Since you have been a Baptist, have you . . .

please show me where I have added to God's Word?

Oh, I am sorry. I see. Jesus meant let the physically dead bury their dead. How could I have missed that?

 

Show me where "spiritually dead" and "deceased" are in the text.

If you can't you have added to God's word.

Show me where I err, using His words, not yours please.

 

And we wonder why folks are critical of how we Fundamentalists misuse the scriptures to advance our own judgemental opinions?

 

show me where the christian is referred as being dead.

as far as deceased. who in their right mind would want to bury a live person

 

I asked for Bible proof, not human logic. Surely you have a clear cut Bible reason for judging me instead of just your opinion about one verse.

 

I appreciate you opening this thread Craig. It has helped to learn much about my Fundamentalist brethren.

 

What part of Bible proof do you not get, SFIC?

 

Boy that is a mouthful and a half.

 

If all Fundamentalists thought like some of my brothers posting on this board, I would be looking for a new circle in which to associate.

I am glad that there are some who refuse to judge hearts and motivation and who realise the compassion, love, and concern which can be shown by being there when a person needs a pastor or Christian friend, no matter where that need occurs.

 

Bible proof?

Let the dead bury their dead. That is enough Bible proof in itself.

One does not have to be a scholar with ThD's or any other degrees to know that it is not speaking of a man who is physically dead that is to bury another physically dead person. It is impossible. The fact that the man wanted to go and bury his father is more Bible proof that the man's father is already deceased. One would not bury their parents when they were still alive, unless that one is mentally deranged. Jesus told the man, 'Follow me. Let the dead bury their dead.' He did not say go and bury your father. Now, did he?

 

Principle: Christians should not participate in false religious services.

Why is that amazing? Just because you don't want to admit that attendance is participation doesn't mean that it isn't.

I would not attend any kind of religious services conducted by Anton Szandor LaVey (if he were still alive) regardless of intent or primary participants. The principle doesn't change just because the particular religion if more familiar but just as fatal.

 

I agree. Thankfully there are many fundamentalists who don't think like some on here. This thread has been an example of hyper-fundamentalism.

 

It has also been an example of hyper-liberalism as well.

 

Then acording to the Council of Trent, they only think that they are Catholics. In fact they have been, as they put, made anathema, or ex-communicated. Not officially of course. But ex-communicated just the same. And they should not be taking their sacraments.

Also, Catholics sometimes say that they are saved through faith alone, but that their faith came by their works and God's grace.

Read this double-tongued answer on the subject:

http://www.scborromeo.org/glad/c15.htm

http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org/whycatholic/faithalone.html

 

Diggin,

Again you have not answered the issue at hand. If you subscribe to the theory that by simply being there you have consented to everything the Catholic Church stands for, and you are intellectually honest, then you must extend this theory to other aspects of your life (which you say you do). I will repost my earlier statements which you have refused to answer - quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Diggin in da Word:
Yes, I believe it does. The catholics have an entirely different way of performing the funeral service than the christian faith with their Prayers to the Blessed Virgin Mary and other rituals. If we attend the services, whether we say the prayers to Mary or not, we are participating and consenting to their false doctrines.

I stand to my convictions.
________________________________________

Brice (Me) says - You could see how this would make daily life quite difficult right? Do you wear t-shirts made in China or South America? Are you consenting to outsourcing and the loss of American Manufacturing? Do you shop at Wal-Mart? Are you consenting to the sale of extremely non-Christian products at that particular store? How about Target? How about restaurants that sell alcohol? How about gas stations that sell products that are obviously contrary to the faith? The list goes on and on. You won’t pay respects to a loved one, but I bet you you’ll get your deodorant at Wal-Mart or your gas at BP.
________________________________________

 

Craig asked me:

The Glories of Mary is a very well know work, and Catholic scholars that I have debated verified the quotes. I gave page numbers and book references to all of the quotes that I posted from other works as well.

As for true Catholic dogma, one need only go to The Council of Trent to see what they really believe on Justification. Why Craig to you think that this council was called in the first place? To lend credibility to Luther and his views on justification?

Here is a sampling from this heretical work:

"If anyone denies that by baptism the guilt of original sin is remitted (or) denies that justice, santification and redemption of Jesus Christ is applied both to adults and to infants by the sacrament of baptism...let him be anathema.

If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law (i.e. the seven sacramenst of the RCC) are not necessary for salvation...and that without them...men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification (see what I mean Tim)..let him be anathema.

If anyone says that baptism...is not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that after the reception of grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotteed out...and that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that the sacifice of the mass...wherein that life-giving victim by which we are reconciled to the Father is daily immolated on the altar by priests...is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one...offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities, let him be anathema."

In 1962, at the opening of Vatican II in Rome, Pope John XXIII affirmed, "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council of Trent." Vatican II itself "proposes again the decrees of the Council of Trent." On 12/31/95, honoring the 450th anniversary of the opening of Trent, Pope John Paul II declared, "Its conclusions maintain all their value." (From The Berean Call)

 

Amen, JackRUS!!

 

Brice,

I do not buy my deodorant at Wal-mart,, No Targets here nor is there any BP in my area of the country!

So you can rest now.

I might also add, Walmarts, BP's, Target's, the list goes on and on..., do not call themselves churches, nor do they represent churches.

Also, I have never seen a funeral procession coming out of a Walmart, a Target, a BP, the list goes on and on...

 

Now that is funny!!

 

Ah nice try at evasion. Target, Wal-Mart, BP etc. are examples of the overarching point. You said you would not go to a funeral at a Catholic Church because that is consenting to everything the Catholic Church believes. You then went on to say that you stick to that theory in your everyday life. I simply gave you some examples that make this a completely ridiculous assertion. Keep evading, but the truth is obvious. By your standard you consent to anti-Christian, anti-Jesus and anti-diggin standards everyday.