Anti-Catholicism

[Drawmack]

Please look up the word Protestant. It is literally one who protests. It is a movement that originated by a Roman Catholic Priest Martin Luther against the Catholic Church.

Please look it up.

Rinnie,

According to dictionary.reference.com/browse/protestant we have four meanings. The fourth meaning is when it is used in the lowercase and therefore not relevant to this conversation, let’s look at the other three.

1. any Western Christian who is not an adherent of a Catholic, Anglican, or Eastern Church.

According to this definition the Anglican Church is not Protestant! Clearly you do not agree with this definition because Catholics believe that Anglicans are Protestants. This definition could make Mormons Protestant. However, in order for that to be the case it would have to hold that Mormons are Christian. Mormons deny the divinity of Christ and the trinity. This is evidenced by the fact that the Catholic Church does not accept their baptism as valid. As Mormons are not Christian they are not Protestants under this definition.

1. an adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the Reformation, or of any group descended from them.

If you go back to my first post in this line of the discussion you will see that this is exactly what I said. Every Protestant church can trace it’s roots back to the reformation of the 1500’s. The Mormon Church cannot trace its roots back to the reformation and can only trace their roots to the 1800’s when it was founded whole cloth. Therefore the Mormon Church is not Protestant.

1. (the original meaning) any of the German princes who protested against the decision of the Diet of Speyer in 1529, which had denounced the Reformation.

By this definition it only applies to men who are long dead, so this cannot be the definition we are using. However, this shows that originally the term applied to those protesting the Diet of Speyer and not those protesting the Catholic Church so your assertion that anyone who Protests the Catholic Church is Protestant does not hold under this definition. Actually, this clearly states that your assumption about the word’s original intent and meaning is completely incorrect.

So, what exactly did you want me to find when I looked up the word Protestant? To be honest, I have an excellent command of the English language and getting into a battle of semantics with me is a little silly.

 

[rinnie]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

So you admit that he was not acting on his own authority. If he were acting solely on his own authority then he would not have accepted the reproof of those others mentioned above! You tell me to use a little common sense, you should take your own advice.

He was working with the authority of the church – defining church as the congregation of believers. The last time I said this you responded as if I were talking about the Catholic Church, so let’s see if I can make this clear enough for you to get it. IN THIS STATEMENT CHURCH DOES NOT MEAN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

That’s what you believe, I disagree.

[SIGN]My best guess would be that the Catholic Church had strayed from the Truth,[/SIGN] but for a definitive answer you’ll have to ask God.

No where in the Bible does it say that God is the Catholic Church. Actually, even making this claim borders on blasphemy. You are saying God is the Catholic Church. That is the same is saying God is the Father, Son, Spirit, and Catholic Church. I’m sorry but I cannot accept that any Church is God.

I never denied that one can both be Catholic and come to Christ. In order for your first two statements to really have anything to do with what I said, I would need to deny that. I do not agree with your last statement. I believe that the Rock which Jesus built his Church on is Jesus. Jesus did not build his Church on the theology or a man he built it on his own theology.

I do have my answer from God and it is completely different from you guess. Jesus promised us in John 14 That the spirit of truth would guide you to all turth

1 Tim sayid the churchis the pillar and foundation of truth

John 16 says The HS will be with you always and teach and remind you of everyhing.

John 14 The HS whom the Father sent in my name will teach you everything and remind you of all I have said to you.

Jesus said the gates of Hade will not prevail.

Now was this all promised before Luther to the Church Peter started or not? ANd is the Pope in the seat of Peter or not?

 

[Drawmack]

Drawback, Please understand what I am Saying OKAY. A discipline can be CHANGED by the POPE. He can say tommorow you can eat meat on Friday during lent. If he wants.

A teaching cannot be changed. Thats what this whole thing is about. The church was accused, saying it can say one thing and then turn it around and say another. That is why I was denfending my CHurch saying there is a difference between a teaching and discipline. Do you understand now?

I know all that. I was actually pointing out that the discipline had not really changed so much as it evolved to be applicable to everyone even those who would not view fasting from meat as giving something up. Let’s drop this line of conversation because we are really hitting at different aspects and talking across one another.

 

[Drawmack]

Why not. Do Muslim’s accept Jesus Christ as I AM. Or do they deny Jesus?

Do Buddhists accept Jesus CHrist as God, or do they deny that teaching?

Are they one in all of the teachings of the CC or do they protest (disagree with some of the teachings)?

To be Catholic we must agree with all of the teachings of the faith. ALL of em.

If Muslims and Buddhists are Protestant then Protestants predate Catholic Church, therefore it can not possibly mean one who protests the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church would actually be protesting the Protestants. See, if doesn’t make any sense.

 

[rinnie]

Any Church that is in commumion with Rome and have the same teachings of the CC is considered Catholic.

Any Church that is no in communion with Rome is considered to be broken off of the CHurch of ROme and not Catholic.

 

[rinnie]

If Muslims and Buddhists are Protestant then Protestants predate Catholic Church, therefore it can not possibly mean one who protests the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church would actually be protesting the Protestants. See, if doesn’t make any sense.

It has nothing to do with that. THe Catholic CHurch did not even exist back then. Neither did Protestants. The Christian faith and the CC came into effect at Pentecost.

 

[Drawmack]

1 Tim sayid the churchis the pillar and foundation of truth

Yup, and we define church differently in this statement. You take it to mean a physical entity (The Magisterium) and I take it to be a spiritual entity.

John 16 says The HS will be with you always and teach and remind you of everyhing.

The only logical way I see to equate this statement and the above statement is to equate Holy Spirit with church. We saw above that you are taking church to be a physical entity so to equate the two is to claim that the Holy Spirit is a physical entity. We, also, saw above that my definition of church is a spiritual entity so to equate the two is to claim the the Holy Spirit is a spiritual entity. I believe that my interpretation makes more sense.

John 14 The HS whom the Father sent in my name will teach you everything and remind you of all I have said to you.

Again, if we are relating this back to your original quote from Tim and your definition of church and equating Holy Spirit with that definition you are, again, claiming that the Holy Spirit is the physical entity of the Magisterium. I’m sorry, but I do not believe that is a reasonable claim. I think it is much more reasonable to apply the definition of church as a spiritual entity and allow the Holy Spirit to be spiritual and not physical.

Jesus said the gates of Hade will not prevail.

Yes, but again we define church differently in this passage. You take church to mean a physical entity (the Magisterium) I take it to mean an spiritual entity.

Now was this all promised before Luther to the Church Peter started or not?

No, it was promised to the Church, the spiritual church, that Jesus started and not the church, the physical church, that Peter started.

ANd is the Pope in the seat of Peter or not?

That does not prove anything.

 

[Drawmack]

It has nothing to do with that. THe Catholic CHurch did not even exist back then. Neither did Protestants. The Christian faith and the CC came into effect at Pentecost.

Correct, and Protestant are Christians, according to the CCC anyway. So Protestant cannot simply mean any who protest the Catholic Church.

 

[Drawmack]

Yes or no would have been a more clear answer.

Sure, if I wanted to play your game and logical fallacy. I did not wish to play your game of logical fallacy so I answered you in a way that did not do that.

 

[Drawmack]

Any Church that is in commumion with Rome and have the same teachings of the CC is considered Catholic.

Any Church that is no in communion with Rome is considered to be broken off of the CHurch of ROme and not Catholic.

The second statement is not correct. First of all, according to the Catholic Church, they aren’t even church they are ecclesiastic communities. Secondly, any entity which does not have its roots in the Catholic Church cannot be broken off from the Catholic. Thirdly, according to the CCC Protestants are seen as separated brethren not as completely broken off but simply not in full communion.

I will agree that any church not in full communion with Rome is not Catholic. But, I will not agree that every non-Catholic church is Protestant.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Yup, and we define church differently in this statement. You take it to mean a physical entity (The Magisterium) and I take it to be a spiritual entity.

The only logical way I see to equate this statement and the above statement is to equate Holy Spirit with church. We saw above that you are taking church to be a physical entity so to equate the two is to claim that the Holy Spirit is a physical entity. We, also, saw above that my definition of church is a spiritual entity so to equate the two is to claim the the Holy Spirit is a spiritual entity. I believe that my interpretation makes more sense.

Again, if we are relating this back to your original quote from Tim and your definition of church and equating Holy Spirit with that definition you are, again, claiming that the Holy Spirit is the physical entity of the Magisterium. I’m sorry, but I do not believe that is a reasonable claim. I think it is much more reasonable to apply the definition of church as a spiritual entity and allow the Holy Spirit to be spiritual and not physical.

Yes, but again we define church differently in this passage. You take church to mean a physical entity (the Magisterium) I take it to mean an spiritual entity.

No, it was promised to the Church, the spiritual church, that Jesus started and not the church, the physical church, that Peter started.

That does not prove anything.

are you saying that Church is invisible?

explain to us how Jesus sent a spiritual Church to teach all men.

explain to us how Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to lead a spiritual Church into all Truth.

explain to us how Jesus tell us that if we have a problem with a brother is to take to a spiritual Church.

tell us how St Peter is to feed Jesus sheep. are the sheep also invisible?

were all the early Christians also invisible when killed for the Catholic Faith?

"Love men, slay error, without pride be bold in the Truth, without cruelty fight for the Truth." St Augustine

 

[Drawmack]

are you saying that Church is invisible?

explain to us how Jesus sent a spiritual Church to teach all men.

explain to us how Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to lead a spiritual Church into all Truth.

explain to us how Jesus tell us that if we have a problem with a brother is to take to a spiritual Church.

tell us how St Peter is to feed Jesus sheep. are the sheep also invisible?

were all the early Christians also invisible when killed for the Catholic Faith?

"Love men, slay error, without pride be bold in the Truth, without cruelty fight for the Truth." St Augustine

When you demonstrate the ability to post something that actually makes sense I’ll respond to it.

 

[rinnie]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Yup, and we define church differently in this statement. You take it to mean a physical entity (The Magisterium) and I take it to be a spiritual entity.

The only logical way I see to equate this statement and the above statement is to equate Holy Spirit with church. We saw above that you are taking church to be a physical entity so to equate the two is to claim that the Holy Spirit is a physical entity. We, also, saw above that my definition of church is a spiritual entity so to equate the two is to claim the the Holy Spirit is a spiritual entity. I believe that my interpretation makes more sense.

Again, if we are relating this back to your original quote from Tim and your definition of church and equating Holy Spirit with that definition you are, again, claiming that the Holy Spirit is the physical entity of the Magisterium. I’m sorry, but I do not believe that is a reasonable claim. I think it is much more reasonable to apply the definition of church as a spiritual entity and allow the Holy Spirit to be spiritual and not physical.

Yes, but again we define church differently in this passage. You take church to mean a physical entity (the Magisterium) I take it to mean an spiritual entity.

No[BIBLEDRB], it was promised to the Church, the spiritual church, that Jesus started and not the church, the physical church, that Peter started[/BIBLEDRB].

That does not prove anything.

Huh, Are you saying the Jesus and Peter started 2 different Church’s? So you deny that the Holy SPirit appeared to the Apostles at Pentecost?

And how do you know how I define my Church. I never said it was Physical or spiritual. But now that you are asking it is both. It is here and the RCC is Jesus Christ. He is indeed running it in a Physical sense by the Advocate the Holy SPirit and yes he speaks throught the Magisterium. But what is the difference if I say to you I want you to go to the store for me. OR I ask your neighbor to tell you I want you to go to the store for me? Is it not the same message. Did it not come from me. So If Jesus said he was going to run the CHurch by the power of the HS whats the big deal. What is the difference of what JEsus told Peter in person, or by the Power of the HS. DId it not come from God? Did Jesus or did he not promise us the Advocate to lead us to all truth?

I am sorry you do agree with the scripture or Tim, but there is nothing I can do about that.

Jesus Christ said himself he is the Church. Thats good enough for me.

 

[rinnie]

The second statement is not correct. First of all, according to the Catholic Church, they aren’t even church they are ecclesiastic communities. Secondly, any entity which does not have its roots in the Catholic Church cannot be broken off from the Catholic. Thirdly, according to the CCC Protestants are seen as separated brethren not as completely broken off but simply not in full communion.

I[SIGN] will agree that any church not in full communion with Rome is not Catholic. [/SIGN]But, I will not agree that every non-Catholic church is Protestant.

Huh? Okay lets say that I agree with you. Becasue I do when you say that a Church not in full comm. with rome is not Catholic. Okay so if it is not in communion that means there is something in the teachings of the RCC it protests? SO if you so not call it Protestant I can agree with you. BUt what name do you give it. Because remember you agree its not Catholic.

 

[Prieldedi]

God and his congregation of believers. It is public knowledge that Luther wanted to do away with many books of the Bible, yet every Bible translated by him includes all the books. If Luther were acting on his own, and only his own, authority then why do his Bibles contain books he did not think should be there? Remember, he was acting on his own and only his own authority so you need to answer the question without alluding to him accepting reproof from anyone accept himself.

Sorry, but God did not authorize Luther to rebel against His own Church.God doesn’t accept rebellions. Luzbel (Satan) was the first rebel, so we now have a better idea why God is against rebellions. When we sin we rebel against God. When we rebel against God we sin. The Church is the Body of Christ. How then is God going to command anyone (Luther) to sin, to rebel against Himself, against His own body?

“Protestantism clearly changed the principles of authority. That is the bottom line underneath all Protestant-Catholic discussion… Protestants changed the rule of faith to sola Scriptura and private judgment … over ecclesiastical binding authority” Dave Armstrong in “Martin Luther”

On the subject of Authority, this is from Bob Stanley:

«"I would suggest that everyone read Numbers 16. It is about the rebellion to the authority of Moses by Korah and his followers. Moses did everything he could to try and convince Korah, pleading with him that he was wrong in doing this, and yet Korah and his followers rejected his pleas. Read the final outcome of Korah’s rebellion in Numbers 16:30-35. It isn’t pretty, but then Korah would not listen to Moses, who was the man on earth of whom GOD had chosen to lead His people. Now read about Martin Luther and his rebellion against the authority of the Catholic Church, and you will see that the story of Numbers 16 has repeated itself. Now read Numbers 16 again, but this time substitute the name of the founder of your church for Korah, and for Moses, the name of the Pope. Those who fail to profit from history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

“Nothing under the sun is new, neither is any man able to say: Behold this is new; for it has already gone before in the ages that were before us.” Ecclesiastes 1:10

Have you ever read Psalms 127:1?
“Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain who build it.”

Now show me the verse(s) in the Bible which gives the authority to any human creature to found another church other than the ONE CHURCH which Jesus Christ founded?

Show me the verse(s) which authorizes anyone to simply hold up a Bible and proclaim, “This is my authority”.»

If Luther was right and the Catholic Church was wrong, why aren’t there just two churches, the Catholic Church and the Lutheran? Why aren’t you Lutheran?

God bless you

 

[rinnie]

are you saying that Church is invisible?

explain to us how Jesus sent a spiritual Church to teach all men.

explain to us how Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to lead a spiritual Church into all Truth.

explain to us how Jesus tell us that if we have a problem with a brother is to take to a spiritual Church.

tell us how St Peter is to feed Jesus sheep. are the sheep also invisible?

were all the early Christians also invisible when killed for the Catholic Faith?

"Love men, slay error, without pride be bold in the Truth, without cruelty fight for the Truth." St Augustine

IT makes sense to me WS

You are saying Jesus sent his Disciples to teach and they were human and visible.
Then you are showing how Jesus promised the Power of the HS to guide the Apostles and their successors into the fullnes of the truth. So they cannot be led astray.

THen you explain the sacrament of Confession. (MY favoriite of all)

THen you showed scripture of how Jesus told Peter to take care of us and feed us the truth so we can not be led away from the flock.

Any the last one. ( I think you mean there that Jesus died for his Church),

How did I do, Did I pass my test

 

[Drawmack]

[SIGN][/SIGN]Huh, Are you saying the Jesus and Peter started 2 different Church’s?

Jesus founded the spiritual Church. Peter founded a physical church based on the teachings of Jesus which allowed congregants of the spiritual Church founded by Jesus to meet and worship in a physical congregation. While that physical church is part of the spiritual Church it is not synonymous with or the entirety of the spiritual Church.

So you deny that the Holy SPirit appeared to the Apostles at Pentecost?

That is a logical leap which does not flow from what I said.

And how do you know how I define my Church. I never said it was Physical or spiritual. But now that you are asking it is both. It is here and the RCC is Jesus Christ.

Here is a summary of statements you’ve made in this thread:

1. Jesus is God
2. The RCC is Jesus Christ
   Therefore, one can logically draw the conclusion that you believe the RCC to be God. I’m sorry but I cannot accept that. There is only one God, who is manifest through three entities: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

He is indeed running it in a Physical sense by the Advocate the Holy SPirit and yes he speaks throught the Magisterium.

That is what you believe, I disagree.

But what is the difference if I say to you I want you to go to the store for me. OR I ask your neighbor to tell you I want you to go to the store for me? Is it not the same message. Did it not come from me.

That is a great analogy, let’s explore it a little bit. In the first case where you ask me directly to go to the store for you, I would be certain that I received your message correctly because I heard it from you. And, if I misinterpreted that message the onus would be on me for not having made sure I understood you properly. So, if you ended up with the wrong items from the store it would be my fault for not interpreting you correctly and the onus to correct this would also be on me. If, on the other hand, you asked my neighbor to tell me to go to the store I cannot be certain that I received your message properly because it could have been distorted in the process of delivery. So, to make sure that I, in fact, did receive your message properly I would have to do one of two things: get a written list of the items you wanted which I could then clarify with you if I had questions or contact you directly and ask exactly what it was you wanted me to get for you at the store. God wrote down the shopping list, it’s called the Bible. Why would He write down the shopping list and not include everything he wanted us to get at that store? Why would He bother to write down a list if He were still going to rely on word of mouth for some parts?

So If Jesus said he was going to run the CHurch by the power of the HS whats the big deal. What is the difference of what JEsus told Peter in person, or by the Power of the HS. DId it not come from God? Did Jesus or did he not promise us the Advocate to lead us to all truth?

Yes, it came from God. Yes, Jesus promised an Advocate. I assert that this Advocate is the Holy Spirit. You assert that this Advocate is the RCC which you have also asserted is God. This, I simply cannot and will not accept. No organization on this earth is God.

I am sorry you do agree with the scripture or Tim, but there is nothing I can do about that.

I never and no where said I disagreed with Scripture. What I said was I disagreed with your interpretation of that Scripture. I ask that you rescind this wholly incorrect assertion and apologize for it.

Jesus Christ said himself he is the Church. Thats good enough for me.

It is good enough for me to. What is not good enough for me is that Jesus Christ is a physical church.

 

[Drawmack]

Huh? Okay lets say that I agree with you. Becasue I do when you say that a Church not in full comm. with rome is not Catholic. Okay so if it is not in communion that means there is something in the teachings of the RCC it protests? SO if you so not call it Protestant I can agree with you. BUt what name do you give it. Because remember you agree its not Catholic.

No only is the LDS not Catholic they are not even Christian. Therefore I would not refer to them as Protestant. I would refer to them a LDS or Mormon and leave it at that. Just as I would refer to Muslims, who are also not in communion with Rome, as Muslims and leave it at that.

 

[Drawmack]

Sorry, but God did not authorize Luther to rebel against His own Church.God doesn’t accept rebellions. Luzbel (Satan) was the first rebel, so we now have a better idea why God is against rebellions. When we sin we rebel against God. When we rebel against God we sin. The Church is the Body of Christ. How then is God going to command anyone (Luther) to sin, to rebel against Himself, against His own body?

Because Jesus’ true Church is not a physical entity on this planet.

 

[rinnie]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Jesus founded the spiritual Church. Peter founded a physical church based on the teachings of Jesus which allowed congregants of the spiritual Church founded by Jesus to meet and worship in a physical congregation. While that physical church is part of the spiritual Church it is not synonymous with or the entirety of the spiritual Church.

That is a logical leap which does not flow from what I said.

Here[SIGN] is a summary of statements you’ve made in this thread:

1. Jesus is God
2. The RCC is Jesus Christ
   Therefore, one can logically draw the conclusion that you believe the RCC to be God. I’m sorry but I cannot accept that. There is only one God, who is manifest through three entities: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.[/SIGN]

That is what you believe, I disagree.

That is a great analogy, let’s explore it a little bit. In the first case where you ask me directly to go to the store for you, I would be certain that I received your message correctly because I heard it from you. And, if I misinterpreted that message the onus would be on me for not having made sure I understood you properly. So, if you ended up with the wrong items from the store it would be my fault for not interpreting you correctly and the onus to correct this would also be on me. If, on the other hand, you asked my neighbor to tell me to go to the store I cannot be certain that I received your message properly because it could have been distorted in the process of delivery. So, to make sure that I, in fact, did receive your message properly I would have to do one of two things: get a written list of the items you wanted which I could then clarify with you if I had questions or contact you directly and ask exactly what it was you wanted me to get for you at the store. God wrote down the shopping list, it’s called the Bible. Why would He write down the shopping list and not include everything he wanted us to get at that store? Why would He bother to write down a list if He were still going to rely on word of mouth for some parts?

Yes, it came from God. Yes, Jesus promised an Advocate. I assert that this Advocate is the Holy Spirit. You assert that this Advocate is the RCC which you have also asserted is God. This, I simply cannot and will not accept. No organization on this earth is God.

I never and no where said I disagreed with Scripture. What I said was I disagreed with your interpretation of that Scripture. I ask that you rescind this wholly incorrect assertion and apologize for it.

It is good enough for me to. What is not good enough for me is that Jesus Christ is a physical church.

You got it. I believe that the RCC is the Living Christ. Yes now you understand. I believe that the RCC is being led by the HOLY SPIRIT yes now you understand.

I believe as CHrist said in the his teachings that he is united to the Church as a bride to the bridegroom the two become one. Yes I believe CHrist and his church again to be one. And just like no one can separate a husband and wife no one can separate Christ from his Church.

Now you got it. You have the full understanding of what I believe.

You on the other hand reject the authority that Jesus gave to Apostles. You reject the teachings of the Church. I understand that.