Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ

[romishpopishorganist]

Really?

Yes

Who were the witnesses to this event?

Possibly John the Apostle since he writes about it in Revelation 12.

When and where did it happen?

At some point during the apostolic age. Scripture, nor Tradition give an indication as to a precise date of the event.

If the rcc had evidence that this event happened, they would have made it public and put an end to the protestant revolution once and for all.

The IC of Mary was not defined until 1854. The Assumption of Mary was not defined until 1950. These two teachings would not have been an issue for the Protestant reformers.

 

[Atemi]

Who were the witnesses to this event?

Possibly

Translation: you have no witnesses and you are making this up as you go.

When and where did it happen?

At some point during the apostolic age. Scripture, nor Tradition give an indication as to a precise date of the event.

Neither Scripture or the early church record and such event. Actually, just the opposite as the church fathers record that they do not know what happened to Mary.

Your myth was so important, no one ever heard of it. LOL!

If the rcc had evidence that this event happened, they would have made it public and put an end to the protestant revolution once and for all.

The Assumption of Mary was not defined until 1950. These two teachings would not have been an issue for the Protestant reformers.

I thought you RC apologists always say that a dogma is not defined until it is challenged.

As you testify, that is not so. You guys just make up new dogmas when you want them.

Funny that the Holy Spirit thought your myth was so vital for Christians to believe....even "necessary"...that He made sure not to reveal it until almost 2 millenia after the Apostles!

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Translation: you have no witnesses and you are making this up as you go.

Then let me rephrase: John was a witness to the fact that Mary is in heaven body and soul. Whether he witnessed the ACTUAL assumption of Mary as it happened is not clear. What IS clear is that he saw Mary in heaven body and soul in his vision. In other words: if John is seeing Mary in heaven body and soul, she was assumed. What matters is THAT Mary was assumed, not WHEN or HOW she was assumed.

Church teaching following the teaching of Revelation 12 is THAT Mary was assumed into heaven. The Church makes no pronouncements on the WHEN or HOW of the assumption.

Neither Scripture or the early church record and such event. Actually, just the opposite as the church fathers record that they do not know what happened to Mary.

Well, yeah they did: the Scripture in Revelation 12 records that Mary is in heaven body and soul.

Your myth was so important, no one ever heard of it. LOL!

For the first 300 years or so, Christianity was largely underground due to persecutions. When Christianity was legalized, then became the official religion, the Church spend her energies fighting Christological heresies for the next 400 years.

Why would we expect the Church fathers to be worrying about Mary, the IC and the assumption when they had far bigger fish to fry?

I thought you RC apologists always say that a dogma is not defined until it is challenged.

The Church only defines things when it becomes necessary. This usually happens becasue of some controversy that affects the unity of the Church.

There are two exceptions to this rule: the IC and the assumption, both defined by the pope. In both of these cases, the faithful at large requested the definition because it was clear that the Church believes these things.

In other words: the Church does not believe the IC and assumption of Mary becasue the pope said so, rather, the pope says so----because the Church believes them.

As you testify, that is not so. You guys just make up new dogmas when you want them.

Well, even if this were the case, how is it any different from Protestants and their constant moving targets with regard to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide? Catholics refute Sola Scriptura, the Protestant just changes the definition so the critique offered doesn't apply. The same with Sola Fide.

Funny that the Holy Spirit thought your myth was so vital for Christians to believe....even "necessary"...that He made sure not to reveal it until almost 2 millenia after the Apostles!

It was revealed with the apostles. The Church as a whole didn't become fully conscious of this fact until the times when the doctrines were defined.

What difference does it make WHEN a doctrine is defined anyway? The full equality of Christ with the Father wasn't defined until 325AD. You aren't bothered by that!

What matters isn't WHEN a doctrine is defined, what matters is that the doctrine is defined because it is true.

 

[Mik]

Translation: you have no witnesses and you are making this up as you go.



Neither Scripture or the early church record and such event. Actually, just the opposite as the church fathers record that they do not know what happened to Mary.

Your myth was so important, no one ever heard of it. LOL!




I thought you RC apologists always say that a dogma is not defined until it is challenged.

As you testify, that is not so. You guys just make up new dogmas when you want them.

Funny that the Holy Spirit thought your myth was so vital for Christians to believe....even "necessary"...that He made sure not to reveal it until almost 2 millenia after the Apostles!

It is soooo sad how they try to defend the unbiblical teachings of their masters. I've see the mormons do this also.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

It is soooo sad how they try to defend the unbiblical teachings of their masters. I've see the Mormons do this also.

Funny--that is how I feel about you and your sorry attempts to defend Protestantism.

 

[Nondenom40]

Funny--that is how I feel about you and your sorry attempts to defend Protestantism.

Funny, we don't defend protestantism. We defend scripture, the faith, Jesus, true Christianity. No one has ever encouraged you to be a prot. I know i haven't. Born again? Sure. Protestant is a loaded term and inaccurate for true believers.

 

[Atemi]

Translation: you have no witnesses and you are making this up as you go.

Then let me rephrase: John was a witness to the fact that Mary is in heaven body and soul.

No he isn't. He never claimed any such thing....and that is why it would still take centuries for the Assumption to "develop."

What IS clear is that he saw Mary in heaven body and soul in his vision.

Mary gave birth in Heaven?

LOL.

Mary was in terrible labor pains in Heaven?

Oh wait....your sect's dogma is that Mary did not experience any labor pains at all.

Funny how that works, right?

Church teaching following the teaching of Revelation 12 is THAT Mary was assumed into heaven.

The early church had the Apostles AND Revelation....and they did not see what you magically see.

Neither Scripture or the early church record and such event. Actually, just the opposite as the church fathers record that they do not know what happened to Mary.

Well, yeah they did: the Scripture in Revelation 12 records that Mary is in heaven body and soul.

- Mary is nowhere mentioned beyond Acts 2.
- Mary is nowhere mentioned in Revelation.
- No one is mentioned to be "bodily" in Heaven in Revelation 12.
- The early church never got that memo.
- In actual fact, the testimony of the early church is that no one knows what happened to Mary.

Your myth was so important, no one ever heard of it. LOL!

Why would we expect the Church fathers to be worrying about Mary, the IC and the assumption when they had far bigger fish to fry?

They had time to write about and teach on just about everything else!

ROFL.

They mentioned Mary many times....and they still did not mention she was resurrected before the Church. THAT is how "important" your late arriving novel false doctrine was.

I thought you RC apologists always say that a dogma is not defined until it is challenged.

The Church only defines things when it becomes necessary. This usually happens becasue of some controversy that affects the unity of the Church.

There are two exceptions to this rule: the IC and the assumption, both defined by the pope. In both of these cases, the faithful at large requested the definition because it was clear that the Church believes these things.

Hahahahahaha.

Dogma by popular opinion!

In other words: the Church does not believe the IC and assumption of Mary becasue the pope said so, rather, the pope says so----because the Church believes them.

If Catholics all already believed it, your sect would not have to threaten you with Hell forever if you deny it.

As you testify, that is not so. You guys just make up new dogmas when you want them.

Well, even if this were the case, how is it any different from Protestants and their constant moving targets with regard to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide?

They have not changed since the terms were first coined.

Funny that the Holy Spirit thought your myth was so vital for Christians to believe....even "necessary"...that He made sure not to reveal it until almost 2 millenia after the Apostles!

It was revealed with the apostles.

Any lie like that is easy to post. It comes second nature to Catholics.

The problem remains that the Apostles did not teach it. The churches they planted did not teach it either. It would take centuries to "develop" what you say was revealed by the Apostles.

The Church as a whole didn't become fully conscious of this fact until the times when the doctrines were defined.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

A dogma lost to the sands of time! It was believed by the Church so thoroughly, that they did not even know it!

Hilarious, romish! Keep them coming.

What difference does it make WHEN a doctrine is defined anyway?

If on Oct 31 you can believe whatever you want about a claim....but on Nov 1 you have to believe that claim is true as "necessary for salvation"...then that is clear proof it is a lie that the Apostles did not teach.

The full equality of Christ with the Father wasn't defined until 325AD. You aren't bothered by that!

Jesus was always God. Christians always believed Jesus is God.

The record clearly shows that the Apostles taught that Jesus is God.
They record clearly shows that the churches the Apostles planted all taught that Jesus is God.

What anyone "defined" hundreds of years after the Apostles matters not one bit.

 

[Atemi]

It is soooo sad how they try to defend the unbiblical teachings of their masters. I've see the mormons do this also.

All cultists do this. They are desperate to give their false doctrines an air of legitimacy because they need to prop up their sect leaders with any lie possible.

They don't actually PRODUCE any evidence or records. Nope. They just tell us it has always been that way and to just "truuuuuuuuuust" them.

 

[utilyan]

How can Roman Catholics share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when most of them don't even know it?

Indeed its amazing how Catholics share the Gospel by sheer Love and Kindness without KNOWING any scripture at all, without having to KNOW the "required" THIS and THAT, without titles, without gnostic superiority issues like faith alone.

Without having such a poor faithless trust of God that one would think he is going to damn everyone who doesn't believe or act the way I want them to act. Without care for heaven and personal reward and gain, without having to continuously harp on and obsess over salvation which btw is a excellent indicator someone doesn't trust God at all. People who trust God are actually very calm, very relax. Without the silly idea God is some thin-skinned petty monster who brings to despair and doom to folks I don't agree with.

Its like they literally only need God rather then some guy with a book over your shoulder hoping his best to ruin your day. We all know that guy who's petty and always trying to hold things over your head. He doesn't trust God at all. which is why they insist THEY must help God with you or at least give their take of their "how to survive against God manual". Spiritual threats is still a threat, terrorism...... ive seen kids faces go white with terrorism of folks threatening them with hell fire for not being gnosticly born again in their understanding.

There is a saying the "emperor has no clothes", folks who just LOVE to give bad news, Love making folks squirm, pretend to be their superiors in knowledge and wisdom. Evil has always been immature, petty, heaven forbid they would ever tell you that they are far from perfect TODAY.

 

[Mik]

Indeed its amazing how Catholics share the Gospel by sheer Love and Kindness without KNOWING any scripture at all, without having to KNOW the "required" THIS and THAT, without titles,

And how do they do that?

without gnostic superiority issues like faith alone.

What else in addition to faith does one need to be saved?

Without having such a poor faithless trust of God that one would think he is going to damn everyone who doesn't believe or act the way I want them to act. Without care for heaven and personal reward and gain, without having to continuously harp on and obsess over salvation which btw is a excellent indicator someone doesn't trust God at all. People who trust God are actually very calm, very relax. Without the silly idea God is some thin-skinned petty monster who brings to despair and doom to folks I don't agree with.

Meaningless uninformed rant that does not answer the question asked.

Its like they literally only need God rather then some guy with a book over your shoulder hoping his best to ruin your day.

So then how do rc's share the Gospel using this method? What is the Gospel they are sharing.

We all know that guy who's petty and always trying to hold things over your head.

We all do? Who is that?

He doesn't trust God at all.

Who is he?

which is why they insist THEY must help God with you or at least give their take of their "how to survive against God manual".

What??????

Spiritual threats is still a threat, terrorism...... ive seen kids faces go white with terrorism of folks threatening them with hell fire for not being gnosticly born again in their understanding.

Now you ignorance of the Gospel is really showing.

There is a saying the "emperor has no clothes",

Like the pope?

folks who just LOVE to give bad news,

You mean like, Luke 13:3? I can give you other verses from the Word of God

Love making folks squirm, pretend to be their superiors in knowledge and wisdom.

Angry rant?

Evil has always been immature, petty, heaven forbid they would ever tell you that they are far from perfect TODAY.

??????? SMH. Angry?

The actual question was - How can Roman Catholics share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when most of them don't even know it?

 

[leonard03782]

Indeed its amazing how Catholics share the Gospel by sheer Love and Kindness without KNOWING any scripture at all, without having to KNOW the "required" THIS and THAT, without titles, without gnostic superiority issues like faith alone.

Without having such a poor faithless trust of God that one would think he is going to damn everyone who doesn't believe or act the way I want them to act. Without care for heaven and personal reward and gain, without having to continuously harp on and obsess over salvation which btw is a excellent indicator someone doesn't trust God at all. People who trust God are actually very calm, very relax. Without the silly idea God is some thin-skinned petty monster who brings to despair and doom to folks I don't agree with.

Its like they literally only need God rather then some guy with a book over your shoulder hoping his best to ruin your day. We all know that guy who's petty and always trying to hold things over your head. He doesn't trust God at all. which is why they insist THEY must help God with you or at least give their take of their "how to survive against God manual". Spiritual threats is still a threat, terrorism...... ive seen kids faces go white with terrorism of folks threatening them with hell fire for not being gnosticly born again in their understanding.

There is a saying the "emperor has no clothes", folks who just LOVE to give bad news, Love making folks squirm, pretend to be their superiors in knowledge and wisdom. Evil has always been immature, petty, heaven forbid they would ever tell you that they are far from perfect TODAY.

You sound angry, bitter, and resentful about the fact that true Christians, that know what r 'ism teaches, try to point out the flaws in your false religion rather than acknowledge you as a brother and say that it is alright to believe what you want. I can tell you that it will not happen on CARM.

 

[utilyan]

And how do they do that?

What else in addition to faith does one need to be saved?

Meaningless uninformed rant that does not answer the question asked.

So then how do rc's share the Gospel using this method? What is the Gospel they are sharing.

We all do? Who is that?

Who is he?

What??????

Now you ignorance of the Gospel is really showing.

Like the pope?

You mean like, Luke 13:3? I can give you other verses from the Word of God

Angry rant?

??????? SMH. Angry?

The actual question was - How can Roman Catholics share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when most of them don't even know it?

The actual question was - How can Roman Catholics share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when most of them don't even know it?

The actual answer is LOVE.

35By this all people will know that you are My disciples: if you have love for one another.”

You only need love and kindness. God is LOVE.

1 john 43
8The one who does not love does not know God, because God is love.

If you have GOD what else do you need?

Catholic number one priority is LOVE. The priority is GOD not heaven or rewards nor fear of punishment.


Folks start with hey you know if you going to be in heaven or hell or saved if you die?

Nope. Catholic is why we love God and why God loves everyone.

And yet i'm not suppose to fault people because they served their fear above serving God. God teaches mercy. Not everyone perfect, everyone makes mistakes.

Luke 13 is beautiful verse explain why you are calling that "BAD NEWS".

24And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.

Aww man does this mean I have to be nice to you guys? can i be just a little spiteful?

 

[leonard03782]

The actual question was - How can Roman Catholics share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when most of them don't even know it?

The actual answer is LOVE.

35By this all people will know that you are My disciples: if you have love for one another.”

You only need love and kindness. God is LOVE.

1 john 43
8The one who does not love does not know God, because God is love.

If you have GOD what else do you need?

Catholic number one priority is LOVE. The priority is GOD not heaven or rewards nor fear of punishment.


Folks start with hey you know if you going to be in heaven or hell or saved if you die?

Nope. Catholic is why we love God and why God loves everyone.

And yet i'm not suppose to fault people because they served their fear above serving God. God teaches mercy. Not everyone perfect, everyone makes mistakes.

Luke 13 is beautiful verse explain why you are calling that "BAD NEWS".

24And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.

Aww man does this mean I have to be nice to you guys? can i be just a little spiteful?

TRANSLATION: I do not know or care what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is.

 

[utilyan]

You sound angry and resentful about the fact that that true Christians, that know what r 'ism teaches, try to point out the flaws in your false religion rather than acknowledge you as a brother and say that it is alright to believe what you want. I can tell you that it will not happen on CARM.

Well its a good thing I found the TRUE christians. I can feel the anger and resentment just flowing out of my evil bones.

I heard TRUE christians say that the BIBLE teaches that for something to be christian it must be BIBLICAL.

Can you show me that verse, kind loving sir?

 

[leonard03782]

Well its a good thing I found the TRUE christians. I can feel the anger and resentment just flowing out of my evil bones.

I heard TRUE christians say that the BIBLE teaches that for something to be christian it must be BIBLICAL.

Can you show me that verse, kind loving sir?

DEUTERONOMY 12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

 

[utilyan]

TRANSLATION: I do not know or care what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is.

Well you should care.

how the turns have tabled.....

From a clean slate, a BLANK, suppose we meet a atheist who found interest in Christianity, does not know anything about it, literally has zero authority.

Where does he start? We already have an indoctrinated bias, well sir of course you should go to the bible. But even within Christians we would disagree WHAT IS THE BIBLE.

When you have to TELL HIM from your own mouth YOU are his authority. He can't walk into a library of all the Christian BOOKS there ever was and say well this is legit and this is not.

An atheist from the outside has no idea, he would say look at all these silly dressed folks with silly book, and silly beliefs. That first step, that first square one.

I have to accept what YOU say as full authority. I have to accept what YOU say is scripture to be scripture at all. And then I have to accept YOUR TAKE of what the words mean.

 

[utilyan]

DEUTERONOMY 12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

If I have a newspaper that says God says "be good" that doesn't equal =/= Newspaper is God or that it is the highest authority.

You don't think this newspaper is the highest authority? i guess you are not loyal to GOD.

we are talking about biblical >>WRITINGS<< there is absolutely nothing about writing in your verse.

It doesn't say "to be christian it must be BIBLICAL." OLD testament at that, rabbi bubba over there says ain't even your book.

 

[Atemi]

Well you should care.

how the turns have tabled.....

From a clean slate, a BLANK, suppose we meet a atheist who found interest in Christianity, does not know anything about it, literally has zero authority.

Where does he start? We already have an indoctrinated bias, well sir of course you should go to the bible. But even within Christians we would disagree WHAT IS THE BIBLE.

When you have to TELL HIM from your own mouth YOU are his authority. He can't walk into a library of all the Christian BOOKS there ever was and say well this is legit and this is not.

An atheist from the outside has no idea, he would say look at all these silly dressed folks with silly book, and silly beliefs. That first step, that first square one.

I have to accept what YOU say as full authority. I have to accept what YOU say is scripture to be scripture at all. And then I have to accept YOUR TAKE of what the words mean.

Still no Good News anywhere in there for that atheist...

 

[leonard03782]

Well you should care.

how the turns have tabled.....

From a clean slate, a BLANK, suppose we meet a atheist who found interest in Christianity, does not know anything about it, literally has zero authority.

Where does he start? We already have an indoctrinated bias, well sir of course you should go to the bible. But even within Christians we would disagree WHAT IS THE BIBLE.

When you have to TELL HIM from your own mouth YOU are his authority. He can't walk into a library of all the Christian BOOKS there ever was and say well this is legit and this is not.

An atheist from the outside has no idea, he would say look at all these silly dressed folks with silly book, and silly beliefs. That first step, that first square one.

I have to accept what YOU say as full authority. I have to accept what YOU say is scripture to be scripture at all. And then I have to accept YOUR TAKE of what the words mean.

So you will point them to a religion that protects and defends child molesters?
So you will point them to a religion that gives shelter to "consecrated prests" that are in open rebellion against God in their homosexality?

First question they will ask is why should I come here when I can steam it all online for free. Rc's do not realize it, but the world sees right through your false piety. Our clergy do not wear pagan fish hats like that of your false religion.

 

[utilyan]

So you will point them to a religion that protects and defends child molesters?
So you will point them to a religion that gives shelter to "consecrated prests" that are in open rebellion against God in their homosexality?

First question they will ask is why should I come here when I can steam it all online for free. Rc's do not realize it, but the world sees right through your false piety. Our clergy do not wear pagan fish hats like that of your false religion.

Ok sign me up....... NAME ONE PERSON in your clergy to teach me.