Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by blackbird

  1. 44 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

    Two things, first Jesus said, Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved. 

    Second, James is clear we are not saved by faith alone. 

    BTW not a single one of those verses says faith alone. AGAIN you confuse volume with accuracy. 

    You must be totally blind or willfully so.

    Any thinking person would understand one doesn't need to use the exact words "faith alone" to have the same meaning.  The countless verses I quoted say repeatedly that it is by believing or faith or similar thoughts.  It is being dishonest to deny that and claim they must say the words "faith alone" when the verses clearly demonstrate salvation is by faith.

    Again you cherry pick one or two verses and misinterpret them in a way that contradicts countless other verses that say salvation is by faith.  You still haven't learned the basic principle that the Bible must be interpreted in a way that does not contradict itself.

  2. 20 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

    I've been through this with you already.

    I doubt very much that you read the information.  You blindly believe what you've been told by the RCC and won't even read any other information explaining clearly that Jesus often spoke figuratively.   He was obviously speaking figuratively when he spoke about eating his flesh and blood.

    First of all it is cannibalism to interpret it literally.  Cannibalism is forbidden in the Bible.

    Secondly it is irrational to believe priests have the power to change bread and wine into Jesus' flesh and blood, like some kind of magicians.  Where does the Bible give priests such power?  It doesn't.

    When Jesus said those words, he was sitting right there in his flesh and blood.  The elements were not literally changed into his flesh and blood.  

    The Catholic church admits the elements still appear as bread and wine.  That is because they are bread and wine.  They obviously are not changed.  It is nonsense to believe they are changed in a million places in the world.  Why would God do that?  It is nonsense in the extreme.

    When Jesus spoke figuratively he had a meaning for his words.  If Jesus is not physically in the elements and he is not, then you are committing the sin of idolatry by worshiping the elements as if God is in them.  Clearly that is what the priests and people are doing.  They are worshiping the elements because they think Jesus is in them.  Priests carry them in their special container and hold it up as if they are carrying God in their hands, which is false. That is idolatry.  That has nothing to do with worshiping Jesus because he is not in the elements.

    Again, Jesus spoke repeatedly in figurative language.  So what justifies cherry picking one verse and claiming it is literal when it contradicts all reason?

  3. quote

    We believe that the real meaning of Christ’s words can be seen when they are compared with similar figurative language which He used in John 4:13-14. There, speaking to the woman at Jacob’s well, He said: “Every one that drinketh this water shall thirst again; but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall become in him a well of water springing up unto eternal life.”

    On other occasions He used similar language. He said, “I am the door” (John 10:7), but of course He did not mean that He was a literal wooden door with lock and hinges. He said, “I am the vine” (John 15:5), but no one understood Him to mean that He was a grapevine. When He said, “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:14), He did not mean that He was actually a shepherd. When He said, “Ye must be born again,” (John 3:7), He referred not to a physical birth but to a spiritual birth. When He said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19), he meant His body, not the structure of wood and stone. When He said, “He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life” (John 6:54), He was speaking of a spiritual relationship between Himself and His people in terms of the Old Testament type, that is, eating the Passover lamb and drinking the Passover wine; but His Jewish hearers, being literalists, as are the Roman Catholics, misunderstood His words. He said, “Ye are the salt of the earth” (Matthew 5:13), and “Ye are the light of the world” (Matthew 5:14). He spoke of “the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matthew 16:6). James said, “The tongue is a fire” (3:6); and again, “Ye are a vapor that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away” (4:14). Moses spoke of “the bread of affliction” (Deuteronomy 16:3), and Isaiah spoke of “the bread of adversity and the water of affliction” (30:20). None of these statements is true if taken literally. The disciples had no trouble understanding Jesus’ figures of speech. Similarly, the expressions, “This is my body,” and “This is my blood,” are clear enough for all except those who will not see, or those who merely follow medieval theologians. It is unreasonable in the extreme to take these two expressions literally while taking the others figuratively.

    The actual eating of human flesh and blood is repulsive, abhorrent to all right minded people, and it was especially so to the Jews. Such practice is contrary to Scripture and to common sense. “And whatsoever man there be... that eateth any manner of blood, I will set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people,” was the word of God through Moses (Leviticus 17:10); “Ye shall not eat the blood” (Deuteronomy 12:16); etc. In Jewish law a stem penalty was enacted against eating blood. In Peter’s vision (Acts 10) when he was told to arise, kill and eat, he promptly protested that he had never eaten anything unclean. A little later the Jerusalem Council, legislating for the Christian dispensation, ratified a provision against the eating of blood: “...that ye abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood” (Acts 15:29). It is impossible to believe that when the apostles thus set forth the law of God they were themselves partakers, not merely of animal blood, but of human blood—as they would have been if in the Lord’s Supper they regularly ate the literal flesh and blood of Christ.

    The Roman Church acknowledges that in the mass there is no visible change in the bread and wine, that they continue to have the same properties: the same taste, color, smell, weight, and dimensions. It should be sufficient to refute this doctrine to point out that it involves an impossibility. It is impossible that the attributes or sensible properties of bread and wine should remain if the substance has been changed. It is self-evident that if the attributes of flesh and blood are not there, the actual flesh and blood are not there. When Jesus changed the water into wine at Cana of Galilee, there was no question but that it was wine. It had the properties of wine. But since the bread and wine in the eucharist do not have the attributes of flesh and blood, it is absurd to say that any such change has taken place. That which contradicts our reason must be pronounced irrational. Yet the adherents of Rome, under threat of eternal condemnation, are forced to believe what their church tells them, even though it contradicts their senses. The effect cannot be other than detrimental when men are forced to accept as true that which they know to be false. Says Henry M. Woods:

    “If men think at all, they know that what the papal church requires them to believe in the eucharist, under penalty of an eternal curse, is a monstrous untruth. They know they are eating bread, not human flesh: and they know that no human priest can offer a real atoning sacrifice for sin” (Our Priceless Heritage , p. 107).

    When the Roman priest consecrates the wafer it is then called the “host,” and they worship it as God. But if the doctrine of transubstantiation is false, then the “host” is no more the body of Christ than is any other piece of bread. And if the soul and divinity of Christ are not present, then the worship of it is sheer idolatry, of the same kind as that of pagan tribes who worship fetishes.    unquote

    So you should understand you are being forced to believe what the Roman catechism and church says about the bread and wine, not what the Bible says.  It is obviously figurative, not literal.

    Also read Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews.  It is clear Jesus' sacrifice was a one time event, never to be repeated.  The whole claim that priests are re-enacting the sacrifice of Jesus is therefore completely false.  Nowhere does the Scripture give priests the power to re-enact the sacrifice of Jesus.

  4. On 2/15/2024 at 1:47 PM, Yakuda said:

    Jesus tells me everything I need to know. You should of try it some time. Jesus said whoever believes and is baptized will be saved. Is he right or do you and Luther know better? 

    You claim you have the correct interpretation of Jesus' words but you take his words on the bread and wine literally when it clearly is not meant to be taken literally.  This article explains why it cannot be meant literal.  Jesus often spoke figuratively.


    This doctrine of the mass, of course, is based on the assumption that the words of Christ, “This is my body,” and “This is my blood” (Matthew 6:26-28), must be taken literally. The accounts of the institution of the Lord’s Supper, both in the Gospels and in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, make it perfectly clear that He spoke in figurative terms. Jesus aid, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood” (Luke 22:20). And Paul quotes Jesus as saying: “This is the new covenant in my blood. ... or as oft as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Corinthians 11:25-26). In these words He used a double figure of speech. The cup is put for the wine, and the wine is called the new covenant. The cup was not literally the new covenant, although it is declared to be so as definitely as the bread is declared to be His body. They did not literally drink the cup, nor did they literally drink the new covenant. How ridiculous to say that they did! Nor was the bread literally His body, or the wine His blood. After giving the wine to the disciples Jesus said, “I shall not drink from henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come” (Luke 22:18). So the wine, even as He gave it to them, and after He had given it to hem, remained “the fruit of the vine”! Paul too says that the bread remains bread: “Wherefore whosoever shall eat the bread and drink the pup of the Lord in an unworthy manner. ... But let each man prove himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup” (1 Corinthians 1:27-28). No change had taken place in the elements. This was after the prayer of consecration, when the Church of Rome supposes the change took place, and Jesus and Paul both declare that the elements still are bread and wine.

    Another and more important proof that the bread and wine are not changed into the literal and actual flesh and blood of Christ is this: the literal interpretation makes the sacrament a form of cannibalism. For that is precisely what cannibalism is—the eating of human flesh. Rome attempts to deny this, but not with much logic. Clearly there is a contradiction in the Romanist explanation somewhere.

    Indeed, how can Christ’s words, “This is my body,” and, “This is my blood,” be taken in a literal sense? At the time those words were spoken, the bread and wine were on the table before Him, and in His body He was sitting at the table a living man. The crucifixion had not taken place. They ate the Lord’s Supper before the crucifixion took place. Furthermore, we do not, and cannot memorialize someone who is present, as the Romanists say Christ is present in the mass. But in the future, in His absence, these things would symbolize His broken body and shed blood. They would then call to mind His sacrifice, and would then be taken in remembrance” of Him (1 Corinthians 11:25).

    Jesus’ words, “This do in remembrance of me,” show that the Lord’s Supper was not some kind of magical operation, but primarily a memorial, instituted to call Christians throughout the ages to remember the wondrous cross of the crucified Lord and all its marvelous benefits and lessons for us. A memorial does not present the reality, in this case His true body and blood, but something quite different, which serves only as a reminder of the real thing.

    We often show a friend a photograph and say, “This is my wife”; “This is my son”; “This is my daughter.” Such language is readily understood in ordinary conversation. Nobody takes such words literally. The Bible is written in the language of the common people. Hence it is perfectly obvious to any observant reader that the Lord’s Supper was intended primarily as a simple memorial feast, in no sense a literal reincarnation of Christ.  unquote

    Roman Catholicism : Loraine Boettner : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

  5. 3 hours ago, Yakuda said:

    All you offer is rejection of Jesus. 

    No where does scripture teach sola scriptura. It's a protestant invention. No where does scripture say what books should be in scripture. You don't even follow your own inventions. You're as confused as Luther Calvin and Zwingli

    Here are over a hundred verses showing salvation is by faith alone.


    The Bible is clear that salvation is by faith alone in Jesus Christ!

    Genesis 15:6: “And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.”

    Habakkuk 2:4: “Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.”

    Mark 1:15: “And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”

    Mark 16:16: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”

    Luke 8:12: “Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.”

    Luke 7:50: “And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.”

    Luke 8:12: “Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.”

    John 1:12: “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:”

    John 3:(14,)15: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.“

    John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

    John 3:18: “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

    John 3:36: “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

    John 5:24: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”

    John 6:35: “And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.”

    John 6:40: “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. “

    John 6:47: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.”

    John 7:38: “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.”

    John 8:24: “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”

    John 11:25: “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:”

    John 11:26: “And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?”

    John 12:46: “I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.”

    John 16:27: “For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.”

    John 20:31: “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”

    Acts 2:21: “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

    Acts 5:14: “And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.)”

    Acts 8:12: “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.”

    Acts 8:13: “Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.”

    Acts 8:37 (8:35-38): “Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.”

    Acts 10:43: “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”

    Acts 11:17,18: “Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”

    Acts 11:21: “And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.”

    Acts 13:39: “And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”

    Acts 13:48: “And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”

    Acts 15:7-9: “And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.”

    Acts 16:31: “And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”

    Acts 18:8: “And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.”

    Acts 22:16: “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

    Acts 26:18: “To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”

    Romans 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.”

    Romans 1:17: “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.”

    Romans 3:22a: “Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe:”

    Romans 3:25: “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;”

    Romans 3:26: “To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”

    Romans 3:28: “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”

    Romans 3:30: “Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.”

    Romans 4:3: “For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”

    Romans 4:5: “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

    Romans 4:9: “Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.”

    Romans 4:11: “And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:”

    Romans 4:13: “For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.”

    Romans 4:16,17: “Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.”

    Romans 4:18-22: “Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb: he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.”

    Romans 5:1: “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:”

    Romans 5:2: “By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.”

    Romans 4:20-25: “He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.”

    Romans 9:30: “What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.”

    Romans 9:32,33: “Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; as it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.”

    Romans 10:4: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

    Romans 10:6a: “But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise…”

    Romans 10:9: “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

    Romans 10:10: “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”

    Romans 10:11: “For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.”

    Romans 10:13: “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

    Romans 10:14-17: “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”

    Romans 11:20: “Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:”

    1 Corinthians 1:21: “For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.”

    1 Corinthians 15:2: “By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.”

    1 Corinthians 15:17: “And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.”

    2 Corinthians 4:4: “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”

    2 Corinthians 6:14: “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

    2 Corinthians 6:15: “And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?”

    Galatians 2:16: “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

    Galatians 2:20: “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.”

    Galatians 3:6,7: “Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.”

    Galatians 3:8: “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.”

    Galatians 3:11: “But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.”

    Galatians 3:14: “That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

    Galatians 3:22: “But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.”

    Galatians 3:24: “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”

    Galatians 3:26: “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.”

    Galatians 5:5: “For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.”

    Ephesians 1:13: “In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,”

    Ephesians 1:19: “And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,”

    Ephesians 2:8,9: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”

    Philippians 3:9: “And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:”

    Colossians 1:4,5: “Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, for the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, wherefore ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;”

    Colossians 2:12: “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.”

    1 Thessalonians 2:13: “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”

    2 Thessalonians 1:10: “When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.”

    2 Thessalonians 2:12: “That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

    1 Timothy 1:16: “Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.”

    1 Timothy 4:10: “For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.”

    2 Timothy 3:15: “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

    Hebrews 3:18: “And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?”

    Hebrews 4:2: “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.”

    Hebrews 4:3a: “For we which have believed do enter into rest…”

    Hebrews 11:7: “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.”

    Hebrews 11:31: “By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.”

    Hebrews 10:38: “Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.”

    Hebrews 10:39: “But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.”

    Hebrews 11:6: “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”

    James 2:5: “Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?”

    James 2:23: “And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.”

    1 Peter 1:5: “Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.”

    1 Peter 1:9: “Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.”

    1 Peter 1:18-21: “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.”1 Peter 2:6: “Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.”

    1 Peter 2:7: “Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,”

    1 John 5:1a: “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God…”

    1 John 5:4: “For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.”

    1 John 5:5: “Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?”

    1 John 5:10: “He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.”

    1 John 5:13: “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.”   unquote

    100+ Bible Verses On Salvation By Faith Alone | New Covenant Baptist Church - Spokane, WA

  6. Just now, Yakuda said:

    You follow one of the three heretics I previously mentioned and not Jesus but you get all uppity. I've never really been impressed with protestant sanctimony 

    Nonsense.  I have given you many verses from the Bible.  Jesus is the word and the Bible came from him.  

    You think your interpretation is correct even if I gave you many verses that differ with it.

    The only reason I can see why you cling to your own interpretation is because you believe the RCC has the infallible interpretation.  Why don't you just admit that?

  7. 25 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

    You sure seem intent on denying that the heretics you follow were blood thirsty haters and the killers. Luther Calvin and Zwingli were demented lunatics who called each other the anti christ and had no compunction about calling for thr death of people who disagreed with them. 

    You people can't get your own crap together but you think you can decide whats true and what isnt. 

    I have no doubt that atrocities were committed by both Catholics and Protestants down through history.  There are books available online that critique Fox's Book of Martyrs.  I am sure they raise many valid points.  Fox's Book likely did not include many violent acts committed by Protestants.  Both RCs and Protestants who committed those kinds of things were wrong and doing evil.  We should be able to agree on that.

    The point is that Rome was by far the only state church with tremendous power that existed for well over a thousand years except for a small number of groups that disagreed with Roman Catholicism.  According to history they were heavily persecuted and wiped out in many cases.  I don't defend any violence committed by any group.  When people are acting in self-defence, then perhaps we can agree with that aspect.  But to claim the RCC did not do these kinds of things or that they were justified is nonsensical.

  8. 3 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

    It seems as if you need a security blanket. We are arguing about beliefs... beliefs are not empirical fact. 

    You appear incapable of discussing the theory of evolution versus creation.  You prefer insults.  Go for it if that's what turns you on.

  9. 2 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

    You sure seem intent on denying that the heretics you follow were blood thirsty haters and the killers. Luther Calvin and Zwingli were demented lunatics who called each other the anti christ and had no compunction about calling for thr death of people who disagreed with them. 

    You people can't get your own crap together but you think you can decide whats true and what isnt. 

    Fox's Book of Martyrs is accepted by much of the world (except the Catholic Church of course) as a factual record of the persecution down through the ages by Rome.  This is a long history going back 2,000 years.   

    The RC church was by far the overwhelming state church in the western world.  Your trying to claim what Rome called the heretics were the blood thirsty haters and killers is ludicrous.  It just shows you have no knowledge of history or what actually happened.  Rome controlled nations, and ordained emperors, kings and queens to rule.  Almost everyone had to obey the RCC.  That is just a simple fact.  So whenever its authority was challenged by small groups or individuals, then the RCC came down heavy on them, hunted them down, and either punished them, or burned them at the stake and wiped them out.

  10. 2 hours ago, Yakuda said:

    Do you know who Michael Servetus is? Jesus said let him who is without sin cast the first stone. I know you dont listen to Jesus but thought I'd remind you anyway. 

    It's amazing how you people traipse out the same old tired rote responses. It's almost as if you're programmed only to regurgitate what's put into you. 

    So you deny the history of the Catholic church concerning its persecution down through the ages.  It's no different than denying the Holocaust happened and six million Jews were killed.  

    Its not a matter of casting stones.  That is a ludicrous application of that verse.  According to your thinking everyone should turn a blind eye to all the atrocities that happened down through history.  These are simple facts that everyone needs to face.  You would have much more credibility if you accepted it, admitted it was completely wrong, and that therefore the Church, church leadership, councils, and Popes cannot be infallible.  

    You need to read some of Avro Manhattan's books on the RC church as well. 

    "11  And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. 12  For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. 13  But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. " Ephesians 5:11-13  KJV

  11. 13 minutes ago, Aristides said:

    I'm saying that China is not communist, its system is more capitalist than many western countries. It is definitely totalitarian and trying to exert more influence on an international scale, both economic and political.

    China is a totalitarian system that uses its laws to control companies.  While they may seem to be independent, they are not.  Companies operate under an extensive system of controls by the Communist party.  

    One definition of Communism includes the following:

    " a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production"

    China does not take ownership of the companies but through bureaucracy and regulations, the party still controls the means of production, which one could say amounts to the same thing... Communism.   Canada is attempting to do the same thing.

  12. 33 minutes ago, Aristides said:

    China is certainly totalitarian but communist in name only.

    It is a bit of a mystery why you don't want to call China Communist. 

    "Other companies have been locked out altogether because of a refusal to adhere to rules. Google, for example, offered search in China from 2006 to 2010 with censored results, but was eventually blocked when the company decided it would end that practice. Several years later, it considered returning to China, but was heavily criticized by human rights groups wary of the ruling Chinese Communist Party’s vast censorship apparatus.'

    Canada is moving in the same direction as China in some ways.

    We know the NDP hates successful companies.  The Liberals are heading in the same direction and going after companies.

    "It is politically expedient in Ottawa these days for the federal government to express disappointment that Canadian companies don’t invest more in Canada. Ottawa says it wants Canadian businesses to invest in Canada , but in the next breath, warns those same companies that returns on their investments may be capped."

    Goldy Hyder: Government should celebrate, not attack Canadian companies' success (msn.com)


  13. Just now, Aristides said:

    Been to China many times, the Chinese are the keenest capitalists on the planet regardless of what they call themselves.

    China is certainly totalitarian but communist in name only.

    You forget they are totally controlled by the Communist party and system.  They have no freedom.  That meets the definition of a Communist state.  Why you want to claim they are some kind of Capitalist country is bizarre.  Are you some kind of Communist plant?


    Doing business in China is difficult. A clash over human rights is making it harder

    Beijing has made it clear that multinational corporations have to follow its rules if they wish to operate in the country, and gaining favor can require anything from abiding by restrictive regulations to saying a few good words about China. Many companies have traditionally been willing to play along, given how enticing the giant economy is as a market for everything from cars and clothes to movies and luxury goods.

    But the escalating political blowback may make some of those relationships untenable. Just as China has whipped its citizens into a nationalist frenzy over Xinjiang, customers, lawmakers and investors are stepping up the pressure on Western companies to scrutinize their supply chains for evidence of human rights abuses. That’s making it hard for companies to avoid picking sides.  unquote

    Doing business in China is difficult. A clash over human rights is making it harder | CNN Business


  14. 1 minute ago, Aristides said:

    China is communist in name only

    You have swallowed the liberal way of thinking.  That's is exactly what Trudeau believes.  He even said publicly how he admired their system.  Demonstrates how badly Canadian politicians right up to the PM have been brainwashed about China.  It is still a totalitarian, authoritarian system.  All companies are controlled by the Communist Party of China.  There is no real freedom.  You can call it Communist or not, but it is still the same as the old Communist system.  Just changed its outward face. 

  15. Anybody who thinks the Communists are not hard a work attacking the west and extending their influence in Canada is living in a dream world.

    Biological weapons are a great tool for Communists to use against the west.   Communists have a vast population, well into the billions, and if they lose a few million, they likely are not too concerned if it means they can weaken the west and create more division.

    A 2% loss in population in a heavily populated Communist country is not the same kind of loss as 2% in a less populated western country.  Remember, Communism doesn't care about individual rights if the end goal is the expansion of Communism.

    Communists do not think in terms of individual lives and rights;  they are defending the supremacy of the ideology primarily.  

  16. On 2/18/2024 at 12:11 PM, Aristides said:

    How well did the most powerful airforce in the world do to protect the US on 911?

    The most powerful nation on earth can not stop every attack.  But their response was fitting.  They dealt with a lot of al Qaida terrorists for years after 9-11 in Iraq and Afghanistan and eliminated Bin Laden as well, the terrorist leader.

  17. On 2/15/2024 at 10:19 AM, Yakuda said:

    How.much of this work is the inspired infallible word of God? That's how much of it I'll believe. 

    So you totally reject history of the persecution and genocide of the Roman church down through history?

    I guess the Roman church indoctrinated you very well and told you not to believe anything unless they told you.  That sounds like a real cult if ever there was one.

    Better get the book Fox's Book of Martyrs and open your eyes to the truth.


    Fox's Book of Martyrs: Or, A History of the Lives, Sufferings, and Triumphant: Deaths of the Primitive Protestant Martyrs

    by John Fox

    The famous historical compendium of Christians who sacrificed themselves for their faith over many centuries is presented here, complete. At times uplifting, at times harrowing, but in its entirety compelling and worthwhile reading, Fox's Book of Martyrs is a work of supreme Christian devotion. It catalogs the rise to prominence, and deaths, of many Christian saints and martyrs who placed their faith above all else. Many were, under penalty of torture and death, told to give up their beliefs: by refusing, they proved themselves to be of the highest devotion. When this book was published in 1563, the Christian church was in the throes of schism: the Reformation was proceeding at a fast pace, creating the first denominational forks in Christianity. The rise of Protestantism, and the attempts by the Catholic Church at preventing a split and consequent loss of authority, left a marked impression upon John Fox.   unquote

    Fox's Book of Martyrs: Or, A History of the Lives, Sufferings, and Triumphant: Deaths of the Primitive Protestant Martyrs by Fox, John: New, Paperback, $18.24 at Alibris

    There are some less expensive used copies at Alibris.

    But I am not holding my breath for you to read it.   It is also available online for free to read on some websites.


    Fox's Book of Martyrs.jpg

  18. 12 hours ago, cougar said:

    What difference does it make that they are only 5% ????

    The Canadian Government can bring even more immigrants to wash this down to 1% or 0.5% and it still makes no difference.

    If something is yours , it is yours, regardless how many people want to make use of it or take it from under your feet

    You are obviously one very confused person.

    A small number of natives claim thousands of square kilometers as theirs on the basis that their ancestors lived somewhere in some remote villages scattered around the province.  They never occupied or developed most of the province that they are now claiming as theirs.  It is ludicrous to think they actually have claim to the vast areas they are claiming.  They are doing it simply because they can and the  BC NDP is buying it.  They know the weakness and foolishness of the NDP leftists and are exploiting it for all they can.  They have been doing this kind of thing for years.  What is shocking is the NDP actually falls for all this crap and is giving away the province which they have absolutely no right to do.

  19. I tried to post a short video clip of the Kenesin motor which is a biological motor but had some trouble.

    Will try again.   The Kenesin motor is an amazing biological motor that shows the complexity of a cell.  Only an intelligent designer creator could have made this.   This is something Darwin never knew anything about when he came out with theory of evolution in 1859.  This has been discovered by scientists in more recent times.


  20. 2 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

    No sir , I asked you to define evolution in the way biologists do . You couldn't, therefore anything you say is the literal definition of ignorant.

    How about defending your point of view instead of trying to play silly games?


    Are you created or evolved?

    Since Charles Darwin first published his Origin of Species in 1859, the idea that everything just evolved by itself over millions and billions of years has come to dominate our public media and educational institutions. Evolution is often spoken of as ‘fact’.

    So it surprises many that there are an increasing number of voices speaking out against evolution. They say we are not evolved, but created. It’s even more of a surprise to discover many of those voices are from leading scientists across a range of disciplines. Not only are they pointing out the flaws in evolutionary theory, but they’re also showing that the evidence around us fits with the Bible’s account of the past, not evolution.

    What is this evidence for creation that these scientists are pointing to? There’s lots. Here’s just a taste.

    The design of living things

    If we look at even just one aspect of our bodies, such as the dexterity of our hand, wrist and fingers, it speaks of design, and therefore, a Designer. Robotics engineers are still striving to copy that dexterity!1 And our movements are controlled by our brains—no mean feat! The immense complexity of the human brain, its creativity and power of abstract reasoning, with capacities vastly beyond that required for sheer survival, is perhaps the most obvious evidence for intelligent creation.   unquote

    Created or evolved (creation.com)

  21. 2 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

    No sir , I asked you to define evolution in the way biologists do . You couldn't, therefore anything you say is the literal definition of ignorant.

    Nonsense.  I defined it like anyone would with their own words.  There is no rule that says I must define evolution like a biologist would in order to dispute it or reject it.  Your line of reasoning is absurd to begin with.

    You are just trying to play word games which is nonsense.  You don't convince anyone of anything that way.

    Evolution is simply a theory of how life came to be what it is today.  It is unproven and has been rejected by many scientists.

  22. 1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

    So you base your understanding of one of the most evidenced theories in science on your opinion?

    No, I base my understanding on empirical science and reason.

    The theory of evolution is not "one of the most evidenced theories".   It is only a theory which has been rejected by many scientists.

    There is a good article explaining this at this website:

    Created or evolved (creation.com)

    1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

    Using terms like "Darwinism" and confusing abiogenesis with evolution further proves you are completely ignorant on the topic.

    I don't know how you can make that claim.   I simply stated what evolutionists claim, which is that the first life forms came about by the accidental coming together of certain molecules or chemicals.  Evolution is the theory that says life progressed from very simple cells to more advanced life forms.  This is part of the theory of evolution.  Evolution is the theory of how life today came to be from simple life forms.  If your only purpose is to come on here to call someone ignorant, you are wasting your time.  You should be intelligent enough to contribute some worthwhile comments without calling someone ignorant because they don't share your views.

  23. 2 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

    Would you please define evolution in a couple sentences in the way the evolutionary biologists that have spent years studying would.

    Thank you 

    My own definition would say the theory of evolution (or Darwinism) is the unproven claim that all living creatures developed through time from some simpler living organism by what is claimed as "natural selection", beginning from some accidental combination of chemicals on the earth.  I would add this is an unproven theory which has been rejected by many scientists because there is no proof and it is an unreasonable theory.  It is a religion to many people. 

    The links between species are missing and since the time of Darwin's theory (1859), the complexity of life has been found to be extremely great. Even the simple cell has vast amounts of information stored in it to govern how it functions, grows and multiplies.  Darwin did not know this. The information in living organisms is so great that many conclude that only an intelligent designer could have created life and the universe.



  • Create New...