gospel according 2 patrick j miron

reccanboy · #**557** Oct 11, '08, 4:58 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailka

[list]

The Next verse by Our Lord is What You bind on earth is bound in heaven; what You loose on Earth is Loosed in Heaven Our Lord gave infallibility on Dogma to the Pope (Peter) and the Apostles of The Church He was establishing Then. The verses are Mathew 16:18 and 19. The Pope and the Magesterium (The Council of Thousands of Bishops) Decide what is Dogma From That authorization by the Lord himself, on anything inherently moral/spiritual. Few things become Dogma, but many are followed as if they were: Tradition. Only "Papal Bulls' are Inherent required Dogma, and decided and Signed as such by the Pope. Are not many Actual Infalllible Papal Bulls.

. Vivat Jesus. Tony

Comparing Matthew 16:19 with Matthew 18:18, Jesus seems to be speaking of when there is a brother sinning in the Church, or a scandal. The issue is to be taken up with the Church.

This also seems to be the interpretation given by the Church Fathers. I find no mention of an infallible Church.

**guanophore** · #**558** Oct 11, '08, 5:17 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4

The issue here is unity. Catholics continually claim to have unity while Protestants are in chaos.

Actually, I don't think this about the whole of Protestantism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4

If there are many different interpretations in the Catholic church then you don't really have unity but are in the same position as Protestants are.

Catholics who behave like Protesants are in the same boat. These are commonly called "cafeteria" catholics. Personally I think they are Protesant, and don't realize it. But the unity is not dependent upon the membership. The unity is in the doctrine. The Teachings of the Church are One, and they are the same over the whole world, in every language, and every culture.

The Catholic faith is not a matter of "personal interpretation", but a matter of receiving what was handed down by the Apostles.
I agree, not everyone receives it all, and to that extent, they are not in communion with the One Church, and her One Faith.

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4

How about you? Do you think you have synchronized completely?

The more I learn, the more I find there is more to learn. To be perfectly synchronized with the One Body is to be perfectly synchronized with the One Head, so no, I am no under any misperception that I have "arrived".

justasking4 · #**559** Oct 11, '08, 5:19 pm

Quote:

RobHom;4281065]
Originally Posted by justasking4
The issue here is unity. Catholics continually claim to have unity while Protestants are in chaos. If there are many different interpretations in the Catholic church then you don't really have unity but are in the same position as Protestants are.
But the difference is this, something you fail to grasp: The Roman Catholic Church has ONE set of teachings. So we are not in the same position as "Protestants" (noting herein that you used the word first )

I could say the same thing about Prostants. One is that the Bible that is the ultimate authority. This unites all Protestants. Is it not also true that even the teachings of the church itself has different interpretations among Catholics? Just look at how many catholics support abortion and those who do not.

Quote:

RobHom
The only possible semblance of unity that "some" protestants have is their common dislike and antagonism of the Catholic Church....and beyond that any possible "unity" is illusory at best.

This has not been my experience. Protestants don’t deal much with the catholic church at large rather what unites Protestant Christians are their faith in Christ i.e. He is God and died for their sins etc. There is quite a large and wide agreement on the fundamentals of the faith.

Quote:

If it were not so....why are there so many different "protestant religions/denominations/groups....etc"?

Many churches split off to form churches elsewhere. Many still share the same doctrines and practices.

Quote:

Yes, some Catholics have a slightly different interpretation of things...even scriptures even, however...we all have and know of the ground rule that makes the Church the final arbiter in those issues. Protestants have only themselves as aribters based on their own many millions of interpretations....according to their prevalent theological positions

.
The problem is that the church has not taken the role in many cases of being the final arbiter. Again go back to the abortion issue. There are still many catholics who support it and yet they are still catholics.

Quote:

Quote: justasking4
How about you? Do you think you have synchronized completely?

Quote:

RobHom
We Catholics have far more "unity" than you think. You just don't see it. You have the myopic tendency to always seek the lowest common denominator.....especially to try and use the individual person to define the Church. If we as Catholics used that identical premise as justification I could personally prove that just about every protestant on the planet was totally damned at birth, without any chance of salvation period.

And its all based on the actions of one or two people held up as examples of absolute and undeniable hypocrisy. Yep, damning all for the sins of one or two....and I'm not talking about Adam and Eve......

**guanophore** · #**560** Oct 11, '08, 5:20 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by reccanboy

Comparing Matthew 16:19 with Matthew 18:18, Jesus seems to be speaking of when there is a brother sinning in the Church, or a scandal. The issue is to be taken up with the Church.

This also seems to be the interpretation given by the Church Fathers. I find no mention of an infallible Church.

Most of the disputes are about doctrine, therefore, there must be an authoritative source to settle these doctrinal questions. What use would an authoritative source be if it were fallible in matters of Truth?

But, I agree, it is this passage together with several others that support our understanding of infallibility.

RobHom · #**561** Oct 11, '08, 5:43 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4

The issue here is unity. Catholics continually claim to have unity while Protestants are in chaos. If there are many different interpretations in the Catholic church then you don't really have unity but are in the same position as Protestants are.

I said:
But the difference is this, something you fail to grasp: The Roman Catholic Church has ONE set of teachings. So we are not in the same position as "Protestants" (noting herein that you used the word first )

Quote:

you have answered: justasking4
I could say the same thing about Prostants. One is that the Bible that is the ultimate authority. This unites all Protestants. Is it not also true that even the teachings of the church itself has different interpretations among Catholics? Just look at how many catholics support abortion and those who do not.

And if there was a grain of truth in what you say or imply, then abortion clinics and divorce lawyers would be bankrupt and out of business. Again you try to point the failures of individual Catholics to be the failures of the Church as a whole.

You have no ultimate "authority". You have only your opinions, and among "protestants" there are more opinions than fleas. I have never seen a societal group so at odds with itself. You people make us look like the iron bulwark of steadfastness!!

You people, aka "Protestants" do NOT believe in the Bible. You believe in your individual "BK, hold the pickles, can I have fries with that" theologies. It is your churches embracing gay marriage, looking the other way and even justifying divorces and doing so by saying there is no biblical prohibition to divorce. Some of you rail and rant about drinking liquor....but what and who do you find at the drive up window at the liquor store? Who are the "backsliders" that your preachers rail about all the time?
Why is that your preachers always have to preach to ones emotions to get them to accept God?

How many Protestants support abortion, even if not openly??? How many "elected officials" in Congress are not Catholic? The vast majority are "Protestant"....this being the case: Why is not abortion outlawed?? Hmmmmm?

Quote:

This has not been my experience. Protestants don’t deal much with the catholic church at large rather what unites Protestant Christians are their faith in Christ i.e. He is God and died for their sins etc. There is quite a large and wide agreement on the fundamentals of the faith.

I think you have lived a very sheltered provincial life.

Quote:

Many churches split off to form churches elsewhere. Many still share the same doctrines and practices.

If this was the case, what is the "excuse" for the split? Personality conflicts? No....severe doctrinal disputes and differences in "opinions". Were it otherwise.... there would not be the many thousands of different protestant religions/denominations/groups etc. There would be one or two.
.

Quote:

The problem is that the church has not taken the role in many cases of being the final arbiter. Again go back to the abortion issue. There are still many catholics who support it and yet they are still catholics.

You lack a great deal of understanding about how the Catholic Church works. We do not have "hit squads" dressed in black who go out and serve excommunication notices to individuals who do not do this or that. They automatically excommunicate themselves. If they continue to receive sacraments, then they are committing grave mortal sins.

How many of your brothers and sisters work in abortion clinics, doctors offices, pharmacies and hospitals where abortions are conducted or work where drugs (abortifactants) are dispensed?
How many of your brothers and sisters (protestants) do all the wrongs that you decry then go and sit piously in church and holler "Amen" when the preacher wants an Amen? How many blow their horns on the issue in social situations siding with which ever side they are talking to?

My "friend" you have a black and evil bent to you. You constantly attempt to place blame on others and attempt to judge all by the actions of the few. People who do this kind of erroneous action are not of Christ. To claim that one is, is to shame oneself. I take no delight in this subject or my rejoinder to you. But your threw the rock, so I am willing to return it. My one greatest failure as a Christian....is my unwillingness to repeatedly turn the other cheek.

Your line, theory and position are foul, and I address them as such.

PJM · #**562** Oct 11, '08, 6:30 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by reccanboy

Comparing Matthew 16:19 with Matthew 18:18, Jesus seems to be speaking of when there is a brother sinning in the Church, or a scandal. The issue is to be taken up with the Church.

I don't understand your position from my reading of Matthew, can you help me out?

This also seems to be the interpretation given by the Church Fathers. I find no mention of an infallible Church.

Reply:
My dear friend in Christ,

Can we agree that "words mean something?" Catholic means "Universal' thus her (THE RCC) takes the utmost care in selecting not only what she teaches, but also HOW, as in what words best articulate, the truth taught by God and handed on by her.

A most common understanding of the word is to be applied.

Jesus was a Jew, so because He spoke most often to the Jewish nation of His time, he utilized Jewish words, stories and expressions, inorder to be clearly understood. Agreed

In the O.T. time period Jewish cities were almost always "walled in and fortified." This is a historical fact.

The norm for these walled cities was to have a "main gate" which in point of fact, did have real a key.

I'm getting tired so I'll try to be brief. Please take note of the following (use the K.J. version if it'll make you more comfortable.)

13* Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do men say that the Son of man is?" 14* And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." 15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16* Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17* And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19* I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."[/COLOR
]Now note the following:

"I" singular

give "you Peter" ( a new name from God meaning ROCK in Greek, so He Jesus is speaking now, to only Peter.

Again "I" singular will build "MY church" also singular

I (Jesus) will give you (Peter) singular the "keys to the kingdom."

And the gates of hell shall not (God speaking to Peter) prevail againist it." How can this be, because God manifested in the Holy Spirit is the guarentor of this truth. God simply cannot lie, and a "Pope cannot error when teaching world wide, to the entire Church on matters of Faith and Morals."

Now back to the walled city, which represents the Kingdom of God in this instance.

Each city had a King, but the person who held "the key" held the real power. (Because this was the Kings desire.)

The key-holder was called the "Prime Minister" and it was he who make all the daily decissions, what could be done, what could not be done, who could do what, and who could't do this or that. Again this is historically proveable.

So what was the point of Jesus giving Peter the keys? To clearly indicate His Godly intent to give Peter the complete power (answering ONLY to the King) to run totally, independently and completely the Kings Kingdom (now meaning God's Kinkdon on earth: His Bride. His Church.)

Jesus is "the King" and Peter is the New Prime Minister.

The terms "binding and loosing" meant exactly that, and in point of fact are legeally binding rabbical terms of the time, for this very kind of power and administration.

Thus read "as infallible" that is a proper understanding of the term, "bind and loose" because ONLY the King could over rule the PM. So only Christ Himself can over-rule Peter and the Pontiffs.

Jesus is represented as the King: 'Hail King of the Jews." St. Peter is the New Priminister. I Jesus give you Peter the key's to My Kingdom. Can't be clearer than this.

So that explains clearly how Peter was placed in charge, of God's one church.

Because Christ died "for the many", we know that His church was not entended just for the short life of Peter alone. Common sense!

Because Christ (God's) Church was given the seven Sacraments ( and yes this is bibically founded) we understand this was because "all men are sinners", God's desires that "all-men" be saved." (There are more who are lost than saved.) He provides heavenly-Godly help in the form of the free gift of grace, and in His one Church, are the Sacramental graces par exellence: Holy Communion, the Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Glorified Body of Jesus, and the Sacrament of Known Forgiveness, "reconcillation." plus the other Sacraments.

So, it's late for me, so until next time.

May our loving God continue to shoer you with blessings,

Pat Miron
Marian Catecheist

What an awesome God we have! Amen!

justasking4 · #**563** Oct 11, '08, 6:31 pm

Quote:

RobHom;4281260]I said:
But the difference is this, something you fail to grasp: The Roman Catholic Church has ONE set of teachings. So we are not in the same position as "Protestants" (noting herein that you used the word first )

Many Protestant churches also have "ONE set of teachings" also.

Quote:

And if there was a grain of truth in what you say or imply, then abortion clinics and divorce lawyers would be bankrupt and out of business. Again you try to point the failures of individual Catholics to be the failures of the Church as a whole.

What i see you and others try to do is make it seem that the Catholic church is one unified whole. The reality is thats its not. It has just as much diversity as Protestant churches.

Quote:

You have no ultimate "authority". You have only your opinions, and among "protestants" there are more opinions than fleas. I have never seen a societal group so at odds with itself. You people make us look like the iron bulwark of steadfastness!!

What does your authority do for you? Think of interpetations of Scriptures. Your authority has essentially done nothing to give you "one set of interpretation" for a verses and passages of the Scriptures.

Quote:

You people, aka "Protestants" do NOT believe in the Bible. You believe in your individual "BK, hold the pickles, can I have fries with that" theologies. It is your churches embracing gay marriage, looking the other way and even justifying divorces and doing so by saying there is no biblical prohibition to divorce. Some of you rail and rant about drinking liquor....but what and who do you find at the drive up window at the liquor store? Who are the "backsliders" that your preachers rail about all the time?
Why is that your preachers always have to preach to ones emotions to get them to accept God?

No doubt there are diifferences of opinions and beliefs about these things among Christians. We also have many in our churches who claim to believe in Christ but in reality do not. This should be expected since there will always be "tares among the wheat".

Quote:

How many Protestants support abortion, even if not openly??? How many "elected officials" in Congress are not Catholic? The vast majority are "Protestant"....this being the case: Why is not abortion outlawed?? Hmmmmm?

Should we not expect this from protestantism since it is supposedly fragmented anyway?

Quote:

I think you have lived a very sheltered provincial life.

I think not. One can easily with the net access the core beliefs of churches and see what they believe.

Quote:

If this was the case, what is the "excuse" for the split? Personality conflicts? No....severe doctrinal disputes and differences in "opinions". Were it otherwise.... there would not be the many thousands of different protestant religions/denominations/groups etc. There would be one or two.

Most splits that i'm aware of are due to church growth.
.

Quote:

You lack a great deal of understanding about how the Catholic Church works. We do not have "hit squads" dressed in black who go out and serve excommunication notices to individuals who do not do this or that. They automatically excommunicate themselves. If they continue to receive sacraments, then they are committing grave mortal sins.

Has this happened to Catholic politians who support abortion?

Quote:

How many of your brothers and sisters work in abortion clinics, doctors offices, pharmacies and hospitals where abortions are conducted or work where drugs (abortifactants) are dispensed?
How many of your brothers and sisters (protestants) do all the wrongs that you decry then go and sit piously in church and holler "Amen" when the preacher wants an Amen? How many blow their horns on the issue in social situations siding with which ever side they are talking to?

i'm sure this happens for a number of reasons.

Quote:

My "friend" you have a black and evil bent to you.

Name: 4_15_7[1].gif
Views: 45
Size: 5.8 KB

Quote:

You constantly attempt to place blame on others and attempt to judge all by the actions of the few. People who do this kind of erroneous action are not of Christ. To claim that one is, is to shame oneself. I take no delight in this subject or my rejoinder to you. But your threw the rock, so I am willing to return it. My one greatest failure as a Christian....is my unwillingness to repeatedly turn the other cheek.

It seems you don't want to look at the problems in your church that claims to be led by the HS and to be unified. I don't blame but if we want the truth then these issues must be discussed.

Quote:

Your line, theory and position are foul, and I address them as such.

Sailka · #**564** Oct 11, '08, 11:32 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by reccanboy

Comparing Matthew 16:19 with Matthew 18:18, Jesus seems to be speaking of when there is a brother sinning in the Church, or a scandal. The issue is to be taken up with the Church.

This also seems to be the interpretation given by the Church Fathers. I find no mention of an infallible Church.

[list]

There are here 3 different types of Bind/Loose:

Mathew 16:18-19 is Obviously about THE Church of Our Lord He is establishing with Peter as the Rock: This is the verse establishing the Infallibility of Church basic Dogma, and that of the Pope. How can the Church be in error, or different than 'Heaven', God?

The Apostolic Power to Bind/Loose individual Sinners Is Given to the Apotles by the Resurected Lord in John 20:23.

Mathew 18:18 Is the Authority of the Church on declaring Heresies, excomunictions, etc.

The Church has not been known to err in any of the 3.

And please notice that it is the interpretation of The Lord in His Church on infallibility, forgiveness, not the Church interpretation.

Vivat Jesus

Tony

RobHom · #**565** Oct 12, '08, 12:01 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4

Many Protestant churches also have "ONE set of teachings" also.

Granted, but so many "ONE's" and all claim to be the only ONE.

Quote:

What i see you and others try to do is make it seem that the Catholic church is one unified whole. The reality is thats its not. It has just as much diversity as Protestant churches.

The "unity" is in the fact that the core teachings and dogmas of the Church are shared throughout the Church as being the same world-wide. The Church is unified in this fashion.

Quote:

What does your authority do for you? Think of interpetations of Scriptures. Your authority has essentially done nothing to give you "one set of interpretation" for a verses and passages of the Scriptures.

I have no "authority". The Church has the "authority" where interpretation of the scriptures are concerned. Maybe the Church has not interpreted each and every one of the passages, but in reality is that necessary? No, because much of the Bible does not require a Phd. to understand. Thus, with the exception of certain passages, its not necessary. But in the event that I have reason to, I have access to many learned men to give me the correct knowledge.

Quote:

No doubt there are diifferences of opinions and beliefs about these things among Christians. We also have many in our churches who claim to believe in Christ but in reality do not. This should be expected since there will always be "tares among the wheat".

Thank you for your honesty in this. I think that we have some people in our Church who may well fit that description. We certainly have lay people...often referred to as "cafeteria Catholics" who fit the description.

Quote:

Should we not expect this from protestantism since it is supposedly fragmented anyway?

Part of me says yes, and part of me says no. Let me explain, and my explanation comes from some bias in that I have encountered people who are so rabid and certain that they and they alone possess the truth as protestants, they almost want to make you think they walk on water. But on the other hand, I see those who are driven by other issues. I think that there is a great deal of confusion in the protestant world. Internecine warfare, albeit somewhat polite appears to be rife, though not widely reported.

Quote:

I think not. One can easily with the net access the core beliefs of churches and see what they believe.

Be that as it may...my observation was from a point of honesty in what I have seen and read from you.

Quote:

Most splits that i'm aware of are due to church growth.

And the ones that I know of are of engendered over personality issues and the different camps of people in the churches wanting to contain and control power within that church. This comes from friends....who have experienced it.

Quote:

Has this happened to Catholic politians who support abortion?

Yes, it is very clear doctrinally.

Quote:

i'm sure this happens for a number of reasons.

Possibly, but still, how would they justify it to God?

Quote:

Attachment 4310

Quote:

It seems you don't want to look at the problems in your church that claims to be led by the HS and to be unified. I don't blame but if we want the truth then these issues must be discussed.

I have absolutely no problem looking at the problems in our Church.... That problem has been and is continuing to be addressed. Being led by the Holy Spirit and being united is not corrupted or compromised by some sinners. What I have a problem with is having non-Catholics constantly and to the point of "repetitive redundancy" trying to use it as a weapon or justification for denunciation of all Catholics or the Church. No Church or society is immune from it. It is a horrible crime and the perpetrators need to be punished without any hesitancy whatsoever. You really don't want to know what I think the punishment should be...trust me on that. But, I rest in the knowledge that God has something in store for them....and its not good.

There is really nothing to be discussed, unless of course others are prepared to discuss equally the failures of their own ministers in this same vein.

Quote:

Not necessary if we agree to disagree and remain civil and unantagonistic...and respect each others rights....

Cinette · #**566** Oct 12, '08, 12:34 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by guanophore

It is very Catholic of you to say this!

No, it started while the NT was being written:

Acts 9:31
"the church throughout"

ἐκκλησία καθ᾿ ὅλης

Kath holos = Catholic = throughout the whole = universal

Don't believe that the NT was written by God in principal? Think it is the word of the first Apostles and Disciples?

Both.

2 Peter 1:21
"men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God"

What tradition or holy Words of The Church ever said that the NT was written for Catholics?

There were no others writing the NT, except Catholics. The whole contents of the NT was intended for use by the Church. It was the Church that Jesus sent to bring His gospel to the world.

Matt 28:18-20
"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

He did not say "give them writings which will be made in the next 50 years, and let them try to figure it out on their own."

The first recorded use of the term "the Catholic Church" was by Ignatius of Antioch towards the end of the first century in the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, chaps. 1-2, 6, 9, "......Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."

At the time it was not being used as a denominational label, since the Bishop's whole intent is to repudiate denominationalism. The word itself - catholic, or katholike in Greek - means universal, in the sense of "appearing everywhere" or "subsisting throughout the whole".

Again, I hope that our playful friend Justasking4 would take the time and make the effort to read FOUR WITNESSES by Rod Bennett. It is a pity that he appears to be playing and is not earnest in his "quest" for answers.

Cinette · #**567** Oct 12, '08, 2:21 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by guanophore

Actually, I don't think this about the whole of Protestantism.

Catholics who behave like Protesants are in the same boat. These are commonly called "cafeteria" catholics. Personally I think they are Protesant, and don't realize it. But the unity is not dependent upon the membership. The unity is in the doctrine. The Teachings of the Church are One, and they are the same over the whole world, in every language, and every culture.

The Catholic faith is not a matter of "personal interpretation", but a matter of receiving what was handed down by the Apostles.
I agree, not everyone receives it all, and to that extent, they are not in communion with the One Church, and her One Faith.

The more I learn, the more I find there is more to learn. To be perfectly synchronized with the One Body is to be perfectly synchronized with the One Head, so no, I am no under any misperception that I have "arrived".

Your response is spot on. It is unfortunate but true that there are cafeteria Catholics - they are those who have not received proper instruction in the Faith - they may also be cultural Catholics although some of those are staunch (but don't know why) - just to uphold the culture I suppose.

We have a wonderful Church and it is so exciting and one keeps discovering more and more. This is very reassuring - we know we can count on the Church to teach the truth always and never to compromise the truth. It is not easy.

Having lived as a young woman in the 60s and 70s I realise what a terrible thing it was to compromise. Today I believe with all my heart that the family is so very important. I believe there should be no sex before marriage - cohabiting is dangerous. If we can instruct our children to follow the precepts of the CC and really live the Faith I know that their happiness would be guaranteed. That doesn't mean perfection but definitely on the road to salvation.

Cinette · #**568** Oct 12, '08, 2:24 am

[quote=justasking4;4281419]Many Protestant churches also have "ONE set of teachings" also.

Yes, each of the 40 000 churches has one set of teachings - that adds up to 40 000 different interpretations!

Kay Cee · #**569** Oct 12, '08, 8:35 am

Well, once again JA4 has ignored my post (#532).

He claims he bases his idea that scripture is the sole rule of faith upon facts. Since that's his claim, he must know what these "facts" are.

I'm still waiting to see these "facts."

RobHom · #**570** Oct 12, '08, 8:44 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kay Cee

Well, once again JA4 has ignored my post (#532).

He claims he bases his idea that scripture is the sole rule of faith upon facts. Since that's his claim, he must know what these "facts" are.

I'm still waiting to see these "facts."

Might I suggest that you don't hold your breath waiting?

One of the pages in their "playbook" tells them to spew mountains of snippets of scripture, ad hominem attacks, self righteous holier than thou vilifying rants, but never, never answer a question. Further the "playbook" says only respond to a question with another question preferably of a diversionary or deflective nature.

For one such as him/her to state the use of "facts" is specious at best.

gospel according 2 patrick j miron

Friday, October 26, 2012

Stewie - Soothing Voice Return the Map

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

What kind of power is Jesus speaking of in John 20:23 regarding forgiven...

Friday, October 19, 2012

Sola Scriptura--biblical---? : Disabled Guy At Church