Quote But has he ever told you that he believes that Jesus is really Michael the Archangel?CA. You are so far behind.There are about 8 threads on Michael the Archangel, almost of all which were started by people such as yourself. I think you'd be surprised to find that you and I have one or two overlapping beliefs that most people on this forum…[Read more]

Quote unbroken line of apostolic succession.No.”unbroken”No.Made up of sometimes imaginary people that didn't even exist to fill the holes.Yes.

CA, I knew you would want to leave when people started mentioning the Bible and I was actually going to predict this would be the next thing you'd do.  The truth is, I, as everyone here knows, would like to discuss what the Bible says about these things.  You, do not.  The truth is, if we just discussed the Bible, things would not go well for yo…[Read more]

CA, why can't we just discuss the Bible ever? Quote whenever the Watchtower finds evidence in the Fathers suggesting that Jesus is inferior or subordinate to God, they take this as proof that Jesus is therefore not coequal with the Father. On the surface, this conclusion seems appropriate – after all, how can one be inferior to another and yet b…[Read more]

CA. That was very long. Do you even know what it says?

Quote Nick,The name “Jesus” means “Jehovah saves.” It is NOT the Father's name. The name belongs to Christ ALONE! I challenge you to disprove this.thinkerHi The Thinker.You repeat this a few times. I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Many Bible names had Jehovah's name in them.

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Aug. 26 2009,17:57)Quote (david @ Aug. 26 2009,15:44)When Jesus’ ministry brings him to his hometown of Nazareth, his former acquaintances recognize him. “Is this not the carpenter’s son?”they ask.  “Is not his mother called Mary, and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And his sisters , are they not a…[Read more]

Hi Cindy. While I find your questions interesting, I'd rather just discuss the actual topic and not have this thread go off topic.

So as far as I can tell, my Augustine quote stands.As do all the scriptures I quoted that haven't been responded to.

Quote You mis-interpret Scripture ALMOST as good as you misinterpret Augustine”If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell s…[Read more]

Quote He is an excellent one to debate with, and what an interesting debate that would be, too (a Catholic, and a Jehovah's Witness).I'm not sure why you'd think that would be an interesting debate.Here is how it goes:Me: The Bible says…Him: We have to also consider tradition.Me: But the Bible says this about tradition…Him: The Bible isn't the…[Read more]

Let's break it down. Let's start with Augustines point.Was Peter the “rock” on which the church was built?Matt. 16:18, JB: “I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it.” (Notice in the context that the discussion centers on the identity of Jesus.)I have an…[Read more]

Quote After the Bible was published nobody was aloud to have one. It was the Catholic Church that forbid this. Many lost their lives by the hands of that Church because of it. It is still called the Roman Catholic Church. Hi Cindy. While I admire your zeal, the travesties of the Catholic Church are not in question here. And there are a 150…[Read more]

Augustine, in Tractate CXXIV, 24, says: “He (Peter) represented the universal Church, which in this world is shaken by divers temptations, that come upon it like torrents of rain, floods and tempests, and falleth not, because it is founded upon a rock (petra), from which Peter received his name. For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but…[Read more]

Quote If you can do a copy-paste job so can I:Apostolic SuccessionThe first Christians had no doubts about how to determine which was the true Church and which doctrines the true teachings of Christ. The test was simple: Just trace the apostolic succession of the claimants.“Just trace the apostolic succession….” On January 19, 1947, the…[Read more]

Quote (RokkaMan @ Aug. 27 2009,05:31)Quote (david @ Aug. 22 2009,17:01)Quote She said that she had “actually” seen God.“Have I here actually looked upon him who sees me?”–NWTIt looks more like a question to me.You seem to have neglected that:Quote Then she began to call the name of Jehovah who was speaking to her: “You are A God of sight,” for…[Read more]

Quote And if you cannot even try to refute my reasoning, I don't really see the point.I have a moderator who won't answer a direct question and gives me a warning for calling someone here a “twit”. Consider Nick (I assume it's him) a test,that will make you a stronger person. (just kiddin Nick.)CA, tell us your reasoning. Is it apostolic…[Read more]

Quote if any of you had even engaged my line of logic I would probably still be here.I will engage your line of logic.First, what is it? Is it that of apostolic succesion and therefore what you say is right?Is that your logic?

Quote if Jesus was not God in the flesh then why does the bible say what it does in john1:1,14At John 1:1, my Bible and 10 others do not refer to Jesus as “The” God, but “a god” or something like that.The Greek of John 1:1 has no indefinite article (“a”). So, if someone translates it into a language that does have indefinite articles (“a” or…[Read more]

Quote Scripture never, “never” called angels the Sons of God. Then who were the “sons of God” that shouted in applause when the earth was created?When the morning stars joyfully cried out together,And all the sons of God began shouting in applause? (Job 38:7)