It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
JudgeEden
notice that their profession of faith has them believe in one church, the Catholic church.
Of which no Christian has part in.
Lastly, just because it may seem bizarre to you, doesn't mean there is no truth to it.
JudgeEden
reply to post by Akragon
Really? Well, if it isn't speaking about teachings or beliefs, what is it then? Jesus was in the middle of speaking about false prophets, was He not? He was speaking of that very thing right before He uttered the line you posted.
Are we to believe it was sin and the condition of your life He was talking about, as most Christians believe? Because as we know (or we should know) salvation isn't dependent on what you do in your life.
JudgeEden
What is bizarre to me, is that you feel as if both of these parties are the same.
By this logic, all Christians are Catholic, right?
Most also seem to glaze over the fact that Christianity (as outlined in the Bible) is much older than Catholicism.
JudgeEden
Oh really? I'm wrong about Christians having no part in the Catholic Church?
JudgeEden
What the hell is a Chickie? Not something I'm familiar with.
JudgeEden
Catholics have their own anti-fundamentalist bigotry too? I'm almost surprised you admit that.
FlyersFan
JudgeEden
What the hell is a Chickie? Not something I'm familiar with.
Are you getting your 'catholics aren't christians' junk from Jack Chick tracts?
Or is it just the usual fundamentalist preacher rhetoric coming through? Or perhaps both?
Jack Chick Tracts
killjoy99
reply to post by Annunak1
its amazing that a book claimed and heralded as the truth is a living document, always trying to stay relevant, always being updated to try and fit modern times... i understand that as new evidence comes out it may contradict previous claims.. but people kill each other over these books.. They condemn one another over the translation of these texts... they claim this to be proof and use it as a validation of their beliefs which this book originally instilled in them.. Until we can completely dismantle organized religion globally we will remain as the good books say, sheep always looking for a shepherd. Sorry.. may be off topic, not meant to derail thread..
Pretty much this. It can be deduced that the claim that Jesus had a wife, appeared much after Jesus' exit. Or do ATSers just prefer to jump to a conclusion after reading a thread title?
@ DeadSeraph...1) This is not proof that Jesus was married. Your own source acknowledges that. It was written in 7 or 800 AD.
Jesus did say something about becoming ''eunuchs'' for the sake of the kingdom of heaven ...that is IF one is able to, so he wasn't forcing it upon anybody else. Unless you want to take it literally, ''becoming as eunuchs'' can be interpreted as absistence from sex. Also, the bible portrays celibacy as 'virtuous'. Like, the chosen 144000 are said to be virgins. Why couldn't they have been married men? ___________________________________________________As for catholic celibacy, they can argue its from the Bible aol they want...but the bible only suggests it within a context.....as opposd to forcing it as a rule for priests.
@DeadSeraph...
Paul states that it is better to be celibate if a man is capable of it, but if he is unable to do so he should take a wife. Similarly, nowhere does Jesus himself say anything about celibacy in the church.