Actually, one last question as a bit of related trivia. Who succeeded to Judas’ office? Admittedly, I already gave it away through the link I shared above.
[quote]pat wrote:
<<< You talk as if you know, but you do not know, nor do you care. Being right is all you care about. Not only being right, but being right with dramatic flare. You do not understand the faith, yet you attack it vociferously, with out cause. The problems you claim you have with the church, don’t even exist. There is no idolatry, there is not worship of anything other than God.
You are rallying against fictions. One of my best friends is evangelical, we discuss religion all the time. He has no problem with my faith and I have no problem with his.
Now, I will tell you this truly. If you think I am going to hell for the faith I practice, I will see you there. You are not better than me and your faith is in no way superior to mine.
[/quote]I doubt if I can convince you, but you couldn’t be more wrong about me. I avoided any confrontation about catholicism in these threads for weeks because I knew it would be no fun and it isn’t. I couldn’t care less about being right. I want to return the faithfulness to Him that He has shown to me. There is no my faith and your faith. There is only THE faith once for all delivered to the saints. All saints. I have not said anything about you going to hell and if you do it won’t because you were a catholic.
Could you please answer this. You never did. I’ll try one more time.
I said a few pages back:
[quote]Come on Pat ol buddy. Have the courage of your convictions. I’m not even being sarcastic here. Not a bit. I reject the pope, the holy see, the catholic sacraments, Mary as anything other than “blessed among women” and a true example of piety. I reject any "tradition of the RCC not found by overt declaration or necessary implication in the holy scriptures. In short I reject anything and everything uniquely catholic about the Roman church as a horrific deception and tool of Satan to lead untold millions of unsuspecting faithful followers to their eternal death and as such I do hate it. (I must emphatically add that this does not translate into hatred for individual catholics in any way or on any level. Quite and absolutely the contrary)
I declare all of the above with the full knowledge that by Roman dogma I am a living a symphony of “mortal” sin and do hereby proclaim that if Rome be true I am bound for hell should I perish in this state.
Agree or disagree?
Or since Pat’s not talkin to me anymore maybe one of you other guys can agree or disagree with what I just said. Or you can ignore me entirely. Let me say one more time. This is not fun for me and I am not hateful or even angry at any person in this forum. If you people knew me in real life you would know that. Truly. [/quote]
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assurance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.
When I say I would love for there to be one true holy apostolic church…[/quote]
It doesn’t matter what you or I would love. It has to exist. I’m going to take the liberty to assume you can’t show us the Church left by Christ. In which case, this whole debate is bunk, because Christianity has been demonstrated as a false and failed religion. And all of these threads are pointless, because we debate over a savior whose promise was already broken.
But, if his Church remains, please, again, point it out. We know it has a ministerial priesthood and a hierarchy, so I would hope the we don’t get an answer about us all being “priests in the churches of our homes.” [/quote]In short (very short)
Matthew 18:20
I don’t think you read the rest of my post. It is not possible for both the bible to be the Word of God and the RCC to be what it says. [/quote]
At this point it looks like I’d have to wait until eternity. So, I’ll bow out of responding until I see someone, anyone, actually answer my challenge.
As to my claims about the nature of the Church–ministerial priesthood, hierarchy–plenty of plain scripture to be found here. http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0503fea4.asp
“Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders (presbyteroi) of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.”
James 5:14â??15 [/quote]
I agree with this whole heartidly. This does not only pertain to the Roman Catholic Church. The Baptist Church I go to has the same priesthood, which we call Pastors, and elders, which we call deacons. We go to our Pastor and have him pray for us and we ask for forgiveness of our sins all the time. This last Sunday we opened up the altar for people to come up and pray and receive forgiveness.
Again the Church is a group of sinful humans that have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. I beleive that people can come to Jesus both through Protestant Churches and Roman Catholic Chruches, and Eastern Orthodox Churches. We all preach the gospel of the loving and saving power through Jesus’ blood. It is only by God’s grace that we are saved. Once saved we want to do good works, and further the kingdom. I do not hate the Catholic Church, I just have a couple of small issues. I have the same issues with the Baptist Church I go to now. We are all sinners and every church has their issues. We are all just trying to run the race and run for the goal. The goal is to be more and more like Jesus Christ everyday. We will not attain this goal this side of death, but we will get there one day.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m gonna go out on limb and submit that you haven’t done Rome any PR favors here to which I’m sure you’ll reply that that isn’t your job or problem.
[/quote]
I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assuarance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.[/quote]
This struck me as an interesting question.
What do you think Christ meant when he said the gates of hell will not prevail?
[/quote]
It means that Satan will try, but not succeed at destroying it. He will protect it ultimately. History bares this out. It was attempted to be squashed by Nero and the Church grew huge. It was attempted to be destroyed from with in, yet it stands. It was attempted to be divided, but yet it remains.[/quote]
That is an interesting and common take on it, but I would say that is incorrect. In Jesus times Gates were not used as an offensive weapon, instead they were a defensive weapon.
I would say that Jesus is saying that the gates of Hell can’t with stand an offensive and attacking Church. Which if you reverse your viewpoint of the church as a victim in those situations and see it instead as the reactions to an advancing church that would be inline with my take on it.
I held your view point on that as well. Then I realized a gate doesn’t attack instead it defends. So why should I interject that meaning into it.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
<<< You talk as if you know, but you do not know, nor do you care. Being right is all you care about. Not only being right, but being right with dramatic flare. You do not understand the faith, yet you attack it vociferously, with out cause. The problems you claim you have with the church, don’t even exist. There is no idolatry, there is not worship of anything other than God.
You are rallying against fictions. One of my best friends is evangelical, we discuss religion all the time. He has no problem with my faith and I have no problem with his.
Now, I will tell you this truly. If you think I am going to hell for the faith I practice, I will see you there. You are not better than me and your faith is in no way superior to mine.
[/quote]I doubt if I can convince you, but you couldn’t be more wrong about me. I avoided any confrontation about catholicism in these threads for weeks because I knew it would be no fun and it isn’t. I couldn’t care less about being right. I want to return the faithfulness to Him that He has shown to me. There is no my faith and your faith. There is only THE faith once for all delivered to the saints. All saints. I have not said anything about you going to hell and if you do it won’t because you were a catholic.
Could you please answer this. You never did. I’ll try one more time.
I said a few pages back:
[quote]Come on Pat ol buddy. Have the courage of your convictions. I’m not even being sarcastic here. Not a bit. I reject the pope, the holy see, the catholic sacraments, Mary as anything other than “blessed among women” and a true example of piety. I reject any "tradition of the RCC not found by overt declaration or necessary implication in the holy scriptures. In short I reject anything and everything uniquely catholic about the Roman church as a horrific deception and tool of Satan to lead untold millions of unsuspecting faithful followers to their eternal death and as such I do hate it. (I must emphatically add that this does not translate into hatred for individual catholics in any way or on any level. Quite and absolutely the contrary)
I declare all of the above with the full knowledge that by Roman dogma I am a living a symphony of “mortal” sin and do hereby proclaim that if Rome be true I am bound for hell should I perish in this state.
Agree or disagree?
Or since Pat’s not talkin to me anymore maybe one of you other guys can agree or disagree with what I just said. Or you can ignore me entirely. Let me say one more time. This is not fun for me and I am not hateful or even angry at any person in this forum. If you people knew me in real life you would know that. Truly. [/quote]
[/quote]
Tool of Satan! LOL!
My faith is no more a tool of satan than yours is.
You are not bound by the dogma of the church. This stupidity that you consider yourself “bound for hell” is just ridiculous. Was the topic that started this whole thing, not about who is saved and damned?
While you damn by your understanding of the Scriptures I have said the total opposite. All men of good will are pleasing to God and will be welcomed by him. Jesus said God’s kingdom has many rooms. That there will be many not considered the children of God in the kingdom for those of the called. St. Paul said that those who know the law are judged by the law, while those who do not have the law are judged by the heart…I am paraphrasing, of course. I don’t have the time or the will the copy and paste the scriptures, especially when I have done it before and it has been ignored. This is also the view of the church.
If you were not angry or hateful you would not say thing things you say or insult my faith. Notice I have not returned in kind.
If you wholly reject all things uniquely Catholic you are also rejecting the scriptures by which they are prescribed. The scriptures after all, were born of the church and not the other way around.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
<<< At this point it looks like I’d have to wait until eternity. So, I’ll bow out of responding until I see someone, anyone, actually answer my challenge.
As to my claims about the nature of the Church–ministerial priesthood, hierarchy–plenty of plain scripture to be found here. Catholic Magazines & Religious Articles | Catholic Answers
“Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders (presbyteroi) of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.”
James 5:14�¢??15 [/quote]You and I are not getting anywhere, but I am just as concerned about those who are reading, but not posting. Did you really think that I had not heard every last syllable on this page you linked to at one time or another? I am not at the moment up to a point by point rebuttal to this heroic, but fatally flawed attempt to establish the Roman ministerial priesthood from the bible.
I am dealing in you with a man I greatly respect and have a certain genuine fondness for. The last time you and I got into it I was a upset for days whenever I thought of it. My wife suggested at the time that maybe I should get away from here. I do not like conflict with people, especially people I like. That goes for the rest of you guys too, even you Pat, who thinks I just wanna be right which is just SO wrong.
I am also dealing in you with a man who believes that genuine repentance, from the largest organization in human history, which also claims to be Christ’s only true church, does not carry with it the same requirements that it does for every other instance of sin since the 3rd of Genesis. Who believes that the very bible that condemns that organization for hundreds and hundreds of years of abuse and corruption and which is still making primary use of the gains of it’s godless extortion to this day, can somehow be used on the other hand to demonstrate it’s legitimacy.
Once somebody knows the story of the modern “St. Peter’s Basilica” they can determine for themselves, IF there is a gospel and or a church at all whether Rome can be it.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Actually, one last question as a bit of related trivia. Who succeeded to Judas’ office? Admittedly, I already gave it away through the link I shared above. [/quote]
There were two that were given the position. The first was Matthias which was chosen by the 11. This includes Peter, but Jesus had a different opinion. Jesus did not choose Matthias, but Saul of Tarsus was chosen. Jesus usurps the power of the pope. Jesus went over Peter’s head and chose Saul of Tarsus.
IMO I beleive that Jesus went over the Pope’s head during the Reformation. The Holy Spirit sturred the hearts of men to try and reform the church from the inside, and when that did not work he went public with it. What changes did the Roman Catholic Church make after the Reformation? Pat has claimed that the Roman Catholic Chruch cleaned house. To me it looks like they just solidified into Dogma what had been going on for centuries. I hope I am wrong about the Catholic Church, and I will be doing a lot of reading this next week while on Vacation in Germany.
Does anyone believe God can heal people with various injuries or diseases?
If so, why is there no recorded instance of someone regenerating an arm from prayer or someone with Down Syndrome be cured? Why is it only diseases or illnesses that can be cured “naturally” the ones that are always used as proof that prayer works?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Did you really think that I had not heard every last syllable on this page you linked to at one time or another? I am not at the moment up to a point by point rebuttal to this heroic, but fatally flawed attempt to establish the Roman ministerial priesthood from the bible.[/quote]
Fine, forget the RCC claim. The point stands that a hierarchial and ministerial priesthood is clearly left behind. And since we are promised that the Church left by Christ will not perish, if not the RCC, you should be able to point out some Church (and their hierarchy) that is the Church Christ intended to leave behind. Let’s start there.
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m gonna go out on limb and submit that you haven’t done Rome any PR favors here to which I’m sure you’ll reply that that isn’t your job or problem.
[/quote]
I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assuarance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.[/quote]
This struck me as an interesting question.
What do you think Christ meant when he said the gates of hell will not prevail?
[/quote]
It means that Satan will try, but not succeed at destroying it. He will protect it ultimately. History bares this out. It was attempted to be squashed by Nero and the Church grew huge. It was attempted to be destroyed from with in, yet it stands. It was attempted to be divided, but yet it remains.[/quote]
That is an interesting and common take on it, but I would say that is incorrect. In Jesus times Gates were not used as an offensive weapon, instead they were a defensive weapon.
I would say that Jesus is saying that the gates of Hell can’t with stand an offensive and attacking Church. Which if you reverse your viewpoint of the church as a victim in those situations and see it instead as the reactions to an advancing church that would be inline with my take on it.
I held your view point on that as well. Then I realized a gate doesn’t attack instead it defends. So why should I interject that meaning into it.
[/quote]
That sounds quite reasonable to me as well.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Does anyone believe God can heal people with various injuries or diseases?
If so, why is there no recorded instance of someone regenerating an arm from prayer or someone with Down Syndrome be cured? Why is it only diseases or illnesses that can be cured “naturally” the ones that are always used as proof that prayer works?[/quote]
yawn.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Did you really think that I had not heard every last syllable on this page you linked to at one time or another? I am not at the moment up to a point by point rebuttal to this heroic, but fatally flawed attempt to establish the Roman ministerial priesthood from the bible.[/quote]
Fine, forget the RCC claim. The point stands that a hierarchial and ministerial priesthood is clearly left behind. And since we are promised that the Church left by Christ will not perish, if not the RCC, you should be able to point out some Church (and their hierarchy) that is the Church Christ intended to leave behind. Let’s start there.[/quote]I will have more on this when I get a chance. This exact issue is near and dear to my heart, but your premise is flawed.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Been through it, his arguments are weak and pathetic and he’s just picking on a poor dumb guy. I could wipe the floor with this moron as I did last time somebody posted this idiotic video argument for atheism.
Go check back in one of the other hundred religion threads…It’s there like 30 times.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Does anyone believe God can heal people with various injuries or diseases?
If so, why is there no recorded instance of someone regenerating an arm from prayer or someone with Down Syndrome be cured? Why is it only diseases or illnesses that can be cured “naturally” the ones that are always used as proof that prayer works?[/quote]
yawn.[/quote]
But it’s true, pat. It seems like “God” can only heal injuries that the body can normally heal itself. But when tasked with something the body cannot normally heal, why is there no evidence for this?
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Been through it, his arguments are weak and pathetic and he’s just picking on a poor dumb guy. I could wipe the floor with this moron as I did last time somebody posted this idiotic video argument for atheism.
Go check back in one of the other hundred religion threads…It’s there like 30 times.[/quote]
[/quote]
Ha, yeah it’s going to be hard to find that with all these religious threads lately. What was your main argument against the video?
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Does anyone believe God can heal people with various injuries or diseases?
If so, why is there no recorded instance of someone regenerating an arm from prayer or someone with Down Syndrome be cured? Why is it only diseases or illnesses that can be cured “naturally” the ones that are always used as proof that prayer works?[/quote]
There is a man in my congregation who claims that his leg(one leg was shorter than the other so he had to wear special shoes) was healed(lengthened) with the laying of hands and prayer(Not those scams artist on tv where they deceive people for their money). I believe God does impossible things all the time, just that people don’t give him the credit.
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Does anyone believe God can heal people with various injuries or diseases?
If so, why is there no recorded instance of someone regenerating an arm from prayer or someone with Down Syndrome be cured? Why is it only diseases or illnesses that can be cured “naturally” the ones that are always used as proof that prayer works?[/quote]
There is a man in my congregation who claims that his leg(one leg was shorter than the other so he had to wear special shoes) was healed(lengthened) with the laying of hands and prayer(Not those scams artist on tv where they deceive people for their money). I believe God does impossible things all the time, just that people don’t give him the credit.[/quote]
Did he actually measure his legs and saw the difference? Or perhaps he just adjusted to the shortness and it was no longer bothering him (hence cured in his mind).
[quote]pat wrote:
<<< All men of good will are pleasing to God and will be welcomed by him. >>>[/quote]
ENCYCLICAL ON RELIGIOUS UNITY - FROM POPE PIUS XI - January 6, 1928: MORTALIUM ANIMOS (mortali1.htm)
[quote]<<< 2. A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion. >>>[/quote]My how God changed His mind at Vatican II. BTW, the anathemas of Trent were most assuredly condemning people just like me to hell, do not pass purgatory, do not collect 200 indulgences. If I have not committed and am not willfully persisting in mortal sin. Then who is? I have deliberately declared the “the one true most holy apostolic church” a “tool of Satan”. I have done so with full knowledge of the grave import of such a statement. I with great sorrow and a heavy heart do nonetheless stand by that statement. Your church pronounces me as of this minute outside of saving grace and as one who will suffer eternal damnation should I fail to repent before my death. No sincere “act of contrition” will be forthcoming. Now grow a pair and agree with your church. I would… if I were Roman catholic.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Did you really think that I had not heard every last syllable on this page you linked to at one time or another? I am not at the moment up to a point by point rebuttal to this heroic, but fatally flawed attempt to establish the Roman ministerial priesthood from the bible.[/quote]
Fine, forget the RCC claim. The point stands that a hierarchial and ministerial priesthood is clearly left behind. And since we are promised that the Church left by Christ will not perish, if not the RCC, you should be able to point out some Church (and their hierarchy) that is the Church Christ intended to leave behind. Let’s start there.
[/quote]
After Pentecost when the church was born, do you think there was anyone save that was not part of the RCC? I am not sure what tirib will respond with but my take on the church is all believers in Christ since the church was born are part of this church and is lead by Christ. Therefore it is not defined or limited by buildings, space and time or ran by institutions of men. All those in the church are one body in Christ so there will be some elders, deacons and preachers etc… but all those in the body are one in Christ so why should there be hierarchy among the people themselves except for having God as their master.