info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Mattb
Jan 18, 2022, 1:37:41 PM1/18/22
to
Posted with permission.
What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
clear about what we should accept and believe. But the Roman Catholic
Church has ignored the Bible in order to secure control of what its
people believe.
Roman Catholic Teaching
The Roman Catholic Church does not accept the Bible as the only source
of truth. In fact, they do not believe the Bible is the only source of
divine truth. The following quote comes from the Second Vatican
Council.
. . . there exists a close connection and communication between sacred
tradition and Sacred Scripture. . . Sacred Scripture is the word of
God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of
the divine Spirit, while sacred tradition takes the word of God
entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and
hands it on to their successors in its full purity, so that led by the
light of the Spirit of truth they may in proclaiming it preserve this
word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.[1]
This statement says that they believe that Sacred Scripture and sacred
tradition are both necessary and both are divine truth. It is also
important to notice that they believe sacred tradition preserves the
Word of God. That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
Sacred Scriptures. It is also important to note that they believe
their understanding of divine truth evolves.
This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church
with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed
down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the
words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.[2]
This last statement simply means that their teachings will change, and
they have. Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
teachings of the Bible. One of the most recent new doctrines of the
church is the worship of Mary. This is a serious problem since any new
doctrine could be added or revoked. Is it possible that a new
understanding about the means of salvation will be taught some day?
The concept of an oral tradition with an understanding that evolves
over time means that there is no absolute truth within the Roman
Catholic Church.
The Second Vatican Council also makes the following statement.
Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church
draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed.
Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
reverence.[3]
They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence.
Then the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second
Vatican Council says that both of them are the word of God.
Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the
word of God . . .[4]
It is important to notice that when they use the expression the “word
of God,” they do not mean only the Sacred Scriptures. Most Protestants
use the expression the “word of God” to refer to both the Old and New
Testaments. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “word of
God” is both the Sacred Scripture and sacred tradition. This is a
serious issue because we saw earlier that their sacred tradition has
greater importance to them. In the next statement, they say that
neither Sacred Scripture or sacred tradition can be completely
trusted.
It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and
the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise
design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand
without the others, and that all together and each in its own way
under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the
salvation of souls.[5]
The absolute and ultimate authority is the teaching of the church.
They believe that this is “God’s most wise design.” We will discover
shortly that neither Jesus nor His apostles taught this. This is not
God’s wise design but human manipulation. In fact, scripture has a
serious statement about those who would do the teach that we should
abstain from foods and forbid men and women to marry. The doctrine of
demons teaches the clergy to not marry and forbids eating certain
foods on Fridays and other occasions.
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away
from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of
demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own
conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and
advocate abstaining from foods, which God has created to be gratefully
shared in by those who believe and know the truth. 1 Timothy 4:1-3
(NASB)
The Roman Catholic Church forbids marriage and forbids the eating of
meat on Fridays and other times.
Jesus and Tradition
In the gospel of Matthew we are told that some Pharisees and scribes
came to Jesus from Jerusalem to ask Him why His disciples had not
washed their hands before eating. The Pharisees and scribes were the
religious leaders in Jerusalem and they did not like other folks
listening to and following Jesus (John 11:47-52). Then Jesus answered
with the following statement.
And He answered and said to them, “And why do you yourselves
transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? . .
. BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS
OF MEN.” Matthew 15:3, 9 (NASB)
The gospel of Mark includes some additional statements made by Jesus.
“Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
He was also saying to them, “You nicely set aside the commandment of
God in order to keep your tradition.” . . . thus invalidating the word
of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many
things such as that.” Mark 7:8-9, 13 (NASB)
Human tradition is not the scared scripture. It is simply human
tradition. These religious leaders were false teachers because they
ignored the sacred scriptures and taught their traditions as divine
truth. Jesus rebuked them for their false teaching. Later they killed
Him.
Apostle Paul and Tradition
The Apostle Paul also had some strong things to say about tradition.
The apostle had both positive and negative things to say. Here are his
positive statements.
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold
firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. (NASB) 1
Cor. 11:2
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you
were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us. (NASB) 2
Thess. 2:15
In both statements, the apostle encourages the saints or those who
believe in Jesus, to hold firmly to his traditions or what he has
taught them. It is important to remember that the New Testament was in
the process of being written. What Paul taught or referred to as
“traditions” was to become scripture and was included in the Bible.
Therefore, the wonderful news about Jesus was initially taught by word
of mouth. The last statement is used by the Roman Catholic Church to
support their teaching about their “sacred” tradition.
But the Apostle has some strong statements about accepting anything
contrary to what had already been taught.
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and
not according to the tradition which you received from us. 2
Thessalonians 3:6 (NASB)
See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty
deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the
elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8 (NASB)
They were to reject anything that did not agree with what they had
already been taught. But the most significant statement is found in
the next passage of the sacred scriptures.
But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a
gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be
accursed. Galatians 1:8 (NASB)
The Roman Catholic Church has been adopting new teachings since the
time of Jesus and the apostles. The apostle Paul clearly says that we
are to reject any teacher who changes what has already been taught.
The scriptures are the only proof as to what has been taught. Even if
it is an angel, institution, or church, we are to reject that person
or organization.
Conclusion:
The sacred scriptures are the final authority according to 2 Timothy.
The Apostle Peter also tells us that God has given us the authority to
interpret scripture too!
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man
of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16
(NASB)
But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter
of one’s own interpretation . . . 2 Peter 1:20 (NASB)
Neither the Roman Catholic Church, a Protestant Church, or this
website has the final and exclusive authority or right to interpret
the sacred scriptures. In fact if anyone of us disagrees with what the
apostles put in writing, we are to be rejected as false teachers.
Today the Roman Catholic Church is teaching error. They are teaching
human traditions as sacred truth. Their traditions cannot be found in
the things the Apostle Paul had previously taught.
But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a
gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be
accursed. Galatians 1:8 (NASB)
References:
1. Second Vatican Council. “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine
Revelation.” no. 9.
2. Ibid., no. 8.
3. Ibid, no. 9.
4. Ibid., no. 10.
5. Ibid.
https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/what-does-the-bible-say-about-roman-catholic-traditions/
What are you views on this??
What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
clear about what we should accept and believe. But the Roman Catholic
Church has ignored the Bible in order to secure control of what its
people believe.
Roman Catholic Teaching
The Roman Catholic Church does not accept the Bible as the only source
of truth. In fact, they do not believe the Bible is the only source of
divine truth. The following quote comes from the Second Vatican
Council.
. . . there exists a close connection and communication between sacred
tradition and Sacred Scripture. . . Sacred Scripture is the word of
God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of
the divine Spirit, while sacred tradition takes the word of God
entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and
hands it on to their successors in its full purity, so that led by the
light of the Spirit of truth they may in proclaiming it preserve this
word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.[1]
This statement says that they believe that Sacred Scripture and sacred
tradition are both necessary and both are divine truth. It is also
important to notice that they believe sacred tradition preserves the
Word of God. That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
Sacred Scriptures. It is also important to note that they believe
their understanding of divine truth evolves.
This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church
with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed
down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the
words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.[2]
This last statement simply means that their teachings will change, and
they have. Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
teachings of the Bible. One of the most recent new doctrines of the
church is the worship of Mary. This is a serious problem since any new
doctrine could be added or revoked. Is it possible that a new
understanding about the means of salvation will be taught some day?
The concept of an oral tradition with an understanding that evolves
over time means that there is no absolute truth within the Roman
Catholic Church.
The Second Vatican Council also makes the following statement.
Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church
draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed.
Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
reverence.[3]
They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence.
Then the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second
Vatican Council says that both of them are the word of God.
Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the
word of God . . .[4]
It is important to notice that when they use the expression the “word
of God,” they do not mean only the Sacred Scriptures. Most Protestants
use the expression the “word of God” to refer to both the Old and New
Testaments. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “word of
God” is both the Sacred Scripture and sacred tradition. This is a
serious issue because we saw earlier that their sacred tradition has
greater importance to them. In the next statement, they say that
neither Sacred Scripture or sacred tradition can be completely
trusted.
It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and
the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise
design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand
without the others, and that all together and each in its own way
under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the
salvation of souls.[5]
The absolute and ultimate authority is the teaching of the church.
They believe that this is “God’s most wise design.” We will discover
shortly that neither Jesus nor His apostles taught this. This is not
God’s wise design but human manipulation. In fact, scripture has a
serious statement about those who would do the teach that we should
abstain from foods and forbid men and women to marry. The doctrine of
demons teaches the clergy to not marry and forbids eating certain
foods on Fridays and other occasions.
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away
from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of
demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own
conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and
advocate abstaining from foods, which God has created to be gratefully
shared in by those who believe and know the truth. 1 Timothy 4:1-3
(NASB)
The Roman Catholic Church forbids marriage and forbids the eating of
meat on Fridays and other times.
Jesus and Tradition
In the gospel of Matthew we are told that some Pharisees and scribes
came to Jesus from Jerusalem to ask Him why His disciples had not
washed their hands before eating. The Pharisees and scribes were the
religious leaders in Jerusalem and they did not like other folks
listening to and following Jesus (John 11:47-52). Then Jesus answered
with the following statement.
And He answered and said to them, “And why do you yourselves
transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? . .
. BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS
OF MEN.” Matthew 15:3, 9 (NASB)
The gospel of Mark includes some additional statements made by Jesus.
“Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
He was also saying to them, “You nicely set aside the commandment of
God in order to keep your tradition.” . . . thus invalidating the word
of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many
things such as that.” Mark 7:8-9, 13 (NASB)
Human tradition is not the scared scripture. It is simply human
tradition. These religious leaders were false teachers because they
ignored the sacred scriptures and taught their traditions as divine
truth. Jesus rebuked them for their false teaching. Later they killed
Him.
Apostle Paul and Tradition
The Apostle Paul also had some strong things to say about tradition.
The apostle had both positive and negative things to say. Here are his
positive statements.
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold
firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. (NASB) 1
Cor. 11:2
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you
were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us. (NASB) 2
Thess. 2:15
In both statements, the apostle encourages the saints or those who
believe in Jesus, to hold firmly to his traditions or what he has
taught them. It is important to remember that the New Testament was in
the process of being written. What Paul taught or referred to as
“traditions” was to become scripture and was included in the Bible.
Therefore, the wonderful news about Jesus was initially taught by word
of mouth. The last statement is used by the Roman Catholic Church to
support their teaching about their “sacred” tradition.
But the Apostle has some strong statements about accepting anything
contrary to what had already been taught.
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and
not according to the tradition which you received from us. 2
Thessalonians 3:6 (NASB)
See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty
deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the
elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8 (NASB)
They were to reject anything that did not agree with what they had
already been taught. But the most significant statement is found in
the next passage of the sacred scriptures.
But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a
gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be
accursed. Galatians 1:8 (NASB)
The Roman Catholic Church has been adopting new teachings since the
time of Jesus and the apostles. The apostle Paul clearly says that we
are to reject any teacher who changes what has already been taught.
The scriptures are the only proof as to what has been taught. Even if
it is an angel, institution, or church, we are to reject that person
or organization.
Conclusion:
The sacred scriptures are the final authority according to 2 Timothy.
The Apostle Peter also tells us that God has given us the authority to
interpret scripture too!
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man
of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16
(NASB)
But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter
of one’s own interpretation . . . 2 Peter 1:20 (NASB)
Neither the Roman Catholic Church, a Protestant Church, or this
website has the final and exclusive authority or right to interpret
the sacred scriptures. In fact if anyone of us disagrees with what the
apostles put in writing, we are to be rejected as false teachers.
Today the Roman Catholic Church is teaching error. They are teaching
human traditions as sacred truth. Their traditions cannot be found in
the things the Apostle Paul had previously taught.
But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a
gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be
accursed. Galatians 1:8 (NASB)
References:
1. Second Vatican Council. “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine
Revelation.” no. 9.
2. Ibid., no. 8.
3. Ibid, no. 9.
4. Ibid., no. 10.
5. Ibid.
https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/what-does-the-bible-say-about-roman-catholic-traditions/
What are you views on this??
P+Barker
Jan 18, 2022, 4:55:15 PM1/18/22
to
On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>Posted with permission.
accoding to the troll and liar.....
>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>
>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>clear about what we should accept and believe.
If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
statements about following the traditions of man.
Will matty follow up on this?
Or will he make some crap up?
Let's see.
>But the Roman Catholic
>Church has ignored the Bible in order to secure control of what its
>people believe.
Ha sit?
Or is this something matty, the troll will decide upon?
>Roman Catholic Teaching
>The Roman Catholic Church does not accept the Bible as the only source
>of truth. In fact, they do not believe the Bible is the only source of
>divine truth. The following quote comes from the Second Vatican
>Council.
>. . . there exists a close connection and communication between sacred
>tradition and Sacred Scripture. . .
So far, so good.
> Sacred Scripture is the word of
>God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of
>the divine Spirit,
The Bible is the "INSPIRED" Word of God.
> while sacred tradition takes the word of God
>entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and
>hands it on to their successors in its full purity,
What does this mean?
> so that led by the
>light of the Spirit of truth they may in proclaiming it preserve this
>word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.[1]
What does this mean?
>This statement says that they believe
Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
matty is about to make something up.
> that Sacred Scripture and sacred
>tradition are both necessary and both are divine truth.
The RCC does not say tradition is necessary.
That is like saying cottage cheese is necessary.
>It is also
>important to notice that they believe sacred tradition preserves the
>Word of God.
Huh?
Where in the world did this come from?
>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>Sacred Scriptures.
LIE. LIE. LIE.
This has never been a claim of the RCC.
Somebody just made that shit up.
> It is also important to note that they believe
>their understanding of divine truth evolves.
LIE. LIE. LIE.
This has never been a claim of the RCC.
Somebody just made that shit up.
Read the Nicene Creed.
It is our profession of faith.
It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
It has not changed.
It has not evolved.
>This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church
>with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
>understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed
>down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
>constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the
>words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.[2]
OK then.
>This last statement simply means
Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
matty is about to make something up.
>that their teachings will change, and they have.
Some examples please?
>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>teachings of the Bible.
Some examples please?
>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>church is the worship of Mary.
We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
It is a commandment from God Himself.
If you wish to worship her, go for it.
Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
>This is a serious problem since any new
>doctrine could be added or revoked.
I suppose if you worship Mary, you can worship a goat next.
Go for it.
>Is it possible that a new
>understanding about the means of salvation will be taught some day?
Only when you start worshipping yer goat.
>The concept of an oral tradition with an understanding that evolves
>over time means that there is no absolute truth within the Roman
>Catholic Church.
If it evolved over time, then maybe.
Since it doesn't, then you are a liar and a troll.
>The Second Vatican Council also makes the following statement.
>Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church
>draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed.
>Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>reverence.[3]
Yup.
Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
supplement to Scripture.
https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
Second Thessalonians 2:15 mentions “tradition” in some translations:
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye
have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (KJV). The NIV
simply says “teachings.” Paul cites both his oral teaching and his
written epistles as authoritative for the church. There is nothing
here, though, that would suggest apostolic succession or a lasting
body of oral tradition distinct from the written Word. Paul, who had
been teaching for many years before he wrote any epistle, is simply
saying that his previous instructions delivered in Thessalonica were
to be followed, as were those contained in his first letter to them.
In other words, Paul is saying, “Hold fast to what I directly taught,
whether I said it when I was with you, or wrote it after I left.”
1 Corinthians 11:2
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
traditions just as I handed them on to you.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the
traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
our letter.
2 Thessalonians 3:6
Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to
keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according
to the tradition that they received from us.
Philippians 4:9
Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard
and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you.
>They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence.
>Then the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second
>Vatican Council says that both of them are the word of God.
>Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the
>word of God . . .[4]
>
>It is important to notice that when they use the expression the “word
>of God,” they do not mean only the Sacred Scriptures. Most Protestants
>use the expression the “word of God” to refer to both the Old and New
>Testaments. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “word of
>God” is both the Sacred Scripture and sacred tradition.
OK
>This is a
>serious issue because we saw earlier that their sacred tradition has
>greater importance to them.
LIE. LIE. LIE.
Above you claimed:
Or.... are you merely trolling?
> In the next statement, they say that
>neither Sacred Scripture or sacred tradition can be completely
>trusted.
HUH?
Did you just make up some more shit?
I didn't hear you.
Provide the quote where "THEY SAY" this.
>It is clear, therefore,
+++ WHOPPER ALERT......
> that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and
>the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise
>design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand
>without the others,
LIE. LIE..... LIE.....
The RCC has never said this, or implied this.
> and that all together and each in its own way
>under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the
>salvation of souls.[5]
LIE. LIE..... LIE.....
The RCC has never said this, or implied this.
That is enough for now.
matty found a christian site that seems sola scriptura.
Good for him.
Unfortunately, the opinions of this site are bull shit.
>Posted with permission.
accoding to the troll and liar.....
>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>
>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>clear about what we should accept and believe.
statements about following the traditions of man.
Will matty follow up on this?
Or will he make some crap up?
Let's see.
>But the Roman Catholic
>Church has ignored the Bible in order to secure control of what its
>people believe.
Or is this something matty, the troll will decide upon?
>Roman Catholic Teaching
>The Roman Catholic Church does not accept the Bible as the only source
>of truth. In fact, they do not believe the Bible is the only source of
>divine truth. The following quote comes from the Second Vatican
>Council.
>. . . there exists a close connection and communication between sacred
>tradition and Sacred Scripture. . .
> Sacred Scripture is the word of
>God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of
>the divine Spirit,
> while sacred tradition takes the word of God
>entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and
>hands it on to their successors in its full purity,
> so that led by the
>light of the Spirit of truth they may in proclaiming it preserve this
>word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.[1]
>This statement says that they believe
matty is about to make something up.
> that Sacred Scripture and sacred
>tradition are both necessary and both are divine truth.
That is like saying cottage cheese is necessary.
>It is also
>important to notice that they believe sacred tradition preserves the
>Word of God.
Where in the world did this come from?
>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>Sacred Scriptures.
This has never been a claim of the RCC.
Somebody just made that shit up.
> It is also important to note that they believe
>their understanding of divine truth evolves.
This has never been a claim of the RCC.
Somebody just made that shit up.
Read the Nicene Creed.
It is our profession of faith.
It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
It has not changed.
It has not evolved.
>This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church
>with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
>understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed
>down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
>constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the
>words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.[2]
>This last statement simply means
matty is about to make something up.
>that their teachings will change, and they have.
>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>teachings of the Bible.
>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>church is the worship of Mary.
It is a commandment from God Himself.
If you wish to worship her, go for it.
Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
>This is a serious problem since any new
>doctrine could be added or revoked.
Go for it.
>Is it possible that a new
>understanding about the means of salvation will be taught some day?
>The concept of an oral tradition with an understanding that evolves
>over time means that there is no absolute truth within the Roman
>Catholic Church.
Since it doesn't, then you are a liar and a troll.
>The Second Vatican Council also makes the following statement.
>Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church
>draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed.
>Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>reverence.[3]
Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
supplement to Scripture.
https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
Second Thessalonians 2:15 mentions “tradition” in some translations:
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye
have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (KJV). The NIV
simply says “teachings.” Paul cites both his oral teaching and his
written epistles as authoritative for the church. There is nothing
here, though, that would suggest apostolic succession or a lasting
body of oral tradition distinct from the written Word. Paul, who had
been teaching for many years before he wrote any epistle, is simply
saying that his previous instructions delivered in Thessalonica were
to be followed, as were those contained in his first letter to them.
In other words, Paul is saying, “Hold fast to what I directly taught,
whether I said it when I was with you, or wrote it after I left.”
1 Corinthians 11:2
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
traditions just as I handed them on to you.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the
traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
our letter.
2 Thessalonians 3:6
Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to
keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according
to the tradition that they received from us.
Philippians 4:9
Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard
and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you.
>They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence.
>Then the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second
>Vatican Council says that both of them are the word of God.
>Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the
>word of God . . .[4]
>
>It is important to notice that when they use the expression the “word
>of God,” they do not mean only the Sacred Scriptures. Most Protestants
>use the expression the “word of God” to refer to both the Old and New
>Testaments. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “word of
>God” is both the Sacred Scripture and sacred tradition.
>This is a
>serious issue because we saw earlier that their sacred tradition has
>greater importance to them.
Above you claimed:
"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
So did you LIE?
Or.... are you merely trolling?
> In the next statement, they say that
>neither Sacred Scripture or sacred tradition can be completely
>trusted.
Did you just make up some more shit?
I didn't hear you.
Provide the quote where "THEY SAY" this.
>It is clear, therefore,
+++ WHOPPER ALERT......
> that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and
>the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise
>design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand
>without the others,
The RCC has never said this, or implied this.
> and that all together and each in its own way
>under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the
>salvation of souls.[5]
The RCC has never said this, or implied this.
That is enough for now.
matty found a christian site that seems sola scriptura.
Good for him.
Unfortunately, the opinions of this site are bull shit.
Mattb
Jan 18, 2022, 9:28:52 PM1/18/22
to
On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>Posted with permission.
>
>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>
>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>
>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>
>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>statements about following the traditions of man.
>Will matty follow up on this?
>Or will he make some crap up?
>Let's see.
Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
provide you with some answers in future articles.
>
>
>
>>Roman Catholic Teaching
>>The Roman Catholic Church does not accept the Bible as the only source
>>of truth. In fact, they do not believe the Bible is the only source of
>>divine truth. The following quote comes from the Second Vatican
>>Council.
>>. . . there exists a close connection and communication between sacred
>>tradition and Sacred Scripture. . .
>
>So far, so good.
>
>
>> Sacred Scripture is the word of
>>God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of
>>the divine Spirit,
>
>The Bible is the "INSPIRED" Word of God.
OK that is your opinion.
Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>
>>This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church
>>with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
>>understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed
>>down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
>>constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the
>>words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.[2]
>
>OK then.
>
>
>
>>This last statement simply means
>
>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>matty is about to make something up.
Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
Barker using calumny and disinformation.
use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
Therefore, if the earthly power errs, it shall be judged by the
spiritual power ... but if the supreme spiritual power errs it can be
judged only by God, and not by man ... Therefore we declare, state,
define and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to salvation for
every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff.
Pope Boniface VIII
more to come.
>It is a commandment from God Himself.
Show where.
>If you wish to worship her, go for it.
>Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
Yet you violate theh second commandment in bowing before her.
https://www.landoverbaptist.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/mary-worship.jpg
Here you see even your Pope bows before a idol.
https://images.randomhouse.com/cover/9780847846689
Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
>
>2 Thessalonians 2:15
>So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the
>traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
>our letter.
Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
traditions you were willing to use lies in its defense.
>
>So did you LIE?
Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
Barker using calumny, with disinformation.
That is your opinion and one you were not able to counter.
wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>Posted with permission.
>
>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>
>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>
>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>
>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>statements about following the traditions of man.
>Will matty follow up on this?
>Or will he make some crap up?
>Let's see.
provide you with some answers in future articles.
>
>
>>But the Roman Catholic
>>Church has ignored the Bible in order to secure control of what its
>>people believe.
>
>Ha sit?
>Or is this something matty, the troll will decide upon?
Patrick Barker can you provide a counter to this claim?
>
>>But the Roman Catholic
>>Church has ignored the Bible in order to secure control of what its
>>people believe.
>
>Ha sit?
>Or is this something matty, the troll will decide upon?
>
>
>
>>Roman Catholic Teaching
>>The Roman Catholic Church does not accept the Bible as the only source
>>of truth. In fact, they do not believe the Bible is the only source of
>>divine truth. The following quote comes from the Second Vatican
>>Council.
>>. . . there exists a close connection and communication between sacred
>>tradition and Sacred Scripture. . .
>
>So far, so good.
>
>
>> Sacred Scripture is the word of
>>God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of
>>the divine Spirit,
>
>The Bible is the "INSPIRED" Word of God.
>
>
>> while sacred tradition takes the word of God
>>entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and
>>hands it on to their successors in its full purity,
>
>What does this mean?
>
>
>> so that led by the
>>light of the Spirit of truth they may in proclaiming it preserve this
>>word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.[1]
>
>What does this mean?
Think.
>
>> while sacred tradition takes the word of God
>>entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and
>>hands it on to their successors in its full purity,
>
>What does this mean?
>
>
>> so that led by the
>>light of the Spirit of truth they may in proclaiming it preserve this
>>word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.[1]
>
>What does this mean?
>
>
>>This statement says that they believe
>
>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>matty is about to make something up.
Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>
>>This statement says that they believe
>
>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>matty is about to make something up.
Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>
>> that Sacred Scripture and sacred
>>tradition are both necessary and both are divine truth.
>
>The RCC does not say tradition is necessary.
>That is like saying cottage cheese is necessary.
>
>
>>It is also
>>important to notice that they believe sacred tradition preserves the
>>Word of God.
>
>Huh?
>Where in the world did this come from?
>
>
>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>Sacred Scriptures.
>
>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>Somebody just made that shit up.
Then show us what they do claim.
>
>> that Sacred Scripture and sacred
>>tradition are both necessary and both are divine truth.
>
>The RCC does not say tradition is necessary.
>That is like saying cottage cheese is necessary.
>
>
>>It is also
>>important to notice that they believe sacred tradition preserves the
>>Word of God.
>
>Huh?
>Where in the world did this come from?
>
>
>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>Sacred Scriptures.
>
>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>Somebody just made that shit up.
>
>
>> It is also important to note that they believe
>>their understanding of divine truth evolves.
>
>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>Somebody just made that shit up.
>
>Read the Nicene Creed.
>It is our profession of faith.
>It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
>It has not changed.
>It has not evolved.
That will be another article and post.
>
>> It is also important to note that they believe
>>their understanding of divine truth evolves.
>
>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>Somebody just made that shit up.
>
>Read the Nicene Creed.
>It is our profession of faith.
>It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
>It has not changed.
>It has not evolved.
>
>
>>This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church
>>with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the
>>understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed
>>down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
>>constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the
>>words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.[2]
>
>OK then.
>
>
>
>>This last statement simply means
>
>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>matty is about to make something up.
Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>
>
>>that their teachings will change, and they have.
>
>Some examples please?
>
>
>>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>>teachings of the Bible.
>
>Some examples please?
Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>
>
>>that their teachings will change, and they have.
>
>Some examples please?
>
>
>>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>>teachings of the Bible.
>
>Some examples please?
use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
Therefore, if the earthly power errs, it shall be judged by the
spiritual power ... but if the supreme spiritual power errs it can be
judged only by God, and not by man ... Therefore we declare, state,
define and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to salvation for
every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff.
Pope Boniface VIII
more to come.
>
>
>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>church is the worship of Mary.
>
>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>
>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>church is the worship of Mary.
>
>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>If you wish to worship her, go for it.
>Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
https://www.landoverbaptist.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/mary-worship.jpg
Here you see even your Pope bows before a idol.
https://images.randomhouse.com/cover/9780847846689
>
>2 Thessalonians 2:15
>So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the
>traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
>our letter.
>
>2 Thessalonians 3:6
>Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to
>keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according
>to the tradition that they received from us.
>
>Philippians 4:9
>Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard
>and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you.
>
>
>>They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence.
>>Then the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second
>>Vatican Council says that both of them are the word of God.
>>Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the
>>word of God . . .[4]
>>
>>It is important to notice that when they use the expression the “word
>>of God,” they do not mean only the Sacred Scriptures. Most Protestants
>>use the expression the “word of God” to refer to both the Old and New
>>Testaments. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “word of
>>God” is both the Sacred Scripture and sacred tradition.
>
>OK
>
>
>>This is a
>>serious issue because we saw earlier that their sacred tradition has
>>greater importance to them.
>
>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>Above you claimed:
>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
Patrick look at your own reaction to even questioning those
>2 Thessalonians 3:6
>Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to
>keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according
>to the tradition that they received from us.
>
>Philippians 4:9
>Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard
>and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you.
>
>
>>They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence.
>>Then the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second
>>Vatican Council says that both of them are the word of God.
>>Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the
>>word of God . . .[4]
>>
>>It is important to notice that when they use the expression the “word
>>of God,” they do not mean only the Sacred Scriptures. Most Protestants
>>use the expression the “word of God” to refer to both the Old and New
>>Testaments. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “word of
>>God” is both the Sacred Scripture and sacred tradition.
>
>OK
>
>
>>This is a
>>serious issue because we saw earlier that their sacred tradition has
>>greater importance to them.
>
>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>Above you claimed:
>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
traditions you were willing to use lies in its defense.
>
>So did you LIE?
Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
Barker using calumny, with disinformation.
P+Barker
Jan 19, 2022, 6:05:58 AM1/19/22
to
On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
Is that about it?
Why did you poist it then?
>>>This statement says that they believe
>>
>>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>>matty is about to make something up.
>
>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
Then you do not defend an article you posted?
Is that about it?
Why did you poist it then?
>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>
>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>
> Then show us what they do claim.
Been there, done that.
>>Read the Nicene Creed.
>>It is our profession of faith.
>>It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
>>It has not changed.
>>It has not evolved.
>
> That will be another article and post.
Is that about it?
Why did you poist it then?
>>>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>>>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>>>teachings of the Bible.
>>
>>Some examples please?
>
> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
Married priests do not.
>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>
>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>
> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>
> Show where.
Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>If you wish to worship her, go for it.
>>Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
>
> Yet you violate theh second commandment in bowing before her.
>
>https://www.landoverbaptist.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/mary-worship.jpg
>
>Here you see even your Pope bows before a idol.
>https://images.randomhouse.com/cover/9780847846689
Bowing is a sign of respect.
Just like you saluting officers.
Did you worship those officers?
This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>>1 Corinthians 11:2
>>I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
>>traditions just as I handed them on to you.
>
> Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
So, traditions are not bad? or are they?
>>2 Thessalonians 2:15
>>So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the
>>traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
>>our letter.
>
> Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
So, traditions are not bad? or are they?
>>Above you claimed:
>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>
> Patrick look at your own reaction to even questioning those
>traditions you were willing to use lies in its defense.
But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
Which is it?
"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
or
Which is it?
>>> In the next statement, they say that
>>>neither Sacred Scripture or sacred tradition can be completely
>>>trusted.
>>
>>HUH?
>>Did you just make up some more shit?
>>I didn't hear you.
>>Provide the quote where "THEY SAY" this.
Which is it?
"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
or
wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Posted with permission.
>>
>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>
>>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>>
>>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>>
>>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>>statements about following the traditions of man.
>>Will matty follow up on this?
>>Or will he make some crap up?
>>Let's see.
>
>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>provide you with some answers in future articles.
Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Posted with permission.
>>
>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>
>>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>>
>>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>>
>>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>>statements about following the traditions of man.
>>Will matty follow up on this?
>>Or will he make some crap up?
>>Let's see.
>
>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>provide you with some answers in future articles.
Is that about it?
Why did you poist it then?
>>>This statement says that they believe
>>
>>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>>matty is about to make something up.
>
>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
Is that about it?
Why did you poist it then?
>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>
>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>
> Then show us what they do claim.
>>Read the Nicene Creed.
>>It is our profession of faith.
>>It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
>>It has not changed.
>>It has not evolved.
>
> That will be another article and post.
>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
Is that about it?
Why did you poist it then?
>>>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>>>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>>>teachings of the Bible.
>>
>>Some examples please?
>
> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
Married priests do not.
>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>
>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>
> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>
> Show where.
>>If you wish to worship her, go for it.
>>Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
>
> Yet you violate theh second commandment in bowing before her.
>
>https://www.landoverbaptist.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/mary-worship.jpg
>
>Here you see even your Pope bows before a idol.
>https://images.randomhouse.com/cover/9780847846689
Just like you saluting officers.
Did you worship those officers?
I didn't hear you.
>>>This is a serious problem since any new
>>>doctrine could be added or revoked.
>>
>>I suppose if you worship Mary, you can worship a goat next.
>>Go for it.
>>>doctrine could be added or revoked.
>>
>>I suppose if you worship Mary, you can worship a goat next.
>>Go for it.
>>>The concept of an oral tradition with an understanding that evolves
>>>over time means that there is no absolute truth within the Roman
>>>Catholic Church.
>>
>>If it evolved over time, then maybe.
>>Since it doesn't, then you are a liar and a troll.
>>>over time means that there is no absolute truth within the Roman
>>>Catholic Church.
>>
>>If it evolved over time, then maybe.
>>Since it doesn't, then you are a liar and a troll.
>>Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>supplement to Scripture.
>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>
>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>reverence.[3]"
Well then.
>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>supplement to Scripture.
>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>
>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>reverence.[3]"
This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>>1 Corinthians 11:2
>>I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
>>traditions just as I handed them on to you.
>
> Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
>>2 Thessalonians 2:15
>>So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the
>>traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
>>our letter.
>
> Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
>>Above you claimed:
>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>
> Patrick look at your own reaction to even questioning those
>traditions you were willing to use lies in its defense.
authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
++++++
Which is it?
"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
Scriptures.
++++++++
Scriptures.
Which is it?
>>> In the next statement, they say that
>>>neither Sacred Scripture or sacred tradition can be completely
>>>trusted.
>>
>>HUH?
>>Did you just make up some more shit?
>>I didn't hear you.
>>Provide the quote where "THEY SAY" this.
"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
Scriptures.
Scriptures.
Mattb
Jan 19, 2022, 12:07:17 PM1/19/22
to
On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 06:05:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>Is that about it?
>Why did you poist it then?
You asked for it and it is open for debate, so far you are unable to
debate this with logic and reason. You lose.
information from purely Catholic sources is hardly proof, that is like
saying I must believe in Scientology because you post pages of BS out
of Scientology books.
>Married priests do not.
Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
tradition?
before God.
suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
all.
Ephesians 6
6 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor
your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise—
3 “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on
the earth.”[a]
4 Fathers,[b] do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up
in the training and instruction of the Lord.
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with
sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not
only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of
Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly,
as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that
the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they
are slave or free.
9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten
them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in
heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
This verse would also seem to support slavery is the RCC the master
and the flock the slaves in your view?
>
>
>>>If you wish to worship her, go for it.
>>>Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
>>
>> Yet you violate theh second commandment in bowing before her.
>>
>>https://www.landoverbaptist.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/mary-worship.jpg
>>
>>Here you see even your Pope bows before a idol.
>>https://images.randomhouse.com/cover/9780847846689
>
>Bowing is a sign of respect.
The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
Commandments.
It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>Just like you saluting officers.
No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
of Jesus and he never said not to.
>Did you worship those officers?
Hell, no most as you were are arrogant paper-pushers without much in
the way of common sense.
Yes and shows your deception.
wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>
>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>>
>>>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>>>
>>>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>>>
>>>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>>>statements about following the traditions of man.
>>>Will matty follow up on this?
>>>Or will he make some crap up?
>>>Let's see.
>>
>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>
>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>
>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>>
>>>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>>>
>>>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>>>
>>>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>>>statements about following the traditions of man.
>>>Will matty follow up on this?
>>>Or will he make some crap up?
>>>Let's see.
>>
>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>
>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>Is that about it?
>Why did you poist it then?
debate this with logic and reason. You lose.
>
>
>
>>>>This statement says that they believe
>>>
>>>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>>>matty is about to make something up.
>>
>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>Is that about it?
>Why did you poist it then?
>
>
>
>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>>
>>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>>
>> Then show us what they do claim.
>
>Been there, done that.
No, you haven't just pages of unrelated posts. Then again
>
>
>>>>This statement says that they believe
>>>
>>>Uh oh.... Whopper Alert.... Whopper Alert...
>>>matty is about to make something up.
>>
>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>Is that about it?
>Why did you poist it then?
>
>
>
>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>>
>>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>>
>> Then show us what they do claim.
>
>Been there, done that.
information from purely Catholic sources is hardly proof, that is like
saying I must believe in Scientology because you post pages of BS out
of Scientology books.
>
>
>>>Read the Nicene Creed.
>>>It is our profession of faith.
>>>It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
>>>It has not changed.
>>>It has not evolved.
>>
>> That will be another article and post.
>
>
>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>Is that about it?
>Why did you poist it then?
>
>
>
>>>>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>>>>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>>>>teachings of the Bible.
>>>
>>>Some examples please?
>>
>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>
>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
>
>>>Read the Nicene Creed.
>>>It is our profession of faith.
>>>It has been our profession of faith for nearly 2000 years.
>>>It has not changed.
>>>It has not evolved.
>>
>> That will be another article and post.
>
>
>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Again you see Patrick
>>Barker using calumny and disinformation.
>
>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>Is that about it?
>Why did you poist it then?
>
>
>
>>>>Since Jesus and the Apostles departed from this earth, the
>>>>Roman Catholic Church has changed their interpretations of the
>>>>teachings of the Bible.
>>>
>>>Some examples please?
>>
>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>
>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>Married priests do not.
Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
tradition?
>
>
>
>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>
>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>
>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>
>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>
>
>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>
>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>
>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>
>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
before God.
>
>
>
>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>
>> Show where.
>
>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>
>
>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>
>> Show where.
>
>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
all.
Ephesians 6
6 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor
your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise—
3 “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on
the earth.”[a]
4 Fathers,[b] do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up
in the training and instruction of the Lord.
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with
sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not
only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of
Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly,
as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that
the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they
are slave or free.
9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten
them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in
heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
This verse would also seem to support slavery is the RCC the master
and the flock the slaves in your view?
>
>
>>>If you wish to worship her, go for it.
>>>Mary is NOT a God. We do not worship her.
>>
>> Yet you violate theh second commandment in bowing before her.
>>
>>https://www.landoverbaptist.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/mary-worship.jpg
>>
>>Here you see even your Pope bows before a idol.
>>https://images.randomhouse.com/cover/9780847846689
>
>Bowing is a sign of respect.
image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
Commandments.
It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>Just like you saluting officers.
Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
of Jesus and he never said not to.
>Did you worship those officers?
the way of common sense.
>
>
>>>1 Corinthians 11:2
>>>I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
>>>traditions just as I handed them on to you.
>>
>> Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
>
>So, traditions are not bad? or are they?
Some are.
>
>>>1 Corinthians 11:2
>>>I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
>>>traditions just as I handed them on to you.
>>
>> Just as Jesus did, not as the RCC decided to over 1000 years after.
>
>So, traditions are not bad? or are they?
P+Barker
Jan 19, 2022, 4:19:22 PM1/19/22
to
On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 09:07:12 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
Why would I defend it?
>>Is that about it?
>>Why did you poist it then?
>
> You asked for it and it is open for debate, so far you are unable to
>debate this with logic and reason. You lose.
I don't ask for fake news stories from fag web sites.
>>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>
>>>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>>>
>>> Then show us what they do claim.
>>
>>Been there, done that.
>
> No, you haven't just pages of unrelated posts. Then again
>information from purely Catholic sources is hardly proof, that is like
>saying I must believe in Scientology because you post pages of BS out
>of Scientology books.
The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
There is no Catholic website that states this.
This is merely your claim.
>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>
>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>
> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
Indulgences are not in the Bible.
Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
>>Married priests do not.
>
> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>tradition?
Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>
>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>
>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>
>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>
> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>before God.
Why? God sent His only son to earth to become the sacrifice that paid
for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>
>>> Show where.
>>
>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>
> That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
>all.
Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
It is a commandment.
Didn't you know?
>>Bowing is a sign of respect.
>
> The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
>image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
>in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
>shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
>Commandments.
>It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
Do you think we serve statues?
>>Just like you saluting officers.
>
> No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
>Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
>of Jesus and he never said not to.
That was because it is a sign of respect.
>>>>Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
>>>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>>>supplement to Scripture.
>>>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>>>
>>>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>>>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>>>reverence.[3]"
>>
>>Well then.
>>This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>
> Yes and shows your deception.
Why?
You said Tradition comes above Scripture.
You lied.
>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>
>>++++++
>>
>>Which is it?
>>
>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>or
>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>Scriptures.
>>
>>++++++++
>>
>>Which is it?
matty didn't answer.
cuz he is a liar and a troll.
And he has no answer.
wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 06:05:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>>
>>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>>>
>>>>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>>>>
>>>>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>>>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>>>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>>>>
>>>>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>>>>statements about following the traditions of man.
>>>>Will matty follow up on this?
>>>>Or will he make some crap up?
>>>>Let's see.
>>>
>>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>>
>>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>
> Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
I don't post false articles about it.
>On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 06:05:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>>
>>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>>>
>>>>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
>>>>>
>>>>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
>>>>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
>>>>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
>>>>
>>>>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
>>>>statements about following the traditions of man.
>>>>Will matty follow up on this?
>>>>Or will he make some crap up?
>>>>Let's see.
>>>
>>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>>
>>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>
> Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
Why would I defend it?
>>Is that about it?
>>Why did you poist it then?
>
> You asked for it and it is open for debate, so far you are unable to
>debate this with logic and reason. You lose.
>>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>
>>>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>>>
>>> Then show us what they do claim.
>>
>>Been there, done that.
>
> No, you haven't just pages of unrelated posts. Then again
>information from purely Catholic sources is hardly proof, that is like
>saying I must believe in Scientology because you post pages of BS out
>of Scientology books.
There is no Catholic website that states this.
This is merely your claim.
>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>
>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>
> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
>>Married priests do not.
>
> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>tradition?
>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>
>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>
>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>
>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>
> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>before God.
for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>
>>> Show where.
>>
>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>
> That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
>all.
Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
Didn't you know?
>>Bowing is a sign of respect.
>
> The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
>image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
>in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
>shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
>Commandments.
>It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>>Just like you saluting officers.
>
> No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
>Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
>of Jesus and he never said not to.
>>>>Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
>>>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>>>supplement to Scripture.
>>>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>>>
>>>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>>>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>>>reverence.[3]"
>>
>>Well then.
>>This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>
> Yes and shows your deception.
You said Tradition comes above Scripture.
You lied.
>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>
>>++++++
>>
>>Which is it?
>>
>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>or
>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>Scriptures.
>>
>>++++++++
>>
>>Which is it?
cuz he is a liar and a troll.
And he has no answer.
P+Barker
Jan 19, 2022, 6:00:41 PM1/19/22
to
On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:39:51 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>On Jan 18, 2022, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<nubeuglffcs4j9dm5...@4ax.com>):
What is there to forgive.
My Subaru is an automatic - all wheel drive.
Fact. Not fiction.
I refuse to forgive or forget this.
Matty is a troll and a liar.
Facr, not fiction.
Nothing to forgive here.
Just a statement of fact.
>You would do well to heed these words of Jesus.
>
>“For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also
>forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your
>Father forgive your trespasses.” (Mat 6:14-15)
People must SEEK forgiveness before they can be forgiven.
Do you seek forgiveness for being a troll in a Catholic newsgroup.
Let me know.
>Now if someone is lying in the post you are replying to that is one thing to
>bring it to their attention. But quite another to make it a lifetime
>accusation.
>
>Something to consider.
When you and matty stop lying, let me know.
>On Jan 18, 2022, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<nubeuglffcs4j9dm5...@4ax.com>):
>
>>
>> > Posted with permission.
>>
>> accoding to the troll and liar.....
>
>Never the one to forgive others, eh?
>>
>> > Posted with permission.
>>
>> accoding to the troll and liar.....
>
What is there to forgive.
My Subaru is an automatic - all wheel drive.
Fact. Not fiction.
I refuse to forgive or forget this.
Matty is a troll and a liar.
Facr, not fiction.
Nothing to forgive here.
Just a statement of fact.
>You would do well to heed these words of Jesus.
>
>“For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also
>forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your
>Father forgive your trespasses.” (Mat 6:14-15)
People must SEEK forgiveness before they can be forgiven.
Do you seek forgiveness for being a troll in a Catholic newsgroup.
Let me know.
>Now if someone is lying in the post you are replying to that is one thing to
>bring it to their attention. But quite another to make it a lifetime
>accusation.
>
>Something to consider.
When you and matty stop lying, let me know.
Mattb
Jan 19, 2022, 10:15:30 PM1/19/22
to
On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 16:19:18 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
Is the article fake, provide proof.
>Why would I defend it?
>
>
>
>>>Is that about it?
>>>Why did you poist it then?
>>
>> You asked for it and it is open for debate, so far you are unable to
>>debate this with logic and reason. You lose.
>
>I don't ask for fake news stories from fag web sites.
No you just defend a fag pedophile church.
>There is no Catholic website that states this.
There is no Catholic website that states "The RCC does not rate
tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
>This is merely your claim.
>
>
>>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>>
>>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>>
>> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
>
>Indulgences are not in the Bible.
Very true as isn't this purgatory in theh way theh RCC claims to
exist.
>Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
They were used in combination by theh RCC with its greed and power
hungry hierarchy.
>Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
Yes and they did so using the power of fear the RCC produced.
>
>
>
>
>>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>>
>>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>>
>>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>>
>>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>>
>> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>>before God.
>
>Why? God sent His only son to earth to become the sacrifice that paid
>for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
>because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
>other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
>Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>
>
>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>
>>>> Show where.
>>>
>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>
>> That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>>suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
>>all.
>
>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>It is a commandment.
>Didn't you know?
Yes but not as you claim. You just like to worship idols.
before statues.
>You lied.
>
>
>
>>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>>
>>>++++++
>>>
>>>Which is it?
>>>
>>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>>or
>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>>Scriptures.
>>>
>>>++++++++
>>>
>>>Which is it?
>
>matty didn't answer.
>cuz he is a liar and a troll.
>And he has no answer.
The answer is above.
>Why would I defend it?
>
>
>
>>>Is that about it?
>>>Why did you poist it then?
>>
>> You asked for it and it is open for debate, so far you are unable to
>>debate this with logic and reason. You lose.
>
>I don't ask for fake news stories from fag web sites.
>
>
>>>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>>
>>>>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>>>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>>>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>>>>
>>>> Then show us what they do claim.
>>>
>>>Been there, done that.
>>
>> No, you haven't just pages of unrelated posts. Then again
>>information from purely Catholic sources is hardly proof, that is like
>>saying I must believe in Scientology because you post pages of BS out
>>of Scientology books.
>
>The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
Good as they should not.
>
>>>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>>>Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>>
>>>>>LIE. LIE. LIE.
>>>>>This has never been a claim of the RCC.
>>>>>Somebody just made that shit up.
>>>>
>>>> Then show us what they do claim.
>>>
>>>Been there, done that.
>>
>> No, you haven't just pages of unrelated posts. Then again
>>information from purely Catholic sources is hardly proof, that is like
>>saying I must believe in Scientology because you post pages of BS out
>>of Scientology books.
>
>The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
>There is no Catholic website that states this.
tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
>This is merely your claim.
>
>
>>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>>
>>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>>
>> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
>
>Indulgences are not in the Bible.
exist.
>Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
hungry hierarchy.
>Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
>
>
>>>Married priests do not.
>>
>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>tradition?
>
>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
Then why can't priest marry?
>
>>>Married priests do not.
>>
>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>tradition?
>
>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>
>
>
>
>>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>>
>>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>>
>>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>>
>>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>>
>> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>>before God.
>
>Why? God sent His only son to earth to become the sacrifice that paid
>for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
>because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
>other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
>Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>
>
>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>
>>>> Show where.
>>>
>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>
>> That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>>suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
>>all.
>
>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>It is a commandment.
>Didn't you know?
>
>
>>>Bowing is a sign of respect.
>>
>> The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
>>image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
>>in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
>>shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
>>Commandments.
>>It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>
>>>Bowing is a sign of respect.
>>
>> The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
>>image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
>>in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
>>shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
>>Commandments.
>>It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
>
>
>>>Just like you saluting officers.
>>
>> No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
>>Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
>>of Jesus and he never said not to.
>
>That was because it is a sign of respect.
The Bible did not say not to respect authority just not to bow
>
>>>Just like you saluting officers.
>>
>> No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
>>Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
>>of Jesus and he never said not to.
>
>That was because it is a sign of respect.
before statues.
>
>
>>>>>Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
>>>>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>>>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>>>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>>>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>>>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>>>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>>>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>>>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>>>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>>>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>>>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>>>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>>>>supplement to Scripture.
>>>>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>>>>
>>>>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>>>>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>>>>reverence.[3]"
>>>
>>>Well then.
>>>This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>>
>> Yes and shows your deception.
>
>Why?
>You said Tradition comes above Scripture.
No I did not say it does.
>
>>>>>Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
>>>>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>>>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>>>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>>>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>>>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>>>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>>>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>>>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>>>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>>>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>>>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>>>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>>>>supplement to Scripture.
>>>>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>>>>
>>>>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>>>>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>>>>reverence.[3]"
>>>
>>>Well then.
>>>This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>>
>> Yes and shows your deception.
>
>Why?
>You said Tradition comes above Scripture.
>You lied.
>
>
>
>>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>>
>>>++++++
>>>
>>>Which is it?
>>>
>>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>>or
>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>>Scriptures.
>>>
>>>++++++++
>>>
>>>Which is it?
>
>matty didn't answer.
>cuz he is a liar and a troll.
>And he has no answer.
P+Barker
Jan 20, 2022, 7:32:23 AM1/20/22
to
>>There is no Catholic website that states this.
>
> There is no Catholic website that states "The RCC does not rate
>tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
Are you just plain stupid?
The Church does not depend on the bible alone for the certainty of the
revealed truth. Both Tradition and Bible must be accepted and honored
with equal devotion and reverence. The both make up a single sacred
deposit of the word of God entrusted to the Church.
+ Please try to remember this.
I don't want to have to keep saying this.
Are you stupid?
Catholics recognize that the true “rule of faith”—as expressed in the
Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition, as manifested in
the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were
entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the
authority to interpret Scripture correctly.
In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
John’s Gospel tells us only that the Bible was composed so we can be
helped to believe Jesus is the Messiah. It does not say the Bible is
all we need for salvation, much less that the Bible is all we need for
theology; nor does it say the Bible is even necessary to believe in
Christ. After all, the earliest Christians had no New Testament to
which they could appeal; they learned from oral, rather than written,
instruction.
The Bible denies that it is sufficient as the complete rule of faith.
Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition
which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to
“stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us,
either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15).
+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>This is merely your claim.
>>
>>
>>>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>>>
>>>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>>>
>>> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
>>
>>Indulgences are not in the Bible.
>
> Very true as isn't this purgatory in theh way theh RCC claims to
>exist.
Rev 27:21
>>Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
>
> They were used in combination by theh RCC with its greed and power
>hungry hierarchy.
>>Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
>
> Yes and they did so using the power of fear the RCC produced.
>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>
>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>tradition?
>>
>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>
> Then why can't priest marry?
>>>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>>>
>>>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>>>
>>> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>>>before God.
>>
>>Why? God sent His only son to earth to become the sacrifice that paid
>>for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
>>because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
>>other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
>>Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
>
> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
Stop lying.
>>>>>>Apostolic tradition is important to the RCC.
>>>>>>The phrase apostolic tradition is not found in the Bible, but the term
>>>>>>is used to refer to the teachings of the apostles passed down to the
>>>>>>church. According to the Roman Catholic Church, apostolic tradition is
>>>>>>“the transmission of the message of Christ, brought about from the
>>>>>>very beginnings of Christianity by means of preaching, bearing
>>>>>>witness, institutions, worship, and inspired writings. The apostles
>>>>>>transmitted all they received from Christ and learned from the Holy
>>>>>>Spirit to their successors, the bishops, and through them to all
>>>>>>generations until the end of the world” (Compendium of the Catechism
>>>>>>of the Catholic Church). Among Catholics, apostolic tradition is seen
>>>>>>as a special revelation of God, distinct from the written Word, that
>>>>>>the apostles passed down to the early church. It is an authoritative
>>>>>>supplement to Scripture.
>>>>>>https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-tradition.html
>>>>>
>>>>>"both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be
>>>>>accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and
>>>>>reverence.[3]"
>>>>
>>>>Well then.
>>>>This answers your stupid question above, doesn't it?
>>>
>>> Yes and shows your deception.
>>
>>Why?
>>You said Tradition comes above Scripture.
>
> No I did not say it does.
"That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>>>>>>>Sacred Scriptures."
>>>>>>>Sacred Scriptures."
You lied.
>>>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>
>>>>++++++
>>>>
>>>>Which is it?
>>>>
>>>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>>>or
>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>>>Scriptures.
>>>>
>>>>++++++++
>>>>
>>>>Which is it?
>>
>>matty didn't answer.
>>cuz he is a liar and a troll.
>>And he has no answer.
>
> The answer is above.
YOU LIED.
>>>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>
>>>>++++++
>>>>
>>>>Which is it?
>>>>
>>>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>>>or
>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>>>Scriptures.
>>>>
>>>>++++++++
>>>>
>>>>Which is it?
>>
>>matty didn't answer.
>>cuz he is a liar and a troll.
>>And he has no answer.
>
> The answer is above.
Mattb
Jan 20, 2022, 2:24:47 PM1/20/22
to
On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 07:32:21 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
You have been unable to prove they are false.
You claim "There is no Catholic website that states this" how can
you give me a quote that verifies that?
>Are you just plain stupid?
>The Church does not depend on the bible alone for the certainty of the
>revealed truth. Both Tradition and Bible must be accepted and honored
>with equal devotion and reverence. The both make up a single sacred
>deposit of the word of God entrusted to the Church.
Yes I know as your Popes have said.
"That it has pleased God to make Holy Scripture obscure in certain
places lest, if it were perfectly clear to all, it might be vulgarized
and subjected to disrespect or be so misunderstood by people of
limited intelligence as to lead them into error."
Pope Gregory VII
"We declare, assert, define and pronounce to be subject to the Roman
Pontiff is to every creature altogether necessary for salvation… I
have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all, and above
all, so that God Himself and I, the Vicar of Christ, have but one
consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do. What
therefore, can you make of me but God?"
Pope Boniface VIII
"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil;
for no one may judge the Pope."
Pope Innocent III
Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>
>
>>>This is merely your claim.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>>>>
>>>>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>>>>
>>>> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
>>>
>>>Indulgences are not in the Bible.
>>
>> Very true as isn't this purgatory in theh way theh RCC claims to
>>exist.
>
>Purgatory Exists.
>Rev 27:21
Nope that is not proof.
“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
The article said that.
>
>You lied.
No Patrick Barker lied.
tradition/doctrine is personal attacks I pity your lack of faith.
wrote:
you give me a quote that verifies that?
>Are you just plain stupid?
>The Church does not depend on the bible alone for the certainty of the
>revealed truth. Both Tradition and Bible must be accepted and honored
>with equal devotion and reverence. The both make up a single sacred
>deposit of the word of God entrusted to the Church.
"That it has pleased God to make Holy Scripture obscure in certain
places lest, if it were perfectly clear to all, it might be vulgarized
and subjected to disrespect or be so misunderstood by people of
limited intelligence as to lead them into error."
Pope Gregory VII
"We declare, assert, define and pronounce to be subject to the Roman
Pontiff is to every creature altogether necessary for salvation… I
have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all, and above
all, so that God Himself and I, the Vicar of Christ, have but one
consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do. What
therefore, can you make of me but God?"
Pope Boniface VIII
"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil;
for no one may judge the Pope."
Pope Innocent III
>
>
>>>This is merely your claim.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Lets see its historic use of Purgatory combined with greed in its
>>>>>>use of Indulgences. It saying priest must not marry.
>>>>>
>>>>>Purgatory has its sources in the Bible.
>>>>
>>>> Not as the RCC used it in combination with Indulgences.
>>>
>>>Indulgences are not in the Bible.
>>
>> Very true as isn't this purgatory in theh way theh RCC claims to
>>exist.
>
>Purgatory Exists.
>Rev 27:21
>
>
>
>>>Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
>>
>> They were used in combination by theh RCC with its greed and power
>>hungry hierarchy.
>
>Some evil people sold indulgences.
Some evil Church sold them to suckers through fear mongering.
>
>
>>>Therefore, they are not used in combination with Purgatory.
>>
>> They were used in combination by theh RCC with its greed and power
>>hungry hierarchy.
>
>Some evil people sold indulgences.
>
>
>
>>>Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
>>
>> Yes and they did so using the power of fear the RCC produced.
>
>Evil people always use religion to gain power, resources.
Yes and the Vatican is full of such evil.
>
>
>>>Some evil dudes (hundreds of years ago) sold indulgences for money.
>>
>> Yes and they did so using the power of fear the RCC produced.
>
>Evil people always use religion to gain power, resources.
>
>
>
>>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>>
>>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>>tradition?
>>>
>>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>
>> Then why can't priest marry?
>
>Priests can and do marry all the time.
Now you are playing headgames.
>
>
>>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>>
>>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>>tradition?
>>>
>>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>
>> Then why can't priest marry?
>
>Priests can and do marry all the time.
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>>>>
>>>>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>>>>
>>>> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>>>>before God.
>>>
>>>Why? God sent His only son to earth to become the sacrifice that paid
>>>for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
>>>because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
>>>other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
>>>Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
>>
>> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>
>Is Jesus not the Second Person of God?
Depends how you look at it.
>
>
>>>>>>>>One of the most recent new doctrines of the
>>>>>>>>church is the worship of Mary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We honor Mary, the Mother of God.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mary was the Mother to Jesus not God.
>>>>>
>>>>>You don't believe that Jesus is part of the Trinity of God?
>>>>
>>>> Not as you use it. The mother of God would have to have existed
>>>>before God.
>>>
>>>Why? God sent His only son to earth to become the sacrifice that paid
>>>for all our sins. Without Jesus, no man or woman could enter heaven
>>>because we are all stained with sin. If we believe in Christ, on the
>>>other hand, we can have eternal life in heaven.
>>>Jesus had to be born a human in order to take on the face of humanity.
>>
>> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>
>Is Jesus not the Second Person of God?
>
>
>
>>>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Show where.
>>>>>
>>>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>>>
>>>> That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>>>>suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
>>>>all.
>>>
>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>>It is a commandment.
>>>Didn't you know?
>>
>> Yes but not as you claim. You just like to worship idols.
>
>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>It is a commandment.
>Didn't you know?
>
>
>
>
>>>>>Bowing is a sign of respect.
>>>>
>>>> The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
>>>>image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
>>>>in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
>>>>shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
>>>>Commandments.
>>>>It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>>>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
Your kind do bow before them. I have proven that.
>
>
>>>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Show where.
>>>>>
>>>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>>>
>>>> That, while being a commandment was not aimed at Mary as you
>>>>suggest. Then it is to honor your parents and God as the creator of
>>>>all.
>>>
>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>>It is a commandment.
>>>Didn't you know?
>>
>> Yes but not as you claim. You just like to worship idols.
>
>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>It is a commandment.
>Didn't you know?
>
>
>
>
>>>>>Bowing is a sign of respect.
>>>>
>>>> The commandment says “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven
>>>>image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is
>>>>in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
>>>>shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them”: second of the Ten
>>>>Commandments.
>>>>It says you shall not "bow down thyself to them nor serve them"
>>>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
>
>
>>
>>>>>Just like you saluting officers.
>>>>
>>>> No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
>>>>Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
>>>>of Jesus and he never said not to.
>>>
>>>That was because it is a sign of respect.
>>
>> The Bible did not say not to respect authority just not to bow
>>before statues.
>
>The Bible didn't say that.
The Bible did not say not to bow to statues/idols?
>
>>
>>>>>Just like you saluting officers.
>>>>
>>>> No, an OFFICER IS A LIVING BEING NOT A STATUE OR IDOL AS SPOKEN OF.
>>>>Not a "graven image". The Romans saluted their officers in the time
>>>>of Jesus and he never said not to.
>>>
>>>That was because it is a sign of respect.
>>
>> The Bible did not say not to respect authority just not to bow
>>before statues.
>
>The Bible didn't say that.
“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself
to them nor serve them”
Seems the "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them" is quite plain.
to them nor serve them”
>
>You lied.
No Patrick Barker lied.
>
>
>
>>>>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>>>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>>
>>>>>++++++
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is it?
>>>>>
>>>>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>>>>or
>>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>>>>Scriptures.
>>>>>
>>>>>++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is it?
>>>
>>>matty didn't answer.
>>>cuz he is a liar and a troll.
>>>And he has no answer.
>>
>> The answer is above.
>
>YOU LIED.
Patrick Barker is all you have to defend this false
>
>
>>>>>But above, you stated: >>>That is, sacred tradition has greater
>>>>>authority than the Sacred Scriptures.
>>>>>
>>>>>++++++
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is it?
>>>>>
>>>>>"They state that they accept both with equal loyalty and reverence."
>>>>>or
>>>>>That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the Sacred
>>>>>Scriptures.
>>>>>
>>>>>++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is it?
>>>
>>>matty didn't answer.
>>>cuz he is a liar and a troll.
>>>And he has no answer.
>>
>> The answer is above.
>
>YOU LIED.
tradition/doctrine is personal attacks I pity your lack of faith.
P+Barker
Jan 20, 2022, 3:38:01 PM1/20/22
to
Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
>>>>The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
>>>
>>> Good as they should not.
>>
>>Why did you post a BS news artilce that claimed it did?
No answer from matty.
>>>>There is no Catholic website that states this.
>>>
>>> There is no Catholic website that states "The RCC does not rate
>>>tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
>>
>>I gave you a quote before.
>
> You claim "There is no Catholic website that states this" how can
>you give me a quote that verifies that?
Huh?
How do you prove a falsehood?
How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
>"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil;
>for no one may judge the Pope."
>Pope Innocent III
OK then.
Innocent was a bit wacky.
>
>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
> Some evil Church sold them to suckers through fear mongering.
Some evil PEOPLE did this.
The Church doesn't sell anything.
>>Evil people always use religion to gain power, resources.
>
> Yes and the Vatican is full of such evil.
Examples please.
Let us keep to the last century or so.
>>>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>>>tradition?
>>>>
>>>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>>
>>> Then why can't priest marry?
>>
>>Priests can and do marry all the time.
>
> Now you are playing headgames.
You started it.
If you can't stand the answer, don't ask the question.
>>> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>>>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>>
>>Is Jesus not the Second Person of God?
>
> Depends how you look at it.
How do you look at it?
Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>>>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Show where.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
Whopper Alert.
>>You claimed: "That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
Sacred Scriptures."
>
> The article said that.
>>
>>You lied.
>
> No Patrick Barker lied.
You lied.
> Patrick Barker is all you have to defend this false
>tradition/doctrine is personal attacks I pity your lack of faith.
Pity in one hand.
Shit in the other.
Let me know which hand fills up first.
> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>>>>>>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>>>>>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>>>>>
>>>>> Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
>>>>
>>>>I don't post false articles about it.
>>>
>>> Is the article fake, provide proof.
>>
>>I don't post false articles about it.
>
> You have been unable to prove they are false.
How do you prove a falsehood?
>>>>>>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>>>>>
>>>>> Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
>>>>
>>>>I don't post false articles about it.
>>>
>>> Is the article fake, provide proof.
>>
>>I don't post false articles about it.
>
> You have been unable to prove they are false.
How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
>>>>The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
>>>
>>> Good as they should not.
>>
>>Why did you post a BS news artilce that claimed it did?
>>>>There is no Catholic website that states this.
>>>
>>> There is no Catholic website that states "The RCC does not rate
>>>tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
>>
>>I gave you a quote before.
>
> You claim "There is no Catholic website that states this" how can
>you give me a quote that verifies that?
How do you prove a falsehood?
How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
>"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil;
>for no one may judge the Pope."
>Pope Innocent III
Innocent was a bit wacky.
>
>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>
> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
What do you think history records?
>
> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
> Some evil Church sold them to suckers through fear mongering.
The Church doesn't sell anything.
>>Evil people always use religion to gain power, resources.
>
> Yes and the Vatican is full of such evil.
Let us keep to the last century or so.
>>>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>>>tradition?
>>>>
>>>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>>
>>> Then why can't priest marry?
>>
>>Priests can and do marry all the time.
>
> Now you are playing headgames.
If you can't stand the answer, don't ask the question.
>>> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>>>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>>
>>Is Jesus not the Second Person of God?
>
> Depends how you look at it.
Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>>>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Show where.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>
>>> You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>>
>>Do you think we serve statues?
>
> Your kind do bow before them. I have proven that.
Do you think we serve statues?
>>>
>>> You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>>
>>Do you think we serve statues?
>
> Your kind do bow before them. I have proven that.
Do you think we serve statues?
>>> The Bible did not say not to respect authority just not to bow
>>>before statues.
>>
>>The Bible didn't say that.
>
> The Bible did not say not to bow to statues/idols?
>
>“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
>any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
>that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>to them nor serve them”
>
>Seems the "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them" is quite plain.
I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>before statues.
>>
>>The Bible didn't say that.
>
> The Bible did not say not to bow to statues/idols?
>
>“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
>any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
>that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>to them nor serve them”
>
>Seems the "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them" is quite plain.
Whopper Alert.
>>You claimed: "That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
Sacred Scriptures."
>
> The article said that.
>>
>>You lied.
>
> No Patrick Barker lied.
> Patrick Barker is all you have to defend this false
>tradition/doctrine is personal attacks I pity your lack of faith.
Shit in the other.
Let me know which hand fills up first.
Gregory Carr
Jan 20, 2022, 7:11:04 PM1/20/22
to
On Wednesday, 19 January 2022 at 03:05:58 UTC-8, P+Barker wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Posted with permission.
> >>
> >>accoding to the troll and liar.....
> >>
> >>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
> >>>
> >>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
> >>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
> >>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
> >>
> >>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
> >>statements about following the traditions of man.
> >>Will matty follow up on this?
> >>Or will he make some crap up?
> >>Let's see.
> >
> >Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
> >provide you with some answers in future articles.
> Then you do not defend an article you posted?
> Is that about it?
> Why did you poist
Drunken stupid Patrick Barker can't even spell. Who is doing your wife right now?
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:28:47 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:55:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:37:40 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@mail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Posted with permission.
> >>
> >>accoding to the troll and liar.....
> >>
> >>>What does the Bible say about Roman Catholic traditions?
> >>>
> >>>The New Testament records a number of powerful statements about
> >>>following the traditions of men. Jesus and the apostles were very
> >>>clear about what we should accept and believe.
> >>
> >>If this were true, then matty should be able to list these powerful
> >>statements about following the traditions of man.
> >>Will matty follow up on this?
> >>Or will he make some crap up?
> >>Let's see.
> >
> >Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
> >provide you with some answers in future articles.
> Then you do not defend an article you posted?
> Is that about it?
> Why did you poist
Mattb
Jan 21, 2022, 3:34:48 PM1/21/22
to
On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:37:59 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>>>>>>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't post false articles about it.
>>>>
>>>> Is the article fake, provide proof.
>>>
>>>I don't post false articles about it.
>>
>> You have been unable to prove they are false.
>
>How do you prove a falsehood?
Sometimes it is easy.
>How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
That you can't do it as it is you that is lying.
been able to prove it is BS.
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>>There is no Catholic website that states this.
>>>>
>>>> There is no Catholic website that states "The RCC does not rate
>>>>tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
>>>
>>>I gave you a quote before.
>>
>> You claim "There is no Catholic website that states this" how can
>>you give me a quote that verifies that?
>
>Huh?
>How do you prove a falsehood?
>How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
How do you prove you daughters don't sleep with the students?
has shown itself to be of rotten fruit.
>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>
>
>
>> Some evil Church sold them to suckers through fear mongering.
>
>Some evil PEOPLE did this.
Some evil Church.
>The Church doesn't sell anything.
The RCC sells a pack of lies and deceptions if you are a example.
>
>
>>>Evil people always use religion to gain power, resources.
>>
>> Yes and the Vatican is full of such evil.
>
>Examples please.
>Let us keep to the last century or so.
No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
as well as Africa.
>If you can't stand the answer, don't ask the question.
You don't answer many questions you apply deceptions and
distractions instead or if really cornered a ad hominem to the point
of ad nauseam.
one when needed for other Eisegesis.
The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Show where.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>
>
>
>>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>>
>>>> You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>>>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> Your kind do bow before them. I have proven that.
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
>
>
>
>>>You claimed: "That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>Sacred Scriptures."
>>
>> The article said that.
>>>
>>>You lied.
>>
>> No Patrick Barker lied.
>
>You lied.
Yet you have been unable to prove your views are correct.
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>Posted with permission.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>accoding to the troll and liar.....
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>Patrick Barker, I did not write this article. Yet might be able to
>>>>>>>>provide you with some answers in future articles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Then you do not defend an article you posted?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Defend it? Do you defend the Pedophilia within the RCC?
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't post false articles about it.
>>>>
>>>> Is the article fake, provide proof.
>>>
>>>I don't post false articles about it.
>>
>> You have been unable to prove they are false.
>
>How do you prove a falsehood?
>How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
>
>
>>>>>The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
>>>>
>>>> Good as they should not.
>>>
>>>Why did you post a BS news artilce that claimed it did?
>
>No answer from matty.
Maybe because I choose to open it up for discussion and you have not
>
>>>>>The RCC does not rate tradition above Sacred Scripture.
>>>>
>>>> Good as they should not.
>>>
>>>Why did you post a BS news artilce that claimed it did?
>
>No answer from matty.
been able to prove it is BS.
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>>There is no Catholic website that states this.
>>>>
>>>> There is no Catholic website that states "The RCC does not rate
>>>>tradition above Sacred Scripture."?
>>>
>>>I gave you a quote before.
>>
>> You claim "There is no Catholic website that states this" how can
>>you give me a quote that verifies that?
>
>Huh?
>How do you prove a falsehood?
>How do I proove you are a liar about larry?
>
>
>>"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil;
>>for no one may judge the Pope."
>>Pope Innocent III
>
>OK then.
>Innocent was a bit wacky.
But he was a Pope a freak yes, but many Popes were evil. The RCC
>
>>"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil;
>>for no one may judge the Pope."
>>Pope Innocent III
>
>OK then.
>Innocent was a bit wacky.
has shown itself to be of rotten fruit.
>
>
>
>>
>>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>
>
>>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>
>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>
>What do you think history records?
It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>
>
>>
>>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>
>
>>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>
>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>
>What do you think history records?
>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>
>
>
>> Some evil Church sold them to suckers through fear mongering.
>
>Some evil PEOPLE did this.
>The Church doesn't sell anything.
>
>
>>>Evil people always use religion to gain power, resources.
>>
>> Yes and the Vatican is full of such evil.
>
>Examples please.
>Let us keep to the last century or so.
pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
as well as Africa.
>
>
>
>>>>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>>>>tradition?
>>>>>
>>>>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>>>
>>>> Then why can't priest marry?
>>>
>>>Priests can and do marry all the time.
>>
>> Now you are playing headgames.
>
>You started it.
I started playing headgames? LOL
>
>
>>>>>>>Married priests do not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do not what? Then you agree not allowing priest to marry is a false
>>>>>>tradition?
>>>>>
>>>>>Married priests are not a tradition in the Catholic Church.
>>>>
>>>> Then why can't priest marry?
>>>
>>>Priests can and do marry all the time.
>>
>> Now you are playing headgames.
>
>You started it.
>If you can't stand the answer, don't ask the question.
distractions instead or if really cornered a ad hominem to the point
of ad nauseam.
>
>
>
>
>>>> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>>>>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>>>
>>>Is Jesus not the Second Person of God?
>>
>> Depends how you look at it.
>
>How do you look at it?
>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>
>
>
>>>> That God sent Jesus can't be denied and yet it has nothing to do
>>>>with the RCC claim of calling Mary 'mother of God'.
>>>
>>>Is Jesus not the Second Person of God?
>>
>> Depends how you look at it.
>
>How do you look at it?
>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
one when needed for other Eisegesis.
The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>>It is a commandment from God Himself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Show where.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
>
>
>
>>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>>
>>>> You do bow before them I've shown evidence even your Popes have.
>>>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> Your kind do bow before them. I have proven that.
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>
>
>
>>>> The Bible did not say not to respect authority just not to bow
>>>>before statues.
>>>
>>>The Bible didn't say that.
>>
>> The Bible did not say not to bow to statues/idols?
>>
>>“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
>>any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
>>that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>to them nor serve them”
>>
>>Seems the "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them" is quite plain.
>
>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>Whopper Alert.
Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>
>
>>>> The Bible did not say not to respect authority just not to bow
>>>>before statues.
>>>
>>>The Bible didn't say that.
>>
>> The Bible did not say not to bow to statues/idols?
>>
>>“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
>>any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
>>that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>to them nor serve them”
>>
>>Seems the "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them" is quite plain.
>
>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>Whopper Alert.
correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
>
>
>
>>>You claimed: "That is, sacred tradition has greater authority than the
>Sacred Scriptures."
>>
>> The article said that.
>>>
>>>You lied.
>>
>> No Patrick Barker lied.
>
>You lied.
P+Barker
Jan 21, 2022, 5:47:03 PM1/21/22
to
Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
<snip a bunch of matty's whines>
>>>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>>
>>
>>>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>>
>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>
>>What do you think history records?
>
> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>
>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>
> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
Your "truth"?
Yes, of course. \
> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>as well as Africa.
Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>
> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
Why?
>>Do you think we serve statues?
>
> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
<snip a bunch of matty's whines>
>>>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>>
>>
>>>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>>
>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>
>>What do you think history records?
>
> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>
>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>
> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
Yes, of course. \
> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>as well as Africa.
>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>
> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>Do you think we serve statues?
>
> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
Do you think we serve statues?
>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>Whopper Alert.
>
> Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
Whopper Alert.
>>Whopper Alert.
>
> Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
Whopper Alert.
Mattb
Jan 21, 2022, 7:16:09 PM1/21/22
to
On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 17:46:38 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
><snip a bunch of matty's whines>
>
>
>>>>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>>>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>>>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>>>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>>>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>>>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>>>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>>>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>>>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>>>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>>>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>>>
>>>
>>>>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>>>
>>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>>
>>>What do you think history records?
>>
>> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>>
>>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>>
>> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>
>Your "truth"?
>Yes, of course. \
Truth is truth.
>
>
>
>> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>>as well as Africa.
>
>Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
Nope.
>
>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
Do you?
>
>
>
>>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>Whopper Alert.
>>
>> Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>>correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
>
>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>Whopper Alert.
That is a rather limited reply and a lie as nowhere in the above
statement will you find theh words "It seems".
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
><snip a bunch of matty's whines>
>
>
>>>>>In the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei
>>>>>Verbum (Latin: “The Word of God”), the relationship between Tradition
>>>>>and Scripture is explained: “Hence there exists a close connection and
>>>>>communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both
>>>>>of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way
>>>>>merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture
>>>>>is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the
>>>>>inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles,
>>>>>sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was
>>>>>entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
>>>>>https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition
>>>
>>>
>>>>>+ Do I need to give you more proof?
>>>>
>>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>>
>>>What do you think history records?
>>
>> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>>
>>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>>
>> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>
>Your "truth"?
>Yes, of course. \
>
>
>
>> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>>as well as Africa.
>
>Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
>
>
>
>>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>
>> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
>
>Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
>
>
>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>
>Why?
Read it and think.
>
>
>>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>
>> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
>
>Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
>
>
>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>
>Why?
>
>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>
>Do you think we serve statues?
>
>
>
>>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>Whopper Alert.
>>
>> Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>>correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
>
>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>Whopper Alert.
statement will you find theh words "It seems".
P+Barker
Jan 22, 2022, 7:55:44 AM1/22/22
to
On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:16:07 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Unless matty is staing what he THINKS is the truth.
>>> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>>>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>>>as well as Africa.
>>
>>Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
>
> Nope.
He didn't rape those Canadian kids?
>>>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>>
>>> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>>>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
>>
>>Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
>>
>>
>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>
>>Why?
>
> Read it and think.
Read it.
Thought.
Don't understand your whine.
>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>
>>> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>>
>>Do you think we serve statues?
>
> Do you?
Nope. I am not a catholic basher like you.
wrote:
>>> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>>>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>>>as well as Africa.
>>
>>Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
>
> Nope.
>>>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>>
>>> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>>>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
>>
>>Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
>>
>>
>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>
>>Why?
>
> Read it and think.
Thought.
Don't understand your whine.
>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>
>>> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>>
>>Do you think we serve statues?
>
> Do you?
Mattb
Jan 22, 2022, 12:41:58 PM1/22/22
to
On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 07:55:43 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
We are taking about recording history here.
the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC.
>
>
>>>> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>>>>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>>>>as well as Africa.
>>>
>>>Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
>>
>> Nope.
>
>He didn't rape those Canadian kids?
He wasn't Catholic, no.
>
>>>> No, let us keep to its history. Then again, we can discuss
>>>>pedophilia and what it did at orphanages in Canada and other countries
>>>>as well as Africa.
>>>
>>>Did your pops live in Canada fro a while?
>>
>> Nope.
>
>He didn't rape those Canadian kids?
>
>
>
>>>>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>>>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>>>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>>>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>>>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>>>
>>>> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>>>>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
>>>
>>>Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>>
>>>Why?
>>
>> Read it and think.
>
>Read it.
>Thought.
>Don't understand your whine.
>
>
>>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>>>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>>>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> Do you?
>
>Nope. I am not a catholic basher like you.
No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>
>
>>>>>Catholics believe that there are three distinct Persons to this one
>>>>>God and that these three Persons form a unity. This belief is called
>>>>>the doctrine of the Trinity: God the Father - the creator and
>>>>>sustainer of all things. God the Son - the incarnation of God as a
>>>>>human being, Jesus Christ, on Earth.
>>>>
>>>> Then he is three separate beings when needed for Eisegesis, and then
>>>>one when needed for other Eisegesis.
>>>
>>>Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>>
>>>Why?
>>
>> Read it and think.
>
>Read it.
>Thought.
>Don't understand your whine.
>
>
>>>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't say just serve it says "Thou shalt not bow down thyself
>>>>to them nor serve them” You are not to do either.
>>>
>>>Do you think we serve statues?
>>
>> Do you?
>
>Nope. I am not a catholic basher like you.
>
>
>
>>>>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>>>Whopper Alert.
>>>>
>>>> Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>>>>correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
>>>
>>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>Whopper Alert.
>>
>> That is a rather limited reply and a lie as nowhere in the above
>>statement will you find theh words "It seems".
>>>
>>>
>Pity in one hand.
>Shit in the other.
>Let me know which hand fills up first.
Patrick Barker you lied and all to defend pedophilia, the cover-up,
>
>
>>>>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>>>Whopper Alert.
>>>>
>>>> Then you believe the Bible is false on this point and the RCC is
>>>>correct? That looks like you are saying tradition before scripture.
>>>
>>>I love it when you start with: " It seems...."
>>>Whopper Alert.
>>
>> That is a rather limited reply and a lie as nowhere in the above
>>statement will you find theh words "It seems".
>>>
>>>
>Pity in one hand.
>Shit in the other.
>Let me know which hand fills up first.
the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC.
P+Barker
Jan 22, 2022, 3:01:02 PM1/22/22
to
>>>>>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you think history records?
>>>>>
>>>>> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>>>>>
>>>>> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>>>>
>>>>Your "truth"?
>>>>Yes, of course. \
>>>
>>> Truth is truth.
>>
>>Unless matty is stating what he THINKS is the truth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you think history records?
>>>>>
>>>>> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>>>>>
>>>>> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>>>>
>>>>Your "truth"?
>>>>Yes, of course. \
>>>
>>> Truth is truth.
>>
>
> We are taking about recording history here.
Someone hates catholics and writes a history about them.
> We are taking about recording history here.
Remind me of all the Trump "epose'" books written.
>>>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>>>
>>>>Why?
>>>
>>> Read it and think.
>>
>>Read it.
>>Thought.
>>Don't understand your whine.
> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
What is it, and why do you say this?
>>Pity in one hand.
>>Shit in the other.
>>Let me know which hand fills up first.
>
> Patrick Barker you lied and all to defend pedophilia, the cover-up,
>the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC.
Mattb
Jan 23, 2022, 12:57:30 AM1/23/22
to
On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 15:01:00 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What do you think history records?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>>>>>
>>>>>Your "truth"?
>>>>>Yes, of course. \
>>>>
>>>> Truth is truth.
>>>
>>>Unless matty is stating what he THINKS is the truth.
>>
>> We are taking about recording history here.
>
>Someone hates catholics and writes a history about them.
Then you should have no problem countering my post.
>Remind me of all the Trump "epose'" books written.
Trump and the RCC have much in common on ethics.
>
>
>>>Pity in one hand.
>>>Shit in the other.
>>>Let me know which hand fills up first.
>>
>> Patrick Barker you lied and all to defend pedophilia, the cover-up,
>>the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC.
>
>Call yer pops, larry. He misses you.
Another sign Patrick Barker is a fundamentalist Catholic his need to
lie and all in the defense of pedophilia, the cover-up, the false
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>> Why is your history as it is? Why centuries of evil?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What do you think history records?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It could have recorded centuries of good done by the RCC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you think it records only good things that have happened?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It should record truth. Do you oppose truth?
>>>>>
>>>>>Your "truth"?
>>>>>Yes, of course. \
>>>>
>>>> Truth is truth.
>>>
>>>Unless matty is stating what he THINKS is the truth.
>>
>> We are taking about recording history here.
>
>Someone hates catholics and writes a history about them.
>Remind me of all the Trump "epose'" books written.
>
>
>>>>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why?
>>>>
>>>> Read it and think.
>>>
>>>Read it.
>>>Thought.
>>>Don't understand your whine.
>
>
>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>
>What is it, and why do you say this?
Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>
>>>>>> The example of the unforgivable sin makes it plain they are not one.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why?
>>>>
>>>> Read it and think.
>>>
>>>Read it.
>>>Thought.
>>>Don't understand your whine.
>
>
>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>
>What is it, and why do you say this?
>
>
>>>Pity in one hand.
>>>Shit in the other.
>>>Let me know which hand fills up first.
>>
>> Patrick Barker you lied and all to defend pedophilia, the cover-up,
>>the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC.
>
>Call yer pops, larry. He misses you.
lie and all in the defense of pedophilia, the cover-up, the false
P+Barker
Jan 23, 2022, 7:26:47 AM1/23/22
to
>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>
>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>
> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>
>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>
> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
I keep asking, and you keep skirting the issue.
Mattb
Jan 23, 2022, 11:22:00 AM1/23/22
to
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>
>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>
>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>
>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
You fit your own Pope's definition.
>I keep asking, and you keep skirting the issue.
>
>
>
>
>
>Call yer pops, larry. He misses you.
You just have proven my point with you use of calumny, with
disinformation, and doing evil.
wrote:
> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>
>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>
>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>
>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>I keep asking, and you keep skirting the issue.
>
>
>
>
>
>Call yer pops, larry. He misses you.
disinformation, and doing evil.
P+Barker
Jan 23, 2022, 1:16:58 PM1/23/22
to
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>
>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>
>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>
>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>
> You fit your own Pope's definition.
Huh?
What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
Please use REAL examples.
None of your calumny BS.
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>
>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>
>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>
>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>
> You fit your own Pope's definition.
What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
Please use REAL examples.
None of your calumny BS.
Mattb
Jan 23, 2022, 1:40:18 PM1/23/22
to
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:16:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
you have it seems.
>Please use REAL examples.
>None of your calumny BS.
Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
convicted pedophile. How does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>>
>>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>>
>>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>>
>>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>
>> You fit your own Pope's definition.
>
>Huh?
>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>>
>>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>>
>>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>>
>>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>
>> You fit your own Pope's definition.
>
>Huh?
>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
you have it seems.
>Please use REAL examples.
>None of your calumny BS.
convicted pedophile. How does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
P+Barker
Jan 23, 2022, 3:22:55 PM1/23/22
to
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 10:40:18 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
You really should look it up.
>>Please use REAL examples.
>>None of your calumny BS.
>
> Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
>convicted pedophile.
Do all fundamentalists say this?
You are such a wuss.
>ow does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
>the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
I have never defended you or larry.
And if I did, how would that make me a fundy?
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:16:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>>>
>>>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>>
>>> You fit your own Pope's definition.
>>
>>Huh?
>>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
>
> You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>you have it seems.
That is NOT a definition of a fundamentalist.
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:16:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>>>
>>>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>>
>>> You fit your own Pope's definition.
>>
>>Huh?
>>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
>
> You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>you have it seems.
You really should look it up.
>>Please use REAL examples.
>>None of your calumny BS.
>
> Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
>convicted pedophile.
You are such a wuss.
>ow does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
>the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
And if I did, how would that make me a fundy?
Mattb
Jan 23, 2022, 8:43:22 PM1/23/22
to
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 15:22:53 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>You really should look it up.
Why don't you tell us using a non-Catholic source.
actions against your own grand kids?
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 10:40:18 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:16:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>>>>
>>>>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>>>
>>>> You fit your own Pope's definition.
>>>
>>>Huh?
>>>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
>>
>> You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>>you have it seems.
>
>That is NOT a definition of a fundamentalist.
It is part of it.
>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 10:40:18 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:16:56 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:21:59 -0800, Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:26:45 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mattb <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No,you are a fundamentalist Catholic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What is it, and why do you say this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Been over this already. You even oppose your Pope on this.
>>>>>
>>>>>WHY do you feel I am a fundamentalist?
>>>>
>>>> You fit your own Pope's definition.
>>>
>>>Huh?
>>>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
>>
>> You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>>you have it seems.
>
>That is NOT a definition of a fundamentalist.
>You really should look it up.
>
>
>
>
>>>Please use REAL examples.
>>>None of your calumny BS.
>>
>> Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
>>convicted pedophile.
>
>Do all fundamentalists say this?
>You are such a wuss.
>
>
>
>>ow does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
>>the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
>
>I have never defended you or larry.
>And if I did, how would that make me a fundy?
Did Melanie Berkmen, Melissa Kalt, and Barbara Barker defend your
>
>
>
>>>Please use REAL examples.
>>>None of your calumny BS.
>>
>> Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
>>convicted pedophile.
>
>Do all fundamentalists say this?
>You are such a wuss.
>
>
>
>>ow does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
>>the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
>
>I have never defended you or larry.
>And if I did, how would that make me a fundy?
actions against your own grand kids?
P+Barker
Jan 24, 2022, 6:16:45 AM1/24/22
to
>>>>What do you CLAIM I do to fit this description.
>>>
>>> You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>>>you have it seems.
>>
>>That is NOT a definition of a fundamentalist.
> It is part of it.
>
>>You really should look it up.
>
>Why don't you tell us using a non-Catholic source.
fun·da·men·tal·ist
>>>
>>> You did it just today "calumny, with disinformation" that is all
>>>you have it seems.
>>
>>That is NOT a definition of a fundamentalist.
> It is part of it.
>
>>You really should look it up.
>
>Why don't you tell us using a non-Catholic source.
a person who believes in the strict, literal interpretation of
scripture in a religion.
"religious fundamentalists"
relating to or advocating the strict, literal interpretation of
scripture.
Definitions from Oxford Languages
Fundamentalism is defined as strict adherence to some belief or
ideology, especially in a religious context, or a form of Christianity
where the Bible is taken literally and obeyed in full. When a person
follows every possible rule of the Bible, both literal and implied,
this is an example of fundamentalism.
religious fundamentalism—which refers to the belief in the absolute
authority of a religious text or leaders—is almost never good for an
individual. This is primarily because fundamentalism discourages any
logical reasoning or scientific evidence that challenges its
scripture, making it inherently maladaptive.
+ Please notice it does not include calumny, larry, or your pedo ways
Mattb
Jan 24, 2022, 11:21:08 AM1/24/22
to
On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 06:16:43 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Yet it fits you, with your Pedophilia, calumny, disinformation and
you being very much like Larry.
wrote:
you being very much like Larry.
>
>
>
>>>>>Please use REAL examples.
>>>>>None of your calumny BS.
>>>>
>>>> Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
>>>>convicted pedophile.
>>>
>>>Do all fundamentalists say this?
>>>You are such a wuss.
>
>
>>>>ow does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
>>>>the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
>>>
>I have never defended you or larry.
>
>
>>>>>Please use REAL examples.
>>>>>None of your calumny BS.
>>>>
>>>> Lets see you claimed my father is some guy named Larry Brooks a
>>>>convicted pedophile.
>>>
>>>Do all fundamentalists say this?
>>>You are such a wuss.
>
>
>>>>ow does that aid your defense of pedophilia,
>>>>the cover-up, the false doctrine, and the fake traditions of the RCC?
>>>
>I have never defended you or larry.
Did Melanie Berkmen, Melissa Kalt, and Barbara Barker defend your
actions against your own grand kids?
actions against your own grand kids?
P+Barker
Jan 24, 2022, 11:23:16 AM1/24/22
to
>>Fundamentalism is defined as strict adherence to some belief or
>>ideology, especially in a religious context, or a form of Christianity
>>where the Bible is taken literally and obeyed in full. When a person
>>follows every possible rule of the Bible, both literal and implied,
>>this is an example of fundamentalism.
>>ideology, especially in a religious context, or a form of Christianity
>>where the Bible is taken literally and obeyed in full. When a person
>>follows every possible rule of the Bible, both literal and implied,
>>this is an example of fundamentalism.
Mattb
Jan 24, 2022, 12:31:39 PM1/24/22
to
On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 11:23:15 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Doesn't leave that out necessarily either.
wrote:
0 new messages