Are all Catholics lost?

[Esaias]

Dope snot...

lol!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Dope snot...

lol!

Ohoh. I do that SO MUCH!

lol

Fixed.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Jason B

Good grief, this is ridiculous.

sorry, i missed this. This is your opinion, but i can back mine up with Scripture, and you cannot. So there. If you have a Scriptural point to make Mr Badejo, then BAM do so, but please understand that i have had like a year of this partisan opinionizing already, and you have had a year to come up with something better than your groupthink opinion which defies Scripture without being aware of it. You are mocking me, without providing some Scriptural basis for your opinion. It is demonstrably not ridiculous, and i have provided many Scriptures to indicate so, sir. While you certainly are not compelled to my interpretation or understanding, it might be beneficial for you to at least pretend to some grasp of defamation from a Scriptural perspective.

[shazeep]

Also, forgiveness from a person is not secondary. In fact, Jesus distinctly said he will not forgive if we do not make it right with out brothers first. Even the Lord's prayer told us we cannot ask forgiveness if we don't give it to our brothers first.

which is why i mention that it is secondary, an afterthought, in your stated model.

But that does not save me.

I find no biblical precedent for saying any of these things you listed save me.

then by all means do not regard them as salvational--that is your right, and you have my permission to stick with "read some Paul, and viola"--but see that other people have a different interpretation, that may be justified with Scripture--or don't, it is irrelevant as far as i am concerned, and likely completely irrelevant anyway.

it serves me for you and Jason to be as obnoxious as you like, in the end, so justify "be offensive" however you like, and disregard do not offend to your heart's content.

The bible is full of absolute statements when it comes to salvation. And all other passages that you feel circumvent them, actually are vague "circumventions" as you yourself admit.

i admit no such thing, there is no circumventing Paul even, for that matter, and if you have got that opinion from anything i stated then let this stand as the correction. you are duplicitous and dishonest in your replies at best, and your obfuscation is evident in many posts at this point, so i feel no need to engage with you any longer, however i did equate the two ideas, which does not mean that any "circumventing" was going on which = your "circumvention" of the important points that i have reiterated in a vain attempt to give you an opportunity to explain yourself.

Now do you wanna try again @ "Golden Rule" and how to more completely represent the cross, or not. I don't care, and will not read them, but they will be included as anonymous replies in my dissertation on the matter, as will the first answers, being as how no other elder has seen fit to negate or correct them, and my repeated requests to your governing body yield remarkably similar gibberish--which is unkind, but they also tend to obfuscate or make jokes at the important questions, and i am noticing a pattern here.

i see that below this you have yet again devolved into preaching at me, yet you have not demonstrated that you even understand the cross, or agape, except from a legal, dead faith perspective, so ttfn. I will say that you do demonstrate an amazing obliviousness of your position in a discussion; although my patience is at an end with you, you once again desire to elevate yourself in whatever manner, rather than simply clarifying the points i am challenging you on, which obviously preclude you from lecturing me.

Fyi, i doubt you are going to find anyone who can retain their equanimity in the face of multiple offenses, "accidentally" dropping the pivotal statements in quotes, disregarding...well, you get the idea. Or, since i guess you don't, i have made them plain enough. Address them or don't. goodbye.

[mfblume]

shazeep I meant nothing against you. you totally misunderstood my post. more than any post I ever made before.

please don't respond to my posts in the future.

[mfblume]

when it comes to salvation and being kind, I see a pattern in the world held by many believers. the same pattern says you cannot love people if you think they're sinful. that's where the gay movement is standing. they say we hate them because we think they're sinful. they cannot conceive God's love that is unconditional. to the world, they can only love if no sin is present.

advice: use this as a witness tool of God's love.

that same error is seen in this issue of salvation and kindness. I don't have to believe I'm saved by the works of kindness in order for me to be kind.

to say one is obnoxious because one doesn't believe one is saved by being kind, is the world's way of thinking.

to believe one won't be kind and wants to be obnoxious because one says "kindness does not save," is ridiculous. the fact is we can lose salvation by breaking the golden rule, but the golden rule doesn't save us. already dealt with that.

[shazeep]

Guard your heart above all else, for it is the source of life.

Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.

Guard your heart above all else, for it determines the course of your life.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Also, forgiveness from a person is not secondary. In fact, Jesus distinctly said he will not forgive if we do not make it right with out brothers first. Even the Lord's prayer told us we cannot ask forgiveness if we don't give it to our brothers first.

which is why i mention that it is secondary, an afterthought, in your stated model.

But that does not save me.

I find no biblical precedent for saying any of these things you listed save me.

then by all means do not regard them as salvational--that is your right, and you have my permission to stick with "read some Paul, and viola"--but see that other people have a different interpretation, that may be justified with Scripture--or don't, it is irrelevant as far as i am concerned, and likely completely irrelevant anyway.

it serves me for you and Jason to be as obnoxious as you like, in the end, so justify "be offensive" however you like, and disregard do not offend to your heart's content.

The bible is full of absolute statements when it comes to salvation. And all other passages that you feel circumvent them, actually are vague "circumventions" as you yourself admit.

i admit no such thing, there is no circumventing Paul even, for that matter, and if you have got that opinion from anything i stated then let this stand as the correction. you are duplicitous and dishonest in your replies at best, and your obfuscation is evident in many posts at this point, so i feel no need to engage with you any longer, however i did equate the two ideas, which does not mean that any "circumventing" was going on which = your "circumvention" of the important points that i have reiterated in a vain attempt to give you an opportunity to explain yourself.

Now do you wanna try again @ "Golden Rule" and how to more completely represent the cross, or not. I don't care, and will not read them, but they will be included as anonymous replies in my dissertation on the matter, as will the first answers, being as how no other elder has seen fit to negate or correct them, and my repeated requests to your governing body yield remarkably similar gibberish--which is unkind, but they also tend to obfuscate or make jokes at the important questions, and i am noticing a pattern here.

i see that below this you have yet again devolved into preaching at me, yet you have not demonstrated that you even understand the cross, or agape, except from a legal, dead faith perspective, so ttfn. I will say that you do demonstrate an amazing obliviousness of your position in a discussion; although my patience is at an end with you, you once again desire to elevate yourself in whatever manner, rather than simply clarifying the points i am challenging you on, which obviously preclude you from lecturing me.

Fyi, i doubt you are going to find anyone who can retain their equanimity in the face of multiple offenses, "accidentally" dropping the pivotal statements in quotes, disregarding...well, you get the idea. Or, since i guess you don't, i have made them plain enough. Address them or don't. goodbye.

And of course, you cannot see how obnoxious and offensive you are to others. You sit as judge, condemning everyone who is "not on board with Shazeep".

Once again, you do the very thing you accuse others of.

Are you a frequent YouTube commenter?

lol

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And of course, you cannot see how obnoxious and offensive you are to others. You sit as judge, condemning everyone who is "not on board with Shazeep".

Once again, you do the very thing you accuse others of.

Are you a frequent YouTube commenter?

lol

It's getting bipolar. And an attack against persons

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by shazeep

it serves me for you and Jason to be as obnoxious as you like, in the end, so justify "be offensive" however you like, and disregard do not offend to your heart's content.

On what page of this thread did I become obnoxious? You didn't seem to have a problem with me until I disagreed with you.