Another Priest Bites the Dust

Doctrine or Dogma? There have been very few dogmatic changes in the Catholic Church since the third, fourth, and fifth centuries. There have been plenty of doctrinal changes, but, then again, those are merely doctrinal changes.


Is not the doctrine as important as the dogma?
 
Since we gettin' all biblical up in hurrrr, I say we bring back stoning specifically for pedophiles. Stick your Wang in a little boy and your ass gets rocked...no pun intended.
 
After years of diligent study, that's my basic conclusion.

I think the good that comes from religion is actually not coming from the religion, but its members, who are inherently good among themselves.

I agree 100%

Church is big business.


Some Churches and some religions are big business. God isn't within 10 miles of them.
 
Debatable.

This is and has been debated. Most scholars adhere to the early writers. There are several scholars do adhere to later writers

1) Such councils would not be necessary if the original texts were not contradictory and ambiguous.

It benefits certain men and organizations to make changes to suite their needs. Religion is like politics. You have people that will blindly follow a specific religion as they follow a political party


2) So men since Christ are not subject to revelation?

never said that.
 
It benefits certain men and organizations to make changes to suite their needs. Religion is like politics. You have people that will blindly follow a specific religion as they follow a political party

Deflections. If Jesus was truly God, and those who wrote the Bible were truly there to experience it, there would not the amount of contradictions in the testimonies. They would be more unified and harmonious.

never said that.

Since revelations are nontransferable, one cannot validate any revelation as inherently better or more true than another. Thus, the original disciples are no more knowledgeable than the council or any other man who claim revelation.
 
Last edited:
It benefits certain men and organizations to make changes to suite their needs. Religion is like politics. You have people that will blindly follow a specific religion as they follow a political party

Deflections. If Jesus was truly God, and those who wrote the Bible were truly there to experience it, there would not the amount of contradictions in the testimonies. They would be more unified and harmonious.



Since revelations are nontransferable, one cannot validate any revelation as inherently better or more true than another. Thus, the original disciples are no more knowledgeable than the council or any other man who claim revelation.


An eternity in hell is a lot to risk. Ill pray for you
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
:
I think a lot of the "scandal" comes from the perception that priests are better than others in society. It is a faulty perception, and one that the Church would even say is faulty.

I equate it to the perception that individuals have of the military. They inherently honor soldiers and think of soldiers as a better class of human; thus, they either deny the wrongdoings of soldiers who they try to offer some rationalization for the wrongdoing in which the soldier is not actually at fault.

Priests are human. And, there is no fail-proof system to ensure that only good men become priests.


Agree on all of this.

I always fail to see why people put trust in people they do not know merely because of their occupation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Rare to find a Christian who doesn't worship a trinity. Good for you. :hi:

I do believe in the trinity.
I also believe the Father in the trinity is the God of Abraham.The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

I don't know of a Christian that doesn't worship the God of Abraham.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I do believe in the trinity.
I also believe the Father in the trinity is the God of Abraham.The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

I don't know of a Christian that doesn't worship the God of Abraham.

Abraham did not worship a trinity. Islam worships the God of Abraham. Jews worship the God of Abraham. Modern Christians do not.

All due respect Gramps, you can't be quick to call out the Catholic Church for what they get wrong and blindly ignore the rest.

Catholic Church admits the trinity was an adopted pagan teaching making it "christian". It was for political reasons. That's historical fact, not religious teaching. Protestant religions left the church over various unscriptural teachings but kept the teaching of the trinity.
 
Abraham did not worship a trinity. Islam worships the God of Abraham. Jews worship the God of Abraham. Modern Christians do not.

All due respect Gramps, you can't be quick to call out the Catholic Church for what they get wrong and blindly ignore the rest.

Catholic Church admits the trinity was an adopted pagan teaching making it "christian". It was for political reasons. That's historical fact, not religious teaching. Protestant religions left the church over various unscriptural teachings but kept the teaching of the trinity.


I have no earthy idea where you are getting your information.I must respectfully say you are wrong.

The God of Abraham is the Father listed in the Trinity in which Christians worship.

If your statement about the Catholic Church is correct that is another err by them. The trinity does have biblical backing.

I would suggest you read Matthew 28:19, John 15:26, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 1John 5:7
 
I have no earthy idea where you are getting your information.I must respectfully say you are wrong.

The God of Abraham is the Father listed in the Trinity in which Christians worship.

If your statement about the Catholic Church is correct that is another err by them. The trinity does have biblical backing.

I would suggest you read Matthew 28:19, John 15:26, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 1John 5:7

I just read all those texts. Plus cross referenced them with Strong's. No mention of a triune god Gramps.

My suggestion, instead of allowing a preacher tell you what you believe, go to a library and read some history books and make up your own mind.
 
I just read all those texts. Plus cross referenced them with Strong's. No mention of a triune god Gramps.

My suggestion, instead of allowing a preacher tell you what you believe, go to a library and read some history books and make up your own mind.

So what is your argument ? The apostles of the Old Testament didn't believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit?
 
Like I said I'll pray for you. The only one who is wagering their soul is you.

1) Your plea would be stronger if I knew I had a "soul".

2) Your plea would be stronger if I knew there was an afterlife.

3) Your plea would be stronger if I knew your God and his will.
 
I just read all those texts. Plus cross referenced them with Strong's. No mention of a triune god Gramps.

My suggestion, instead of allowing a preacher tell you what you believe, go to a library and read some history books and make up your own mind.

You do know the trinity is The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost?

Matthew 28:19

KJV: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

NAS: Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

NIV: herefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,


I study the Bible daily. I don't allow a preacher to tell me what I believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
So what is your argument ? The apostles of the Old Testament didn't believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit?

Apostles, as well as all Jews before, and after, reject the idea of 1+1+1=1.

Apostles worshipped the God that Jesus told them was greater.

Jesus died. God can not die. No beginning. No end.

If Jesus did not die, there's no sacrifice, no resurrection, worship is futile.
 
You do know the trinity is The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost?

I study the Bible daily. I don't allow a preacher to tell me what I believe.

The trinity is that all three are one. No scripture mentions that.

Studying the Bible is fantastic. Add some history books to it, it makes it come alive.

I recommend Flavius Josephus to start.
 
The trinity is that all three are one. No scripture mentions that.

Studying the Bible is fantastic. Add some history books to it, it makes it come alive.

I recommend Flavius Josephus to start.

Are you as dense as a door knob?

The word "trinity" is not found in the Bible. But this does not mean that the concept is not taught there. The word "bible" is not found in the Bible either, but we use it anyway. Likewise, the words "omniscience," which means "all knowing," "omnipotence," which means "all powerful," and "omnipresence," which means "present everywhere," are not found in the Bible either. But we use these words to describe the attributes of God. So, to say that the Trinity isn't true because the word isn't in the Bible is an invalid argument.

There is, apparently, a subordination within the Trinity in regard to order but not substance or essence. We can see that the Father is first, the Son is second, and the Holy Spirit is third. The Father is not begotten, but the Son is (John 3:16). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). The Father sent the Son (1 John 4:10). The Son and the Father send the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 15:26). The Father creates (Isaiah 44:24), the Son redeems (Gal. 3:13), and the Holy Spirit sanctifies (Rom. 15:16).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Are you as dense as a door knob?

The word "trinity" is not found in the Bible. But this does not mean that the concept is not taught there. The word "bible" is not found in the Bible either, but we use it anyway. Likewise, the words "omniscience," which means "all knowing," "omnipotence," which means "all powerful," and "omnipresence," which means "present everywhere," are not found in the Bible either. But we use these words to describe the attributes of God. So, to say that the Trinity isn't true because the word isn't in the Bible is an invalid argument.

There is, apparently, a subordination within the Trinity in regard to order but not substance or essence. We can see that the Father is first, the Son is second, and the Holy Spirit is third. The Father is not begotten, but the Son is (John 3:16). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). The Father sent the Son (1 John 4:10). The Son and the Father send the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 15:26). The Father creates (Isaiah 44:24), the Son redeems (Gal. 3:13), and the Holy Spirit sanctifies (Rom. 15:16).

Subordination of any kind invalidates the trinity.

The Father is almighty. That's what the apostles believed and continued to believe after Jesus' death, a death which is impossible if he were almighty god, and to stay dead for three days at that.
 
After years of diligent study, that's my basic conclusion.

I think the good that comes from religion is actually not coming from the religion, but its members, who are inherently good among themselves.

Church is big business.

Agreed. I've always said good people will be good, bad people will be bad. Religion has a way of making good people believe and act bad though.

That's not to say religion can't drive people to do good things they may not do otherwise, but taken as a whole, I don't think it is worth it, JMO. It tends to cloud issues, drive irrationality, and make socio-political problems worse than they should be.
 
Subordination of any kind invalidates the trinity.

The Father is almighty. That's what the apostles believed and continued to believe after Jesus' death, a death which is impossible if he were almighty god, and to stay dead for three days at that.

So you don't believe Jesus is the son of God?
He didn't die on the cross for our sins?
And he didn't resurrect ?
 
Advertisement





Back
Top