Total Posts:89|Showing Posts:61-89|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Praying To the Saints?

Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2013 10:05:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/21/2013 5:56:10 PM, Dogknox wrote:
annanicole Your Church has zero authority to decide truth, yet you believe your church over the scriptures, God' words!

Jesus' One Church Jesus formed will never fail, it is guided forever by God, into all truth! You say.. "Nope not forever, the Church Jesus formed failed at 70 A.D.!"
John 14:16
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever"
annanicole To be a member of your man made "churches of Christ" you must reject Jesus' words! You must believe Jesus needs help to restore his body back to him, by your church!

Jesus' body is the "Household of God!"
1 Timothy 3:15
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God"s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

God' house will last forever, His CHURCH is the Pillar of TRUTH!
"The church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth."
annanicole Do you see it.. "The church of the living God"!!! Does them mean there is another church other then "churches of Christ"? ha-ha!!!! Another church formed by Paul called The church of the living God NOTICE this The church of the living God is SINGULAR not PLURAL!!!

You say: "Jesus' body fell as soon as the scaffolding came down!"
Clearly you have placed the salvation of your soul in the teaching of these men that named your church; "churches of Christ"! (PLURAL)

1 Corinthians 1:2
To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"their Lord and ours:

Do you see it.. The church of God?? Does this mean there is another church other then "churches of Christ"? ha-ha!!!! Does this "CHURCH (Singular) of God" mean God formed only ONE CHURCH!!!????

Jesus formed ONE Church.. Christians named the ONLY CHURCH Jesus formed: Catholic Church!

Dogknox

Acts 1:7
He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."


annanicole Looking at Jesus' words... The Church Jesus formed, will WITNESS to "the Ends of the Earth"!

annanicole You are clearly WRONG!!!!.. Jesus' Church could not have fallen away unless you are saying "Jesus lied, in Acts 1:8?" (above)

annanicole Your man made "churches of Christ" does not witness to the ends of the earth!! Your man made "churches of Christ" was not around for the first eighteen hundred years!!! LOGIC SAYS: If anyone was looking for the TRUE Church Jesus formed, they would be "Whack-O" to look towards your "churches of Christ"!

Dogknox
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 1:26:03 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/21/2013 5:56:10 PM, Dogknox wrote:
annanicole Your Church has zero authority to decide truth, yet you believe your church over the scriptures, God' words!

Know what? You're RIGHT. The thing is: I don't have a church, but you're right, what you call "my church" does not have any "right" to decide truth. And it's a good thing we recognize it, else we'd be in your predicament. The Roman Catholic Church has no authority, either - but keeps asserting that she thinks she does. There's the difference.


Jesus' One Church Jesus formed will never fail, it is guided forever by God, into all truth! You say.. "Nope not forever, the Church Jesus formed failed at 70 A.D.!"

I didn't say anything failed. I said the prophecies in the OT were TRUE. The Messiah was WITH HIS CHURCH miraculously - certain members of the early church could perform miracles - for about 40 years, or until about AD 70.

John 14:16
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever"
annanicole To be a member of your man made "churches of Christ" you must reject Jesus' words! You must believe Jesus needs help to restore his body back to him, by your church!

Nope, "forever" many times in the Bible means "to the completion". It doesn't always mean "eternally". IF you want proof, let me know.

Jesus' body is the "Household of God!"
1 Timothy 3:15
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God"s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

God' house will last forever, His CHURCH is the Pillar of TRUTH!
"The church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth."
annanicole Do you see it.. "The church of the living God"!!! Does them mean there is another church other then "churches of Christ"? ha-ha!!!! Another church formed by Paul called The church of the living God NOTICE this The church of the living God is SINGULAR not PLURAL!!!

And? It is perfectly fine to call the church "the church of the living God". No problem. "Church of God" is fine. "Church of Christ" is fine. "Holy Catholic Church" is not. That's not hard. Do you have any use for the Bible at all?

You say: "Jesus' body fell as soon as the scaffolding came down!"

I never said that, did I? You put it in quotes but, of course, I never said it.

Clearly you have placed the salvation of your soul in the teaching of these men that named your church; "churches of Christ"! (PLURAL)

You are correct. Among these men was the apostle Paul. "...the churches of Christ salute you." (Rom 16: 16)

1 Corinthians 1:2
To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"their Lord and ours:

Do you see it.. The church of God?? Does this mean there is another church other then "churches of Christ"? ha-ha!!!!

Nope the "church of Christ", "church of God" and "church of the Living God" are all correct and acceptable names for the Lord's church. The name "Holy Catholic Church" is unacceptable. We are in agreement on that.

Does this "CHURCH (Singular) of God" mean God formed only ONE CHURCH!!!????

Jesus formed ONE Church.. Christians named the ONLY CHURCH Jesus formed: Catholic Church!

I do not recall any inspired Christian naming the church "Catholic Church". I could as well say they called it "Baptist Church" or "Methodist Church". Same authority either way - the words of uninspired men. Give me a passage that mentions any "Catholic Church" and I'll agree with you. Until then, you'll have to drop the name as unscriptural silliness concocted in the minds of uninspired men, won't you?

By the way, Dogknox, thanks for answering my 4 or 5 questions. You did superbly as you always do. Those were some A #1, tip-top, king-of-the-hill answers you gave. They always are.
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 1:29:26 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Dogknox: "Acts 1:7
He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

annanicole Looking at Jesus' words... The Church Jesus formed, will WITNESS to "the Ends of the Earth"!

annanicole You are clearly WRONG!!!!.. Jesus' Church could not have fallen away unless you are saying "Jesus lied, in Acts 1:8?" (above)

annanicole Your man made "churches of Christ" does not witness to the ends of the earth!! Your man made "churches of Christ" was not around for the first eighteen hundred years!!! LOGIC SAYS: If anyone was looking for the TRUE Church Jesus formed, they would be "Whack-O" to look towards your "churches of Christ"!"

Ye shall be my witness was spoken to the apostles, not the church. The church didn't even exist yet. Yet look what you say: "The Church Jesus formed, will WITNESS to "the Ends of the Earth"!" Why, the Bible never said that. The passage was spoken to the apostles, who later did disperse, and DID carry the messages "to all creation". What's wrong with you? The passage has no direct reference to the church.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 2:58:37 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/21/2013 3:54:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 1/21/2013 12:57:40 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/20/2013 11:33:34 PM, annanicole wrote:
So that's four little questions. I answered yours. Let's see how you do.

Does this mean I'm now allowed to ask aggressive, loaded questions?

No, I might have to go "research" them

C'mon, I'll stick to the Bible, I promise.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 3:04:21 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/21/2013 4:20:17 PM, annanicole wrote:
AMTY: "He was condemned by the Holy Office, not by a Council nor a Pope."

Reply: Oh. Lemme guess. The Holy Office (which I know nothing about - the Bible fails to mention it) was, of course, commissioned by the pope. The fact that such an office existed was, in the end, the decision of the pope. The pope commissioned them. The pope sanctioned them. Further, the pope knew Galileo - they weren't strangers. He knew his case. Thus, the Office of the Inquisition which imprisoned Galileo was merely an agent of the pope.

While I'm sure the Pope knew and disagreed with Galileo, Galileo was condemned by the Holy Office. The Holy Office was wrong. The Pope didn't issue the condemnation, although he disagreed with Galileo. He was wrong in disagreeing with him, but his disagreement wasn't in an official capacity.

Here is the simplied

I beg your pardon?

version of what the Catholic church teaches about infallibility:

"Three conditions must be met for a pope to exercise the charism of infallibility: (1) he must speak in his official capacity as the successor of Peter; (2) he must speak on a matter of faith or morals; and (3) he must solemnly define the doctrine as one that must be held by all the faithful."

Too many questions.

But who knows when he is speaking in his "official capacity"?

I know.

The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

Who decides whether a particular issue is a "matter of faith or morals" or not?

It should be pretty clear if it refers to the faith or morals. Regardless, I suppose a holy Synod could decide.

Is there a difference between "solemning defining" and "not-so-solemnly" defining?

It's mainly between 'defining' and 'not defining'. I'm not sure what the 'solemnly' is in there for, seeing as I don't think he goes around flippantly defining things are requisite beliefs for the faithful.

If so, who determines the difference?

Of course, the Bible says nothing about any of that. It's all made-up. It turns out, depending upon the source - and they are all different, that papa averages utilizing this special "charism" - this "gift" - perhaps about once per century. According to some sources, it would be once every couple hundred years. Betwixt and between, the "definings" and "infallible utterances", he apparently screws up like everyone else.

Of course. No one's perfect.

Of course, a non-Catholic can hardly win when discussing infallibility: a Catholic is like a greased-pig on the subject.

Why, thank you. Of course, it begs the question why you'd even bother trying to discuss infallibility in the first place then.

When the popes are trapped on numerous heresies, condemnations, etc, guess what?

Condemnations, probably, because Popes can screw up just like anyone else. The closest thing I've seen to a heresy is Pope Honorius I, and he wasn't even a heretic.

The Catholic will demand endless sources, for one thing.

I don't know about any old Catholic, but I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. I need endless sources because what, do you expect me to just take your word for it that Honorius was a heretic?

I've seen them say the Latin was "mistranslated." Then if all else fails, the clincher: "Sure, he was a heretic. But he wasn't acting infallibly at the time!" If I were Roman Catholic, I'd skip all the preliminaries, and just move on to that clincher: "Pope So-and-So was NOT acting infallibly at the time he screwed up."

Of course you would, seeing as you can't sufficiently support the preliminaries to make them have any sort of relevance in the first place.

annanicole: 'Why did God allow a condemned heretic to occupy Peter's chair?'
me: 'Pope Leo condemned Honorius for inaction.'
annanicole: 'Not acting against something is the same as actively supporting it.'
me: 'Can you source the condemnations of Honorius?'

And just like that, I'm not hearing anything else about how Honorius was a heretic, rather generic ranting about how Catholics demand endless sources.

We all know that's how it's gonna turn out in the end. If someone doesn't believe me, try it.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 2:43:59 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
annanicole
Ye shall be my witness was spoken to the apostles, not the church. The church didn't even exist yet. Yet look what you say: "The Church Jesus formed, will WITNESS to "the Ends of the Earth"!" Why, the Bible never said that. The passage was spoken to the apostles, who later did disperse, and DID carry the messages "to all creation". What's wrong with you? The passage has no direct reference to the church.

I reply... The scriptures say.. When the CHURCH is empowered then They/CHURCH will witness to the ends of the earth!
The Next chapter Acts 2.. The Church is empowered by the Holy Spirit THEN..
annanicole Then it is CHURCH witnessing to the ENDS OF THE EARTH! Peter goes out and Baptizes 3000 people!

Acts 1:4
On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."

In a few days is PENTECOST.. At PENTECOST is when the CHURCH witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth DUH!!

AND...

annanicole And the Church that is doing the witnessing to the ends of the earth, is not your man made "churches of Christ" church!

Acts 1:8
But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you

annanicole When the Holy Spirit comes on them, they are CHURCH EMPOWERED!!
Church empowered to witness to the ends of the earth!!!

Dogknox
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 6:11:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Dogknox: "I reply... The scriptures say.. When the CHURCH is empowered then They/CHURCH will witness to the ends of the earth!"

Reply: No, the scriptures never said that, unfortunately. The passage doesn't mention the church. The church did not exist yet.

Dogknox: "The Next chapter Acts 2.. The Church is empowered by the Holy Spirit THEN"

Reply: The church was not empowered by the Holy Spirit - the apostles were. You're like a birddog that gets on the scent occasionally, but loses it quickly.

Dogknox: "In a few days is PENTECOST.. At PENTECOST is when the CHURCH witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth DUH!!"

Reply: No, THE APOSTLES received the baptism of the Spirit, the APOSTLES received the power to speak in other languages. DUH is right!

Dogknox's Brilliant Conclusion: "And the Church that is doing the witnessing to the ends of the earth, is not your man made "churches of Christ" church!"

Reply: No, it wasn't any man-made "churches of Christ". It was the churches of Christ of which Paul wrote in Rom 16: "... the churches of Christ salute you."

WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO CALL THE CHURCH, DOGKNOX? GIVE US A GOOD, SCRIPTURAL NAME, and WE'LL GO WITH IT !!!!!! We'll settle this "name" business here and now, Dogknox. You take your New Testament in hand, and YOU TELL US which of the names will please you. You have a dozen to choose from. Have at it.

Dogknox: Acts 1:8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you

annanicole When the Holy Spirit comes on them, they are CHURCH EMPOWERED!!
Church empowered to witness to the ends of the earth!!!

Reply: "Church-empowered"? Where'd you get that? Listen, Dogknox, the Spirit descended upon each of the apostles on Pentecost. They were baptized in the Spirit. They thus could speak in other languages which they had never studied. THERE is some infallible "defining" and "decree-ing" - not this fake stuff that you get from Rome today. The apostles claimed to speak with the authority of Jesus Christ - and THEY BACKED IT UP! What does papa do? He makes the same claims, but CAN'T BACK IT UP. See the difference?

You see, the apostles could, for instance, simply strike a man dead. Strike a man blind. Raise the dead. Not be harmed by deadly things such as snake-bites. Speak in foreign languages that they never studied. They PROVED their apostleship. They PROVED they should be heeded. Papa over in Rome doesn't prove anything. Why, that old fart can't speak in any languages he's never studied. He can't strike a man blind or dead. And he can't raise the dead. As goes the claim or proposition, so must go the proof.
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 7:44:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
annanicole you said..
The church was not empowered by the Holy Spirit - the apostles were.

I reply..Again you are WRONG..
Peter Baptized 3000 and they were "ADDED" to their number!
Acts 2:38
Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."

A Vital Church Grows

40 And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, "Be saved from this perverse generation." 41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles" doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.
46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart,


NOTE this next verse....
Acts 2:47
praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.

annanicole The CHURCH was empowered at Pentecost... Peter ADDED 3000 to the CHURCH the, "Body Of Jesus" the first day of Pentecost!

You are WRONG>> The church was empowered by the Holy Spirit!!
DID YOU SEE IT??? And the Lord added to the church daily (verse 47 above)

Acts 5:11
Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

DID YOU SEE IT?? the whole church

Acts 8:1
Now Saul was consenting to his death.
At that time a great persecution arose against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles.


DID YOU SEE IT (above)? arose against the church

Acts 9:3
As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. 4 Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?"

5 And he said, "Who are You, Lord?"
Then the Lord said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It is hard for you to kick against the goads."


DID YOU SEE IT??? Paul/Saul is persecuting the CHURCH...(verse 4 above) Jesus asks Paul..
why are you persecuting Me?"

DO YOU SEE IT?? (verse 5 above) "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

annanicole The CHURCH is the Body of Jesus! Jesus is God!
Rejecting the CHURCH is rejecting Jesus!

You claim the CHURCH fell away????!! Yet the Church grew by 3000 the first day of Pentecost!!! Paul is persecuting the CHURCH and the CHURCH continues to GROW!!!!!

The CHURCH is not, it CANNOT be your man made "churches of Christ" church! You church think God lied that the church fell away!
No scriptures say "the church fell away"!!! DUH

Dogknox
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2013 10:32:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Me: "The church was not empowered by the Holy Spirit - the apostles were."

Dogknox: I reply..Again you are WRONG... Peter Baptized 3000 and they were "ADDED" to their number!

Reply: ....... and? The whole 3,000 did not receive baptism of the Holy Spirit, too, did they?

*********

Dogknox: "annanicole The CHURCH was empowered at Pentecost... Peter ADDED 3000 to the CHURCH the, "Body Of Jesus" the first day of Pentecost!"

Reply: Part 2 is true. Part 1 is not. It is painfully incorrect to say the church was empowered with the Spirit at Pentecost because, well, for one thing, the Bible never says it. The Bible also never says that "Peter added them." See how you twist the scriptures? The Bible says,

"And there appeared unto THEM cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon EACH of THEM. And THEY were ALL filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave THEM utterance."

ALL of the apostles received the baptism of the Holy Spirit - not just Peter.

After the record of Peter's sermon, Luke continues ... "And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles." You see that? The apostles. The apostles did all sorts of wonders and signs

Dogknox: "You are WRONG>> The church was empowered by the Holy Spirit!!"

Reply: Too bad that all you can find is that the APOSTLES received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Nobody but the apostles ever did receive Spirit baptism. That's why papa over in the Vatican can't perform any signs and wonders.

*****

The rest of his nonsense is nothing but a bunch of citations which prove the church existed after Acts 2. Nobody denies that - so you wasted your time there. Nobody is denying that the church was established in Acts 2, either (unless you are). I AM denying that the church as a whole received the baptism of the Spirit. Nobody but the apostles received that.

******

Hear Dogknox. Look at his reasoning (or lack thereof): "You claim the CHURCH fell away????!! Yet the Church grew by 3000 the first day of Pentecost!!! "

Reply: What do the two have to do with each other? Whether the church grew by 3,000 on day 1 makes no difference. Your reasoning if flawed.

*****

Dogknox: "Paul is persecuting the CHURCH and the CHURCH continues to GROW!!!!!"

Reply: Whether the church grew or not ... whether it grew in spite of Paul's persecutions makes no difference: the only people who ever received the baptism of the Spirit were the apostles. The church as a whole never received it.

******

Dogknox: "The CHURCH is not, it CANNOT be your man made "churches of Christ" church!"

Reply: I thought you were instructed to come up with a good, scriptural, non-divisive name so that we could move forward. You neglected to do that - and I have a suspicion as to why. The main reason is: Dogknox could really care less what the Bible says, when it gets right down to it. Watch him on this subject and see. He'll leave it alone.

C'mon, Dogknox! You have perhaps a dozen choices. Pick one. That's what we'll call the church from now on. You pick one, give me a chapter and verse, and you and I will use that name from now on. How's that?
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2013 5:24:36 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
annanicole you said..
Reply: ....... and? The whole 3,000 did not receive baptism of the Holy Spirit, too, did they?

I reply: YES they did receive the Holy Spirit!... We KNOW without any doubt, they received the Gift because they were "ADDED to Jesus' Body!" 3000 were ADDED the first day!

annanicole You can't be ADDED to Jesus' holy Body if you do not have the Gift of the Holy Spirit!

Yes they received the Holy Spirit! The GROOM sent the Holy Spirit!
The Groom Baptizes with the Holy Spirit!
The Bride Baptizes with WATER!!!!

FACT: The Bride NEVER, EVER Baptizes with the Holy Spirit!
FACT: The Groom Never, EVER Baptizes with WATER>> NEVER!!!!!!
Read on.. let me explain...

It takes Two, Two, Two, parents to form a Child!!

The Bride ALWAYS FORMS the Child!!!
QUESTION: How many men do you know that have "WOMBS"!!!!? NONE!!!!
ALWAYS without exception.. WOMAN/BRIDES form babies/children only they have a WOMB!!!!

annanicole The GROOM/MEN supply the LIFE!
MEN NEVER Form the baby, they don't have WOMBS!
Jesus does NOT form God' Children!! NEVER!!!

Adam was formed out of EARTH and SPIRIT God gave Adam Life when he gave the Spirit to Adam!
FORMED and given LIFE!

The BRIDE takes the "Dust Of the EARTH" Adams children and RE-FORMS Adams children with the waters of Baptism into the new form of God' Children, into God' Son.. Jesus! THEN>> The Groom sends the Spirit, to give true life!
Thus God' children are "Re-FORMED and given LIFE!"
The new Adam (Jesus) is formed of Earth and Spirit!

Acts 2:38
Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins >>AND<< you will receive the gift The HOLY SPIRIT!!!!!!!!
Peter/CHURCH/BRIDE baptizes with WATER.. always!!!

Acts 2:40
With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation."
41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

Those who accepted his message were baptized, WITH WATER!!!!!!!!!!
annanicole Those who accepted his message were baptized, WITH WATER!!!!!!!!!!

Peter/CHURCH/BRIDE baptizes with WATER.. always: ALWAYS BAPTIZES WITH WATER!!!!!!

The Groom/GOD sends the GIFT..The Holy Spirit!
Jesus baptizes with the Holy SPIRIT!!!!!
Jesus baptizes with FIRE!
Jesus/GOD always gives LIFE!!!!! ALWAYS gives life, never, ever FORMS the Children of Adam into Jesus' Body!!
Never, ever does the Groom FORM the Children of God.. The BRIDE does that with WATER!!!

John 4:1
Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John" 2 although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples.

FACT: It was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. CHURCH Baptizes with WATER ALWAYS!!!

annanicole Jesus NEVER Baptizes with WATER!!
annanicole The CHURCH NEVER Baptizes with the SPIRIT!

Every single time you read in the scriptures "They were Baptizes" it means with WATER done by the CHURCH!!!
Only the CHURCH Baptizes with WATER!

No one is a Child of God until they are BAPTIZED with WATER, God sends the Holy Spirit as a GIFT!!! WATER and SPIRIT form God' children! MOST..

annanicole MOST are baptizes with WATER FIRST but not always first!!!
Acts 10:46
For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

Then Peter said, 47 "Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."
48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.


annanicole Clearly the above scriptures tell you, these people were Baptizes FIRST with the Holy Spirit!
Clearly the were Baptizes FIRST with FIRE!!!!
Jesus wanted them to be baptizes with WATER so they would be ADDED as God' Children!
Peter would not have ORDERED them to be Baptizes with water if Jesus did not want them Baptizes with Water!

annanicole Peter speaking for Jesus.. Peter speaking in Jesus' name!
Peter speaking with all the AUTHORITY of Jesus, ORDERS THEM "Baptizes them with WATER"!
Clearly they were NOT complete God' children until they were Baptized with WATER!!

"Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."

They were Baptized, they were RE-FORMED into God' children when they were finally baptized by the Church!
They were ADDED to Jesus holy Catholic Body as they were Baptized with WATER, they had already received the GIFT from God/Groom!

John 3:5
Jesus answered, "Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.

"Born of water PLUS spirit!"
"Born of water ALONG WITH spirit"!
Unless they are born of water and the Spirit.
"Born of water AS WELL AS spirit"!
"Born of water TOGETHER WITH spirit"!
"Born of water AND spirit"!!!

NOT Water ALONE!
NOT Spirit ALONE!
Unless they are born of water and the Spirit.

Dogknox
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 12:49:27 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Anna: The whole 3,000 did not receive baptism of the Holy Spirit, too, did they?

Dogknox : YES they did receive the Holy Spirit!... We KNOW without any doubt, they received the Gift because they were "ADDED to Jesus' Body!"

Reply: I didn't ask if they received the gift, did I? Nor did I ask if they received the Spirit. I specifically asked you if they received the baptism of the Spirit. Answer that one.

*****

Anna (prior post): "WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO CALL THE CHURCH, DOGKNOX? GIVE US A GOOD, SCRIPTURAL NAME, and WE'LL GO WITH IT !!!!!! We'll settle this "name" business here and now, Dogknox. You take your New Testament in hand, and YOU TELL US which of the names will please you.

Anna (recent post): "I thought you were instructed to come up with a good, scriptural, non-divisive name so that we could move forward. You neglected to do that "

Dogknox: No answer as of yet.

*********

Dogknox: "You can't be ADDED to Jesus' holy Body if you do not have the Gift of the Holy Spirit!"

Anna: Is that objective case or possessive genitive? I'd like to know that. Further, I specifically asked about the baptism of the Spirit - not the gift.

********

Dogknox: "FACT: The Bride NEVER, EVER Baptizes with the Holy Spirit!"

Anna: Huh? Nobody said anything about the bride baptizing with the Spirit.

********

The rest looks like a bunch of rambling to me. This gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2. Do you mean that the "gift" is the "Holy Spirit" Himself?

Is it? If you think so, I'd like to know how you determined that the passage was purely objective case, and not possessive genitive.

Afterall, is the "gift of God" --> God Himself?
Is the "gift of Christ" --> Christ Himself?

Tell us, plainly - without stuttering around about the bride and groom. Take a look at Eph 2: 8, and tell us if the "gift of God" is GOD HIMSELF?

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" Is the gift of God --> GOD?

When you're done, direct your attention to Eph 4: 7:

"But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ"

Is the "gift of Christ" --> CHRIST HIMSELF?

If not, why do you persist in flipping the grammar and flipping the case and trying to say that the "gift of the Holy Spirit" is the HOLY SPIRIT HIMSELF?

Now you thoroughly explain that. Be sure not to forget it.
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 11:53:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
annanicole You asked.. I specifically asked you if they received the baptism of the Spirit. Answer that one.

I reply: All peoples baptized by the Church receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit!
38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

3000 people received the GIFT of the Holy Spirit the first day of Pentecost because 3000 were Baptized by the CHURCH the first day of Pentecost! The BRIDE Baptizes with Water then God sends the "GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT!" AND you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

God sends the Holy Spirit when the Church Baptizes with WATER!
There is JUST one baptism... Done by "WATER & SPIRIT!"
There is NO such thing as being baptizes by JUST the Spirit and becoming God' Child!
annanicole Becoming God' CHILD is what saves! Baptism IMMERSES us into Jesus' body!

Sure people have the Holy Spirit but none are God' children until the Church does her part..
She washes away the corruption of Adam.. She FORMS God' children, into the body of Jesus!!

You ask: After all, is the "gift of God" --> God Himself?
Is the "gift of Christ" --> Christ Himself?


I reply "YES"!

annanicole Baptism ADDS people to Jesus' Body!
Communion KEEPS them in his body!
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.

I was ADDED to Jesus by Baptism I received the Holy Spirit!
I REMAIN in Jesus holy Body because I eat the "TRUE Manna come down from heaven">> Jesus' holy, living forever Body & Blood!

Dogknox
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 2:36:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I asked, "Tell us, plainly - without stuttering around about the bride and groom. Take a look at Eph 2: 8, and tell us if the "gift of God" is GOD HIMSELF?

'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.' Is the gift of God --> GOD?"

Dogknox (to my amazement) says: I REPLY "YES"

Hmmmmmm

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God"

Alright, Doknox thinks that means:

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is God Himself."

I'd say there is a big difference between "gift of God" and "God Himself".

And again:

"And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy the good of all his labour, it is the gift of God." (Eccl 3: 13)

Dogknox thinks "gift of God" just means "God Himself." I'd say "gift of God" refers to "God's gift." There is a big difference between the "gift" and the "giver."

And again:

"Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God." (Eccl 5: 19)

Dogknox thinks the "gift of God" means the GOD IS THE GIFT.

"Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water." (John 4: 10)

GOD HIMSELF IS THE GIFT?

"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Rom 6: 23)

The passage says the "gift of God" is eternal life. Dogknox says the gift of God = GOD HIMSELF.

Here's Dogknox's translation: ""For the wages of sin is death; but the God Himself is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Makes absolutely no sense.

And again:

"For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that."

Dogknox says "his proper gift of God" = GOD HIMSELF

Here's Dogknox: ""For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper GOD HIMSELF, one after this manner, and another after that."

That make a lick of sense?

Methinks you need a refresher in Greek grammar. The "gift of God" cannot mean "God Himself". Course you said it did, and you see how silly you look.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 2:37:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 11:53:36 AM, Dogknox wrote:
I reply "YES"!

Owned.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 3:18:00 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
annanicole
I asked, "Tell us, plainly - without stuttering around about the bride and groom. Take a look at Eph 2: 8, and tell us if the "gift of God" is GOD HIMSELF?

I reply PLAINLY!!
Ephesians 2:8
God"s grace has saved you because of your faith in Christ. Your salvation doesn"t come from anything you do. It is God"s gift.
9 It is not based on anything you have done. No one can brag about earning it.


PLAINLY>>>>>> "NO ONE CAN BAPTIZE THEM SELF"!!!!!
PLAINLY>>>>>> "The GIFT is the the result of the actions of the BRIDE and GROOM"!
PLAINLY>>>>>> "The BRIDE washes with the WATER, the GROOM sends the GIFT!!!"
PLAINLY>>>>>> BAPTISM is not based on anything you have done. No one can brag about earning BAPTISM.

PLAINLY>>>>>> BAPTISM SAVES!!!!
1 Peter 3:21
and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also"not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ

PLAINLY>>>>>> "Baptism ADDS people to the Holy RESURRECTED Body of Jesus, ALL "ADDED" to Jesus' RESURRECTED BODY can't die!! Jesus died he can't die a second time!

PLAINLY>>>>>>God"s grace has saved me because of my faith in the RESURRECTED Christ.

I believe; Jesus died and rose... I believe Jesus can't die a second time I believe you can't even kill a dog two times NO ONE can die twice!
I believe; Jesus has been there and done that.. Jesus caN't die again, I being IMMERSED INTO THE RESURRECTED Body Of Jesus, by Baptism, am saved by the WORK of the Bride and Groom!!

PLAINLY>>>> I am IN Jesus' body!
I was ADDED to the Body of Jesus by BAPTISM!

When I was baptized; I received the Gift of the Holy Spirit from my FATHER God!
The BRIDE re-FORMED me by the waters of Baptism into the new Adam!!
The GROOM my FATHER sent the Holy Spirit!

Dogknox
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 3:47:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

At 1/22/2013 3:04:21 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
annanicole: 'Why did God allow a condemned heretic to occupy Peter's chair?'

There are NO Supernatural god(s) and the total catholic evidence agrees with every other religious evidence; by being a total of zero legitimate proofs otherwise!

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

e.g. paedophiles, Nun raping priests, 100% malignant sinners & agents of their devil, all in violation of -

No one who abides in him sins; * no one who sins has either seen him or known him. . . . . He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. (1 John 3:6, 8) RSV catholic Story book

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 3:47:46 PM, Composer wrote:
The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

If you're going to go around making dramatic assertions, the least you could do is back them up.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

Dafuq?

At 1/22/2013 3:04:21 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
annanicole: 'Why did God allow a condemned heretic to occupy Peter's chair?'

There are NO Supernatural god(s) and the total catholic evidence agrees with every other religious evidence; by being a total of zero legitimate proofs otherwise!

You've never read St. Aquinas, have you?

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

Deja vu.

e.g. paedophiles, Nun raping priests, 100% malignant sinners & agents of their devil, all in violation of -

No one who abides in him sins; * no one who sins has either seen him or known him. . . . . He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. (1 John 3:6, 8) RSV catholic Story book

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

I'm tempted, but I'll pass.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 4:05:52 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Dogknox, you are the one that said the gift of God = GOD HIMSELF. That's where you messed up, if you haven't realized it. You also said the gift of Christ is .... CHRIST HIMSELF. That's just as bad.
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 4:08:04 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:47:46 PM, Composer wrote:
The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

If you're going to go around making dramatic assertions, the least you could do is back them up.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Dafuq?

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/22/2013 3:04:21 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
annanicole: 'Why did God allow a condemned heretic to occupy Peter's chair?'

There are NO Supernatural god(s) and the total catholic evidence agrees with every other religious evidence; by being a total of zero legitimate proofs otherwise!

At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
You've never read St. Aquinas, have you?

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

For our records, let's see the alleged legitimate evidence your catholic agent of the Devil has presented for consideration?

I don't want a Link to pages of catholic drivel & propaganda to wade through, I want definitive and concise proofs; not more empty catholic words!

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 4:08:04 PM, Composer wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:47:46 PM, Composer wrote:
The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

If you're going to go around making dramatic assertions, the least you could do is back them up.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Dafuq?

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

That much I knew, unfortunately.

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

Sure, whatever you say.


At 1/22/2013 3:04:21 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
annanicole: 'Why did God allow a condemned heretic to occupy Peter's chair?'

There are NO Supernatural god(s) and the total catholic evidence agrees with every other religious evidence; by being a total of zero legitimate proofs otherwise!


At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
You've never read St. Aquinas, have you?

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Don't worry, I won't forget who you are after scrolling down a couple of lines; you don't need to reiterate all the titles you've appropriated to yourself every time you respond.

For our records, let's see the alleged legitimate evidence your catholic agent of the Devil has presented for consideration?

Summa Theologica.

I don't want a Link to pages of catholic drivel & propaganda to wade through, I want definitive and concise proofs; not more empty catholic words!

Read the Five Ways.

I find it pretty ironic that you don't want a link. I'll fix that problem by adopting your tactics and copy/pasting a giant wall of ancient text.

'Respondeo dicendum quod Deum esse quinque viis probari potest. Prima autem et manifestior via est, quae sumitur ex parte motus. Certum est enim, et sensu constat, aliqua moveri in hoc mundo. Omne autem quod movetur, ab alio movetur. Nihil enim movetur, nisi secundum quod est in potentia ad illud ad quod movetur, movet autem aliquid secundum quod est actu. Movere enim nihil aliud est quam educere aliquid de potentia in actum, de potentia autem non potest aliquid reduci in actum, nisi per aliquod ens in actu, sicut calidum in actu, ut ignis, facit lignum, quod est calidum in potentia, esse actu calidum, et per hoc movet et alterat ipsum. Non autem est possibile ut idem sit simul in actu et potentia secundum idem, sed solum secundum diversa, quod enim est calidum in actu, non potest simul esse calidum in potentia, sed est simul frigidum in potentia. Impossibile est ergo quod, secundum idem et eodem modo, aliquid sit movens et motum, vel quod moveat seipsum. Omne ergo quod movetur, oportet ab alio moveri. Si ergo id a quo movetur, moveatur, oportet et ipsum ab alio moveri et illud ab alio. Hic autem non est procedere in infinitum, quia sic non esset aliquod primum movens; et per consequens nec aliquod aliud movens, quia moventia secunda non movent nisi per hoc quod sunt mota a primo movente, sicut baculus non movet nisi per hoc quod est motus a manu. Ergo necesse est devenire ad aliquod primum movens, quod a nullo movetur, et hoc omnes intelligunt Deum. Secunda via est ex ratione causae efficientis. Invenimus enim in istis sensibilibus esse ordinem causarum efficientium, nec tamen invenitur, nec est possibile, quod aliquid sit causa efficiens sui ipsius; quia sic esset prius seipso, quod est impossibile. Non autem est possibile quod in causis efficientibus procedatur in infinitum. Quia in omnibus causis efficientibus ordinatis, primum est causa medii, et medium est causa ultimi, sive media sint plura sive unum tantum, remota autem causa, removetur effectus, ergo, si non fuerit primum in causis efficientibus, non erit ultimum nec medium. Sed si procedatur in infinitum in causis efficientibus, non erit prima causa efficiens, et sic non erit nec effectus ultimus, nec causae efficientes mediae, quod patet esse falsum. Ergo est necesse ponere aliquam causam efficientem primam, quam omnes Deum nominant. Tertia via est sumpta ex possibili et necessario, quae talis est. Invenimus enim in rebus quaedam quae sunt possibilia esse et non esse, cum quaedam inveniantur generari et corrumpi, et per consequens possibilia esse et non esse. Impossibile est autem omnia quae sunt, talia esse, quia quod possibile est non esse, quandoque non est. Si igitur omnia sunt possibilia non esse, aliquando nihil fuit in rebus. Sed si hoc est verum, etiam nunc nihil esset, quia quod non est, non incipit esse nisi per aliquid quod est; si igitur nihil fuit ens, impossibile fuit quod aliquid inciperet esse, et sic modo nihil esset, quod patet esse falsum. Non ergo omnia entia sunt possibilia, sed oportet aliquid esse necessarium in rebus. Omne autem necessarium vel habet causam suae necessitatis aliunde, vel non habet. Non est autem possibile quod procedatur in infinitum in necessariis quae habent causam suae necessitatis, sicut nec in causis efficientibus, ut probatum est. Ergo necesse est ponere aliquid quod sit per se necessarium, non habens causam necessitatis aliunde, sed quod est causa necessitatis aliis, quod omnes dicunt Deum. Quarta via sumitur ex gradibus qui in rebus inveniuntur. Invenitur enim in rebus aliquid magis et minus bonum, et verum, et nobile, et sic de aliis huiusmodi. Sed magis et minus dicuntur de diversis secundum quod appropinquant diversimode ad aliquid quod maxime est, sicut magis calidum est, quod magis appropinquat maxime calido. Est igitur aliquid quod est verissimum, et optimum, et nobilissimum, et per consequens maxime ens, nam quae sunt maxime vera, sunt maxime entia, ut dicitur II Metaphys. Quod autem dicitur maxime tale in aliquo genere, est causa omnium quae sunt illius generis, sicut ignis, qui est maxime calidus, est causa omnium calidorum, ut in eodem libro dicitur. Ergo est aliquid quod omnibus entibus est causa esse, et bonitatis, et cuiuslibet perfectionis, et hoc dicimus Deum. Quinta via sumitur ex gubernatione rerum. Videmus enim quod aliqua quae cognitione carent, scilicet corpora naturalia, operantur propter finem, quod apparet ex hoc quod semper aut frequentius eodem modo operantur, ut consequantur id quod est optimum; unde patet quod non a casu, sed ex intentione perveniunt ad finem. Ea autem quae non habent cognitionem, non tendunt in finem nisi directa ab aliquo cognoscente et intelligente, sicut sagitta a sagittante. Ergo est aliquid intelligens, a quo omnes res naturales ordinantur ad finem, et hoc dicimus Deum.'

That should occupy you.

Source: http://www.corpusthomisticum.org...

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Thanks for reminding me.

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

(:
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 4:40:19 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/24/2013 4:08:04 PM, Composer wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:47:46 PM, Composer wrote:
The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
If you're going to go around making dramatic assertions, the least you could do is back them up.

Unlike YOU & Dogknox here I always ' back up ' what I say legitimately -

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

You wanna-be another agent of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Sure, whatever you say.

Of course you must agree with Luke 1:35 , I knew that, LOL!

Oh you wanna-be the agent of a Mother Fuckr, and no where have I ever used the tactics of copying & pasting a giant wall of ancient text in Latin especially never!

Latin is now known and considered by most as a DEAD Language, but paedophiles, priestly homosexuals, Nun-Raping catholic wanna-be agents of a Mother Fuckr are known to still use it in their incestuous, double-agent of their devil agent, catholic Cult cess-pit!

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

Much much much much better luck next times you malignant sinning wanna-be agent of a Mother Fuckr! (Luke 1:35)
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 9:56:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 4:05:52 PM, annanicole wrote:
Dogknox, you are the one that said the gift of God = GOD HIMSELF. That's where you messed up, if you haven't realized it. You also said the gift of Christ is .... CHRIST HIMSELF. That's just as bad.

The HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD!!!
The GIFT is the HOLY SPIRIT!
The GIFT brings LIFE!
The Gift is sent from God!

The GROOM sends the GIFT...
33 And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, "The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit."

annanicole The GROOM sends the HOLY SPIRIT!
Mark 1:8
I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."

Matthew 3:11
"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

annanicole The GROOM sends the GIFT.. The HOLY SPIRIT!
The Holy Spirit is God!
Baptize in the name of the Father and in the Name of the Son and in the NAME OF THE HOLY SPIRIT!!
The father is GOD!
The son is GOD!
The holy spirit is GOD!

The Bride forms each child of Adam, into a Child of God, by waters of Baptism!
The GROOM sends the GIFT of the HOLY SPIRIT!

Dogknox
Dogknox
Posts: 6,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2013 10:11:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
annanicole
I asked, "Tell us, plainly - without stuttering around about the bride and groom. Take a look at Eph 2: 8, and tell us if the "gift of God" is GOD HIMSELF?

I reply PLAINLY!! About the "Bride & Groom"!
"PLAINLY about the GIFT of God"!

Ephesians 2:8
God"s grace has saved you because of your faith in Christ. Your salvation doesn"t come from anything you do. It is God"s gift.
9 It is not based on anything you have done. No one can brag about earning it.


PLAINLY>>>>>> "NO ONE CAN BAPTIZE THEM SELF"!!!!!
PLAINLY>>>>>> "The GIFT is the the result of the actions of the BRIDE and GROOM"!
PLAINLY>>>>>> "The BRIDE washes with the WATER, the GROOM sends the GIFT!!!"
PLAINLY>>>>>> BAPTISM is not based on anything you have done. No one can brag about earning BAPTISM.

PLAINLY>>>>>> BAPTISM SAVES!!!!
1 Peter 3:21
and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also"not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ

PLAINLY>>>>>> "Baptism ADDS people to the Holy RESURRECTED Body of Jesus, ALL "ADDED" to Jesus' RESURRECTED BODY can't die!! Jesus died he can't die a second time!

PLAINLY>>>>>>God"s grace has saved me because of my faith in the RESURRECTED Christ.

I believe; Jesus died and rose... I believe Jesus can't die a second time I believe you can't even kill a dog two times NO ONE can die twice!
I believe; Jesus has been there and done that.. Jesus caN't die again, I being IMMERSED INTO THE RESURRECTED Body Of Jesus, by Baptism, am saved by the WORK of the Bride and Groom!!

PLAINLY>>>> I am IN Jesus' body!
I was ADDED to the Body of Jesus by BAPTISM!

When I was baptized; I received the Gift of the Holy Spirit from my FATHER God!
The BRIDE re-FORMED me by the waters of Baptism into the new Adam!!
The GROOM my FATHER sent the Holy Spirit!

GOD is MY FATHER because the GROOM sends the GIFT of the Holy Spirit!
GOD is my FATHER because Jesus is GOD!
GOD is my Father because the GROOM is GOD!
God is MY FATHER so the BRIDE is my MOTHER!
My MOTHER re-FORMED me by the waters of BAPTISM!!
I was saved by the waters of BAPTISM because Baptism ADDED me the body of Jesus!
I was ADDED to the Body of Jesus by the saving waters of BAPTISM so God is MY FATHER!
I was ADDED and SAVED by NO WORKS on my part.. I can't baptize my self!
I can't BOAST because I was saved by the WORK of my father & mother, no work was done on my part!
ALL...
annanicole all the WORK of my salvation was done by my MOTHER the BRIDE and BY GOD my FATHER the GROOM!
The BRIDE WASHED ME!
The GROOM SENT THE GIFT of LIFE!
I have TWO, TWO, TWO parents not just one!
Jesus had two parents, all Catholic's have two parents.. God and CHURCH!!

Dogknox
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2013 12:46:40 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 4:40:19 PM, Composer wrote:
At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/24/2013 4:08:04 PM, Composer wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:55:03 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/24/2013 3:47:46 PM, Composer wrote:
The Pope is usually speaking in his official capacity when declaring things publicly. I suppose if he's just having tea with his pals and he says something, it's probably not his official capacity, but this in general makes sense to assume he's speaking in his official capacity unless he's discussing something privately.

According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! -

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
If you're going to go around making dramatic assertions, the least you could do is back them up.

Unlike YOU & Dogknox here I always ' back up ' what I say legitimately -

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit , . . . . (Matt. 7:18) KJV Story book

A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, . . . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) catholic Story book RSV 1965 edition

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit . . . . . . . (Matt. 7:18) Digital catholic bible 1.3 Story book

Hence popey is the arrogated position held by a fraud ruling over one of the worlds greatest producing abominations!

Which doesn't prove your dramatic assertion at all. When did you suffer the brain damage that made you unable to make such simple connections?

'According to the catholic Story book itself, whatever it says isn't worth squat! '

Go ahead. Prove that. Repeatedly quoting Matthew 7:8 won't get you anywhere, because Matthew 7:8 doesn't say 'Whatever it says isn't worth squat'.

You wanna-be another agent of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

You're wrong, obviously, but I don't care enough to show you why.

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Sure, whatever you say.

Of course you must agree with Luke 1:35 , I knew that, LOL!

I do. Of course, I must have missed the part where it said 'catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr'.

Oh you wanna-be the agent of a Mother Fuckr, and no where have I ever used the tactics of copying & pasting a giant wall of ancient text in Latin especially never!

Perhaps not 'ancient' so much as horribly outdated, but yes, you have copied pretty much entire arguments from sources, sometimes sources that don't even exist anymore.

Latin is now known and considered by most as a DEAD Language, but paedophiles, priestly homosexuals, Nun-Raping catholic wanna-be agents of a Mother Fuckr are known to still use it in their incestuous, double-agent of their devil agent, catholic Cult cess-pit!

Come at the five ways. You still haven't, probably because you can't.

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

/:

Much much much much better luck next times you malignant sinning wanna-be agent of a Mother Fuckr! (Luke 1:35)

Thanks :)
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2013 8:44:45 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Anna: I asked, "Tell us, plainly - without stuttering around about the bride and groom. Take a look at Eph 2: 8, and tell us if the "gift of God" is GOD HIMSELF?

Dogknox: I reply PLAINLY!! About the "Bride & Groom"! "PLAINLY about the GIFT of God"!

Anna: I didn't ask anything about any "bride and groom". You have a verse before you, Eph 2: 8:

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God"

I asked you if the phrase 'gift of God' refers to (A) salvation or (B) God Himself.

Does it read, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: salvation is the gift of God" OR "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: God Himself is the gift of God."

Amazingly, you said it means "God Himself." No, it doesn't. No way. No educated person, including educated Roman Catholics, would run around saying that "gift of God" in Eph 2: 8 is synonymous with "God Himself." Only you. The phrase gift of God is possessive genitive and means "God's gift." The "crown of Queen Elizabeth" means "Queen Elizabeth's crown." The "house of Dogknox" means "Dogknox's House." And the gift of God means "God's gift" - not God Himself.

Dogknox, you are foolish for claiming that the phrase is the objective case. You don't need to study the Bible - you need a remedial English grammar course. NO WONDER you sit around waiting on papa over in Rome to tell you what something means: look at the mess you make on your own.
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2013 8:54:03 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 9:56:42 PM, Dogknox wrote:
The GROOM sends the GIFT of the HOLY SPIRIT!

IF YOU actually believe that a literal Supernatural ' holy-spirit ' force, person whatever literally exists then the James Randi Educatonal Foundation is still waiting to hear from Mother Fuckr supporters like you & your spirits to show up & prove themselves accordingly by the alleged standards they demand of others e.g. -

1. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thess. 5:21) KJV Story book

2. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry . {make...; or, fulfil} (2 Tim. 4:5) KJV Story book

You, those like you & your trinitarian god(s) remain unambiguously impotent against those like moi, so get going asap with your proofs otherwise or else remain liars and a frauds?

Your mentor & personal successful literal Saviour, moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2013 9:27:39 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/24/2013 4:40:19 PM, Composer wrote:
You wanna-be another agent of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/25/2013 12:46:40 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
You're wrong, obviously, but I don't care enough to show you why.

Nah! 100% correct as always!

You are a trinitarian Mother Fuckr supporter (Luke 1:35), so that almost says it all!

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Sure, whatever you say.

Of course you must agree with Luke 1:35 , I knew that, LOL!

I do. Of course, I must have missed the part where it said 'catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr'.

Of course you ' missed it ' because catholic Mother Fuckr supporters like you catholics always ' miss the facts & truth ' even according to your very own alleged the catholic jebus Mother Fuckr's own Story book!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

Much much much much better luck next times you malignant sinning fraudulent agent of the trinitarian Mother Fuckr! (Luke 1:35)
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2013 9:58:50 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/25/2013 9:27:39 AM, Composer wrote:
At 1/24/2013 4:40:19 PM, Composer wrote:
You wanna-be another agent of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/25/2013 12:46:40 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
You're wrong, obviously, but I don't care enough to show you why.

Nah! 100% correct as always!

You are a trinitarian Mother Fuckr supporter (Luke 1:35), so that almost says it all!

No, it sure doesn't. Definitely doesn't say the words 'trinitarian Mother Fuckr' anywhere in that passage.

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Sure, whatever you say.

Of course you must agree with Luke 1:35 , I knew that, LOL!

I do. Of course, I must have missed the part where it said 'catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr'.

Of course you ' missed it ' because catholic Mother Fuckr supporters like you catholics always ' miss the facts & truth ' even according to your very own alleged the catholic jebus Mother Fuckr's own Story book!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

Much much much much better luck next times you malignant sinning fraudulent agent of the trinitarian Mother Fuckr! (Luke 1:35)

Of course you've decided to completely drop all five of the Five Ways. Typical.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2013 10:04:25 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 1/25/2013 9:58:50 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 1/25/2013 9:27:39 AM, Composer wrote:
At 1/24/2013 4:40:19 PM, Composer wrote:
You wanna-be another agent of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/25/2013 12:46:40 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
You're wrong, obviously, but I don't care enough to show you why.

Nah! 100% correct as always!

You are a trinitarian Mother Fuckr supporter (Luke 1:35), so that almost says it all!

No, it sure doesn't. Definitely doesn't say the words 'trinitarian Mother Fuckr' anywhere in that passage.

Not only that, but catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr (Luke 1:35)

At 1/24/2013 4:13:46 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
Sure, whatever you say.

Of course you must agree with Luke 1:35 , I knew that, LOL!

I do. Of course, I must have missed the part where it said 'catholics & trinitarians in general are also actually agents of a Mother Fuckr'.

Of course you ' missed it ' because catholic Mother Fuckr supporters like you catholics always ' miss the facts & truth ' even according to your very own alleged the catholic jebus Mother Fuckr's own Story book!

Me Composer the ongoing successful & vindicated Cult buster!

Much much much much better luck next times you malignant sinning fraudulent agent of the trinitarian Mother Fuckr! (Luke 1:35)

Of course you've decided to completely drop all five of the Five Ways. Typical.

You also dropped Matthew 7:8, now that I look back.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.