Sorry, Pope, but this 'proper church' declaration is surreal

[RedFox]

Once more for Raymond

From another thread

One of the most famous passages in the Bible is the passage found in
Hebrews 11, which is used by many Christians, especially of the twenty
first century variety to define the word "faith"

The passage

 

[RedFox]

In article <i8cq93tslcmuoimt2r9ja7uo7h5c4a971f@4ax.com>, duke
<duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:

>
> I know what it is, you don't. It's the church on earth that Christ founded to
> be led by a man (Papacy) under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. You
see, Christ
> left us 2000 years ago. And he left an organizational foundation to guide it,
> gave it the keys to heaven, to bind on earth to be so in heaven for all time
> until he returns.

Its the same old silly fable - put together long after the supposed events

It is a mythology specifically designed to create and bolster an authority
that is at its core a malignant fraud

And what do you offer as evidence for your claim? - the very ruddy
Scripture the frauds composed over several centuries

Gee what a surprise

It "confirms" their authority

DOH!

 

[RedFox]

In article <hmcq93lqc260b8jn33khd393kkf4es3s9l@4ax.com>, duke
<duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:32:01 +1000, Jesse@StJoseph.com (RedFox) wrote:
>
> >> The protest_ants left the one true church 400 years ago. It's historical.
>
> >Maybe they did
> >They were quite right to
> >Even the best building can become a derelict brothel
> >Your point?
>
> You also left that which Christ gave us.

No

I left in search of it


+++++++++++

QUOTE

All that I need further say is to point out that when such
defiance is offered to the intelligence of a thoughtful and
honest young man with the normal impulses of his twenty-one
years, there are but two alternatives. Either he must cease to
think for himself; or his individualism must be instantly
confirmed, and the necessity of religious independence must be
emphasized.

No compromise, it is seen, was offered; no proposal of a truce
would have been acceptable. It was a case of 'Everything or
Nothing'; and thus desperately challenged, the young man's
conscience threw off once for all the yoke of his 'dedication',
and, as respectfully as he could, without parade or remonstrance,
he took a human being's privilege to fashion his inner life for
himself.


"Father and Son," by Edmund Gosse

 

[Raymond]

On Jul 17, 4:21 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:46:05 GMT, Joe Bol <notr...@notreal.com> wrote:
>
> Then again, you and I sin every day, but I go to confession.

To whom a man or to Jesus Christ that said He is the only way to the
Father.

>
> >Duke, stop kidding yourself. The Vatican is a huge, cumbersome
> >bureaucracy where people can hide out for years, never getting caught
> >while never having to pay for their sins.
>
> Yet it comes directly from the lips of Christ.

That is not possible as the Vatican was not even made yet.

>
> >You think THIS MOST RECENT episode is all there is???
>
> The biggest molester is the step father, not a priest. The bad guys came from
> an identified group in formation in the 50's to 70's. Many are now dead. You
> appear to be falsely led to believe that it's a large problem to be continued.
> It's not.

That is interesting and one would think you could prove that
statement. In one area of the USA over 500 priest were found
molesting children and the RC church paid over 600 million dollars
that was reported last week in the newspapers. Priest are suppose to
be holy men, I never heard of any 500 step father being accused of
such behaviour unless one says the priest that is called "father" are
really in their mind the "step father" since they are or suppose to be
the protectors of youth and all people that come to church. One has
to wonder how many the total number is, when there should not of been
even ONE. I have known many Priest, as well as Monsignors some
Bishops and even a Cardinal and never meet any that did such things to
children, as a youth I attended the summer catholic youth camp that
was two weeks long and the priest were all nice people, never once did
we hear of any of them doing such evil deeds, if they did they hid it
well. The problem is not so much the sin of child molesting but that
one priest would confess to another and forgive each other of
molesting a child and then do it again. The system for repentance is
wrong in the catholic church as they look to a man to confess to and
then hear do so man hail Mary's and some Our fathers and go in
peace. Which means they sin and go to the priest to get forgiveness
so to sin again and confess and sin again. Now the law says it is not
acceptable and never should of been, false teaching bring sin and we
see that in the number of the priest that have been found out and how
many more are there.

> I know what it is, you don't. It's the church on earth that Christ founded to
> be led by a man (Papacy) under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. You see, Christ
> left us 2000 years ago. And he left an organizational foundation to guide it,
> gave it the keys to heaven, to bind on earth to be so in heaven for all time
> until he returns.

So where does it say to molest a child is one of them keys? More like
a key to Hell not heaven. So the priest bind on earth children and
molest them you think that is of God and blessed of the Father, or is
it that the RCC is not the church Jesus set up and is not the Holy
church, as such sins by its membership of ministers are not holy but
sin, and sin ends a person into HELL not Heaven.

 

[Raymond]

On Jul 15, 5:21 pm, Je...@StJoseph.com (RedFox) wrote:
> In article <1184506070.943237.245...@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Raymond <rwkn...@aim.com> wrote:
>
> > The Bible points out that in the last day's people will believe a lie
> > and people will try to turn people from Christ and the WORD of the
> > Holy Bible to the teachings of men who want to be seen as the leaders
> > and only true church. I would say beware the end is soon to come and
> > the LORD JESUS will return to get His Church, not a Popes church or
> > hundreds of child molesters.
>
> Always the same stupid fantasy

Yes your words are always the same stupid fantasy.

 

[Raymond]

On Jul 15, 5:21 pm, Je...@StJoseph.com (RedFox) wrote:
> In article <md9k93dd2j2jp4ouhbtp4qf2adff4nj...@4ax.com>, duke
>
> <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On 15 Jul 2007 09:49:17 GMT, NY.Transfer.N...@blythe.org wrote:
>
> > >Sorry, Pope, but this 'proper church' declaration is surreal
>
> > The Pope says "yes" to the words of Christ in the Gospels.
>
> > duke, American-American
> >
>
> Ratty is an idiot

No more they you are also.

 

[Raymond]

On Jul 16, 5:46 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 08:21:45 +1000, Je...@StJoseph.com (RedFox) wrote:
> >> >Sorry, Pope, but this 'proper church' declaration is surreal
> >> The Pope says "yes" to the words of Christ in the Gospels.
> > Ratty is an idiot
>
> The protest_ants left the one true church 400 years ago. It's historical.

Oh yeah 500 plus priest molesting children that we know of in the last
60 years, how many hid from the law in the last 400 years. Then the
one true church is not in a building but in the heart and what happen
some 400 years ago is that they found the real one church and it sure
was not in Rome or was it Catholic. Then the Greek Orthodox Church
has been around longer then the Bishop of Rome and they still have
popes in their faith. Roman left them and the Protestant church left
the RCC. Then it is not a church that saves it is faith in JESUS not
Mary, not the saints not, not, not, it is only in Jesus as LORD not a
Pope in a church so called.

 

[Raymond]

On Jul 17, 7:50 pm, Je...@StJoseph.com (RedFox) wrote:
> In article <1184642227.395844.275...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Raymond
>
> Not all of them at all - yours is an interesting distortion of history.

Your twist is not worth even thinking about as so far nothing you say
is interesting.

>
> I'd recommend the American book "Africans in America - Americas Journey
> Through Slavery" by Johnson and Smith of WGBH to help you put your
> Southern Cracker facts right.

What has "Southem" which is not even a word. If you mean southern it
still means nothing to me, as I was born in the North, and your nation
is down south not mine.

>
> But ignoring that - I find yours is an interesting and no doubt
> accidentally expressed justification of slavery - they were already
> slaves you say (incorrectly in most cases)

We in the north did not have slaves maybe your folks did, we did not.
Again you show you know nothing.

>
> Raymond - I don't particularly dislike you - You annoy me but that is all

I like annoying you as it seems you like doing the same. So at least
we have that in common.

>
> But I do care that you have distorted Christianity to suit your own ego.

NOT I, but you sure have tried here to distort Christianity that
really means nothing to you and your ego, just can not take being
shown as in error, wrong and without any way to win this argument.


> Don't you think you have placed yourself in your own thinking just a
> little too close to God?

I can never get too close to God, I love God and His promise is never
to leave me or forsake me, or any true believer of which your not, so
you feel anyone that is close to God has to be wrong.

>
> And if that is true - do you really think that is good for your soul?

Great for my soul, not so good for yours.

snip out more silly statements of yours.

 

[Raymond]

On Jul 17, 7:52 pm, Je...@StJoseph.com (RedFox) wrote:
> Once more for Raymond
>
> From another thread

Sorry your trash is not welcome and that is once more for you, I got
better things to do then dig in the trash to read your garbage.

Snip and I so enjoy doing that.

Even your facts are in error.

 

[Joe Bol]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:21:09 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:46:05 GMT, Joe Bol <notreal@notreal.com> wrote:
>
>>>The problem has been revealed and corrected.
>>HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!
>
>>Sure it has been corrected. That's like the felon who cries in court.
>>He apologizes NOT because of what he has done. He cries in court
>>because HE GOT CAUGHT AND WAS FORCED TO PAY.
>
>Then again, you and I sin every day, but I go to confession.

Yeah, we all know how spiritual you are. You never miss an
opportunity to tell everyone.

>>Duke, stop kidding yourself. The Vatican is a huge, cumbersome
>>bureaucracy where people can hide out for years, never getting caught
>>while never having to pay for their sins.
>
>Yet it comes directly from the lips of Christ.

Keep telling yourself that.

>>You think THIS MOST RECENT episode is all there is???
>
>The biggest molester is the step father, not a priest. The bad guys came from
>an identified group in formation in the 50's to 70's. Many are now dead. You
>appear to be falsely led to believe that it's a large problem to be continued.
>It's not.

It's still happening.

>>ROFLMAO at your continued denial of reality and claims that the Romand
>>Catholic Church is what you think it is.
>
>I know what it is, you don't. It's the church on earth that Christ founded to
>be led by a man (Papacy) under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

So the Holy Spirit told the pope to cover up all those molesting
priests and move them around from parish to parish. Good, really good
for your cause.

>But what is there in your words that are believable? I have scripture to
>support what I say.

Sure, Mack, sure.

SF

 

[RedFox]

In article <1184856887.629906.133570@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
Raymond <rwknapp@aim.com> wrote:

The problem is not so much the sin of child molesting but that
> one priest would confess to another and forgive each other of
> molesting a child and then do it again.

huh?

aren't there then TWO sins of child molesting

Who gives a stuff about a menaingless confession

Only the child could forgive and then only both as a child and later as a
mature adult

Only the victim can forgive

The rest is superstious bosh aimed at sinning first - reaping the benefit
in material matters - and then keeping the loot with a good conscience.

 

[RedFox]

In article <1184884995.498668.80260@m3g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, Raymond
<rwknapp@aim.com> wrote:


>
> We in the north did not have slaves maybe your folks did, we did not.
> Again you show you know nothing.

Certainly shows YOU don't

By 1830 the slave population in America was around two million; in 1827
with the freeing of ten thousand slaves in New York (NORTH enough for you
Raymond?) fewer than three percent of the nations 12 million population
were free blacks

You see you really don't know your own history, Raymond