1 John 4:8 God IS love.

[enoob57]

On ‎5‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 3:09 PM, Patrick Miron said:

Only the Catholic & Orthodox Churches HAVE Jesus alive and in Person: "Really, Truly and Substantially Present" in our churches and in Holy Communion testified to by FIVE different Catholic Authors of the New Testament; four of whom gave their lives as martyrs; {the 5th. John tried to  by was saved miraculously from being BOILED IN OIL}... So in a literal sense leaving the RCC is abandoning God.

The RCC is revealed error according to The Written Word...

[Patrick Miron]

9 hours ago, enoob57 said:

The RCC is revealed error according to The Written Word...

OK?

I'm a reasonable guy. Just HOW to you prove your theory?

1. Given that the Bible is a Catholic birthed book. It was Catholics who choose the 46 OT books Inspired by the Holy Spirit; and it is Catholics who authored the entire NT.

2. Because the Bible was fully authored by the end of the 1st Century {about 1,400 years before the Protestant Reformation}, it is logically clear that the bible is a Catholic Book assembled and authored for other Catholics

3. The Only Christians for about the first 1,000 years; were Catholic Christians

4. The Apostles were Catholics

I could go on but this is sufficient to disprove your theory. 

May God guide our paths,

God Bless you and THANKS,

Patrick

 

[Patrick Miron]

11 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

This is false.  He lives within us who are Christians, who are born again by the Spirit of God.  

Transubstantiation is a heresy.   Those who leave the RCC have left a Christ-less cult and have become authentic New Testament Christians.

Your first statement is conditional; and NOT a sure thing.

Your second statement is ignorant {meaning grossly uninformed. So I ASK YOU my friend: was Jesus wrong or is it the Bible that is wrong? {I'd REALLY like to know your answer.

I suspect that your only parroting others views here, and its not something you have bothered to research yourself. 

How then do you explain these?

John 6: 47-60 {which BTW are literal}

"

 [47] Amen, amen {often translated as "truly; truly"}  I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. [50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

[Douay Bible explanation:[54] "Eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood": To receive the body and blood of Christ, is a divine precept, insinuated in this text; which the faithful fulfil, though they receive but in one kind; because in one kind they receive both body and blood, which cannot be separated from each other. Hence, life eternal is here promised to the worthy receiving, though but in one kind. Ver. 52. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. Ver. 58. He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. Ver. 59. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.

[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. {Which is precisely & accurately what DOES take place in Catholic Holy Communion} [58] As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. [59] This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.

 Then your favorite Bible author Paul {WE LOVE him too} teaches this:

1 Cor. 11: 23-30 

 [23] For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. [24] And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. [25] In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

[26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. [29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. [30] Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. {"sleep" here means Eternal Damnation} 

Douay Bible explanations: [27] "Or drink": Here erroneous translators corrupted the text, by putting and drink (contrary to the original) instead of or drink.

[27] "Guilty of the body": not discerning the body. This demonstrates the real presence of the body and blood of Christ, even to the unworthy communicant; who otherwise could not be guilty of the body and blood of Christ, or justly condemned for not discerning the Lord's body.

[28] "Drink of the chalice": This is not said by way of command, but by way of allowance, viz., where and when it is agreeable to the practice and discipline of the church.

Now GOOGLE Eucharistic Miracles

Then my new friend, please tell ME is Jesus Lying or is the Bible in error?

May God guide our paths,

Patrick

 

 

 

[enoob57]

58 minutes ago, Patrick Miron said:

OK?

I'm a reasonable guy. Just HOW to you prove your theory?

1. Given that the Bible is a Catholic birthed book. It was Catholics who choose the 46 OT books Inspired by the Holy Spirit; and it is Catholics who authored the entire NT.

2. Because the Bible was fully authored by the end of the 1st Century {about 1,400 years before the Protestant Reformation}, it is logically clear that the bible is a Catholic Book assembled and authored for other Catholics

3. The Only Christians for about the first 1,000 years; were Catholic Christians

4. The Apostles were Catholics

I could go on but this is sufficient to disprove your theory. 

May God guide our paths,

God Bless you and THANKS,

Patrick

 

You've been shown numerous times and yet you remain in your error... your not even getting church history right! And no your not a reasonable guy or else you would reason with God in His Word and come to the true faith in Christ alone through faith in Him alone...

[Guest shiloh357]

58 minutes ago, Patrick Miron said:

Your first statement is conditional; and NOT a sure thing.

Salvation is not conditional.

Quote

 

Your second statement is ignorant {meaning grossly uninformed. So I ASK YOU my friend: was Jesus wrong or is it the Bible that is wrong? {I'd REALLY like to know your answer.

I suspect that your only parroting others views here, and its not something you have bothered to research yourself. 

How then do you explain these?

John 6: 47-60 {which BTW are literal}

 

 

Quote

 

 Then your favorite Bible author Paul {WE LOVE him too} teaches this:

1 Cor. 11: 23-30 

 

Those verses in John 6: 47-60 have nothing to do with communion.   They are a refutation of the Jewish theology of the Torah.   The Jews believed and still teach that the Torah is spiritual food and drink of the faithful Jewish person.  They use terms like "living water" and "the tree of life"  to characterize how they view the Torah.  They believe that partaking of the spiritual food of the Torah/Tanakh is the way to eternal life. 

Jesus refuted this when he offered them his body to eat and His blood to drink as the means of eternal life.  It wasn't cannibalism. It was something they understood readily.   Jesus by claiming to be the giver of eternal life by means eating of his flesh and drinking His blood was claiming to be greater than the Torah, and thus greater than Moses and was in fact claiming to be God as only God can offer eternal life.   That is why many of His disciples turned away from Him to follow Him no longer.

So that passage, since the audience is not comprised of Christians, did not occur at the last supper, has nothing to do with the Communion at all. 

Paul did not teach transubstantiation.  That is a false, pagan teaching that is really more about offering the body and blood of Jesus to the Father and that is simply heretical.

[Patrick Miron]

19 hours ago, Willa said:

 

Joh 6:53  WEB Jesus therefore said to them, “Most certainly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don’t have life in yourselves. Joh 6:54  He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. Joh 6:55  For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. Joh 6:56  He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me, and I in him.

Joh 6:60  Therefore many of his disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying! Who can listen to it?” Joh 6:61  But Jesus knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? Joh 6:62  Then what if you would see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

Joh 6:63  It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.

Jesus is saying that God's word produces life.   His flesh doesn't profit anything.  The Eucharist does nothing for you apart from God's word.  He dwells in the word, not in the elements.  

Your explanation of Hebrews is really poor exegesis.  It has nothing to do with falling away from the Catholic church.  It might have something to do with falling away from Christ.  The Catholic church is not Christ and has in fact fallen away from the teaching of the Bible; it corrupts its meaning to justify itself.

 

Thank you my new friend; a serious reply is always appreciated.

Permit me to add your education if I may:

1.    One cannot separate verse 63 from the other literal and exceeding clear teaching of Jesus the Christ

2.    From Haydock’s Bible commentary:

3.    Verse 55 :Christ, to confirm the notion his disciples had formed of a real eating of his body, and to remove all metaphorical interpretation of his words, immediately adds, "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. ... For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed;" which could not be so, if, as sectarists pretend, what he gives us in the blessed sacrament is noting but a bit of bread; and if a figure, certainly not so striking as the manna

4.    Verse 63: If then you shall see, &c. Christ, by mentioning his ascension, by this instance of his power and divinity, would confirm the truth of what he had before asserted; at the same time, correct their gross apprehension of eating his flesh and drinking his blood, in a vulgar and carnal manner, by letting them know he should take his whole body living with him to heaven; and consequently not suffer it to be, as they supposed, divided, mangled, and consumed upon earth. (Challoner) --- The sense of these words, according to the common exposition, is this: you murmur at my words, as hard and harsh, and you refuse now to believe them: when I shall ascend into heaven, from whence I came into the world, and when my ascension, and the doctrine that I have taught you, shall be confirmed by a multitude of miracles, then shall you and many others believe. (Witham)

 

5.    Verse 68:Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? He shews them, says St. John Chrysostom, that he stood not in need of them, and so leaves them to their free choice. (Witham) --- Jesus Christ remarking in the previous verse that the apostate disciples had left him, to walk no more with him, turning to the twelve, asks them, Will you also go away? The twelve had heard all that passed; they had seen the Jews strive amongst themselves, and the disciples murmur and leave their Master; they understood what he said in the same literal sense; it could, indeed, bear no other meaning; but when Jesus put the above question to them, leaving them to their free choice, whether to follow him, or to withdraw themselves, Simon Peter answered him: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life;" and therefore art able to make good thy words, however hard and difficult they may appear to others. --- We may here admire not only the excellency of their faith, but the plain, yet noble motive of their faith: they believe, because he is Christ, the Son of God, (or, as it is in the Greek, the Son of the living God) who is absolutely incapable of deceiving his creatures, and whose power is perfectly equal to perform the promises he here makes them.

6.   

---

Verse 69:Simon Peter, the chief or head of them, said in the name of the rest: Lord, to whom shall we go? It is only from thee that we hope for salvation. Thou hast the words of eternal life: we have believed, and known, and remain in this belief, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God. (Witham)

 

And this from: Catholic apologetics Site:

Ver. 64.—It is the spirit which quickeneth: the flesh, Arabic, the body, &c. The Calvinists bring forward against us these words of Christ to show that in the Eucharist there is not the Flesh of Christ really and corporeally, but only spiritually and figuratively by representation and faith, because, say they, the flesh profiteth nothing. But if this be true, then in vain was the Word made Flesh, then in vain did the Flesh of Christ suffer and was crucified, and died. God forbid. And who does not see that the Flesh of Christ is more profitable than the mere bread of Calvin, even though it were seasoned with sugar and honey out of Calvin’s throat? For in his bread there is no spirit, except the spirit of error and satanic madness.

First then SS. Cyril and Austin learnedly expound these words, thus: they are as if Christ said, “My Flesh alone profits not to preserve him who eats It unto life eternal, because it is not My mere Flesh which confers life and resurrection, but it is the Spirit, i.e., My Divinity united to the Flesh which quickens first the soul, and then the body at the Resurrection. And thus My Flesh profiteth very exceedingly, forasmuch as being united to the Spirit of the Word, it derives from It its quickening power.” By a similar form of speech we are wont to say, The eye doth not see, the ear doth not hear, nor the body feel, but it is the spirit i.e., the soul, which sees through the eye, and hears through the ear. Consequently, the words, i.e.,

the reality and the mystery of My Flesh to be eaten in the Eucharist, which I speak unto you are spirit and life. 

That is, My Deity, which is a pure Spirit, is a living and quickening Spirit. For It will give you life in the- Eucharist, not My bare Flesh. So S. Augustine says, “This Flesh alone profiteth not, but let the Spirit be joined to the Flesh, and It profiteth greatly.

 For if the Flesh profiteth nothing, the Word would not have become Flesh.” The same (lib. 10, de. Civit. Dei) says, “The Flesh of itself cleanseth not, but through the Word by which it hath been assumed.” And S. Cyril, “If the Flesh be understood alone, it is by no means able to quicken, forasmuch as it needs a Quickener, but because it is conjoined with the life-giving Word, the whole is made life-giving.

For the Word of God being joined to the corruptible nature does not lose Its virtue, but the Flesh itself is lifted up to the power of the higher nature. Therefore, although the nature of flesh as flesh cannot quicken; still it doth this because it hath received the whole operation of the Word.”

For Christ is here making answer to the Capharnaites murmuring as to how Christ’s Flesh being eaten could give eternal life. But He gave this answer because they had murmured still more concerning the eating the flesh of Christ, and the method of doing so, which they thought of as something carnal and barbarous, as is seen by verses 52 and 60, and 61. For it seems something savage and inhuman to tear like wolves, and devour the human flesh of Christ. Hence secondly,

More aptly and naturally, the flesh, i.e., the carnal understanding, by which in sooth ye suppose that My Flesh is to be visibly cut and eaten like the flesh of sheep, profits nothing for the bestowal of everlasting life: but the spirit and the spiritual intelligence, by which we believe that the Flesh of Christ united to His spiritual Divinity, i.e., in a sacramental manner, veiled and hidden in the Eucharist under the species of bread and wine, is to be eaten - this gives life to soul and body.

Wherefore Christ subjoins, the words which I speak, &c.: Spirit, i.e., are spiritual, and must be understood spiritually, i.e., Sacramentally, in the manner in which I have now explained, and not carnally, as ye Capharnaites, like butchers, understand them. So they are life, i.e., vital, and bestow life on him who heareth and eateth Me. There is a hebraism, by which the abstract is put for the concrete.

Thirdly, the fullest sense will be if we join both meanings previously given, and with Bede unite them into one, thus - The virtue of giving life which My Flesh eaten in the Eucharist possesses, is not derived so much from the flesh as from the Spirit of the Word which is living and life-giving.

 And consequently this eating of My Flesh is not to be taken in the carnal manner of butchers, but in a spiritual manner, and accommodated to the spirit, that is to say in a hidden and sacramental manner.

My friend; Catholic Holy Communion is the now GLORIFIED Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. Are We to assume that GOD cannot do this?

 

To attempt to defeat ALL of John 6; 1^st. Cor 11:23-30; Mt. 26: 26-28; Mk. 14:22-24; Lk. 22: 19-20 {THAT FIVE DIFFERENT AUTHORS OF THE NT ..ALL CATHOLICS BY THE WAY}

 

So do you really presume to rewrite the Bibles God spoken; Holy Spirit Inspired; evidenced by the martyrdom of 4 of the 5 {they tried to boil John by GOD interceded teaching, further evidenced by many Eucharistic MIRACLES {GOOGLE IT}

 

Further the Bible {a Catholic Birthed book by Catholics and assembled and authored at that time; exclusively FOR Catholics} can only be correctly translated by the Magisterium of the RCC. {Mt. 16: 18-19; John 17: 17-20; Mt 28:19-20; Eph. 4:5; Eph 2:20 for examples.   … John 17:19; Rightly understood means that Jesus {GOD} Himself is the warranty of the RCC teaching ONLY His Truths on all matters of Faith and Morals: [19] “And for THEM do I sanctify myself, that THEY  also may be sanctified in {my}  truth.”

 

2 Peter 1: [16] For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. [17] For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased," [18] we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. [19] And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. [20] First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, [21] because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

Douay Bible explanation 20 "No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation"... This shews plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Some may tell us, that many of our divines interpret the scriptures: they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise

 

aS As for Hebrews 6 which you think I mistranslate; My friend, I would point out these facts for you to prove to be false:

 

1 The Bible is a Catholic Birthed Book

2 The Bible’s OT; all 46 books were chosen my Catholic Fathers Inspired by the HS {2 Tm 3:16-17}; and the Bibles NT; 27 books, was fully authored by men known today to be Catholics

3 The Bibles Canon, still in place today was affirmed in the late 4th Century; still about 1,000 years prior to the Reformation.

4 the Apostles are ALL Catholics

5 hence it is grammatically, historically and factually correct to claim that the Bible was by the Holy Spirits original intent; BY catholics and exclusively for Catholics

6 It seems inconceivable that the Early Fathers {Catholics ALL} would have foreseen the Great Easter Schism of 1054 AD; or the 16^th Century Protestant Revolution.

7 Logic would also then affirm that the men who put the Bible together; would quite naturally be the ONLY ones able to fully and correctly translate it.

 

So now my friend I will share with you a Bible commentarie on Hebrew 6:

 

Haydock’s Bible commentary:

“Verse 1-2 
Wherefore leaving the word, &c. This is to be taken as connected with what he had said in the last chapter, (ver. 12.) of the elements, or rudiments of Christian faith, concerning which, though some seemed not sufficiently instructed, yet he thinks it here enough to name them, and pass them over: to wit, 1. Penance, or the dispositions of a sincere repentance. 2. Faith,when they are come to the years of being instructed. 3. The doctrine of baptisms, which he expresseth in the plural number, either because all the faithful must be baptized once, if we speak of Christian baptism; or he means that persons ought to know they cannot receive Christ's baptism over again. Or, in fine, he means that the baptisms of the Jews, which they so frequently repeated, could not make them justified. 4. The doctrine of imposition of hands, by which is commonly expounded that which is given in the sacrament of confirmation. 5. Of the resurrection of the dead. 6. Of the judgment, by which God would judge all mankind. Of these things he supposeth them already instructed. (Witham) --- We see here the order in which the apostles taught the Christian doctrine to the catechumens: 1. They excited them to sorrow for their sins. 2. They required of them acts of faith in God and his Son Jesus Christ. 3. They explained the nature of Christ's baptism, its virtue, and difference from the baptism of [John] the Baptist and others. 4. After baptism, they laid their hands on them, that they might receive the strengthening grace of the Holy Ghost in confirmation; and finally, they excited them to perseverance, by the hope of a glorious resurrection, and of eternal life, and by setting before their eyes eternal damnation as the consequence of apostacy.”

“Your explanation of Hebrews is really poor exegesis.  It has nothing to do with falling away from the Catholic church.  It might have something to do with falling away from Christ.  The Catholic church is not Christ and has in fact fallen away from the teaching of the Bible; it corrupts its meaning to justify itself.”

REALLY?

 I’ll break it down for you:

Hebrews 6: [4] For it is impossible for those who were once illuminated,{SACRAMENTASLLY BAPTIZED] have tasted also the heavenly gift,[CATHOLIC HOLY COMMUNION:JESUS HIMSELF}and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, [SACRAMENTALLY CONFIRMED; WHICH BTW CREATES A PERSONAL COVENANT OBLIGATION} [5] Have moreover tasted the good word of God, [HAVE BEEN RIGHTLY TAUGHT WHAT THE BIBLE TEACHES AND MEANS}  and the powers of the world to come,

DOUAY Bible explanations: [1] "The word of the beginning": The first rudiments of the Christian doctrine.

[4] "It is impossible": The meaning is, that it is impossible for such as have fallen after baptism, to be again baptized; and very hard for such as have apostatized from the faith, after having received many graces, to return again to the happy state from which they fell.

[6] And are fallen away:[ HAVE IGNORANC E & AUDUSITY TO LITERALLY ABANON GOD IN JESUS THE CHRIST] to be renewed again to penance, crucifying again to themselves the Son of God, and making him a mockery. [7] For the earth that drinketh in the rain which cometh often upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is tilled, receiveth blessing from God. [8] But that which bringeth forth thorns and briers, is reprobate, and very near unto a curse, whose end is to be burnt.    {WITHOUT REPENTANCE AND RECONVERSION THESE SOULS SELF CONDEM THEMSELVES TO ETERNAL HELL.

How can one be assured of this reality? May I humbly suggest you read number  1 through 7 above.

I TRULY appreciate your taking the time to communicate your thoughts with me; however they are not able to be supported by evidence; hence they are subjective while my reply is evidenced making it objective reality.

May God Guide our paths,

Patrick

[Patrick Miron]

56 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

You've been shown numerous times and yet you remain in your error... your not even getting church history right! And no your not a reasonable guy or else you would reason with God in His Word and come to the true faith in Christ alone through faith in Him alone...

Ooooh my,

Would YOU be so kind as to

1. Be specific

2. Evidence your claims

So that I might objectively respond to your charges?

God Bless you,

 

Patrick

 

 

[Guest shiloh357]

3 hours ago, Patrick Miron said:

 

HOW is THAT not about Holy Communion my friend?

 

Taking communion doesn't give us eternal life.   Communion is only commanded to those who are already saved and already have eternal life and it is only a remembrance of what Jesus did on the cross.  It is not a means of gaining eternal life. 

Jesus, in John 6 :47-60 is talking to Jews.   He is not talking to Christians.   He is not at all talking about taking communion.   You are trying pencil something into the Bible that isn't there.    Jesus is talking metaphorically about his body and blood as the means to eternal life.

The heresy of the RCC is that the wafer and wine turn into the literal body and blood of Jesus and that is simply not a biblical teaching.  And I live only by the Bible and its teachings.  

[Patrick Miron]

18 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

Taking communion doesn't give us eternal life.   Communion is only commanded to those who are already saved and already have eternal life and it is only a remembrance of what Jesus did on the cross.  It is not a means of gaining eternal life. 

Jesus, in John 6 :47-60 is talking to Jews.   He is not talking to Christians.   He is not at all talking about taking communion.   You are trying pencil something into the Bible that isn't there.    Jesus is talking metaphorically about his body and blood as the means to eternal life.

The heresy of the RCC is that the wafer and wine turn into the literal body and blood of Jesus and that is simply not a biblical teaching.  And I live only by the Bible and its teachings.  

My new friend,

I am NOT in the conversions business; THAT is between you and our God.

Shalom and sincere thanks for taking time to dialog

May GOD guide our life paths,

Patrick

 

 

 

[Patrick Miron]

21 hours ago, Yowm said:

I never left the RCC so I guess I am exempt. I never went to Church my first 25 years growing up, yet Jesus delivered me from drugs, the occult, gambling and other sordid affairs. Yet where I grew up, there were Roman Catholic Churches galore along with the attendees who would go to midnight Mass only to come home and get smashed, or witness their child getting shot up in gang warfare by other 'Catholic' kids. These people were taught nothing, had no concept of being born again and at that time was discouraged to read the Bible (pre-Vatican II), what's up with that? 

 Only they have Jesus 'alive and in Person'?? Is this why pedophilia runs rampant in the RCC? Go clean your own house before spewing your rubbish doctrine here. I've seen too much destruction left in the wake of RCCs teachings.

Our God is truly amazing!

Friend, I don't believe that I ever stated that Salvation is for Catholics only {despite the FACT that it is the One True Faith and Church Jesus desired}

You are so Blessed in what Christ did for you; now perhaps you can work on the REST OD THE STORY?

John.13

1. [34] A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

1John.2

1. [7] Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment which you had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard. [8] Yet I am writing you a new commandment, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.

2John.1

1. [5] And now I beg you, lady, not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning, that we love one another

We are to strive to LOVE one another; judge not least you ALSO be judged.

Shalom!

May our God guide our Life paths,

Patrcik