Christian Forums

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 06:33:58

Quote from: AVZ on Wed Jul 10, 2013 - 20:32:27

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Wed Jul 10, 2013 - 15:15:50
The Eucharist is unifying sacrament. 

The Church acknowledges Protestants as Christians, but separated Christians. They reject the truth of the Church, and so they would make the Eucharist vain.

The Bible gives a rather serious warning about mistreatment of the Eucharist, and it is simply something the Church is not going to mettle with:

"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord."(1 Corinthians 11:27)

Jesus never instituted the bread and wine as a token that one submits to the truth of the church.
The bread and wine are a token of remembrance of His suffering on the cross.
It is exactly that part that Catholics and Protestants have in common, yet the Catholic Church refuses to share this remembrance with those who believe the same.
Reason is the possibility that those who eat the bread and drink the sup in an unworthy manner are guilty of profanity to the body and blood of the Lord.

Yet, when it comes to a religion whose core teaching is profanity, plainly denies the suffering of Christ on the cross, who have absolutely no desire to eat the bread or drink the cup and who in fact condemn this practice, the Catholic Church acknowledges that they too are part of God's salvation.

Strange. You refuse to share your table with brothers, but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ.

Lol, it finally comes out: *the anti-Christ* 

It doesn't matter who it is, every Protestant itches to say it whenever they are frustrated with Catholics regardless of denying the status 'anti-Catholic'.

After all, it's in your churches treatises that the papacy is the son of perdition. I rather find it odd, with that and the flak they constantly pummel at the Church, why anyone would even begin to say the Church is unrighteous in not sharing the Eucharist.

In other words, if you all were registered Catholics, and felt that way about the Church, you would not only NOT receive communion but be excommunicated.

If you read my post correctly you will see that I call Islam the anti-Christ.
So sorry to disappoint you.

Quote from: AVZ on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 07:24:42

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 06:33:58

Quote from: AVZ on Wed Jul 10, 2013 - 20:32:27

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Wed Jul 10, 2013 - 15:15:50
The Eucharist is unifying sacrament. 

The Church acknowledges Protestants as Christians, but separated Christians. They reject the truth of the Church, and so they would make the Eucharist vain.

The Bible gives a rather serious warning about mistreatment of the Eucharist, and it is simply something the Church is not going to mettle with:

"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord."(1 Corinthians 11:27)

Jesus never instituted the bread and wine as a token that one submits to the truth of the church.
The bread and wine are a token of remembrance of His suffering on the cross.
It is exactly that part that Catholics and Protestants have in common, yet the Catholic Church refuses to share this remembrance with those who believe the same.
Reason is the possibility that those who eat the bread and drink the sup in an unworthy manner are guilty of profanity to the body and blood of the Lord.

Yet, when it comes to a religion whose core teaching is profanity, plainly denies the suffering of Christ on the cross, who have absolutely no desire to eat the bread or drink the cup and who in fact condemn this practice, the Catholic Church acknowledges that they too are part of God's salvation.

Strange. You refuse to share your table with brothers, but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ.

Lol, it finally comes out: *the anti-Christ* 

It doesn't matter who it is, every Protestant itches to say it whenever they are frustrated with Catholics regardless of denying the status 'anti-Catholic'.

After all, it's in your churches treatises that the papacy is the son of perdition. I rather find it odd, with that and the flak they constantly pummel at the Church, why anyone would even begin to say the Church is unrighteous in not sharing the Eucharist.

In other words, if you all were registered Catholics, and felt that way about the Church, you would not only NOT receive communion but be excommunicated.

If you read my post correctly you will see that I call Islam the anti-Christ.
So sorry to disappoint you.

What makes you think the Antichrist will come from Islam, because they have extremists against Christians?

Why not an actual false messiah from Judaism, when the Jews think theirs has come? Or maybe, he'll come right of Christianity itself, where there's never a shortage of false prophets.

You're a bit green on the subject.



Nevertheless, my point still stands. If one is by principle a heretic to the Church, why would share communion? They can't share communion with churches who declare the pope the son of perdition or that Catholics are idolaters. That's a desecration of the Eucharist by the Catholic interpretation.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 11:19:38
What makes you think the Antichrist will come from Islam, because they have extremists against Christians?

Why not an actual false messiah from Judaism, when the Jews think theirs has come? Or maybe, he'll come right of Christianity itself, where there's never a shortage of false prophets.

You're a bit green on the subject.



Nevertheless, my point still stands. If one is by principle a heretic to the Church, why would share communion? They can't share communion with churches who declare the pope the son of perdition or that Catholics are idolaters. That's a desecration of the Eucharist by the Catholic interpretation.

If you want me to go into apologetics on Islam, you can start a new tread. This tread is not about that.

Anyway, your point makes no sense.
By allowing the plan of salvation to Muslims, who do reject Christ as saviour, you are already desecrating the eucharist yourself.
That's why I say: You refuse to share your table with brothers (Protestants), but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ (Muslims).

Quote from: AVZ on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 13:27:51

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 11:19:38
What makes you think the Antichrist will come from Islam, because they have extremists against Christians?

Why not an actual false messiah from Judaism, when the Jews think theirs has come? Or maybe, he'll come right of Christianity itself, where there's never a shortage of false prophets.

You're a bit green on the subject.



Nevertheless, my point still stands. If one is by principle a heretic to the Church, why would share communion? They can't share communion with churches who declare the pope the son of perdition or that Catholics are idolaters. That's a desecration of the Eucharist by the Catholic interpretation.

If you want me to go into apologetics on Islam, you can start a new tread. This tread is not about that.

Anyway, your point makes no sense.
By allowing the plan of salvation to Muslims, who do reject Christ as saviour, you are already desecrating the eucharist yourself.
That's why I say: You refuse to share your table with brothers (Protestants), but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ (Muslims).

We don't share communion with Islam, they wouldn't do so anyhow -_-
And we don't call them Christians either. So what you are saying doesn't make any sense.

The Catholic Church is not in communion with them in any way, we just acknowledge that a person born and raised Muslim or Jewish shouldn't be doomed to Hell. They are not equatable to others against Christ, they otherwise believe in the same God.

You should become familiar with the different notions and theologies surrounding 'invincible ignorance' and how it contrasts with rightful judgement.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 15:57:31

Quote from: AVZ on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 13:27:51

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 11:19:38
What makes you think the Antichrist will come from Islam, because they have extremists against Christians?

Why not an actual false messiah from Judaism, when the Jews think theirs has come? Or maybe, he'll come right of Christianity itself, where there's never a shortage of false prophets.

You're a bit green on the subject.



Nevertheless, my point still stands. If one is by principle a heretic to the Church, why would share communion? They can't share communion with churches who declare the pope the son of perdition or that Catholics are idolaters. That's a desecration of the Eucharist by the Catholic interpretation.

If you want me to go into apologetics on Islam, you can start a new tread. This tread is not about that.

Anyway, your point makes no sense.
By allowing the plan of salvation to Muslims, who do reject Christ as saviour, you are already desecrating the eucharist yourself.
That's why I say: You refuse to share your table with brothers (Protestants), but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ (Muslims).

We don't share communion with Islam, they wouldn't do so anyhow -_-
And we don't call them Christians either. So what you are saying doesn't make any sense.

The Catholic Church is not in communion with them in any way, we just acknowledge that a person born and raised Muslim or Jewish shouldn't be doomed to Hell. They are not equatable to others against Christ, they otherwise believe in the same God.

You should become familiar with the different notions and theologies surrounding 'invincible ignorance' and how it contrasts with rightful judgement.

I know nothing about your so called invincible ignorance, but perhaps you are wearing the shoes your self.

And rightful judgment is Gods to make. What we can count on though is Gods infallible word.

It may surprise you that the Bible does not condemn us for our sins but for unbelief. It says that all will have opportunity to receive true saving salvation before the end comes.  Hell for anyone is already been determined in Gods word by the one verse that can set them free. God is not cruel but just. Today we have the opportunity to decide heaven or hell. 

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 15:57:31

Quote from: AVZ on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 13:27:51

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 11:19:38
What makes you think the Antichrist will come from Islam, because they have extremists against Christians?

Why not an actual false messiah from Judaism, when the Jews think theirs has come? Or maybe, he'll come right of Christianity itself, where there's never a shortage of false prophets.

You're a bit green on the subject.



Nevertheless, my point still stands. If one is by principle a heretic to the Church, why would share communion? They can't share communion with churches who declare the pope the son of perdition or that Catholics are idolaters. That's a desecration of the Eucharist by the Catholic interpretation.

If you want me to go into apologetics on Islam, you can start a new tread. This tread is not about that.

Anyway, your point makes no sense.
By allowing the plan of salvation to Muslims, who do reject Christ as saviour, you are already desecrating the eucharist yourself.
That's why I say: You refuse to share your table with brothers (Protestants), but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ (Muslims).

We don't share communion with Islam, they wouldn't do so anyhow -_-
And we don't call them Christians either. So what you are saying doesn't make any sense.

The Catholic Church is not in communion with them in any way, we just acknowledge that a person born and raised Muslim or Jewish shouldn't be doomed to Hell. They are not equatable to others against Christ, they otherwise believe in the same God.

You should become familiar with the different notions and theologies surrounding 'invincible ignorance' and how it contrasts with rightful judgement.

The Bible says:
I (Jesus) am the way the truth and the life.
No one comes to the Father except through the Son.
He who believes in his hart and professes with his mouth that Jesus is the Son of God, will have eternal life.

Contrary to what Jesus said, we now have the Catholic Church saying that if you believe in the Father, you are part of the plan of salvation.

Now have a look at what Islam says:
Jews and Christians are infidels and MUST convert to Islam or be killed.
Only Muslims will go to heaven.
Jesus is NOT the Son of God.
The most important person (prophet) is Mohammad.
The Bible is to be rejected in its complete.
Jesus did not die on the cross.
There is no Trinity...believing in the Trinity is heretic and punishable by death.
Jesus is a Muslim and will subject himself to Muhammad in the end days.
In the end times Jesus will return to earth and help persecute Jews and Christians.

Your escape to "invincible ignorance" in case of Islam holds no ground, because no Muslim is ignorant of the Jewish and Christian faith.
There are two holy books in Islam: the Quran and the Sunna.
The Quran are teachings directly from Allah, and the Sunna is a summary of the life and works of Muhammad.
The Sunna interprets Quran.
A Muslim must align his life with the life of Muhammad in order to be a good follower of Allah, and is therefore bound to believe, study and express the commands and teachings of the Sunna.

Muslims do not reject Jesus, they reject Jesus as the Son of God. In Islam Jesus is a central figure, but only as a prophet.
Especially the Sunna addresses the "false religion" of the Jews and Christians quite in detail. It also displays many horrific details of situations where Muhammad forces Christians to convert to Islam or else have them killed.

In other words, a Muslim is well aware of the teachings of Jewism and Christianity. The last thing he is, is "ignorant".

Lets back this up and compare it to what we believe:

We believe: 1 John 2:2-23 "Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also."

So CLEARLY is says, if you deny the Son...YOU CANNOT HAVE THE FATHER!
RCC 841 however claims exactly the opposite: You can have the Father, even if you deny the Son.

See what Islam says:
Sura 5:73 "They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them."

Sura 5:17 "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that God is Christ the son of Mary."

Sura 10:68 "They say: "God hath begotten a son!"—Glory be to Him! He is self-sufficient! His are all things in the heavens and on earth! No warrant have ye for this! Say ye about Allah what ye know not?"

Sura 19:88-92 "They said, "The Most Gracious has begotten a son"! You have uttered a gross blasphemy. The heavens are about to shatter, the earth is about to tear asunder, and the mountains are about to crumble. Because they claim that the Most Gracious has begotten a son. It is not befitting the Most Gracious that He should beget a son."

Sura 9:30 "The Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!"

Sura 4:157 "That they said (in boast", "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah"; but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not: Nay, Allah raised him up unto himself; and Allah is exalted in power, wise."


So this is the religion the Catholic Church says are in the plan of salvation.
The Apostle John calls them the anti-Christ.

Here we are: If you are a Protestant and wishes to share Holy Communion with a Catholic, the Catholic Church slaps away the hand because Protestants do not believe in the Eucharist.
However, if you are a Muslim and condemn the Eucharist, Holy Communion, Christ, the Cross and the resurrection...the Catholic Church gladly holds your hand and walks together with you into Paradise.

Quote from: AVZ on Sat Jul 13, 2013 - 00:03:57

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 15:57:31

Quote from: AVZ on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 13:27:51

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Fri Jul 12, 2013 - 11:19:38
What makes you think the Antichrist will come from Islam, because they have extremists against Christians?

Why not an actual false messiah from Judaism, when the Jews think theirs has come? Or maybe, he'll come right of Christianity itself, where there's never a shortage of false prophets.

You're a bit green on the subject.



Nevertheless, my point still stands. If one is by principle a heretic to the Church, why would share communion? They can't share communion with churches who declare the pope the son of perdition or that Catholics are idolaters. That's a desecration of the Eucharist by the Catholic interpretation.

If you want me to go into apologetics on Islam, you can start a new tread. This tread is not about that.

Anyway, your point makes no sense.
By allowing the plan of salvation to Muslims, who do reject Christ as saviour, you are already desecrating the eucharist yourself.
That's why I say: You refuse to share your table with brothers (Protestants), but are prepared to share eternity with the anti-Christ (Muslims).

We don't share communion with Islam, they wouldn't do so anyhow -_-
And we don't call them Christians either. So what you are saying doesn't make any sense.

The Catholic Church is not in communion with them in any way, we just acknowledge that a person born and raised Muslim or Jewish shouldn't be doomed to Hell. They are not equatable to others against Christ, they otherwise believe in the same God.

You should become familiar with the different notions and theologies surrounding 'invincible ignorance' and how it contrasts with rightful judgement.

The Bible says:
I (Jesus) am the way the truth and the life.
No one comes to the Father except through the Son.
He who believes in his hart and professes with his mouth that Jesus is the Son of God, will have eternal life.

Contrary to what Jesus said, we now have the Catholic Church saying that if you believe in the Father, you are part of the plan of salvation.

Now have a look at what Islam says:
Jews and Christians are infidels and MUST convert to Islam or be killed.
Only Muslims will go to heaven.
Jesus is NOT the Son of God.
The most important person (prophet) is Mohammad.
The Bible is to be rejected in its complete.
Jesus did not die on the cross.
There is no Trinity...believing in the Trinity is heretic and punishable by death.
Jesus is a Muslim and will subject himself to Muhammad in the end days.
In the end times Jesus will return to earth and help persecute Jews and Christians.

Your escape to "invincible ignorance" in case of Islam holds no ground, because no Muslim is ignorant of the Jewish and Christian faith.
There are two holy books in Islam: the Quran and the Sunna.
The Quran are teachings directly from Allah, and the Sunna is a summary of the life and works of Muhammad.
The Sunna interprets Quran.
A Muslim must align his life with the life of Muhammad in order to be a good follower of Allah, and is therefore bound to believe, study and express the commands and teachings of the Sunna.

Muslims do not reject Jesus, they reject Jesus as the Son of God. In Islam Jesus is a central figure, but only as a prophet.
Especially the Sunna addresses the "false religion" of the Jews and Christians quite in detail. It also displays many horrific details of situations where Muhammad forces Christians to convert to Islam or else have them killed.

In other words, a Muslim is well aware of the teachings of Jewism and Christianity. The last thing he is, is "ignorant".

Lets back this up and compare it to what we believe:

We believe: 1 John 2:2-23 "Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also."

So CLEARLY is says, if you deny the Son...YOU CANNOT HAVE THE FATHER!
RCC 841 however claims exactly the opposite: You can have the Father, even if you deny the Son.

See what Islam says:
Sura 5:73 "They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them."

Sura 5:17 "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that God is Christ the son of Mary."

Sura 10:68 "They say: "God hath begotten a son!"—Glory be to Him! He is self-sufficient! His are all things in the heavens and on earth! No warrant have ye for this! Say ye about Allah what ye know not?"

Sura 19:88-92 "They said, "The Most Gracious has begotten a son"! You have uttered a gross blasphemy. The heavens are about to shatter, the earth is about to tear asunder, and the mountains are about to crumble. Because they claim that the Most Gracious has begotten a son. It is not befitting the Most Gracious that He should beget a son."

Sura 9:30 "The Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!"

Sura 4:157 "That they said (in boast", "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah"; but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not: Nay, Allah raised him up unto himself; and Allah is exalted in power, wise."


So this is the religion the Catholic Church says are in the plan of salvation.
The Apostle John calls them the anti-Christ.

Here we are: If you are a Protestant and wishes to share Holy Communion with a Catholic, the Catholic Church slaps away the hand because Protestants do not believe in the Eucharist.
However, if you are a Muslim and condemn the Eucharist, Holy Communion, Christ, the Cross and the resurrection...the Catholic Church gladly holds your hand and walks together with you into Paradise.

The Church states that Protestants are guilty of material heresy. It pretty much means that your belief of Christ was learned through a corruption of theology and interpretation.

So what do you think they state of Muslims and Jews?
Seriously, you are just being ridiculous in saying that the Church holds them in higher esteem then Protestants. This is typically what anti-Catholics resort to doing- being ridiculous.

Drop that falsehood. You all don't get the Eucharist because you all dishonor the truth of the Church, not because the Church is trying to 'one up' you. Don't blame the Church for your transgressions, they are not going to trade truth for a false unity.


Invincible Ignorance 101:

If you were born in a Latin country, you would be as Catholic as ever. If you were born in the Middle East, you would be as Jewish or Muslim as ever.
You would have just as much a chance of becoming Christian as you, now, would become Judaic or Islamic. What are the odds of that?

Exactly. God would have you born to your own inevitable doom. Those who never heard of God go to Hell to, whether it be adult or infant.

That doesn't sound like the an ultimate grace from God, it doesn't even sound Christian. It sounds like corrupted theology via playing legal mathematics with scripture, which is what Protestantism basically is.

Legal fictions.

You can't be a Christian and an advocate of wrath. There is plenty wrong with the Protestant standing, for all that cherry-picking you do that conjure your beliefs, I'm sure you'd find a way to save your child from damnation in the event you ever lost one, thereby ruining the entire symphony of your standing.
It's easy to make claims which don't apply to you, in other words. It just goes to show the incompleteness that Protestantism is.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Sat Jul 13, 2013 - 04:01:26
The Church states that Protestants are guilty of material heresy. It pretty much means that your belief of Christ was learned through a corruption of theology and interpretation.

So what do you think they state of Muslims and Jews?
Seriously, you are just being ridiculous in saying that the Church holds them in higher esteem then Protestants. This is typically what anti-Catholics resort to doing- being ridiculous.

Drop that falsehood. You all don't get the Eucharist because you all dishonor the truth of the Church, not because the Church is trying to 'one up' you. Don't blame the Church for your transgressions, they are not going to trade truth for a false unity.


Invincible Ignorance 101:

If you were born in a Latin country, you would be as Catholic as ever. If you were born in the Middle East, you would be as Jewish or Muslim as ever.
You would have just as much a chance of becoming Christian as you, now, would become Judaic or Islamic. What are the odds of that?

Exactly. God would have you born to your own inevitable doom. Those who never heard of God go to Hell to, whether it be adult or infant.

That doesn't sound like the an ultimate grace from God, it doesn't even sound Christian. It sounds like corrupted theology via playing legal mathematics with scripture, which is what Protestantism basically is.

Legal fictions.

You can't be a Christian and an advocate of wrath. There is plenty wrong with the Protestant standing, for all that cherry-picking you do that conjure your beliefs, I'm sure you'd find a way to save your child from damnation in the event you ever lost one, thereby ruining the entire symphony of your standing.
It's easy to make claims which don't apply to you, in other words. It just goes to show the incompleteness that Protestantism is.

Really dumb proposal you are depositing.

Jesus told the Apostles to go out and preach the gospel to the Gentiles.
So the Apostles did. They went to countries where people were born under pagan doctrine.

Your proposal is that those pagans who heard the gospel and did not believe it (same as happens today with people in South America, Israel, Middle East etc) are excused by God because of heritage.

Well, I guess sending the Apostles out was kind of overkill then.
If Jesus really wanted all those people to go to heaven...He should have kept them ignorant.

QuoteThe Church states that Protestants are guilty of material heresy. It pretty much means that your belief of Christ was learned through a corruption of theology and interpretation.

So what happens when a Muslim dreams of Christ and converts to Christ, but does not join the Roman club, but reads Protestant bibles etc and dedicated teachers and prophets of Protestant teachings.

Lets clarify  about being of antichrist or being the antichrist. First the world in general is antichrist because they reject Christ to be sole savior of men. This can also be called the spirit of antichrist that exists in the world. This includes secular society  all religions and none religious people. It also includes false Christianity which claims to be of Christ but are really in opposition to Him by loving the world and follows man's intellect and secular humanism.
This is what is meant by that there are many antichrists in the world.  The spirit of antichrist is also known as the spirit of the world. In the book of Revelation it is known as Babylon. Which in three parts consists of religious, political, and monetary Babylon.  All this is the spirit of antichrist.
Islam is not invincibly ignorant as AVZ has already pointed out. They are antichrist meaning they are of the above mentioned.  Thee antichrist is a man who is of great political power whom the false church will embrace for they are of men who love the world and desire unity among religions and say they can have salvation even if they do not except Christ as Lord. This is antichrist and the spirit of antichrist in the world

Quote from: mclees8 on Sat Jul 13, 2013 - 20:35:39
Lets clarify  about being of antichrist or being the antichrist. First the world in general is antichrist because they reject Christ to be sole savior of men. This can also be called the spirit of antichrist that exists in the world. This includes secular society  all religions and none religious people. It also includes false Christianity which claims to be of Christ but are really in opposition to Him by loving the world and follows man's intellect and secular humanism.
This is what is meant by that there are many antichrists in the world.  The spirit of antichrist is also known as the spirit of the world. In the book of Revelation it is known as Babylon. Which in three parts consists of religious, political, and monetary Babylon.  All this is the spirit of antichrist.
Islam is not invincibly ignorant as AVZ has already pointed out. They are antichrist meaning they are of the above mentioned.  Thee antichrist is a man who is of great political power whom the false church will embrace for they are of men who love the world and desire unity among religions and say they can have salvation even if they do not except Christ as Lord. This is antichrist and the spirit of antichrist in the world

There are many people in this world who are anti Christ, but there is only one anti-Christ the person mentioned in Revelation.

Jesus said: "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
That means that also Satan is not aware when the day will come.
But Satan can, same as us, see the signs that lead to the end of days.
The only way for Satan to be prepared is to have an anti-Christ stashed away in every generation. And I think that is exactly what he is doing.
I believe that Satan has prepared a platform which provides an easy and fast rise of an anti-Christ and in my opinion that platform is Islam.

Islam is already an anti-Jewish and anti-Christian religion. It is both a religious and military power.
The agenda of Islam is openly preached: total annihilation of Israel and total religious domination.
It is relatively easy to make an anti-Christ rise from such an environment in which the basic ingredients of the end time prophesies are already present.

Quote from: AVZ on Sun Jul 14, 2013 - 07:11:39

Quote from: mclees8 on Sat Jul 13, 2013 - 20:35:39
Lets clarify  about being of antichrist or being the antichrist. First the world in general is antichrist because they reject Christ to be sole savior of men. This can also be called the spirit of antichrist that exists in the world. This includes secular society  all religions and none religious people. It also includes false Christianity which claims to be of Christ but are really in opposition to Him by loving the world and follows man's intellect and secular humanism.
This is what is meant by that there are many antichrists in the world.  The spirit of antichrist is also known as the spirit of the world. In the book of Revelation it is known as Babylon. Which in three parts consists of religious, political, and monetary Babylon.  All this is the spirit of antichrist.
Islam is not invincibly ignorant as AVZ has already pointed out. They are antichrist meaning they are of the above mentioned.  Thee antichrist is a man who is of great political power whom the false church will embrace for they are of men who love the world and desire unity among religions and say they can have salvation even if they do not except Christ as Lord. This is antichrist and the spirit of antichrist in the world

There are many people in this world who are anti Christ, but there is only one anti-Christ the person mentioned in Revelation.

Jesus said: "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
That means that also Satan is not aware when the day will come.
But Satan can, same as us, see the signs that lead to the end of days.
The only way for Satan to be prepared is to have an anti-Christ stashed away in every generation. And I think that is exactly what he is doing.
I believe that Satan has prepared a platform which provides an easy and fast rise of an anti-Christ and in my opinion that platform is Islam.

Islam is already an anti-Jewish and anti-Christian religion. It is both a religious and military power.
The agenda of Islam is openly preached: total annihilation of Israel and total religious domination.
It is relatively easy to make an anti-Christ rise from such an environment in which the basic ingredients of the end time prophesies are already present.

We agree on  lot AVZ but I do not believe that Islam will be his platform. His rise will be on a political platform, and  Both he and the false prophet will share  the same ideals. At least at first. The false prophet being the religious anchor for his climb to be world ruler. This ideal is religious unity between the three major religions of the world. He will be the worlds religious political messiah and I just cannot see this as an Islamic person. How ever we may be getting into another thread that would be moved to end times. My point in all this thought is this idea that this false prophet church is saying that one does not half to believe in Christ to be saved. Religions can be buddies all the way to heaven which is counter to Christ.

Hence this church that professes to be of Christ is  in fact antichrist. The command for Gods people is to come out of her.  POST HASTE!

Quote from: FireSword on Sat Jul 13, 2013 - 14:33:48

QuoteThe Church states that Protestants are guilty of material heresy. It pretty much means that your belief of Christ was learned through a corruption of theology and interpretation.

So what happens when a Muslim dreams of Christ and converts to Christ, but does not join the Roman club, but reads Protestant bibles etc and dedicated teachers and prophets of Protestant teachings.

You mean when they decide that Christianity appeals more to them then Islam?

Sorry if I don't take someone's word when they state they underwent a mystical vision. Christians decide to believe it because it ascertains their religion, endorsing what probably isn't true.

I wonder the amount of people who have switched to other religions from Christianity for the same alleged reason throughout the ages_
And people convert from Protestantism to Catholicism, and vice versa, relatively often. I guess the Devil pulls them out of your league, right?

It's not something you can really put up to debate, whatever the case.

Quote from: AVZ on Sat Jul 13, 2013 - 06:08:27
Really dumb proposal you are depositing.

Jesus told the Apostles to go out and preach the gospel to the Gentiles.
So the Apostles did. They went to countries where people were born under pagan doctrine.

Your proposal is that those pagans who heard the gospel and did not believe it (same as happens today with people in South America, Israel, Middle East etc) are excused by God because of heritage.

Well, I guess sending the Apostles out was kind of overkill then.
If Jesus really wanted all those people to go to heaven...He should have kept them ignorant.

What's really dumb is the fact that if a Muslim came to your door and tried to convert you, you would turn them away. Yet you tell others they are going to Hell if they don't convert to your beliefs.

That's what's *dumb*. Perhaps it is people who think that way who might receive a thing or two at judgement, ascertaining themselves by their own fated belief, harboring an image of destruction on others because they were fated not to be you.

There is no righteousness in that, there is righteousness in sending the wicked to Hell and the good to Heaven.
It is a self-evident fact. There is nothing more abysmal then listening to a Christian state that Hell is for the unbeliever. As if God saves the wicked and burns the wicked, saves the good and burns the good.

It's time to crawl out of your legal fictions.


It is why Protestant doctrine is false. I think for all the flak you all give the Church, you certainly don't stop to think about the absurdity of your own doctrines.

You need to reflect really hard on what is *dumb*. In fact, you need to learn to think for yourself a little and stop taking *dumb* people at their word. It's the *dumbest* thing among Protestantism in my opinion, people laboring under *dumb* notions without ever thinking about it. It's *dumbed* down Christianity, and that's why you think my intricacy on theology is *dumb*.

You all coming on here about a thread on bigotry, acting like bigots. I'm seriously just done with it.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 14:21:07

You need to reflect really hard on what is *dumb*. In fact, you need to learn to think for yourself a little and stop taking *dumb* people at their word. It's the *dumbest* thing among Protestantism in my opinion, people laboring under *dumb* notions without ever thinking about it. It's *dumbed* down Christianity, and that's why you think my intricacy on theology is *dumb*.

That is entirely inappropriate.  I might even think it was bigoted.

Quote from: Jimmy on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 14:36:47

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 14:21:07

You need to reflect really hard on what is *dumb*. In fact, you need to learn to think for yourself a little and stop taking *dumb* people at their word. It's the *dumbest* thing among Protestantism in my opinion, people laboring under *dumb* notions without ever thinking about it. It's *dumbed* down Christianity, and that's why you think my intricacy on theology is *dumb*.

That is entirely inappropriate.  I might even think it was bigoted.

What's entirely inappropriate is a Catholic subforum being ransacked with countless threads of anti-Catholicism, calling our beliefs pagan and our leader the Devil, and Protestants not knowing when to stop being bigoted on a thread PERTAINING TO BIGOTRY.

I don't see you speaking on any of that, I don't see ANYBODY speaking on that. But when something is put in you all's direction, you all want to get 'butt hurt' about it.

Well, you can just deal with it the same as Catholics have to deal with you all's constant nonsense.

What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Quote from: FireSword on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:05:31
What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Speaking on anti-Catholic bigotry is not inappropriate, it is the ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY that is inappropriate.

And blaming human behavior?

_will be something I'll be sure to use in court if I ever so unfortunately find myself there. Thanks for your sage knowledge -_-

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:50:51

Quote from: FireSword on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:05:31
What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Speaking on anti-Catholic bigotry is not inappropriate, it is the ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY that is inappropriate.

And blaming human behavior?

_will be something I'll be sure to use in court if I ever so unfortunately find myself there. Thanks for your sage knowledge -_-

I could agree we should be careful about how things are said. Comments should not be personal attacks. We are not going to see eye to eye here and apposition is what drives this forum. Everyone is a debater trying to flex his skills. Catholics should not jump at taking remarks to personal.  calling us bigots is not nice either. We just have different slants on the truth.

Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 17:09:38

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:50:51

Quote from: FireSword on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:05:31
What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Speaking on anti-Catholic bigotry is not inappropriate, it is the ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY that is inappropriate.

And blaming human behavior?

_will be something I'll be sure to use in court if I ever so unfortunately find myself there. Thanks for your sage knowledge -_-

I could agree we should be careful about how things are said. Comments should not be personal attacks. We are not going to see eye to eye here and apposition is what drives this forum. Everyone is a debater trying to flex his skills. Catholics should not jump at taking remarks to personal.  calling us bigots is not nice either. We just have different slants on the truth.

Calling the Church the seat of the Antichrist is pretty bigoted. It is due to bigotry, it is only by definitively anti-Catholic people which those old bones get dug back up.
The claim belongs in the 16th century the same as the claim of Jewish blood libel belongs in the 17th. They are falsehoods wrought by isolated issues in history.

Non-Catholics just don't understand what it is to be Catholic and listen to all that. When you call the pope or clergy sons of perdition, or imply some proverbial mischief of the church, it is equatable to me calling your church and your preacher, their sermons, your practices, and basically your very activity as a Christian void and corrupt.


Nobody ever tries to disrupt that bigotry, and so insofar as I lose my patience as I have today, you should ignore it like you do them. As such, that has not been the case, and so I've deduced plenty of implications which I'm not so sure I'm wrong on now that I've witnessed the entirety of this thread.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 19:17:57

Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 17:09:38

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:50:51

Quote from: FireSword on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:05:31
What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Speaking on anti-Catholic bigotry is not inappropriate, it is the ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY that is inappropriate.

And blaming human behavior?

_will be something I'll be sure to use in court if I ever so unfortunately find myself there. Thanks for your sage knowledge -_-

I could agree we should be careful about how things are said. Comments should not be personal attacks. We are not going to see eye to eye here and apposition is what drives this forum. Everyone is a debater trying to flex his skills. Catholics should not jump at taking remarks to personal.  calling us bigots is not nice either. We just have different slants on the truth.

Calling the Church the seat of the Antichrist is pretty bigoted. It is due to bigotry, it is only by definitively anti-Catholic people which those old bones get dug back up.
The claim belongs in the 16th century the same as the claim of Jewish blood libel belongs in the 17th. They are falsehoods wrought by isolated issues in history.

Non-Catholics just don't understand what it is to be Catholic and listen to all that. When you call the pope or clergy sons of perdition, or imply some proverbial mischief of the church, it is equatable to me calling your church and your preacher, their sermons, your practices, and basically your very activity as a Christian void and corrupt.


Nobody ever tries to disrupt that bigotry, and so insofar as I lose my patience as I have today, you should ignore it like you do them. As such, that has not been the case, and so I've deduced plenty of implications which I'm not so sure I'm wrong on now that I've witnessed the entirety of this thread.

In all the years on this board there are a few things I learned.

Firstly, everybody comes here to have a debate, and everybody would like to convince the other party that he or she is right.
And sometimes people get so worked up that they think things are said, which were not.
No one here has stated that the RCC is the seat of the anti-Christ, and I have not seen anyone calling the Pope or clergy "sons of perdition".

Secondly, Catholics are very quick to ascertain the role of the victim. Once a debate does not go the required direction, it is common for Catholics to call the opposition "anti-Catholic" who has the soul purpose to falsely accuse everything and anything Catholic.
Remarkably you do not see the Protestants calling the opposition "anti-Protestant", it is a term that is exclusively used by the Catholics on this board.
Objective observation however shows that none of the participants here are anti-Catholic, and none of them condemn ALL practices of the Catholic Church.
The points of discussion always return to just a handful of main disagreements, whilst common doctrine is hardly addressed for the plain and simple reason that agreeable doctrine makes bad fodder for debate.

Thirdly, participation in a debate is a choice you do not have to make if you don't want to.
If you do not like to be challenged...post your messages in the Catholic Safe House.
Fact is however that the Catholic Safe House is not only underutilized...its also boring.


Point is, we are all here for a reason, and that is to either knowingly invoke or participate in a debate between opposite parties that are outspoken in their opinions.
There is nothing else to expect but disagreement and sometimes fierce opposition.
So instead of playing the victim, you should pull up your pants and stop whining.
If you are not able to defend that what you believe in or the history of that what you believe in, then you should perhaps not participate in a debate.
If you are not capable to defend what you believe in; then perhaps you should refresh your knowledge on the topic, or alternatively consider that the other party is right and you are wrong.

Quote from: AVZ on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 06:12:00
No one here has stated that the RCC is the seat of the anti-Christ, and I have not seen anyone calling the Pope or clergy "sons of perdition".

Yes they have, and over the course of many threads. Maybe you know that and are trying to induce a falsehood, or maybe you're saying it's not a bigotry stated on this thread with the rest, neither would surprise me. The day you all actually take some accountability for your continuing transgressions, either that or others, will be quite the day.

Quote
Secondly, Catholics are very quick to ascertain the role of the victim. Once a debate does not go the required direction, it is common for Catholics to call the opposition "anti-Catholic" who has the soul purpose to falsely accuse everything and anything Catholic.
Remarkably you do not see the Protestants calling the opposition "anti-Protestant", it is a term that is exclusively used by the Catholics on this board.

Catholics ar enot quick to play the role of victim. Catholics are constantly attacked on here, you all see to it every single waking moment on this piece. Not one moment of respite can be wrought out of any discussion, every one gets turned into something absurd about the Church as soon as Catholics get 1 inch through the surface of a discussion.

If anybody plays victim, it is you all. I make one post exposing my loss of patience and now, like clockwork, you all come in multiples barraging me, making sweeping statements. You all just add insult to injury by doing that, and that is a fact- and so your defense on the matter means exactly squat to me.

Quote
If you are not capable to defend what you believe in; then perhaps you should refresh your knowledge on the topic, or alternatively consider that the other party is right and you are wrong.

I'm perfectly capable if defending my faith. I demonstrate it all the time. But it is returned with blindfolding, absurdity and bias- that is also a fact, and just like the above, your defense means squat to me. The only reason you all get away with the falsehoods you just stated is because you all are the majority and will vouch among each other those lies. 

It's completely asinine, you all need to harvest some self-respect and stop making yourselves look like religious nuts.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 19:17:57

Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 17:09:38

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:50:51

Quote from: FireSword on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:05:31
What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Speaking on anti-Catholic bigotry is not inappropriate, it is the ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY that is inappropriate.

And blaming human behavior?

_will be something I'll be sure to use in court if I ever so unfortunately find myself there. Thanks for your sage knowledge -_-

I could agree we should be careful about how things are said. Comments should not be personal attacks. We are not going to see eye to eye here and apposition is what drives this forum. Everyone is a debater trying to flex his skills. Catholics should not jump at taking remarks to personal.  calling us bigots is not nice either. We just have different slants on the truth.

Calling the Church the seat of the Antichrist is pretty bigoted. It is due to bigotry, it is only by definitively anti-Catholic people which those old bones get dug back up.
The claim belongs in the 16th century the same as the claim of Jewish blood libel belongs in the 17th. They are falsehoods wrought by isolated issues in history.

Non-Catholics just don't understand what it is to be Catholic and listen to all that. When you call the pope or clergy sons of perdition, or imply some proverbial mischief of the church, it is equatable to me calling your church and your preacher, their sermons, your practices, and basically your very activity as a Christian void and corrupt.


Nobody ever tries to disrupt that bigotry, and so insofar as I lose my patience as I have today, you should ignore it like you do them. As such, that has not been the case, and so I've deduced plenty of implications which I'm not so sure I'm wrong on now that I've witnessed the entirety of this thread.

I have harsh words for the RC authority. Sorry but I cannot but have only a strong disdain for them. Not that I hate men but what they are promoting. Any stand the apposes this order will be taken personal by Catholics, even though it is not about the laity, but what they teach laity. Its just going to be taken as bashing and bigotry. It just goes that way. Yet I cannot apologize for it nor stop telling the truth. There is such a thing as righteous anger, and anger is what I have for this teaching about other religions such as Islam or others saying that they do not have  to turn to Christ for their salvation which is an out right slap in the face to Christ who suffered the cross for us who believe. God the Father sets the standard for our salvation in John 3:16. Even though Jesus gave his life for all men that is not going to save the unbelieving world or any of its religions. So  this stand of the papacy is antichrist . It just cannot be vied as anything else.

Let me clarify my statement about antichrist. This is not to say they are antichrist but their stand is antichrist whether they see it that way or not.  Is the false prophet the antichrist? No but he walks hand and hand with him and therefore will be judged with him.  Gods people must leave this order and system that promotes antichrist.

Just like clockwork, and here was being told I was wrong_

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 10:29:37
Just like clockwork, and here was being told I was wrong_

Well Black my point was about personal attacks and demeaning comments against other Catholics
Im not making a personal attack on Catholics or you.  You only want to take it that way. Is it evil to tell the truth. Was Jesus evil to slam the hierarchy. was it wrong for John the Baptist to slam them. Jesus did say to obey them. but the day the papacy promotes antichrist it is time to leave. Of course you can be hard headed about it if you want, but know this, you will remember this day.

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 12:11:01

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 10:29:37
Just like clockwork, and here was being told I was wrong_

Well Black my point was about personal attacks and demeaning comments against other Catholics
Im not making a personal attack on Catholics or you.  You only want to take it that way. Is it evil to tell the truth. Was Jesus evil to slam the hierarchy. was it wrong for John the Baptist to slam them. Jesus did say to obey them. but the day the papacy promotes antichrist it is time to leave. Of course you can be hard headed about it if you want, but no this you will remember this day.

Your point is that you are anti-Catholic, I'm an idolater, and I should just deal with your comments because that's how you feel.

That is what all of you are saying. From this point on, don't swell your cheeks and pretend you all just got the rod when I have anything to say.

All I want is for you all to stop acting like religious nuts and expel more spiritual fruit. There is absolutely no reason for you to have to say ANYTHING of which you just stated in discussion or debate. That is an opinion put in place to draw lines and aggravate Catholics, nothing more and nothing less.

You all have no justification, so you all will take anything I say when you propel garbage on here- or I will personally highlight the hypocrisy each and every time.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:11:22

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 12:11:01

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 10:29:37
Just like clockwork, and here was being told I was wrong_

Well Black my point was about personal attacks and demeaning comments against other Catholics
Im not making a personal attack on Catholics or you.  You only want to take it that way. Is it evil to tell the truth. Was Jesus evil to slam the hierarchy. was it wrong for John the Baptist to slam them. Jesus did say to obey them. but the day the papacy promotes antichrist it is time to leave. Of course you can be hard headed about it if you want, but no this you will remember this day.

Your point is that you are anti-Catholic, I'm an idolater, and I should just deal with your comments because that's how you feel.

That is what all of you are saying. From this point on, don't swell your cheeks and pretend you all just got the rod when I have anything to say.

All I want is for you all to stop acting like religious nuts and expel more spiritual fruit. There is absolutely no reason for you to have to say ANYTHING of which you just stated in discussion or debate. That is an opinion put in place to draw lines and aggravate Catholics, nothing more and nothing less.

You all have no justification, so you all will take anything I say when you propel garbage on here- or I will personally highlight the hypocrisy each and every time.

Could you clarify that last comment?  I have no clue what you just said. I guess if we never opposed what you post we all could be buddies.  If we never spoke the real truth I'm sure that would please you.  Think ?

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:30:32

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:11:22

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 12:11:01

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 10:29:37
Just like clockwork, and here was being told I was wrong_

Well Black my point was about personal attacks and demeaning comments against other Catholics
Im not making a personal attack on Catholics or you.  You only want to take it that way. Is it evil to tell the truth. Was Jesus evil to slam the hierarchy. was it wrong for John the Baptist to slam them. Jesus did say to obey them. but the day the papacy promotes antichrist it is time to leave. Of course you can be hard headed about it if you want, but no this you will remember this day.

Your point is that you are anti-Catholic, I'm an idolater, and I should just deal with your comments because that's how you feel.

That is what all of you are saying. From this point on, don't swell your cheeks and pretend you all just got the rod when I have anything to say.

All I want is for you all to stop acting like religious nuts and expel more spiritual fruit. There is absolutely no reason for you to have to say ANYTHING of which you just stated in discussion or debate. That is an opinion put in place to draw lines and aggravate Catholics, nothing more and nothing less.

You all have no justification, so you all will take anything I say when you propel garbage on here- or I will personally highlight the hypocrisy each and every time.

Could you clarify that last comment?  I have no clue what you just said. I guess if we never opposed what you post we all could be buddies.  If we never spoke the real truth I'm sure that would please you.  Think ?

There is a difference between 'opposing' a belief and 'crusading' a belief. I'm fairly certain that the rules of this site strongly imply that crusading one's belief is equivalent to trolling.

You debate your belief against another, you don't simply go around baldly proclaiming what you believe to the the truth over others. Over half of Christendom in this wide world unanimously disagrees with you, and so it is pretty asinine in and of itself anyhow. Be a self-indulgent loudmouth on you all's own time, this is a place where such claims are put to the test, not in a cannon and shot at others. 

It would be one thing if it was uncommon, only happening every once in a while or perhaps in a heated discussion, but it's not. It's an everyday thing, fluent and frequent. And that is completely unnecessary and disrespectful.
We are not 'in your house', this is a place where we all gather. You all have no right to act that way.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:50:51

Quote from: FireSword on Mon Jul 15, 2013 - 16:05:31
What's inappropriate is this thread. You challenged us, then you expects us to remain quiet, what part of human behaviour you don't understand?

Speaking on anti-Catholic bigotry is not inappropriate, it is the ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY that is inappropriate.

And blaming human behavior?

_will be something I'll be sure to use in court if I ever so unfortunately find myself there. Thanks for your sage knowledge -_-

You're welcome. I believe in court they call it 'self defence'.

Quotebig·ot  (bgt)
n.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[French, from Old French.]

Word History:  Bigots may have more in common with God than one might think. Legend has it that Rollo, the first duke of Normandy, refused to kiss the foot of the French king Charles III, uttering the phrase bi got, his borrowing of the assumed Old English equivalent of our expression by God. Although this story is almost surely apocryphal, it is true that bigot was used by the French as a term of abuse for the Normans, but not in a religious sense. Later, however, the word, or very possibly a homonym, was used abusively in French for the Beguines, members of a Roman Catholic lay sisterhood. From the 15th century on Old French bigot meant "an excessively devoted or hypocritical person." Bigot is first recorded in English in 1598 with the sense "a superstitious hypocrite."

Got this from dictionary, am I wrong or is this suggesting that God is similar to bigots?
In that case I think it should not be allowed in a dictionary.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:44:54
There is a difference between 'opposing' a belief and 'crusading' a belief. I'm fairly certain that the rules of this site strongly imply that crusading one's belief is equivalent to trolling.

I am pretty sure that you can report these posts to the moderator, who will then remove it if it is not acceptable

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:44:54
You debate your belief against another, you don't simply go around baldly proclaiming what you believe to be the truth over others.

Really, there is no need to get all dramatic over this and besides haven't you been proclaiming that your truth is superior over other peoples truth yourself?
Just a few quotes from some of your posts:
- "Catholicism simply wins out and so others resort to proclaiming a holier-than-thou standing"
- "You (Protestants) all are literally self-proclaimed heretics against the apostolic churches"
- "In a way, that makes the Church superior with doctrine because it is heavily interpreted and sought out."

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:44:54
Over half of Christendom in this wide world unanimously disagrees with you, and so it is pretty asinine in and of itself anyhow.

At this moment there are about 1.2 billion Catholics in this world, and there are about 1.6 billion Muslims.
As we already know, RCC 841 acknowledges that Muslims too are taken up in the plan of salvation.

So, if this really is a democratic issue, then I suppose Catholics should hang their opinions in the willows and convert to Islam?
Seems to me that it must be pretty asinine to resist a religion that not only is part of salvation, but adores the same God and has the majority vote.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Tue Jul 16, 2013 - 16:44:54
Be a self-indulgent loudmouth on you all's own time, this is a place where such claims are put to the test, not in a cannon and shot at others

I wish that was true, but unfortunately it is not.
Catholics are not supposed to put their own claims to the test. If you believe the Catholic doctrine, you neither have the spiritual ability or authority to interpret matters of faith outside the framework of the Church.
You are allowed however to put claims of other people to the test, but here too your tests must result in an outcome pre-determined by Catholic doctrine or dogma.
The question arises though that if you are not given the spiritual ability or authority to interpret YOUR OWN matters of faith, what makes you think you have the ability and authority to interpret mine?

Anyway, any outcome that is not consistent with Catholic doctrine or dogma is by definition false, and since you are not authorized to accept or proclaim anything beyond the set boundaries, you yourself "violate" your own accusation: "you don't simply go around baldly proclaiming what you believe to be the truth over others".


As far as I can see you have two options, you either take some time off and cool down...or stick around, don't get your knickers in a twist and face the music.

This thread is about bigotry, and you few come on here proudly wearing that badge.

There's really nothing else to say, it speaks for itself.

You don't have to like Catholic belief, but you are bound by rules to respect Catholicism with decency. This is not Protestant.com, we shouldn't have to put up with you all's disrespectful biases, making cheap attacks and acting like bunch of nuts. On a thread such as this, you have an obligation to either not post or at the very least digress, not continue being an anti-Catholic plank. It just adds insult to injury, really.

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Wed Jul 17, 2013 - 08:52:51
This thread is about bigotry, and you few come on here proudly wearing that badge.

There's really nothing else to say, it speaks for itself.

You don't have to like Catholic belief, but you are bound by rules to respect Catholicism with decency. This is not Protestant.com, we shouldn't have to put up with you all's disrespectful biases, making cheap attacks and acting like bunch of nuts. On a thread such as this, you have an obligation to either not post or at the very least digress, not continue being an anti-Catholic plank. It just adds insult to injury, really.

With all due respect BS, about the decency part...were you not the guy that posted "Oh, blow it out your rear" in another thread?
And I remember something like "...you all want to get 'butt hurt' about it"

You have every right to demand decency and respect, but ehhh...would setting a good example perhaps help with that?

Quote from: AVZ on Wed Jul 17, 2013 - 09:27:54

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Wed Jul 17, 2013 - 08:52:51
This thread is about bigotry, and you few come on here proudly wearing that badge.

There's really nothing else to say, it speaks for itself.

You don't have to like Catholic belief, but you are bound by rules to respect Catholicism with decency. This is not Protestant.com, we shouldn't have to put up with you all's disrespectful biases, making cheap attacks and acting like bunch of nuts. On a thread such as this, you have an obligation to either not post or at the very least digress, not continue being an anti-Catholic plank. It just adds insult to injury, really.

With all due respect BS, about the decency part...were you not the guy that posted "Oh, blow it out your rear" in another thread?
And I remember something like "...you all want to get 'butt hurt' about it"

You have every right to demand decency and respect, but ehhh...would setting a good example perhaps help with that?

When trying to transfigure a subject relevant to molestation and greed, you cross the line. It's too much, it's a pure example of the anti-Catholic nonsense around here.

So yes, they can blow it out their rear, I'm pretty sure you can gather what I am calling their statements by that.

And also, getting butt hurt about it- don't be a hypocrite. As far as I can tell, it's been a long time coming that somebody point you all out on your nonsense.
The difference it that I can take responsibility, you all can't. You all have gotten so used to badgering Catholicism that you can't even deduce that it is trolling after a while. 

 

Quote from: AVZ on Wed Jul 17, 2013 - 09:27:54

Quote from: BlackSepulcher on Wed Jul 17, 2013 - 08:52:51
This thread is about bigotry, and you few come on here proudly wearing that badge.

There's really nothing else to say, it speaks for itself.

You don't have to like Catholic belief, but you are bound by rules to respect Catholicism with decency. This is not Protestant.com, we shouldn't have to put up with you all's disrespectful biases, making cheap attacks and acting like bunch of nuts. On a thread such as this, you have an obligation to either not post or at the very least digress, not continue being an anti-Catholic plank. It just adds insult to injury, really.

With all due respect BS, about the decency part...were you not the guy that posted "Oh, blow it out your rear" in another thread?
And I remember something like "...you all want to get 'butt hurt' about it"

You have every right to demand decency and respect, but ehhh...would setting a good example perhaps help with that?

Amen from a self indulgent bigoted loudmouth  and all the decent things to say to. Out of decency though I refrain from calling  black BS