Nairaland Forum

OLAADEGBU:

Read the reasons in the suggested link below.

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0071/0071_01.asp

on a 2nd thought i looked i all i find is speculations, ifs and if not. Cant you make a good arguement at all. Ha im surprised at the way you discuss.

OLAADEGBU:

You are still saying the same thing, that your final authority does not lie in the Bible alone but with your traditions. Why make God's commandments of no effect because of your traditions?

i asked you before where did d bible teach sola scriptura and you said it didnt well you bible says we should hold on to christain tradition. If you dont know the difference between scripture+christain tradition and the traditions of men that make the word ineffective then i would have to question your ability to reason. It seem your brain simply malfunctions when it comes to the catholic church.

Isaiah prophesied it, Jesus cited and quoted it to confirm that those who put their tradition above the Word of God are only paying lip service to His commandments.

that is where you get it wrong, the christain tradition is the word of God that is why paul tell the christains to keep and hold it, and if you are a christain you would. I have reason(s) to question your christainity.

Ubenedictus: no problem.
you are trying to make an arguement from silience that is a logical fallacy and it shows a weak arguement. luk 1:28 says chiare kecharitomene, if you know the meaning of 'kecharitomene' you will know how it surports the IC.
. It is very special, the word kecharitomene appears just once in scripture. Dont be surprised it wasnt used anywhere else. just try and explain kecharitomene. no friend they are the guys who heard it from the the horses' mouth, from the apostle, from the disciples of the apostles. They are the transmitter of the word of God. They dont preach heresy, they preach want they recieved.
again wrong the canons wasnt to proclaim all that was recieved. None of the guys who compiled it wanted to put down all they believed in a book, you are making an assumption, a speculation and a wrong one.
hahaha he was fine with the ark of d covenant, do u know it it was a just a tablet and some images of cheribim. My dear when images are used right God isnt against it.
sorry i think you need more faith in christ words 'the gates of hell shall neva prevail' 'i will be wit u till the end of time'. People can fall the the church cant teach heresy because christ said 'thou art cephas nd on this cephas i will build my ecclesia nd the gates of hell shall neva prevail against her' i think you need more faith.
did you missed the word neva prevail? Where did you get the idea that a christain neva sins? Wow u are on you own. That means each time a christains sins the church a new sect will break away. Ha u are joking

Lol' exactly what I expected. Rather than defend his claims properly he dances around the issue, throws in a word he knows I am not familiar with "kecharitomene" and doesn't even attempt to translate it in the least. Much like his papal predecessors who would bambuzzle the common men with big latin words they were sure thy wouldn't understand and then condemn them to death for daring to understand it.

It is interesting how you place your church leaders above God's law and call everyone who points out their errors a heretic. I wish you God's grace.

Mr_Anony:

Lol, shouldn't the priority be truth rather than agreement?

if God isnt the guy who brings confusion then i guess he bring harmony and agreement.

Ubenedictus: if God isnt the guy who brings confusion then i guess he bring harmony and agreement.

Let me adopt your style a bit: So in other words any time people agree it must be God?

This your "God" must have been the cause of the Rwandan genocide - The Hutus all killed the Tutsis in "harmony"

This your "God" must have brought the "agreement" for the Nazis to kill Jews

This your "God" is also the cause of the "harmony and agreement" amongst Nigerian politicians to embezzle money.

In fact anyone that condemns the activities of the "One True House Of Assembly" is a heretic and deserves to be put to death and this includes anyone that dares to translate the Nigerian constitution to Yoruba.

The House of Assembly can never be corrupt even if all it's members are rotten to the core.

Don't you just love your logic?

Mr_Anony:

Lol' exactly what I expected. Rather than defend his claims properly he dances around the issue, throws in a word he knows I am not familiar with "kecharitomene" and doesn't even attempt to translate it in the least.

that is because you didnt read the previous posts i explained the word. If you dont agree check the net.

Much like his papal predecessors who would bambuzzle the common men with big latin words they were sure thy wouldn't understand and then condemn them to death for daring to understand it.

point of correction kecharitomene isnt latin it is greek. No body was condemn for trying to understand, i think you have been misinformed or you are just trying to be a fanatic.

It is interesting how you place your church leaders above God's law and call everyone who points out their errors a heretic.

you cant even defend your claim all u do is make accusations, you have been talking about error and you cant even prove that one thing i have said is wrong. My church leaders may have their own sin just like your church leaders but that isnt a reason to claim that that they taught errors in doctrine. If you cant prove that they are teaching errors that mean you are against the truth. And be carefull i havent called you a heretic, you are throwing accusations.

i wish you God's grace.

same 2 u, the feeling is mutual

Mr_Anony:

Let me adopt your style a bit: So in other words any time people agree it must be God?

another logical fallacy, conclusion based on wrong premise. I said God brings about harmony and agreement, i didnt say whenever people agree they are doing Gods work those two points arent dsame. A laptop process information, that doesnt mean that that anything that process information is a laptop, go and learn your logic again. What is your aim? Pushing words into my mouth

This your "God" must have been the cause of the Rwandan genocide - The Hutus all killed the Tutsis in "harmony"
This your "God" must have brought the "agreement" for the Nazis to kill Jews

not all the germans wanted the jews dead.

This your "God" is also the cause of the "harmony and agreement" amongst Nigerian politicians to embezzle money.

In fact anyone that condemns the activities of the "One True House Of Assembly" is a heretic and deserves to be put to death and this includes anyone that dares to translate the Nigerian constitution to Yoruba.

well i cant help but laugh at you. Before protestanism started there were already some translations in the local language.

The House of Assembly can never be corrupt even if all it's members are rotten to the core.
Don't you just love your logic?

you need to learn the difference between the state and the church. You miss the oga in charge of the church, the holyspirit, like i said you really need to believe in christ promise. The previous national assembly was called corrupt and yet all their policies that was passed into law cant be faulted, that is just a human organisation not to talk about 'the pillar and foundation of truth' guided by the holy spirit.

Ubenedictus: that is because you didnt read the previous posts i explained the word. If you dont agree check the net. point of correction kecharitomene isnt latin it is greek. No body was condemn for trying to understand, i think you have been misinformed or you are just trying to be a fanatic.
you cant even defend your claim all u do is make accusations, you have been talking about error and you cant even prove that one thing i have said is wrong. My church leaders may have their own sin just like your church leaders but that isnt a reason to claim that that they taught errors in doctrine. If you cant prove that they are teaching errors that mean you are against the truth. And be carefull i havent called you a heretic, you are throwing accusations. same 2 u, the feeling is mutual

Ok all is well then, I wasn't referring to you but your popes who declared people heretics for translating the bible to English (i.e. condemning people for reciting the lord's prayer in a language they understood) in other words killing people for an attempt to understand scripture. Your pope has a history of adulterous, power hungry, murders as predecessors and this you cannot deny.

Back to the true bone of contention:
I have not made any claims. You are the one claiming Mary as free from original sin. Prove it.
You may also want to translate "kecharitomeme" to plain English so we can be on the same page. Thank you

Ubenedictus: [b] another logical fallacy, conclusion based on wrong premise. [/b]I said God brings about harmony and agreement, i didnt say whenever people agree they are doing Gods work those two points arent dsame. A laptop process information, that doesnt mean that that anything that process information is a laptop, go and learn your logic again. What is your aim? Pushing words into my mouth
not all the germans wanted the jews dead.
well i cant help but laugh at you. Before protestanism started there were already some translations in the local language. (I wonder why English was such a heretic language then)
you need to learn the difference between the state and the church. (The Vatican is a theocracy)You miss the oga in charge of the church, the holyspirit,(exactly! then condemn the evil corrupt pope) like i said you really need to believe in christ promise. The previous national assembly was called corrupt and yet all their policies that was passed into law cant be faulted, that is just a human organisation not to talk about 'the pillar and foundation of truth' guided by the holy spirit.

I love how you flare up when I play your game on you. (Notice the bolded) I asked if agreement was more important than truth and your answer was "if God isnt the guy who brings confusion then i guess he bring harmony and agreement." in other words you were implying that if we disagree over what is truth, the guys who agree on a viewpoint are on God's side. FAIL

I just wonder if it is necessary to mention the Bible, to know if Mary was a virgin or not before your pregnancy to see if after calving remained virgin., ...
A little common sense ... within both blind fanaticism.

Mr_Anony:

Lol, shouldn't the priority be truth rather than agreement?

But there is only ONE truth. In that, ubenedictus and I agree.

Paul disagreed with Peter, he never left the Church. He made his reservations known and the issue was resolved within the Church. He could never dare break off from the body of Christ. Even when he had preached to the Gentiles for years, he still went back to the Church in Jerusalem to confirm from them if he was preaching the right thing. ONE DOCTRINE! ONE FAITH! ONE TRUTH! ONE CHURCH! Not 35000 shops.

italo: Paul disagreed with Peter, he never left the Church. He made his reservations known and the issue was resolved within the Church. He could never dare break off from the body of Christ. Even when he had preached to the Gentiles for years, he still went back to the Church in Jerusalem to confirm from them if he was preaching the right thing. ONE DOCTRINE! ONE FAITH! ONE TRUTH! ONE CHURCH! Not 35000 shops.

Yes I agree, ONE DOCTRINE! ONE FAITH! ONE TRUTH! ONE CHURCH! but if you agree that the truth remains the same and never changes, then the doctrine must remain the same and never change, The faith must also be unshakable likewise the Church must remain true to the same faith, the same doctrine and the same truth.The one true church is not pentecostal, baptist, catholic, jehovah's witness, methodist e.t.c.

The one true church is the church that holds steadfastly to the truth which is Christ or else it is one of 35,000 shops.

The question now is; Is your church holding steadfastly to the truth which is Christ. Does your church resemble Christ?

Mr_Anony:

Yes I agree, ONE DOCTRINE! ONE FAITH! ONE TRUTH! ONE CHURCH! but if you agree that the truth remains the same and never changes, then the doctrine must remain the same and never change, The faith must also be unshakable likewise the Church must remain true to the same faith, the same doctrine and the same truth.The one true church is not pentecostal, baptist, catholic, jehovah's witness, methodist e.t.c.

The one true church is the church that holds steadfastly to the truth which is Christ or else it is one of 35,000 shops.

The question now is; Is your church holding steadfastly to the truth which is Christ. Does your church resemble Christ?

Yes! The one true Church is the Catholic Church.

Now since I have answered your own question, now my own questions are:

Since you have admitted in the other thread that you are not sure of what you are preaching (it could be wrong) and we Catholics say we are sure of what we are preaching (it cannot be wrong), why are you trying to teach us, when you could be teaching us the wrong thing (which would be the way to hell)?

Who should be teaching who, is it the one who knows (about a subject) that should teach the ignoramus (on that subject) or the ignoramus should teach the one who knows?

italo:

Yes! The one true Church is the Catholic Church.

Now since I have answered your own question, now my own questions are:

Since you have admitted in the other thread that you are not sure of what you are preaching (it could be wrong) and we Catholics say we are sure of what we are preaching (it cannot be wrong), why are you trying to teach us, when you could be teaching us the wrong thing (which would be the way to hell)?

Who should be teaching who, is it the one who knows (about a subject) that should teach the ignoramus (on that subject) or the ignoramus should teach the one who knows?

Again here we go with your dubious logic and poor attempts at insults. Claiming that you cannot be wrong doesn't automatically make you right. It is funny you would pounce on a soundbite and quote out of context so that it reads as something else. It doesn't still make you right.

I am not trying to teach you anything. I am only asking you to compare you "church" to the truth. If it passes then it is a true church. if it does not, then it is another 'shop'

Why are you getting so defensive? If your church is as true as you claim, then submit it for scrutiny.

So shall we proceed to scrutinize your "church" or are you afraid?

@Mr Anony

You also have to name your church so it could also be scrutinised.Don't hide under d broad term pentecostalism.Name ur church be it redeem,winners e.t.c

Mr_Anony:

Again here we go with your dubious logic and poor attempts at insults. Claiming that you cannot be wrong doesn't automatically make you right. It is funny you would pounce on a soundbite and quote out of context so that it reads as something else. It doesn't still make you right.

I am not trying to teach you anything. I am only asking you to compare you "church" to the truth. If it passes then it is a true church. if it does not, then it is another 'shop'

Why are you getting so defensive? If your church is as true as you claim, then submit it for scrutiny.

So shall we proceed to scrutinize your "church" or are you afraid?

Na wa o. When I ask you questions and bring up issues, you evade them and call them "trick questions", now again, you are say I am being defensive. What approach do you want me to take. Do you want to be the one to determine the things you say and also the things I say?

I have been comparingand continue to compare my Church to the truth and I have been asking and continue to ask the Holy Spirit for guidance, I have been reading and continue to read the Bible with an open mind and I have been telling and continue to tell you that all these have revealed to me that the Catholic Church is the one true Church that Christ built to teach all truth to all men. What else do you want me to do?

I'm sorry for the way I addressed you but if you want me to be civil you should also be careful about the way you talk about Popes, Priests, The Church...these are things that I hold sacred. Every man has a beast in him.

I say that I am right; you say that you don't know if you are right or wrong. If you don't know whether you are right or wrong, then you cannot know if I am right or wrong.

So if you don't know (since you are not sure if you are right or wrong) why are you trying to teach me what you don't know which may be wrong and be the road to hell, especially when I am certain about my position?

And to say that you didn't try to teach me anything, with due respect, is a big lie.

You tried to teach me how to determine the true Church in this thread; You tried to teach me how to determine whether Jesus was speaking literally or figuratively; you tried to teach me that baptism is only symbolic and not salvific; you tried to teach me the Characteristics of God's miracles (wrongly implying that it is always clear for humans to see); you tried to teach me the way to arrive at the truth (telling me to "forget popes, priests, the Church"..in the other thread... You tried to teach me many things that you yourself DON'T KNOW.

So I ask my questions again: why are you trying to teach us what you don't even know, which could very well be wrong and the way to hell?

Who should be the one to teach, is it the one who knows that should teach the one who doesn't know or the other way round?

You refuse to submit yourself for scrutiny - dodging questions that are asked you, but you want God's Church to be submitted to you for scrutiny. How hypocritical!

chukwudi44: @Mr Anony

You also have to name your church so it could also be scrutinised.Don't hide under d broad term pentecostalism.Name ur church be it redeem,winners e.t.c

You see that is the thing that bothers me with Christian sects. I got born-again by reading the bible and I base my belief on scripture I am not a pentecostal neither am I baptist or Methodist or whatever.I describe myself as a bible believing Christian.
Since you insist, the name of the church I attend is Hillsong church and yes sometimes my pastors preach errors but the beauty is that I can question and debate them (not in the service of course)and we can refer to scriptures as our final authority.

italo:

Na wa o. When I ask you questions and bring up issues, you evade them and call them "trick questions", now again, you are say I am being defensive. What approach do you want me to take. Do you want to be the one to determine the things you say and also the things I say?

I have been comparingand continue to compare my Church to the truth and I have been asking and continue to ask the Holy Spirit for guidance, I have been reading and continue to read the Bible with an open mind and I have been telling and continue to tell you that all these have revealed to me that the Catholic Church is the one true Church that Christ built to teach all truth to all men. What else do you want me to do?

I'm sorry for the way I addressed you but if you want me to be civil you should also be careful about the way you talk about Popes, Priests, The Church...these are things that I hold sacred. Every man has a beast in him.

I say that I am right; you say that you don't know if you are right or wrong. If you don't know whether you are right or wrong, then you cannot know if I am right or wrong.

So if you don't know (since you are not sure if you are right or wrong) why are you trying to teach me what you don't know which may be wrong and be the road to hell, especially when I am certain about my position?

And to say that you didn't try to teach me anything, with due respect, is a big lie.

You tried to teach me how to determine the true Church in this thread; You tried to teach me how to determine whether Jesus was speaking literally or figuratively; you tried to teach me that baptism is only symbolic and not salvific; you tried to teach me the Characteristics of God's miracles (wrongly implying that it is always clear for humans to see); you tried to teach me the way to arrive at the truth (telling me to "forget popes, priests, the Church"..in the other thread... You tried to teach me many things that you yourself DON'T KNOW.

So I ask my questions again: why are you trying to teach us what you don't even know, which could very well be wrong and the way to hell?

Who should be the one to teach, is it the one who knows that should teach the one who doesn't know or the other way round?

You refuse to submit yourself for scrutiny - dodging questions that are asked you, but you want God's Church to be submitted to you for scrutiny. How hypocritical!

What hypocrisy are you talking about? I never said I don't know, you jumped to that conclusion yourself. I am not trying to teach you anything. The one who claims he know must first prove that he knows before he can start teaching.
Even if you don't agree that the bible is the final authority, at least you agree that the bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is true.
I submit what I am saying to the scrutiny of the bible. If your church is truly God's Church them it must totally agree with the bible. If not your claim is false i.e. it is either your church is not God's church or the Holy Spirit is a self-contradicting liar.

How can we discuss when I don't even know what you stand for. 1st you are here, then you are there. You accept the authority of the church in canonising the new testament without seeking biblical scrutiny, then now you want biblical scrutiny on the issues you don't believe in. You said you could be wrong which means that you don't know if you are right or wrong then now you wanna switch to say that you cannot be wrong.

Again I ask:

Is there a possibility that you can be wrong in your interpretation or understanding of God's teaching using scripture and/or tradition?

Yes, no or I don't know.

Nobody will kill you on nairaland for being transparent.

italo: How can we discuss when I don't even know what you stand for. 1st you are here, then you are there. You accept the authority of the church in canonising the new testament without seeking biblical scrutiny, then now you want biblical scrutiny on the issues you don't believe in. You said you could be wrong which means that you don't know if you are right or wrong then now you wanna switch to say that you cannot be wrong.

Again I ask:

Is there a possibility that you can be wrong in your interpretation or understanding of God's teaching using scripture and/or tradition?

Yes, no or I don't know.

Nobody will kill you on nairaland for being transparent.

I am sorry my friend, I have answered your question clearly enough. What you want is a soundbite that you can jump on and I refuse to give that to you.

Perhaps this is a veiled attempt at shying away from the challenges I have put forward.

Stop being dubious and come clean. If your church's doctrine and popes are infallible, let us test it. Or are they infallible just because you say so?

Mr_Anony:

I am sorry my friend, I have answered your question clearly enough. What you want is a soundbite that you can jump on and I refuse to give that to you.

Perhaps this is a veiled attempt at shying away from the challenges I have put forward.

Stop being dubious and come clean. If your church's doctrine and popes are infallible, let us test it. Or are they infallible just because you say so?

Since you say you can be wrong in your interpretation or understanding of God's teaching using Scripture and Tradition, how can you then be in the position to determine the method for knowing what is truth and what is error?

A teacher can and should be tested, but only by the authorities, never by the student. And the only authority the Catholic Church is subject to is God, not Mr_Anony.

When you were in secondary or high school, were you the one that tested your Maths teacher? There mere fact that he was your teacher shows that he knew and you didn't. So if you don't know 1+ 1, how can you test your Maths teacher?

Likewise, you do not even know what is or is not scripture, so how can you test God's Church?

But just to let you make a fool of yourself, let us then scrutinizeThe Catholic Church against Scripture like you crave.

But first, you will agree with me that we have to determine what Scripture is, right?

So what is Scripture?

How do we know the origin, authors and the source of inspiration of all the books of the new testament, especially Mark and Luke?

You implied earlier that the Church that Christ built was corrupted at some point. At what point did this happen?

Note: I am expecting questions to my answers in this scrutiny.

italo:

Since you say you can be wrong in your interpretation or understanding of God's teaching using Scripture and Tradition, how can you then be in the position to determine the method for knowing what is truth and what is error?

A teacher can and should be tested, but only by the authorities, never by the student. And the only authority the Catholic Church is subject to is God, not Mr_Anony.

When you were in secondary or high school, were you the one that tested your Maths teacher? There mere fact that he was your teacher shows that he knew and you didn't. So if you don't know 1+ 1, how can you test your Maths teacher?

Likewise, you do not even know what is or is not scripture, so how can you test God's Church?

But just to let you make a fool of yourself, let us then scrutinizeThe Catholic Church against Scripture like you crave.

But first, you will agree with me that we have to determine what Scripture is, right?

So what is Scripture?

How do we know the origin, authors and the source of inspiration of all the books of the new testament, especially Mark and Luke?

You implied earlier that the Church that Christ built was corrupted at some point. At what point did this happen?

Note: I am expecting questions to my answers in this scrutiny.

My friend, let me use your Maths teacher analogy.

Now assumming I don't know maths and my math teacher gives me a maths textbook that says 1+1=2 but then my maths teacher starts teaching me that 1+1=3. I have every right to ask him to explain himself. Now instead of correcting himself he starts shouting "do you know maths?" "how dare you question my authority!" then it means that he doesn't really know the maths he is teaching and he is too arrogant to admit it.

I don't have to question what is scripture and what is not. Your church compiled scripture and I accept it. All I am asking now is that we examine your church against the bible that it claims to preach. How hard is that?

Mr_Anony:
My friend, let me use your Maths teacher analogy.

Now assumming I don't know maths and my math teacher gives me a maths textbook that says 1+1=2 but then my maths teacher starts teaching me that 1+1=3. I have every right to ask him to explain himself. Now instead of correcting himself he starts shouting "do you know maths?" "how dare you question my authority!" then it means that he doesn't really know the maths he is teaching and he is too arrogant to admit it.

Good! You are picking up. So since we are comparing the Church and Scripture to your Maths teacher and the textbook, we can then assume that your Maths teacher wrote the textbook just as the Church wrote the new testament and compiled the entirely Bible. So if you question the authenticity of what your Maths teacher teaches you, you should also question his textbook. But YOU are not questioning scripture, you affirm that scripture is true and you only question Church teaching. How do you know that the Church teaches error by tradition but only teaches truth in letter?
If the Church teaches error by tradition, then there every possibility that it taught error in scripture, and that would mean that you who hold scripture to be truth might well be doomed.

Then, if you have 1 + 1 = 2 in the text book, then 1 + 1 = 3 would be something contrary to what you have in the textbook. That is a wrong analogy to use BECAUSE the immaculate conception is not contrary to any part of scripture, only, it isn't explicitly taught, just like the canon of scripture wasn't explicitly taught. Now a good analogy would be, your teacher teaching you that the square-root of 4 is 2, when your textbook doesn't explicitly teach that probably because the textbook is for a certain class and squares and square roots are advanced for that class. The fact that it cannot be found in your text book does not make it false. In that case, it would not be up to you to decide the method for proving wether it is true or false, and it would be foolish to scrutinise your teacher against that one text book he wrote, especially when that text book doesn't explicitly teach squares and square roots but he has other text books tha teach squares and square roots. Will you let him teach you from those?

So you see, the teacher doesn't need to correct himself after all, and there is no shouting or arrogance anywhere, you just need to sit down, humble yourself and be taught by your teacher.

Mr_Anony:
I don't have to question what is scripture and what is not. Your church compiled scripture and I accept it. All I am asking now is that we examine your church against the bible that it claims to preach. How hard is that?

We have been examining the Church for ages but let us continue, as long as the topic of examination is treated in the Bible it compiled and we can refer to its other "textbooks" when the topic isn't explicitly treated in the Bible. Also, if you will let us examine your Church side by side.

Please also answer my question: at what point in time did Christ's Church get corrupted?

Honesty, remember.

Mr_Anony:

Ok all is well then, I wasn't referring to you but your popes who declared people heretics for translating the bible to English (i.e. condemning people for reciting the lord's prayer in a language they understood)

that is a lie, translating the bible wasnt a crime, translating without permission or when permission had been refused was a crime, producing and possesing an adultrated bible was also a crime, and in our world today any reasonable xtain will consider the above as crimes. Just know that nobody was kill for lawfully translating the bible and the laws that were applied were state law not church, nobody called english a heritic language. The church was alway careful when it comes to transmitting the word of God.

in other words killing people for an attempt to understand scripture.

another lie, the state considered adultrated bibles as capital crime.

Your pope has a history of adulterous, power hungry, murders as predecessors and this you cannot deny.

i have noticed that protestants love to talk about peoples sins, but in an arguement that constitute a logical fallacy called ad hominem.

Back to the true bone of contention:
I have not made any claims. You are the one claiming Mary as free from original sin. Prove it.
You may also want to translate "kecharitomeme" to plain English so we can be on the same page. Thank you

i have already translated it check my previous posts.

Mr_Anony:
I love how you flare up when I play your game on you. (Notice the bolded) I asked if agreement was more important than truth and your answer was "if God isnt the guy who brings confusion then i guess he bring harmony and agreement." in other words you were implying that if we disagree over what is truth, the guys who agree on a viewpoint are on God's side. FAIL

you are alledging that im implying, if you are not in my mind you cant know. Even then, the fact that i said God inspires harmony doesnt imply that all agreements are Godly. Your logic is very defective. I inspire laughter in people, but that doesnt mean im responsible for all laughter.

Ptolomeus: I just wonder if it is necessary to mention the Bible, to know if Mary was a virgin or not before your pregnancy to see if after calving remained virgin., ...
A little common sense ... within both blind fanaticism.

wow u are on ya own.

Why Is Mary Crying?

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0040/0040_01.asp

Ubenedictus: you are alledging that im implying, if you are not in my mind you cant know. Even then, the fact that i said God inspires harmony doesnt imply that all agreements are Godly. Your logic is very defective. I inspire laughter in people, but that doesnt mean im responsible for all laughter.

As in...very very defective logic.

That Someone says that God is not the author of division, another understands it to mean that God is the source of ALL unity.

Pathetic!

OLAADEGBU: Why Is Mary Crying?

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0040/0040_01.asp

she is crying because the iniquity of the world has reach horrible heights, because many has left the church of christ to form their own churches, she is crying for the sins of people like u and me. Scrape that your anti catholic site. If you have a church father to quote i'll be more inclined to listen untill then stop diverting the topic.

Ubenedictus: she is crying because the iniquity of the world has reach horrible heights, because many has left the church of christ to form their own churches, she is crying for the sins of people like u and me. Scrape that your anti catholic site. If you have a church father to quote i'll be more inclined to listen untill then stop diverting the topic.

For God!
First we have a spirit that impregnates a woman!
Then a spirit cries ...

Call a psychiatrist!

Ptolomeus:

For God!
First we have a spirit that impregnates a woman!
Then a spirit cries ...

Call a psychiatrist!

God can do the imposible that is why it is called a miracle. Actually i believe mary is in heaven body and soul.