toldailytopic: What do you suppose God thinks of the Catholic Church?

[bucksplasher]

I've wondered what non-Catholics do with the bible verses on marriage and divorce?

It seems to me that one of the only churches following the "Word of God" in these matters is the Catholic Church.

Does SD have a biblical verse or two, to show us?

tWINs

 

[serpentdove]

[Y]ou're a public liar...

Proof please each:

 

[IXOYE]

:yawn: Ad hominem



Wrong way (Jude 11). :burnlib:

You really don't know what an ad hominem is, do you.

It's not name calling.

There is nothing as entertaining as someone trying to look intellectual, making a fool of themselves.

And, I don't even have to buy tickets to your show.

Go look up the word and study Ad Hominem and learn something before you open your piehole again.

 

[serpentdove]

[Ranting]

Have we met? :idunno:

 

[IXOYE]

Have we met? :idunno:

If you still breathe, we have not met.:think:

 

[IXOYE]

You really don't know what an ad hominem is, do you.

It's not name calling.

There is nothing as entertaining as someone trying to look intellectual, making a fool of themselves.

And, I don't even have to buy tickets to your show.

Go look up the word and study Ad Hominem and learn something before you open your piehole again.

I don't have to meet you, to see your assertions and accusations, and see you abuse the term ad hominem.

Your choice is simple. You can face the fact you are an idiot and learn what it means. Or continue to look an idiot and pretend you are some intellectual giant.

You are reminding me of one of those 8 yr old preachers you see in the deep south. Saying all the "right" cliches and having no clue what it means or how stupid you look.

Can I get an AMEN!

 

[serpentdove]

I've wondered what non-Catholics do with the bible verses on marriage and divorce?

It seems to me that one of the only churches following the "Word of God" in these matters is the Catholic Church.

Does SD have a biblical verse or two, to show us?

Mt 5:37 :straight:

 

[IXOYE]

Mt 5:37 :straight:

Jesus Wept John 11:35 :thumb::wave2::sheep:<<< follow other men and not the Bible.

Why don't you do something NOVEL and start reading the Bible to see what it says, rather than say something and word search the Bible for something that might, if you were stoned on shrooms, support your silly claims.

From here on out, everytime you post a vs that doesn't support your comments, I'm going to thumbs down you....

 

[IXOYE]

Apparently the RCC is closer than the protestants....

EPH 4:11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, (this would be your church.) 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service,(you are expected to be trained by the Church to do works. Oppositive if your lazy grace teaching.) to the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. 14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; 15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

Another Example is how Jesus described the righteous in this parable...Mat 25:37 "Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink?
Mat 25:38 'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You?
Mat 25:39 'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'
Mat 25:40 "The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

:O the ones with works were the ones going to heaven. The RCC is the largest charitable organization the world has ever seen. They are active in the world, communities, neighborhoods. And you condemn them for works.

At least they have scripture behind their moves, unlike you.

 

[serpentdove]

[Jesus Wept John 11:35]

He did. Christians will agree with his decision for each soul.

When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled,
And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.

Jesus wept [John 11:33–35].

"If you want to know how God feels about the death of your loved ones, look at this. He groaned in the spirit and was troubled. Death is a frightful thing. And you can be sure that He enters into sympathy with you.

His sympathy was for the living. He knew what He was going to do for the dead. “Jesus wept.” While John’s gospel is written to show us the deity of Christ, here Jesus is shown in all His humanness. He even asked where Lazarus was laid because He was so human. And here we can see the way God feels at a funeral today. He mingles His tears with ours. He groans within Himself. I get a little impatient with Christians who say one must not cry at a funeral, but one must be a brave Christian. Death is not pretty; it is a terrible thing. Jesus wept!"
McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 4:440

 

[john w]

Roman Catholic Organization-great fish fryes.


End of thread.

 

[Cruciform]

Proof please.

No need, "since I wasn't offering it as an argument, but merely as an observation based on past precedent." That precedent can be seen here, as well as in several other posts.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[IXOYE]

You really are this dense.

The point is, the verse had nothing to do with the conversation. It's a total non sequitur, just like your stupid quotes. You say something preposterous and reference a verse that has a word or two similar in it, to what you said.

Just total idiocy.

Have you ever had an original thought? Or do you always buy WHAT MAN TAUGHT ME TO BELIEVE I THE BIBLE books?

He did. Christians will agree with his decision for each soul.

When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled,
And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.

Jesus wept [John 11:33–35].

"If you want to know how God feels about the death of your loved ones, look at this. He groaned in the spirit and was troubled. Death is a frightful thing. And you can be sure that He enters into sympathy with you.

His sympathy was for the living. He knew what He was going to do for the dead. “Jesus wept.” While John’s gospel is written to show us the deity of Christ, here Jesus is shown in all His humanness. He even asked where Lazarus was laid because He was so human. And here we can see the way God feels at a funeral today. He mingles His tears with ours. He groans within Himself. I get a little impatient with Christians who say one must not cry at a funeral, but one must be a brave Christian. Death is not pretty; it is a terrible thing. Jesus wept!"
McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 4:440

 

[serpentdove]

[Proof of accusation that I am a liar each:] "No need, ...since I wasn't offering it as an argument, but merely as an observation..."

Do you argue or observe here at TOL? :smokie:

[Lying] That precedent can be seen here...

:yawn: Non causae ut causae (claiming victory despite defeat)

 

[Cruciform]

Do you argue or observe here at TOL?

Both, depending on what the circumstances call for.

Non causae ut causae (claiming victory despite defeat)

Smoke screenae ut patheticae (you're full of it)




Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[serpentdove]

[Do you argue or observe here at TOL? ] "Both, depending on what the circumstances call for."

:BRAVO: When observing or arguing :freak: avoid the use of logical fallacies. :dizzy:

"...[Y]ou're full of it..."

Isa. 63:10; Matt. 12:31, 32 Luke 12:10. Mark 3:29 Luke 2:10; 1 John 5:16; Acts 5:9. Acts 5:3, 9; Acts 7:51; Acts 8:18–22; Eph. 4:30; Heb. 10:29

 

[IXOYE]

:yawn: Non causae ut causae (claiming victory despite defeat)

The fallacy you mention is EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST DID. This is like the fourth time you've pulled this stunt.

By not explaining or offering any argument/explanation as to HOW your assertion occured in his link to proof, you have just claimed victory via fallacy and offered no argument.

You are a flaming idiot.

Incapable of independent thought.

A master of google and bible search tools, but not bright enough to choose the pertinent results to back up your points that are unbackable.

You can't say he claimed victory and didn't have victory until you have shown he didn't have victory, which you have not done. You are of the dumbest flock of sheeple :sheep: a Xian chat board has ever seen.

 

[IXOYE]

:BRAVO: When observing or arguing :freak: avoid the use of logical fallacies. :dizzy:



Isa. 63:10; Matt. 12:31, 32 Luke 12:10. Mark 3:29 Luke 2:10; 1 John 5:16; Acts 5:9. Acts 5:3, 9; Acts 7:51; Acts 8:18–22; Eph. 4:30; Heb. 10:29

If he was fallacious and you weren't just using a lying empty assertion to try to denigrate his arguments in an ad hominem fashion by false assertions.

Here, let me help you out some.

This is an excellent link for you to use.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Please educate your ignorant self before expecting anyone to take you serious.

Yours sincerely,

brad dickey.

 

[IXOYE]

Do you argue or observe here at TOL? :smokie:

:yawn: Non causae ut causae (claiming victory despite defeat)

Description of Appeal to Spite
The Appeal to Spite Fallacy is a fallacy in which spite is substituted for evidence when an "argument" is made against a claim. This line of "reasoning" has the following form:


Claim X is presented with the intent of generating spite.
Therefore claim C is false (or true)
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because a feeling of spite does not count as evidence for or against a claim. This is quite clear in the following case: "Bill claims that the earth revolves around the sun. But remember that dirty trick he pulled on you last week. Now, doesn't my claim that the sun revolves around the earth make sense to you?"

Of course, there are cases in which a claim that evokes a feeling of spite or malice can serve as legitimate evidence. However, it should be noted that the actual feelings of malice or spite are not evidence. The following is an example of such a situation:

Jill: "I think I'll vote for Jane to be treasurer of NOW."
Vicki: "Remember the time that your purse vanished at a meeting last year?"
Jill: "Yes."
Vicki:"Well, I just found out that she stole your purse and stole some other stuff from people."
Jill: "I'm not voting for her!"

In this case, Jill has a good reason not to vote for Jane. Since a treasurer should be honest, a known thief would be a bad choice. As long as Jill concludes that she should vote against Jane because she is a thief and not just out of spite, her reasoning would not be falacious.

Examples of Appeal to Spite

Bill: "I think that Jane did a great job this year. I'm going to nominate her for the award."
Dave: "Have you forgotten last year? Remember that she didn't nominate you last year."
Bill: "You're right. I'm not going to nominate her."

Jill: "I think Jane's idea is a really good one and will really save a lot of money for the department."
Bill: "Maybe. Remember how she showed that your paper had a fatal flaw when you read it at the convention last year..."
Jill:"I had just about forgotten about that! I think I'll go with your idea instead."

 

[serpentdove]

...You are of the dumbest flock of sheeple :sheep: a Xian chat board has ever seen...

1 Cor 1:27, Jn 10:27 :sheep: