for all / seasons

@JMDeVito2 @TheBasedTrinity If you were vigilant you would know the person you are supposed to suspect deceit from most is yourself. But here is sensible argumentation: Without using the Bible and without claiming personal, unfalsifiable experiences, why should I believe you speak for God?

@TheBasedTrinity Sure. Call it pride when I an vigilant against being deceived and demand strong and sensible argumentation before changing my mind. You still have nothing but ad hominem yOu hAVe pRIde. Certainly not any convincing dialog.

Still fighting the retarded Protestants.

@kellymarierago The Bible says, and all history shows, that manmade institutions don't last. The Papacy has stood since Ancient Rome. God didn't abandon His flock. You need God to have abandoned His flock because you put more faith in yourself than God. Why on Earth would you trust yourself?

Jesus is the rock upon which the Church was built, Isaiah 9:6, not this worldly man in a robe who runs the false church

@ashemup @real_lumethos @memeticsisyphus If helpful, another framing from pure logic. ¬(P ∧ ¬P), i.e., a round square; meaningless. Sin can be said to be opting for the logical NOT against God, and as God is existence, to sin is to thus express, at varying degree, preference for nonexistence.

@real_lumethos @memeticsisyphus Thank you for being one of the rare people on this platform actually responding rather than resorting to insults or personal incredulity. I think your point makes some unwarranted assumptions, but a 280-character limit space is probably not the right place to hash this out :)

I think it’s funny how often the atheist arguments end up mistaking “it is” with something like “God’s feelings.” Such a profound misunderstanding of the topic.

@Crisis_Director You're half-right. Protestantism was founded on the belief that the equality of men before God means equality among and before men. So it is wrong to say, of such atheists, their morals are Christian, but that's actually because their morals are 100% foundationally Protestant.

this doesn't mean they arise from internalizing christian morality either, enlightenment thinkers took universalism from christianity, but rejected original sin in favour of a more worldly outlook most atheists' moral values are informed by said enlightenment

You employ a different definition unto "Mother" in "Mother of God" and then argue it as meaning something it never did. The term, as known even among the first Protestants, never attributed divinity. Mary is Mother of God because she gave birth to Jesus and Jesus is God. It is, from proper Christology, a description of a relationship God chose. God can have a mother, because He can and did choose a woman to give birth to His Son. It is for much the same reason we can say God died on the Cross. "Death" does not mean "existential end." Death is not existential end, it isn't an end at all, death is the separation of soul from body and God experienced separation of soul from body. God died on the Cross. It is exactly in this way that as God experienced being physically born, we have a term for the relationship between the woman and this Man to Whom she gave birth. Mother and Child. Mother of God. It really is that simple. I understand why the term makes you feel weird, you think it attributes divinity and that is a fair thing to be worried about, but you owe it just to yourself and your own good to realize your understanding of language is not the universal rule as to what words mean.

@Burgess7281975 @familyjules6252 No, you don’t understand traducianism apparently. It says the human soul is transmitted from parents to offspring through natural generation, rather than being created individually by God. The soul is created by God and placed within the body at conception. You are the one…

No Jim - Jesus is God and the Blessed Virgin Mary is His Mother. (1) Jesus is God. (A) Of Christ’s Nature (Uncreated, Fully God) John 1:1, 14 — In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ... And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. John 10:30 — I and the Father are one. John 20:28 — Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Colossians 1:19 — For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell. 2 Peter 1:1 — ... our God and Savior Jesus Christ ... Hebrews 1:8 — But of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom.’ (The Father actually calls the Son God in reference to Psalms 45:6-7) (B) Christ is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent Philippians 3:20-21 — ... the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself. Colossians 2:2-3 — ... Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.  Ephesians 1:22-23 — ... the Church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all. (cf. Colossians 3:11) (C) Jesus as Consubstantial with the Father Matthew 23: 34, 37 — Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town. ... O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Christ in Philippians 2:10-11 is described in the same terms as the Father in Isaiah in 45:23. Colossians 2:9 - “For in him dwells the whole fullness of the deity* bodily” (also see Colossians 1:19). John 10:30 — I and the Father are one. (2) The Blessed Virgin Mary is His Mother. Matthew 1:23 “virgin shall . . . bear a son . . . shall be called “Emmanuel”” Luke 1:35 “child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God” Luke 1:43 “the mother of my Lord” Galatians 4:4 “God sent forth His Son, born of woman” Isaiah 7:14 “a virgin shall conceive and bear a son” John 19:27 “Behold your mother.” Luke 2:6-7 “While they were there, the time came for her to have her child, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn son.[c]She wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.” Matthew 1:16 “Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary. Of her was born Jesus who is called the Messiah.”

Another term for this "consistent message" is rhetorical couching, also known as spiritual dishonesty, else tens of thousands of good and faithful Witnesses wouldn't, time and again, have lived and acted in such absolute belief the return of Christ was indeed upon them. Below, you skipped the actual first step. The actual first step isn't quoting the Bible, it's proving you possess authority to speak on behalf of God. As I don't know whether you are giving the true meaning of a verse, giving me more verses only compounds the problem. There is a double-edge to this, you would rightly say, how do you know it about me? You don't. But, descriptively, this verse in Acts says our Lord confirmed the message of His grace by enabling Paul and Barnabas to perform signs and wonders. What this means in the grand context is a point of interpretation, but I can ask this very simple question: Do your missionaries prove themselves to the world with signs and wonders? Or, for example, does your congregation have record of three peasant children making a series of true prophecies culminating in the sun itself dancing in the sky, events of which tens of thousands witnessed and an expressly communist-and-thus-atheist newspaper admitted happened? Because the Catholic Church as both of these, and she has many, many more examples than the Miracle of the Sun. The discomfort you will feel as you attempt to form a response will be the voice of grace in the quiet corner of your heart trying to tell you that you wouldn't have to try to explain anything if you could just accept that you're wrong, and the fear will be your pride, but worse, how your family and/or friends would respond. Abusive and manipulative ostracization is a sinful but very human behavior. The teaching of this exact abusive and manipulative ostracization comes straight from hell.

@callernumberten @Sacramentshow Jehovah's Witnesses have consistently stated that they are not inspired prophets and are willing to correct their understanding when Scripture shows it is necessary. Proverbs 4:18 describes the path of God's servants as becoming progressively brighter, not perfectly understood

Serious question. If the early Christians had the wrong Church, wrong sacraments, wrong authority, and wrong doctrine, when did Christianity stop being what Christ founded?

@Arinzeoreva @Sacramentshow Up through 1975, the Witnesses were still making false prophecies. Catholic peasant children in Portugal made a long and atheist-attested series of true prophecies in 1917. God uses miracle-workers, first for His glory, but also to give proof of His Church.

@Sacramentshow Jesus warned that weeds would be sown among the wheat until the harvest (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43). The apostles likewise warned that apostasy would arise from within the congregation. Paul told the elders at Ephesus "From among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted

@EssenceGui16924 @Catholic_bro @KellyPowersBPA It's blessed to believe only for having heard, but God doesn't give that grace to everyone. Some people need hard proof, and the Bible says God works miracles, in part, as proof of His message. We ask God to answer our prayers as offered by Mary and the Saints, and He does.

@Catholic_bro @KellyPowersBPA Ha ha ha... yeah, burn candles, incense, pray to the dead, magical wafers, dropping magic water on baby's heads, praying to graven images, worshiping a dead woman.. sounds satanic to me. Catholic cult of idolatry. That's not God's church of ppl, it's Satan's eartly kingdom.

Catholics, Orthodox, Mormons, Protestants, whoever got a question for you. What if the Bible didn’t exist? How would anyone know what church is the true Church? How would anyone know which Church to join? Catholics, Orthodox, Mormons, and others reject Sola Scriptura, claiming extra authority and tradition outside the Bible, along with apostolic succession. If the Bible didn’t exist or we didn’t have the Scriptures, how could someone accurately determine truth from error without bias, assumptions, or being deceived? If we didn’t have the Bible, we would have no standard for truth, and everything would be right in each person’s eyes. (Judges 21:25; Proverbs 14:12) Therefore, this demonstrates why the Bible is crucial, foundational, essential, and so important in our day, to know truth from error, right from wrong, and sound doctrine from false doctrine. It also shows why Sola Scriptura is not only biblical but also essential. This is the blueprint for Christians to examine, test, and expose what people claim by comparing it to the Bible. That is what the Scriptures teach throughout the Bible, and what it means to be a Berean, as in Acts 17:10-11. What do you think? How would you respond? @rockreborn22 @GenuineRex @BiblicGrounded @james_bert_mill @BibleInContext1 @Majormadd @ChristianKingTV @johncdirks @EssenceGui16924 @biblecia @Wait_ItsThatGuy @HHS3239 @hopper3545 @theThinkInst @KermitWog11757 @BloodstainLane7 @ManassehRJones @ProtPhilosopher @patisfaction34 @root_monkey @MDHensley5 @tayman47

@Edgarson_777 @LouisMassett Yes, and Judas betrayed our Lord. There will always be bad priests, and all of them know they necessarily excommunicate themselves with every Mass. You guys there for at least a bit weren't necessarily excommunicating yourselves with every Mass. That's the difference.

That is what we call a non sequitur. Just ONCE I'd like to see a pope-splainer give an actual argument in reply, not another tired ad hominem. By your reply I conclude that you are fine with the profusion of gay weddings and queer themed Masses that have popped up all over the Church, and with your hero appointing an endless stream of priests and bishops that have supported the same publicly. And with the German bishops immediately and publicly dismissing your hero's 'sternly worded letter'. And with the scandalous report from Synod Workgroup 9, who had the equally notorious James Martin as subject matter expert, that called for the very same. You're okay with all of that? Because your reply to my post implies you think I'm a clown for opposing what the clear Holy Scripture, AND Catholic doctrine, AND the (actual Magisterium) oppose.

Yes, Leo appointed Würtz. Yes, Würtz voted for the Synodal Way documents. Both are true. But Leo has publicly opposed formalized same-sex blessings — on the papal plane in April, in writing through the DDF in May. On the record, twice. Judging a pope by one appointment while ignoring his teaching is the SSPX playbook. Rome is not the enemy. The framing that makes it the enemy is.

@PetrusDamianu11 @ClassicalTheis Read the homily. You carelessly repeat a grave perversion of his words.

@ClassicalTheis Feeding the 5000 is a prefigurement of the Eucharist. Denying its miracle is a step toward denying our Lord presence in the blessed sacrament. No suprise from the post conciliar church in which only 31% believe in the true presence (according to pew research)

The Pope never rejected the miraculous nature of the feeding of the 5,000 but you know what? It actually is a far greater display of divine power for the grace of God to draw supernatural charity from the obediential potency of the soul than it is to multiply bread or fish

@esrtweet @EpistemiclyRich @bumbadum14 There is a holistic sort of obliviousness in the phrase "Christianity defended slavery." Said earnestly, as here, it would be difficult to exhibit ignorance across more subjects in as few words. Point: your use of this phrase is proof you would have also defended slavery.

@EpistemiclyRich @bumbadum14 And yet Christianity defended slavery for more than a thousand years.

These people know literally nothing of basic human history. Yes the “golden rule” was invented by Christ and every historian and anthropologist will agree that the moral framework of Christianity was revolutionary at its time

@GrimGrin17 @memeticsisyphus The "lie" of child sacrifice? Haven't you noticed that it works? The Protest saw gnostic animus converge to make Christianity itself gnostic secret knowledge. You're supposed to know it's true, that's one reason His Church abounds with the scientifically-attested supernatural.

@memeticsisyphus That still doesn't make any of the depicted events true. At best you have "the lie of child sacrifice" defeated by "the lie of the 600 BCE version of the isaac story." In that case i suppose we can just stop lying or pick a more compelling lie than the bible.

So there’s this practice that’s ubiquitous in the world. People kill their own children for favor from the gods. The Bible depicts a man about to carry out the task, when a messenger from God tells him God will not ask this of him. This sets up a culture differentiated from all around it. One that rejects human sacrifice as a means of worship. A moral standard that is spread through its religion and its offshoots. A moral standard that so permeates our culture that now thousands of years later after the religious belief has waned but the morality still holds, an unbeliever points to the story as some horrible wickedness. He points to it as an example of how Christian morality isn’t different than the barbaric practices of others. He’s unable to see how silly his argument is and that’s a shame.

@TheExBeliever As is your right. Free will is a good, that's why we have it. If you want to be happy without Him, He won't just let you, He'll let you, forever. In your torment, you will have that as your center. That you are getting exactly what you want.

@callernumberten Not interested.

Believing in Jesus is blind faith, especially believing in a person who did not exist and did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.

@matt_zaps @AutismLutheran1 I think he means the part where God says "This is my body"

@AutismLutheran1 You mean like when Jesus said "destroy this temple and I will build it up in three days", he wasn't talking about the actual temple?

You mean like "the Eucharist isn't really his body".

@Roberttheseeker @TaylorRMarshall @KnightofChrist7 @YouTube You repeat your error. Which is more likely: 1. You have made a mistake 2. God lied The Church cannot err. When you remember this it becomes wonderfully easy to see through every poor argument and awful lie peddled by the likes of the SSPX.

@callernumberten @TaylorRMarshall @KnightofChrist7 @YouTube Are you unfamiliar with the state of the Church in at least the 21st century? Do you know the history of the Church?

Why I Cannot Support the SSPX under Fr Pagliarani - by Dr. Taylor Marshall youtube.com/live/1ulnTBXg8… via @YouTube

@RyanGabriel_RC I spent thirty years thinking there was no inerrant authority. You draw the genetic fallacy because it would ruin you to consider the people who overcame lives spent under a vastly stronger form of your pitiable argument. You would rather God have lied than you be wrong.

Just to clarify, Matt Fradd classifies himself as a convert from being agnostic, which is why I chose him for the right, and apparently Westen was atheist, so he likely should have been on the right, but I mainly wanted people to question how much they are listening to neophytes.

@pastorspomer @dragodimitrov For their ignorance, your predecessors made absolute claims: not "misinterpreted" but "invented." Confronted with proof of their generational errors they rationalized to "misinterpreted." This claim requires external inerrant authority.

@dragodimitrov Sola Scriptura does not mean that one doesn’t need tradition. It merely means that you can’t make up stuff and say, “Thus says the Lord.”

This is the classic killshot of, "the Bible is clear enough for any sincere person of average IQ to understand" sola scriptura. I've used this exact sentence and exercise before as well. Without Tradition, you will never be able to reduce the number of plausible interpretations of key Scriptural passages down to one. The best you can do is get stuck with ~3 reasonable sounding readings of a contentious passage.

@posttenebrasluz @TDizzle62097 Here's a question. You all wave your Bibles, you all say you speak on behalf of God. Without using your Bible, can you prove it?

@TDizzle62097 Yeah because you can just infallibly make up exceptions to God’s law using meaningless words that don’t appear in Scripture. So guess who’s actually your god? You are. I’d tell you to ask AI to pick a good name for your new cult, but it already exists: Feminist egalitarianism

@KeithDiamond994 @timelessfaithh Acts 14:3. God accompanies the servants of His Church with His glorious signs and wonders as proof He sent them. The Holy Catholic Church abounds with His miracles. All you have are words. You have no proof God sent you.

Well he was without Christ and did not SEE nor ENTER the Kingdom of God because he followed the FALSE CHURCH which never taught him to be born again. This pretend "saint" didn't obey Jesus, will YOU? In John 3:5 Jesus said… 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. This is how your “first pope” (lol) told you to achieve the two parts of the new birth. THE WATER PART Acts 2:38 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. THE WATER PART CORRECTLY DONE GUARANTEES THE SPIRIT PART Acts 2:4 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Your failure to obey the first part is the reason you do not have the second part and the reason you will neither see nor enter God’s Kingdom. You are the proof that Peter was right because you are not baptized properly, your pedophiles betrayed Jesus by dropping His Holy Name from their baptism in the 2nd century which is why He doesn’t give you the “spiritual baptism” without which you will go to hell. You know, it would be one thing if you guys were like “Well, I was sprinkled by Catholic priests in the Father Son and Holy Ghost AND I STILL GOT THE HOLY GHOST JUST LIKE THE APOSTLES, SPEAKING IN TONGUES so it doesn’t matter how I was baptized!” But you DON’T GET IT THAT WAY so you “heap to yourselves” lying teachers who’ll tell you what you want to hear! You glorify His mother , saints and you turn your mind to stupid stories of 2nd century morons as prophesied. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. So this is you ignoring ^^^^^^^^^^all this bible on the topic of your salvation and thinking you're some kind of "christian". If it weren't sad, it'd be hysterical ! There is a lie that the rape of children by the Catholic Church is being committed by just a “Few Bad Apples” this is a damnable lie……it is GLOBAL “The Catholic child abuse scandal was globally widespread, spanning decades. Investigations revealed systemic patterns where thousands of priests abused tens of thousands of children. Church leaders routinely concealed crimes, moving offenders from parish to parish rather than reporting them, sparking massive Catholic Church sexual abuse cases globally.”

"Without God, what am I but a guide to my own destruction?" — Saint Augustine