Abt on French anti-Americanism during TdF

[David Ryan]

Dashi Toshii wrote:
>
> "David Ryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Raptor wrote:
> > >
> > > David Ryan wrote:
> > > > Dashi Toshii wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> 2 Kings 22:20 Behold therefore, I will gather thee unto thy fathers, and thou shalt be
> > > >> gathered into thy grave in peace; and thine eyes shall not see all the evil which I
> > > >> will bring
> upon this
> > > >>place. And they brought the king word again.
> > > >>
> > > >> (Whole Chapter: 2 Kings 22 In context: 2 Kings 22:19-21)
> > > >>
> > > >> Dashii
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Evil" in the King James Bible is used to translate two entirely
> different
> > > > concepts. One is for moral evil. The other is for calamity, often as
> a
> > > > punishment for evil. If you are going to be an effective atheist, you should at least be
> > > > informed on the subject of religion.
> > >
> > > When you create different definitions for the same word as needed, how can you expect anyone
> > > to be properly informed?
> > >
> > > Same ****, different day.
> >
> > Just to start breaking down your own sentence:
> >
> > When, adverb
> > 1 : at what time <when will you return> 2 a : at or during which time b : and then
> > 3 : at a former and usually less prosperous time <brag fondly of having
> known him when -- Vance Packard>
> >
> > When, conjunction 1 a : at or during the time that : WHILE <went fishing when he was a boy>
> b : just at the moment that <stop writing when the bell rings> c : at any or every time that <when
> he listens to music, he falls asleep>
> > 2 : in the event that : IF <a contestant is disqualified when he disobeys
> the rules>
> > 3 a : considering that <why use water at all when you can drown in it --
> Stuart Chase> b : in spite of the fact that : ALTHOUGH <quit politics when I might have had a
> great career in it>
> > 4 : the time or occasion at or in which <tomorrow is when we must decide>
> <humor is when you laugh -- Earl Rovit>
> >
> > When, pronoun
> > 1 : what or which time <life-long homes for those... who have lived here
> since when -- Kim Waller>
> >
> > When, noun
> > 1 : the time in which something is done or comes about <troubled his head
> very little about the hows and whens of life -- Laurence Sterne>
> >
> > You are using the conjunction, definition 2, of "when". The only reason I have a clue what
> > you're saying is context.
>
> argumentum ad hominem. Personal attacks on your opponent are an admission of intellectual
> bankruptcy.
>
> Dashii

What are you talking about? Now you're finding ad hominems where none exists.

 

[Kyle Legate]

Robert Chung wrote:
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

>> Considering that the only source of intelligence for at least a couple of years are dodgy
>> sattelite photos, this is a realistic possibility.
>
> You mean like this recently de-classified photo that formed much of the basis for our invasion?
> The mobile biological weapons trailer can be seen in the lower right-hand corner.
> http://tinyurl.com/g026
>
Absolutely! Give a reasonably talented child a few hours with a sheet of bristolboard, some
scissors, a hand held lamp for shadow and a black and white camera and you too can have your very
own evidence for WMD.

 

[Kyle Legate]

David Ryan wrote:
> Kyle Legate wrote:
>>
>> David Ryan wrote:
>>> "B. Lafferty" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well stated. Sow Justice. Reap Peace.
>>>
>>> That's what we just did.
>>>
>> I see lots of neither.
>
> That's because you are on the wrong side.
>
Ok. show me the peace.

 

[David Ryan]

Stewart Fleming wrote:
>
> David Ryan wrote:
>
> > Stewart Fleming wrote:
> > >
> > > David Ryan wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'll remember all that the next time the Maori rise up.
> > >
> > > Go for it. What's your current position on who owns the seashore and seabed?
> >
> > The Maori own all of it
>
> Cool! Really? Write and tell our government then. Can you explain why too?

That's my position because I won't support your government either. It's called geo-politics,
***-for-tat, quid pro quo.

 

[Van Hoorebeeck]

David Ryan schreef:

>
>
> That's because you are on the wrong side.

This way of thinking, which is also carried by Rumsfeld et.al., is what European lifelong US-allies
find so scary.

If we don't approve of whatever unilateral decision to intervene chest-beatingly wherever in the
world, we are on the wrong side, weasels, etc.

Overall I (and 90% of Belgians) disagreed with the intervention in Iraq. But we acknowledge Saddam
is a dictator and criminal who'd better not be in charge of things, and so there exist reasons to
deal with him forcefully. It's all debatable.

The current US gov line is to have no such respect for other opinions, but to classify nations on
the good or bad side. And to threaten allies with negative consequences for their unsupportiveness.

 

[Steven L. Sheff]

On 7/3/03 10:45 PM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'll accept your explanation based on the original Hebrew, but you're in the seeming minority that
> doesn't consider the King James version to be the divinely inspired Word o' Gawd.

**** ... Even the Anglican church hardly uses the KJV anymore ... I think the only church that does
ACTIVELY use the KJV is the one that's ruining Utah.

 

[Raptor]

Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
> On 7/3/03 10:45 PM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>I'll accept your explanation based on the original Hebrew, but you're in the seeming minority that
>>doesn't consider the King James version to be the divinely inspired Word o' Gawd.
>
>
>
> **** ... Even the Anglican church hardly uses the KJV anymore ... I think the only church that
> does ACTIVELY use the KJV is the one that's ruining Utah.

No kidding? What do the Southern Baptists proclaim?

Which then begs the question, which version DO those churches use, written by necessity by some
modern day author and/or committe? And why not turn to an actual literary classic about religion
like Dune?

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

 

[Steven L. Sheff]

On 7/4/03 11:21 AM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
>> On 7/3/03 10:45 PM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'll accept your explanation based on the original Hebrew, but you're in the seeming minority
>>> that doesn't consider the King James version to be the divinely inspired Word o' Gawd.
>>
>>
>>
>> **** ... Even the Anglican church hardly uses the KJV anymore ... I think the only church that
>> does ACTIVELY use the KJV is the one that's ruining Utah.
>
> No kidding? What do the Southern Baptists proclaim?
>
> Which then begs the question, which version DO those churches use, written by necessity by some
> modern day author and/or committe? And why not turn to an actual literary classic about religion
> like Dune?

My great grandmother's bible (sitting on my shelf) is the Scofield Reference Edition, originally
published in 1909 (although hers was printed in 1945). She was a member of First Baptist Church in
Chattanooga, Tennessee until she died in 1977, right around her 86th birthday.

The official bible of the Anglican/Episcopal Church (in which most of my family are currently
members) is the New Revised Standard Version, 3rd Edition or the New Oxford Annotated NRSV. The NRSV
was originally published about 50 years ago.

 

[Dashi Toshii]

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:BB2B2D9B.30C7%[email protected]...
> On 7/4/03 11:21 AM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
> >> On 7/3/03 10:45 PM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I'll accept your explanation based on the original Hebrew, but you're
in
> >>> the seeming minority that doesn't consider the King James version to
be
> >>> the divinely inspired Word o' Gawd.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> **** ... Even the Anglican church hardly uses the KJV anymore ... I
think
> >> the only church that does ACTIVELY use the KJV is the one that's
ruining
> >> Utah.
> >
> > No kidding? What do the Southern Baptists proclaim?
> >
> > Which then begs the question, which version DO those churches use, written by necessity by some
> > modern day author and/or committe? And why not turn to an actual literary classic about religion
> > like Dune?
>
>
> My great grandmother's bible (sitting on my shelf) is the Scofield
Reference
> Edition, originally published in 1909 (although hers was printed in 1945). She was a member of
> First Baptist Church in Chattanooga, Tennessee until
she
> died in 1977, right around her 86th birthday.
>
> The official bible of the Anglican/Episcopal Church (in which most of my family are currently
> members) is the New Revised Standard Version, 3rd Edition or the New Oxford Annotated NRSV. The
> NRSV was originally
published
> about 50 years ago.

There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existance. Each one think that
they and only they are the real Christians!

While the bible clearly states that the Church is to be founded by Peter and that this Church is the
Church authorized by Christ.

Of course all of these other sects (cults) will argue that the following passage doesn't really mean
that. And only they can interpert the bible correctly.

Matthew 16 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and
blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee,
That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not
prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever
thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be
loosed in heaven.

This statement by Jesus clearly gives Peter the authority to establish a church, which he did, the
Roman Catholic church "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Dashii

 

[Dashi Toshii]

"David Ryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Dashi Toshii wrote:
> >
> > "David Ryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> heh heh You copied the little audio icon

Heh, heh, right, unlike you I am not perfect!

Happy Fourth of July!

"The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to
attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts
of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what
parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have
proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds.
It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills." -Thomas Jefferson,
letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814

Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of
fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much
ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it
impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, April 13, 1820

Dashii

 

[David Ryan]

Dashi Toshii wrote:
>
> "David Ryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Dashi Toshii wrote:
> > >
> > > "David Ryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> > heh heh You copied the little audio icon
>
> Heh, heh, right, unlike you I am not perfect!
>
> Happy Fourth of July!
>
> "The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to
> attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the
> texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much
> doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts
> of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very
> inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills."
> -Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814
>
> Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages
> of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so
> much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce
> it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being.
>
> -Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, April 13, 1820
>
> Dashii

I would not take a position whether he is right or wrong. Interestingly like Jefferson, I consider
myself also a deist. (You can confirm in Google.) That means a belief in God from evidence and
rational argument, as opposed to a theist whose belief proceeds from faith or mysticism. I put no
stock in generalities and broad conclusions but in specific points of dispute. If it's right, it's
right. If it's wrong, it's wrong. With most people I can usually shed light on facts they never
considered.

BTW, you can find the full letters at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mtj1&fileName=mtj-
1page047.db&recNum=207&itemLink=%2Fammem%2Fmtjhtml%2Fmtjser1.html&linkText=6
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mtjfield(DOCID+@lit(ws03101))

 

[David Ryan]

Dashi Toshii wrote:
>
> "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:BB2B2D9B.30C7%[email protected]...
> > On 7/4/03 11:21 AM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
> > >> On 7/3/03 10:45 PM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> I'll accept your explanation based on the original Hebrew, but you're
> in
> > >>> the seeming minority that doesn't consider the King James version to
> be
> > >>> the divinely inspired Word o' Gawd.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> **** ... Even the Anglican church hardly uses the KJV anymore ... I
> think
> > >> the only church that does ACTIVELY use the KJV is the one that's
> ruining
> > >> Utah.
> > >
> > > No kidding? What do the Southern Baptists proclaim?
> > >
> > > Which then begs the question, which version DO those churches use, written by necessity by
> > > some modern day author and/or committe? And why not turn to an actual literary classic about
> > > religion like Dune?
> >
> >
> > My great grandmother's bible (sitting on my shelf) is the Scofield
> Reference
> > Edition, originally published in 1909 (although hers was printed in 1945). She was a member of
> > First Baptist Church in Chattanooga, Tennessee until
> she
> > died in 1977, right around her 86th birthday.
> >
> > The official bible of the Anglican/Episcopal Church (in which most of my family are currently
> > members) is the New Revised Standard Version, 3rd Edition or the New Oxford Annotated NRSV. The
> > NRSV was originally
> published
> > about 50 years ago.
>
> There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existance. Each one think that
> they and only they are the real Christians!
>
> While the bible clearly states that the Church is to be founded by Peter and that this Church is
> the Church authorized by Christ.
>
> Of course all of these other sects (cults) will argue that the following passage doesn't really
> mean that. And only they can interpert the bible correctly.
>
> Matthew 16 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and
> blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto
> thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall
> not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and
> whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on
> earth shall be loosed in heaven.
>
> This statement by Jesus clearly gives Peter the authority to establish a church, which he did, the
> Roman Catholic church "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
>
> Dashii

Read on just a little further:

Mat 16: 20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem,
and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised
again the third day. 22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee,
Lord: this shall not be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me,
Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those
that be of men.

This matter of interpretation is not so simple...

 

[Steven L. Sheff]

On 7/4/03 5:50 PM, in article [email protected], "Dashi Toshii"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> This statement by Jesus clearly gives Peter the authority to establish a church, which he did, the
> Roman Catholic church "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Phew! Then I'm safe ... The Anglican Church is the Catholic Church, but without the power-trips.

Although, in reality, Peter did not found the Roman Catholic church ... He founded the catholic
church. The word "catholic" refers not to the Roman Catholic Church, but to the universal church of
the Lord Jesus Christ.

The "Roman Catholic" church wasn't known as such until the Reformation in the 16th Century.

CATHOLIC: \Cath"o*lic\ (k[a^]th"[-o]*[i^]k), a. [L. catholicus, Gr. kaqoliko`s, universal, general;
kata` down, wholly + "o`los whole, probably akin to E. solid: cf. F. catholique.] 1. Universal or
general; as, the catholic faith. Of broad or liberal scope; comprehensive. 2. Including or
concerning all humankind; universal.

The Nicene Creed:

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen
and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God
from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the
Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by
the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our
sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he
rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right
hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom
will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the
Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness
of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

The Apostles' Creed:

I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his
only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended to the dead. On the
third day he rose again. He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He
will come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic
Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life
everlasting. Amen.

 

[Nick Burns]

You are so completely full of ****. Who told you this? A catholic priest? You are not allowed to
interpret the scriptures according to the Catholic Church.

"Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:BB2B2D9B.30C7%[email protected]...
> > On 7/4/03 11:21 AM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
> > >> On 7/3/03 10:45 PM, in article [email protected], "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> I'll accept your explanation based on the original Hebrew, but
you're
> in
> > >>> the seeming minority that doesn't consider the King James version to
> be
> > >>> the divinely inspired Word o' Gawd.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> **** ... Even the Anglican church hardly uses the KJV anymore ... I
> think
> > >> the only church that does ACTIVELY use the KJV is the one that's
> ruining
> > >> Utah.
> > >
> > > No kidding? What do the Southern Baptists proclaim?
> > >
> > > Which then begs the question, which version DO those churches use, written by necessity by
> > > some modern day author and/or committe? And
why
> > > not turn to an actual literary classic about religion like Dune?
> >
> >
> > My great grandmother's bible (sitting on my shelf) is the Scofield
> Reference
> > Edition, originally published in 1909 (although hers was printed in
1945).
> > She was a member of First Baptist Church in Chattanooga, Tennessee until
> she
> > died in 1977, right around her 86th birthday.
> >
> > The official bible of the Anglican/Episcopal Church (in which most of my family are currently
> > members) is the New Revised Standard Version, 3rd Edition or the New Oxford Annotated NRSV. The
> > NRSV was originally
> published
> > about 50 years ago.
>
> There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existance. Each one think that
> they and only they are the real Christians!
>
> While the bible clearly states that the Church is to be founded by Peter
and
> that this Church is the Church authorized by Christ.
>
> Of course all of these other sects (cults) will argue that the following passage doesn't really
> mean that. And only they can interpert the bible correctly.
>
> Matthew 16 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon
Barjona:
> for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say
> also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of
> hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven:
> and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
whatsoever
> thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
>
>
> This statement by Jesus clearly gives Peter the authority to establish a church, which he did, the
> Roman Catholic church "and the gates of hell
shall
> not prevail against it."
>
> Dashii
> >
>

 

[Dashi Toshii]

"Nick Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You are so completely full of ****. Who told you this? A catholic priest? You are not allowed to
> interpret the scriptures according to the Catholic Church.

The only true Christians are Catholics, all others can only be saved by converting to Catholicism!

See you in hell. hahahaha

> There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existence. Each one think that
> they and only they are the real Christians!
>
> While the bible clearly states that the Church is to be founded by Peter
and
> that this Church is the Church authorized by Christ.
>
> Of course all of these other sects (cults) will argue that the following passage doesn't really
> mean that. And only they can interpret the bible correctly.
>
> Matthew 16 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon
Barjona:
> for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say
> also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of
> hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven:
> and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
whatsoever
> thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
>
>
> This statement by Jesus clearly gives Peter the authority to establish a church, which he did, the
> Roman Catholic church "and the gates of hell
shall

 

[Nev Shea]

"Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existance. Each one think that
> they and only they are the real Christians!

Click this link and forget about them other 33,000 phonies:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/

NS

 

[Dashi Toshii]

"Nev Shea" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> > There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existance. Each one think
> > that they and only they are the real Christians!
>
> Click this link and forget about them other 33,000 phonies:
>
> http://www.landoverbaptist.org/

Excellent point! I'm sure that Henry would look good in one of those thongs.
<G>

Dashii

 

[Nick Burns]

Not even the "Infallible" Pope takes that position these days.

The Bible clearly states that Peter is the rock that the church will be built on. The only thing
that is clear is that Peter would have a part in founding the church. The Catholic Church eventually
became corrupt after the death of the first generation of apostles.While the were alive though, Paul
was clearly the supreme apostle and all of the others, including Peter, deferred to him.

In any case, there are clearly Catholic traditions that not only are unsupported, but that are in
direct conflict with the scriptures. The only reason that the Catholic Church became so corrupt was
that they were left alone for centuries without anyone to challenge their authority. There was
really no other way to preserve Christianity since the scripture could not be distributed easily, as
you well know. However, as soon as the printing press came along, it was just a matter of time for
the reform movement to challenge the corruption that had crept in. As it turned out, the Catholic
Church was too far gone to accept the reforms and the true Christians had no choice but to make the
brave decision to start over. If the printing press had come in to existence at the time that Christ
was walking the earth, I doubt the Catholic Church would have ever come in to existence.

"Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Nick Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > You are so completely full of ****. Who told you this? A catholic
priest?
> > You are not allowed to interpret the scriptures according to the
Catholic
> > Church.
>
> The only true Christians are Catholics, all others can only be saved by converting to Catholicism!
>
> See you in hell. hahahaha
>
> > There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existence. Each one think
> > that they and only they are the real Christians!
> >
> > While the bible clearly states that the Church is to be founded by Peter
> and
> > that this Church is the Church authorized by Christ.
> >
> > Of course all of these other sects (cults) will argue that the following passage doesn't really
> > mean that. And only they can interpret the bible correctly.
> >
> > Matthew 16 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon
> Barjona:
> > for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which
is
> > in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
> > church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it.
> > 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind
> > on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
> whatsoever
> > thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
> >
> >
> > This statement by Jesus clearly gives Peter the authority to establish a church, which he did,
> > the Roman Catholic church "and the gates of hell
> shall

 

[Nick Burns]

That number "33,000" was the total number of Christian physically separate churches, not
organizations. Most of those churches are affiliated within larger organizations. Even most of the
independent ones follow the same theology. They simply recognize that there is no need to have an
official connection to one another. Most of them use the same set of bibles.

"Nev Shea" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> > There are over 33,000, yes over 33,000, Christian sects (cults) in existance. Each one think
> > that they and only they are the real Christians!
>
> Click this link and forget about them other 33,000 phonies:
>
> http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
>
> NS

 

[Dashi Toshii]

"Nick Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> That number "33,000" was the total number of Christian physically separate churches, not
> organizations. Most of those churches are affiliated within larger organizations. Even most of the
> independent ones follow the same theology. They simply recognize that there is no need to have an
> official connection to one another. Most of them use the same set of bibles.

You miss the point, there was only one Church authorized by Christ:

Truth is one and it is a person, the person of Jesus Christ: "I am the way, and the truth, and the
life." John 14:6

Elucidation: Just as there is only one Jesus Christ, there can be only one truth. This verse is true
because He said it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death
shall not prevail against it. I will give you* the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 16:18-19 *The Greek word used here for 'you', is 'sou', meaning 'thou', which is singular.

Why did Jesus change the name of Simon to Peter? The answer is in Scripture. Did you notice that
Jesus said Church (singular), and not churches (plural) in verse 18? Did you notice that Jesus gave
the single set of keys to Peter and to him only in verse 19? Did you notice that the binding and
loosening are the authority which Jesus Christ gave to the one and only Church that He founded, and
to none other?

Elucidation: Jesus founded only one Church, and He gave the single set of keys to one person only,
Peter. Just as truth is one and Jesus Christ is one, the Church which He founded is one, the visible
head of His Church (Peter) on earth is one, and the GOD given authority of that Church is one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Caiphas, the Jewish high priest said: "He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest
that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to
gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad." John 11:51-52