First Of All Let Me Say, This has Gotten Out Of Hand. I'm gonna address the subject as politely and respectfully as I can. But Truth can be a two edged sword. If you listen fine if not so be it.
An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this worldâ€â€how he can please his wife and his interests are divided
While this true, admirable, and sometimes thrust upon us. The Jewish priesthood was commanded against such things. I could find many verses to support my point. But, I think its time for cooler heads to prevail. Like some of you have said, anyone can find a verse and use it to there own advantage. I know what I said was hard to take. I could go on and on with this and that. Making point after point only to be rebuffed. God also forbid, the hierachial systems that is inherent in the RC church, like he did at Antioch. My point is there have been many fallible priests, who don't have there mind on God, but authority, power, etc.. The Child Molestations in the RC is proof of this. The Fact That the Vatican has power and uses it to shadow its priests from guilt, by use of there power and position, is also evidence of this.
you do know that pagans use the word god? by your logic you must not use this word, what about the word hermeneutics do you use this...uhoh if you do, its about the greek god hermes was zeus' messenger to enlighten humans.
So, God's a generic term. In fact The latin word for God is Dios. Dios is representative of the Sun and Mithras. Dios day is Sunday, which is why the Catholics moved, the Sabbath to Sunday. I also have a great deal of knowledge about mythology and pagan culture in ancient times. Rome was always happy to add another god to there pantheon. The Word "Goth" as In Ostro and Visigoth's were the people who sacked Rome? Which means God's people!
In legal terms your using false logic.
A Complex Question Argument: Where Two unrelated points are joined as a single idea.
The Relativist Fallacy: Where a person rejects a claim by asserting that the claim might be true for others but is not for him/her.
The Who is to say Arguement? By affecting an argument with a skeptical attitude using rhetoric. This line of questioniong is supposed to “prove†that there is no way to decide whether any position or view is better than another. By assuming that the truth is unknowable.
Non Sequitor Inconsistencies: Asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true.
Genetic Fallacy: A perceived defect in the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence that discredits the claim or thing itself.
Anyways thats enough of that I could go on but you get my point, I hope.
maybe you should read something besides jack chick
This is an ad hominem attack on the the character and beliefs of the writer
If I was to say that I would be edited, and warned, I've been edited for just using theses characters ! @ # $ % & * ?
So I'm assuming that, Catholic voodoo. The Fact That Mardi Gras Is the Celebration of Lent (a pagan holiday), so everyone can party. That Malachi Martin who was the Lord protector of Popes and one of the most trusted men in Rome. That Hans Kung a brilliant philosopher who as an ex-priest is critical of Rome and her policies. That the illogical stance of Transubstatiation and Papal Infalliblity. Are not to be considered valid arguments that something is not a miss?
It must be said that all scripture was oral before it was written. All of it was tradition.
Well The Jew's where meticulous, at transcribing his word as the Lord commanded them. The Septuigant is proof of that. Also the fact that after 1000's of years, scrolls dug up in Qumram vary very little from the text we have today, puts this last statement in doubt.
: That's quite a bit of false teachings. But I notice that you defend the pope over Jesus because the two disgaree with each other. So again, you proved my point that catholicism is a cult, pure and simply. ;-)