the words appeared” (was this by magic, rightlydivide?) then what about the variations among the manuscripts?

Get organized.

This is the posting which you put the prior answer to, not the one I referenced again for you.

Holy Guacamole.

Robert

 

[Rightlydivide]

Get organized.

This is the posting which you put the prior answer to, not the one I referenced again for you.

Holy Guacamole.

Robert

So you want to talk about the ending of Mark? Ok…or text variances. I recognize the majority text as the stream which contains the inspired word of God. I believe the Alexandrian stream to be corrupt. I will also point out that the textual variances for Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and so forth are much greater than the text the underlies the Textus Receptus.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

So you want to talk about the ending of Mark? Ok…or text variances. I recognize the majority text as the stream which contains the inspired word of God. I believe the Alexandrian stream to be corrupt. I will also point out that the textual variances for Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and so forth are much greater than the text the underlies the Textus Receptus.

**
Where is the Vatican I quote for me?**

Quit the legerdemain on the manuscripts. Go read the Oxford Companion to the Bible entry (a good Protestant wrote it) and see what he says about your hallowed “Textus Receptus.”

It’s the post-Temple destruction, post-Resurrection Jewish assemblage of OT scrolls and codices into the TaNakh.

And the irony: Protestants think it is the ‘Jewish Scriptures’ Jesus quoted from.

Robert