Religious Controversies: The Right Religion

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[

Does he know that without confession it requires an act of perfect contrition to blot out mortal sin, and can he easily make such an act?

So, no there are other ways to be forgiven of your sins then confessing to a priest, however they are very difficult to do.

[/quote]

So all those times I’ve confessed my sins directly to God, it fell on deaf ears? Those were not valid confessions? God only accepts confessions if they are given to a (Catholic) priest?[/quote]

Falling on deaf ears does not follow it being difficult to do. I cannot say they were valid confessions, and it was already pointed out that there are other ways to confess than go to a Catholic priest.

I remind you of James 5:16 “Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved.”[/quote]

Right. Only a “perfect act of contrition” which, we’ve been told, by the Catholic Church, is near impossible. Suggesting the only real viable way is through a priest. The scripture you posted doesn’t qualify the “another” you confess your sins to, leading me to believe it isn’t necessary for a priest to be involved.[/quote]

I do not know what by the Catholic Church means in this instance but, if you read how to make a perfect act of contrition, it is fairly hard.

Anyway, remember what Jesus said to the Apostles, "Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

[dmaddox]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

You say, “contest any baptism of an infant.”

In John 3:5 Jesus answers the reason for this, “unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” So it would follow that if a person, as an infant, were not to be baptized and die they would not be able to “enter into the kingdom of God.” [/quote]

Sorry Brother Chris, but I am going to use your favorite rebuttle. So you are putting limitations on God? God is not powerful enough to overcome water?
[/quote]

No, that is not a limitation on God, that is a limitation on who can be around God, it is clearly stated in scripture above, it is a commandment. Without wiping away the stain of original sin YOU cannot go to Heaven, now there are other kinds of baptism, but let’s just call all of them baptism, for the moment.

“There shall not enter into it any thing defiled, or that worketh abomination or maketh a lie, but they that are written in the book of life of the Lamb.” Apocalypse 21:27

If you are defiled, in anyway, you cannot enter into Heaven. Original sin leaves us all defiled, until baptism.

[quote]
Why was Jesus not Baptized until he was 30? Do you not think that what Jesus did is the way to go?[/quote]

Jesus was not baptized as we are baptized, Jesus had what Jewish people call a Tevilah (Gk. baptisma, wash or immerse) this was considered a ritual that you do to wash any impurity off you, (even though he had no impurity on him) he did it out of righteousness, before he started his public ministry.

No, because the Tevilah which Jesus did (which is not baptism after Jesus), does not wipe away original sin. It is two separate acts that are closely related, but not the same thing. And anyway, why would we limit who could get this wonderful gift from God?

Why would you not let infants and children into a spiritual life, why exclude them?
[/quote][/quote]

I say that infants and children are closer to God than you or I. Jesus stated let the children come to me. He also stated that we need to have faith like a child.

I am not saying your are wrong or correct in your assertions. I will say that baptism in and of itself does not cleanse anything, same thing can be said that only Catholic Priests can cleanse sins. The act of baptism is in obedience of God. God is the only one that can cleanse sins. You do not have to be baptised to be cleansed of sins. You have to ask for the forgiveness of sins, and repent then you will be saved. You see it differently and I can understand that. I understand the idea of tradition, but sometimes traditions are false and there needs to be a measuring stick to make sure they are true. We look to the Bible as the measuring stick. Anything outside of the Bible can lead people astray. If Jesus is the Word, and our only tie to the Word is the Bible we have to stay close to its teachings.

Not trying to convert you, just trying to get you to think. You are making me think and I am doing a lot of study, but I have to use the Bible to make sure that thoses teachings are true.

What is the Apocolypse 21:27 you are referring to?

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]69GoatMan wrote:
So, no scripture evidence of infant baptism?
[/quote]

No scripture evidence against baptism? Are we limiting God now? Can God not give a gift to an infant?

My belief on sin is well studied, not repeated by a question and written answer system. I said “would” be considered, not is. There is specific scripture, Mark 28:30 that refers to a sin that won’t be forgiven, “in this age or ages to come”. Does it make that sin to be mightier than the rest? More damning? That sin is one that is not repented of, as it is non-belief in Christ/denying the Holy Spirit.

Go ahead and continue to make snide remarks, the Catechism is founded in Biblical and Doctrinal truths.

Yes, I know of Mark 28:30, however you said, “a sin is a sin.” That is not the case, you want to infer that there is two kinds of sin, but that the Catholic Church is wrong for having more than one kind of sin.

That sin would not be confessed to another brother, prayed upon or repented of as it would be by a total non-believer, who would not repent. They see no reason. Would I commit that sin? No, but I commit others and pray for forgiveness.
and I know that they are forgiven, by Jesus, the only mediator between me and God.

How do you know you are forgiven when we are commanded to “confess sins to another”?

[quote]
Does the RCC have levels of sin? Not attacking your dogma but you state they, RCC, are correct and I don’t find levels of sin.

He that knoweth his brother to sin a sin which is not to death, let him ask, and life shall be given to him, who sinneth not to death. There is a sin unto death: for that I say not that any man ask. All iniquity is sin. And there is a sin unto death.

“The classic text for the distinction of mortal and venial sin is that of St. Paul (1 Corinthians 3:8-15), where he explains in detail the distinction between mortal and venial sin. “For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: every man’s work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it; because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work, of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.” By wood, hay, and stubble are signified venial sins (St. Thomas, I-II:89:2) which, built on the foundation of a living faith in Christ, do not destroy charity, and from their very nature do not merit eternal but temporal punishment. “Just as”, says St. Thomas, [wood, hay, and stubble] “are gathered together in a house and do not pertain to the substance of the edifice, so also venial sins are multiplied in man, the spiritual edifice remaining, and for these he suffers either the fire of temporal tribulations in this life, or of purgatory after this life and nevertheless obtains eternal salvation.” (I-II:89:2)” - Newadvent.org

Where do I find indulgences in the Bible? and more so, where do I find that someone else can do my indulgences for me, work or monetary? Can someone else work out my salvation? Other than the One who did, which is Jesus the Christ? From what little I have read on this subject, and have read the pro’s and the cons, I see no scripture basis for this act. I read suppositions and I read conjecture, but no sound Bible reference. I see greed and power and purchasing of favor.

So, let’s see I do not believe in Sola Scripture, why would I need to find everything in the Bible? However it is, and you can find it in the page I give below if you care to read.

You cannot buy indulgences. Someone can pray for your suffering to be shortened. No only at the Throne of the Kingdom of Heaven can you be saved. I dropped a link to something more expansive since I am not well learned in this area. There is bibles references in there. Purchasing of favor, you cannot pay for indulgences and you need to stop with the Ad hominem or I’m putting you on ignore.

I am going to direct you to an article, since I do not know at this moment very much about indulgences. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Indulgences
By the way, I did read a great deal of the gutenburg file you attached. I will read it with an open mind, best I can.

[Brother_Chris]

Stated,

So, no scripture evidence of infant baptism?

In John 3, He declares: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he can not enter into the kingdom of God.” Christ makes no exception to this law and it is therefore general in its application, embracing both adults and infants.

[Brother_Chris]

Interpreting “born of water” as natural birth would be incorrect, as Jesus says if a man is not “born again of water”. And, does Peter not commanded of us to repent and baptize (Acts 2:38). As well, does Jesus not command of his Apostles to “baptize (Gk. baptisma, wash or immerse) them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”?

The fact that water baptism is not a condition of salvation does not lead to that baptism is not needed, and/or that you can enter heaven without baptism. There are three types of baptism: Baptism of Water, Baptism of Desire, and Baptism of Blood (Martydom).

On the topic of the dying thief, this is where the Church get’s her teaching on Baptism of desire (John 3, or Holy Ghost). The thief made a perfect act of contrition, his desire to be with Jesus was so great that he was sorrowful for those sins he committed because he wished to be in the presence of the true God. Being that baptism by desire is not a sacrament, however it does has the same grace to emit the guilt of sins.

Yes, and how is a man born again? water, desire (or Holy Ghost), in martyrdom for the faith.

[Brother_Chris]

Stated,

I will say that baptism in and of itself does not cleanse anything, same thing can be said that only Catholic Priests can cleanse sins. The act of baptism is in obedience of God. God is the only one that can cleanse sins.

You are using straw man argument, the Holy Catholic Church does not teach these things. The Holy Catholic Church does not teach that baptism in and of itself cleanse anything. If I dunk you into Holy Water, all I would have done is dunk you into Holy Water. However, the Holy Catholic Church envokes the name of the Lord, and through God you are baptised.

The Holy Catholic Church does not teach that only Catholic Priests can cleanse sins, and certainly not by their own power. God cleanse sin, Priest absolves you of sin through the Trinity God. As well you can go straight to God.

Baptism is a passive sacrament, we are not doing anything for God. God is making us a new creation like when the waters covered the earth and the breath of God was over the waters. Baptism is not an act of obedience, it is a gift from God.

[dmaddox]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
And, does Peter not commanded of us to repent and baptize (Acts 2:38). As well, does Jesus not command of his Apostles to “baptize (Gk. baptisma, wash or immerse) them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”?

[/quote]

If you have to repent and be baptized as the scripture states, but the Catholics baptize infants, how can an infant be saved if they do not repent? This is just curiosity. I see your other points and how the Catholic Church came to those conclusions.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
And, does Peter not commanded of us to repent and baptize (Acts 2:38). As well, does Jesus not command of his Apostles to “baptize (Gk. baptisma, wash or immerse) them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”?

[/quote]

If you have to repent and be baptized as the scripture states, but the Catholics baptize infants, how can an infant be saved if they do not repent? This is just curiosity. I see your other points and how the Catholic Church came to those conclusions. [/quote]

Repent when stated in this translates, correct me if I am wrong, is changing of mind, changing how you think. Godparents speak for the child at baptism, that they will teach the child the faith.

[Tiribulus]

Listen Chris, If you are saying that you converted to catholicism this last spring I will give you one thing without hesitation fer sher. You are a studying machine. It’s almost impossible for me to believe somebody could learn this much in a few months. Either that or you are a google-meister par excellence. Either way pretty impressive. I’m being quite serious. Also I never got a chance to respond to a post of yours somewhere where you were saying that people think you’re a jerk though you weren’t trying to be. That made me feel kinda bad because I never thought were a jerk.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Listen Chris, If you are saying that you converted to catholicism this last spring I will give you one thing without hesitation fer sher. You are a studying machine. It’s almost impossible for me to believe somebody could learn this much in a few months. Either that or you are a google-meister par excellence. Either way pretty impressive. I’m being quite serious. Also I never got a chance to respond to a post of yours somewhere where you were saying that people think you’re a jerk though you weren’t trying to be. That made me feel kinda bad because I never thought were a jerk.

[/quote]

Thank you. I did have an RCIA class for nine months before I was confirmed, even though it lacked depth it raise questions. And, I am one to look for answers to questions, which leads to more questions. Likely the reason why I choose St. Thomas Aquinas as my Confirmation name.

No need to feel bad, I just know that “jerk” is something that I have been called a few times, among other names. I guess it is partially my fault, because I was schooled in debate after joining a debate group for religious students (and atheists). And, the lack of actually debating my personal side has allowed me to learn how to distance emotion with the actual argument, and I assume most people can do that. However, that is not the case as when debating religion most people are debating from their heart, and with a lack of training leads to people taking my direct and blunt arguments as insults at them. Or, in some cases they do not read my words or hear my correctly and accuse me of something I didn’t say. Which leads to ad hominem of all sorts, and arguments running down hill.

Second, I know I am a jerk, because I run a two 12 disciples men’s group (College and High School). And, I’ve literally dragged some of my younger guys into mass in a head lock. I’ve kicked them out of meetings for breaking my rules (the high school group is at a Catholic HS, which gave me a few of the kids that were undisciplined and in order to stay in school had to attend the meetings).

[69GoatMan]

In a nutshell, if there is one. Agreed here, by all, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
In Him we believe and have hope, yes, the faith and knowledge of His saving grace.

We could banter on and on about who is right, wrong or indifferent. I can pick apart your religion and you can pick apart mine and we gain nothing. We might gain insight, by studying each other’s beliefs, or might strengthen our own resolve by learning we have more to learn. I hope the learning process nevers ends.

I think we find our core values to be similar. Will that be enough for us all to meet someday in His Heavenly kingdom?

BC…you have the debate language down pretty well, straw man, ad hominem, etc. I debated too in school, but that was some 35 years ago. As a side note, if you are a jerk, and you say you are, then change. I was a jerk at your age and it got me nothing. I realized that in my 30’s and continue, to this day, to smack myself on the head and ask, why was I like that? I can give my reasons and I would bet they are similar to yours, but I won’t assume that on you. If Christ can change you inwardly, then he can change you outwardly. He changed me. No one likes a jerk, they just tolerate them, and then for only so long.

[cryptik]

I think all religions are bs. They are nice thoughts but still bs. They serve a purpose to the weak minded that need to believe in something and for those that want to believe in something. The truth be told when your days are done your ass goes in a box in the ground or a box in the oven. Nothing more or nothing less. So live everyday to the fullest and be good to your fellow man.

[dmaddox]

[quote]69GoatMan wrote:
In a nutshell, if there is one. Agreed here, by all, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
In Him we believe and have hope, yes, the faith and knowledge of His saving grace.

We could banter on and on about who is right, wrong or indifferent. I can pick apart your religion and you can pick apart mine and we gain nothing. We might gain insight, by studying each other’s beliefs, or might strengthen our own resolve by learning we have more to learn. I hope the learning process nevers ends.

I think we find our core values to be similar. Will that be enough for us all to meet someday in His Heavenly kingdom?

[/quote]

I agree, and to answer your question I would say yes.

I did not debate at any level, but I am learning from you guys. Everything you read on these threads is from my heart. That might be bad at sometimes, but that is all I got is a big heart for Jesus and all the people on this planet.

[cueball]

[quote]cryptik wrote:
I think all religions are bs. They are nice thoughts but still bs. They serve a purpose to the weak minded that need to believe in something and for those that want to believe in something. The truth be told when your days are done your ass goes in a box in the ground or a box in the oven. Nothing more or nothing less. So live everyday to the fullest and be good to your fellow man.[/quote]

Prefacing your statement with “I think” doesn’t lend much weight to the rest of it. Especially when the rest of it seems so “definitive”. But thank you for sharing what you think.

Edit: Can you provide proof that when we die we go in a box or oven and “nothing more”.

[cryptik]

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]cryptik wrote:
I think all religions are bs. They are nice thoughts but still bs. They serve a purpose to the weak minded that need to believe in something and for those that want to believe in something. The truth be told when your days are done your ass goes in a box in the ground or a box in the oven. Nothing more or nothing less. So live everyday to the fullest and be good to your fellow man.[/quote]

Prefacing your statement with “I think” doesn’t lend much weight to the rest of it. Especially when the rest of it seems so “definitive”. But thank you for sharing what you think.

Edit: Can you provide proof that when we die we go in a box or oven and “nothing more”.[/quote]

[cueball]

[quote]cryptik wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]cryptik wrote:
I think all religions are bs. They are nice thoughts but still bs. They serve a purpose to the weak minded that need to believe in something and for those that want to believe in something. The truth be told when your days are done your ass goes in a box in the ground or a box in the oven. Nothing more or nothing less. So live everyday to the fullest and be good to your fellow man.[/quote]

Prefacing your statement with “I think” doesn’t lend much weight to the rest of it. Especially when the rest of it seems so “definitive”. But thank you for sharing what you think.

Edit: Can you provide proof that when we die we go in a box or oven and “nothing more”.[/quote]

[/quote]

?

[dmaddox]

I think he agrees with you cue.

[69GoatMan]

I’ve always found it interesting, the folks who say religion is bs, not there, etc. They have no idea how they got here, nor do they care where they are going. A big bang theory perhaps? I could almost agree with that if there was but one or two species represented by it. But for a big bang to suddenly happen and create millions of variations of plants and animals takes more belief than mine does in God. God makes more sense.
Logically. Non-matter becoming everything that surrounds us, formed from an accident? Now that is a stretch.

In the end remember this: there are no atheists in hell.

[cryptik]

Well no I do not agree. Now evolution and science is something I can get into. Can you prove that there is a supreme being? Tell you what have god come over to your house this weekend and take a picture then post it.

[cryptik]

Revolutionary New Theory For Origins Of Life On Earth

this is interesting to.