Define worship first, Dummay. I would say worship is admiration, and only [God] deserves admiration
Last edited:
ECT WHO IS THE HEAD OF THE EKKLESIA TODAY ??
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
Define worship first, Dummay. I would say worship is admiration, and only [God] deserves admiration
Cruciform
New member
No there aren't. Try again.
Cruciform
New member
Cite the number of the post in which I supposedly "call you names."
Cruciform
New member
I admire a great many people---artists, scientists, inventors, writers, historical figures, etc. Is it your claim, then, that I "worship" these people? :think:
Wick Stick
Well-known member
50% of your posts consist of:
"...according to the entirely non-authoritative opinions of your favored recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, anyway."
It may as well say, "I know you are, but what am I?"
Cruciform
New member
If you don't want to see this entirely logical reply, then you'll need to do something more than merely parroting the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect. Until then, nothing more is necessary on my part.
Wick Stick
Well-known member
I already am. Doing more than that, I mean.
Probably that's the reason why your "stock answer" is so unimpressive to me. It's a non-sequitur in my case.
Jarrod
Cruciform
New member
Hardly. Given that you reject Christ's one historic Catholic Church and her teachings, it follows that you must therefore have derived your religious assumptions and beliefs from one or more of the 50,000+ recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects in existence today. Doctrine is not formulated in a vacuum.
Wick Stick
Well-known member
You sure seem to know a lot of things about me! Stuff even I didn't know!
I reject neither the Catholic church nor the catholic church. Heck - I don't even reject the Roman Catholic Church! (Although, I do think that the bishop of Rome has seriously overstepped his authority.)
I do not belong to any sect or denomination. Actually, I don't believe in sects or denominations. There's just one church, and I'm just another brick in the wall, so to speak.
No, doctrine is not formed in a vacuum. "My" doctrine (if there is any such thing) is formed by historical and linguistic studies, particularly those from the late Bronze Age through the end of the Iron Age. I'm into source documents, ANE literature, and the writings of the Early Church Fathers. If you're a good Catholic, you should be able to appreciate at least part of that.
Anyhow, there is little of "recently-invented" about my beliefs. They are somewhat older than yours, actually.
Finally, I find the irony of you accusing someone of "parroting" anything overwhelmingly hilarious. Who in this forum links more external articles than any 3 other people combined? Put your thumb on your breastbone, and say, "This guuuuuy!"
Jarrod
Hi and maybe they did not have AAA and could not rent a donkey for their trip , BUT John 21:18 and 19 says that Peter died of old AGE !!
DAN P
It is much less 50,000, dummay.
Cruciform
New member
My observation applies not only to you, but to everyone else as well, myself included.
Then you affirm and follow the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Catholic Church...? :think:
I said nothing about "belonging"---that is, being a formal member---of a sect or denomination.
Certainly. My previous observations about the informational sources of your ideas and beliefs, however, stand as posted.
My purpose here is to explain and defend the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Church, not to try and pass off my own fallible private doctrinal formulations as "what the Bible teaches." "Parroting" occurs when one merely spouts his preferred tradition's doctrinal content mindlessly, without a full comprehension of alternative positions, particularly of the one to which he's presuming to criticize. My prior comments stand.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
Nonsense. These texts say nothing even remotely like what you claim. :doh:
Cruciform
New member
Post your proof.
No, post your proof that it [is] 50,000; and you can't because it isn't so.
Last edited:
Nor do they say he was in Rome instead of Babylon.
Right Divider
Body part
YOU claimed that there are 50,000+. It is up to YOU to PROVE the claim that YOU made.
Instead, you're just a bag of wind.
1Way1Truth1Life
New member
Whatever man. Your answers remind me of a movie. Pay no attention to those pictures all over the Internet. I mean behind the curtain.
Right Divider
Body part
Yep, that's "proof"! NOT!