[split] Hello everyone

[Elskidor]

About as much sense as Simplemoss' opinions on who can and can't be a racist.

[Mister Agenda]

Oh, I didn't understand your initial post. I wasn't ever Catholic, I was a Jehovah's Witness. I didn't realize that Catholics had so many ways to distinguish themselves from other Christians.

Oh sorry, but Catholics are Catholics and not Christian. That is just protestant theology who want to be king in the hereafter also, and have been declaring that ever since.

Ever read Macbeth? He will show you how that is done, but then, so did Moses and Billy Graham along with another 20,000 like him much in the same way.

The point here is that you just cannot part the water to get into the promised land but walk on it so you will know what the promised land is like when you get there. Does that make sense to you?

Welcome, Lambert.

Funny, but it's usually Protestants telling us that Catholics aren't Christians, and Catholics telling us they are.

[Chili]

I thought that the only thing christian means anymore is worshipping the bible. If not, what the hell is it?

Catholics aren't theists? What's going on! I'm pretty sure they are. I can't keep up with these crazy labels.

Yes it is defined that way by the self proclaimed Christians, and they will read the bible without end.

My point is that Catholics are not Christians because they do not, and are never encouraged to read the bible. In fact they are only given small portions of it much like the poor man eating the scraps that the rich man threw out.

But Catholics do have a bible that is means to collect dust as a silent reminder that to dust they will return. It is kind of like, but then just opposite to the eternal flame burning in Church.

Labels are protestant theology designed to set them apart each with a salvation recipe of their own, that according to each one of them is brewed by design and requires compliance and money to belong.

---

Oh sorry, but Catholics are Catholics and not Christian. That is just protestant theology who want to be king in the hereafter also, and have been declaring that ever since.

Ever read Macbeth? He will show you how that is done, but then, so did Moses and Billy Graham along with another 20,000 like him much in the same way.

The point here is that you just cannot part the water to get into the promised land but walk on it so you will know what the promised land is like when you get there. Does that make sense to you?

Welcome, Lambert.

Funny, but it's usually Protestants telling us that Catholics aren't Christians, and Catholics telling us they are.

Yes you are right. That is true in America only and is much like red paint on the door to tell those wolves that they are already OK and try the neighbor maybe.

---

Fair enough, just so you know, where I come from Baptism was done inside the first week for sure.

It is also true that where I was born everybody was Catholic that so was a tradition for the sake of tradition, I suppose, with never a wolf in sheep's clothing suggesting that there is a different point of view.

Where in Europe are you from?

Nono, no Catholic is Christian. Christian is a protestant idea.
Catholicism is the NT equivalent of OT Judaism and neither are Christian. From here it can be said that once a Jew becomes a Christian he is no longer Jew and in the same way a Catholic will no longer be a Catholic but will be Christian instead. This so makes Christian the end of religion for both Jew and Catholic in Christendom.

To note here that neither Jews nor Catholics are saved-sinners but all so called Christians are, and will remain torn in this paradox until they die and will die nonetheless.

errr... wrong!
Take orthodox christians as an example of pre-protestant christians.
Also, catholics ARE christians.

A Christian (About this sound pronunciation (help·info)) is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. "Christian" derives from the Koine Greek word Christós (Χριστός), a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term mashiach.[1]

Sorry Orthodox Christians? Pre-protestant Christians?

Orthodoxy is without paradox as that is what orthodox means . . . to say that they are not saved-sinner for sure.

Christian is without paradox as that is what Christian means = freedom from the law of slavery to sin.

That must have been a protestant Wiki, you think?

---

About as much sense as Simplemoss' opinions on who can and can't be a racist.

Sorry about that, just putting in time. Stay tuned if you like.

---

I see, thanks

Lol fuck me it's getting so ridiculous. It's starting to sound like the restrictions on re rolling a character in d&d or something.

Oops, address the argument please.

[JesusHChrist]

My name is Lambert and this is my first post here. I used to frequent the Internet Infidels and kind of learned what atheist are all about.

So I am a Catholic and I always thought that they never become an atheist but just quit going to church. Does that make sense to anyone here?

I'm not at all sure what you mean. Since I was baptized as a baby to "be" a Catholic, I'm sure the Church counts me as a member. Someday, I'll work on unbaptizing myself and get removed from the rolls. Being baptized before the age of consent seems rather odious in retrospect.

Me, I haven't been in a Catholic Church in decades. Living via the guidance of mythology - no thanks. I didn't stop going out of laziness, but as an atheist, rejecting all religious nonsense.

Nonetheless, greetings and welcome! Here's to having a thick skin!

[robvalue]

Address what argument?

[Chili]

Fair enough, just so you know, where I come from Baptism was done inside the first week for sure.

It is also true that where I was born everybody was Catholic that so was a tradition for the sake of tradition, I suppose, with never a wolf in sheep's clothing suggesting that there is a different point of view.

Where in Europe are you from?

Nono, no Catholic is Christian. Christian is a protestant idea.
Catholicism is the NT equivalent of OT Judaism and neither are Christian. From here it can be said that once a Jew becomes a Christian he is no longer Jew and in the same way a Catholic will no longer be a Catholic but will be Christian instead. This so makes Christian the end of religion for both Jew and Catholic in Christendom.

To note here that neither Jews nor Catholics are saved-sinners but all so called Christians are, and will remain torn in this paradox until they die and will die nonetheless.

errr... wrong!
Take orthodox christians as an example of pre-protestant christians.
Also, catholics ARE christians.

A Christian (About this sound pronunciation (help·info)) is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. "Christian" derives from the Koine Greek word Christós (Χριστός), a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term mashiach.[1]

For what it is worth, the error in your Wiki thing here is that there is a difference between Jesus of Nazareth and "Jesus out of Egypt called" who made a pit-stop in Nazareth so he can be called a Nazorean, but actually was not. This here is where Orthodoxy must do it's thing on its own in the believer, and that very well means no evangelist yanking away.

And do you see the difference here? If you do not see this let me add that John had a camelhair coat as not a true Nazarite in Matthew and Mark but not in Luke and in John. You can so call this John a 'one night stand' evangelist (so you can relate to him), that we would call a protestant today simply because orthodoxy is not what called him to be.

So now 'who is who' here and who is Wiki talking about because the Jesus of Matthew and Mark was forsaken on the cross and goes back to Galilee again in the end, and that translates into hell on earth as opposite to Luke and John where he does go to heaven instead.

Not that it matters to me, but it is a good idea to never put your Sunday suit on when reading the bible so that critical thinking can be part of it when you do. This in turn is where and why PhD's are the most handicapped of them all . . . and that in turn is why the saints in heaven are entertained by the folly of Christians below, so they claim.

So do you ever see prots proclaiming that Matthew and Mark's Jesus goes to hell?

[pocaracas]

Where in Europe are you from?


errr... wrong!
Take orthodox christians as an example of pre-protestant christians.
Also, catholics ARE christians.

Sorry Orthodox Christians? Pre-protestant Christians?

Orthodoxy is without paradox as that is what orthodox means . . . to say that they are not saved-sinner for sure.

Christian is without paradox as that is what Christian means = freedom from the law of slavery to sin.

That must have been a protestant Wiki, you think?

Are you for real?

See that thing on the top of the staff?


I hear that's Jesus Christ.
Followers are called christians.
Catholics are followers of Christ, hence are christians. That's it.
Why are you trying to change that extremely simple definition?

Extra points, since you seem to think I use a protestant source:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religioni_in_Italia (oh, maybe it was the protestants from the US or UK or Germany that wrote this in italian....)

La religione più diffusa in Italia è il cristianesimo, presente fin dai tempi apostolici. La confessione cristiana maggioritaria è il cattolicesimo.

I'm guessing that, if anyone would know if catholics are christians... the italians would be right there on top!

For what it is worth, the error in your Wiki thing here is that there is a difference between Jesus of Nazareth and "Jesus out of Egypt called" who made a pit-stop in Nazareth so he can be called a Nazorean, but actually was not. This here is where Orthodoxy must do it's thing on its own in the believer, and that very well means no evangelist yanking away.

And do you see the difference here? If you do not see this let me add that John had a camelhair coat as not a true Nazarite in Matthew and Mark but not in Luke and in John. You can so call this John a 'one night stand' evangelist (so you can relate to him), that we would call a protestant today simply because orthodoxy is not what called him to be.

So now 'who is who' here and who is Wiki talking about because the Jesus of Matthew and Mark was forsaken on the cross and goes back to Galilee again in the end, and that translates into hell on earth as opposite to Luke and John where he does go to heaven instead.

Not that it matters to me, but it is a good idea to never put your Sunday suit on when reading the bible so that critical thinking can be part of it when you do. This in turn is where and why PhD's are the most handicapped of them all . . . and that in turn is why the saints in heaven are entertained by the folly of Christians below, so they claim.

So do you ever see prots proclaiming that Matthew and Mark's Jesus goes to hell?

What?

I'm not continuing this.
We are on the intro forum and not exactly allowed to argue about anything in here.
But arguing for the inclusion of catholics as a part of christianity... now there's something I'd never expect...

[Losty]

It's funny because when I went to a Catholic Church they seemed to think Catholics were the only true Christians. Now I'm finding out that Catholics aren't even Christian at all. Well, those damn impostors.

[robvalue]

I've heard before of this idea of stopping people reading the bible, or at least discouraging it.

I think I've got a good idea why they do that.

[Chili]

My name is Lambert and this is my first post here. I used to frequent the Internet Infidels and kind of learned what atheist are all about.

So I am a Catholic and I always thought that they never become an atheist but just quit going to church. Does that make sense to anyone here?

I'm not at all sure what you mean. Since I was baptized as a baby to "be" a Catholic, I'm sure the Church counts me as a member. Someday, I'll work on unbaptizing myself and get removed from the rolls. Being baptized before the age of consent seems rather odious in retrospect.

Me, I haven't been in a Catholic Church in decades. Living via the guidance of mythology - no thanks. I didn't stop going out of laziness, but as an atheist, rejecting all religious nonsense.

Nonetheless, greetings and welcome! Here's to having a thick skin!

And you know what? It is very easy to be a non-Catholic as they wrote the "Syllabus of Error" to make this easy for you.

This was done after the Reformation made so called 'wolving' legal in Christendom and that eliminated the need for an Inquisitor to decide as ordered by National Law.

So now it is like a 'help yourself" decision to make and you sure are free to go.

Be reminded here that they are not head-hunters and do not hunt to save souls because that is not part of their busy-ness in any way, shape or form. Salvation is not part of the act with never an altar call made.

The age of consent requires 'reason' to be our guide and since Catholicism is a mystery religion reason is not desired to justify being a member at all.

---

Sorry Orthodox Christians? Pre-protestant Christians?

Orthodoxy is without paradox as that is what orthodox means . . . to say that they are not saved-sinner for sure.

Christian is without paradox as that is what Christian means = freedom from the law of slavery to sin.

That must have been a protestant Wiki, you think?

Are you for real?

See that thing on the top of the staff?


I hear that's Jesus Christ.
Followers are called christians.
Catholics are followers of Christ, hence are christians. That's it.
Why are you trying to change that extremely simple definition?

Extra points, since you seem to think I use a protestant source:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religioni_in_Italia (oh, maybe it was the protestants from the US or UK or Germany that wrote this in italian....)

La religione più diffusa in Italia è il cristianesimo, presente fin dai tempi apostolici. La confessione cristiana maggioritaria è il cattolicesimo.

I'm guessing that, if anyone would know if catholics are christians... the italians would be right there on top!

For what it is worth, the error in your Wiki thing here is that there is a difference between Jesus of Nazareth and "Jesus out of Egypt called" who made a pit-stop in Nazareth so he can be called a Nazorean, but actually was not. This here is where Orthodoxy must do it's thing on its own in the believer, and that very well means no evangelist yanking away.

And do you see the difference here? If you do not see this let me add that John had a camelhair coat as not a true Nazarite in Matthew and Mark but not in Luke and in John. You can so call this John a 'one night stand' evangelist (so you can relate to him), that we would call a protestant today simply because orthodoxy is not what called him to be.

So now 'who is who' here and who is Wiki talking about because the Jesus of Matthew and Mark was forsaken on the cross and goes back to Galilee again in the end, and that translates into hell on earth as opposite to Luke and John where he does go to heaven instead.

Not that it matters to me, but it is a good idea to never put your Sunday suit on when reading the bible so that critical thinking can be part of it when you do. This in turn is where and why PhD's are the most handicapped of them all . . . and that in turn is why the saints in heaven are entertained by the folly of Christians below, so they claim.

So do you ever see prots proclaiming that Matthew and Mark's Jesus goes to hell?

What?

I'm not continuing this.
We are on the intro forum and not exactly allowed to argue about anything in here.
But arguing for the inclusion of catholics as a part of christianity... now there's something I'd never expect...

But you know what? It is never smart to ask sheep if they know where they are going because all they can ever say is 'hither and thither we go," and if you ask the shepherd if he knows where they are going the best he can say is that "hither and thither they must go."

And you know that cross you are pointing at just shows that they left him hanging there like a dirty rag to never be worshiped for sure.

---

I've heard before of this idea of stopping people reading the bible, or at least discouraging it.

I think I've got a good idea why they do that.

No, they would never stop you or try to stop you, but will suggest that guidance is needed when you do because all is allegory that only bears witness to truth . . . such as here now with Christmas the infancy is real but the baby is not.

So yes, discouraging is safe to say, and lets call it a sin when you do.

---

It's funny because when I went to a Catholic Church they seemed to think Catholics were the only true Christians. Now I'm finding out that Catholics aren't even Christian at all. Well, those damn impostors.

No sry, you must be careful here with your use of the word 'true' Christian.

What they really means is that heaven is for Catholics only that they call the "Church Triumphant" to say, and there are no longer part of the "Church Militant" where the confessionals are (just so you know).

So here then the Church Militant is for sinners only and the Church Triumphant is where freedom from sin is entertained. This would be where the halo's are at, and they are only for the seer to see.

The point made here is that in Catholicism you do not have to [physically] for die for good times to begin, like our dear lost brethren have concluded to maintain on their own.

The imposter is typically Matthew where the Great Commission is Ordered because "their Jesus won't come back" until the whole world is converted instead of only their own [little] world. To this end the Buddha would say that "if you want to walk on leather it is much easier to put on leather shoes than clad the whole world with leather so you can." I think he is right, don't you? (and think he should have been a Catholic myself).

---

And in case you wonder, my neighbors are all protestant and they are good neighbors too.