Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

September 11, 2025, 04:13:59 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Shoutbox

 

Phidippides

2025 Apr 21 23:36:36
Happy Easter!
 

Phidippides

2025 Apr 18 14:16:36
Today is Good Friday. Think of how often you see the Cross - churches, signs, jewelry, etc.  It all points to this day.
 

Donald Baker

2024 Apr 26 11:53:47
Boy this site sure is dead.  Did the Rapture happen already? ;D
 

Phidippides

2024 Mar 31 01:32:32
Happy Easter! 🐰🐣✝️⛪
 

Phidippides

2024 Mar 29 16:59:45
Today is Good Friday. ✝️

Recent

Members
  • Total Members: 3
  • Latest: skiguy
Stats
  • Total Posts: 392
  • Total Topics: 93
  • Online today: 55
  • Online ever: 331
  • (June 28, 2025, 03:00:00 PM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 5
Total: 5

Theme Select





5 Guests, 0 Users

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Didn't you first float this debate challenge back around 2008 or something?  Lol, I could be wrong, but I thought you asked for it earlier than July 2022.
22
For there to ever be unity, the RCC must relinquish its claim as the universal head of all churches.  Protestant denominations will never accept one supreme authority over them other than Jesus Christ Himself.
 

Why do you say this?  I ask because it seems like each Protestant congregation has to have its own form of authority within itself anyway.  While I'm not sure how such congregations are organized or how authority is distributed, certainly someone is making final decisions in regard to theological matters.  Couldn't union with the Catholic Church simply be considered in this light?

In other words, when an important theological matter comes up within the Southern Baptists, I assume that there are certain churches within the larger congregation that get to vote on the matter, and people declare that the Church has spoken, correct?  Some congregants will like the outcome, while others will not, but everyone is required to follow such a teaching.

Quote
As for theological differences, they would have to be watered down to the point all denominations could accept.  Any deviation away from the simplest form of the Gospel would immediately invite Schism.
I do realize that theological differences would be particularly difficult to reconcile.  Part of this is due to cultural associations tied to theology that is not easy to break.  My guess is that this would be the easiest with denominations that already have some existing theological beliefs that are someone similar to what the Catholic Church holds.
23
Still waiting for an atheist or agnostic to join and debate.  Is that fear I smell? :)
24
For there to ever be unity, the RCC must relinquish its claim as the universal head of all churches.  Protestant denominations will never accept one supreme authority over them other than Jesus Christ Himself. 

As for theological differences, they would have to be watered down to the point all denominations could accept.  Any deviation away from the simplest form of the Gospel would immediately invite Schism.
25
We've talked about this a while ago, but there are two fundamental questions regarding Catholic/Protestant churches:
  • Should they be brought into unity?
  • What would it take to make this happen?
Each of these questions is critical.  To the first, I say a resounding "yes!".  Unity should be a goal that is sought.  I realize that others, however, may not share such a goal. 

Assuming for the moment that #1 is not the issue, how could #2 be accomplished?  This would be an incredibly difficult challenge, one the has eluded Christians for centuries.  Still, "nothing is impossible with God", so unity is not out of the question.

The theological issues would have to be ironed out that began since Martin Luther.  However, I believe that over the years, progress at common understanding has actually been made between Catholics and Protestants, so it's not as if they would be starting from scratch.  However, there would still be massive challenges in this regard.

Another issue that would have to be dealt with is structural/administration.  Would they exist as different "rites" under the same umbrella?

Are there other big issues that would have to be rectified?
26
Yes.  Consider these realities:

1) The J6 riots were relatively minor in terms of damage, and rioters caused no loss of life.  While conceding that the symbolic effect was high, the actual harm committed was quite low.  Nevertheless, the political left treated is disproportionately for political theater, even going so far as to claim it was "worse than 9/11".

2) We now know of at least some involvement of the federal government in the J6 riot.  The full extent is unknown at this time, but it appears that there was likely some instigation that is being hidden from public knowledge.

3) We know that the J6 riot served as a pretext for a massive crackdown on Democrats' political opponents.  This crackdown was not limited to hunting down those who committed felonies, but those who either committed very minor infractions, and in some cases, those who do not seem to have broken any laws at all.

4) We know the media plays an instrumental role in exaggerating events in order to favor a left-leaning worldview, while also excluding facts and storylines that would favor a reality-based worldview.  The power of the media in shaping public opinion is extremely high, and the political disposition of the media seems to be further and further to the left.   

5) We also know that the left is able to advance its policies most effectively in times of crisis or tragedy.  Consider how voting rules during COVID were modified to benefit Democratic candidates, or how gun restrictions gain the most support by politicians (even some Republicans) in the aftermath of mass shootings.

Put these all together, and we have a potential playbook for the left going forward.  They can have the federal government instigate some sort of event (#2) that is even somewhat minor in the scheme of things (#1), the media will attempt to craft public opinion about the event (#4), and the political left will be able to mobilize the federal government to target dissent (#3).  In addition, a strong psychological reaction by the public would create widespread support for laws or federal policies that institutionalize objectives that the left would not be able to do in normal times (#5).

 
27
So you seem to be indicating provocation and even False Flags will be used to bait the Right into open rebellion so the Left, while still in power, can use whatever excuse they can come up with to suspend our Republic so they can crush dissent and remain in power perpetually?
28
Democrats are already setting the stage for a Civil War if we have a hung election.  Bill Gates believes this.

I think the ball is pretty much in the hands of left right now.  They are tired of democracy because it doesn't allow them to achieve their objectives.  It hasn't for a while, which is why their main political agenda is to promote fear (of Trump, of mythical "white supremacists", of climate change, etc.). 

With this in mind, if the left wanted to abolish democracy, all it would have to do is to push people on the right far enough that at least some people react in rebellion.  Eventually, someone will react violently.  Even if it's a small rebellion (with 100 people or so), the left could use this as an excuse to crack down on the right completely, arrest GOP congressmen, perhaps suspend elections, etc. 
29
Re-reading this thread from four years ago, it seems almost prophetic.  In fact, nothing about the original prediction has changed; we're just closer to a national division.

It does make one wonder, though, for how long this will drag on.  Could America be in a state of a "warm war" for another ten years?  Or more?  I'm referring to harsh and nasty political in-fighting, vigilante attacks, jailing political rivals, weaponizing law enforcement, and political moves that effectively destroy American government (e.g. packing the court).  I don't know the U.S. Civil War well enough to know how long things dragged on at an elevated rate before Harper's Ferry.

Democrats are already setting the stage for a Civil War if we have a hung election.  Bill Gates believes this.
30
Re-reading this thread from four years ago, it seems almost prophetic.  In fact, nothing about the original prediction has changed; we're just closer to a national division.

It does make one wonder, though, for how long this will drag on.  Could America be in a state of a "warm war" for another ten years?  Or more?  I'm referring to harsh and nasty political in-fighting, vigilante attacks, jailing political rivals, weaponizing law enforcement, and political moves that effectively destroy American government (e.g. packing the court).  I don't know the U.S. Civil War well enough to know how long things dragged on at an elevated rate before Harper's Ferry.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10