Posted on 05/02/2015 12:50:12 PM PDT by RnMomof7
I just got back from Mass.
Why is it that half of the posting protestants don’t answer the question?
Because as it has been answered by them Scriture doesn’t require it.
That would be your personal protestant interpretation of Scripture, of course divinely inspired, just because your protestant.
AMDG
Btw you didn’t answer the auestion I posed: are you one of those protestants who stay at home and ‘church themselves’ today?
For the Greater Glory of God
Because that's the half that leans towards Proverbs 26:4.
“leans”
Does that mean that half have a ‘divinely inspired’ personal revelation that “leans” toward ‘churching themselves’.
Whereas the other half are ‘divinely inspired’ thru their own personal protestant interpretation to show up at the church of their faith and worship and give thanks just as their ancesters had for millennia?
There is only One Truth and He is not amused at all of the contradictory beliefs due to the personal protestant interpretations ‘divinely inspired of course’ that are diametrically opposed to each other - all in the name of Christ.
Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam
**I just got back from Mass.**
If eating the ‘mass’ gives eternal life, why does it need repeating. Does a dose of eternal life wear off?
PETER doesn’t seem to have been very forceful about it in Acts, or taught on it in his epistles. I’ll tell you what he DID make very clear:
-He commanded repentance, baptism in the name of JESUS for the remission of sins, and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.
-He saw to it that the three main groups of people, Jews (Acts 2), Samaritians (Acts 8), and Gentiles (Acts 10) were converted in that fashion. He saw to it the ‘keys’ were used in their conversion.
-He understood the Godhead perfectly, for he was taught by the Master. He understood that the ‘name’ in Matthew 28:19 is Jesus.
-He never used the phrase ‘God the Son’, only ‘Son of God’, just like the Master.
Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom and on the day of Pentecost he used them to unlock the door and the door was opened.
The only thing we know other than this that we could call first hand information is that Peter did preach to the Gentiles.
Peter was not out to make a reputation for himself he was to build on the cornerstone which is Jesus Christ, he was truly an unsung hero.
From what we read of John who was also a rock of faith did the same thing.
All of the authority the Catholic Church claim seems to have came from no one other than Paul.
you don’t meat the Mass you eat the EUCHARIST a word so ancient derives from the original first century koine Greek.
and Catholics eat the Eucharist because we are doing exactly what we were commanded to in John 6:35-58.
Now your own ‘divinely inspired’ personal protestant interpretation of those passages may make you think that they mean something other than what the Catholic Church has practiced for two millennia.
And maybe your ‘divine inspiration’ and personal protestant interpretation allows that you stay home and ‘church yourself’ today - well whatever floats your little protestant boat.
actually I try to attend morning Mass every day along with 30-40 others in our little Catholic church in the middle of nowhere, so that we can partake of the Eucharist daily.
Why do we do it?
Because we can and for The Greater Glory of God.
PS only a protestant would ever be conflicted about what a Catholic does - living rent free in the protestant mind for over 500 years.
Going to play catch with my sons, have a blessed day.
**you don’t meat the Mass you eat the EUCHARIST a word so ancient derives from the original first century koine Greek.**
I think that you know I meant the ‘eucharist’ when I said ‘mass’. So, does that entitle you to dodge the question, and also, what I said about Peter?
Glad you are spending time with your sons. God Bless.
Mary is dead, too,
It sure seems that way. They had rather trust Mary or dead people.
We notice that from the lack of Catholics responding on these threads. Oh wait...................ROFL
Could you point to the exact particular Scripture passage that states that Mary is dead?
This is again sounds just like your own ‘devinely inspired’ personal protestant interpretation of some passage or another.
Why does it matter that Catholics believe that Mary, Mother if God, was assumed into heaven?
Why is your protestant interpretation of Mary ‘more valid’ than the Catholic Church’s dogma?
By what authority do you claim that belief?
BTW, you may not be aware that Luther’s beliefs regarding Mary were never at variance with the Church, lots of other things just not his love for the Blessed Mother.
Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam
yes.
“It sure seems that way. They had rather trust Mary or dead people.”
Evidentially, you do not believe Scripture that says ‘they are not dead but alive in Christ’
Evidentially, you’re a protestant that doesnt believe what is directly spoken by Christ, but rather your own ‘divinely inspired’ personal interpretation of the words of Christ.
When Christ says they are ‘alive in Christ’ and you say they are ‘dead people’ - who are we to believe?
Wow do you protestants all believe they are all ‘dead people’?
AMDG
Do you believe that physically dead people acquire the attributes of God?
physically dead people acquire whatever attributes that God wishes them to have.
and for you to state otherwise must mean you are ‘divinely inspired’ to know the mind of God.
Is that a special power you get when you become protestant?
For the Greater Glory of God
Source????
Source????
Do you believe in God?
Just when does one of you faithful protestants step up and explain to this person what ‘the mind of God’ means and how it applies to her question?
Someone? Anyone?
Explain why ‘the Mind of God’ determines the attributes of ‘dead people’
Do it please
For the Greater Glory of God
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.