Dies Irae said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Faithful Ag said:

---

John 6

53 Jesus said to them, "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever." 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Many Disciples Desert Jesus

60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, "This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?"

61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, "Does this offend you? 62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! 63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to youthey are full of the Spirit[e] and life. 64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65 He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

67 "You do not want to leave too, do you?" Jesus asked the Twelve.

68 Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God."

---

What does that have to do with the "Father" moniker?

---

Nothing, merely that Protestants are the ones listen in verse 60.

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

This argument reminds me of Sheemish vs Chubu,
so much unnecessary stress.

---

Quote:

---

It actually took me a few years to go through this process because it was so ingrained in me by the SBC that Catholic doctrine wasn't scriptural. Ironically, i found many more holes in the Protestant take on Sola Scriptura

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

Faithful Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

"Defending Catholic dogma is an impossible task."

What's consistent about Catholic doctrine is how it replaces God and Jesus with other figures.

It is a worldly system that is embraced and loved by said world. That should be cause to reconsider but it's difficult, if not impossible, for Catholics to replace Catholic doctrines with the doctrines of Christ.

May God bless you all.

---

M1Buckeye - Are you interested in an actual discussion on Real Catholic doctrine & practice - or do you just want to continue to lob your attacks at the Catholic Church based on your misguided understanding and flawed interpretations? Serious question.

Your posting history has a very strong anti-Catholic bent and lacks any real attempt to engage when posters provide substantive responses. You construct straw-man arguments by misrepresenting what the Catholic Church teaches and/or drop proof-texts with only YOUR personal interpretation being worth consideration (despite evidence to the contrary seen clearly throughout church history and demonstrated scripturally and by the Apostles themselves).

You completely dismiss any discussion that goes against your preconceived ideas and you offer little to nothing to engage any poster who challenges your views (even when the poster is not Catholic).

You offer nothing to defend your attacks on the Catholic Church aside from telling us we are wrong and are misguided. If you are going to make claims and go on the attack you need to support your claims and engage the discussion.

---

I've given scriptural support, which Catholics reject. So be it.

---

Its not rejection of scripture but rather the interpretation of it. Catholic doctrine, first and foremost cannot contradict scripture.

---

Saying Catholic doctrine cannot contradict scripture is a non starter for anyone not catholic. If I actually believed that the catholic church was infallible I'd already be Catholic.

It's a pointless argument.

---

Well...that's actually not completely true. I was a protestant who was told all sorts of things about Catholic teachings contradicting scripture...until I actually looked at scripture and Church teachings in the full context...and then joined the Catholic Church. It actually took me a few years to go through this process because it was so ingrained in me by the SBC that Catholic doctrine wasn't scriptural. Ironically, i found many more holes in the Protestant take on Sola Scriptura. So the argument ended up not being pointless for me...or many others that have gone from being protestant to Catholic.

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

Faithful Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

"Defending Catholic dogma is an impossible task."

What's consistent about Catholic doctrine is how it replaces God and Jesus with other figures.

It is a worldly system that is embraced and loved by said world. That should be cause to reconsider but it's difficult, if not impossible, for Catholics to replace Catholic doctrines with the doctrines of Christ.

May God bless you all.

---

M1Buckeye - Are you interested in an actual discussion on Real Catholic doctrine & practice - or do you just want to continue to lob your attacks at the Catholic Church based on your misguided understanding and flawed interpretations? Serious question.

Your posting history has a very strong anti-Catholic bent and lacks any real attempt to engage when posters provide substantive responses. You construct straw-man arguments by misrepresenting what the Catholic Church teaches and/or drop proof-texts with only YOUR personal interpretation being worth consideration (despite evidence to the contrary seen clearly throughout church history and demonstrated scripturally and by the Apostles themselves).

You completely dismiss any discussion that goes against your preconceived ideas and you offer little to nothing to engage any poster who challenges your views (even when the poster is not Catholic).

You offer nothing to defend your attacks on the Catholic Church aside from telling us we are wrong and are misguided. If you are going to make claims and go on the attack you need to support your claims and engage the discussion.

---

I've given scriptural support, which Catholics reject. So be it.

---

Its not rejection of scripture but rather the interpretation of it. Catholic doctrine, first and foremost cannot contradict scripture.

---

Saying Catholic doctrine cannot contradict scripture is a non starter for anyone not catholic. If I actually believed that the catholic church was infallible I'd already be Catholic.

It's a pointless argument.

---

Well...that's actually not completely true. I was a protestant who was told all sorts of things about Catholic teachings contradicting scripture...until I actually looked at scripture and Church teachings in the full context...and then joined the Catholic Church. It actually took me a few years to go through this process because it was so ingrained in me by the SBC that Catholic doctrine wasn't scriptural. Ironically, i found many more holes in the Protestant take on Sola Scriptura. So the argument ended up not being pointless for me...or many others that have gone from being protestant to Catholic.

---