Chad_Catholic
Member
The correct word is heretic. It refers to someone who holds views or beliefs that are contrary to traditional Catholic dogma.What's "an heretick" ? Is that talking about me??
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
The correct word is heretic. It refers to someone who holds views or beliefs that are contrary to traditional Catholic dogma.What's "an heretick" ? Is that talking about me??
Maybe so, I don't know. Sure is off-base either way!It makes one wonder if he might not be controlled opposition.
You're claiming a speculative theory, not held universally but held, in various forms, by some theologians, to be definitive dogma of the Church. And you don't even present that theory correctly but twist it to your own rather offensive interpretation. Many of the Fathers taught that there is hope of salvation for the unbaptized. See for example St Ambrose's funeral oration for the emperor Valentinan. Others indeed expressed hope in universal salvation.No, I don't, and I don't think you know what you are talking about. Tell me, what exactly did I misrepresent?
None of the Church Fathers believed someone could be saved outside of Church, and every Pope since the establishment of that dogma professed the same.You're claiming a speculative theory, not held universally but held, in various forms, by some theologians, to be definitive dogma of the Church. And you don't even present that theory correctly but twist it to your own rather offensive interpretation. Many of the Fathers taught that there is hope of salvation for the unbaptized. See for example St Ambrose's funeral oration for the emperor Valentinan. Others indeed expressed hope in universal salvation.
The International Theological Commission addressed this topic in detail under Pope Benedict XVI, if you care to know what they said: The hope of salvation for infants who die without being baptised
Not outside of but in and through the Church. Although God ordains the sacramental economy, he is not bound by it, and his grace can reach those who do not receive sacramental baptism.None of the Church Fathers believed someone could be saved outside of Church, and every Pope since the establishment of that dogma professed the same.
is it SO horrifying i agreeThis thread is horrifying
You're a heretic and fake Christian if that is what you believe.Not outside of but in and through the Church. Although God ordains the sacramental economy, he is not bound by it, and his grace can reach those who do not receive sacramental baptism.
i've just found a bunch of people to add to my 'ignore list' though.. so bonusThis thread is horrifying
Yes of course.hi, if you are absolutely certain that people under 20 who die are "guaranteed entry into an eternal heaven on account of their immaturity", and that you consider that this "heaven" is necessarily better than the life of which we can enjoy in our lifetime, so yes from your perspective "School shootings aren't as bad as the world makes them out to be".
You still consider that it is a tragedy and that this consideration cannot be debated by sane people,
a majority of people will consider like you that it is a tragedy, however a good part do not share your absolute certainty that all people under 20 who die go to "heaven" and that they necessarily enjoy a better life into this heaven,
a good part of them will probably not be influenced by your perspective and dismiss it as quickly because at least to me it seems to manifest a low enough degree of empathy,well being,mental freedom,and that a tragedy "not as bad",is still a tragedy
I just kept hearing the news headlines for a recent one and considered a position based on the KJV.did you have the same perspective during spring/summer under the sun?or did you manifest this perspective in the darker/colders months?
...yes of course.to put things into perspective:
imagine a person who claims to be certain that the second life after the death of this first life is necessarily better, that everyone should die at birth for their own good and that he claims this on the forum despite the fact that this person has never experienced this second life, and that he bases this "certainty" on a text, whether it is an internet text or written on paper, a text which is potentially a fiction from the perspective of a good part of the people,and a believe for others(believe imply not being certain)would you want to consider it?
^^(the last paragraph isnt your perspective,just a fictional one that i made for the exemple,to demonstrate why some similar elements of your post can be perceive as absurb and not be consider)
have fun
You can have the best energetic life, but it will end and then you will witness Him and you will have to spend the ethernity in hell energetically.I don't give any special consideration to the idea of Jesus Christ and God, who to me are two fictional characters that I haven't witnessed myself
loooooooooooooool i had a good laugh,i dont worry about such thing,god from christianism/islam is a fiction that i can not verify their authenticity from my perspective;You can have the best energetic life, but it will end and then you will witness Him and you will have to spend the ethernity in hell energetically.
see and believe:@HighT Hi,
loooooooooooooool i had a good laugh,i dont worry about such thing,god from christianism/islam is a fiction that i can not verify their authenticity from my perspective;
i was answering specifically to Twohandsonneck that said that "Those without Christ & God have no hope in the world"
wish you fun