None of what you just said makes any sense. NONE OF IT. You really don't understand any of it
Any religious people watch the Wonders of Life last night?
- Thread starter Johnnytoxic
- Start date
None of what you just said makes any sense. NONE OF IT. You really don't understand any of it
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2005
- Posts
- 1,890
- Location
- On the road
Your body is made out of inert matter just arranged on a certain manner ... there are not different types of matter.
People has offered you plenty of evidence, which you refuse to accept, and to be honest I doubt you have ever tried to seriously study any of the material put to you.
Why do you accept only certain disciplines of science? For example accepting quantum mechanics, or astrophysics, or geology ... and not the parts that you feel attack your believes? Same as evolution the rest of the body of science has been deduced from first principles, and keep on being challenged and refined overtime.
The way you are coming across is just as a fanatic who is evangelising, and an hypocrite.
Which denominations hold with the view that the Pope is Satans proxy?
People from other denominations, all though im sure some denominations will probably "sanction" that view. It really is not uncommon.
There's even "test" for phrophets in the bible. Many use these as evidence against the pope.
Can start asking people from most of the baptist denominations.
Last edited:
Which other denominations? I know an abundant amount of Christians and while quite a few of them do not hold with Catholicism, they also do not make the suggestion that the Pope is Satan's proxy either. I know some people do think such things, however it isn't that common and is generally limited to primitivist and non-denominational Christian views, not unlike Kedge. Making accusations that the Pope is Satan's proxy on Earth is hardly a sensible or particularly valid theological position in any denomination, least of all the mainstream which account for the majority of Christians.
The Papacy doesn't claim prophethood so that is pretty much irrelevant. Some do indeed attempt to ascribe such to the Papacy, yet it is not common practice and hardly sensible given the hoops you have to jump through and the assumptions you have to make regarding scripture to do so.
Also I would be careful about confusing US Evangelical Conservative Baptist movements (which is a generally a primitivist movement or literalist movement with other Baptist Congregations). Baptists are not a denomination in the strictest sense, they are congregational, they have no unified authority and are autonomous at the Congrational level.
None of the Baptists I know express such beliefs as the Pope is Satan's proxy and would find the idea pretty daft tbh.
Last edited:
Start with baptists and then move to the Protestants I've knowen a lot as well, and a fair few of them see the pope as a false prophet.
Actually its pretty sensible. The bible even talks about false phophets and if you don't follow Catholicism, then the pope would almost certainly fail that.
SDA for one in the older generations.
Actually its pretty sensible. The bible even talks about false phophets and if you don't follow Catholicism, then the pope would almost certainly fail that.
SDA for one in the older generations.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2005
- Posts
- 1,890
- Location
- On the road
Love it how all those biased scientist have built the foundations of the comfy world you live in, the computer you use, the internet you are currently using, the medicines that cure you ... etc etc.
Those cartoons can be refuted by my 3 year old by the way.
having been a member of this forum for a while and only a occasional GD dweller it still amazes me every time i read a thread like this, its been educational, inspirational and scary all at the same time.
Believe what you want (or not) the basic premise is that no one knows for sure how it started, if there is a soul /afterlife, if splash is better than mannequin..its all down to your own personal feelings on the matter and typing into a PC related forum is not all of a sudden going to change someones beliefs/non beliefs so why bother??
Lets all just agree there are some strange people out there that will believe anything and leave it at that.
Believe what you want (or not) the basic premise is that no one knows for sure how it started, if there is a soul /afterlife, if splash is better than mannequin..its all down to your own personal feelings on the matter and typing into a PC related forum is not all of a sudden going to change someones beliefs/non beliefs so why bother??
Lets all just agree there are some strange people out there that will believe anything and leave it at that.
That form of anti-Establishment Calvinism is largely antiquated in modern Protestant Church congregations, the only thing that sensible baptists or Protestants in the Calvinist tradition would state is that The Pope is not head of the Church, Christ is. They disagree that The Pope should hold the offices he does, they say the same about The British Monarch also which is why they are not part of the Anglican Church, and finally they can sometimes hold that the Catholic tradition is not Christian.....what it doesn't support in any sensible manner is that the Papacy is synonymous with the Antichrist, or that the Papacy is inherent in the unfulfilled prophecy (false prophet) or that the claim of apostasy is limited to within such.
The point is that they simply maintain that Christ is head of the Church, and the claim that anyone has to be the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church is not supported by Scripture. This is a sensible point that is open to discussion.
Anything beyond that, such as accusations that the Papacy is Satan's proxy and so on is not a sensible point to be making, it is simply rhetoric.
Last edited:
NONONONO. Mannequin was better. This is a FACT. I am going to sidestep any and all other questions and points you have raised here because the answers make me uncomfortable and counter with questions of my own which I do not want answered.
This is how a discussion forum works and God made it possible
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
That would be an ecumenical matter.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 113
None of what you have just written is true. Either you are using words that you do not understand or you're lying for religious-political reasons. Whichever is true (and it must be one or the other), your statements are false.
You are not using the scientific method. You're using pretty much the opposite of the scientific method.
There is no such thing as an evolutionist.
Biologists do not claim that evolution is random chance (quite the opposite, actually).
Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with the vast majority of "the universe and everything in it" and nobody who has any understanding of the subject claims that it does.
Cause and effect does not refute evolution. Your claim that it does is so bizarre that I don't even see what disinformation leads to that ludicrous claim. Evolution could be summed up as the effects of causes.
Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with the origin of life.
There is no such thing as the law of biogenesis. You've made it up and falsely claimed that it's a scientific law.
Absolutely everything you wrote in that post is false and much of it is the very opposite of the truth. That is also true for almost every part of every post of yours that I have seen in this thread.
EDIT: I've just realised something else that's so obvious that I initially overlooked it: your faith requires belief in abiogenesis. Your posts aren't just inconsistent with reality and inconsistent with rationality - they're also inconsistent with themselves. You believe, as a matter of faith, that there was some period of time in which there was no life and then there was life - abiogenesis. That's at the core of your faith. So you're now arguing that your own faith is false, that it cannot possibly be true because it is refuted by what you call the law of biogenesis. You probably didn't even know you were doing that. You don't know what any of the other words and concepts you use mean, so why would you know what abiogenesis means?
Last edited: