Pope Francis gives church hundreds of new saints...

[WestminsterMan]

Why would it be wise?

My mind is quite clear, and I fully understand what I believe.

unnecessary diatribe.

And let me tell you something, I will take a break when I so choose.

...

WM

 

[saturneptune]

edited
...

WM

IMO, You believe in a false gospel. I do not. End of story. [edited]

 

[Walter]

I never said you were not saved. Produce a quote, which you cannot. I have only opposed the Catholic Church and doctrine. Never one word said about you personally. Chalk up another lie.

"You cannot figure out why the sun rises. What I cannot figure out is why you are here or why you are allowed to continue here. This is a Christian board in general, and Baptist in particular. That means the basic requirement is salvation by grace, not the Gospel that either you"

I guess you don't think that calls my salvation into question? Really?

 

[saturneptune]

"You cannot figure out why the sun rises. What I cannot figure out is why you are here or why you are allowed to continue here. This is a Christian board in general, and Baptist in particular. That means the basic requirement is salvation by grace, not the Gospel that either you"

I guess you don't think that calls my salvation into question? Really?

No, I do not. Feel free [edited] and contact the moderators, and lets see what happens.

 

[DHK]

That is not extra-bilical evidence. It is the opinion of a 20th Century commentator who gives no citation whatsoever to any ancient writing that says Peter was in Babylon on the Euphrates. It is also clear that the writer is anti-Catholic by his use of the pejorative term "papist."

Most commentators believe Peter wrote his first epistle from Rome. For example, the evangelical scholar Ray Stedman writes thusly:

I don't agree with Stedman's assessment.
Remember that Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles, but Peter the Apostle to the circumcised. Again, look to whom he addresses his first epistle and what areas, geographically, they are located. They are near Babylon. He was writing to the dispersed Jewish believers. There is no evidence that he was in Rome, except to die. We have the same basic testimony with Paul. He was set free after his first captivity and then brought back to face court and then die. Both Paul and Peter died at about the same time, and by the same person (the hand of Nero), but not doubt in different ways. One thing that you will never find agreement with Stedman on is that Peter was a bishop or pastor at Rome. No evangelical believes that.
Notice Stedman said:

So it is very likely that the Apostle Peter wrote this letter from the city of Rome in about 67 A.D. And he wrote it to Christians, mostly Gentile Christians, who were scattered about in cities in the northeast province of what we now call Asia Minor, or Turkey, and to them this letter came.

He believes the epistle was written in 67; Peter was martyred in 68.
No evidence that he spent much time in Rome.

 

[Walter]

No, I do not. Feel free[edited] and contact the moderators, and lets see what happens.

And, the name-calling continues. No, probably nothing would happen by contacting the moderators. I will say this, I participate on Catholic boards and NONE of the Catholic boards would allow a Catholic to make the kind of infantile personal attacks on any other poster that this board has allowed by you. So, who is acting more like a Christian, eh? I have looked back over other threads you have participated on it's always the same. Your big issue is your hatred of Catholics. I think everyone but you sees it.

 

[saturneptune]

And, the name-calling continues. No, probably nothing would happen by contacting the moderators. I will say this, I participate on Catholic boards and NONE of the Catholic boards would allow a Catholic to make the kind of infantile personal attacks on any other poster that this board has allowed by you. So, who is acting more like a Christian, eh? I have looked back over other threads you have participated on it's always the same. Your big issue is your hatred of Catholics. I think everyone but you sees it.

I hope everyone does see it, because the RCC has done everything it could to hamper the work of the Lord. I think the most outrageous thing about the whole organization is the claim they preserved the NT church as Jesus promised. That takes a lot of nerve. to attribute preservation of the church to an organization that is a cult.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Anyone who employs the personal attack has nothing else to offer and as I said before, displays behavior indicative of intellectual cowardace.

WM

When I personally attack you, you will know it.

Cowardice? You sit anonymously behind a computer screen and throw out your lies. How brave of you. I'd say that is indicative of intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

I apologize for doubting your education. It's just that you always respond in such a sophomoric fashion... So what is one to think? "Think" being the operative word.


I accept your apology for that then.


You cannot win the argument, so you try to diminish me. Everyone can see that.



Oh - I see; and only now you trying to walk it back. You use the term "Romanist" to deride Catholics here. You know very well that you are conversing with a limited audience including all of about four Catholics. This is total pap.


Trying to walk it back? I said upfront why I was using the word Romanist: to distinguish the Roman Church from other branches of Catholicism and to deny that the word Catholic is the exclusive property of Romanism. You should sharpen your comprehension skills, or you honesty.



Selective history. It figures.



No. But I do have something else that I would very much like you to start...



Probably because TS and Walter have a much higher tolerance for BS than I. I'm just too old to put up with idiocy.

WM

(See my first answer in blue inside your post)

Then you should try to restrain yours.

And again, your attempt to compare me to the KKK shows what you're made of.

 

[saturneptune]

And, the name-calling continues. No, probably nothing would happen by contacting the moderators. I will say this, I participate on Catholic boards and NONE of the Catholic boards would allow a Catholic to make the kind of infantile personal attacks on any other poster that this board has allowed by you. So, who is acting more like a Christian, eh? I have looked back over other threads you have participated on it's always the same. Your big issue is your hatred of Catholics. I think everyone but you sees it.

This is the difference between you and me. I have no desire to go to another denomination chat board to poke fun at their faith or peddle mine. That is only respect, which you have none.

 

[DHK]

Please set aside the emotions and personal attacks and post as per your position, not at the person.

 

[Walter]

This is the difference between you and me. I have no desire to go to another denomination chat board to poke fun at their faith or peddle mine. That is only respect, which you have none.

If in fact you don't question my salvation, then I should be able to post here. Again, this is the Christian Debate Forums (All Christians), not the 'Baptists Only Forum'. I don't go posting on the 'Baptists Only Forum'. If you have no tolerance for anyone opinions but other Baptists, maybe you should concentrate your efforts there. I am not here to mock or poke fun at Baptists and that is what you are inferring.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Please set aside the emotions and personal attacks and post as per your position, not at the person.

I shall try to do as you request.

Better yet, perhaps I should take a break from the p*****g contest altogether; at my age, my bladder is not what it used to be.

 

[saturneptune]

If in fact you don't question my salvation, then I should be able to post here. Again, this is the Christian Debate Forums (All Christians), not the 'Baptists Only Forum'. I don't go posting on the 'Baptists Only Forum'. If you have no tolerance for anyone opinions but other Baptists, maybe you should concentrate your efforts there. I am not here to mock or poke fun at Baptists and that is what you are inferring.

Did you just read what the moderator posted above? He said keep persons out of the posts. That is just what he meant.

 

[saturneptune]

Ok, since we have been instructed to keep persons out of the posts, then lets concentrate on the core of the problem, the Catholic Church. In relation to the op, the first point to make is that no one makes saints, saints by definition are saved Christians.

Since, IMO, the Catholic Church is a cult and a puppet of the devil himself, even if one could make saints, it would not be from this organization or cult.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Ok, since we have been instructed to keep persons out of the posts, then lets concentrate on the core of the problem, the Catholic Church. In relation to the op, the first point to make is that no one makes saints, saints by definition are saved Christians.

Since, IMO, the Catholic Church is a cult and a puppet of the devil himself, even if one could make saints, it would not be from this organization or cult.

You are correct. A lot can be solved by going to scripture. Scripture refers to all believers as saints, just as it refers to all believers as priests.

 

[WestminsterMan]

You are correct. A lot can be solved by going to scripture. Scripture refers to all believers as saints, just as it refers to all believers as priests.

A lot can be, but not everything. Hence the need for Tradition.

WM

 

[saturneptune]

A lot can be, but not everything. Hence the need for Tradition.

WM

IMO, Catholic tradition is of the devil, and therefore, an invalid of proof of anything true.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Ok, since we have been instructed to keep persons out of the posts, then lets concentrate on the core of the problem, the Catholic Church. In relation to the op, the first point to make is that no one makes saints, saints by definition are saved Christians.

Since, IMO, the Catholic Church is a cult and a puppet of the devil himself, even if one could make saints, it would not be from this organization or cult.

In my opinon the denomination to which you belong - if indicative of your beliefs, "...is a cult and a puppet of the devil himself". Do you see the folly of your tatics? They do not advance the discussion in any meaningful way.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

IMO, Catholic tradition is of the devil, and therefore, an invalid of proof of anything true.

Well... that's your OPINION and as such, means nothing.

WM