hey I read everything man. definately.. you should know that. I may not always understand what someone was trying to say but i read it.
Oh I know. That's why I included that last part in there. I didn't want you, or anyone really, to think I was talking about them doing it. I think we're all guilty of it to a certain extent though. All of us usually feel pretty passionate about whatever we are discussing here on FSA, so it's only natural to sort of get more involved with our own argument & take the focus off of the other poster's points. Communication is a huge barrier in discussions & arguments especially. Five people could read the same message & all come away thinking it meant something different, with no idea how the other people interpreted it differently than themselves. It makes things really difficult when people aren't even on the same wave lengths to try & argue something.
i used to have lots of trouble with the golden rule. i would always do things that i wouldnt mind myself, but i was suprised to find other people hated. mostly because everyone else but me is petty and gets mad at everything, but thats beside the point. i changed my strategy so i can get along better with the peeps. i grew up reading it. but i realize there is alot to study there and you could read it for years, but no thanks. i really have no respect for the bible, and consider it to be third rate bull****. i always have a mile long queue of things to read anyways, and i dont think i can fit the bible in.
Whether you believe in Big Daddy or not, the bible should be read for the mere fact that it's the most influential book in human history...it's concepts and morals are ubiquitous.
I've read probably 50% of it. It's really boring (to me) & I can't bring myself to read it anymore. I read it a bit when I was still unsure about how I felt about God/Religion and was trying to make my mind up. I'm a lot more set now, so now when I read it I can't help but be condescending about it...
The Catholic faith is based on Scriptue and Tradition. Tradition is the basis for things like the Immaculate Conception, the Papal Infalability, and the Churches stance on contraception. Though Sacred Tradition is not in the Bible we know that the earliest Christians, the generations immediately following the Apostolic age beleived these things, and they are maintained by the Church. I never said Christianity existed befor the Church. I said the Church existed prior to the New Testament. Surely the Apostles were Christians on Pentacost even if they were not so named until Antioch. I mean hell, Catholic was not used to describe believers until the late 2nd century. Again, Tradition has nothing to do with Mosaic law. It is the things taught by the Apostles and their deciples that were not in the Bible. These things were maintained by Sacred Tradition First, the priests change wine into the blood of Christ, just as He did. They are follwing his instruction. And this is not a tradition it is plain jane instruction from the Bible. No there have been many miraculous healers in history, and it still are today. I know this. The Church does not teach this. Priests change wine into the blood of Christ, ala the last supper. You know do this in remembrance of me. I don't know where you get this, but its funny how you cling to it and keep repeating it and it has no basis in reality. Priests turn bread into the body of Christ and wine into his blood. This is just what he instructed the Apostles to do. The words Catholic and Pope didn't exist when the Bible was written, but the Church that did exist was the Catholic Church. It just wasn't named. Peter was the Pope, but the word didn't exist when the Bible was written. The institution of the position by Christ should be enough. Didn't cells exist before they were named. Or for that matter atoms. Something does not have to have a name to be real and operating. Well Peter is commissioned as the Pope right in the Bible. Matt 16 18:19. If the Church needed a leader at its onset, why would it not need one afterwards? Now you show me one Bible passage that supports sola scriptura. One verse that says the Bible is the stand alone sole rule of faith. ned by Christ. Show one verse that supports this. I was always taught that Christ was my ticket to Heaven, not the Bible. Remember the New Testament books were written to a partiular audience with a particular purpose. The teachings held by Tradition may not have fit the authors purpose. There is ample evidence to support that early Christians beleived these things. There is just too much here for me to answer. You should read up on your Spanish Inquisition. It wasn't nearly as bad as you seem to think. Far fewer were tortured or killed than in the protestant witch hunts. Were the protestants who killed and tortured supposed witches also not Christians? Did they also need to study their Bible. I will ask those questions if a priest ever tries to change water to wine. Since they do not do this now I doubt they will in the future. Maybe you should learn a little more about the Catholic faith before you try to pick it apart. You wrote three or four times that the church moves the miracle from the wedding at Cannae to the Lord's supper, and that os just nonsense. Its not true and a five minute read up would put that silly notion to bed. Where did it even come from?
LSUsupaFan wins the "Longest Post With Least Amount of Original Text" award.:hihi: Just kidding...all very good points, and I gotta agree with most of what you said.
