A Glaring Example Of Vaticanese

[Eutychus]

[quote] why I'm telling them this and not stone me or scourge me, but in fact thank me. Not only is my method on average faster, but I also get more converts than you.[/quote]

{ for ONCE I am dead serious here....ok?}

The wrong kind of "convert" comes from this approach.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE take a look at this, without ANY agenda here.

Watch the segment, [color="#CC0000"][b][i]HELLS BEST KEPT SECRET[/i][/b][/color]

[url="http://www.wayofthemaster.com/learntoshare.shtml"][b]CLICK HERE - WORKS TOO - PLEASE WATCH IT NON DENOMINATIONAL[/b][/url]

Edited September 10, 2006 by Eutychus

[Farsight one]

I listened to the whole thing. It was quite interesting, and I'm listening to the other one right now. I took some notes, which I'm leaving in the topic. Don't read 'em if you don't want, but they're there if you want to.

[quote]Scare tactics? boo...

people turn away by my method, but at least they got a chance

when talking to people, we really go about it the same way. fully explained.

better flight=better life
jump to come=eternal life

the honestly wanting to convert and repent
guy didn't know what sin was
reverted back to sinfulness
but I would be sure to explain the difference

the guy's kind of funny. such a thing as a christian comedian?

don't want to be saved till they know they're in danger
so i tell them they're in danger after they're my friend
they trust to speak the truth, but not a stranger

sinners have all seen the disease, they just don't recognize it as such

a fornicator and blasphemer can still be a christian

turns the light on slowly, so as not to blind and offend
expose one to the faith patiently?

jesus loves you - no biblical basis for it
doesn't say anything about man coming out of the deep sleep either

did the track cut out and change to another speech half way through?
heard a click and everything sounded different

by the good of God, he MUST punish sinners, rather than overlook
...unless they repent?

xrays won't show poison

all about converting for the right motive instead of the wrong

nope, not scare tactics.[/quote]

Anyways, listening to it helped me to better understand why you choose your method of evangelization. I think I have to stick with my method though. Converting people has often been looked at as a war. In a war the enemy has infantry, tanks, artillery, aircraft, anti aircraft guns, maybe a or two, etc, etc. If the good guys use only infantry in a battle, the tanks will rip them apart. If they use only artillery, the aircraft will destroy them with ease. In a war you HAVE to use many different types of units/methods of attack, or you will fail horribly.
Your method may work on group one, but not group two, and my method may work on group two, but not group one.

[Winchester]

But cutting the supply lines always works.


And as for focusing (in part) on social work, acts of mercy are God approved. All that least of my people, thing that good ole Jesus rambled on about. Easy to overlook between the condemn your enemies and the suffering of the unbelievers, and not as fun or good at massaging the old ego, but hey who thinks people have an easier time believing in a loving and charitable God if His supposed followers help ease their earthly pains?

[stbernardLT]

It realy scares me how Budge and Eutychus will believe any source they find. I couldn't even agree with that many internet sources if I tried. This should be a sign of a blind protestant approach. Their main agenda is anything noncatholic to the point that they don't even consider truth anymore. They will spew anything and everything that looks good, regardless of the actual honesty in the content.

There is no possible way that anyone could know for a fact that these things you post are true, are whether are not they are exaggerated.

I miss the days when phatmassers would post something and we would discuss and critique it, instead of everything popping up being claimed to be facts, by overzealous (not about Jesus, but about their anticatholic agenda) protestants.

Oh and by the way you guys are VERY, VERY predictable. I can pretty much see the future when it come to your post. I hope this isn't your method of evangelization, because I know protestants who are a lot more successful with a more relaxed style.

[Eutychus]

[quote]Oh and by the way you guys are VERY, VERY predictable. I can pretty much see the future when it come to your post. I hope this isn't your method of evangelization, because I know protestants who are a lot more successful with a more relaxed style. [/quote]

For starters, I guess this is the fith time ... I'm NOT a Protestant. My church never left Rome, isn't protesting Rome, nor much cares one way or the other what the idol venerators and pretenders in petticoats do, teach, or misuse.

That being said, and it needed to be said, you make the claim that we are predictable?

Read over the TOPICS raised here. Frankly the only ones that are interesting seem to be raised by Budge. In my dealings with Catholics online, I generally find them to be the least interesting people, less interested in history, politics, and the like.

But thank you for noticing anyway. It is gratifying to know that people notice you.

[brandelynmarie]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1059809' date='Sep 9 2006, 07:27 PM']
it's a desert oasis, not a desert island...
[/quote]


whoops! my bad!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1059098' date='Sep 8 2006, 03:21 PM']
Ok you tell me the difference then.

PRAY TOGETHER or

TO BE TOGETHER AND PRAY.

More straining of gnats from the Pharisees of confusion.

All to fool you folks into universalism.
[/quote]

In the first, "together" is modifying the verb "pray." It is therefore acting adverbally. In the second, "together" is modifying the subject. It is therefore acting adjectivally.

Therefore, in the first, the praying is done as one. In the second, the praying can be separate, but the people are together in physical proximity.