Sola Scriptura

Home Forums Everything Else Sola Scriptura

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 107 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #7196
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Read my post on “what is Tradition” I’m sure you will have allot of Bible verses to counteract to it.

    #7274
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Sorry but I couldn’t find it

    #7378
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Scripture, our Evangelical friends tell us, is the inerrant Word of God. Quite right, the Catholic replies; but how do you know this to be true?

    It’s not an easy question for Protestants, because, having jettisoned Tradition and the Church, they have no objective authority for the claims they make for Scripture. There is no list of canonical books anywhere in the Bible, nor does any book (with the exception of St. John’s Apocalypse) claim to be inspired. So, how does a “Bible Christian” know the Bible is the Word of God?

    If he wants to avoid a train of thought that will lead him into the Catholic Church, he has just one way of responding: With circular arguments pointing to himself (or Luther or the Jimmy Swaggart Ministries or some other party not mentioned in the Bible) as an infallible authority telling him that it is so. Such arguments would have perplexed a first or second century Christian, most of whom never saw a Bible.

    Christ founded a teaching Church. So far as we know, he himself never wrote a word (except on sand). Nor did he commission the Apostles to write anything. In due course, some Apostles (and non-Apostles) composed the twenty-seven books which comprise the New Testament. Most of these documents are ad hoc; they are addressed to specific problems that arose in the early Church, and none claim to present the whole of Christian revelation. It’s doubtful that St. Paul even suspected that his short letter to Philemon begging pardon for a renegade slave would some day be read as Holy Scripture.

    Who, then, decided that it was Scripture? The Catholic Church. And it took several centuries to do so. It was not until the Council of Carthage (397) and a subsequent decree by Pope Innocent I that Christendom had a fixed New Testament canon. Prior to that date, scores of spurious gospels and “apostolic” writings were floating around the Mediterranean basin: the Gospel of Thomas, the “Shepherd” of Hermas, St. Paul’s Letter to the Laodiceans, and so forth. Moreover, some texts later judged to be inspired, such as the Letter to the Hebrews, were controverted. It was the Magisterium, guided by the Holy Spirit, which separated the wheat from the chaff.

    But, according to Protestants, the Catholic Church was corrupt and idolatrous by the fourth century and so had lost whatever authority it originally had. On what basis, then, do they accept the canon of the New Testament? Luther and Calvin were both fuzzy on the subject. Luther dropped seven books from the Old Testament, the so-called Apocrypha in the Protestant Bible; his pretext for doing so was that orthodox Jews had done it at the synod of Jamnia around 100 A. D.; but that synod was explicitly anti-Christian, and so its decisions about Scripture make an odd benchmark for Christians.

    Luther’s real motive was to get rid of Second Maccabees, which teaches the doctrine of Purgatory. He also wanted to drop the Letter of James, which he called “an epistle of straw,” because it flatly contradicts the idea of salvation by “faith alone” apart from good works. He was restrained by more cautious Reformers. Instead, he mistranslated numerous New Testament passages, most notoriously Romans 3:28, to buttress his polemical position.

    The Protestant teaching that the Bible is the sole spiritual authority–sola scriptura –is nowhere to be found in the Bible. St. Paul wrote to Timothy that Scripture is “useful” (which is an understatemtn), but neither he nor anyone else in the early Church taught sola scriptura. And, in fact, nobody believed it until the Reformation. Newman called the idea that God would let fifteen hundred years pass before revealing that the bible was the sole teaching authority for Christians an “intolerable paradox.”

    Newman also wrote: “It is antecedently unreasonable to Bsuppose that a book so complex, so unsystematic, in parts so obscure, the outcome of so many minds, times, and places, should be given us from above without the safeguard of some authority; as if it could possibly, from the nature of the case, interpret itself….” And, indeed, once they had set aside the teaching authority of the Church, the Reformers began to argue about key Scriptural passages. Luther and Zwingli, for example, disagreed vehemently about what Christ meant by the words, “This is my Body.”

    St. Augustine, usually Luther’s guide and mentor, ought to have the last word about sola scriptura: “But for the authority of the Church, I would not believe the Gospel.”
    http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals … /sola.html

    #7643
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Not only does the Sola Scriptura argument make every “Believer” a Pope, but it grants him far more authority than the Catholic Church defines the Pope as having.

    I find it amusing and sad when I watch some of the Evangelical TV programs and see people buy anything the preacher says is so, and is bibilically based, just because the preacher says, “God laid this on my heart.” I did enjoy while sick with the flu one day two different shows on Channel 40, (Our local Protestant Channel) an old re-run where the Owner of the station was agreeing with a Presbyterian Minister that “Communion” is a symbol and memorial of Jesus and the Last Supper, and that Catholics where Idol Worshipers for believing what our Lord said at the last supper.

    The next was a live broadcast in which the Owner of the Station had just recently “Had it laid on his heart by God” to re-interpret the passages on the last supper to mean that Jesus was going to be physically present, and went on to describe almost to the letter the Council of Trent’s explanation of Transubstantiation, even though he did not believe in Apostolic Succession.

    The question comes down with Sola Scriptura, who has the authority to interpret the text? and where all the editions of the text in error until the King James Version (Which incidentally had the books rejected by Luther in the original edition.) There is also by extention the question of who has the authority to determine what books are to be included and excluded from the Bible, (While that was determined by various Councils of the Catholic Church, over 1,000 years before Protestant Churches existed, (but for argument sake) who decides what is and is not Scripture, (If we just chuck the first 1500 years of Christian History out the window, and start with the Protestant “Reformation”?

    As I see it, either our Lord remained with the Church and will do so until the consumation of the Earth as He promised, or He lied and abandoned the Church and let it fall into apostasy until Martin Luther, John Calvin, Tyndale and the rest came along.

    #7677
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I completely agree.

    #7694
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    You guys are really cute!

    First Weathers says:
    [quote:y68lea93]Scripture, our Evangelical friends tell us, is the inerrant Word of God. Quite right, the Catholic replies; but how do you know this to be true?

    It’s not an easy question for Protestants, because, having jettisoned Tradition and the Church, they have no objective authority for the claims they make for Scripture. There is no list of canonical books anywhere in the Bible, nor does any book (with the exception of St. John’s Apocalypse) claim to be inspired. So, how does a “Bible Christian” know the Bible is the Word of God? [/quote:y68lea93]

    Secondly LARoberts adds:



    [quote:y68lea93]Not only does the Sola Scriptura argument make every “Believer” a Pope, but it grants him far more authority than the Catholic Church defines the Pope as having.

    that was determined by various Councils of the Catholic Church, over 1,000 years before Protestant Churches

    As I see it, either our Lord remained with the Church and will do so until the consumation of the Earth as He promised, or He lied and abandoned the Church and let it fall into apostasy until Martin Luther, John Calvin, Tyndale and the rest came along. [/quote:y68lea93]

    And then Bernadine adds finally:
    [quote:y68lea93]I completely agree[/quote:y68lea93]

    So now we have an example of how catholics get their “traditions” because in the future someone can say, “we ‘ve always believed it as far back as the early church days”

    Yet the Word odf God tells us, straight up that :

    1Thes 2:13 — [color=red:y68lea93]For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, en ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, [u:y68lea93][b:y68lea93]ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, [/b:y68lea93][/u:y68lea93]which effectually worketh also in you that believe. [/color:y68lea93]

    So as you see, it isn’t necessary for us to “prove anything” or to give “slanted” information of “how” we got the good book, because we KNOW it is God’s Word and no one, I repeat no one, can give me any other book that carries as much authority as Scripture alone does!

    #7695
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    [quote:e4w8cwqf]we KNOW it is God’s Word and no one, I repeat no one, can give me any other book that carries as much authority as Scripture alone does![/quote:e4w8cwqf]

    The problem Ron is “Someone” yes I say it again, “Someone” has the authority to tell you. Being blind to the Biblical History, you omit the point in the early Church where based on a consensus of the Early Church Fathers, and through the Guidance of the Holy Ghost a council the Catholic Church chose from among the many books circulating at the time and held by individual communities of Christians what books where inspired and what books would be rejected as Inspired. It is on that basis you have the texts ordered as they are. Why do they have this authority, well simply because Christ Jesus founded a visible Church on the Apostles with Peter as the leader of that said Church, and He gave Peter and the Apostles that authority. If anyone is ignoring the Sacredness of the Bible, and the authority it carries it is not the Catholic Church.

    If we follow the illogic of the Protestant “Bible Beliver” and Sola Sciptura and we look into the history of the early Church before the books of the Bible where determined we and buy the invention of Protestant theologians that the Church is an invisible collection of true believers. That only the individual can have assurance of his own salvation based on a split second commitment to Christ and accepting Him as their savior. Then we are posed with this question, did the Catholic Church leave out books that where accepted by these believers when they rejected other letters and books written by the Apostles and other writers who heard Christ Jesus for themselves. And Did Christ Jesus (form the Bible) instruct anyone to write anything, or did He tell him to preach the gospel, (Good News) to the ends of the earth, something only done so far by the Catholic Church.

    Your premise of The Bible is the word of God because I as a believer say so, combined with your shrieks of You don’t know the Bible, Only I do. Add to that the “Don’t quote me out of context, but I can quote any single text, based on how I interpret, (or more likley how the books I have read by other protestants, since none of your arguments are novel, but rather the same old dusty arguments of anti-catholic writers of the past two centuries, sometimes word for word) are as Luther said of the Epistle of James, as straw, easily blown away by the wind.

    Rather than shrieking at you, you remain in my prayers,

    Corde Immaculata Maria, Ora pro nobis, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae, Amen.

    #7696
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Mr. LARoberts says:

    [quote:w8j8iigg]The problem Ron is “Someone” yes I say it again, “Someone” has the authority to tell you. Being blind to the Biblical History, you omit the point in the early Church [/quote:w8j8iigg]
    Yes I do have a problem with History and what the Catholic church tells us is history. How do you know what they are telling you that the history that “they present” is actual or not? Espescially when only 400 years ago people believed that the world was flat and even today many would claim that the Earth and man originated over billions of years with evolution, so where was the correct History of catholicism those years?

    [quote:w8j8iigg]where based on a consensus of the Early Church Fathers, and through the Guidance of the Holy Ghost a council the Catholic Church chose from among the many books circulating at the time and held by individual communities of Christians what books where inspired and what books would be rejected as Inspired. [/quote:w8j8iigg]

    And what of this so called apostolic succession – do you think Jesus would allow popes to father other popes from prostitutes and power surges as your popes proposes? there at times were 3 popes in office at once and they couldn’t agree who the pope was!
    [quote:w8j8iigg]
    It is on that basis you have the texts ordered as they are. Why do they have this authority, well simply because Christ Jesus founded a visible Church on the Apostles with Peter as the leader of that said Church, and He gave Peter and the Apostles that authority. [/quote:w8j8iigg]
    Again you suggest the translation of Matthew 16:18 to us as the same catholic church tells us is correct. Why? Because they say so isn’t good enough when I can see for myself that Jesus was saying that He (Jesus not Peter) would build His (again not Peter’s ) church? and their claim that Peter is the rock is (once again) their interpretation when Scriptures always presents Jesus as THE ROCK, what makes you think that ths is truth?

    [quote:w8j8iigg] If anyone is ignoring the Sacredness of the Bible, and the authority it carries it is not the Catholic Church. [/quote:w8j8iigg]
    Again WHy? Because they say so? When they tell us that priests can remove sins (based on their interpretation of John 20:23) when the Bible clearly shows that only God can forgive sins? Once again all the power is given to a priest when Jesus is the high priest and not men (except all believers are now priests to the lost)
    [quote:w8j8iigg]
    If we follow the illogic of the Protestant “Bible Beliver” and Sola Sciptura and we look into the history of the early Church before the books of the Bible where determined we and buy the invention of Protestant theologians that the Church is an invisible collection of true believers.[/quote:w8j8iigg]
    So wheree did you get that the denomination of catholicism is Christ’s church except for that is what [b:w8j8iigg][i:w8j8iigg][u:w8j8iigg]they[/u:w8j8iigg][/i:w8j8iigg][/b:w8j8iigg] claim, the catholic circular reasoning?
    [quote:w8j8iigg]
    That only the individual can have assurance of his own salvation based on a split second commitment to Christ and accepting Him as their savior. [/quote:w8j8iigg]
    A quick decision? you are calling a lifetime commitment, a change of heart, a split second decision? No sir Mr. LARoberts, it is a life commintment as Ephsians 1:13+14 tells us – [color=red:w8j8iigg]In whom ye also trusted, [u:w8j8iigg][b:w8j8iigg]after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit[/b:w8j8iigg][/u:w8j8iigg] of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. [/color:w8j8iigg] It’s the “born again” moment requred to get to Heaven (which your church claims is done through Baptism? – nahhhha! That is another reason for giving the priests of catholicism “the power” [i:w8j8iigg]they[/i:w8j8iigg] want)
    [quote:w8j8iigg]
    Then we are posed with this question, did the Catholic Church leave out books that where accepted by these believers when they rejected other letters and books written by the Apostles and other writers who heard Christ Jesus for themselves. And Did Christ Jesus (form the Bible) instruct anyone to write anything, or did He tell him to preach the gospel, (Good News) to the ends of the earth, something only done so far by the Catholic Church. [/quote:w8j8iigg]

    Well I think we are given a bigger question – are we to believe that Jesus saved us by what He did at Calvary or by your church’s claims that sacraments and purgatory take care of sins?
    That is the choice given to us – I’ll stick with what His written word says.

    [quote:w8j8iigg]Your premise of The Bible is the word of God because I as a believer say so, combined with your shrieks of You don’t know the Bible, Only I do. Add to that the “Don’t quote me out of context, but I can quote any single text, based on how I interpret, (or more likley how the books I have read by other protestants, since none of your arguments are novel, but rather the same old dusty arguments of anti-catholic writers of the past two centuries, sometimes word for word) are as Luther said of the Epistle of James, as straw, easily blown away by the wind. [/quote:w8j8iigg]

    Nothing worth reading here but slander! The Bible is the Word of God because it proves itself to be 100% correct and Jesus told us that it is the power to save (Romans 1:16) To all that hear and believe (Romans 10:9,10) to grow by (1 Peter 2:2). And if we stayed in it, we’d be saved
    (John 8:31,32) He wassn’t telling some magestirium this, He was telling us that!

    You can keep your catholic whatever – I don’t want anything to do with their twists. As Revelaton tells us
    Rev 18:4-[b:w8j8iigg][color=red:w8j8iigg] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)[/color:w8j8iigg][/b:w8j8iigg]

    #7715
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    [quote:7fk0kuvj]Mr. LARoberts says:

    [quote:7fk0kuvj]The problem Ron is “Someone” yes I say it again, “Someone” has the authority to tell you. Being blind to the Biblical History, you omit the point in the early Church [/quote:7fk0kuvj]
    Yes I do have a problem with History and what the Catholic church tells us is history. How do you know what they are telling you that the history that “they present” is actual or not? Espescially when only 400 years ago people believed that the world was flat and even today many would claim that the Earth and man originated over billions of years with evolution, so where was the correct History of catholicism those years?

    [quote:7fk0kuvj]where based on a consensus of the Early Church Fathers, and through the Guidance of the Holy Ghost a council the Catholic Church chose from among the many books circulating at the time and held by individual communities of Christians what books where inspired and what books would be rejected as Inspired. [/quote:7fk0kuvj]

    And what of this so called apostolic succession – do you think Jesus would allow popes to father other popes from prostitutes and power surges as your popes proposes? there at times were 3 popes in office at once and they couldn’t agree who the pope was!
    [quote:7fk0kuvj]
    It is on that basis you have the texts ordered as they are. Why do they have this authority, well simply because Christ Jesus founded a visible Church on the Apostles with Peter as the leader of that said Church, and He gave Peter and the Apostles that authority. [/quote:7fk0kuvj]
    Again you suggest the translation of Matthew 16:18 to us as the same catholic church tells us is correct. Why? Because they say so isn’t good enough when I can see for myself that Jesus was saying that He (Jesus not Peter) would build His (again not Peter’s ) church? and their claim that Peter is the rock is (once again) their interpretation when Scriptures always presents Jesus as THE ROCK, what makes you think that ths is truth?

    [quote:7fk0kuvj] If anyone is ignoring the Sacredness of the Bible, and the authority it carries it is not the Catholic Church. [/quote:7fk0kuvj]
    Again WHy? Because they say so? When they tell us that priests can remove sins (based on their interpretation of John 20:23) when the Bible clearly shows that only God can forgive sins? Once again all the power is given to a priest when Jesus is the high priest and not men (except all believers are now priests to the lost)
    [quote:7fk0kuvj]
    If we follow the illogic of the Protestant “Bible Beliver” and Sola Sciptura and we look into the history of the early Church before the books of the Bible where determined we and buy the invention of Protestant theologians that the Church is an invisible collection of true believers.[/quote:7fk0kuvj]
    So wheree did you get that the denomination of catholicism is Christ’s church except for that is what [b:7fk0kuvj][i:7fk0kuvj][u:7fk0kuvj]they[/u:7fk0kuvj][/i:7fk0kuvj][/b:7fk0kuvj] claim, the catholic circular reasoning?
    [quote:7fk0kuvj]
    That only the individual can have assurance of his own salvation based on a split second commitment to Christ and accepting Him as their savior. [/quote:7fk0kuvj]
    A quick decision? you are calling a lifetime commitment, a change of heart, a split second decision? No sir Mr. LARoberts, it is a life commintment as Ephsians 1:13+14 tells us – [color=red:7fk0kuvj]In whom ye also trusted, [u:7fk0kuvj][b:7fk0kuvj]after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit[/b:7fk0kuvj][/u:7fk0kuvj] of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. [/color:7fk0kuvj] It’s the “born again” moment requred to get to Heaven (which your church claims is done through Baptism? – nahhhha! That is another reason for giving the priests of catholicism “the power” [i:7fk0kuvj]they[/i:7fk0kuvj] want)
    [quote:7fk0kuvj]
    Then we are posed with this question, did the Catholic Church leave out books that where accepted by these believers when they rejected other letters and books written by the Apostles and other writers who heard Christ Jesus for themselves. And Did Christ Jesus (form the Bible) instruct anyone to write anything, or did He tell him to preach the gospel, (Good News) to the ends of the earth, something only done so far by the Catholic Church. [/quote:7fk0kuvj]

    Well I think we are given a bigger question – are we to believe that Jesus saved us by what He did at Calvary or by your church’s claims that sacraments and purgatory take care of sins?
    That is the choice given to us – I’ll stick with what His written word says.

    [quote:7fk0kuvj]Your premise of The Bible is the word of God because I as a believer say so, combined with your shrieks of You don’t know the Bible, Only I do. Add to that the “Don’t quote me out of context, but I can quote any single text, based on how I interpret, (or more likley how the books I have read by other protestants, since none of your arguments are novel, but rather the same old dusty arguments of anti-catholic writers of the past two centuries, sometimes word for word) are as Luther said of the Epistle of James, as straw, easily blown away by the wind. [/quote:7fk0kuvj]

    Nothing worth reading here but slander! The Bible is the Word of God because it proves itself to be 100% correct and Jesus told us that it is the power to save (Romans 1:16) To all that hear and believe (Romans 10:9,10) to grow by (1 Peter 2:2). And if we stayed in it, we’d be saved
    (John 8:31,32) He wassn’t telling some magestirium this, He was telling us that!

    You can keep your catholic whatever – I don’t want anything to do with their twists. As Revelaton tells us
    Rev 18:4-[b:7fk0kuvj][color=red:7fk0kuvj] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)[/color:7fk0kuvj][/b:7fk0kuvj][/quote:7fk0kuvj]

    Ron,How did you get all your knowledge about religion?Was it because you were a Catholic and ALMOST a priest for 30 odd years.It’s just mind blogging you have a answer for everything about it.(just curious)

    #7716
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Ronaldus:
    Si tibi erat sacerdos, vel simil quae sacerdos. Quod erat tibi ante quae fides abandonavat?

    I run into lot’s of Ron like “Christians” There are three Protestant, or as they call themselves “Christian” Book stores within a five mile radius of my home. One associated with Fuller Seminary, “Evangelical Protestant” another that is associated with a Seminary that has a whole series of classes on anti-Catholic and anti-Protestant rhetoric, and an independent dispensationalist owned bookstore that has some of the hardest to find Puritan books you have ever seen. They like me there because they sell used books, and have very few people interested in Catholic books. I also help them when they get antiquarian books in Latin, and Greek, because while they proclaim that the KJV and the Greek texts of the Septuagent are the only acceptable Bibles, they can’t read greek. It all started when they asked me to look at a set of books that they told me they wanted to burn, to rid the world or “Romish” propoganda. I went into the office, and looked over the books, returned to the front counter laughing, telling them to burn the books, I’d supply the matches. Looking at their shocked and confused faces, I let them know the books where indeed in Latin, but they where Biblical Commentaries written by John Calvin, the founder of the modern day Presbyterians. Well since that day they have asked me questions about the Catholic Faith, and when I answer them they tell me it is not what they heard about the teachings of the Catholic Church. It gives me the opportunity to show them in Catholic books they have on hand, not just one misquoted section of a text as we see presented here, but the entire teaching in context. One such employee hurled insults at Mary, and what he thought was Catholic teaching, only to end up agreeing with the Immaculate Conception when I told him that Mary’s freedom from sin was not due to her own will, but by God’s grace a singular grace that He provided to her in order for her to be a pure vessle, (purified by God, not her own merit) so that the incarnation could take place. She was given this grace because God knew that she would cooperate with it. Her cooperation, any good works she (or that we preform) preformed would be of no significance if she, (and today we) did not conform to God’s will, relying on His grace, and uniting our works with His work on the Cross. It is Christ who elevates our works, (as the scriptures say, Faith without works is dead) because our own works are nothing if not elevated by and united with Christ. Suddenly the Immaculate conception was not threatening, as it was not the false accusation that Mary was raised to a Goddess, but was a simple human who submitted her entire life and self to God and His will, and was forgiven by the Eternal God, who is not constrained by time, and could apply the merits of His Cross to anyone at any time. Just as at the Mass He as the principle priest and victim at each mass applies the grace of the Cross to anyone as He wishes, because He is not constrained by time.

    Back to the bookstore, it is funny to watch the patrons become the unified “invisible church” and true bible believers, in the sense that Ron wishes us to believe composes the Church, how they unite in their hatred for the Catholic Church and anything catholic. How they make fun of Catholic practices and the Pope, but will tell you how anointed the word of the pastor they heard last week was, or how the inaccurate information in Foxes Book of Martyrs is, giving them more authority than the Pope has ever been given by the Catholic Church. They then hit on a private interpretation that they disagree on and start yelling at each other that the other is not a real Christian, because his church uses musical instruments and they are not sanctioned by the NT, or they have a Church Hall, and the Bible does not mention it, or their preacher uses a Geneva Gown, and that is a non-biblical practice. As if our Lord and the Apostles walked around in bad suits, ties, and had KJV Bibles and pulpits.

    I could go on, if the condemnations of each other, and the self importance of each persons individual interpretation, and the individual authors books sold in the bookstores that one accepts as correct and the other rejects in favor of someone else, was not so sad, it would make me laugh like I did when I saw my grandfather get all excited by Miget Wresteling.

    #7721
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Mr. Weathers asks

    [quote:vsc4stsv]Ron,How did you get all your knowledge about religion?Was it because you were a Catholic and ALMOST a priest for 30 odd years.It’s just mind blogging you have a answer for everything about it.(just curious)[/quote:vsc4stsv]
    _________________

    I read God’s Word – the truth – something that you catholics are “told ” that you can’t understand by yourself – Have you ever even tried to see what God’s will is ?

    Mr. LARoberts – save it. You need it more for yourself!

    #7722

    [quote:3r2qipqu]I read God’s Word – the truth – something that you catholics are “told ” that you can’t understand by yourself – Have you ever even tried to see what God’s will is ?[/quote:3r2qipqu]
    Seriously…what is your problem? No Catholic is ever told we can’t understand the truth and God’s word. Where on earth do you come up with this stuff? You seriously have no idea do you? You just spit out whatever comes to you, don’t you?

    Your delusions are no longer welcome here. We’ve had enough. Knock it off.

    #7723
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Jon just because your new born keeps you up is no reason to turn away the truth

    [quote:12hv3tf9]Seriously…what is your problem? No Catholic is ever told we can’t understand the truth and God’s word. Where on earth do you come up with this stuff? You seriously have no idea do you? You just spit out whatever comes to you, don’t you?

    Your delusions are no longer welcome here. We’ve had enough. Knock it off[/quote:12hv3tf9]

    Are you telling me that you’ve never been told that private interpretations are wrong and you need te church to tell you the correct meaning?

    #7724

    [quote:1hmy0r25]Are you telling me that you’ve never been told that private interpretations are wrong and you need te church to tell you the correct meaning?[/quote:1hmy0r25]
    That’s not the same as not being able to understand the truth.

    The Church is here to guide us so that our interpretation is correct and have a unified body. Private interpretations have led to “Christians” proclaiming very different messages yet still calling themselves Christian.

    Ron, being part of the body of Christ is about more than just one’s own personal relationship with God. There is also the relationship with the rest of the community. We must all be of one heart and one mind like Jesus prayed for.

    For everyone to have their own private interpretation and claiming a relationship with God is not sufficient. There is no unity, no authenticity. Even the Bible says private interpretation is wrong!

    Jesus wants everyone to know and love him, but he didn’t say to do it on your own.

    Truth is not subjective, Ron. There are objective truths. You can’t have it be whatever you want because that is the way you happen to interpret it.

    #7725
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Jon

    [quote:10rp1wmu]That’s not the same as not being able to understand the truth. [/quote:10rp1wmu]
    How or what is the difference?
    [quote:10rp1wmu]

    The Church is here to guide us so that our interpretation is correct and have a unified body. Private interpretations have led to “Christians” proclaiming very different messages yet still calling themselves Christian. [/quote:10rp1wmu]
    Again how or what makes you think that “the Church” is your catholicism except for them telling you what to believe?

    [quote:10rp1wmu]Ron, being part of the body of Christ is about more than just one’s own personal relationship with God. There is also the relationship with the rest of the community. We must all be of one heart and one mind like Jesus prayed for. [/quote:10rp1wmu]
    That is true, however being in Christ begins with trusting in His finished work done at Calvary to clean us of sins (believers) not purgatory
    sacraments or by your priests.
    [quote:10rp1wmu]
    For everyone to have their own private interpretation and claiming a relationship with God is not sufficient. There is no unity, no authenticity. Even the Bible says private interpretation is wrong! [/quote:10rp1wmu]
    Are you referring to 2 Peter ? Look at it – 2 Pet 1:20 -[color=red:10rp1wmu]Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.[/color:10rp1wmu]
    I don’t recall anything that any prophet said that was their own interpretetion – neither have I declared that I am any prophet

    [quote:10rp1wmu]Jesus wants everyone to know and love him, but he didn’t say to do it on your own. [/quote:10rp1wmu]
    But He did give us His word – the authority – as believers hold dear to them.

    [quote:10rp1wmu]Truth is not subjective, Ron. There are objective truths. You can’t have it be whatever you want because that is the way you happen to interpret it.[/quote:10rp1wmu]
    that is true and I don’t, I look very carefully before I understand what He wants, my interpretetions are very Biblical, but how about the many catholic errors – why do you reject God’s salvational plan for their popaganda? (with all due respect)

    #7727
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    You are wasting your time Ron. You are not going to convert anyone here.

    #7732
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    And you sir – Mr Bernadine can only speak for a few, you may be surprised, besides that, the Lord said to throw the seeds out there, He’d take care of the rest. I’m sorry you feel that way.

    #7733
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    The Lord was talking about His seeds, not yours.

    #7761
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    That is just what I was doing

    #7764
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    At this point it would seem that the shifting of the conversation to the talking points which have no basis in the authentic interpretation of Sacred Scripture or historical fact (at least until Evangelical Protestant Ministers in the 18th and 19th Centuries re-invented the Church in their own image, making them a religious system that is truly a Tradition of Men,) can not be given an honest replies. Not because of the 2000 year teaching of Christ Jesus, upheld and maintained by the Catholic Church since it’s founding around 33AD is wrong, but because these Evangelical Traditons of Men are so far removed from what Christ Jesus taught, and simply preach a false Christ invented by Protestant Theologians when they proclaimed themselves to be the authority and denied the Church who had been the guardian of the Truth centuries even back to the Apostles. The untruths proposed by Protestant, most of all Evangelical Protestantism and the “Church Invisible” being so distant from what Christ taught, cannot be reconciled with what Jesus handed down to the Apostles, (Traditio: to hand down or to hand on) It is not suprising, as the Man made Traditions of the Protestants have no historical basis before they rejected Christ’s claim that He would remain with us, and that He would send the Holy Ghost to guide and help us, but rather that He abandoned us until they came along to put things back on track. Too bad that according to Protestant “logic” Jesus cannot be taken for his word.

    As the Bible never says that we need to accept Jesus as “Our Lord and Personal Savior,” and that is that. But rather says, we should “Believe and be baptized in Water and the Spirit.” The same goes for the Eternal Assurance hogwash of the Evangelicals, basing their interpretation of Scipture on the King James or other modern language versions of the Scriptures, they tell us that when we “Make our decision for Christ” we are Saved. However the greek word and tense used by St. Paul when he writes about salvation is a transitent form of the verb which means that we are in the process of our salvation, not a completed work, but a work being acted upon us by the work of the passion and death of Christ, and our cooperation with His graces, gained for us by His Cross. Too bad the Evangelicals are not taught to read the Scriptures with an understanding of the original languages, but re-cast the original text to conform to their meanings and interpretations.

    Since the hostility, anger and venom of people who place more stock in Anti-Catholic writers than they do in the Sacred Scriptures, or the 2000 year consistant teaching of the Church which pre-dates the inspired books of the New Testament, making them blind to authentic Christian teaching. I think the only thing left is to ask our Lady, the Immaculate Heart to join us in petitioning her son, our Lord that the heart’s of rabid anti-Catholics be softened and they rather than blindly condemn the teachings of Christ out of the hatred for the Church He founded, that they come to submit to Christ Jesus and the Church He founded.

    So I for one, having Chosen Christ and His teachings, will not be drawn in any further to the false debates of Evangelical Traditions of Men, and will ally myself with the hosts of heaven to pray for the conversion of Evangelical hetrodoxy to the orthodox teachings of Christ preserved in the entire deposit of faith in the Catholic Church, asking Mary, Mother of God, and all the saints to join with me in petitioning the throne of heaven in opening the hearts of the Protestant to the Truths of Christ. Or as the televangelists would say, “I rebuke you demons of Protestant mis-interpretation of the Scriptures, and attacks on the authentic Christ and His Church.”

    For those here who are going to be unfamiliar with the comments I make below to Mr. Ron, I’d suggest you read, [u:1a9coxr1]Evangelical Is Not Enough[/u:1a9coxr1], and [u:1a9coxr1]The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism[/u:1a9coxr1], both written by former Anti-Catholics who make Mr? Ron look passive in his approach who also converted to the Christ and His Church. The difference between the above books and the postings by Mr. Ron here, is the men where trained and had advanced studies at Protestant Universities, where before their converson to the Faith honest and gave readers sources for their points of attack on the Catholic Church, and opened their souls to recieve Christ and become a follower of Christ and be recieved into the Church. There is also Karl Keatings [u:1a9coxr1]Catholic Answers[/u:1a9coxr1] web-site. Karl also being a former trubador against anything Catholic, who had the scales before his eyes removed, and read history from an honest no biased point of view, and came to the Church.

    The above is a general note to any Evangelical Anti-Catholic. Now a personal note to Ron K a responso as it was his command to me, [quote:1a9coxr1]Mr. LARoberts – save it. You need it more for yourself![/quote:1a9coxr1]

    I come from a Sephardic home, my father and grandfather led the same congregation for over 60 years. In my late teens as I was being groomed to take over my father’s pulpit, I was infludenced by the Evangelical Free Chruch and one Bart Brewer. Bart had been a Catholic priest, a Carmelite in fact. He “opened the eyes” of many an Evangelical Church by his seminars on the evils of the Catholic Church and the Pope. The problem with Bart and a whole slew of professinal Anti-Catholics is that they are poorly Bible based, (They do throw out a few stock Protestant phrases, much like yourself Mr. Ron) but spend most of the time bashing what they falsely accuse the Catholic Church of being. Bart and his friends made two fatal errors. They started misquoting the Hebrew Scriptures, as well as the Early Church Fathers in order to assert the claims they where making. This got me to study what the actual texts said. I read Josephus, and Philo, early Jewish historians and philosopers, who also wrote with contempt about the early Church, I read other non-catholic sources and anti catholic writings from the first four centuries, and found that rather than wash away the claims of the Catholic Church they confirmed that the practice and teachings of the Early Church where not protestant, but in fact what the Catholic Church teaches today. The second error was to think the sexual sins of their past, would not be found out and the fact they had been expelled from their orders would not come to light if they simply made an angry pre-emtive attack on the Church that had expelled them. As I have mentioned before, Mr. Ron, your anger and your comments are not remarkable, because they are not your own. You have allowed your mind and your soul to be turned over to the Hislops and Bottiners and other Anti-Catholic writers, who’s writings have not only be proved to be false and plagaristic, but your complete trust in them is revealed by the very style of your writing and almost word for word attacks. As Hislop and Bottiner have been proven time and time again to be blithering idiots who simply copied from other people, I for one would rather see some honest fresh arguments. It was the lies and fabrications of Anti-Catholics who slipped up by retelling old fables that could not be backed up historically combined with the Grace of God that brought me not simply to the door of the Catholic Church, but inside the fold. It was in the Catholic Church that I found the eternal Word of God, (Christ Jesus) as he had been preached from the time of the Apostles, rather than the false traditions of Man Jesus of the Protestants. Now I am not making any implication that Mr. Ron has any sexual pecadillos he is hiding, but I do assert that none of the ideas or calumnies he asserts against the Chruch are his own, none of them are inspired by the Spirit of Lite, but rather copied from men who have fallen into the Spirits of Anger and deception. Most of all that Mr. Ron’s eyes and soul seem to be shut tight, based on his knee jerk anti-catholic predigested, comments and his attempts to inject venom rather than to share the Good News of the authentic Christ Jesus. Mr. Ron reminds me of Saul before he converted and was baptized, (but Ron would put less importance on baptism than St. Paul who sought out the Sacrament after his eyes where opened) in Acts Chapter 8 [quote:1a9coxr1] Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples[/quote:1a9coxr1] I for one pray that like Saul he can become a Paul, Mr Ron will one day submit himself to the authentic Christ, and abandon his man made invention of the Protestant Christ.

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 107 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.