Religion II

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Do non sequitur responses much? But I suppose in your little universe, non-answers beat genuine, on-topic replies.

It was in direct response to this glorious line of yours:

"I mean...let's face it: How did that kind of utterly stupid complacency tactic work out for the Jews? For nearly 2,000 years they are still known as the Christ killers. And virtually all Old Covenant Judaism has fallen victim also to the Church Militant's gospel message."

How does it feel to now be known as the safe haven for pedophiles?

Christians...who knew?

[PaceAdvantage]

If Boxcar and Luther take it upon themselves to continue to call Jews "Christ killers", I will forever now label all Christians as pedo protectors.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

If Boxcar and Luther take it upon themselves to continue to call Jews "Christ killers", I will forever now label all Christians as pedo protectors.

Whatever floats your little boat.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

It was in direct response to this glorious line of yours:

"I mean...let's face it: How did that kind of utterly stupid complacency tactic work out for the Jews? For nearly 2,000 years they are still known as the Christ killers. And virtually all Old Covenant Judaism has fallen victim also to the Church Militant's gospel message."

How does it feel to now be known as the safe haven for pedophiles?

Christians...who knew?

Still a mean-spirited, vile, angry, antichrist non sequitur written in today's PC spirit, I'm sure.

And who knew about genuine and wanna-be Christians sinning? I did and still do, since the bible addresses these kinds of issues. But that's not even the main issue. The bigger and more pertinent question is: Does the bible condone, sanction or approve of any sin?

May I be so bold as to suggest that you know the correct answer to the above, which is why you, too, are a Christ-hater?

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

May I be so bold as to suggest that you know the correct answer to the above, which is why you, too, are a Christ-hater?

This just earned you a red card.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

It was in direct response to this glorious line of yours:

"I mean...let's face it: How did that kind of utterly stupid complacency tactic work out for the Jews? For nearly 2,000 years they are still known as the Christ killers. And virtually all Old Covenant Judaism has fallen victim also to the Church Militant's gospel message."

How does it feel to now be known as the safe haven for pedophiles?

Christians...who knew?

Exactly what Alinsky wanted you to think. All of this has ties to Saul Alilinsky through, the late, homosexualist cardinal Bernardin. An inside attack on the Church through predatory homosexuals.

Again, these predators are not pedophiles, they focus there predatory acts on pubescent and post-pubescent males.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Must suck to know one of the biggest Christian religions on earth is best known these days as a safe house for pedophiles.

Not really. Akita, Japan and other Marion apparitions.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

This just earned you a red card.

Why? It's a biblical statement!

Oh wait...I get it...that's why! You wouldn't care much for a biblical indictment, would you?

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

So if we did DNA testing, you believe he would show up as the human son of Joseph and Mary? Was he the Son of God by proxy? Exactly what do you believe about Mary's pregnancy and Jesus' birth?

FYI the dogma of the Immaculate Conception is not about the conception and birth of Jesus. it is about Mary's conception and birth.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

So if we did DNA testing, you believe he would show up as the human son of Joseph and Mary? Was he the Son of God by proxy? Exactly what do you believe about Mary's pregnancy and Jesus' birth?

It appears you are confusing the RCC immaculate conception doctrine for the virgin birth doctrine? Two very different things. The former, I categorically reject but the latter I wholeheartedly embrace.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

That is circular reasoning.

Adam, Baker and Charlie authenticate each other. All three believe the earth is flat. Does that make the statement "the earth is flat" true?

A non sequitur. You should have asked if their authentication of each other constitutes circular reasoning. It does not, since their works would be independent of one another.

However, since there is nothing outside the bible that can successfully refute multiple bible writers's stance on any given issue/doctrine, then their consistency with one another would go a long way in pointing to the truth.

Again, Martin Luther was right. Reason never comes to the aid of religion.

What would you know about reason? It was never your strong suit.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by bollixed-up-car

And what else is quite natural is that since all the passion events surrounding Christ's death, burial and resurrection actually occurred,

No. Very little correspondent between the scripted fable of Jesus and actual historical and archeological evidence it actually happened. YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT AGAIN. The story, the drama, the theme of constructed metaphors are the only thing that matters. Like all religions. Religion is not history, and the Jews in actuality did not kill Christ. And even if you do make the mistake of taking the passion of Christ literally, only some Jews, scribes and pharisees are the guilty ones. As I have mentioned before the Jews represented the letter of the Law, and could not understand or accept the original intemt and SPIRIT of the Law, Jesus.

Symbols meant for anything but antisemitism

.................................................. ...................
Pope Benedict XVI has made a sweeping exoneration of the Jewish people for the death of Jesus Christ in a new book, tackling one of the most controversial issues in Christianity.

In 'Jesus of Nazareth' excerpts released Wednesday, Benedict uses a biblical and theological analysis to explain why it is not true that the Jewish people as a whole were responsible for Jesus' death.

Interpretations to the contrary have been used for centuries to justify the persecution of Jews.

While the Vatican has for five decades taught that Jews weren't collectively responsible, Jewish scholars said Wednesday the argument laid out by the German-born pontiff, who has had his share of mishaps with Jews, was significant and would help fight anti-Semitism today.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Exactly what Alinsky wanted you to think. All of this has ties to Saul Alilinsky through, the late, homosexualist cardinal Bernardin. An inside attack on the Church through predatory homosexuals.

Again, these predators are not pedophiles, they focus there predatory acts on pubescent and post-pubescent males.

Another alt right conspiracy now on the "religion thread"
Please save it for when Trump gets fitted for his spiffy new orange jumpsuit on some political thread

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

Another alt right conspiracy now on the "religion thread"
Please save it for when Trump gets fitted for his spiffy new orange jumpsuit on some political thread

It is not a conspiracy theory. It is a fact Alinski had ties to the Church through Bernardin, in Chicago, and it's Jesuit community. Under Bernardin the Church was involved in identity politics and social justice and the importing of homosexual candidates for the priesthood from South America.

Casa Jesus is not a theory but a fact.

Also the John Jay study is a fact.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

Another alt right conspiracy now on the "religion thread"
Please save it for when Trump gets fitted for his spiffy new orange jumpsuit on some political thread

BTW if someone is a Christian they are not "alt right". The "alt right" rejects Christianity, because it is a religion of weakness. The alt right embraces the strong pagan gods or atheism.