A Complete Waste of Space

You have a quick?

Buzz wrote:You have a quick?

sometimes a little quickie never hurt anyone.

Darkhorse wrote:

HappyHappy wrote:Catholics are not christians?
I think you are more than off a bit.
In fact your "christian" churches split off
from the main stream catholic in about 1520.
Your church has it's foundation in catholicism.

HH

When the Roman government hijacked the church in rome and twisted the teachings to fit thier needs it ceased to be a Christian church. Roman catholicism spread to Europe as the Roman army concurred. As Cuda posted Martin Luther (and others) set the truth free from the Pope and his henchmen. Happy I know the teaching of the Bible and the Catholic church does not teach it.

Happy you don't know what being a Christian is about do you? Do you even know what the Bible is about?

not that you need my assistance DH but here it is anyways

Titus 1:16 They profess to know God but with their deeds they deny him, since they are detestable, disobedient, and unfit for any good deed.

In 1542, Luther read a Latin translation of the Qur'an.[163] He went on to produce several critical pamphlets on the Islamic faith, which he called Mohammedanism or the Turk.[164] Though Luther saw the Muslim faith as a tool of the devil, he was indifferent to its practice: "Let the Turk believe and live as he will, just as one lets the papacy and other false Christians live.

HappyHappy wrote:Seems to me that the Catholic Church follows the
new Testament teachings of a Jew we call by the name of Jesus Christ.
That makes them Christians, not Jews, not Moslems...
So your argument that Catholics are not Christians in completely rejected.

No that makes them Catholics. Picking and choosing parts of Christs' teachings and adding other things made up by thier hierarchy does not make them Christian.

HappyHappy wrote:I have read the Bible cover to cover, yes the King James version.
I have also read the book of Mormon.

I can only judge that statement by your past posts and I find it lacking.

HappyHappy wrote:The Catholic church does teach the bible, they do not encourage
people to read it. The Priest is supposed to teach from it and interpret it for you.

And a big part of that is why we had the dark ages, it was a way for the Pope and his henchmen to keep the people in line.

HappyHappy wrote:They may not be your brand of Christians but they are in fact Christian
and have many times more believers than all Protestant faiths combined.

"My brand" is not the point, the teaching of Christ is, that is the yardstick to measure the truth by.

HappyHappy wrote:Back to the main topic, so far you have posted distortion and worthless math as your evidence.
Care to post something more convincing?

Well Happy that is all you have posted so far! If I sent you volumes of research you would not read it! All you will do is cling to anything that proves you need to stay in your box.

HappyHappy wrote:
I have read the Bible cover to cover, yes the King James version.
I have also read the book of Mormon.

Darkhorse wrote:
I can only judge that statement by your past posts and I find it lacking.

Pudfark wrote:
Seems like with all that reading by HH?
He is on the quest for a "faith"...
I hope you find it HH...I have faith, that you will....eventually.

Old Pudfark sez: " Patience: In itself? Is a kind of faith..... "

Notice that HH edited his post about reading the Bible right after I made my post saying he hasn't read it. Look at the times of the posts and his edit.

So much for having me on ignore huh HH?

I doubt you can convince anybody on this forum that you've read the Bible. If you ever plan the read it. Pick a better version than the King James.

haha yeah there's a version for everyone

HappyHappy wrote:Back to the main topic, so far you have posted distortion and worthless math as your evidence.
Care to post something more convincing?


HH

yes please back to the main topic. I used your own link about the Cambrian explosion to show your wrong. before the Cambrian there were no fossil records.

The seemingly rapid appearance of fossils in the “Primordial Strata”

The long-running puzzlement about the appearance of the Cambrian fauna, seemingly abruptly and from nowhere, centers on three key points: whether there really was a mass diversification of complex organisms over a relatively short period of time during the early Cambrian; what might have caused such rapid change; and what it would imply about the origin and evolution of animals.

what do you have to say about this? seems like a case for creation.

whoops that right, he doesn't read my posts

Darkhorse wrote:

HappyHappy wrote:Seems to me that the Catholic Church follows the
new Testament teachings of a Jew we call by the name of Jesus Christ.
That makes them Christians, not Jews, not Moslems...
So your argument that Catholics are not Christians in completely rejected.

No that makes them Catholics. Picking and choosing parts of Christs' teachings and adding other things made up by thier hierarchy does not make them Christian.

HappyHappy wrote:I have read the Bible cover to cover, yes the King James version.
I have also read the book of Mormon.

I can only judge that statement by your past posts and I find it lacking.

HappyHappy wrote:The Catholic church does teach the bible, they do not encourage
people to read it. The Priest is supposed to teach from it and interpret it for you.

And a big part of that is why we had the dark ages, it was a way for the Pope and his henchmen to keep the people in line.

HappyHappy wrote:They may not be your brand of Christians but they are in fact Christian
and have many times more believers than all Protestant faiths combined.

"My brand" is not the point, the teaching of Christ is, that is the yardstick to measure the truth by.

HappyHappy wrote:Back to the main topic, so far you have posted distortion and worthless math as your evidence.
Care to post something more convincing?

Well Happy that is all you have posted so far! If I sent you volumes of research you would not read it! All you will do is cling to anything that proves you need to stay in your box.

You do realise the King James version of the Bible was translated for the court of King James
and has distortions in the same manner as you accuse the Romans of?
That may be why people get so excited about the ancient scrolls found in Palestine (Isrial).
They contain older scripts from before the Romans and British got their hands on them.

So far I have posted scientific fact and a rebuttal to a weird attitude about catholics.
You have posted creationist distortions and assert that an old novel is fact.

DarkHorse it is becoming obvoius you prefer to remain in your box.

Obviously your never going to post a rational argument.
The statement about the Noah myth makes it obvious
that you posess a narow view of the world who's boundarys
are determined by the bible.

Evolutionary theory does not reject the chance that there is a creator.
It does not reject the chance that there was an intervention at times.

But you do reject all but what the bible teaches and post warped "science" to prove your point.

So far the creationists have been soundly defeated, kicked to the curb.

HH

Here we go again with "I won" .

Same old thing. Why do we even start these threads? They all end the same way.

God wins, and HH eats another banana while claiming victory.