When people have no answer to the information you provide, they then start throwing out the accusations.
There is no answer to information that is false. Strawmen and red herrings. As for accusation, read the title of this thread and your own first post in it.
No, we addressed that. Has there been any recanting of these actions? The Bible tells us to repent of sin.
Actually, there has. If you take the time to re-read threads in this forum you will see it. My stance on Martin Luther as an example.
That aside, I won't recant the Church ex-communicating heretics (something an Anabaptist would understand), and I'm not responsible for what state authorities (Kings, Queens, etc) have done in the name of religion.
I'm sure they have done good things, but that's a bold claim.
Considering there is no other organized body that is 2000 years old, it's not so bold of a claim.
If I give my interpretation, you'll say I'm saying your wrong! You want us to agree with you.
We'll say that's your interpretation and we disagree with it. You will be hard put to find a Catholic attempting to thrust our views down your throat. :shrug:
You want to teach and not be taught. The burden of proof is that you do not want dialogue.
You're right, we want to teach so that you have a better understanding of what we believe and not what you were taught we believe. As for learning something from you, it's doubtful not only because you can't say something we haven't already heard but also because you have no authority for us. We don't mind dialogue, but truly we don't owe you re-hashing everything previously stated simply because you're new. Re-read old threads.
We consider them and refute them. Do you want us to simply agree?
You're as free to disagree with us as we are with you. What we expect from you is a simple "I disagree, but ok that's what you believe and why." It really is that simple. We could care less if you agree with us or not. Any attempt at trying to make us agree with the other side (and vice versa) just bogs down into the monkeys throwing crap analogy that I gave you previously. Now, you can continue to act like a monkey throwing crap, but I, for one, won't.
The charge that because people died in the middle ages and renaissance period that the Church is not "true", not to mention the charge of being extra-biblical and a "works-based" salvation.
We are still commanded to not be silent to error.
You're right. You are a blatant heretic and in gross error and have need to repent.
I've tried to be respectful though I'm sure I was not completely successful. I have a tendency to get defensive. I've gone as far to say that I think some Catholics have a love-faith relationship with Jesus Christ. The part I fail to understand is why expressing what we believe to be Catholic theological errors labeled as "Catholic bashing?" We are open to have our beliefs brought into question.
Try harder. I'm not sure why you feel the need to get defensive, as nobody (until just now) has made accusations toward your faith. I'm glad to hear that you are open to your beliefs being brought into question. Look for a new thread at some point in the future; then you can get defensive.
Probably not. To be fair, non-Catholics are too numerous to hold them all accountable for the ugly things that Protestants did during the reformation. There was an extremely violent sect of the Anabaptists during that time that destroyed the testimony of them all. The Anabaptist majority that taught nonviolence openly condemned the actions of that sect.
So, you can be fair to non-Catholics but not fair to Catholics. Interesting.
I realize the Catholics as individuals cannot control that their church has not recanted, but it's disheartening that so many are willing to sweep the past under a rug and ignore it.
Nobody has ignored it. You just didn't happen to like the response you got. So what. :shrug:
I'm not holier than thee, thy or thou!
I'm glad to see you admit that. You're admission is more than what we have received from other "non-Catholics" on this forum.
Well, that's the trouble. My beliefs are that there is theological errors in the Catholic Church; therefore, stating my beliefs would violate these premises. I'm sorry if I have been hard on people. I did not want to come across like that, but I get carried away sometimes when I feel like I'm under attack. I was hoping to have a conversation on these issues where I could see why the Catholics believe how they do and why my reasoning for thinking there theology is in error is wrong. I realize my spirit has been harsh and I'm sorry.
No my friend, your belief is not based on your opinion that the Catholic Church is in error. I should like to think that your belief is in Christ as the Son of God who died and resurrected so that we may have eternal life.
If you find yourself getting carried away, then I suggest you take a step back lest you fall into sin. Btw, you were never under attack. Again, take a look at the title of this thread and your own first post in it.
I've not seen scriptures posted that were saying what the Catholics were saying they said. I've tried to show that it takes assumptions to make some verses teach certain doctrines.
Again, re-read old threads and you'll find all the biblical evidence that we use for our doctrines. Again, you don't have to agree with it, we could care less if you do, but there it is.
I may not have all the truth (I'm still learning), but I have the source of truth.
If you have the source of truth but yet do not have all the truth, then I highly suggest you stop attempting to force others to believe in your version of it.
The historical things can be found in encyclopedias and history books.
You mean like your historical source for the supposed Council of Valencia?
That falsehood stems from Lorraine Beottner btw, who was a Protestant theologian in the 20th century. It might do you well to actually pay attention to the one entity who has actually lived the history throughout the 2000 years of Christianity.
Let's turn the table here. What is the official Roman Catholic position on the eternal destiny of non-Catholics?
Bottom line, we trust in the mercy of God. It may be more difficult for a non-Christian to obtain heaven, but it's not necessarily out of bounds. We don't usurp the ultimate judgment of God on persons and what lay within their own conscience.
One could bring into question some of the current fruits of Catholic control in Latin America, but those are localized problems. Thus far, I have not seen a Catholic admit that these massacres in the name of religion are true, no less acknowledge that the church was wrong then and have since changed.
Again, re-read old threads.
What do you expect, Starman3000m said it himself, he has his "own Jesus" and his "own Gospel" the rest of worship "another Jesus" and follow "another Gospel".
I don't think that fact has ever occurred to him. It would be impossible for him to think that HE may have the wrong Jesus and gospel as opposed to the Jesus and gospel that has been preached for 2000 years.
![parrot-photo[1].jpg](/data/attachments/48/48726-898070e5765bd099dbdaed4428e36d72.jpg)
![parrot-photo[1].jpg](/data/attachments/48/48727-898070e5765bd099dbdaed4428e36d72.jpg)
Jesus created a hostile environment and it got Him killed, so I guess we should ALL just be quiet, right? Jesus said: "They will hate you because of me", so it wasn't meant to be a feel good happy experience all the time.
