You seem to be content in proving that your ignorance of the Bible is only exceeded by your ignorance of history.
Ecclesiastes 1:9 9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. |
Deuteronomy 31:27 27 For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the Lord; and how much more after my death? |
Say anything you want but it will never hide the fact that any question I ask regarding catholic doctrines goes unanswered.
Say anything you want but it will never hide the fact that your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect is NOT in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D., and therefore that the assumptions, interpretations, and opinions that you have derived from that sect carry no doctrinal authority whatsoever. They can never be considered anything more than the mere "traditions of men."
So why can't you answer the questions I asked? I mean with a real, honest answer that deals with the question I asked. From where I am, my church is beating the pants off of yours when it comes defending Jesus's teachings. That too, is a fact.Say anything you want but it will never hide the fact that your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect is NOT in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D., and therefore that the assumptions, interpretations, and opinions that you have derived from that sect carry no doctrinal authority whatsoever. They can never be considered anything more than the mere "traditions of men."
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
I can, and (specifically regarding your post 518) I've already explained why I haven't bothered. Again, this has already been answered.
...which is concisely described in Post #383 above.
Because you can't.
That post has some words in it but it doesn't list the exact traditions Paul was referring to. It doesn't deal with a single point of the Marian doctrines. It is just more of you pounding your shoe on the podium insisting you have done something you have not.
This coming from a documented liar (Ex. 20:1; Prov. 19:5). Again, you've already been answered.
The exact Traditions that Paul is referring to are any and all teachings delivered verbally by the apostles and their ordained successors, the bishops (Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac.15:6, 22; 16:4; Rom. 16:17; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). It's really not a difficult concept to grasp---unless you've been conditioned by your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect to simply and willfully not "get" it. Here, this might help:
[CM pounding shoe:] "I don't LIKE it! I don't LIKE it! I don't LIKE it...!!!"
Not true at all.
2 Thessalonians 2:15 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. |
The church of Rome has no authority to say if something contradicts scripture.
You have asserted such many times but my consionce is clear.
This is a catholic tradition and not a statement of fact. A statement of fact would be a document that clearly indicates exactly what traditions Paul was referring to when he wrote his letter. Stating that Paul's statement encompasses all catholic traditions for all time us a logical fallacy that crosses the line into stupidity. Sorry to be blunt. (but I am in Colorado)The exact Traditions that Paul is referring to are any and all teachings delivered verbally by the apostles and their ordained successors, the bishops (Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac.15:6, 22; 16:4; Rom. 16:17; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). It's really not a difficult concept to grasp---unless you've been conditioned by your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect to simply and willfully not "get" it. Here, this might help:
You have asserted as much many times, but your own posted statements testify against you (Ex. 20:16; Prov. 19:5).
Contrary to the glaring False Dilemma Fallacy you've engaged in here, it is both Catholic Tradition and fact. Try again.
Now go ahead and provide us with the biblical text which states that "A statement of fact would be a document that clearly indicates exactly what traditions Paul was referring to when he wrote his letter." Chapter-and-verse, please.
...and yet your assumptions and opinions can never rise above the level of mere human opinion---i.e., personal preference---and so this is simply all you have to offer. Every answer you give merely amounts to the declaration, "I don't LIKE that!"
...and the apostles' successors---the bishops---as well. You always seem to conveniently forget about them. Even in the time of the apostles, the bishops held the very same doctrinal authority as the apostles themselves (Ac. 15:6, 22; 16:4).
This is a recently-invented, man-made Protestant tradition, and not a statement of fact. Try again.
I gave seen your "documentation", my conscience remains clear.
That is just another statement if your preferred man-made traditions.
Just as soon as you give is the list of the exact traditions Paul was referring too in his letter. Remember, Paul, "... You have been taught..." Which us past tense so you need to provide the traditions Paul was referring to in the past tense.
That is no different than you. Most of what the Catholics teach is just man-made personal preference by the men who lead the church. This is easily proved by your utter and complete failure to document the traditions Paul was referring to.
The only valid teachings that any "bishop" can teach are those that Jesus and His Deciples taught. They never taught the Marian doctrines the Catholics teach as proven by your inability to refute post 518. You cannot prove that the vast traditions taught by the Catholics today are consistant with the traditions Paul taught as proven by your inability to list the traditions Paul was referring to in His letter. God gave us the bible to guide us. If somebody tells me I must believe something that is nit in God's word, why should I believe such a wolf?
God's word has been around for a long long time. All Protestants have done us abandon the traditions of the RCC in favor what God has actually said. You have given us absolutely no reason to suspect that that is an error.
