Shake Off The Dust From Your Feet. ...

[dairygirl4u2c]

if i were dust, id be offended by this thead...

at least it's not...
"shake the dairygirl4u2c from your feet"

[Socrates]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1378773' date='Sep 5 2007, 04:24 PM']#6 seems to be your favorite.[/quote]


[quote name='prose' post='1378777' date='Sep 5 2007, 04:29 PM']Oh, let's not forget her expertise in #2 as well.[/quote]
Oh come now, people!

Everyone knows that True Bible-Believin' Christians [i]never[/i] use any fallacious arguin' tactics - such things are exclusively used by Romish Papist apologists.

I mean, it [i]says so [/i]right there on the Jack Chick-style anti-Catholic websites Budge loves to copy-and-paste from! (See #2)

[kateri05]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1378945' date='Sep 5 2007, 06:23 PM']if i were dust, id be offended by this thead...

at least it's not...
"shake the dairygirl4u2c from your feet"[/quote]

[Socrates]

[b]Official Jenyoo-wine Independant Fundamental Baptist Cath-lick Bashin' Tekneek List[/b]


* 1: Jack Chick technique

Regurgitate anti-Catholic statements without providing any proof,
Otherwise, known as propaganda.
(Popular examples: Catholics worship a "False Christ," The Church says we don't need to Jesus to be saved, etc.)


* 2: Cut-and-paste technique

Find the closest anti-Catholic rant on any anti-Catholic website, *
stick it into your clipboard and post away.
Upon receiving a scriptural rebuttal,
switch the topic to how the Pope is evil
and then utilize the Jack Chick technique.

* (Note, the website need not be Christian. Even anti-Christian atheist and neo-pagan sites will do, just so long as they attack proper targets such as the Pope, Mother Theresa, etc.)


* 3: Persecuted Martyr technique

If them Cathlicks get offended or angry at your attacks and rants, insist vehemently that your opponent hates Jesus and the Gospel.
It is always advisable to paint yourself as an innocent victim of Catholic hate.
This technique should always contain a reference to your extreme love for Jesus and the limitless bounds of your apostolic zeal for spreading Gospel Truth.


* 4: Fundy interpretation technique

Any text can mean anything when interpreted under the
Fundy interpretation technique.
Use this to your advantage then utilize the Jack Chick technique.
Most often used with attacks on the sacraments.
Symbolic? Yes! Literal? No! Wait, yes, I mean, the Pope wears a Satanic hat!
What else can you do?


* 5: Words without meaning technique

If you are receiving any roadblocks by any particular word
you previously gave in your rant,
or if what you've described is the definition of a word
detrimental to your defense,
simply deny the basic word meaning of the troubling term.
Examples - "eat" "drink" "baptize" "chastise" "work," etc.


* 6. Bait and Switch technique

If your accusations and rants are being shot down repeatedly,
it is because you are staying on one topic for too long.
In the Catholic-bashin' arena,
it is always a good idea to present a moving target.
If your Mother Theresa attack is becoming an embarrassment,
switch it to a Jesus Saves defense,
pretend your opponent has denied it
and act outraged at his blasphemy.[/list]


* 7: Sola Scriptura technique

Put forth that no spiritual authority is found outside of scripture.
However, due to the overwhelming lack of evidence for this statement in the Bible,
this will usually have to be accompanied with the Jack Chick technique, and maybe an inset photo of the Pope meeting with some Africans.


* 8: Attack "Early Deceivers" technique

This can be used as a companion apologetic to the
Sola Scriptura technique.
Always refer to your opponent as syncretist pagan to imply
that the Catholic Church began with "Mystery Babylon."
Insist all recorded Christians in the early Church were "Early Deceivers",
or otherwise dirty pagan liars,
Do not accept any denials of this.
Rubber-stamp him as a follower of Univeralist-Unitarianism if they deny this accusation.


* 9: Stalking technique

Harass the Catholic endlessly whether he shows any interest in leaving the Church or not
Can utilize any of the other above methods.
The object is to fill their e-mail and guestbooks daily with anti-Catholic rants.
When your opponent will no longer respond to you,
insist that he is afraid to debate you.
Continue to harass them until they put you on "ignore"
or you are at risk of losing your ISP account for a second time.
If you are about to lose your ISP a second time,
pass the baton over to a fellow anti-Catholic.


* 10: Babbling Mystery Babble-on technique

Remember when you were a kid.
If you closed your eyes, danger would go away.
This technique is a variation on that theme.
When backed into a corner,
begin babbling about "Mystery Babylon" or the color of Mary's eyes on a Catholic holy-card, and the opponent may forget that you were ever engaged in a debate in the first place.
With all the other fine anti-Catholic techniques available,
this one is usually not advised.

Edited September 6, 2007 by Socrates

[Budge]

[quote]* 1: Jack Chick technique

Regurgitate anti-Catholic statements without providing any proof,
Otherwise, known as propaganda.
(Popular examples: Catholics worship a "False Christ," The Church says we don't need to Jesus to be saved, etc.)[/quote]


Jack Chick is a good christian man, and since things are coming true in tracts he produced 25 years ago...a good student of Gods Word.

You dont offend me when you pair my name by his. I deeply respect the man and yes I know the world hates him.

I wrote a thank you letter to Jack Chick some years ago. I told him his tracts worked on me. I collected comics as an unbeliever--and included was Jack Chick ones...[the street peracher who witnessed to me also passed on many of his tracts to me.

[quote]* 2: Cut-and-paste technique

Find the closest anti-Catholic rant on any anti-Catholic website, *
stick it into your clipboard and post away.
Upon receiving a scriptural rebuttal,
switch the topic to how the Pope is evil
and then utilize the Jack Chick technique.

* (Note, the website need not be Christian. Even anti-Christian atheist and neo-pagan sites will do, just so long as they attack proper targets such as the Pope, Mother Theresa, etc.)[/quote]

I write a lot of my own stuff, but why not cut and paste, dont you share Catholic articles here.

Atheists while deluded about God, often times are thinkers and do examine things, like religious rip-offs, Mother Teresa wasnt the only one dealt with by them, but Poploff, Benny Hinn ect. I think it is the sign of a cult when they tell you not to trust anything the cult does not write, or official approve "imprintaurs". I believe with Mother Teresa for the folks who wanted to sound the alarm like Sandra Shields, no church wanted to have anything to do with knocking a PR manufactuired ULTRA-ICON off the pedestal so the atheists, UUs, and agnostics were the only people they could turn too. They werent going to go to fundie Christians because their dealings with MT had turned them off what they *thought* was Christianity.


[quote]* 3: Persecuted Martyr technique

If them Cathlicks get offended or angry at your attacks and rants, insist vehemently that your opponent hates Jesus and the Gospel.
It is always advisable to paint yourself as an innocent victim of Catholic hate.
This technique should always contain a reference,
to your extreme love for Jesus and the limitless bounds of your apostolic zeal for spreading Gospel Truth.[/quote]

Hmm I dont recall every using the term Anti-Fundie here, or Anti-Protestant.

I dont think any of you hate Jesus, youre just pursuing a false one. In fact many of you are looking for HIm, and I pray you find Him.
[quote]* 4: Fundy interpretation technique


Any text can mean anything when interpreted under the
Fundy interpretation technique.
Use this to your advantage then utilize the Jack Chick technique.
Most often used with attacks on the sacraments.
Symbolic? Yes! Literal? No! Wait, yes, I mean, the Pope wears a Satanic hat!
What else can you do?[/quote]

There are no sacraments in the Bible--baptism is an ordinance,, no Mass in the book of Acts--imagine that the apostles DID not speak LATIN, how did they ever get those wafers transubstantiated

[quote]* 5: Words without meaning technique

If you are receiving any roadblocks by any particular word
you previously gave in your rant,
or if what you've described is the definition of a word
detrimental to your defense,
simply deny the basic word meaning of the troubling term.
Examples - "eat" "drink" "baptize" "chastise" "work," etc.[/quote]

You mean like replacing the word LATRIA for worship?

[quote]* 6. Bait and Switch technique

If your accusations and rants are being shot down repeatedly,
it is because you are staying on one topic for too long.
In the Catholic-bashin' arena,
it is always a good idea to present a moving target.
If your Mother Theresa attack is becoming an embarrassment,
switch it to a Jesus Saves defense,
pretend your opponent has denied it
and act outraged at his blasphemy.[/list][/quote]

or from the Catholic side, send some middle of the fence poster of some vague religion--who wont even admit to anyone what she is exactly, to post 10 threads on whether cats should drive or why God allows fish to be eaten and not cows during Lent.
[quote]* 7: Sola Scriptura technique

Put forth that no spiritual authority is found outside of scripture.
However, due to the overwhelming lack of evidence for this statement in the Bible,
this will usually have to be accompanied
with the Jack Chick technique, and maybe an inset photo of the Pope meeting with some Africans.[/quote]

What lack of evidence?

Things are convienient when your authorities mandate and define their OWN authority isnt it?

[quote]* 8: Attack "Early Deceivers" technique

This can be used as a companion apologetic to the
Sola Scriptura technique.
Always refer to your opponent as syncretist pagan to imply
that the Catholic Church began with "Mystery Babylon."
Insist all recorded Christians in the early Church were "Early Deceivers",
or otherwise dirty pagan liars,
Do not accept any denials of this.
Rubber-stamp him as a follower of Univeralist-Unitarianism if they deny this accusation.[/quote]

All of them nah....

but the ones the Catholic Church holds up as leaders to emulate, sure {thats if you can even trust the words they attribute to them}

UUs and early deceivers...nah... I dont think even the early deceivers taught that Buddhist and Hindus could be Christians without "knowing it", that was made up later...
[quote]* 9: Stalking technique

Harass the Catholic endlessly whether he shows any interest in leaving the Church or not
Can utilize any of the other above methods.
The object is to fill their e-mail and guestbooks daily with anti-Catholic rants.
When your opponent will no longer respond to you,
insist that he is afraid to debate you.
Continue to harass them until they put you on "ignore"
or you are at risk of losing your ISP account for a second time.
If you are about to lose your ISP a second time,
pass the baton over to a fellow anti-Catholic.[/quote]

I havent emailed anyone here.

I dont think Ive even left very many comment on any profiles...maybe twice?

Im the one thats got people chasing me over debates I left 3 months ago.
[quote]* 10: Babbling Mystery Babble-on technique

Remember when you were a kid.
If you closed your eyes, danger would go away.
This technique is a variation on that theme.
When backed into a corner,
begin babbling about "Mystery Babylon" or the color of Mary's eyes on a Catholic holy-card, and the opponent may forget that you were ever engaged in a debate in the first place.
With all the other fine anti-Catholic techniques available,
this one is usually not advised.[/quote]

Why do Catholics think Mystery Babylon is of no concern or does not exsist?

Thats what Id like to know.

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1378768' date='Sep 5 2007, 04:17 PM']Im the one thats got people chasing me over debates I left 3 months ago.[/quote]

Speaking of which...

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1378768' date='Sep 5 2007, 04:17 PM']Speaking of apologetics... I do believe Budge is still in the middle of an apologetic debate with Raphael when she has time to continue - [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=59911&st=40&start=40"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...40&start=40[/url]
I'm sure Raphael would never dive into any of the 10 ebil "apologetic techniques" (I thought it grew to 20)[/quote]



"Kyrie eleison", your "last penny" post is really telling I think how the wording matches up.

Edited September 6, 2007 by CatholicCid

[Budge]

Honestly what does Raphael want?

I responded.

The Immaculate Conception is NOT based on scripture.

Scripture is my authority, its not yours.

I think it is wrong frankly and think the real Mary would be crying because she was humble lady that wouldnt want that stuff attributed to her if she knew this stuff was going on. Why would she want to be elevated when everyone one that loves God, glorifes HIM?

She needed a savior just as well as anyone. Heres a question if she was supposely was perfect at the time of conception when did she need a savior?

the queen of heaven, daughter of Chaldea WANTS all your attention, how come all the latest Catholic Church dogmas have had her as their CENTER instead of Jesus Christ?

The real Mary would say STOP, LOOK TO JESUS CHRIST, not to me!
[b]

2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

[/b]

Edited September 6, 2007 by Budge

[CatholicCid]

I'm sure Raphael would continue the debate in the original.

Edited September 6, 2007 by CatholicCid

[jeffpugh]

. Brilliant CatholicCid.

Btw, I'm finding the hilarity is at a high here with Socrates and Budge. Seriously, I can't tell if they're being totally sarcastic or not. Though, lots of truth is revealed for sure.

[Budge]

One of Jack Chick's latest tracts...

[url="http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1107/1107_01.asp?wpc=1107_01.asp&wpp=a"]FREE AT LAST; MODS NOTHING ANTICATHOLIC HERE![/url]

[img]http://www.chick.com/tractimages3860/1107/1107_16.gif[/img]

[img]http://www.chick.com/tractimages3860/Page23/enKJV.gif[/img]

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1378793' date='Sep 5 2007, 05:54 PM']Out of seriousness, when do we do number 9? And HSM, didn't HSD just give us a big post sayin not to be mocking?[/quote]
Yes...

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Budge' post='1379239' date='Sep 5 2007, 11:22 PM']One of Jack Chick's latest tracts...

FREE AT LAST; MODS NOTHING ANTICATHOLIC HERE[/quote]
Pity its wrong info.

[Old_Joe]

[quote name='"Kyrie eleison' post='1378633' date='Sep 5 2007, 01:39 PM']When is it appropriate for one to shake the dust OFF our feet?[/quote]


When is it appropriate for dUSt to be on people's feet?

dUSt! GET OFF OF OTHER PEOPLE'S FEET!!! TSK. TSK. dON'T YOU KNOW IT'S RUDE TO STAND ON PEOPLE'S FEET!?!

[Budge]

[quote]Pity its wrong info.[/quote]

What do you believe is wrong with it?

Dont you believe Jesus Christ sets people FREE?

Edited September 6, 2007 by Budge

[Socrates]

[quote name='Budge' post='1379140' date='Sep 5 2007, 08:46 PM']Jack Chick is a good christian man, and since things are coming true in tracts he produced 25 years ago...a good student of Gods Word.

You dont offend me when you pair my name by his. I deeply respect the man and yes I know the world hates him.

I wrote a thank you letter to Jack Chick some years ago. I told him his tracts worked on me. I collected comics as an unbeliever--and included was Jack Chick ones...[the street peracher who witnessed to me also passed on many of his tracts to me.
I write a lot of my own stuff, but why not cut and paste, dont you share Catholic articles here.[/quote]
Whatever.
The world "hates" L. Ron Hubbard too, but that still doesn't mean he's not deluded nutjob or a liar.
Many things in Chick tracts are outright lies and fabrications. (And the fact that he may sometimes post truth as well, does not make his lies any less lies.)

[quote]Atheists while deluded about God, often times are thinkers and do examine things, like religious rip-offs, Mother Teresa wasnt the only one dealt with by them, but Poploff, Benny Hinn ect. I think it is the sign of a cult when they tell you not to trust anything the cult does not write, or official approve "imprintaurs". I believe with Mother Teresa for the folks who wanted to sound the alarm like Sandra Shields, no church wanted to have anything to do with knocking a PR manufactuired ULTRA-ICON off the pedestal so the atheists, UUs, and agnostics were the only people they could turn too. They werent going to go to fundie Christians because their dealings with MT had turned them off what they *thought* was Christianity.
Hmm I dont recall every using the term Anti-Fundie here, or Anti-Protestant.[/quote]
But if a Catholic agrees with a non-Christian on anything in anyway, that is proof-positive that the Church is in league with paganism.

[quote]I dont think any of you hate Jesus, youre just pursuing a false one. In fact many of you are looking for HIm, and I pray you find Him.[/quote]
We worship the same Jesus whom the four Gospels teach about - Who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried, on the third day He Rose again and is seated at the Right Hand of the Father - and Who founded a Church on the Rock of St. Peter.
Who's [i]your[/i] Jesus?

[quote]There are no sacraments in the Bible--baptism is an ordinance,, no Mass in the book of Acts--imagine that the apostles DID not speak LATIN, how did they ever get those wafers transubstantiated [/quote]
Been there, done that, Budge.
Baptism - in the Bible.
The Mass [i]is[/i] mentioned in the four Gospels, as well as by St. Paul in I Cor. 11:27-32.
And no one (except maybe the most far-out "rad-trad") says the Mass has to be in Latin to be valid.

[quote]You mean like replacing the word LATRIA for worship?[/quote]
God forbid anyone should use any words not in [i]English[/i], the language God Himself spoke as recorded by King James when he wrote the Bible!

[quote]or from the Catholic side, send some middle of the fence poster of some vague religion--who wont even admit to anyone what she is exactly, to post 10 threads on whether cats should drive or why God allows fish to be eaten and not cows during Lent.[/quote]
I don't "send" Dairygirl to post here, nor does anyone else, as far as I'm aware.
Is it too much for Budge to believe that a "middle of the fence poster" can post on an internet message board of her own free will, without some vast sinister Jesuit conspiracy being involved?
(And surely the Vatican's vast Conspiracy of Evil could come up with some cleverer form of deception than that!?)

[quote]What lack of evidence?[/quote]
You've yet to show where Sola Scriptura is proclaimed in the Bible.
(I believe there was a whole thread on that, where you couldn't be budged to answer - but I'll let someone less lazy than myself dig it up.)

[quote]Things are convienient when your authorities mandate and define their OWN authority isnt it?
All of them nah....

but the ones the Catholic Church holds up as leaders to emulate, sure {thats if you can even trust the words they attribute to them}
UUs and early deceivers...nah... I dont think even the early deceivers taught that Buddhist and Hindus could be Christians without "knowing it", that was made up later...[/quote]
So perhaps you could name [i]one[/i] Christian from the first centuries of the Church after the Bible who was not a "deceiver"?
Maybe we could start from there . . .

[quote]I havent emailed anyone here.

I dont think Ive even left very many comment on any profiles...maybe twice?

Im the one thats got people chasing me over debates I left 3 months ago.[/quote]
I haven't emailed you either, nor do I intend to.
Remember, my post is just a tongue-in-cheek response to the "Catholic Apologetics Technique" list you are so fond of posting here - and it's really no more silly or inaccurate than the original.

Asking that you engage in debate rather than hit-and-run attacks is hardly "stalking."

Edited September 6, 2007 by Socrates

[Budge]

[quote]Whatever.
The world "hates" L. Ron Hubbard too, but that still doesn't mean he's not deluded nutjob or a liar.
Many things in Chick tracts are outright lies and fabrications. (And the fact that he may sometimes post truth as well, does not make his lies any less lies.)[/quote]

I think its sad how you pawn eveyrone off as a "nutjob" that you disagree with.

Also if someone is sharing their sincere beliefs about a religion that is not LYING even if you believe said beliefs are wrong.

[quote]But if a Catholic agrees with a non-Christian on anything in anyway, that is proof-positive that the Church is in league with paganism.[/quote]

Hey I only post from articles and admit they are wrong about things. The Vatican has them over for interfaith pow-wows , thats definitely YOKING TOGETHER.

I still think the very fact the Catholic Church is deeply involved with a UU founded interfaith organization {WCRP} is of deep concern.


[quote]We worship the same Jesus whom the four Gospels teach about, and Who founded a Church on the Rock of St. Peter.
Who's your Jesus?[/quote]

You think you follow the same Jesus the four gospels teach about, I have some more hope for the less gung-ho Catholics who are more proto-Prots, but all of you who bow to the wafer and believe it is Jesus, you are following a false christ.

And if your standing on any other Rock but Jesus Christ, youre on sinking sand, no matter how great of a man Peter was.

[b]1Cr 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
[/b]
[quote]The Mass is mentioned in the four Gospels, as well as by St. Paul in I Cor. 11:27-32.[/quote]

Nothing like Catholic Masses through history and today...

no Latin, no ceremony, everyone breaking bread together...
[quote]And no one (except maybe the most far-out "rad-trad") says the Mass has to be in Latin to be valid.[/quote]

Well that wasnt til the 1960s, so....before hand it did have to be said in Latin...

[quote]God forbid anyone should use any words not in English, the language God Himself spoke as recorded by King James when he wrote the Bible![/quote]

Who cares if its in another language, the fact of the matter is, its a word used to cover, what is being done.
[quote]I don't "send" Dairygirl to post here, nor does anyone else, as far as I'm aware.
Is it too much for Budge to beleive that a "middle of the fence poster" can post on an internet message board of her own free will, without some vast sinister Jesuit conspiracy being involved?
(And surely the Vatican's vast Conspiracy of Evil could come up with some cleverer form of deception than that!?)[/quote]

Well it wouldnt be the Vatican just bored person here.

She still hasnt answered my question as to what religion she is?

It is very interesting to me how her confusion is so willingly tolerated here, none of you ever seem to correct her even as to Catholic teachings.
[quote]You've yet to show where Sola Scriptura is proclaimed in the Bible.
I believe there was a whole thread on that, where you couldn't be budged to answer - but I'll let someone less lazy than myself dig it up.)[/quote]

Theres no Magisterium in the Bible either. {Jesus preached call no man MASTER {Magisterium}

Im sorry you dont see scripture as the main authority you should invest yourself in....love for Gods Word is a fruit of salvation.

The Catholic Church's biggest curse to the world is chaing scripture away from people's hearts.

[quote]So perhaps you could name one Christian from the first centuries of the Church after the Bible who was not a "deceiver"?
Maybe we could start from there . . .[/quote]

Name them? You think that the world loved true Christians and made them all "famous"? The real saints are those who died unknown all but to God. Rome has advanced the deceivers for centuries.

Even today most of the celeb pastors and more even outside of Catholicism are wolves in sheep's clothing, I doubt that has changed much. Why do you trust in people, that won the adulation and love of the world when Jesus taught the complete opposite.

Look at the Pope, cover of Time magazine, loved by the world also. Thats doesnt bode well.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]She still hasnt answered my question as to what religion she is?[/quote]

actually i did. in another thread. there's several posts to you that are not addressed back to me. i realize you are busy, i can tell with all these posts, so i don't take too much beef with it.

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=72449&st=40&start=40"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...40&start=40[/url]

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=72107&st=60&start=60"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...60&start=60[/url]

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Budge' post='1379286' date='Sep 6 2007, 04:01 AM']Theres no Magisterium in the Bible either. {Jesus preached call no man MASTER {Magisterium}[/quote]

I'm confused - maybe I'm reading this post incorrectly. You say that the Bible is the sole source of authority, all Socrates was asking was where that could be found in the Bible. For if the Bible is indeed the sole source of authority, one would think it would say so. But your post makes it sound like you're saying both sola Scriptura and the Magisterium are unbiblical, which is contradicting what you have previously said about the Bible (that is, that sola Scriptura is valid). So my question here is if you are saying that neither is in the Bible. Or if I read your post incorrectly, please forgive me - I'm not entirely awake yet this morning.

Edited September 6, 2007 by Archaeology cat

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Budge' post='1379286' date='Sep 5 2007, 11:01 PM']I think its sad how you pawn eveyrone off as a "nutjob" that you disagree with.

Also if someone is sharing their sincere beliefs about a religion that is not LYING even if you believe said beliefs are wrong.[/quote]

Um, no. Lying in lying. The culpability of the lie might change if the person unknowingly spreads it. But unless you believe in various "truths" and that everyone can decide for themselves what is true, than spreading a falsehood is lying.

[quote]no Latin, no ceremony, everyone breaking bread together...[/quote]
right... I forgot... rock bands and power point sermons were what they had in the catecombs....

[quote]Well that wasnt til the 1960s, so....before hand it did have to be said in Latin...[/quote]
Why do you refuse to understand that small t traditions can change? Just because it [i]was[/i] always said in Latin does not mean that it was theologically necessary. And it wasn't always said in Latin. The first masses were in Greek. So what?



[quote]Well it wouldnt be the Vatican just bored person here.

She still hasnt answered my question as to what religion she is

It is very interesting to me how her confusion is so willingly tolerated here, none of you ever seem to correct her even as to Catholic teachings.[/quote]

Oh, pulease.... Dairy has been here longer than I have. I'm memeber number 737. So, which of the previous 736 members are you accusing of having a second account and posting as her? The fact is, I can rarely make heads or tails out of her posts (sorry dairy), but that doesn't mean that other members do not dialogue with her. And, yes, as she has mentioned, she did answer you question in another post.

[quote]The Catholic Church's biggest curse to the world is chaing scripture away from people's hearts.
Name them? You think that the world loved true Christians and made them all "famous"? The real saints are those who died unknown all but to God. Rome has advanced the deceivers for centuries.[/quote]

So, let me get this right... Any ancient Christian that anyone may have heard of is a false Christian? The True Christians no one heard of..... So much for a City on a Hill.

[Mary-Kathryn]

[quote name='"Kyrie eleison' post='1378633' date='Sep 5 2007, 02:39 PM']Just curious in the case of Budge and others I have come across and their EFFORTS to convince us to leave the Church, when is it appropriate for one to shake the dust OFF our feet? With her every post to DISCREDIT the CHURCH she does nothing but STRENGTHEN my FAITH in the BRIDE of CHRIST.

I have noticied in her last posts that she seems to be LOSING IT and EGGING US ON and more determined to prove her case.

It is obvious that she is on a MISSION and this HATRED for the CHURCH has CONSUMED her BEING.[/quote]


Budge does not come and stay just to keep poking at everyone. Budge stays for a much deeper reason than perhaps even she can admit. Let time do its work. The excellent answers will continue to dispel all the myths. I truly believe that Budge will make an awesome Catholic.