Jump to content

Braveheart91

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Braveheart91

  • Rank
    Poker Forum Newbie
  • Birthday 06/21/1977

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Poker Game
    Nl Hold 'em

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.lagtess.com(not yet published
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    ErehwoN, Ohio
  • Interests
    I am a police officer and aspiring entrepreneur. My interests arefirst and foremost poker, then in no particular order, Politics, philosophy, movies, zymurgy(hmmm beer) and motorcycle travelling.
  1. Like I said, the only one that teaches contraception is always wrong.
  2. Interesting points. Also interesting is that prior to 1930 all churches (read denominations) were opposed to contraception, now only the Catholic Church maintains that contraception is always wrong.
  3. Zealous Donkey, Welcome.I am but a dwarf standing on the shoulders of giants, I've used many resources to research Catholicism (in my futile attempts to disprove it), Scott Hahn's work being invaluable (especially since he as a former protestant, spoke my "language") but there are other great resources to look to: Anything from Catholic Answers, Mark Shea, Karl Keating, the Coming Home Network, EWTN, etc. (For Protestants, converts tend to be able to communicate the faith better simply because of the sensitivity to the "language" gap) There is also some great classical resources available onl
  4. Loved The Brothers Karamazov (although I was disappointed in the ending, Dmitri got hosed) but what point exactly are you trying to demonstrate by referencing Dostoevsky (arguably one Russia's greatest christian writers)?
  5. If you believe that you can only believe what is in the Bible, and the Bible does not claim to be the only rule of faith, then you cannot accept a Bible only doctrine. The premise is self-refuting. So the bottom line is: You position crumbles under its own weight, you have to ADD to scripture to "prove" scripture without ADDITION is the sole rule of faith.Simple. unencumbered logic. Now, what does the Bible say (multiple times) is arbiter of truth and teacher of truth? The Church.Also I don't remember any of those passages cited referring to traditions "taught in scripture". Those words
  6. Scripture that supports a teaching tradition outside of the Bible.2 Thessalonians 2:15Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.1 Thessalonians 2:13 And for this reason we too give thanks to God unceasingly, that,in receiving the word of God from hearing us, you received not a human word but, as it truly is, the word of God, which is now at work in you who believe.2 Thessalonians 3:6 We instruct you, brothers, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus Christ,to shun any brother who conducts himself in a
  7. So thats a "No" you won't engage in a point by point debate. I wasn't referring to names you have called me (you're awfully free with calling people stupid in these threads) but I have read it on other posts and frankly as a Christian you should be ashamed. P.S. Saying something isn't biblical (or moreover anti-biblical) doesn't make it so, it a takes a little more effort than that.
  8. There you go again. (I miss Reagan)Your arguments (I use that term loosely) do not stand up. You actually cited very little to dispute any of the catholic claims and what you did cite was hardly relevant to whole context of what was being put forward. If you would like to debate point by point (for the sake of clarity and continuity) I am up for it anytime. I have been through every argument you may offer (Remember I was an anti-catholic evangelical once too) and they are weak in the overall case against Catholicism. So the choice is yours.(P.S. Ever notice I don't have to resort to petty
  9. Lois, I do not believe engaging in any apologetic with you is of any benefit. You are nasty, ill-spirited, and worst of of all seem to be lost to whole continuity of scripture. You recite but do not understand. You postulate that Christ is not God incarnate, clearly in direct conflict with John 1:1. You refer to Revelation specifcally warning about Catholicism (not Catholocism) and it does no such thing. The Whore of Bablyon rap just doesn't fly. The earliest martyrs and writers of the Church were all distinctively and doctrinally Catholic, period. The men that preserved the script
  10. Well, I am happy to see I can remain catholic.Lois, you have not proven anything (other than that you are not a charitable christian)Although it does not merit response, there have been cases of pedophilia in protestant churches, non-church enviroments, etc. You are not implying that they give a class on molestation in seminary, are you?Tithing is not required in the Church, even if it were, the passage you are referring to wouldn't preclude it.The Roman rite of the Catholic Church requires priests to remain celibate, in keeping with Jesus's exhortation**. Priests of other rites of the Catho
  11. Lois,If you can PROVE one doctrine of the Catholic church to be fasle. I will join your church tomorrow. Just one and I am there. Braveheart911
  12. Whoops, my faux pas. It comes from Matthew 16:15-
  13. The first part is historical covenant theology, actually pretty standard. The most readily accessible and probably most readable is Scott Hahn's "A Father who keeps His promises" (Get out the MLA book, I can't remember the appropriate format for book title) I used much of his format for simplicity sake. He also has a website Salvation History with free courses and resources. He is a professor at Franciscan University (a wonderfully evangelical Catholic university, thats right I said evangelical) in Steubenville, Ohio and a convert himself.
×
×
  • Create New...