A Response to Catholics (Edited Title)

[Kristen1999]

Thanks for this. I have spent a few hours the past couple of days checking out John’s blogs (Beggars All and Triablgue?). Wow. There are some really, really desperate arguments out there.

BA is saying that Harold Camping’s numerology is just like Marian devotion. Huh?

TB is saying knocking down strawman.

I almost wish that there was an actual good anti-Catholic apologetic to engage but alas we’re stuck with this.

 

[Kelley_Green]

It’s very nice that there’s a thread devoted just to discussing little old me here.

But it is all about you John. That’s the problem. Your conduct registers as contrary to what was virtuous about the reformation. Not that Catholics are innocent in this, don’t get me wrong. But really, the basis of all of your (collective) arguments are varying degree of this…
youtube.com/watch?v=XcMBjiILTRk
God is not real estate. When theologians resort to intellectualized thuggery, flock of all sides ought to step up and remind you just how ‘in the way’ of God you’ve allowed yourselves to get. Oh, that’s right, that’s why God made Amish & Quakers.

Long time friend (dearly departed retired Lutheran minister) and I used to have a running joke. When I’d spy him sneaking out of retirement to preach, I’d snap him the ball…

At least Catholics have the decency to keep *their *wild eyed theologians locked in the Vatican to safeguard world peace, whereas Protestants allow theirs to run amok raising hell everywhere.

To which he’d clutch his chest feigning death and reply in his best Homer Simpson voice, “DOH! You got me!”.

Our more productive conversations resembled a George and Gracie Allen routine. We’d sit over our cocoa arbitrating with an imaginary Jesus at the head of the table pointing bony fingers of rebuke & snitching on one another like children. Great fun!

I sorely miss that old coot.

---

Marco, thanks for articulating so well. Curtsy from the ladies when you lead by positive example. The rest of the threads dueling banjo’s routine- too much of Christendom has allowed itself to become a family of llama’s spitting upon one another, all of which has no bearing on worshiping God, but servicing vainglory. Soldiers enamored with their uniforms lose sight of the service, the very purpose of mission.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I have one question for JB.

Can you tell us who appointed you as the guardian of the Revealed Truth of God?

 

[babylonsfalling]

It’s very nice that there’s a thread devoted just to discussing little old me here. <—Vain Ego tripping-typically followed by a long dialog about oneself with tons of I’s, my’s and me’s, mine’s, etc<<< *** That comment thread is now up over 500 comments.<—MORE VAIN EGO TRIPPING-I MAY ADD MY OWN COMMENT, SO YOU CAN EDIT THIS POST TO READ “OVER 501 COMMENTS” *** There were a number of questions asked of me, and I’d like to go back and answer some of them, as I’m able, beginning with this [fairly fundamental] question by paulc.

You should note first of all that I write for Protestant blogs, and primarily to Protestant audiences. I seek to warn Protestants who may be coming under the influence of Roman Catholicism that they are making a mistake. But I do not come here and try to win converts. (Although I am here because I seem to be an ongoing topic of interest***<—YOUR VANITY IS GETTING RIDICULOUS ***, and I

Read the following verses very carefully, every day because you need to memorize it and live it. When someone goes on this much about themselves people know in their gut that the stated subject of the post is false and that in reality, the post is actually all about the poster himself:

Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think

Word of advice: A person reveals a lot about themselves when they try soooo hard to make the post about themselves. It becomes clear that the real subject of the post is not whatever appears in the subject line.

Revelation is an ongoing process.

The papacy still maintains it’s supremacy and takes a lot of heat for it from anti Catholics complaining about the exact opposite of what you complain about.

And we all know that Catholics have not “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling moral man and birds and animals and creeping things”

That’s where you showed that you aren’t even trying to present an honest case.

 

[Rick09]

More on John Bugay here:

“Enemy’s Enemy”: Catholic Bashers John Bugay & Tim Enloe so Clueless as to Utilize Sedevacantists in Order to Contend that Catholicism is “Pantheist”

John Bugay and Pope Benedict XVI’s Alleged “Pantheism”: Even Fellow Anti-Catholics Know This is a Stupid, Groundless Charge

Blistering Anti-Catholic Attack on Lay Catholic Apologetics

John Q. Doe Insults Catholic Apologist Scott Windsor, Then (When It Suits His Polemical Purposes) Sez He is a “Man of Integrity”


The Myth of Multiple “Millions” Supposedly Killed in the Catholic Inquisitions, Revisited (Anti-Catholic John Bugay’s Historically Groundless Claims)

 

[babylonsfalling]

More on John Bugay here:

“Enemy’s Enemy”: Catholic Bashers John Bugay & Tim Enloe so Clueless as to Utilize Sedevacantists in Order to Contend that Catholicism is “Pantheist”

John Bugay and Pope Benedict XVI’s Alleged “Pantheism”: Even Fellow Anti-Catholics Know This is a Stupid, Groundless Charge

Blistering Anti-Catholic Attack on Lay Catholic Apologetics

John Q. Doe Insults Catholic Apologist Scott Windsor, Then (When It Suits His Polemical Purposes) Sez He is a “Man of Integrity”


The Myth of Multiple “Millions” Supposedly Killed in the Catholic Inquisitions, Revisited (Anti-Catholic John Bugay’s Historically Groundless Claims)

I had a feeling I was dealing with an ex Catholic in that guy.
In my experience the most virulent anti Catholics are ones that used to be Catholic who end up spending the rest of their life trying to evil-ize their former church so they can feel better about leaving it. Much like a prideful runaway child who needs to blame his parents for HIS decision to run away.

It seems the more venom a person has toward the Church, the more likely they used to be a member of it…not good.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I had a feeling I was dealing with an ex Catholic in that guy.
In my experience the most virulent anti Catholics are ones that used to be Catholic who end up spending the rest of their life trying to evil-ize their former church so they can feel better about leaving it. Much like a prideful runaway child who needs to blame his parents for HIS decision to run away.

It seems the more venom a person has toward the Church, the more likely they used to be a member of it…not good.

I Think that is what martin luther did. he left the Church and set up to destroy her.

 

[ESMDHokie77]

I Think that is what martin luther did. he left the Church and set up to destroy her.

he certainly thought it was necessary what he did… but at the end of his life, did he consider his reformation, effective? Link.

 

[wisdomseeker]

he certainly thought it was necessary what he did… but at the end of his life, did he consider his reformation, effective? Link.

To no avail. the damage continues to this day. that is how it is when some Catholics leave the Church…

 

[joemccarron]

Let’s do a little thought experiment. Let’s say I wish to continue to remain Roman Catholic, on the ground of faith alone in Christ alone. I reject the Marian dogmas, on the ground that they are neither biblical nor historical. And to do so, further, I reject the papal authority which is supposedly necessary to articulate such dogmas.

Where does that leave me? Remember, I have faith alone in Christ alone.

John

I would say that if you reject the Marian Dogmas on the ground that they are neither biblical or historical, you really don’t believe what Jesus said about his church. You may in fact believe that the gates of hell prevailed against his Church and it therefore is, or has been, teaching salvation jeopardizing falsehoods.

When you say “I have faith alone in Christ alone” what does that specifically mean? Do you have complete faith in everything he said - or just that perhaps he lived and died for our sins? Do you believe everything else in the bible is true? Does that matter? Could you for example believe that Jesus existed and lived and died for our sins but also that Jesus taught a message of cruelty and hatred that we should never love anyone? Maybe we could believe he was a cruel dictator Pol Pot? Could we believe that the Devil gave him his powers? Could I believe that nothing else in the bible is true?

I could go on, and hopefully at some point you would agree that “believing in Jesus” and having “faith in Jesus” means allot more than just believing he in fact lived and his death effected our sins. How much more do we need to believe? Did Jesus leave us orphans with nothing to help us here?

Sometimes I struggle with doctrines of the Catholic Church as well. But it is because of my faith in Christ that I still try to follow them. It is because of what Christ said about the church he established, that I trust in that church. My trust in the church stems from my trust in God/Jesus. Just like my belief that I should do my best to love others is an expression of my faith in Jesus.
If one were to ever to say “nah I don’t need to follow Christ’s command to love each other, I just have to believe that Jesus died for my sins” I would say they do not really have complete faith in Jesus. They are picking and choosing what they want to believe about him. Just like if one were to say I don’t believe what he said about his church.

When I start to doubt what I know the Church teaches I catch myself. Am I to presume Christ was supposed to consult me before he established his church? You, I, and Martin Luther may be unhappy with certain things about the Church. But if we really have faith in Jesus and what he and scripture says about his Church we would view it as a pillar of truth and a sure guide.

It’s not easy for adults to have that full faith. It’s very easy to say Jesus I believe so much of what you say and ask of me, but do I also have to believe this group of sinners is my pillar of truth? Jesus couldn’t you have said the gates of hell won’t prevail against your church “for very long.” Well wish what I might Jesus said what he said, and that is what I am putting my faith in.

I try to have faith in everything Jesus said and taught. Including what he said about his church.

 

[babylonsfalling]

I Think that is what martin luther did. he left the Church and set up to destroy her.

Those ex Catholics throwing the biggest fit about the Church are likely the most insecure about leaving it, and therefore might be the ones most likely to eventually return. They just have to get through the fit before they can truly get over the fit.

Those ex Catholics who appear most content with their decision to leave would seem to be least likely to return.

It could be (in the long run) that those throwing biggest hissy fit now, will be better off later on.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Those ex Catholics throwing the biggest fit about the Church are likely the most insecure about leaving it, and therefore might be the ones most likely to eventually return. They just have to get through the fit before they can truly get over the fit.

Those ex Catholics who appear most content with their decision to leave would seem to be least likely to return.

It could be (in the long run) that those throwing biggest hissy fit now, will be better off later on.

hopefully repentance is on the way.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

It appears John posted what he had to say and has avoided any ‘real’ discussion. Of course, the ‘agenda’ seems clear after reading his other works on the internet.