Posts by Ultra Sonic 007

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • HBO Prepares Another Corrupt-Pope Series

    09/09/2016 8:12:56 AM PDT · 13 of 14
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Romulus

    *coughBergogliocough*

  • A Debate Disaster Waiting to Happen

    09/09/2016 3:18:33 AM PDT · 22 of 74
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Jim Noble

    Don’t get your hopes up about the comments at the NYTimes. The vast majority are just as delusional, if not more so.

    All of the left-sympathizers believe Lauer was soft on Trump and harsh on Hillary.

    Seriously: another reality.

  • A Debate Disaster Waiting to Happen

    09/09/2016 2:57:40 AM PDT · 7 of 74
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Jim Noble

    Further evidence that the journalists of the Left live in an alternate reality, because this does not comport with what I saw on TV.

    I couldn’t believe that Lauer actually seemed indignant that Trump wouldn’t expound on his ISIS plans given the very logical decision of ‘unlike Obama, I’m not going to broadcast military plans on national television’.

  • Trump-Hillary Enthusiasm Gap Confounds the Experts

    08/23/2016 5:23:15 PM PDT · 18 of 74
    Ultra Sonic 007 to x
    Well, her husband IS Billy C.
  • TYLER DURDEN : Milwaukee Blacks Attack Whites Because "The Rich People Are Not Trying To Give Us No

    08/15/2016 5:30:48 AM PDT · 36 of 69
    Ultra Sonic 007 to DrPretorius

    Cameroon is relatively nice.

  • Mystery Science Theater 3000’s Joel Hodgson on the undying appeal of mocking bad movies

    08/06/2016 4:44:53 PM PDT · 38 of 38
    Ultra Sonic 007 to GraceG

    Do a search for Rifftrax. Nelson continued on to a similar venture with a wider availability of movies.

  • Don't Buy the Media Labels on Tim Kaine: 'Centrist' or 'Devout Catholic'

    07/23/2016 1:49:36 PM PDT · 32 of 54
    Ultra Sonic 007 to rawcatslyentist

    Catholics swear obedience to Christ and the Church He founded.

  • Will Most Baptized Christians Go To Heaven?

    07/23/2016 9:49:20 AM PDT · 38 of 154
    Ultra Sonic 007 to SkyPilot

    I think it’s important to keep in mind that although God has prescribed the use of Sacraments as channels for His Grace, God is not bound by them.

  • Will Most Baptized Christians Go To Heaven?

    07/23/2016 9:46:21 AM PDT · 36 of 154
    Ultra Sonic 007 to mountainlion

    Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, yes.

    But He also commanded his disciples to go forth and baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, he instructed them that they were to teach His words and His Word. “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”

  • Pence eats at Chili’s in NY, Twitter erupts

    07/17/2016 8:31:50 PM PDT · 74 of 113
    Ultra Sonic 007 to SamAdams76

    Okay, that is a good one.

  • Pence eats at Chili’s in NY, Twitter erupts

    07/17/2016 6:02:31 PM PDT · 27 of 113
    Ultra Sonic 007 to SamAdams76

    The ‘bad optics’ are outweighed by the stark elitism on display by those mocking Pence’s decision to eat at Chili’s.

  • EXCLUSIVE: 'Dump Trump' RNC Delegate Leader: We 'Have The 28 Votes' To Unbind Delegates

    07/10/2016 3:57:33 PM PDT · 129 of 443
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Pappy Smear

    The polls in 1980 all favored Carter against Reagan at this point in the race.

    Clearly, Reagan was doomed to fail against Carter. /s

  • What I've Learned: Jorge Ramos (On Donald Trump)

    07/06/2016 3:13:29 PM PDT · 1 of 33
    Ultra Sonic 007
    Apparently, Jorge thinks we have short memories of his encounter with Trump last year.
  • Obama warns poor nations will put planet ‘under water’ by using fossil fuels

    06/26/2016 9:16:52 PM PDT · 60 of 60
    Ultra Sonic 007 to PROCON

    Even if all the ice melted, the planet would not be completely submerged. In fact, we’d have new real estate to develop in Antarctica.

  • Antivaccine activists gleefully attack and dox a 12-year-old boy who made a pro-vaccine video

    06/26/2016 5:02:24 PM PDT · 154 of 212
    Ultra Sonic 007 to thoughtomator

    That’s not a red herring.

  • Piss Christ? Piss Koran! (Fiction, for now.)

    06/25/2016 11:18:34 PM PDT · 10 of 39
    Ultra Sonic 007 to publius911

    The main link up top is to a .txt file, which is less data-intensive and more easily accessible than a PDF.

  • Piss Christ? Piss Koran! (Fiction, for now.)

    06/25/2016 8:34:44 PM PDT · 7 of 39
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Travis McGee

    Didn’t realize you had already posted this here: www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3442069/posts

    Still, my commendations for the excellent piece of prose!

  • Piss Christ? Piss Koran! (Fiction, for now.)

    06/25/2016 7:40:15 PM PDT · 4 of 39
    Ultra Sonic 007 to ImaGraftedBranch; SunkenCiv; Trumpinator

    Ping.

  • Piss Christ? Piss Koran! (Fiction, for now.)

    06/25/2016 7:01:47 PM PDT · 1 of 39
    Ultra Sonic 007
    Cross posted here: https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2016/06/23/piss-christ-piss-koran-part-four/
  • DONALD J. TRUMP STATEMENT REGARDING BRITISH REFERENDUM ON E.U. MEMBERSHIP

    06/24/2016 4:59:31 AM PDT · 70 of 245
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Helicondelta; pieceofthepuzzle

    It’s funny in an odd sort of way; you’d think Britain never had economic ties with Europe prior to the EU from the way many are talking. As though, prior to the EU, Britain had no interactions with markets on the continent!

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/17/2016 5:50:02 AM PDT · 653 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to metmom

    Sorry, I know I said I would be retiring from the thread, but I have to reply to this one little bit.

    Jesus didn’t speak Greek, but Aramaic. Matthew 16:18 would thus go as follows: “Thou art Kepha, and upon this Kepha I will build my Church.”

    So why does the Greek render the first Kepha as Petros and the second as petra, instead of using the same word for both?

    Because petra is of the feminine gender, and you wouldn’t give a feminine name to a man; hence, the masculine gender of the term petra was used for Peter’s name.

    Have a blessed day!

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/17/2016 12:38:25 AM PDT · 651 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to imardmd1
    Interesting that you mention Desiderius Erasmus. Even though he was an inspiration for the first Protestants, he still remained Catholic, in communion with the Bishop of Rome, and held to the Catholic understanding of free will as opposed to predestination.

    (Also, the idea that translations of the Old and New Testaments into the vernacular language was opposed by the Catholic Church as some sort of power ploy over the laity is mythical, to put it mildly.)

    You speak of the Tyndale Bible as though it was the first to be translated into the English vernacular, even though English versions of Scriptures existed from before even Wycliffe, by centuries. You laud William Tyndale's translation, even though his avowed anti-Catholic beliefs would hardly make him an unbiased translator.

    You berate and mock the teachings of the Apostolic successors, stating that their interpretation of Scripture and the teachings of Christ and His Apostles are incorrect. You even go so far as to make the outlandish claim that the only way a modern-day Christian would fall 'sway' to Catholicism is that they don't recognize their trust in Christ as 'His condition for reconciliation', as you say. (To which I and many other converts to Catholicism would say that, of course we trust in Christ; for what better reason would we convert to Catholicism if we did not trust in Him?)

    Ultimately, however, that is only your opinion, your interpretation. And you end back up in the same place as before for those who subscribe to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide: an interpretation that can only be called yours, separated from the history of the Church and her teaching.

    "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." - John Henry Cardinal Newman, Anglican priest who converted to Catholicism

    I will leave these two debates on Sola Scriptura and retire from this thread. But I will say that it has been invigorating.

    God bless!

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/16/2016 6:10:57 AM PDT · 644 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to metmom; BipolarBob; Mrs. Don-o

    metmom:

    Romans 14 offers an example of disputable matters, namely Jewish dietary laws; is it an all-inclusive list?

    Jesus condemned *human* tradition, yes, absolutely, when such traditions countermanded the Word of God. But if such traditions are in line with His Word, and with His teaching as handed down by the Apostles, is it to be jettisoned?

    “For even creation reveals Him who formed it, and the very work made suggests Him who made it, and the world manifests Him who ordered it. The Universal Church, moreover, through the whole world, has received this tradition from the Apostles.” - St. Irenaeus, “Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 9”

    All Scripture *is* profitable for teaching, yes, absolutely. But at the time Paul wrote to Timothy, there was no New Testament yet compiled! When he speaks to how Timothy was acquainted with these writings from the time of his childhood, these would have only been the writings seen as Sacred Scripture by the Jewish people, aka the Old Testament.

    When it says that all Scripture is profitable for teaching, does that exclude all other sources of wisdom? Does that mean the oral tradition of the Apostles is to be discounted?

    Did not Paul exhort the Thessalonians to hold fast to the traditions they were taught, either by letter or that was *spoken* to them? (2 Thessalonians 2:2)

    See here for a more thorough explanation: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/scripture-and-tradition

    So, does Christ give any indication as to how disagreements are to be settled, or how offenses between fellow Christians are to be handled? As a matter of fact, He does, in Matthew 18:

    [15] But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. [16] And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. [17] And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

    So I ask you: what church is Christ referring to?

    BipolarBob:

    To say that God chose Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide for you is to say that such a doctrine was taught by Christ, by His Apostles, and by His Church. Yet ‘Scripture alone’ was not formulated until the time of Luther, and the book of James actively denies ‘Faith alone’.

    You ask if God sent a message to flee the Catholic Church, would I listen to it?

    The question I ask of you in return is, how do you know that message is from God? For we were warned of the wiles of the Enemy, as Paul instructed in his second letter to the Corinthians (chapter 11):

    [12] But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off the occasion from them that desire occasion, that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. [13] For such false apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. [14] And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light. [15] Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers be transformed as the ministers of justice, whose end shall be according to their works.

    And what of Paul’s exhortation in the first chapter of his letter to the Galatians?

    [6] I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. [7] Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. [8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. [9] As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.

    We are called to hold fast to the teachings of Christ and His Apostles; so when Christ Himself said that he would build His Church upon Peter, would grant him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, and that the gates of hell would not prevail against it...why would I abandon His Church? Why would I abandon that which He instituted?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/15/2016 7:35:03 PM PDT · 640 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to metmom

    It is Protestantism that chose the banner of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. Catholics didn’t place that on you, nor would we.

    But because of that criteria, the metric by which Protestantism is measured differs compared to Catholicism, which has the threefold Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium.

    And yes, I agree that there is leeway in “disputable matters”. But let me ask you: How do you determine what is considered “disputable” and what is considered non-negotiable?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/15/2016 2:27:19 PM PDT · 635 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to BipolarBob

    Unlike you, I don’t subscribe to Sola Scriptura, so I don’t have the same logical problem.

    So I reiterate: you claim Sola Scriptura, as do Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, Calvinists, and Fundamentalists, among other Protestant denominations. Yet we have mutually exclusive theological positions that emerge, as I have already pointed out.

    Who decides who is right? How do you determine which one is true?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/15/2016 11:18:28 AM PDT · 633 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to BipolarBob

    They claim to go by the Bible alone, just as you do. Who are you to say that their interpretation is incorrect?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/14/2016 11:50:38 PM PDT · 628 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to imardmd1

    It is true that the Scriptures are materially sufficient to equip believers in the faith; however, would you equip a young soldier with a uniform and rifle and send him out into battle without training him first?

    Consider: Lutherans and Calvinists believe in unconditional election as regards predestination. However, Lutherans do not believe in a predestination to Hell, while Calvinists do (aka double predestination). Both denominations subscribe to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. Which of the two is correct?

    Or what of the denominations influenced by Arminianism, such as Methodism? Arminianism holds to conditional election, contrasting with Calvinism in particular. Who is correct?

    Or consider baptismal regeneration, which is held by Lutherans. Evangelicals, Baptists, and Fundamentalists (among others) disagree that water baptism is necessary for salvation. All subscribe to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. Who is correct?

    Or what of salvation in general? Lutherans and Anglicans believe that salvation can be lost by a baptized Christian, that they may fall away. Calvinists, Presbyterians, Baptists, and Evangelicals would disagree. Who is correct?

    These are not minor quibbles, for they are issues of tremendous significance on how a Christian is to live!

    If all these denominations claim Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide, yet arrive at wildly different conclusions, it logically means that some are interpreting Scripture incorrectly.

    How do you tell which interpretation is correct?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/14/2016 6:04:11 AM PDT · 621 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Elsie

    Are you familiar with the royal office of “Gebirah” within the ancient Kingdom of Judah, associated only with the line of David?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 11:18:11 PM PDT · 619 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to MHGinTN; Mrs. Don-o; Elsie

    You keep insisting that God violates His own Law, that the Eucharist stands against the Mosaic Law, despite repeated arguments and explanations to the contrary. You’re certainly free to disregard such arguments, but you carry on as if the Church has never provided an answer to the (incorrect) charge of cannibalism.

    This is great dilemma when all one has is Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide; for numerous paths now exist in the interpretation of Scripture and how doctrine is applied. Is Baptism only for those of the age of reason, or can it be applied to infants as well? Is contraception a moral evil, or not? To what degree is all Scripture interpreted literally? Amillenial, premillenial, or postmillenial?

    And on and on. We would all be akin to the Ethiopian eunuch; do we know what it is that we are reading? How can we, if there is no one to instruct us in proper exegesis? Indeed, only by the most extraordinary grace of God would one pick up a Bible - while invincibly ignorant of Christ and His Church - and understand it perfectly; yet in the annals of history, how often has this happened? After all, the Bible as we know it in its current form is a fruit of the Catholic Church:

    “But should you meet with a person not yet believing the Gospel, how would you reply to him where he to say, I do not believe? For my part, I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.” - Augustine, “Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental, Chapter 5”

    Is it not prudent to seek truthful instruction? Even in the days of Christ’s public ministry, the multitudes who sought Him out professed that He was John the Baptist, or Elijah, or one of the prophets; such people were witnesses of His words and His miracles, and yet got it wrong! Separated from those events by nearly two millennia, what hope have we to fruitfully learn of our Lord and who He is without disciplined teaching?

    Fortunately, despite their frailty and weaknesses, the Apostles were there to bear witness and to profess (”You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.”). How fortuitous are we to have access to their writings, and that of their successors.

    The historicity of Catholic teaching to the earliest days of the Church is undeniable, in their ‘plain sense’, to use a familiar term.

    “’The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the Blood of Christ? ‘ (1 Cor. 10:16). Very persuasively spoke he, and with awe. For what he says is this: ‘This which is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and of that do we partake.’ But he called it a cup of blessing, because holding it in our hands, we so exalt Him in our hymn, wondering, astonished at His unspeakable gift, blessing Him, among other things, for the pouring it out, but also for the imparting thereof to us all. ‘Wherefore if you desire blood,’ says He, ‘redden not the altar of idols with the slaughter of brute beasts, but My altar with My blood.’ Tell me, what can be more tremendous than this? What more tenderly kind?” - John Chrysostom, “Homilies on 1st Corinthians, 24:1”

    “’My Flesh is meat indeed, and My Blood is drink’ (Jn. 6:56). You hear Him speak of His Flesh and of His Blood, you perceive the sacred pledges (conveying to us the merits and power) of the Lord’s death, and you dishonor His Godhead? Hear His own words: ‘A spirit has not flesh and bones’ (Lk. 24:39). Now we, as often as we receive the Sacramental Elements, which by the mysterious efficacy of holy prayer are transformed into the Flesh and the Blood, ‘do show the Lord’s Death’ (1 Cor. 11:26).” - Ambrose, “To Gratian, on the Christian Faith, Book 4, Chapter 10”

    “’He that offers the sacrifice of praise glorifies me, and in this way will I show him my salvation’ (Ps. 49:23). Before the coming of Christ, the flesh and blood of this sacrifice were foreshadowed in the animals slain; in the passion of Christ the types were fulfilled by the true sacrifice; after the ascension of Christ, this sacrifice is commemorated in the sacrament.” - Augustine, “Reply to Faustus the Manichean, 21:20”

    “Now, the blood of the Lord is twofold: one is corporeal, redeeming us from corruption; the other is spiritual, and it is with that we are anointed. To drink the blood of Jesus is to participate in His incorruption. Yet, the Spirit is the strength of the Word in the same way that the blood is of the body. Similarly, wine is mixed with water and the Spirit is joined to man; the first, the mixture, provides feasting that faith may be increased; the other, the Spirit, leads us on to incorruption. The union of both, that is, of the potion and the Word, is called the Eucharist, a gift worthy of praise and surprisingly fair; those who partake of it are sanctified in body and soul, for it is the will of the Father that man, a composite made by God, be united to the Spirit and to the Word mystically.” - Clement of Alexandria, “Christ the Educator, Book 2, Chapter 2”

    “Even of itself the teaching of the blessed Paul (1 Cor. 11:23) is sufficient to give you a full assurance concerning those Divine Mysteries, of which having been deemed worthy, you are become of the same body and blood with Christ. For you have just heard him say distinctly, That Our Lord Jesus Christ in the night in which He was betrayed, took bread, and He had given thanks He broke it, and gave to His disciples, saying, ‘Take, eat, this is My Body’; and having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, ‘Take, drink, this is My Blood’ (Mt 26:26ff). Since then He Himself declared and said of the Bread, This is My Body, who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He Himself affirmed and said, This is My Blood, who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His Blood?” - Cyril of Jerusalem, “Catecheses, 22:1”

    “He once in Cana of Galilee, turned the water into wine, akin to blood, and is it incredible that He should have turned wine into blood? When called to a bodily marriage, He miraculously wrought that wonderful work; and on the children of the bridechamber, shall He no much rather be acknowledge to have bestowed the fruition of His Body and Blood?” - Cyril of Jerusalem, “Catecheses, 22:2”

    “The body which is born of the holy Virgin is in truth body united with divinity, not that the body which was received up into the heavens descends, but that bread itself and the wine are changed into God’s body and blood. But if you enquire as to how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it was through the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord took on Himself flesh that subsisted in Him and was born of the holy Mother of God through the Spirit. And we know nothing further save that the Word of God is true and enrgises and is omnipotent, but the manner of this cannot be searched out. But one can put it well thus, that just as in nature the bread by the eating and the wine and the water by the drinking are changed into the body and blood of the eater and drinker, and do not become a different body from the former one, so the bread of the table and the wine and water are supernaturally changed by the invocation and presence of the Holy Spirit into the body and blood of Christ, and are not two but one and the same...
    The bread and the wine are not merely figures of the body and blood of Christ (heaven forbid!) but the deified body of the Lord itself: for the Lord has said, ‘This is My boy’, not, this is a figure of My Body; and ‘My blood’, not, a figure of My blood (Mt. 26:26, 28)...
    But if some persons called the bread and the wine antetypes of the body and blood of the Lord, as did the divinely inspired Basil, they said so not after the consecration but before the consecration, so calling the offering itself...
    Further antetypes of future things are spoken of, not as though they were not in reality Christ’s body and blood, but that now through them we partake of Christ’s divinity, while then we shall partake mentally through the vision alone.” - John of Damascus, “Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book 4, Chapter 13.”

    “How was Christ carried in His Own Hands? Because when He commended His Own Body and Blood, He took into His Hands that which the faithful know; and in a manner carried Himself, when He said, ‘This is my Body.’” - Augustine, “Expositions on the Psalms, No. 33:1:10”

    What a tremendous grace and blessing that Christ established with His Church, with His Sacraments! As heresies, error, wickedness, and the minions of Satan seek to strike at His Bride (as they have throughout the ages), I will never forget Christ’s guarantee that the gates of Hell will not prevail; thus, I will strive forward toward greater faith, hope, and charity with my head held high, trusting in Him.

    *That* is the Catholic Church, and within the Church I am freer to follow, serve, and praise God in capacities I would have never dreamed of growing up in the Baptist/Reformed tradition.

    Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit!

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 4:27:20 AM PDT · 502 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Elsie; MHGinTN

    It’s also difficult to ignore the words of Christ Himself, and the teaching of His Apostles. Were it not for the Bread of Life discourse in John 6, the communion meal might have ended up as a simple memorial meal through the course of history (as it is in many Protestant denominations today).

    But we take our Lord at His Word when he says that “he who eats my Flesh abides in Me and I in him”. And He provided His Flesh for us sacramentally in the Eucharist, as was taught and believed by the Apostles and their successors, according to what has been verified historically through Scripture and their own non-Biblical writings.

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 4:16:41 AM PDT · 499 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Elsie

    Why do you assume temporal limits apply to those who are in Heaven? Is Heaven subject to the passage of time like us?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 4:14:13 AM PDT · 498 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Elsie

    Historically, it’s very simple to demonstrate that Mormonism is not what it claims to be. In like manner, it’s doctrines do not mesh seamlessly with the teaching of Scripture and the Apostolic Fathers (such as, for example, that God was once a man like us).

    So no, a plaque on man-made statue is not sufficient.

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 4:09:14 AM PDT · 496 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to MHGinTN

    Did you even read the two links I submitted to you regarding the charge of cannibalism? You keep insisting that the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a violation of the Mosaic Law against cannibalism.

    Also, do you consider Ignatius of Antioch a “modern Catholic”?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/12/2016 9:26:01 PM PDT · 477 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to MHGinTN; Mrs. Don-o

    Well, let’s consider.

    When Christ said “the flesh profiteth nothing”, whose flesh is He referring to?

    His? The same flesh that was Incarnate in the womb of a virgin, that fasted for 40 days and was tempted (unsuccessfully, mind you) by the Devil, that was baptized in the Jordan by John the Baptist, whose very touch could heal the blind, the lame, and the sick? The same flesh that was Transfigured in the sight of Peter, James, and John? The same flesh that was crucified on the Cross for our sins, that was Resurrected in a glorified body, and Ascended entirely into Heaven before the very eyes of His disciples? The same flesh that, I reiterate, was spoken of quite plainly as the Bread of Life - the new Manna - by Christ Himself?

    Or was He talking about some other kind of flesh? Perhaps the flesh by which the Jews judged? Consider the example of Nicodemus in John 3:1-7; when Christ first speaks of being born again from above, Nicodemus incredulously assumes the prospect of crawling back into his mother’s womb. Even after Christ speaks of being born of water and Spirit - Baptism - Nicodemus still doesn’t get it. So too with the five thousand.

    But I need not twist anything, for the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist has been believed since the earliest days of the Church. Consider Ignatius, third bishop of Antioch, and one who knew Polycarp (the disciple of the Apostle John):

    “Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.” - “Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D

    “I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed.” - “Letter to the Romans”, paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.

    Or how about Justin Martyr, born a pagan, yet converted and became a prolific defender and apologist for Christianity:

    “This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.” - “First Apology”, Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.

    Or how about Irenaeus, second bishop of Lyons, and a student of Polycarp:

    “For just as the bread which comes from the earth, having received the invocation of God, is no longer ordinary bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly, so our bodies, having received the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, because they have the hope of the resurrection.” - “Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely named Gnosis”. Book 4:18 4-5, circa 180 A.D.

    Or how about the Didache, which 2nd century Christians used as a reference for catechesis:

    “Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: ‘Do not give to dogs what is sacred’”. - Ch. 9:5

    Again: I need not twist anything. There would be no point; indeed, why would the Apostles and their disciples feel the need to speak so strongly of Christ being present in the Eucharist if they did not believe it to be true?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/12/2016 7:58:11 PM PDT · 474 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to MHGinTN

    If Christ’s Flesh profits nothing, as you assert, then why did He become Incarnate in a body of human flesh and human blood?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/12/2016 6:47:18 PM PDT · 470 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to MHGinTN; Mrs. Don-o
    It's really hard to get around the discourse on the Bread of Life in John 6, where Christ repeats *multiple* times that we must eat His Flesh and drink His Blood. Such was the consternation of his disciples that all but the Apostles departed from His sight (and to make their incredulity at His words even more stark, this was right after the miracle of where He multiplied the loaves and fed the five thousand).

    Also, since we're talking about 1 Corinthians 11, let's continue on past verse 26:

    27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

    Very interesting for a mere symbol to have such power.

    The argument of cannibalism has been leveled against Christianity since its earliest days. Here are but two defenses out of many.

    But lastly, consider that Christ is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world. (John 1:29) He is the perfect Lamb, the perfect Paschal sacrifice.

    Recall that when God instituted the Passover to the Israelites in Egypt, He specifically commanded them to eat the lamb. (Exodus 12:8-10)

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/12/2016 6:30:19 PM PDT · 468 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to metmom; Mrs. Don-o
    Why place human limits on Christ? Is His Church not also His Body, wherein all her parts work towards not only His Glorification, but the sanctification of her fellow members?

    We glory in those who have gone ahead of us to Heaven, for their glory is a shadow of Christ's Eternal Glory. They are an inspiration. Since Christ is our Lord, we look to those who served Him dutifully and with great humility as role models of the faith. Does acknowledging that detract from the Glory of God?

    Do not the angels themselves rejoice in Heaven over one who repents? (Luke 15:10)

    Is not the Kingdom of Heaven likened to a grand wedding feast, wherein only those who don wedding garments (who have, in essence, been sanctified in a manner befitting the celebration) remain, and those who do not are cast into the darkness? (Matthew 22:1-14)

    You speak of the mustard seed as a parable for faith. It is also used to describe the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 13:31-32); Jesus speaks of how the diminutive mustard seed sprouts into a grand bush ("greater than any herb"), such that even the birds can nestle in its branches. Is the Kingdom of Heaven so limited that the example of those who have gone before us detract from God's Majesty? Or are they the birds that draw attention to that grand bush, the lights that draw attention to the Glory of Christ's Kingdom?

    Did not Paul, in his second epistle to the Thessalonians, say that we would possess the glory of our Lord through the Gospel? (2 Thessalonians 2:13-17)

    In the time of Islam's rise, St. John of Damascus wrote a compelling treatise titled Defense Against Those who Oppose Holy Images. I link to the entire article, but I will quote some choice sections:

    Worship is one thing, veneration another. The invisible things of God have been made visible through images since the creation of the world. We see images in creation which remind us faintly of God, e.g. in order to talk about the holy and worshipful Trinity, we use the images of the sun and rays of light, a spring and a full river, the mind and speech and the spirit within us, or a rose tree, a sprouting flower, and a sweet fragrance. Also events in the future can be foreshadowed mystically by images. For instance, the ark represents the image of Our Lady, the Mother of God. So does the staff and the earthen jar. The bronze serpent shows us the one who defeated the bite of the original serpent on the Cross; [Jn 3:14-15] the sea, water and the cloud depict the grace of baptism. [I Cor. 10.1]

    You must understand that there are different degrees of worship. First of all the full worship which we show to God, who alone is by nature worthy of worship. But, for the sake of God who is worshipful by nature, we honor and venerate his saints and servants. It is in this sense that Joshua and Daniel worshipped an angel, [Jos. 5.14, Dan. 8:16-17] and David worshipped the Lord’s holy places, when be said, “Let us go to the place where his feet have stood.” [Ps. 132.7] Similarly, his dwelling place is worshipped, as when all the people of Israel adored in the tabernacle, and they stood round the temple in Jerusalem gazing at it from all sides worshipping, as they still do.

    The cherubim, for example, are mere creatures. Why, then, does he allow cherubim, carved by human hand, to overshadow the mercy—seat in the temple? Obviously it is impossible to make an image of God because is infinite and changeless, or of someone like God because creation should not be worshipped as God. But he allowed the people to make an image of the cherubim who are finite and who lie in adoration before his throne, overshadowing the mercy-seat. It was fitting that the image of the heavenly choirs should overshadow the divine mysteries. Would you say that the ark of the covenant and staff and mercy-seat were not made by human hands? Do they not consist of what you call contemptible matter? What was the tabernacle itself? Was it not an image? Did it not depict a reality beyond itself? This is why the holy Apostle says that the rituals of the law, “serve as an example and shadow of heavenly things.” [Heb. 8.5] Moses, when he came to finish the tabernacle, was told “make sure that you make everything according to the pattern that you were shown on the Mountain.” [Ex. 25.40] The law was not an image itself, but it shrouded the image. In the words of the same Apostle, “the law contains the shadow of the goods to come, not the image of those things.” [Heb. 10.1]

    So, since the law is a forerunner of images, how can we say that it forbids images? Should the law ban us from making images, when the tabernacle itself was a depiction, a foreshadowing? No. There is a time for everything. [Eccl. 3.1] In the old days, the incorporeal and infinite God was never depicted. Now, however, when God has been seen clothed in flesh, and talking with mortals, [Baruch 3.37] I make an image of the God whom I see. I do not worship matter, I worship the God of matter, who became matter for my sake, and deigned to inhabit matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. I will not cease from honoring that matter which works my salvation. I venerate it, though not as God.

    I honor all matter, and venerate it. Through it, filled, as it were, with a divine power and grace, my salvation has come to me. Was the three-times happy and blessed wood of the Cross not matter? Was the sacred and holy mountain of Calvary not matter? What of the life-giving rock, the Holy Tomb, the source of our resurrection — was it not matter? Is the holy book of the Gospels not matter? Is the blessed table which gives us the Bread of Life not matter? Are the gold and silver, out of which crosses and altar-plate and chalices are made not matter? And before all these things, is not the body and blood of our Lord matter? Either stop venerating all these things, or submit to the tradition of the Church in the venerating of images, honoring God and his friends, and following in this the grace of the Holy Spirit. Do not despise matter, for it is not despicable. Nothing that God has made is. Only that which does not come from God is despicable — our own invention, the spontaneous decision to disregard the law of human nature, i.e., sin.

    The Kingdom of Heaven has many great treasures, all of which reflect the Glory of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For they who do what Christ commands, He counts not as a mere slave or servant, but as His friend (John 15:1-17)! Why then, would we malign and denigrate the ones whom God calls His friends?

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/12/2016 11:38:46 AM PDT · 438 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to metmom
    At the Council of Trent, some 1500 years after the canon was settled, the Apocrypha was ADDED to the canon by the Catholic church.

    The Latin Vulgate was *affirmed* as the official Latin Bible at the Council of Trent, true. The same Vulgate composed and translated by St. Jerome in the *late 4th century* to serve as a replacement of the Vestus Latin manuscripts.

    Affirming is not the same as creating out of nowhere. Even the Muratorian Fragment attests to the inclusion of the book of Wisdom.

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/12/2016 6:34:16 AM PDT · 430 of 681
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Elsie; Mrs. Don-o

    This has been a very fascinating debate.

    But honestly, I think one need only look at the fruit of Protestantism: over 30,000 different denominations, practically all of which claim inspiration by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of Scripture.

    But logically, only one denomination has the fullness of truth (for the Holy Spirit is not divided against itself).

    So this is the challenge: how can you tell which denomination has the fullness of truth?

  • It’s Payday For Loan Sharks, Courtesy Of Federal Regulators

    06/03/2016 5:33:56 AM PDT · 10 of 19
    Ultra Sonic 007 to IBD editorial writer
    Sorry, but the terms of payday lenders amounts to nothing more than usury.

    Consider this look at the issue. Sure, I don't agree with John Oliver politically, but this is still a great segment.

  • Freddie Gray Arresting Officer Edward Nero Found Not Guilty On All Charges

    05/23/2016 8:07:04 AM PDT · 1 of 76
    Ultra Sonic 007
  • Captain America, Aaron Burr, And The Politics Of Killing Your Friends

    05/05/2016 10:35:53 PM PDT · 14 of 15
    Ultra Sonic 007 to nickcarraway

    You would have been disappointed in how it all played out, given the various character derailments and overall stupidity shown on both sides.

    And given that the “Pro-Registration” side was stated by editors to be “the good guys”...

  • College Kids Say the Darndest Things: On Identity

    04/19/2016 8:25:12 PM PDT · 1 of 7
    Ultra Sonic 007
    Behold and despair.
  • Here's Why Ted Cruz Fought to Keep Sex toys illegal

    04/16/2016 8:52:52 PM PDT · 85 of 141
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Buckeye McFrog
    Particularly if the following gets quoted from his case: "Senator Cruz, as part of your legal argument, your office wrote that, 'There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship.'" Would you like to elaborate?"

    Somehow, I doubt his answer would be an appeal to federalism.

  • Trump Advisor: A Vote for Ted Cruz is a Vote to Offshore American Jobs

    03/30/2016 5:21:52 AM PDT · 27 of 98
    Ultra Sonic 007 to plewis1250
    Pledged against his own assets, eh?

    Color me skeptical.

  • Battery? Only IF Fields Is Charged (On Corey Lewandowski's misdemeanor)

    03/29/2016 7:59:00 PM PDT · 1 of 40
    Ultra Sonic 007
  • Look at the media LIE (On Trump allegedly having no intention to be President)

    03/28/2016 9:38:31 PM PDT · 3 of 12
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Trumpinator

    Ping.

  • Look at the media LIE (On Trump allegedly having no intention to be President)

    03/28/2016 9:33:09 PM PDT · 1 of 12
    Ultra Sonic 007
  • Ted Cruz Fox News Sunday FULL Interview Trump's Attacking My Wife Because He’s Scared

    03/27/2016 6:25:55 PM PDT · 182 of 280
    Ultra Sonic 007 to austingirl; Slyfox

    We’ve had twelve debates so far. None since Rubio dropped out, but do we really need more at this point before the general election?

  • The GOP Should Steal the Nomination from Trump

    03/18/2016 6:41:39 AM PDT · 56 of 93
    Ultra Sonic 007 to Dahoser

    With the exception of two terms, the Republicans have controlled the House for the past 20 years. AKA, the branch of Congress that controls the purse strings for the ENTIRE federal government.

    Have they “united against weakened and corrupt Democrats” in that time span?

    /hears crickets