C
Church_Militant
Guest
language, so brother was put in its place.Hey Tin DC,
That would more accurately be Aramaic not Arabic. Different languages.
- Status
That would more accurately be Aramaic not Arabic. Different languages.
T
Texan_in_DC
Guest
Allan 1972,
How many people are willing to throw out the story of the adulterous woman, the story that Jesus’ sweat was like blood during the Agony in the Garden, the story of the angel stirring the pool, or Christ’s appearance to Mary Magdelene?
Yet, why whould one accept deuterocanonical New Testament passages and accounts while rejecting deuterocanonical Old Testament passages and accounts?
If the Popes and the Church Councils got it wrong with the Old Testament, why would they get it right with the New Testament?
If bishops who could trace their consecration back to Peter and the Apostles were not infallible in their definitions, why should today’s Christians be so certain that THEY have the true canon of Scripture?
One could argue that Christians couldn’t be wrong on something so basic, and yet, historically speaking, if sola scriptura Christians are correct, the whole of Christendom MUST have been wrong for some period of time prior to Trent, for the whole Church admitted the deuterocanonical Old Testament books; everyone used them in liturgical worship during the several centuries leading up to Trent.
How do we know we aren’t still all wrong today, just as they were all wrong in that era?
Without an infallible teaching authority, there is simply no way to tell.
How many people are willing to throw out the story of the adulterous woman, the story that Jesus’ sweat was like blood during the Agony in the Garden, the story of the angel stirring the pool, or Christ’s appearance to Mary Magdelene?
Yet, why whould one accept deuterocanonical New Testament passages and accounts while rejecting deuterocanonical Old Testament passages and accounts?
If the Popes and the Church Councils got it wrong with the Old Testament, why would they get it right with the New Testament?
If bishops who could trace their consecration back to Peter and the Apostles were not infallible in their definitions, why should today’s Christians be so certain that THEY have the true canon of Scripture?
One could argue that Christians couldn’t be wrong on something so basic, and yet, historically speaking, if sola scriptura Christians are correct, the whole of Christendom MUST have been wrong for some period of time prior to Trent, for the whole Church admitted the deuterocanonical Old Testament books; everyone used them in liturgical worship during the several centuries leading up to Trent.
How do we know we aren’t still all wrong today, just as they were all wrong in that era?
Without an infallible teaching authority, there is simply no way to tell.
T
Texan_in_DC
Guest
**Not all uses of the word “brother” indicate two men with the same mother:
**
Deut 23:8 "You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land.
Neh 5:7 I took counsel with myself, and I brought charges against the nobles and the officials. I said to them, “You are exacting interest, each from his brother.” And I held a great assembly against them…
2 Kings 10:13-14 … Jehu met the kinsmen of Ahaziah king of Judah, and he said, “Who are you?” And they answered, “We are the kinsmen of Ahaziah, and we came down to visit the royal princes and the sons of the queen mother.” 14 He said, “Take them alive.” And they took them alive, and slew them at the pit of Beth-eked, forty-two persons, and he spared none of them.
The word translated here as “kinsmen” is the same word which is translated “brother” elsewhere.
Jer 34:9 that every one should set free his Hebrew slaves, male and female, so that no one should enslave a Jew, his brother.
2 Sam 1:26 I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; your love to me was wonderful…
1 Kings 9:11-13 and Hiram king of Tyre had supplied Solomon with cedar and cypress timber and gold, as much as he desired, King Solomon gave to Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee. 12 But when Hiram came from Tyre to see the cities which Solomon had given him, they did not please him. 13 Therefore he said, “What kind of cities are these which you have given me, my brother?” So they are called the land of Cabul to this day.
1 Kings 20:32 So they girded sackcloth on their loins, and put ropes on their heads, and went to the king of Israel and said, “Your servant Ben-hadad says, ‘Pray, let me live.’” And he said, “Does he still live? He is my brother.”
Amos 1:9 Thus says the Lord: "For three transgressions of Tyre, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because they delivered up a whole people to Edom, and did not remember the covenant of brotherhood.
Mk 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?"
Mt 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
Note that Christ isn’t called “a son of Mary,” but “the son of Mary,” nor is he called “a carpenter’s son” but "the carpenter’s son."
Mk 3:21 And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, “He is beside himself.”
**The word “brothers” above is translated “family.” In first-century Jewish society, a younger brother would NEVER presume to tell his older brother (especially his first-born older brother) or his father what to do. It was a violation of honor, respect, and conduct.
**
**
Deut 23:8 "You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land.
Neh 5:7 I took counsel with myself, and I brought charges against the nobles and the officials. I said to them, “You are exacting interest, each from his brother.” And I held a great assembly against them…
2 Kings 10:13-14 … Jehu met the kinsmen of Ahaziah king of Judah, and he said, “Who are you?” And they answered, “We are the kinsmen of Ahaziah, and we came down to visit the royal princes and the sons of the queen mother.” 14 He said, “Take them alive.” And they took them alive, and slew them at the pit of Beth-eked, forty-two persons, and he spared none of them.
The word translated here as “kinsmen” is the same word which is translated “brother” elsewhere.
Jer 34:9 that every one should set free his Hebrew slaves, male and female, so that no one should enslave a Jew, his brother.
2 Sam 1:26 I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; your love to me was wonderful…
1 Kings 9:11-13 and Hiram king of Tyre had supplied Solomon with cedar and cypress timber and gold, as much as he desired, King Solomon gave to Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee. 12 But when Hiram came from Tyre to see the cities which Solomon had given him, they did not please him. 13 Therefore he said, “What kind of cities are these which you have given me, my brother?” So they are called the land of Cabul to this day.
1 Kings 20:32 So they girded sackcloth on their loins, and put ropes on their heads, and went to the king of Israel and said, “Your servant Ben-hadad says, ‘Pray, let me live.’” And he said, “Does he still live? He is my brother.”
Amos 1:9 Thus says the Lord: "For three transgressions of Tyre, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because they delivered up a whole people to Edom, and did not remember the covenant of brotherhood.
Mk 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?"
Mt 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
Note that Christ isn’t called “a son of Mary,” but “the son of Mary,” nor is he called “a carpenter’s son” but "the carpenter’s son."
Mk 3:21 And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, “He is beside himself.”
**The word “brothers” above is translated “family.” In first-century Jewish society, a younger brother would NEVER presume to tell his older brother (especially his first-born older brother) or his father what to do. It was a violation of honor, respect, and conduct.
**
T
Texan_in_DC
Guest
**Additional evidence - the geneologies:
**
Mk 15:40 There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome,
Lk 6:15-16 and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, 16 and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.
Mt 10:2-3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;
Mt 27:56 among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.
Jn 19:25-27 So the soldiers did this. But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 27 Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.
**Mary Magdalen’s offspring: none apparent.
**
Mary, wife of Clopas’ (or Cleophas) offspring: James the younger, Joseph, and sons of Zebedee (Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25). James is called son of Alphaeus in Matthew 10:3, but Alphaeus and Clopas could be the same person, or the mother of James could have re-married. According to Hegesippus, Cleophas was the brother of Joseph, Mary’s husband, which would make James a first-cousin.
The Blessed Virgin Mary’s offspring: Jesus.
Also, note that Mary is given into the care of “the beloved disciple,” who is clearly not Mary’s son. This is not proper for a man whose mother has other sons - she would have been given into the care of a family member, not an unrelated person.
**The “until” argument:
**
Gen 8:5 And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
The waters diminished “until” the tenth month, but they kept diminishing even after that (or we would all be living on one square foot of land).
Mt 1:24-25 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.
**Neither does this imply that Joseph had relations with Mary after the birth of Jesus.
The first-born argument:
**
Ex 34:20 All the first-born of your sons you shall redeem. And none shall appear before me empty.
Does this mean the first-born son wouldn’t be redeemed until the second son was born? “First-born” means no more than it says. This son was born, and he was the first. It doesn’t imply a second.
**
Mk 15:40 There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome,
Lk 6:15-16 and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, 16 and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.
Mt 10:2-3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;
Mt 27:56 among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.
Jn 19:25-27 So the soldiers did this. But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 27 Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.
**Mary Magdalen’s offspring: none apparent.
**
Mary, wife of Clopas’ (or Cleophas) offspring: James the younger, Joseph, and sons of Zebedee (Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25). James is called son of Alphaeus in Matthew 10:3, but Alphaeus and Clopas could be the same person, or the mother of James could have re-married. According to Hegesippus, Cleophas was the brother of Joseph, Mary’s husband, which would make James a first-cousin.
The Blessed Virgin Mary’s offspring: Jesus.
Also, note that Mary is given into the care of “the beloved disciple,” who is clearly not Mary’s son. This is not proper for a man whose mother has other sons - she would have been given into the care of a family member, not an unrelated person.
**The “until” argument:
**
Gen 8:5 And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
The waters diminished “until” the tenth month, but they kept diminishing even after that (or we would all be living on one square foot of land).
Mt 1:24-25 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.
**Neither does this imply that Joseph had relations with Mary after the birth of Jesus.
The first-born argument:
**
Ex 34:20 All the first-born of your sons you shall redeem. And none shall appear before me empty.
Does this mean the first-born son wouldn’t be redeemed until the second son was born? “First-born” means no more than it says. This son was born, and he was the first. It doesn’t imply a second.
L
lak611
Guest
There is a great free MP3 that tells how this happened. It can be found here. biblechristiansociety.com/download/mp3/which_came_first_church_or_bible.mp3
A
Allan1972
Guest
I know the reason why Catholics like to call themselves priests sometimes. It is because they are trying to earn their salvation by works through “vain repititions” like the priests who made sacrifices. Jesus made the final sacrifice so their is no need for that. But carnal man still has the desire to try to gain salvation through repetitious acts. Sacrifices were repetitous also. They had spiritual meaning but they were repetitious.
For example, everyday I face different situations, and if I were to pray to God everyday, I would probably pray different prayers based on my feelings or situation. Catholics pray the same prayers all of time repeatedly, prescibed by someone else. If I pray to God, I pray whatever I want to pray. I don’t rely on anyone to tell me what to pray. Its random or original. Wouldn’t you think it means more to pray from your heart, than to pray what someone else gives you to pray? Otherwise you are just praying someone else’s prayer.
For example, everyday I face different situations, and if I were to pray to God everyday, I would probably pray different prayers based on my feelings or situation. Catholics pray the same prayers all of time repeatedly, prescibed by someone else. If I pray to God, I pray whatever I want to pray. I don’t rely on anyone to tell me what to pray. Its random or original. Wouldn’t you think it means more to pray from your heart, than to pray what someone else gives you to pray? Otherwise you are just praying someone else’s prayer.
L
LilyM
Guest
But you CAN’T read all that Jesus said and did - John himself says in his Gospel that he DIDN’T record everything Jesus said and did. There’s EIGHTEEN YEARS of his life - between 12 and 30 - that doesn’t get ONE single mention! So even if you read every word of the Bible you DON’T have the fullness of his perfect example to follow.
And where does it say in the scripture that scripture is the only thing you need?
When the Ethiopian asked Philip to teach him about Isaiah’s prophecy did Philip say ‘it’s all in there, read it yourself and you’ll be fine’. Of course not. As the Ethiopian rightly said ‘HOW can I understand unless it is explained to me’. By Philip’s teaching, not within the book itself. So if you don’t read other Christian writers then you really are lost.
M
MarkA16
Guest
Sorry to budge in. But why is it that one topic became a whole “all about Catholicism” thread? 
Meaning you came in and started asking questions here and there. Isn’t it suggested that you should take one subject at a time? I don’t think you’ll be getting anything out of this MESS
Just my 2 cents. Ciao!
Meaning you came in and started asking questions here and there. Isn’t it suggested that you should take one subject at a time? I don’t think you’ll be getting anything out of this MESS Just my 2 cents. Ciao!
L
lak611
Guest
I do too, and I am a Catholic.
I say my own prayers many times. The Catholic Church does not have any rules that say you must say certain prayers. Besides, do you pray the Psalms? I do, but they are not my own prayers. Most of them were written by King David.
L
Libertas
Guest
Thanks for misunderstanding Catholic prayers, you’re a riot.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
L
lak611
Guest
That is true. I mentioned the Book of Psalms, though, because most people who read the Bible usually pray the Psalms.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Yeah, and I was just trying to add to the fun, not disagree with you.
It seems Allan may have forgot about the Psalms and the hymns, though.
Don’t worry, there’s more info on some Anti-C web site. When he realizes he can’t respond to the psalms and hymns comments, he’ll just cut-n-paste something else.
I’ll bet it begins with, "Well, you know, while watching the Super Bowl with my friends, someone brought up the fact that Catholics do this.…
BTW, did I miss the part where he grew up Catholic, went to Catholic school, and almost became a priest, before he saw the light? I always love that one, but it lacks variety… spontanaiety… creativity.
Sorry, guys. I didn’t get much sleep last night. :yawn:
B
Brendan
Guest
How does your lexicon describe 1 Galatians
Paul says he saw “James, the Brother of the Lord”
Well there were only 2 Apostles named ‘James’, James the son of Alpheus and James the son of Zebedee.
Now James the Son of Zebedee was killed prior in Acts 12, so the only Apostle named ‘James’ that Paul could have seen was James the son of Alpheus.
So either one must hold that Mary commited Adultery with Alpheus, or that the term ‘brother’ describes a close relationship outside of direct fraternity.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Watch out, there. James, the brother of the Lord, is the Bishop of Jerusalem we read about in Acts. He’s neither of the Apostles. He’s thought to be a cousin of Jesus’, and was thought of as a very righteous man by both Jews and Christians.
When the Jewish High Priest had him executed ( I think around 67AD), both Jews and Christians alike criticized this action to Rome and Rome removed the High Priest from office
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
Actually, I think it would be safe to say that you don’t know anything about Catholics. After all, you tried to convince us that the “Hail Mary” was a hand motion. Now of course, when you were shown you were wrong, did you apologize for spreading your misinformation? No, you changed the subject, something you have done a lot in this thread.
When you misrepresent Catholicism without going through the effort to actually learn what the Catholic Church teaches, you are “Bearing False witness” which is a violation of one of the ten commandments. Now, if you cannot admit your mistakes, why should we listen to you.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
To my fellow Catholics,
I would not give any credit to Allan or if he is worth listening too.
Many of these Non-Catholic Christians like Allan, newbie, and believers believe many of the false assumption that they know the Catholic Church but they don’t. They have no authority at all.
These fallible men who claim to know the Bible, but they don’t.
They are the ignorant just as Peter’s stated in his Epistles regarding self interpreting Scripture.
*And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. And so also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this, as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. * --2 Peter 3:15-16
Men like newbie, believers, and Allan are ignorant of the teachings of the Catholic Church and will twist it to prove the Catholic Church is wrong.
So far they have not proven their case. They could not use to Scripture to refute our beliefs. Even if they did, they take it out of context.
If we use Scripture to defend our beliefs, they ignore our interpretation. These three Protestants are not worth it. They do mean well, but they refuse to listen.
I would not listen to them. These fallible men are not authoritive, nor do they have authority to know the Truth. Where else the Catholic Church, which Jesus Christ established 2,000 yrs ago remain strong to this day.
Who has more credit? The Church which defended the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ from the heresies like Arianism, Nectorianism, Gnosticisim, defined the Canon of Scripture, etc. I would go with the Church.
I would not give any credit to Allan or if he is worth listening too.
Many of these Non-Catholic Christians like Allan, newbie, and believers believe many of the false assumption that they know the Catholic Church but they don’t. They have no authority at all.
These fallible men who claim to know the Bible, but they don’t.
They are the ignorant just as Peter’s stated in his Epistles regarding self interpreting Scripture.
*And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. And so also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this, as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. * --2 Peter 3:15-16
Men like newbie, believers, and Allan are ignorant of the teachings of the Catholic Church and will twist it to prove the Catholic Church is wrong.
So far they have not proven their case. They could not use to Scripture to refute our beliefs. Even if they did, they take it out of context.
If we use Scripture to defend our beliefs, they ignore our interpretation. These three Protestants are not worth it. They do mean well, but they refuse to listen.
I would not listen to them. These fallible men are not authoritive, nor do they have authority to know the Truth. Where else the Catholic Church, which Jesus Christ established 2,000 yrs ago remain strong to this day.
Who has more credit? The Church which defended the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ from the heresies like Arianism, Nectorianism, Gnosticisim, defined the Canon of Scripture, etc. I would go with the Church.
T
Texan_in_DC
Guest
Allan 1972,
The bottom line is that we can show you in scripture why we do what we do, why we pray like we do, why we worship like we do, and the list just goes on and on.
We also fully understand why someone with your background might not fully understand or accept the things we Catholics do. When you take the entire body of christ (meaning his church) we Catholics stand out more than any other.
Our Church has not always done the popular thing, for example many catholics today support contraception but the Church will stand put and not walk away from God’s word. Up until the late 50’s I believe all christian churches had the same stance, but through popular trends things change.
If you take a look at most non denominational and or protesant churches today they are more like country clubs for christians than places of of worship. They spends 100’s of thousand dollars on speaker systems, lights and stages, In away they have turned the high dollar entertainment into false idols. Meaning things that take away from God.
Allan 1972 you came in to a Catholic Apologetic based community to learn our faith. I hope you the best, and I hope you explore the ins and outs of this website, it trully has a lot to offer. At no end are we asking or forcing you to accept our beliefs. But the truth is is in one way or another you are a catholic, you are one of us, even though you are not in full communion or acceptance of the Church.
For example if you believe that Jesus is God well sir you have a catholic belief, if you preach the message of the trinity and accept that God is three persons in one nature well then you have a Catholic belief.
I am willing to discuss any question you have but not in this form any more. If you have a specific question, concern or critique of one of our many beliefs, please by all means start a new thread with that as a title and we will discuss that one topic until all questions have been answered.
It is not fair for us Catholics to spend time on this thread anymore since we answer your questions and your off to the next question or concern with zero regard for backing up you last statement, this gets very very irratating, and through that, we sometimes get upset with this.
Your contined response to us that “thats just not very christian of you” is kinda silly Allan 1972. Because at the end of each day christians are sinners and are in need of God’s grace. I am sure there are a lot of good people out in the world that do not have a relationship with God, and a lot of bad people who pretend they do. When you claim well I am good christian you look at it from a very easy view, for example well the bible says thy shall not kill, and you look at yourself and say well I am not a murderer, then you see thy shall not steal, and you say well I am not a theif and so forth…
At the end, your intentions of this thread has holes in it, on one hand you say you are looking for the truth, but on the other hand you are hear to point out in your truth you already hold in your heart that well you are right and we are wrong. You have not accepted one thing we have said on this thread, if one is trully searching for the truth I would ask more questions on the topics I dont understand or get not instantly rebuke them and say we are wrong.
Oh and FYI
Because we are Catholic we are not even aloud to be on a baptist forum to defend the things they say in their forum, at least here you have an opportunity to see all sides of the apologetics.
The bottom line is that we can show you in scripture why we do what we do, why we pray like we do, why we worship like we do, and the list just goes on and on.
We also fully understand why someone with your background might not fully understand or accept the things we Catholics do. When you take the entire body of christ (meaning his church) we Catholics stand out more than any other.
Our Church has not always done the popular thing, for example many catholics today support contraception but the Church will stand put and not walk away from God’s word. Up until the late 50’s I believe all christian churches had the same stance, but through popular trends things change.
If you take a look at most non denominational and or protesant churches today they are more like country clubs for christians than places of of worship. They spends 100’s of thousand dollars on speaker systems, lights and stages, In away they have turned the high dollar entertainment into false idols. Meaning things that take away from God.
Allan 1972 you came in to a Catholic Apologetic based community to learn our faith. I hope you the best, and I hope you explore the ins and outs of this website, it trully has a lot to offer. At no end are we asking or forcing you to accept our beliefs. But the truth is is in one way or another you are a catholic, you are one of us, even though you are not in full communion or acceptance of the Church.
For example if you believe that Jesus is God well sir you have a catholic belief, if you preach the message of the trinity and accept that God is three persons in one nature well then you have a Catholic belief.
I am willing to discuss any question you have but not in this form any more. If you have a specific question, concern or critique of one of our many beliefs, please by all means start a new thread with that as a title and we will discuss that one topic until all questions have been answered.
It is not fair for us Catholics to spend time on this thread anymore since we answer your questions and your off to the next question or concern with zero regard for backing up you last statement, this gets very very irratating, and through that, we sometimes get upset with this.
Your contined response to us that “thats just not very christian of you” is kinda silly Allan 1972. Because at the end of each day christians are sinners and are in need of God’s grace. I am sure there are a lot of good people out in the world that do not have a relationship with God, and a lot of bad people who pretend they do. When you claim well I am good christian you look at it from a very easy view, for example well the bible says thy shall not kill, and you look at yourself and say well I am not a murderer, then you see thy shall not steal, and you say well I am not a theif and so forth…
At the end, your intentions of this thread has holes in it, on one hand you say you are looking for the truth, but on the other hand you are hear to point out in your truth you already hold in your heart that well you are right and we are wrong. You have not accepted one thing we have said on this thread, if one is trully searching for the truth I would ask more questions on the topics I dont understand or get not instantly rebuke them and say we are wrong.
Oh and FYI
Because we are Catholic we are not even aloud to be on a baptist forum to defend the things they say in their forum, at least here you have an opportunity to see all sides of the apologetics.
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
Sorry to budge in. But why is it that one topic became a whole “all about Catholicism” thread?
A very good point and so, having wandered all over the place and reached a communications impasse, this thread is now closed.Isn’t it suggested that you should take one subject at a time? I don’t think you’ll be getting anything out of this MESS
- Status