[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
I must admit that I never realized that right living is so difficult, it’s like giving the right answer in the last round on who wants to be a millionaire. Wow. How stupid I have been, I mean, you guys blow my brain. Are you serious? Well, it’s rethoric, I know you are, but damn, what dedication. and I thought that watching my children leaving the nest, one by one, with a sound mind and the ability to sustain themselves, is enough.[/quote]
Even though someone side tracked a debate into a condemnation, theology is important. Not as important as loving your neighbor and taking care those that can’t fend for themselves. Yet still important and has its own forum.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I do sin, a lot. I was not religious for a long time, I have bad habits. I smoke, I drink, I fight. I cuss, I swear and spit. I am braggart and I hurt the one’s I love. I don’t hear the voice of God, and never have. I pray into darkness, even when I was ‘born again.’ The only thing that holds me to God is reasoning that He is there. He hasn’t blessed me with the gift of hearing or feeling his presence. Unlike most protestants, that doesn’t matter in the Catholic Church, as we come to God through reason and faith.
I’m a terrible cuss, and stubborn as a dead rock, but since I’ve joined the Church, I know that I am doing His deeds, even it is with a grunt and a snarl.[/quote]Do you? Please listen to me Chris. I don’t know how you do it, but you’ll probably be the only one who reads this post all the way through. Do you even see at all the contradiction in the above compared to these few of absolutely numerous bible passages? I am not beating you up because you have sin for God’s sake!!! I flipped both my middle fingers to heaven and loudly cursed God to His face with the filthiest most abusive language you can imagine. I dared Him to kill me. I can’t even repeat here the things I said. I was doing everything I knew better than and living a double life.
I went to church, paid my tithes (usually) and at work I didn’t curse, didn’t tell or listen to dirty jokes blah blah blah and even occasionally gave a spoken witness and defense of the gospel. At home I’d get drunk and either ignore or be verbally abusive to my family who I actually loved even through all this corruption. I’d surf porn and complain about everything in my life. “Oh no, not all high and mighty Trib”!!! I was a miserable human being and miserable to be around all the while with full knowledge of the truth of Jesus Christ. I am no better and in that light much worse than most people here. That’s not even mentioning the fat slovenly deplorable diabetic state my heath had fallen into.
As I screamed drunken obscenities, cursing God, so help me I heard Him speak in my heart “the robe and the ring are waiting, my son is about to come home”. He would not give me up. I righteously responded by drinking myself unconscious to escape the conviction. Faithful as He always is it wasn’t long after on a Saturday morning that I was all hung over and my daughter sheepishly reminded me that I told her we would go roller blading that day. I mumbled that I wasn’t up to it and saw her face fall… again and I saw my wife’s disgusted disappointment as I broke my word… again.
That was it. The Holy Spirit squeezed my heart until it broke. I locked myself in the bedroom with my bible for an hour and cried like a baby as I finally repented of positively sucking as a man, a husband, a father and a Christian. That was 5 years ago. I haven’t drank since (which I don’t believe is sin in itself btw). I started back into my bible and prayer full time. I do not look at porn, ever, and while I’ll always be a man fighting the struggles of my flesh the Lord has fully answered my prayers and my wife is the most magically desirable creature ever to walk on two legs. Our marriage has never been better. She is my Proverbs 31 dreamgirl, the thrill of my heart and the queen of my bed. I look forward to growing old with her. I am also healthier than 95% of men my age and have gained 45 lbs of muscle.
Most importantly of all I have the blinding smile of the God of heaven and earth on my life again. We are on the verge of homelessness and financial ruin but He is my Shepard I am NOT afraid and it is my unspeakable joy to please Him.
I AM FREE!!! Do you hear me? No sacerdotal superstition or cold clammy ceremony. I bowed before him crying “have mercy on me a sinner” (Luke 18) and HE DID!!! Are you free? Do you have peace with yourself or Him? It sure sounds like you’re trying to talk yourself into believing you do. Below are some samples of the biblical principles that made me free.
Romans 12:1-2 1-Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. 2-And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.
2 Corinthians 5:14-1714-For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; 15-and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf. 16-Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him in this way no longer. 17-Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.
Galations 5:16-25
16-But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17-For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. 18-But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. 19-Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20-idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21-envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22-But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23-gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24-Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25-If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. 26-Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.[/i]
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I do sin, a lot. I was not religious for a long time, I have bad habits. I smoke, I drink, I fight. I cuss, I swear and spit. I am braggart and I hurt the one’s I love. I don’t hear the voice of God, and never have. I pray into darkness, even when I was ‘born again.’ The only thing that holds me to God is reasoning that He is there. He hasn’t blessed me with the gift of hearing or feeling his presence. Unlike most protestants, that doesn’t matter in the Catholic Church, as we come to God through reason and faith.
I’m a terrible cuss, and stubborn as a dead rock, but since I’ve joined the Church, I know that I am doing His deeds, even it is with a grunt and a snarl.[/quote]Do you? Please listen to me Chris. I don’t know how you do it, but you’ll probably be the only one who reads this post all the way through. Do you even see at all the contradiction in the above compared to these few of absolutely numerous bible passages? I am not beating you up because you have sin for God’s sake!!! I flipped both my middle fingers to heaven and loudly cursed God to His face with the filthiest most abusive language you can imagine. I dared Him to kill me. I can’t even repeat here the things I said. I was doing everything I knew better than and living a double life.
[/quote]
I make a lot of contradictions in the fact that some would consider me a hypocrite. That doesn’t mean if I sin, I’m still not working on being perfect.
I don’t sin for God’s sake. I don’t know if that is what you meant, but if you didn’t sorry for misreading that sentence. I sin because either it is already a habit and I’m trying to break it, or
I’m sorry you had to go through that.
Sorry you fell into that kind of stupor.
I suggest everyone ask after giving an act of love to God, to ask the Holy Ghost to give you conviction and ask the Holy Ghost to give you God’s Will.
Sounds like a bastard thing to do (no offense as I assume you don’t break your word anymore).
Of course on the drinking, Aquinas once wrote, “Drink unto hilarity.” Oh yes, no Christian can live without a prayer life. And if they can, possibly read. Personally, I recommend a liturgy of the hours.
I’m glad you stopped looking at porn, and I’m sure your wife is a wonderful, beautiful wife. And glad you aren’t considered a fat body anymore.
Your use of superstition gives you away, as I do not hold superstitions, I understand the reasons for the things that I do. And, my ceremonies are not the least bit cold or clammy.
I’ve repeatedly told you I ask for mercy, it’s even in my daily prayers and my daily and Sunday Masses. I’m completely at peace, I was just having a theological debate.
On Romans 12:1-2: The worship Paul describes in these verses is in glaring contrast to the idolatrous worship described in 1:18-32. Believers engage in rational worship; the idolaters dishonor the body through sexual immorality (1:24). Believers strive to renew their minds with truth; idolaters only darken their minds with error (1:21). Believers discern the divine will; idolaters spurn the divine will in preference to their own (1:32). For Paul, the difference between pagan and Christian worship is the difference between a degrading spiritual free fall (1:18-32) and an ascending spiritual sacrifice (12:1-2) (CCC 2031).
Do not be conformed: Because worldly wisdom and values are often deformed (1:21, 28), Christians must allow God to transform them into the image of Christ (8:29; 2 Cor 3:18). The grace of the Spirit enables us to interpret our lives and evaluate the influences of our culture with respect to the gospel. In all things, God’s WILL should be the central object of our discernment, for it alone is ACCEPTABLE and PERFECT (CCC 2520, 2826).
I fouled up, I stumble sometimes. All I can now do is confess my sins and new my mind.
Yes, Jesus healed the Law, and his followers. However that does not mean that you can’t get sick again. That does not mean you do not sin again. Assumption of salvation is beyond ridiculousness. Yes, Jesus has healed me, he has healed me many times, and he will probably heal me again.
[quote] Galations 5:16-25
16-But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17-For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. 18-But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. 19-Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20-idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21-envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22-But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23-gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24-Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25-If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. 26-Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.[/i] [/quote]
On Galatians 5:16-24 Paul alerts readers that a hidden war is waged in the heart of every Christian. It is a struggle between the Spirit and our flesh, i.e., our fallen nature that inclines us toward (Rom 8:5-8). Unless we follow the Spirit’s lead, the lusts of the flesh (concupiscence) will dominate our lives and enslave us in sin. When we respond to grace, we enable the Spirit to work powerfully in us by clearing out the vices that lead us away from God. Because of our weaknesses, victory in t his struggle is possible but not easy (1 Cor 9:25-27) (CCC 2515-16; 1426; 2744).
Yes, there is war, however in a war, especially with our weak state and our tendency to fall. We sometimes sin. However, we need to after that ask for conviction to know what we have done wrong, confess, repent, and ask for mercy for those sins.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Here are two unknowns about Christianity:
Polygamy is actually allowed in both the Old and New Testament
There is little to no evidence of any of the Jesus stories from non-biblical sources
[/quote]
I was Looking into this a little more. Look at Deuteronomy 17:17 - He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. It is talking about the Israelite King and these are laws to the people about said King. So polygamy is denounced in the Bible. The original set up by God was one woman and one man.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
If believing that you can go to Jesus’ Mother, as the guests did at the wedding, so she on your behalf can ask her Son for your prayers to be answered is a sin. Send me to Hell.
[/quote]
Read John 2. The guests did not go to Mary to beseech Jesus. Jesus had not preformed a miracle yet, so why would they? Mary heard that they were out of wine, or maybe she was thristy and wanted some wine for herself and could not find any. Either way she went to Jesus. The people at the wedding did not know who had done this except the servants that helped Jesus. Most servants as Jewish custom were gentiles. The first miracle of Jesus and it was only revealed to the gentiles. This story is not here to tell us to go to Mary to pray for us. This was the first miracle preformed by Jesus, and started his ministry out in the open.
“No. Re-read Rm 2:14…Replace “Gentiles” with Buddhists, Hindus, whatever else.”
(1) Buddhism do not believe in a supreme deity ( God ).
[/quote]
Granted they don’t view God as a singularity, but as many things, karma forces, etc.
This is a common misconception, brought about by a language barrier. The creator God is Vishnu, all the other “gods” are manifestations of the same God to represent different aspects of life or condition.
He also wasn’t crucified. He was taken to heaven in a chariot.
This is a very two dimensional view. There is more than one way to know Christ. To whom it has been revealed, we have the greater responsibility. Now you condemn these poor bastards by scripture. We are all condemned by scripture if you want to take passages out of context to prove your point. But that’s just it isn’t it? Whose point are you trying to prove, yours or God’s?
For instance have you done this:
Jn 6:53-54
"So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. [54 ] Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
So you eat his flesh and drink his blood you have no life in you, correct? I take it you have not done this. Perhaps you will say this mean you accept him as you Lord and Savior, or that you listen to his word, or that you obey his commands, but is that what it means? It’s not what it says.
No, it does not make a whole lot of sense taken out of context. The problem with throwing out scriptures is that there are so many versus, you can hang yourself on any one of them. You can prove your point and I can prove mine, but are we serving ourselves or God?
So forget scripture for a minute… Let’s pretend you’re God. Would you condemn these people, who do not believe as you do to eternal damnation? A fate worse than death? I know I could not, and I am not a merciful as God. I am not as just as God and I am not better than God. But if you adhere to him a cruelty you yourself could not have, what are you saying about God?
This is the view point Muslims have. This is why they find it so easy to kill us. If you have a limited view such as this, then they have a point. There is no point in being kind to the damned. There is no harm in destroying the damned. You don’t have to respect the damned.
There are more ways to know Christ then just his name. If you do his will and treat his people with mercy, you know Christ. We are called to see Christ in everybody, not just people who claim to be Christians.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Never underestimate Rome brother. They got that covered. I don’t how much studying you guys have done on catholic dogma. However, especially since Vatican II and the adoption of the CCC over the Baltimore Catechism you absolutely cannot imagine the heartburn inducing bog of sophistry surrounding the church’s teaching on “ignorance”.
They cover every last conceivable event and circumstance that even touches the notion of “ignorance” with a slick vocabulary of terms and labels attached to each individual infinitesimal detail. I kid you not. Actually, all their teachings are festooned with mind numbing extra biblical tradition like that. If you doubt this, make sure it’s an off training day, have a double size shake, get a helmet on and do a search for “invincible ignorance”. A simple bible teaching explicable to a 5 year old child becomes a post graduate semester in the hands of men. It’s been a while. I’d semi forgotten. Ubelieveable, really.
[/quote]Did you find error in it? Was it logically/ theologically incorrect? If so, what and why?[/quote]Yes it is a unbiblical and hence a theological catastrophe as Blacksheep pointed out on the previous page. I must have missed this little tidbit in the bible:
[quote]Ignorance
(Latin in, not, and gnarus, knowing)
Ignorance is lack of knowledge about a thing in a being capable of knowing. Fundamentally speaking and with regard to a given object ignorance is the outcome of the limitations of our intellect or of the obscurity of the matter itself. In this article it is the ethical aspect and consequences of ignorance that are directly under consideration. From this point of view, since only voluntary and free acts are imputable, ignorance which either destroys or lessens the first-named characteristic is a factor to be reckoned with. It is customary then to narrow somewhat the definition already given of it. It will, therefore, be taken to mean the absence of information which one is required to have. The mere want of knowledge without connoting any requirement on the part of a person to possess it may be called nescience.
So far as fixing human responsibility, the most important division of ignorance is that designated by the terms invincible and vincible. Ignorance is said to be invincible when a person is unable to rid himself of it notwithstanding the employment of moral diligence, that is, such as under the circumstances is, morally speaking, possible and obligatory. This manifestly includes the states of inadvertence, forgetfulness, etc. Such ignorance is obviously involuntary and therefore not imputable. On the other hand, ignorance is termed vincible if it can be dispelled by the use of “moral diligence”. This certainly does not mean all possible effort; otherwise, as Ballerini naively says, we should have to have recourse to the pope in every instance. We may say, however, that the diligence requisite must be commensurate with the importance of the affair in hand, and with the capacity of the agent, in a word such as a really sensible and prudent person would use under the circumstances. Furthermore, it must be remembered that the obligation mentioned above is to be interpreted strictly and exclusively as the duty incumbent on a man to do something, the precise object of which is the acquisition of the needed knowledge. In other words the mere fact that one is bound by some extrinsic title to do something the performance of which would have actually, though not necessarily, given the required information, is negligible. When ignorance is deliberately aimed at and fostered, it is said to be affected, not because it is pretended, but rather because it is sought for by the agent so that he may not have to relinquish his purpose. Ignorance which practically no effort is made to dispel is termed crass or supine.
The area covered by human ignorance is clearly a vast one. For our purposes, however, three divisions may be noted.
* Ignorance of law, when one is unaware of the existence of the law itself, or at least that a particular case is comprised under its provisions.
* Ignorance of the fact, when not the relation of something to the law but the thing itself or some circumstance is unknown.
* Ignorance of penalty, when a person is not cognizant that a sanction has been attached to a particular crime. This is especially to be considered when there is question of more serious punishment.
We must also note that ignorance may precede, accompany, or follow an act of our will. It is therefore said to be antecedent, concomitant, or consequent. Antecedent ignorance is in no sense voluntary, neither is the act resulting from it; it precedes any voluntary failure to inquire. Consequent ignorance, on the other hand, is so called because it is the result of a perverse frame of mind choosing, either directly or indirectly, to be ignorant. Concomitant ignorance is concerned with the will to act in a given contingency; it implies that the real character of what is done is unknown to the agent, but his attitude is such that, were he acquainted with the actual state of things, he would go on just the same. Keeping these distinctions in mind we are in a position to lay down certain statements of doctrine.
Invincible ignorance, whether of the law or of the fact, is always a valid excuse and excludes sin. The evident reason is that neither this state nor the act resulting therefrom is voluntary. It is undeniable that a man cannot be invincibly ignorant of the natural law, so far as its first principles are concerned, and the inferences easily drawn therefrom. This, however, according to the teaching of St. Thomas, is not true of those remoter conclusions, which are deducible only by a process of laborious and sometimes intricate reasoning. Of these a person may be invincibly ignorant. Even when the invincible ignorance is concomitant, it prevents the act which it accompanies from being regarded as sinful. The perverse temper of soul, which in this case is supposed, retains, of course, such malice as it had. Vincible ignorance, being in some way voluntary, does not permit a man to escape responsibility for the moral deformity of his deeds; he is held to be guilty and in general the more guilty in proportion as his ignorance is more voluntary. Hence, the essential thing to remember is that the guilt of an act performed or omitted in vincible ignorance is not to be measured by the intrinsic malice of the thing done or omitted so much as by the degree of negligence discernible in the act.
It must not be forgotten that, although vincible ignorance leaves the culpability of a person intact, still it does make the act less voluntary than if it were done with full knowledge. This holds good except perhaps with regard to the sort of ignorance termed affected. Here theologians are not agreed as to whether it increases or diminishes a man’s moral liability. The solution is possibly to be had from a consideration of the motive which influences one in choosing purposely to be ignorant. For instance, a man who would refuse to learn the doctrines of the Church from a fear that he would thus find himself compelled to embrace them would certainly be in a bad plight. Still he would be less guilty than the man whose neglect to know the teachings of the Church was inspired by sheer scorn of her authority. Invincible ignorance, whether of the law or fact, exempts one from the penalty which may have been provided by positive legislation. Even vincible ignorance, either of the law or fact, which is not crass, excuses one from the punishment. Mere lack of knowledge of the sanction does not free one from the penalty except in cases of censures. It is true then that any sort of ignorance which is not itself grievously sinful excuses, because for the incurring of censures contumacy is required. Vincible and consequent ignorance about the duties of our state of life or the truths of faith necessary for salvation is, of course, sinful. Ignorance of the nature or effects of an act does not make it invalid if everything else requisite for its validity be present. For instance, one who knows nothing of the efficacy of baptism validly baptizes, provided that he employs the matter and form and has the intention of doing what the Church does.[/quote]
[/quote]
Where is the problem? What is in error here? You are looking from a narrow view. God is bigger than the bible. The bible did not exist in it’s current form until 297 AD. It is an explanation what what ignorance is and how it applies to scripture. Ignorance is certainly in the Bible as I demonstrated before. Knowing what it is is certainly help so that it is not misapplied.
Just because something is not in the bible does not make it useless. In fact there is plenty of extra-biblical writings and such in protestantism as well. So if you say this is in error what is the error? If is not in error, but is just not directly biblical, then all other extra-biblical theology is just as worthless.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
If believing Jesus gave Peter the Keys to Heaven, and built a Church on Peter the Rock as the visible head and foundation of the Church, while Jesus is the invisible head and foundation of the Church is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that salvation is only in the Church, because Jesus gave her the power to loose and bound on earth and that what is will be loosed and bound in Heaven, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing there is the Real Presence in the Eucharist, body and blood, along with Spirit, and is not just a symbol, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing in the communion of Saints is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing in honoring God’s friends the Saints and saints is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is the Catholic Church, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing the Church has authority direct from God, because Jesus did not come to destroy the Law, but fulfill it, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that the Mother of God, perpetual virgin, Blessed Virgin Mary was never with sin and gave virgin birth to Our Lord and Savior, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that you can go to Jesus’ Mother, as the guests did at the wedding, so she on your behalf can ask her Son for your prayers to be answered is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that your salvation is not assumed, and you have to do more than have faith, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that I have no authority to say what Scripture is or isn’t, since I have no authority to do so and I have to rely on someone with authority from God, and of no effort of their own hold the truth, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that there is no invisible church, but instead the Body of Christ, the Mystical Body of Christ, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing in Her and the Holy Catholic Church’s dogmas and truths are a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that God setup a indestructible militant army upon this Earth to fight evil, with full hierarchy is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If believing that Jesus and His Mother, who sits at his right hand, sit up the Kingdom of Heaven, is a sin. Send me to Hell.
If submitting to Jesus and his Wife, the Holy Catholic Church is a sin. Send me to Hell.[/quote]I am not willing to go to hell for ANYTHING. NOTHING. No man I refuse to call father, no woman falsely exalted against her will, no pretended vicar of Christ and no unholy abomination with the flagrant audacity to call itself “the holy apostolic church” but has been a non stop breeding ground for rank perversion, greed and despotic corruption for the better part of 2 millenia to this day.
It’s a perpetual motion machine of sin. Everything’s at once a cause and a symptom of everything else. Man made teaching leading to man made practice laying the groundwork for more man made teaching and so on until we arrive at today with a spiritual bureaucracy so deep you’d need a team of archaeologists to dig what might be left of the actual God breathed gospel out from under it all. If you don’t go to hell? It will only because my gospel, THEE gospel, powered alone by the shed blood and resurrected life of Christ reconciling you to a God who could not be clearer on His abhorrence for pomp and ceremony is true.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Because I am Catholic, I am not a Catholic “but” anything. All or nothing. Any dogma that is presented by the Catholic Church, I believe is the truth. I may not know how they work, I may not know all of them and I may think that something is wrong with them. However, I do not have the audacity to challenge 2000 years of truth and the Holy Ghost, because my selfish self thinks I know better than those who God has put in authority to feed his sheep. Instead I come with humility and ask that the Holy Ghost show me the truth.
Yet, you proclaim to know the truth of what the Bible speaks, that my Church’s Apostles wrote and my Church’s councils created, on your own accord, in the half century you have been alive. And, your book even states that there are no private interpretations, so what authority do you have to interpret?[/quote]My book huh? I really do pray it one day becomes yours as well. It’s Rome who has scandalously forced her voluminous private interpretations on the scriptures and that’s not even what that passage in 2nd Peter means anyway. Read until the end of the chapter. That passage is one of those straightforward childlike statements that simply says that scripture was inspired by God and not by man. It’s not even directly addressing what we commonly refer to as “interpretation” today.
That promised apostasy got underway almost before John’s body was cold. It’s exactly as it’s always been. God preserving His truth even in the midst of the entropy of sin. The whole history of the OT nation of Israel was exactly that. Let’s keep reading in 2nd Peter Ch.2. after the “interpretation” passage in ch.1 you made reference to.
2 Peter 2:1-3 "1-But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2-Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3-and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.
Boy does this sound familiar
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I have zeal for God, I am His Church Militant. I pray for His Church suffering, and hope for the day I join the Church triumphant. I pray that the Holy Ghost gives me His will, and gives me the gift of knowledge. I have no righteousness, except through God. I submit myself before no one except my Lord. And I believe that all that do not kneel before the Lord and submit, at the end of their days will meet before them the fiery wrath of Our Lord. And, [He] will execute great vengeance upon them, rebuking them in fury: and they shall know that [He is] the Lord, when [He] shall lay [His] vengeance upon them.
Godspeed and may the Lord and His Mother keep a watchful eye upon you. Peace, I’m out of here. [/quote]Yesterday you said this in response to a statement of mine about the laity:[quote]We, laity of the Catholic Church (as well as you since you receive these callings from Baptism), are all called to be Kings, Priests, and Prophets. “Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary, use words” which is commonly attributed to St. Francis of Assisi.[/quote]Is that what you’re doing in the sex forum here? A few days ago I was looking for a post of yours and I saw that you had posted in the “Sex and the Male Animal” forum. For my very first time ever I intentionally went into that forum following one of your links expecting to see you there upholding Christian morality because I had come to respect you at least that much. My heart sank as I saw your posts there. This is your witness? That is preaching the gospel at all times? That is what your holy catholic church does for you?
What do you think those people in that forum think when they see you there and then here pontificating about zeal for God, prayer and preaching the gospel through your actions? Aquinas as your avatar? Do you know why this doesn’t occur to you? Because that fake phony gospel of formulas and rituals of yours HAS NO POWER!!! Pat looked at me cross eyed when I mentioned the transforming power of the gospel through the Holy Spirit of God to him. “Power? What power? I’m not lookin for any power and I’m not lookin to transform anybody either” That’s good because the road you’re on is practically a guarantee of success then. That doesn’t matter though right? Because somewhere in all that vast expansive 2000 year labyrinth of “tradition” is your exoneration and theirs.
Your zeal, just like this “Mary’s Meals” guy is not according to knowledge Chris, but according to another gospel of dead works righteousness (Gal. 1) You’d have to be a catholic to misunderstand that chapter. You’re another guy who could be one of Jesus’s golden crowned champions and there you sit neutered by an anemic man made substitute for the gospel which IS the power of God for salvation and sancification to all them that believe. We’ve been praying for you and about 20 other people here (especially Ephrem) for weeks. That will continue and regardless of what you think I am not your enemy.
[/quote]
Tirib,
Speaking of ignorance, you obviously know nothing about Catholicism. Rather than berating Catholics, why don’t you educate yourself on it. After all, it was protestantism that was born out of Catholicism. Yes, we had our share of issues, but so have protestants.
If all you want to do is have a pissing contest between what you believe and Catholicism, then go nuts and count me out…I am not 15 years old here. If you want to ignorantly bash Catholicism, count me out. We have done nothing to you.
I don’t need saving, I don’t you to beat the bible at me and I don’t need your swollen hatred without due cause, of Catholicism thrown at me.
You have no right to determine who is going to heaven or hell. You have no knowledge of such matters. You have no right to say my beliefs will lead me to hell. If I am going, I’ll see you there.
If you want to discuss theology like a man, I am happy to. But this insulting and berating of my faith stops first.
May I make an observation. Brother Chris you have my respect. You are going about this discussion with the utmost integrity and respect. Tirib, you also have my respect and you are trying to not make this personal. Sorry Pat, but you are acting like a child. Respect is gained and earned, and not demanded. Catholics have issues with Protestants, and Protestants have issues with Catholics.
We are all here still trying to figure it out. This is the race we are all running, but on this side of heaven we are not going to figure it all out. We all have the basics, and that is Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life. Jesus is God, and was born of a virgin.
Jesus Christ was crucifed on the cross, and was barried. On the third day rose again, and then accendended into heaven and now sits at the right hand of the Father. One day Jesus will return to judge all men and women. It is just the small details we are trying to figure out.
I am seeing that the main issues Protestants have with Catholics is the use of the Bible, of Mary , and the Pope. To call the Bible nothing more than a paper back IMO is foolish and you should reconsider that statement. To call the teachings of men through the ages after the final cannonization of the Bible to be on the same level as the Bible IMO is also foolish.
If those teachings were on the same par the council would have included them into the Bible. The councils wanted to make sure that the Bible was higher than all the other teachings for a reason. The Bible is the inspired words of God, is a sword, is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. It is all we need.
All the other books are individuals thoughts on the scriptures, and have to be compared to the scriptures. Yes there is a hirearchy in all churches, but we all have to use the Bible and read it to make sure that what is being taught in church is actually Biblical. We are called to verify what is being taught is correct. The only way to do this is to compare it to the Bible. Traditions do not trump the Bible. Traditions can be invented, but the word of God never changes.
That is why the Bible was written in the first place. The letters of Paul was to counter herecy. I do not think Catholics are going to Hell just because they are Catholic, but you have to fight the ideas that are being passed around as tradition. IMO allowing the Idea that “Mary is sitting at the right had of God” in Heaven to me is foolish and another one of those traditons that are not biblical by any stretch of the imagination. We have been over this, but the Bible does not mention this at all.
Jesus even puts Mary in her place in the Bible. Does Jesus love his mother yes, but he loves all of us equally. Mary is a sinner just like you and me. Only Jesus Christ is the only human to have never sinned. When Jesus was asked who would be sitting at his right hand in Heaven, he never mentioned Mary, or anyone else for that matter. All human beleivers are saints, but we are all sinners.
I am still trying to get my hands around the idea that other religious people who do not beleive in Jesus are going to go to heaven. This is herecy and denounced by the Bible as Blacksheep has posted for us all. Jesus is the only way to heaven. It might not seem fair, but who said life was fair? We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
I would love to think that everyone is going to heaven, but the way to God is narrow, and Jesus even told us this. It is not broad, and if the Catholic Church is preaching this they really need to change this because this is not truth, or tradition of the church. We are to spread the Gospel, and that is the Good News that Jesus Christ is alive. He wants us to be with him in heaven, but the only way to do that is to beleive in Jesus Christ.
He is both fully God and fully Human. That is why his sacrifice is complete. He is all we need, and that is why he said, “It is finished.” Seems pretty complete to me.
We are to be holy and a pleasing sacrifice to God. Concentrate on him and his word to us. That is where the focus needs to be, and not on the outside fringes of individual teachings. There is a lot of similarities in us, and all true beleivers are my brothers and sisters.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
May I make an observation. Brother Chris you have my respect. You are going about this discussion with the utmost integrity and respect. Tirib, you also have my respect and you are trying to not make this personal. Sorry Pat, but you are acting like a child. Respect is gained and earned, and not demanded. Catholics have issues with Protestants, and Protestants have issues with Catholics.
We are all here still trying to figure it out. This is the race we are all running, but on this side of heaven we are not going to figure it all out. We all have the basics, and that is Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life. Jesus is God, and was born of a virgin.
Jesus Christ was crucifed on the cross, and was barried. On the third day rose again, and then accendended into heaven and now sits at the right hand of the Father. One day Jesus will return to judge all men and women. It is just the small details we are trying to figure out.
I am seeing that the main issues Protestants have with Catholics is the use of the Bible, of Mary , and the Pope. To call the Bible nothing more than a paper back IMO is foolish and you should reconsider that statement. To call the teachings of men through the ages after the final cannonization of the Bible to be on the same level as the Bible IMO is also foolish.
If those teachings were on the same par the council would have included them into the Bible. The councils wanted to make sure that the Bible was higher than all the other teachings for a reason. The Bible is the inspired words of God, is a sword, is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. It is all we need.
All the other books are individuals thoughts on the scriptures, and have to be compared to the scriptures. Yes there is a hirearchy in all churches, but we all have to use the Bible and read it to make sure that what is being taught in church is actually Biblical. We are called to verify what is being taught is correct. The only way to do this is to compare it to the Bible. Traditions do not trump the Bible. Traditions can be invented, but the word of God never changes.
That is why the Bible was written in the first place. The letters of Paul was to counter herecy. I do not think Catholics are going to Hell just because they are Catholic, but you have to fight the ideas that are being passed around as tradition. IMO allowing the Idea that “Mary is sitting at the right had of God” in Heaven to me is foolish and another one of those traditons that are not biblical by any stretch of the imagination. We have been over this, but the Bible does not mention this at all.
Jesus even puts Mary in her place in the Bible. Does Jesus love his mother yes, but he loves all of us equally. Mary is a sinner just like you and me. Only Jesus Christ is the only human to have never sinned. When Jesus was asked who would be sitting at his right hand in Heaven, he never mentioned Mary, or anyone else for that matter. All human beleivers are saints, but we are all sinners.
I am still trying to get my hands around the idea that other religious people who do not beleive in Jesus are going to go to heaven. This is herecy and denounced by the Bible as Blacksheep has posted for us all. Jesus is the only way to heaven. It might not seem fair, but who said life was fair? We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
I would love to think that everyone is going to heaven, but the way to God is narrow, and Jesus even told us this. It is not broad, and if the Catholic Church is preaching this they really need to change this because this is not truth, or tradition of the church. We are to spread the Gospel, and that is the Good News that Jesus Christ is alive. He wants us to be with him in heaven, but the only way to do that is to beleive in Jesus Christ.
He is both fully God and fully Human. That is why his sacrifice is complete. He is all we need, and that is why he said, “It is finished.” Seems pretty complete to me.
We are to be holy and a pleasing sacrifice to God. Concentrate on him and his word to us. That is where the focus needs to be, and not on the outside fringes of individual teachings. There is a lot of similarities in us, and all true beleivers are my brothers and sisters.[/quote]
When you say crap like this:
and
and
and
I seriously doubt I am mistaking his unwashed disdain for my faith. Further, as evidenced by what he said he knows nothing about the Catholic faith.
Sorry, but I don’t have to take crap like this. I am all for discussing but I am not going to justify, random venom based not on fact but pure emotion.
If it makes me a child to call this out and ask it to stop the pass me my pacifier and change my diaper.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
May I make an observation. Brother Chris you have my respect. You are going about this discussion with the utmost integrity and respect. Tirib, you also have my respect and you are trying to not make this personal. Sorry Pat, but you are acting like a child. Respect is gained and earned, and not demanded. Catholics have issues with Protestants, and Protestants have issues with Catholics.
We are all here still trying to figure it out. This is the race we are all running, but on this side of heaven we are not going to figure it all out. We all have the basics, and that is Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life. Jesus is God, and was born of a virgin.
Jesus Christ was crucifed on the cross, and was barried. On the third day rose again, and then accendended into heaven and now sits at the right hand of the Father. One day Jesus will return to judge all men and women. It is just the small details we are trying to figure out.
I am seeing that the main issues Protestants have with Catholics is the use of the Bible, of Mary , and the Pope. To call the Bible nothing more than a paper back IMO is foolish and you should reconsider that statement. To call the teachings of men through the ages after the final cannonization of the Bible to be on the same level as the Bible IMO is also foolish.
If those teachings were on the same par the council would have included them into the Bible. The councils wanted to make sure that the Bible was higher than all the other teachings for a reason. The Bible is the inspired words of God, is a sword, is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. It is all we need.
All the other books are individuals thoughts on the scriptures, and have to be compared to the scriptures. Yes there is a hirearchy in all churches, but we all have to use the Bible and read it to make sure that what is being taught in church is actually Biblical. We are called to verify what is being taught is correct. The only way to do this is to compare it to the Bible. Traditions do not trump the Bible. Traditions can be invented, but the word of God never changes.
That is why the Bible was written in the first place. The letters of Paul was to counter herecy. I do not think Catholics are going to Hell just because they are Catholic, but you have to fight the ideas that are being passed around as tradition. IMO allowing the Idea that “Mary is sitting at the right had of God” in Heaven to me is foolish and another one of those traditons that are not biblical by any stretch of the imagination. We have been over this, but the Bible does not mention this at all.
Jesus even puts Mary in her place in the Bible. Does Jesus love his mother yes, but he loves all of us equally. Mary is a sinner just like you and me. Only Jesus Christ is the only human to have never sinned. When Jesus was asked who would be sitting at his right hand in Heaven, he never mentioned Mary, or anyone else for that matter. All human beleivers are saints, but we are all sinners.
I am still trying to get my hands around the idea that other religious people who do not beleive in Jesus are going to go to heaven. This is herecy and denounced by the Bible as Blacksheep has posted for us all. Jesus is the only way to heaven. It might not seem fair, but who said life was fair? We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
I would love to think that everyone is going to heaven, but the way to God is narrow, and Jesus even told us this. It is not broad, and if the Catholic Church is preaching this they really need to change this because this is not truth, or tradition of the church. We are to spread the Gospel, and that is the Good News that Jesus Christ is alive. He wants us to be with him in heaven, but the only way to do that is to beleive in Jesus Christ.
He is both fully God and fully Human. That is why his sacrifice is complete. He is all we need, and that is why he said, “It is finished.” Seems pretty complete to me.
We are to be holy and a pleasing sacrifice to God. Concentrate on him and his word to us. That is where the focus needs to be, and not on the outside fringes of individual teachings. There is a lot of similarities in us, and all true beleivers are my brothers and sisters.[/quote]
Now to clarify our position on Mary.
She is the mother of God. The one God chose to carry and raise his son. We DO NOT worship Mary nor would she want us to. We do honor her. Do you know why? Because Jesus honored her, thatâ??s why. Who are we to ignore she whom he himself honored and listened to? Jesus didnâ??t take any human orders, except from her. Further to not honor her is against scripture where in the Magnificat, she proclaims â??All generations will call me Blessed.â?? And so it is so.
If you understood the history of the church, youâ??d understand the traditions. They exist not because they are fun, or pretty or neat. It was to ensure unity and linearity between churches. Your not going to go to one church and see one thing and one message and go to another and see yet another. This was a huge problem in the early church and the apostles and their ordained had a hell of a time keeping people on the same page. You can go to a Catholic church in Georgia, and then go to one in Thailand and you get the same mass.
If it makes me a child to call this out and ask it to stop the pass me my pacifier and change my diaper.
[/quote]
So you stopped at the first paragraph. This is where the child part comes into play. Pat, have you done any reading out side of the Roman Catholic Church? Have you sat down with only your Bible and prayed that the Holy Spirit Teach you? Spend some alone time with your maker. Church is only a tool to help direct you. It is not the end all and be all. The gutenberg press made it easy for the masses to have their own copy of the Bible. The same one used since it was cannonized almost 1800 years ago. The Bible tells us to have discernment about what is being taught. Check out the Bible that is where the learning is. The Bible is the Library full of Books. The others are just paper back books.
I spoke with a lady that once picked up the Bible to read and started to ask questions of both me and her priest. Many were the questions we are all asking each other. The Bible shines light on Sin and falsehoods. The priest only had tradition to back up many of his teachings as you all keep throwing out. When I showed her things in the Bible, now that is authority. The Bible is pure authority given to us by God. The Bible keeps hericies away. I told her to continue to read the Bible and continue to go to church. I left that job a couple of months later, and still wonder what else she has learned, and whatever happened to her. God is good my friend, and he loves spending time with his children.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
May I make an observation. Brother Chris you have my respect. You are going about this discussion with the utmost integrity and respect. Tirib, you also have my respect and you are trying to not make this personal. Sorry Pat, but you are acting like a child. Respect is gained and earned, and not demanded. Catholics have issues with Protestants, and Protestants have issues with Catholics.
We are all here still trying to figure it out. This is the race we are all running, but on this side of heaven we are not going to figure it all out. We all have the basics, and that is Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life. Jesus is God, and was born of a virgin.
Jesus Christ was crucifed on the cross, and was barried. On the third day rose again, and then accendended into heaven and now sits at the right hand of the Father. One day Jesus will return to judge all men and women. It is just the small details we are trying to figure out.
I am seeing that the main issues Protestants have with Catholics is the use of the Bible, of Mary , and the Pope. To call the Bible nothing more than a paper back IMO is foolish and you should reconsider that statement. To call the teachings of men through the ages after the final cannonization of the Bible to be on the same level as the Bible IMO is also foolish.
If those teachings were on the same par the council would have included them into the Bible. The councils wanted to make sure that the Bible was higher than all the other teachings for a reason. The Bible is the inspired words of God, is a sword, is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. It is all we need.
All the other books are individuals thoughts on the scriptures, and have to be compared to the scriptures. Yes there is a hirearchy in all churches, but we all have to use the Bible and read it to make sure that what is being taught in church is actually Biblical. We are called to verify what is being taught is correct. The only way to do this is to compare it to the Bible. Traditions do not trump the Bible. Traditions can be invented, but the word of God never changes.
That is why the Bible was written in the first place. The letters of Paul was to counter herecy. I do not think Catholics are going to Hell just because they are Catholic, but you have to fight the ideas that are being passed around as tradition. IMO allowing the Idea that “Mary is sitting at the right had of God” in Heaven to me is foolish and another one of those traditons that are not biblical by any stretch of the imagination. We have been over this, but the Bible does not mention this at all.
Jesus even puts Mary in her place in the Bible. Does Jesus love his mother yes, but he loves all of us equally. Mary is a sinner just like you and me. Only Jesus Christ is the only human to have never sinned. When Jesus was asked who would be sitting at his right hand in Heaven, he never mentioned Mary, or anyone else for that matter. All human beleivers are saints, but we are all sinners.
I am still trying to get my hands around the idea that other religious people who do not beleive in Jesus are going to go to heaven. This is herecy and denounced by the Bible as Blacksheep has posted for us all. Jesus is the only way to heaven. It might not seem fair, but who said life was fair? We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
I would love to think that everyone is going to heaven, but the way to God is narrow, and Jesus even told us this. It is not broad, and if the Catholic Church is preaching this they really need to change this because this is not truth, or tradition of the church. We are to spread the Gospel, and that is the Good News that Jesus Christ is alive. He wants us to be with him in heaven, but the only way to do that is to beleive in Jesus Christ.
He is both fully God and fully Human. That is why his sacrifice is complete. He is all we need, and that is why he said, “It is finished.” Seems pretty complete to me.
We are to be holy and a pleasing sacrifice to God. Concentrate on him and his word to us. That is where the focus needs to be, and not on the outside fringes of individual teachings. There is a lot of similarities in us, and all true beleivers are my brothers and sisters.[/quote]
Now to clarify our position on Mary.
She is the mother of God. The one God chose to carry and raise his son. We DO NOT worship Mary nor would she want us to. We do honor her. Do you know why? Because Jesus honored her, thatâ??s why. Who are we to ignore she whom he himself honored and listened to? Jesus didnâ??t take any human orders, except from her. Further to not honor her is against scripture where in the Magnificat, she proclaims â??All generations will call me Blessed.â?? And so it is so.
If you understood the history of the church, youâ??d understand the traditions. They exist not because they are fun, or pretty or neat. It was to ensure unity and linearity between churches. Your not going to go to one church and see one thing and one message and go to another and see yet another. This was a huge problem in the early church and the apostles and their ordained had a hell of a time keeping people on the same page. You can go to a Catholic church in Georgia, and then go to one in Thailand and you get the same mass.
[/quote]
Yes she is blessed, but the chruch does not only call her blessed. You say she is sinless, and that she is an eternal virgin. The only way to seal a marriage in Jewish customs was to have sex. So she was a virgin when they got married, but after the birth of Jesus you really think that Joseph would not want to have sex with his wife? You are also saying that Mary is sitting at the right hand of God. You are not calling her just blessed, but raising her up to be equal with God. I hope this is not the teaching of the church, but only your interpretation of it. If it is the teaching of the church, and Brother Chris please correct me if I am wrong. Pat, sorry, but I do not think you are the authoritarian on Catholic teachings. Brother Chris is thinking of going to seminary, so I am going to respect his interpretation of the Catholic Church over yours.
I also beg to differ that Mary was the only one that Jesus would take orders from. He listened to the rabbi’s at the time. He spent time in the synogogue. He was tending to his father’s business. Jesus also learned a trade from his earthly father as being a carpenter. Jesus loved his mother, but his true father’s business was all he was here for. Mary did not know the plan that God had for Jesus.
Your idea of Tiribulus attacking your belief or Religion is the same thing the Catholics do to Protestants. You say your traditions trump the Bible. You say that the Roman Catholic Chruch is the only true chruch. Jesus did not found the Roman Catholic Chruch. He founded the catholic church. Peter was not the first Pope, but was to be the first leader of the Hebrew church in Jerusalem after the ascention into heaven.
The Protestants called out the falsehoods of the Roman Catholic Chruch when Luther started the Reformation, and these findings of Luther were from the Bible. The things that the Roman Catholic Church were doing that were wrong. Sin in the church. That is all we are doing today. The Roman Catholic Church has some really good things that are of God, but there are things that are really bad that are not. Samething can be said for Protestant chruches. We always have to re-evaluate who we are pointing to. Are we pointing to our Church or are we pointing to God and his salvation? We also need to wrestle with our faith and compare ourselves not to each other, but to God. I am no better than any Catholic, and there are no Catholics better than me. We are all sinners in the eyes of God. To put any human higher than any other human is bad. We are not to look to a human for salvation, but to God. The Pope can not save you. Mary can not save you. Only Jesus Christ who is fully God can save you. I am going to read the words that God has given us through the early church. I like the early church, and what they have solidified for us in the early 300’s and 400’s. I know the cannon was not completly solidified until the 1500-1600’s, but all the council at Trent did was solidify what was already known back to the 300’s-400’s.
Sometimes you have to get back to the basics. The basics all started with the teachings of Jesus, and the apostles. All we have from them is the Bible.
When was the first catechism written, and is there a copy of this one on line?
‘So Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. [54 ] Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.’
So you eat his flesh and drink his blood you have no life in you, correct? I take it you have not done this. Perhaps you will say this mean you accept him as you Lord and Savior, or that you listen to his word, or that you obey his commands, but is that what it means? It’s not what it says."
The jews were not following His thought. The eating and drinking of Him meant believing and receiving Him as the revelation of the Father. He had explained that coming to him, believing in Him, is to have eternal life, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life” (John 6:47).
One receives spiritual life by believing in Christ and sharing in the redemptive benefits of His death on the cross (Rom. 3:24-25; 1 John 1:7). We continue to have spiritual life as we abide in fellowship with Christ and His Word. Compare John 6:53 with John 6:63, where He says, “The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” Thus, we partake of christ as we continue to have faith in Him and prayerfully receive His Word.
Jesus is the living Word (John 1:1-5); the Bible is the written Word (II Tim. 3:16; II Peter 1:21). Jesus calls Himself here the “bread of life” (John 6:35), and elsewhere He relates this bread to the Word of God: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that preceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4). Hence, we “eat his flesh” by abiding in Him and by receiving and obeying the Word of God (John 6:63).
We are saved by God’s grace and regenerating power of the holy spirit when we first hear and receive the Word (John 1:12; Acts 2:41). We continue to be saved and receive grace by remaining in union with Christ and partaking of the word of god continually through reading, obeying, and absorbing its truths into our spirits (I Tim. 4:13-16; Jas. 1:21). It is fatal to withdraw from fellowship with Christ or to neglect His Word.
Also stated,
“…So forget scripture for a minute… Let’s pretend you’re God. Would you condemn these people, who do not believe as you do to eternal damnation? A fate worse than death? I know I could not…”
So you say?
You are accursed by the Roman Catholic Church if you deny some of its main doctrines. The following are some of them (“anathema sit” means “let him be accursed”):
Baptism: If anyone says that the Roman Church…does not have the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism, anathema sit…If anyone says that baptism is …not necessary for salvation, anathema sit (Council of Trent, Session 7).
Purgatory: If any one says, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened to him; let him be anathema (Council of Trent, Session 6).
Papal infallibility: The Roman Pontiff… possesses…that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable. So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema (First Vatican Council).
Transubstantiation: If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really and substantially contained, but says that he is in it only in a sign or figure…anathema sit (Council ofTrent, Session 12).
Sacrifice of the Mass: If anyone says that the sacrifice of the Mass is merely an offering of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is a simple commemoration of the sacrifice accomplished on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice…offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfaction and other necessities, anathema sit (Council of Trent, Session 12).
Confession: If anyone denies that the sacramental confession was instituted, and is necessary for salvation, by divine Law; or says that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Catholic Church has always observed from the beginning and still observes, is at variance with the institution and command of Christ and is a human invention, anathema sit (Council of Trent, Session 14).
Do you deny the above? If not, you have condemned me.
Concerning “anathema,” Paul was so certain that the gospel he proclaimed was correct (II Peter 1:21) that he considered anyone else who preached another gospel as accursed (anathema) by God, even if it was an angelic spokesman . This solemn curse was not simply a statement of Paul’s viewpoint; it was the sentence of God upon those who preach another gospel, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Gal. 1:8-9).
This section in Galatians conveys some of the strongest admonitions and rebukes found in the N.T. This is because Christians (and non-christians) there were being led into “another” (Gk. heteros) gospel (Gal. 1:6). Paul vehemently warned that this was not “another” (Gk. allos) gospel of the same kind which brought them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Instead this heteros gospel was a perversion of the true glad tidings of Christ (Gal. 1:7). It was contrary to the one they had first heard Paul preach (Gal. 1:8). He went on to pronounce a curse, anathema, upon anyone (human or angelic) who would present a gospel different from the one they first received from him.
Nowhere in the Word of God can I find any evidence for the above six doctrines of the Catholic Church. I rather choose the Word of God over the word of man.
If it makes me a child to call this out and ask it to stop the pass me my pacifier and change my diaper.
[/quote]
So you stopped at the first paragraph. This is where the child part comes into play. Pat, have you done any reading out side of the Roman Catholic Church? Have you sat down with only your Bible and prayed that the Holy Spirit Teach you? Spend some alone time with your maker. Church is only a tool to help direct you. It is not the end all and be all. The gutenberg press made it easy for the masses to have their own copy of the Bible. The same one used since it was cannonized almost 1800 years ago. The Bible tells us to have discernment about what is being taught. Check out the Bible that is where the learning is. The Bible is the Library full of Books. The others are just paper back books.
[quote]
No, I did not stop at the first paragraph. I thought I should address it, because I disagreed. He was openly bashing my faith with out facts to back it and yes, I am a little sensitive about it.
Now, I have said many times that the church is a means to communicate with God. Technically, you donâ??t need church to accomplish this, but it is a tool.
Yes, I have read plenty out side of the church. I read scripture, I pray in many ways.
What in the hell makes you think I donâ??t own a Bible? You and I have discussed this topic in particular, I am the same dude, except for the haircut.
If you have questions about my faith then ask, donâ??t assume. You are making assumptions about my relationship with the Good Lord that are simply not true. You seem to have this impression that the Catholic faith is a robotic faith devoid of feeling and fervor and nothing could be further from the truth. It is a living breathing faith, full of life. Catholicism is a beautiful faith, born of Christ and lives in him. Our faith starts at scripture but it does not stop there. The church is scripturally based. The new testament was written from within the church. The traditions we carry started with the apostles and believe it or not there are damn good reasons for them. The basic tenents of the church have never changed since the beginning.
I have known many priests and never met one that was not well versed in scripture. Further I havenâ??t met one who has tried to molest kids even when I was alone with them as a kid. If that priest did not know scripture than shame on him.
If the Bible kept heresies away, then why do whackos like the Westboro Baptist church use it to say protest Soldiers funerals and proclaims that “God hates fags”…Certainly they will show you the truth in scripture to back that up, but nothing could be further from the truth. They are not the only perverter of Godâ??s word.
You know, I have discussed these matters with you before and you know where I stand and in many cases agreed. It seems now like those conversations never even took place based on what you said.
Yes she is blessed, but the church does not only call her blessed. You say she is sinless, and that she is an eternal virgin. The only way to seal a marriage in Jewish customs was to have sex. So she was a virgin when they got married, but after the birth of Jesus you really think that Joseph would not want to have sex with his wife? You are also saying that Mary is sitting at the right hand of God. You are not calling her just blessed, but raising her up to be equal with God. I hope this is not the teaching of the church, but only your interpretation of it. If it is the teaching of the church, and Brother Chris please correct me if I am wrong. Pat, sorry, but I do not think you are the authoritarian on Catholic teachings. Brother Chris is thinking of going to seminary, so I am going to respect his interpretation of the Catholic Church over yours.
[/quote]
You know can look all this stuff up here:
I did not know I was in a pissing contest with Brother Chris but, ok. I also never claimed to be an authority. Are you claiming to be an authority of Protestantism?
Now, I don’t know the seating chart in heaven, but since Jesus is at the right hand of the father, that spot is taken.
We do not raise her up to be equal with God nor would she want to be.
Since she took a vow of celibacy, perhaps Josephs would want to have sex, but it wouldn’t happen, seeing as how the marriage was technically unlawful since she was pregnant. You can read about it in nauseating detail here:
Do not persist in your misinformation.
Perhaps, but where in scripture do you see this? You are making an extra-scriptural inference.
My “idea” that Tiribulus was attacking our beliefs are base on what he said, did you read it? Second, it is the teaching of the Church that we do not attack protestants and we are not the only ones with access to the Christ. The exact opposite of what I have heard from the evangelical tradition here as stated here.
Where did I say our “…traditions trump the bible”. Please tell me where I said this, ever.
Jesus founded ‘the Church’ through Peter, Mt 16:17-19.
There was no other church at the time hence there was no need to differentiate. The orthodox churches originally split off for political reasons. If he were to be the leader of the Hebrew Church in Jerusalem there, he would not have move around so much. Second, it is evidenced by the Counsel of Jerusalem that Peter was the leader of the Church.
Learn more here:
List of popes traced back to Peter:
[quote]
The Protestants called out the falsehoods of the Roman Catholic Church when Luther started the Reformation, and these findings of Luther were from the Bible. The things that the Roman Catholic Church were doing that were wrong. Sin in the church. That is all we are doing today. The Roman Catholic Church has some really good things that are of God, but there are things that are really bad that are not. Same thing can be said for Protestant churches. We always have to re-evaluate who we are pointing to. Are we pointing to our Church or are we pointing to God and his salvation? We also need to wrestle with our faith and compare ourselves not to each other, but to God. I am no better than any Catholic, and there are no Catholics better than me. We are all sinners in the eyes of God. To put any human higher than any other human is bad. We are not to look to a human for salvation, but to God. The Pope can not save you. Mary can not save you. Only Jesus Christ who is fully God can save you. I am going to read the words that God has given us through the early church. I like the early church, and what they have solidified for us in the early 300’s and 400’s. I know the cannon was not completly solidified until the 1500-1600’s, but all the council at Trent did was solidify what was already known back to the 300’s-400’s.
Sometimes you have to get back to the basics. The basics all started with the teachings of Jesus, and the apostles. All we have from them is the Bible.
When was the first catechism written, and is there a copy of this one on line? [/quote]
I do not know when the first Catechism was written. Martin Luther started the reformation not because of the falsehoods of the church, but because of the corruption of the people with in the church. Further, he was kicked out and was no longer privy to the sacraments. He was right, and it was wrong to kick him out as he was trying to fix things that were wrong. Particularly when it came to gain profit or power by exploiting the faith of the lowly. It was because of the reformation that the church cleaned house. So in a sense it was a good thing.
What I see here is a lot of misconceptions on what exactly Catholicism is and what we believe. It’s sad really. I do not know what is being taught out there, but it is patently false almost categorically.
Since she took a vow of celibacy, perhaps Josephs would want to have sex, but it wouldn’t happen, seeing as how the marriage was technically unlawful since she was pregnant. You can read about it in nauseating detail here:
[/quote]
So when did she take this vow of celibacy? Let me rephrase the question. What year and which council of the Roman Catholic Church set as Dogma that Mary took a vow of Celibacy?
Oh and by the way Joseph made it lawful when he accepted Mary as his wife. Joseph had every reason to divorce her quietly as the Bible says. Joseph is not given credit for actually making the birth legitimate. No one at the time would have thought differnetly. Everyone knew him as the carpenters son.God chose Joseph so that the lineage of David would be confirmed. Joseph also needs to have the same rights as Mary.
I have a question in regards to Noah’s Ark and the Flood. If this was true and God wiped out everyone except for Noah, his family, and the animals on the Ark, why do we have different ethnicities of people? If Noah’s family were from the middle east, wouldn’t everyone be that color? Nobody else could have survived the flood cause it lasted 40 days.