ECT DEEP IN HISTORY

H

HisServant

New member
Cruciform said:
"...by scripture" as interpreted according to the entirely non-authoritative opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, you mean.


Categorically refuted by any number of my posts on this very thread. Try again.


You have long since abandoned scripture in favor of your recently-invented sect's man-made doctrines and traditions.


Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...

Spoken by a man that belongs to a sect that was invented in 1054 and its man made doctrines and traditions.
 
H

HisServant

New member
Cruciform said:
Just another wholly unsubstantiated assertion by HS, answered here and here.

(As for the Catholic Church supposedly being a "sect," see this.)
Click to expand...

Its the truth.... you were a minority of the catholic church, yet split off due to the pride of one man that decided to excommunicate his brothers because they would not cede all power to him.

I'm sorry you are so brainwashed into paganism.

First Council of Nicæa was after the Roman Corruption.. FYI.
 
Cruciform

Cruciform

New member
HisServant said:
Its the truth.... you were a minority of the catholic church, yet split off due to the pride of one man that decided to excommunicate his brothers because they would not cede all power to him.
Click to expand...
Post #42

I'm sorry you are so brainwashed into paganism.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry you are so brainwashed into schismatic sectarianism.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
CabinetMaker

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Cruciform said:
"...by scripture" as interpreted according to the entirely non-authoritative opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, you mean.


Categorically refuted by any number of my posts on this very thread. Try again.


You have long since abandoned scripture in favor of your recently-invented sect's man-made doctrines and traditions.


Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...

I post scripture straight from the bible. Please explaine to us all jaw that constitutes interpreting scripture.
 
CabinetMaker

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Cruciform said:
Yes---in an attempt to "support" the entirely non-authoritative anti-Catholic opinions that you have derived from your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.
Click to expand...

So that would be a non answer on your part.
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Cruciform said:
quote-to-be-deep-in-history-is-to-cease-to-be-a-protestant-john-henry-newman-255654.jpg

It certainly worked for me. :thumb:
Click to expand...



Hi and just who are the Protestants in the Bible , I do not see any , EXCEPT man-made religions !!

The bible writes about the Jews and the Body of Christ !!

Jesus and Paul I know , so who are you ??

dAN P
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Cruciform said:
Mmmm...so what?
Click to expand...



Hi and a good answer as there are no POPES mentioned in the Gospels and no where in the bibLE , makes you , JUST a BOLVIATOR !!

So you have no HISTORY nor Depth at all , whatsoever !!

DAN P
 
Last edited:
CabinetMaker

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Cruciform said:
Rather, it would be an answer you don't happen to prefer, a fact which is entirely irrelevant. Post #46 stands as given.
Click to expand...

No, it's just plain non-responsive on your part. I asked how posting a passage of scripture is interpreting it and you babble off with this: Yes---in an attempt to "support" the entirely non-authoritative anti-Catholic opinions that you have derived from your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.

That in no way addresses the question I asked.
 
Cruciform

Cruciform

New member
CabinetMaker said:
No, it's just plain non-responsive on your part. I asked how posting a passage of scripture is interpreting it and you babble off with this: Yes---in an attempt to "support" the entirely non-authoritative anti-Catholic opinions that you have derived from your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.
 That in no way addresses the question I asked.
Click to expand...
Sure it does, since it directly addresses your implicit claim that you somehow simply post biblical texts which you have not already interpreted, or---even more absurd---whose meaning is somehow supposedly self-evident and so require no interpretation. This is plainly nonsense. The Bible, like any other book, is written in human language and so must be interpreted---correctly or incorrectly---by human beings. Your posted proof-texts, therefore, are exactly that---texts intended to "prove" the assumptions and opinions that you have derived from your preferred entirely non-authoritative recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.

Again, Post #46 stands exactly as given.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
CabinetMaker

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Cruciform said:
Sure it does, since it directly addresses your implicit claim that you somehow simply post biblical texts which you have not already interpreted, or---even more absurd---whose meaning is somehow supposedly self-evident and so require no interpretation. This is plainly nonsense. The Bible, like any other book, is written in human language and so must be interpreted---correctly or incorrectly---by human beings. Your posted proof-texts, therefore, are exactly that---texts intended to "prove" the assumptions and opinions that you have derived from your preferred entirely non-authoritative recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.

Again, Post #46 stands exactly as given.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...

Nope, sorry, you're still not answering the question. Let me rephrase it a little. When somebody quotes the exact words that somebody wrote or spoke, are they interrupting those words?

For instance, if I say Jesus said we are to partake of the Lord's Supper in memory of Him and then post the scripture of Him actually saying that, what is being interpreted?

I also note that you never answered the question add to whether your dad would be mad at you for doing something he told you not do but you did because a friend told you that your dad didn't actually mean what he said.
 
Last edited:
Cruciform

Cruciform

New member
CabinetMaker said:
Nope, sorry, you're still not answering the question. Let me rephrase it a little. When somebody quotes the exact words that somebody wrote or spoke, are they interrupting those words?
Click to expand...
If they are quoting them for a reason---and not completely senselessly and arbitrarily---then yes, they have already interpreted them, and decided that the words agreed with their particular assumptions and opinions. Back to Post #58 above.

For instance, if I say Jesus said we are to partake of the Lord's Supper in memory of Him and then post the scripture of Him actually dating that, what is being interpreted?
Click to expand...
Any number of things, depending on your particular reason(s) for quoting the text.

I also note that you never answered the question add to whether your dad would be mad at you for doing something he told you not do but you did because a friend told you that your dad didn't actually mean what he said.
Click to expand...
Sure I did (review the thread). The fact that you may be unsatisfied with---that is, don't prefer---the answer certainly does not mean that the answer wasn't given.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top