[quote]forbes wrote:
Another thread for questions and answers. This may be annoying to some, but whatever, I have questions that I seem to have a hard time finding answers for. I want first hand Catholic input, not from another source that doesn’t accurately represent Catholicism.
By the way I want to say that I have only respect and these questions are to only understand.
My first question deals with tradition. Where in scripture does it say that we are to obey the traditions of our early church fathers, especially when some of them seem contradictory to scriptures?[/quote]
And I say to thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give
thee the keys to the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever thou shalt
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven’" (St. Matt. 16:13-20).
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.”(Matthew 16:19; 18:18) “Receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained.”(John 20:23)
John 16:12-15
12 "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth;
(BTW the last one pretty much knocks out the need for a Pope “vicar of Christ on earth” or a belief in an infallible Bible, because it says that the Holy Spirt, not the Pope nor the Bible will lead you into all truth.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
(BTW the last one pretty much knocks out the need for a Pope “vicar of Christ on earth” or a belief in an infallible Bible, because it says that the Holy Spirt, not the Pope nor the Bible will lead you into all truth. [/quote]
[quote]forbes wrote:
So do you have an idea who or what the Whore of Babylon is?[/quote]
An idea who? No, that would be a little difficult, since it is a prophesy. What? Yes, John talks about what it is. I am not familiar with the Whore of Babylon, because it doesn’t come up much, even with my Baptist friends.
I assume that’s because they dare not cross certain lines as most of them seem to respect me because of my stature as a heavy-weight wrestler and thrower and as an officer in the local 4H, FFA, rodeo society, wrestling and boxing club, and member of the hunting and gun cllub. Or, maybe because their mothers told them if they didn’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. Since, they are from the South and for the sake of my pride, I am going to go with the latter.
Whenever someone does try to say something about the Church though, I just have to remember what Jesus said: “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household” (Matt. 10:25).
And, if I may ask what do you disagree with the Church about (like what topics)? Sola Fide, Sola Scripture, call no man father, &c.?
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
(BTW the last one pretty much knocks out the need for a Pope “vicar of Christ on earth” or a belief in an infallible Bible, because it says that the Holy Spirt, not the Pope nor the Bible will lead you into all truth. [/quote]
How does it? If I may ask?[/quote]
As Pope Leo III (a saint of the RC church) said: The Spirit is present in ecumenical councils which represent all diocese of the “church” (ecclasia), and whose authority stands above that of a single mere pope.
the Church (Ecclasia) is what Christ said the spirit would lead into all truth. The Church is the body of Christ, and the people are the members.
The Roman Catholic church has actually developed a new theology in the past 100 year that Christ exists in 3 venues: At the right hand of the Father in heaven, in the Eucharist, and in the person of his Vicar on Earth the Pope of Roman. Prior to that change, the third part stated “in his body the CHURCH (Ecclasia)”
And Peter was never even the pope or bishop of Rome. He died there. Before he went there he wrote letters to the bishop of Rome, Linus, and the Roman list of Popes includes “names” of Popes which are not even names, they are prepositions describing who was ordained by whom.
I had a conversation (not a conversion, although I have those daily) today, in which I discussed the topic of Sola Fide. It was about 7.5 hours long, it was mostly me asking questions to my Presbyterian friend who is going into the seminary to become a minister for the Presbyterian Church in America. This man and I have passed more money back and forth from challenges and dares than anyone else I know of. So, I am in a challenge mood…for money!
I have wanted to do a challenge, with Sola Fide. And well, I just never had the gumption to do it, and I have been increasingly and increasingly more and more tempted to do it. So, I want to run it by you Forbes and anyone who wishes to make a comment (I know people read but don’t comment looking at the views, I guess this is a good way to get comments in this thread) on the challenge and prize.
The challenge I am thinking of, I have dubbed…All or Nothing Catholic Challenge! Sounds exciting.
This would be to anyone: Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist, or event Atheists!
It’s a two-part challenge though, no fun if there is no stakes for the other person.
The first part of the challenge would be: To find one legitimate passage of Scripture (Bible) that says we’re saved or justified by Faith Alone (Sola Fide).
Who could participate: Anyone!
The offer would be: I will send you a cashiers check for every penny I have in my name ($500, sorry I’m a University student). And, on top of putting my money where my mouth is, I’ll put my soul there, too. If anyone can show me that one passage I will renounce Catholicism and I will go to service that next Sunday worship G-d next to them in their church.
The second part of the challenge would be: For me to show you one passage in Scripture that we are not saved or justified by faith alone.
Offer: $500 and renounce your faith tradition and worship in the Catholic Church with me. Actually, to make it more intriguing I will take away the $500 and go with the latter part. If anyone will take up my offer and I win the challenge they will renounce their faith tradition and they come (not even to where I live, but to their local Catholic Church) and worship G-d in the Catholic Church with me on Sunday.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
And Peter was never even the pope or bishop of Rome. He died there.[/quote]
Did you get into some Dan Brown novels?
Well, I think the Early Church Fathers would have to disagree with you when they list Peter as the First Pope and the Bishop of Rome.[/quote]
If he was the first Bishop of Rome then how was there a church in Rome when he wrote to them?
When I talk to RC scholars about the apostolic succession of Rome, they admit it. They basically resort the line that he was the head of the church, and the Apostle who went to Rome, and he died there, but there was a church in Rome with a Bishop before he ever got there.
“The Apostolic Constitutions[10] says that Linus was the first bishop of Rome and was ordained by Paul, and that he was succeeded by Clement, who was ordained by Peter. Cletus is given as Linus’s successor by Irenaeus and the others cited above who present Linus either as the first bishop of Rome or, if they give Peter as the first, as the second.”
Also, Anticletus is listed as the 3rd bishop of Rome, but Anticletus means AFTER Cletus.
One line says: Peter Cletus Anticletus Clement and Anticletus was listed as a Pope as a result.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I had a conversation (not a conversion, although I have those daily) today, in which I discussed the topic of Sola Fide. It was about 7.5 hours long, it was mostly me asking questions to my Presbyterian friend who is going into the seminary to become a minister for the Presbyterian Church in America. This man and I have passed more money back and forth from challenges and dares than anyone else I know of. So, I am in a challenge mood…for money!
I have wanted to do a challenge, with Sola Fide. And well, I just never had the gumption to do it, and I have been increasingly and increasingly more and more tempted to do it. So, I want to run it by you Forbes and anyone who wishes to make a comment (I know people read but don’t comment looking at the views, I guess this is a good way to get comments in this thread) on the challenge and prize.
The challenge I am thinking of, I have dubbed…All or Nothing Catholic Challenge! Sounds exciting.
This would be to anyone: Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist, or event Atheists!
It’s a two-part challenge though, no fun if there is no stakes for the other person.
The first part of the challenge would be: To find one legitimate passage of Scripture (Bible) that says we’re saved or justified by Faith Alone (Sola Fide).
Who could participate: Anyone!
The offer would be: I will send you a cashiers check for every penny I have in my name ($500, sorry I’m a University student). And, on top of putting my money where my mouth is, I’ll put my soul there, too. If anyone can show me that one passage I will renounce Catholicism and I will go to service that next Sunday worship G-d next to them in their church.
The second part of the challenge would be: For me to show you one passage in Scripture that we are not saved or justified by faith alone.
Offer: $500 and renounce your faith tradition and worship in the Catholic Church with me. Actually, to make it more intriguing I will take away the $500 and go with the latter part. If anyone will take up my offer and I win the challenge they will renounce their faith tradition and they come (not even to where I live, but to their local Catholic Church) and worship G-d in the Catholic Church with me on Sunday.[/quote]
MAIN POINT, the Greek word Pistis conventionally means “faithfulness” not some abstract blind belief. Faithfulness is “acting faithfully”. The Jews had no concept of faith either, without faithfulness, or faithful obedience to the laws of God. My position: The word faith as we know of it in English today had no equivalent at the time of the Bible. The only concept was one of acting in a faithful manner. So we are not judged by the MAGNITUDE of our works, but the faithfulness with which we do them.
Liturgy of St. Basil:
Having made man by taking dust from the earth, and having honored him with Your own image, O God, You placed him in a garden of delight, promising him eternal life and the enjoyment of everlasting blessings in the observance of Your commandments. But when he disobeyed You, the true God who had created him, and was led astray by the deception of the serpent becoming subject to death through his own transgressions, You, O God, in Your righteous judgment, expelled him from paradise into this world, returning him to the earth from which he was taken, yet providing for him the salvation of regeneration in Your Christ. For You did not forever reject Your creature whom You made, O Good One, nor did You forget the work of Your hands, but because of Your tender compassion, You visited him in various ways: You sent forth prophets; You performed mighty works by Your saints who in every generation have pleased You. You spoke to us by the mouth of Your servants the prophets, announcing to us the salvation which was to come; You gave us the law to help us; You appointed angels as guardians. And when the fullness of time had come, You spoke to us through Your Son Himself, through whom You created the ages. He, being the splendor of Your glory and the image of Your being, upholding all things by the word of His power, thought it not robbery to be equal with You, God and Father. But, being God before all ages, He appeared on earth and lived with humankind. Becoming incarnate from a holy Virgin, He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, conforming to the body of our lowliness, that He might change us in the likeness of the image of His glory. For, since through man sin came into the world and through sin death, it pleased Your only begotten Son, who is in Your bosom, God and Father, born of a woman, the holy God-bearer and ever virgin Mary; born under the law, to condemn sin in His flesh, so that those who died in Adam may be brought to life in Him, Your Christ. He lived in this world, and gave us precepts of salvation. Releasing us from the delusions of idolatry, He guided us to the sure knowledge of You, the true God and Father. He acquired us for Himself, as His chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. Having cleansed us by water and sanctified us with the Holy Spirit, He gave Himself as ransom to death in which we were held captive, sold under sin. Descending into Hades through the cross, that He might fill all things with Himself, He loosed the bonds of death. He rose on the third day, having opened a path for all flesh to the resurrection from the dead, since it was not possible that the Author of life would be dominated by corruption. So He became the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep, the first born of the dead, that He might be Himself the first in all things. Ascending into heaven, He sat at the right hand of Your majesty on high and He will come to render to each according to His works. As memorials of His saving passion, He has left us these gifts which we have set forth before You according to His commands. For when He was about to go forth to His voluntary, ever memorable, and life-giving death, on the night on which He was delivered up for the life of the world, He took bread in His holy and pure hands, and presenting it to You, God and Father, and offering thanks, blessing, sanctifying, and breaking it He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles saying: â??Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you and for the forgiveness of sins.â?? And likewise, He took the cup of the fruit of vine, and having mingled it, offering thanks, blessing, and sanctifying it He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles saying: â??Drink of this all of you. This is my blood of the new Covenant, shed for you and for many, for the forgiveness of sins. Do this in remembrance of me. For as often as you eat this Bread and drink this Cup, you proclaim my death, and you confess my resurrection.
Paschal homily of John Chrysostom
If any man be devout and loveth God,
Let him enjoy this fair and radiant triumphal feast!
If any man be a wise servant,
Let him rejoicing enter into the joy of his Lord.
If any have laboured long in fasting,
Let him how receive his recompense.
If any have wrought from the first hour,
Let him today receive his just reward.
If any have come at the third hour,
Let him with thankfulness keep the feast.
If any have arrived at the sixth hour,
Let him have no misgivings;
Because he shall in nowise be deprived therefore.
If any have delayed until the ninth hour,
Let him draw near, fearing nothing.
And if any have tarried even until the eleventh hour,
Let him, also, be not alarmed at his tardiness.
For the Lord, who is jealous of his honour,
Will accept the last even as the first.
He giveth rest unto him who cometh at the eleventh hour,
Even as unto him who hath wrought from the first hour.
And He showeth mercy upon the last,
And careth for the first;
And to the one He giveth,
And upon the other He bestoweth gifts.
And He both accepteth the deeds,
And welcometh the intention,
And honoureth the acts and praises the offering.
Wherefore, enter ye all into the joy of your Lord;
Receive your reward,
Both the first, and likewise the second.
You rich and poor together, hold high festival!
You sober and you heedless, honour the day!
Rejoice today, both you who have fasted
And you who have disregarded the fast.
The table is full-laden; feast ye all sumptuously.
The calf is fatted; let no one go hungry away.
Enjoy ye all the feast of faith:
Receive ye all the riches of loving-kindness.
Let no one bewail his poverty,
For the universal Kingdom has been revealed.
Let no one weep for his iniquities,
For pardon has shown forth from the grave.
Let no one fear death,
For the Saviour’s death has set us free.
He that was held prisoner of it has annihilated it.
By descending into Hell, He made Hell captive.
He embittered it when it tasted of His flesh.
And Isaiah, foretelling this, did cry:
Hell, said he, was embittered
When it encountered Thee in the lower regions.
It was embittered, for it was abolished.
It was embittered, for it was mocked.
It was embittered, for it was slain.
It was embittered, for it was overthrown.
It was embittered, for it was fettered in chains.
It took a body, and met God face to face.
It took earth, and encountered Heaven.
It took that which was seen, and fell upon the unseen.
O Death, where is thy sting?
O Hell, where is thy victory?
Christ is risen, and thou art overthrown!
Christ is risen, and the demons are fallen!
Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice!
Christ is risen, and life reigns!
Christ is risen, and not one dead remains in the grave.
For Christ, being risen from the dead,
Is become the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< My position: The word faith as we know of it in English today had no equivalent at the time of the Bible. >>>[/quote]Hebrews 11:1 [quote]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. [/quote]The word here is pistis. Word studies have their limitations.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< My position: The word faith as we know of it in English today had no equivalent at the time of the Bible. >>>[/quote]Hebrews 11:1
[quote]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. [/quote]The word here is pistis. Word studies have their limitations.
[/quote]
Yes the word is pistis meaining “faithfulness” in coine Greek. I don’t see an issue with saying that “faithfulness” is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of things not seen. You could just as easily say that faithful good works are the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
So if you are trying to say that “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” is equivalent to what “saved by faith” Christians mean, I think you have failed. You have shown the opposite, that the biblical meaning of Pistis was that it was something SUBSTANTIAL and EVIDENT!
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
And Peter was never even the pope or bishop of Rome. He died there.[/quote]
Did you get into some Dan Brown novels?
Well, I think the Early Church Fathers would have to disagree with you when they list Peter as the First Pope and the Bishop of Rome.[/quote]
If he was the first Bishop of Rome then how was there a church in Rome when he wrote to them?[/quote]
What letter did Peter write to Rome, 1 Peter or 2 Peter? Because both likely were sent to Asia Minor.
[quote]
When I talk to RC scholars about the apostolic succession of Rome, they admit it. They basically resort the line that he was the head of the church, and the Apostle who went to Rome, and he died there, but there was a church in Rome with a Bishop before he ever got there.[/quote]
Okay, and I can get a scholar who calls himself an ‘Catholic’ scholar to admit that the Church really doesn’t believe in the Real Presence. I could careless what “scholars” say, I care what the Church says and what the truth is. We have so much dissent in the Church, I almost exclusively listen to the Pope.
As, I heard a talk show host put it, there is a shortage of vocations for the priesthood, but no shortage of vocation for the papacy.
What is this supposed to show me?
I see, well let’s take the first line of the page, “Pope Saint Linus (d. ca. 76) was, according to several early sources, Bishop of the diocese of Rome after Saint Peter.”
So…since that is taken care of.
Really, because every day, I here “St. Peter, Linus, Cletus, Clement, and all the Martyrs, Mary and Joseph pray for us.” The list of Popes being longer depending on variables, but I can rattle off the the first Popes no problem.
Sorry, I don’t put much weight on dissenters 2000 years and put more weigh on the Church Fathers. After all, that is the tradition I am following.
Let’s no forget what Paul says in the next verse, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which G-d prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”
Really, because every day, I here “St. Peter, Linus, Cletus, Clement, and all the Martyrs, Mary and Joseph pray for us.” The list of Popes being longer depending on variables, but I can rattle off the the first Popes no problem.
Sorry, I don’t put much weight on dissenters 2000 years and put more weigh on the Church Fathers. After all, that is the tradition I am following.[/quote]
Yes Anticletus was removed during the Renaissance when they realized he was a preposition.
I miswrote that Peter sent letters to Rome. Paul sent letters to the established Roman Church before Peter went to Rome.
But I am not really sure it matters. The whole church, east and west placed the Bishop of Rome as the PRIME patriarch, which he should be. The problem was placing the Pope above eccumenical councils which began as the west became cut off from the east and Islam grew and western church officials didn’t want to have to send all their Bishops to an Eastern city to form a council, and as the western church was pressured by Charlemeign to split from Byzantium so that he could be the Christian emperor.
The creed that is posted on the Vatican building on silver and gold shields is the Eastern form of the creed sans et Fili. Pope Leo III and other Popes proclaimed that that ecumenical creed should never be altered (although locally used creeds could include et fili and other phraseology). The Orthodox church was excommunicated for defending this rule of prior Popes, several of whom are recognized as saint. It was pure politics-cut off the Eastern empire so Chuck could be the Holy Roman Emperor.
The challenge I am thinking of, I have dubbed…All or Nothing Catholic Challenge! Sounds exciting.
This would be to anyone: Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist, or event Atheists!
It’s a two-part challenge though, no fun if there is no stakes for the other person.
The first part of the challenge would be: To find one legitimate passage of Scripture (Bible) that says we’re saved or justified by Faith Alone (Sola Fide).
Who could participate: Anyone!
The offer would be: I will send you a cashiers check for every penny I have in my name ($500, sorry I’m a University student). And, on top of putting my money where my mouth is, I’ll put my soul there, too. If anyone can show me that one passage I will renounce Catholicism and I will go to service that next Sunday worship G-d next to them in their church.
[/quote]
No need to make this difficult:
According to your faith will it be done to you (Matt 9:29).
If you have faith that you are saved by faith alone, it will be done to you accordingly. This verse has infinite implications. If you have enough faith in ANYTHING!, it will be done to you accordingly. Examples: the Rosary, the Tarot, the I Ching, a lucky hat, superstition, Communion, etc.
I am clearly not an atheist but don’t belong to a Church now. Tell you what, I’ll accept the $500 and put it towards greens fees and a cart at Sunday morning worship at the Church of Links.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< My position: The word faith as we know of it in English today had no equivalent at the time of the Bible. >>>[/quote]Hebrews 11:1
[quote]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. [/quote]The word here is pistis. Word studies have their limitations.
[/quote]
Yes the word is pistis meaining “faithfulness” in coine Greek. I don’t see an issue with saying that “faithfulness” is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of things not seen. You could just as easily say that faithful good works are the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
So if you are trying to say that “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” is equivalent to what “saved by faith” Christians mean, I think you have failed. You have shown the opposite, that the biblical meaning of Pistis was that it was something SUBSTANTIAL and EVIDENT!
[/quote]Read the rest of the chapter and get back to me. New Testament faith (pistis) absolutely IS the confident presuppositional conviction of that which cannot be apprehended through temporal, carnal methods and or means. THAT is what the above verse so clearly states that only someone utterly impervious to the force of clear communication could dispute it. I know what Koine Greek is BTW.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< My position: The word faith as we know of it in English today had no equivalent at the time of the Bible. >>>[/quote]Hebrews 11:1
[quote]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. [/quote]The word here is pistis. Word studies have their limitations.
[/quote]
Yes the word is pistis meaining “faithfulness” in coine Greek. I don’t see an issue with saying that “faithfulness” is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of things not seen. You could just as easily say that faithful good works are the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
So if you are trying to say that “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” is equivalent to what “saved by faith” Christians mean, I think you have failed. You have shown the opposite, that the biblical meaning of Pistis was that it was something SUBSTANTIAL and EVIDENT!
[/quote]Read the rest of the chapter and get back to me. New Testament faith (pistis) absolutely IS the confident presuppositional conviction of that which cannot be apprehended through temporal, carnal methods and or means. THAT is what the above verse so clearly states that only someone utterly impervious to the force of clear communication could dispute it. I know what Koine Greek is BTW.
[/quote]
I didn’t say you didn’t. Coine is also an appropo transliteration BTW as we use a hard c in the English equivalents.
Why did you post part of the chapter that calls Pistis SUBSTANTIAL and EVIDENTIARY?
Conviction is latin. The latin word conviction means DEMONSTRATION. So even confident, presuppositional conviction means ACTING in a FAITHFUL MANNER. So just as Pistis is an active, so are any equivalents you would use to try to define it and make it appear not to be.
Faith, as you think of it was a word created a couple hundred years ago at most. Did not exist before that.
1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
The “ancients” were specifically commended for FAITHFULNESS, and STEADFASTNESS time and time again in the OT.
2 By faith Abel brought God a better offering than Cain did. By faith he was commended as righteous, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith Abel still speaks, even though he is dead.
etc
All of these things “by faith” are faithful actions.
Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. The first 3 chapters of Galatians and the first 5 of Romans. Of course belief will bring attitudes and actions or it isn’t faith. http://strongsnumbers.com/greek/4102.htm
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. The first 3 chapters of Galatians and the first 5 of Romans. Of course belief will bring attitudes and actions or it isn’t faith. http://strongsnumbers.com/greek/4102.htm[/quote]
let me guess, the word for believed is also Pistis which means faithful action. Translation: Abraham was righteous because he did what God told him to do.
Furthermore, the Hebrew word Enumah, used to describe Abraham in the OT also means faithful or steadfast obedience. The Hebrews had no word for actionless “faith”.