Jesus said, "They that worship the Father must worship him in spirit and in TRUTH." We have to worship God according to the truth.

Yes. And the truth is that revelation did not stop when the last words in the book were written, and God did not stop interacting with the world and sending emissaries. But you pretend that he did, and that everything is in the book.

There's ENOUGH in the book, to be sure. It's a matter of following Jesus, who said to feed the poor, shelter the homeless, heal the sick, visit the prisoner, take care of the widowed and the orphan. But you twist the book to say that this is purely voluntary (it isn't) and that people getting together through the institutions they control (e.g. government)is contrary to God, which it isn't.

Your religion fits the contours of your political beliefs - and where your political beliefs don't match what Jesus said, you don't see it at all and genuinely assert that your book says exactly what your politics believes. This is the great sin and obvious howling error of American political evangelism.

By comparison, I recognize and freely admit that my bloodyminded militaristic urge to kill my enemies certainly stems from my upbringing, military training, and long military service. I recognize that it is not in accordance with Jesus, and that it is a struggle between my personality, and the expressed will of my God. It is something that I struggle with.

You evince no struggle at all in squaring your book with your politics.

The difference between you and me is that you call me out with loud braying every single place where my humanity shows through and I depart, in anger (or in lust) from what the Savior said was right. By contrast, I don't generally call you out in the same way, and if I were to, you would deny that there is any difference between what the Savior said and your political beliefs, even though the daylight shining through that gap is obvious to anybody who looks.

Also, the fact that God has touched me with miracles and I am unashamed to speak about them seems to drive you nuts. It's a recurring theme that you mention them - not the broken neck healed - but the two little animals - you return to them over and over. You use these things as a point of ridicule, but I think they spook you. As in: why would God do that for that CATHOLIC who doesn't even properly believe in my BOOK, and not for me? That's what's going on in your head.

But I let you beat on me with it over and over without saying anything in return. Until this morning.

She became recognized as a Saint

She became recognized as a saint....

That is not the way it works.

The saints are the christains. It is as simple as that. They are living. It is not something bestowed on you by popes who worship the pagan babylonian queen of heaven. Who is not Mary of the Bible mother of Jesus.

Yes. And the truth is that revelation did not stop when the last words in the book were written, and God did not stop interacting with the world

I agree with that. God still works in this world. Miracles still happen. People are healed.

But it is also true that Mary is dead. Judgement didn't come yet so she is still dead. Enoch is the only one who didn't die and is still alive and will probably return some day if my reading comprehension is correct.

5 Then all the men which knew that their wives had burned incense unto other gods, and all the women that stood by, a great multitude, even all the people that dwelt in the land of Egypt, in Pathros, answered Jeremiah, saying,

16 As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee.

17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

18 But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

19 And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men?

20 Then Jeremiah said unto all the people, to the men, and to the women, and to all the people which had given him that answer, saying,

21 The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, ye, and your fathers, your kings, and your princes, and the people of the land, did not the Lord remember them, and came it not into his mind?

22 So that the Lord could no longer bear, because of the evil of your doings, and because of the abominations which ye have committed; therefore is your land a desolation, and an astonishment, and a curse, without an inhabitant, as at this day.

23 Because ye have burned incense, and because ye have sinned against the Lord, and have not obeyed the voice of the Lord, nor walked in his law, nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies; therefore this evil is happened unto you, as at this day.

24 Moreover Jeremiah said unto all the people, and to all the women, Hear the word of the Lord, all Judah that are in the land of Egypt:

25 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.

26 Therefore hear ye the word of the Lord, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the Lord, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord God liveth.

27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all the men of Judah that are in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine, until there be an end of them.

28 Yet a small number that escape the sword shall return out of the land of Egypt into the land of Judah, and all the remnant of Judah, that are gone into the land of Egypt to sojourn there, shall know whose words shall stand, mine, or their's.

29 And this shall be a sign unto you, saith the Lord, that I will punish you in this place, that ye may know that my words shall surely stand against you for evil:

30 Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I will give Pharaohhophra king of Egypt into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life; as I gave Zedekiah king of Judah into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, his enemy, and that sought his life.

Poor Judah, poor Egypt, poor Pharaohhophra.

And what has this to do with thee and me?

It's a matter of following Jesus, who said to feed the poor, shelter the homeless, heal the sick, visit the prisoner, take care of the widowed and the orphan. But you twist the book to say that this is purely voluntary (it isn't) and that people getting together through the institutions they control (e.g. government)is contrary to God, which it isn't.

It is voluntary in the sense that is is our personal responsibility to do those things. Not to have the government do those things in your individual place. How is letting the government give out welfare the same as what you said?

Your religion fits the contours of your political beliefs - and where your political beliefs don't match what Jesus said, you don't see it at all and genuinely assert that your book says exactly what your politics believes. This is the great sin and obvious howling error of American political evangelism.

My religion came before I even thought about politics. My politics are based on what God taught in the Bible. So you have me pegged incorrectly.

The book of Sirach, the book of Wisdom, the book of Judith, the book of Tobit, the books of 1 Maccabbees and 2 Maccabbees, about half of the book of Daniel - all present in the oldest complete Bible, all excised by Martin Luther and his ilk.

If you post it in a separate thread I will read it or at least some of it as it is obviously long.

You deny Christs book. You are saying your pope and his cult is the new christ.

Christ never wrote anything. It's a book.

I listen very carefully to Christ's words IN the portions of the book that contain them (which are, to be specific: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, the first two or three chapters of Acts, Revelation, and one single line in one of Paul's letters.

I note the extent to which Christ spoke about taking care of the poor and sick. I then compare that to the politics espoused by Protestants such as yourself, and I wonder how you can think that way and claim Christ, just as you wonder how I can be so bloodyminded and militaristic and claim Christ.

The difference is that I recognize that I am a sinner and have to fight both my bloodlust and my plain old lust for beautiful flesh. But you and yours actually believe yourselves to be right and godly when you oppose aid to the poor if it doesn't come through your churches. It's mind-bogglingly blind.

Like does Mary hear everyones prayers in every language all over the earth? Don't be a pussy answer the question.

I don't know. And neither do you.

By comparison, I recognize and freely admit that my bloodyminded militaristic urge to kill my enemies certainly stems from my upbringing, military training, and long military service. I recognize that it is not in accordance with Jesus, and that it is a struggle between my personality, and the expressed will of my God. It is something that I struggle with.

Like I said I only bring that up to say why should I believe someone who is saying things that are in the Bible are not true. Then saying things that are without scriptural basis and in fact in contradiction of scripture is Gods word.

So I am like why should I believe this guy when the abundence of his heart seems to be murder me and others.

But it is also true that Mary is dead.

Mary is not dead. Neither are the Apostles, the saints and the rest of the dead. You are very much mistaken.

They are alive, elsewhere, in Gan Eden/Paradise or Gehenna/Purgatory/"Hell".

I don't know. And neither do you.

Yes I know. Since it is appointed to man once to die then comes judgement. Since judgement day hasn't come yet Mary is still dead and can't hear shit.

Also For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5 Notice not Mary.

No where in the Bible does it say Mary is Holy. It never says to pray to her. It never says she has Gods power to hear all prayers in every language.

But since you admit you don't know and she didn't speak english. Do you think she hears your prayers?

Purgatory

That is true according to you and it isn't in the Bible. Jesus never said a word about it. But Paul is a liar according to what you have said in the past.

I listen very carefully to Christ's words IN the portions of the book that contain them

He never said Purgatory. So you add to scripture like the Catholics.

Like I said I only bring that up to say why should I believe someone who is saying things that are in the Bible are not true.

I try to turn the other cheek and not bring up your over-the-top behavior, because judging your God by the way you behave, I wouldn't want anything to do with him or his religion. It's really easy to reject virtually any human being for human weakness. We are imperfect. Lord knows I am. I don't generally skewer you personally for your graceless behavior, because I think it's wrong to do so. But if I copy you, your vitriolic behavior renders Protestantism and angry religion of poop-flinging apes with very poor reading comprehension, who make no allowance for human weakness and oblivious to their own raging unChristian fury. There. How does that feel? It doesn't even feel like a slap to you, because you are oblivious to your offensive behavior, and actually think that it's "righteous wrath". Pharisees and idolators.

He never said Purgatory. So you add to scripture like the Catholics.

He did, over and over: Gehenna is Purgatory, but it's function.

"Until the last penny is paid." Until means "not forever".

Also, the fact that God has touched me with miracles and I am unashamed to speak about them seems to drive you nuts.

IF you said only that God healed your broken neck. I wouldn't challenge you even if I didn't completely believe you. I may even believe you. In my family before i met my wife when she was a kid. Her family tells me of how her sister had a severe medical condition. Her father prayed and gave up alcohol and became a preacher because they tell me she was healed and the tumor was completely gone never to return. I didn't witness that but I believe it.

But when you go around talking about rats and lizards being raised from the dead. That is a bridge to far for me.

But Paul is a liar according to what you have said in the past.

You and your ilk are the sorts who like to call people who are wrong about something "liars". I don't.

Paul was not right about a great many things in his life. He was a fanatic and a murderer before he converted, then he was a fanatic for what he believed, and that's fine, but it caused him to state some things in ways that diverge from what Jesus said. Also, Paul, the Pharisee, was incredibly impressed, still, with the who Jewish apparatus, and continued to exalt it (and to insert features of it into Christianity), where Jesus did not do so.

But this is not a discussion we can have. We cannot simultaneously discuss text from an academic viewpoint and fling poop at each other. That doesn't work. If you're going to fling poop, and I'm flinging it back you personally, for once, we're not going to bring in Scripture in a serious discussion.

My behavior is over the top sometimes. Sometimes I like to get reactions out of people by saying stuff. I should do better.

But that doesn't excuse any of your denying Scripture and adding to it.

Vic I just like the truth and I consider the Bible to be true. So when you go around saying Mary is alive and such nonsense. *It contradicts scriputure and I wonder why someone who says the believe in God is willing to say the Bible is full of truth and also lies. What you call God must be cruel not giving us a clear truth. Having to add to the word and subtract and change babylonian tradition about the queen of the earth into Mary of the Bible in order to convert people back then.

but it caused him to state some things in ways that diverge from what Jesus said.

nope

But this is not a discussion we can have. We cannot simultaneously discuss text from an academic viewpoint and fling poop at each other. That doesn't work. If you're going to fling poop, and I'm flinging it back you personally, for once, we're not going to bring in Scripture in a serious discussion.

Uh. You have quoted zero scripture. You have made excuses why scripture doesn't mean what it says. You make stuff up like purgatory and praying to Mary. Ok you didn't make it up personally but you believe the crap in contradiction to Gods word found in the Bible and only the Bible.

Paul doesn't have the final word. God sent Mary repeatedly to earth - the only person he has seny back since Jesus ascended.

Factually wrong.

Jesus came back to convert Saul to become the Apostle Paul on the road to Damascus. Paul went on to defeat Peter, the alleged first Roman pontiff, in a major theological battle over the conversion of Gentiles at the council of Jerusalem.

My book has 9 additional books in it that you people cut out of it fifteen hundred years after the fact, because they conflict with the theology that you want to believe.

Those books were all rejected when the first canon was estabished. The first canon has never been challenged.

It was only at the council of Trent that Roman Catholics decreed that those 9 additional books were official scripture.

Despite this, even Rome does not elevate those extra 9 false books to the same status as that held by the books of the original NT canon. Because they know better. And so they are termed the Apocrypha.

The book of Sirach, the book of Wisdom, the book of Judith, the book of Tobit, the books of 1 Maccabbees and 2 Maccabbees, about half of the book of Daniel - all present in the oldest complete Bible, all excised by Martin Luther and his ilk.

Excised by the Council of Hippo and confirmed subsequently in the ancient NT canon. By the Roman Catholic church.

It was only in 1546 at the Council of Trent that these dodgy books were again added to the Rome's official canon, though never granted equal status by Rome with the books of the original ancient canon.

That is true according to you and it isn't in the Bible. Jesus never said a word about it. But Paul is a liar according to what you have said in the past.

Uh-huh. Paul, who was the only human converted by Jesus after his ascent to heaven, is considered by Count Vicula to be inferior in authority to Jesus' baby-mama, Mary who the Count claims has converted millions.

Notice how the Count never gives Jesus even the slightest credit for converting any of those souls. It's all for the glory of the Queen of Heaven, Mary. Yet scripture never mentions her as having any spiritual authority whatsoever and Jesus merely assigned disciples to help care for her after His own death.

Funny how that works.

I always enjoy your posts. Well almost always.

The saints are the christains. It is as simple as that

Nothing is 'simple' when it comes to religion! You're a big boy and you should know that.

Paul went on to defeat Peter, the alleged first Roman pontiff, in a major theological battle over the conversion of Gentiles at the council of Jerusalem.

They had a dispute. He appears to have persuaded Peter of something. The text hardly gives a trial transcript.

It's all for the glory of the Queen of Heaven, Mary.

She always came in the name of her son, and always called people to follow her son, and they did. You calumniate a messenger of God with your nonsense.

Excised by the Council of Hippo and confirmed subsequently in the ancient NT canon. By the Roman Catholic church.

It was only in 1546 at the Council of Trent that these dodgy books were again added to the Rome's official canon, though never granted equal status by Rome with the books of the original ancient canon.

Utterly false. Go back to school. Those books have been part of the Catholic Canon, East and West, since the first complete Bibles of the 300s. Local synods disagreed about this and that.

The Orthodox and the Catholics both have proceeded forth with these books. Jerome protested some of them but he translated them nevertheless, because the Pope was firm on the matter.

Utterly false. Go back to school. Those books have been part of the Catholic Canon, East and West, since the first complete Bibles of the 300s. Local synods disagreed about this and that.

Lie all you want. They were affirmed only by the Council of Trent and they were never included in the canon approved by the Council of Hippo.

Stuff that in a dead mouse and smoke it.

So what happened to your announced plan from two days ago to run away and pout for a while? You didn't carry through on your little threat.

They had a dispute. He appears to have persuaded Peter of something. The text hardly gives a trial transcript.

A lot of Gentiles converted when they found out they didn't have to give up their foreskins like a Jew would have. Or follow Jewish dietary laws, etc. Probably those Christians with foreskins numbered in the millions over the centuries.

We know what the dispute was. And Paul prevailed over Peter before the Council, very clearly. Which does throw into question how Peter could be the first Roman pontiff if Paul, who had never even met Jesus during his lifetime, could and did beat Peter like a rug, theologically speaking. And Paul was by far the greater missionary as well. Peter seems to have accomplished very little, perhaps the reason why Rome chose to depict him as their purported first pope. Peter himself never wrote epistles that indicated he knew anything about holding such a status or commission of leadership.

She always came in the name of her son, and always called people to follow her son, and they did.

You'd worship her as the Queen of Heaven (and the Immaculate Queen of the Universe, as the sedevecantists do) if the Romans had just nailed one of her bloody tampons to a cross.

Were it possible, the Mariolatrists would replace Jesus altogether. Certainly, they make little mention of Him at any time. It's all "Mary, Mary, quite contrary (to scripture)" with you lot.

Those books have been part of the Catholic Canon, East and West, since the first complete Bibles of the 300s.

These books (the Apocrypha), though valuable documents, were never in the Hebrew canon of Scripture.

The Hebrews excluded the Apocrypha because these books contain errors.

And Paul prevailed over Peter before the Council, very clearly.

Paul prevailed over Peter because Peter was in error. Peter was causing a division in the church because of his fear of displeasing the Judaizers.

Paul rebuked Peter and corrected the whole lot of them...that we are saved by grace not by works of the Law.

The conflict was short lived. By Acts 15:7 Peter affirms the gospel message.

After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

BTW Peter was never a stinking Pope...there is no such office listed in the Bible.

Anyway, that's how I read him from what the bible describes.

I think Paul had a very aggressive personality.

Yeah, all the apostles were a pretty rough bunch.

Saul before he was Paul participated in stonings, you know, killing people with rocks.

Peter, a fisherman, used a sword to hack an ear off a dude.

James and John were known locally as the "Sons of Thunder"

Even so, God tenderized them...and made them useful.

You'd worship her as the Queen of Heaven (and the Immaculate Queen of the Universe, as the sedevecantists do) if the Romans had just nailed one of her bloody tampons to a cross.

That's novel. Keep it up, please. Keep heaping derision on Mary.

o what happened to your announced plan from two days ago to run away and pout for a while? You didn't carry through on your little threat.

I want to urge you to keep saying evil things, to get so full of yourself and such a head of steam on you keep right on down that self-righteous road of yours, spewing nonsense and contempt at holy things.

The Hebrews excluded those books at Jamnia, 90 years into the Christian era.

You are suggesting that the Apocrypha was part of the Hebrew canon up until Jamnia, and then tossed out. That isn't the case at all.

Keep heaping derision on Mary.

Every time you elevate Mary, you diminish Jesus Himself.

Can Jesus do anything without his baby-mama? Anything at all?

Catholics elevate Mary to the point that she replaces the Father/Son/Spirit entirely in their minds. You know it's true.

You are suggesting that the Apocrypha was part of the Hebrew canon up until Jamnia, and then tossed out. That isn't the case at all.

The disputed books were not included in the original NT canon for sound reasons. The Maccabees were just a history of a series of recent wars for Jewish independence from Rome. A few others were dubious rehashes of Daniel. And so on. They were considered carefully and rejected as inferior at Hippo.

The account of the Maccabees is interesting and sets the stage historically for the appearance of Christ and the rebellion that ended with the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 70AD. But they had no greater spiritual merit than the history written by Josephus a little later after he went Benedict Arnold and threw in with the Roman conquerors. A history book is not a spiritual book. Such was the judgment of the council of Hippo and subsequent ratifications of Hippo's NT canon.

The disputed books were not included in the original NT canon for sound reasons.

The account of the Maccabees...

Errors in the Apocrypha...Money as an offering for the sins of the dead:

2 Maccabbees 12:43, "And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection."

From https://carm.org/catholic/errors-apocrypha

Vic can buy you a stairway to heaven TC...but I have a feeling it is gonna cost way more than twelve thousand drachms of silver to save your sin blighted soul ;)

Vic is deceived and trying to deceive with his doctrine of demons. He is to educated to have common sense. In other words brainwashed.

Mary is not dead.

She is dead and you even admitted that you don't even know if she hears your prayers. She is a dead sinner that practiced repentance. Here is another verse that shows you are not to worship sinners. Even Mary mother of Jesus.

27 And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked.

28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.