Apologetics in This Rock

[rickL]

I am sorry I am not as dedicated a poster as some of you. It appears that I have stuck a stick in a hornets nest with some of you.

One example of the apologists I mention is from Volume 15 #5 of the magazine This Rock. "pologetics for the Scripturally Challenged"written by John Martignoni. I find this article to be flawed in many ways.

I would love to spend countless hours posting on this site but I am very busy and find it hard to add to the rest of my life. The reason I posted in the first place was because I read Mr. Keatings e-letters and the CatholicAnswers web site and this article just pushed me to a rant. My apologies to all you dedicated posters, I am ,maybe, an occasional poster. I am not a protestant red herring, I have been a Catholic all my life. Attended CCD as an elementary schooler and Catholic High School. I am active in my parish and have had the privilege of serving in many capacities. I am a student of our faith and have spent a good portion of my adult life studying all I can read from many viewpoints. I have learned a lot, and expect to continue to do so.

Once in a while I let things get the best of me an have a good rant, this was one of those times. I will not fence with my Christian brothers and sisters but hope that this will instead cause you to continue your study so that we can reach the lost with the Good News.

 

[puzzleannie]

thank you for the response with one specific site, in the article you cite, and the editorial in suceeding issue, I don’t see the flaws you allude to, but I am willing to be instructed. The place to respond to Karl’s eletter is on that forum, so we can all participate in an orderly way.

 

[rickL]

I guess my greatest concern was voiced at the end of my rant.

Now is the time to stop our silly bickering and foolish boasts of who is right! We should get on our faces and repent before a Holy God and ask His forgiveness for ignoring the lost to prove we are the best. Pride goes before the fall. If we will humble ourselves and repent He will be faithful to forgive us. Then we can get on with the Gospel Mission.

Isn’t that what all of this debate in forums is, we sharpen our swords while the lost perish.

If you don’t understand, then you may never understand. I believe that it was Paul to the Phillipians that chastised them for agruing endlessly about things that don’t matter.

 

[CANman]

francisca:

It is very easy for us-- using computer – to find that the word “ROCK” in the old testament refers to God.

Isaiah says "look to the rock from which you were hewn, and to the quarry from which you were digged. Look to Abraham your father
Isaiah 51:2 (RSV)

Isaiah of the OT says that Abraham is the rock! How can that be if God is the Rock. It is simply because Abraham participates in Gods’ “rockship”, not separate from. Similarly, Peter is Rock insomuch as he participates in Christ, the True Rock and foundation.
Just as Jesus is the foundation of our faith, that doesn’t prevent the Apostles from also being foundations; “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets,” Eph 2:20 (RSV)

One rock does not necessarily conclude the other. One is Rock, the other is rock only because he participates in the Grace that flows from the true Rock.

 

[francisca]

CANman:

Isaiah says "look to the rock from which you were hewn, and to the quarry from which you were digged. Look to Abraham your father
Isaiah 51:2 (RSV)
Isaiah of the OT says that Abraham is the rock! How can that be if God is the Rock.

Isiah 51
1 Listen to me, you who pursue justice, who seek the LORD; Look to the rock from which you were hewn, to the pit from which you were quarried;
2 Look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, who gave you birth; When he was but one I called him, I blessed him and made him many.
3 Yes, the LORD shall comfort Zion and have pity on all her ruins; Her deserts he shall make like Eden, her wasteland like the garden of the LORD; Joy and gladness shall be found in her, thanksgiving and the sound of song.

I don’t see how you relate “the rock” in verse 1 as “abraham” in verse 2… for me the passage is talking “the rock” as “the LORD” (verse1) who comfort Zion (verse 3). Abraham comes out there because abraham’s Faith to the ROCK brought forth Israel (verse 2).

Verse 1 above clearly read :
“…seek the LORD; Look to the rock from which you were hewn…”

It is quite clear that the rock is God.

Isaiah 17:10
For you have forgotten the God of your salvation
And have not remembered the rock of your refuge.
Therefore you plant delightful plants
And set them with vine slips of a strange god.

Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever,
For in GOD the LORD, we have an everlasting Rock.

Isaiah 44:8
‘Do not tremble and do not be afraid;
Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it?
And you are My witnesses.
Is there any God besides Me,
Or is there any other Rock?
I know of none.’ "

 

[elvisman]

francisca:

Tradition that says “Peter” is the “ROCK”. This is subject to “context” (and therefore is under scrutinize of scientific truths). But Jesus as THE ROCK, is not subject to any context (nor any scientific truths). It is the highest truth and that cannot change. This Truth is unmoveable and therefore IS THE FOUNDATION.

Gosh, Francisa I SURE am glad that we have you - YOU who has decided to take on the magesterium of the Church - NOT to mention the Church fathers who had THIS to say about the primacy of St. Peter:

Tertullian"For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]" (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).
“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

The Letter of Clement to James"Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect" (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).

Jerome"‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘**it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ ** [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is cho-sen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division" (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).
“Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord” (Lives of Illustrious Men 1 [A.D. 396]).

Council of Ephesus"Philip, presbyter and legate of [Pope Celestine I] said: ‘We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you . . . you joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessednesses is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles, is blessed Peter the apostle’" (Acts of the Council, session 2 [A.D. 431]).
“Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome] said: ‘There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors’” (ibid., session 3).

"Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ" - St. Jerome

 

[CANman]

francisca:

Isiah 51
1 Listen to me, you who pursue justice, who seek the LORD; Look to the rock from which you were hewn, to the pit from which you were quarried;
2 Look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, who gave you birth; When he was but one I called him, I blessed him and made him many.
3 Yes, the LORD shall comfort Zion and have pity on all her ruins; Her deserts he shall make like Eden, her wasteland like the garden of the LORD; Joy and gladness shall be found in her, thanksgiving and the sound of song.

I don’t see how you relate “the rock” in verse 1 as “abraham” in verse 2… for me the passage is talking “the rock” as “the LORD” (verse1) who comfort Zion (verse 3). Abraham comes out there because abraham’s Faith to the ROCK brought forth Israel (verse 2).

Verse 1 above clearly read :
“…seek the LORD; Look to the rock from which you were hewn…”

It is quite clear that the rock is God.

Isaiah 17:10
For you have forgotten the God of your salvation
And have not remembered the rock of your refuge.
Therefore you plant delightful plants
And set them with vine slips of a strange god.

Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever,
For in GOD the LORD, we have an everlasting Rock.

Isaiah 44:8
‘Do not tremble and do not be afraid;
Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it?
And you are My witnesses.
Is there any God besides Me,
Or is there any other Rock?
I know of none.’ "

Francisca,
No good Catholic denies that God is the ultimate “Rock”. That does NOT mean that others cannot share in this ministry. Abraham was called the rock, you cannot deny this fact. Read the passage again. You see how the language points to Abraham, not God? Isaiah says “Look to the rock you were hewn”, and then again " look to Abraham your father." The word looks applies to both rock and Abraham. Besides, you cannot separate a person from that persons faith. Their faith is part of them, not a separate entity. Your faith is you! It helps make you who you are.
For sure verse three speaks of the Lord again, but so what. Anyone who doesn’t recognize when Abraham spoke, God was speaking through him is in error. Similarly, when we go to a priest for confession, we know we are going to God. Any “fatherhood” my pastor has comes from the True Father. We know that and recognize that. We do not set up this separatist notion that becauseGod is called rock, that leaves no room for another rock.
He was ‘rock’ because of God. His faith indeed was rock-like, but in this passage, he was called rock, not his faith. Similarly, Peter was called rock, not his Peters’ faith only.faith.
Please, do not set up a false dichotomy between Abraham being called rock, and God being the true Rock. Abraham can only be called a rock because he participates in Gods’ “rockness.”
Similarly, Jesus Is our foundation, but that didn’t prevent the Sacred Authors to say the Apostle’s are also foundations :" built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone," Eph 2:20 (RSV) We must be careful when using metaphors. They can can applied to various things. In this case, the metaphor “rock” is used of God in a primary sense, but of Abraham and Peter in secondary sense in that their rockness relies on and depends on the primary rock, God.

 

[ahimsaman72]

rickL:

Let me just say that the Apostle’s Creed and Nicene Creed are the basic tenets of our faith. Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to get to heaven and He had a strong disregard for those that added burden to the Jews by man made laws, i.e. Scribes, Pharisees, Saducees, etc. If it does not further the Good News of Jesus why are we arguing about it.

The hymn, “They’ll Know We are Christians by our Love”, is an oxymoron in modern Christianity. We are spending more time fighting with each other over ridiculas interpretations and traditions that we are not being the hands, feet and heart of Jesus to a dying world. Now is the acceptable day of salvation and now is the time to get to work to bring the love of Jesus to the lost.

Now is the time to stop our silly bickering and foolish boasts of who is right! We should get on our faces and repent before a Holy God and ask His forgiveness for ignoring the lost to prove we are the best. Pride goes before the fall. If we will humble ourselves and repent He will be faithful to forgive us. Then we can get on with the Gospel Mission.

rick,
loved your post here. I’m a baptist who believes and loves Christ and extend my hand to you as a brother if you will receive it. We may not ever agree on some things like you said here, but Christ has called us to love one another.

I agree with those creeds and therefore raise my hand with you in proclaiming it to be true.

blessings to you as you walk the Christian path.

 

[CANman]

rickL:

I guess my greatest concern was voiced at the end of my rant.

Now is the time to stop our silly bickering and foolish boasts of who is right! We should get on our faces and repent before a Holy God and ask His forgiveness for ignoring the lost to prove we are the best. Pride goes before the fall. If we will humble ourselves and repent He will be faithful to forgive us. Then we can get on with the Gospel Mission.

Isn’t that what all of this debate in forums is, we sharpen our swords while the lost perish.

If you don’t understand, then you may never understand. I believe that it was Paul to the Phillipians that chastised them for agruing endlessly about things that don’t matter.

Although this sounds nice, it’s wrong. Most of the issues I’ve seen discussed here DO matter. Let’s see, is the pope the head of all Christ’s sheep (John 21)? Is the Eucharist truly the Body and Blood of the Lord (John 6)? Is there a role for Mary and the saints in the life of the Christian (John 2)? Theses are important!!! Pride has absolutely nothing to do with. It is all about the comand to go and preach EVERYTHING Jesus commanded. If He wanted EVERYTHING taught, then EVERYTHING must be of value to the Christian. It would be a disservice to all involved to preach a watered down version of Christianity (which wouldn’t be Christianity at all).
I agree to argue over things that aren’t essential is not that important, but still of value. For instance, the discipline of no meat on Friday or other such disciplines. While not doctrinal; in nature, it can be very useful to discuss what purpose these disciplines have on the life of a Christian.

 

[francisca]

CANman:

Francisca,
No good Catholic denies that God is the ultimate “Rock”. That does NOT mean that others cannot share in this ministry. Abraham was called the rock, you cannot deny this fact. Read the passage again. You see how the language points to Abraham, not God? Isaiah says “Look to the rock you were hewn”, and then again " look to Abraham your father." The word looks applies to both rock and Abraham.

Isiah did not write “Look to the rock you were hewn” but “Look to the rock FROM WHICH you were hewn”

Isiah 51
1 Listen to me, you who pursue justice, who seek the LORD; Look to the rock from which you were hewn , to the pit from which you were quarried;
2 Look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, who gave you birth; When he was but one I called him, I blessed him and made him many.
3 Yes, the LORD shall comfort Zion and have pity on all her ruins; Her deserts he shall make like Eden, her wasteland like the garden of the LORD; Joy and gladness shall be found in her, thanksgiving and the sound of song.

For me, it is very clear

Verse 1 :

• “Those who pursue justice & seek the LORD” are instructed to LOOK at the rock
• “Those who pursue justice & seek the LORD” were hewn from the rock

Verse 2 :

• Abraham is an EXAMPLE (to show that Abraham was among those hewn from the rock as well)

Verse 3 :

• That the LORD is the source of comfort (that we shall always “look at”—> verse1). Notice the word “ruins” in this verse 3 (ruins—>hewn from the rock).

“the rock” here IS NOT Abraham, but GOD.

 

[francisca]

[continue]

Read other verses too such as :

Isiah 51
7 Hear me, you who know justice, you people who have my teaching at heart: Fear not the reproach of men , be not dismayed at their revilings.
8 They shall be like a garment eaten by moths, like wool consumed by grubs; But my justice shall remain forever and my salvation, for all generations.
…

If we read the whole Isiah 51 we know that it talks not about abraham but about the rock from which “men who seek justice” were hewn from ----> the LORD.

God bless.

 

[CANman]

[continue]

Read other verses too such as :

Isiah 51
7 Hear me, you who know justice, you people who have my teaching at heart: Fear not the reproach of men , be not dismayed at their revilings.
8 They shall be like a garment eaten by moths, like wool consumed by grubs; But my justice shall remain forever and my salvation, for all generations.
…

If we read the whole Isiah 51 we know that it talks not about abraham but about the rock from which “men who seek justice” were hewn from ----> the LORD.

God bless.

I disagree with your interpretation.

Our little exchange here is proof why Sola Scriptura is bankrupt.

As to your signature line, have you not read:
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion:
1 Tim 3:16 (RSV)
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
James 1:27 (RSV)

 

[pnewton]

rickL:

Isn’t that what all of this debate in forums is, we sharpen our swords while the lost perish.

If I understand correctly what Rick’s main gripe is, he may or may not, be right. There may be some here whose main goal is to argue and in their daily life ignore those who are lost and hurting around them. But what Rick and everyone else must remember is that we do not know how the people we meet here live their lives.

If we “sharpen our swords” as an end unto itself, then we have accomplished nothing. If however we reach out to those around us in Christian charity, using the sharp sword to bring light to those in darkness, then we do the work of the kingdom.

 

[francisca]

CANman:

I disagree with your interpretation.

Our little exchange here is proof why Sola Scriptura is bankrupt.

As to your signature line, have you not read:
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion:
1 Tim 3:16 (RSV)
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
James 1:27 (RSV)

Sure such is the pure religion.

Have you done one of these things lately?

 

[francisca]

CANman,

You disagree with me that the rock in Isiah 51 is God.

Why is it that the rock is Abraham, if the whole chapter of Isiah 51 is about trusting God and not man?

About my signature that says “God is condemned to death by religion” is refering to Jesus’s Cross. Jesus was crucified by the people who used the law to condemn Him to death-- failing to recognize Who He was, and failing to see that He had fulfilled all that was written-- for proclaiming the highest truth : That He is the Son of God who come to redeem sinners. They were blinded from the truth because of their unbelieve.

May God bless us all.

 

[system]

francisca:

Exactly. We have to always remember that “truth” has “layers of truth”. Some truths are more important than others. The lower layers can change (due to new revelation, new historical/ linguistic findings, etc----> tradition), but the upper layers are more “fixed”, and the top most (Jesus, the messiah, the son of the living God) is the HIGHEST truth. This is THE ONLY the ultimate FOUNDATION that cannot change forever.

There’s no such thing as new revelation

For centuries catholic church use the Latin Vulgate. But since Martin Luther translated the New Testament directly from Greek into German, there has been new findings that lead the church to new revelations: things we did not know before.

Your fascination with Luther as a Catholic amuse me.

Do you really know Luther? Do you really know his theology? Do you relaly know how blasphemous his theology is to the Christian faith? A theology that has never seen the light of day until he brought it up. A theology that’s never held by the Fathers of the Church.

The heretic Martin Luther HAD NEVER DISCOVERED ANYTHING NEW BESIDE HERESIES!

And Luther ADD Romans 3:28 with the word “ALONE” to advanced his own heretical doctrine of faith alone. In fact he darely commented:

“You tell me what a great fuss the Papist are making because the word ‘alone’ is not in the text of Paul. If your Papist makes such unnecessary row about the word ‘alone,’ say right out to him: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,’ and say: ‘Papist and asses are one and the same thing.’ I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very well that the word ‘alone’ is not in the Latin or Greek text, and it was not necessary for the Papist to teach me that. It is true those letters are not in it, which letters the jackasses look at, as a cow stares at a new gate… It shall remain in my New Testament, and if the Popish donkeys were to get mad and beside themselves, they will not get out of it” (Cited in John Stoddard, Rebuilding a Lost Faith, (Rockford, IL; TAN books), 136-137

continue bellow

 

[system]

And who said that the Catholic Church use ONLY Latin Vulgate? Before Luther even translated the Bible to German, there are numerous vernaculars Bible approved by the Catholic Church. In German alone there had been SIXTEEN BIBLE EDITIONS before Luther even wrote his heretical Bible with the word “alone” added.

• High German: Strasburg: 1466, 1470, 1485
  Basel, Switzerland: 1474
  Augsburg: 1473 (2), 1477 (2), 1480, 1487, 1490, 1507 [also in 1518]
  Nuremburg: 1483

Low German:

Cologne: 1480 (2)
Lubeck: 1494
Halberstadt: [1522]
Delf: [before 1522]

(From Johannes Janssen, History of the German People From the Close of the Middle Ages, 16 vols., translated by A.M. Christie, St. Louis: B. Herder, 1910 [orig. 1891], vol. 1, 56-57, vol. 14, 388)

Totally agree.

It takes thousands of years to come to this point. It does not mean we have to stop and refuse whatever is “new” and wanting to “go backward in time” to the past. We must move forward.

If going forward mean all the chaos and liberalism after Vatican II perpetrated by those liberals, than the old ways of real Catholicism is a billions time better.

 

[system]

francisca:

About my signature that says “God is condemned to death by religion” is refering to Jesus’s Cross. Jesus was crucified by the people who used the law to condemn Him to death-- failing to recognize Who He was, and failing to see that He had fulfilled all that was written-- for proclaiming the highest truth : That He is the Son of God who come to redeem sinners. They were blinded from the truth because of their unbelieve.

May God bless us all.

Your signature undermine the one and only religion appeasing to God that is the Great Catholic Church which is the body of Christ.

There’s nothing wrong with a religion only if it’s Catholic. Other religion (including Orthodox and Protestantism) are not of God.

 

[francisca]

beng3000:

Your signature undermine the one and only religion appeasing to God that is the Great Catholic Church which is the body of Christ.

There’s nothing wrong with a religion only if it’s Catholic. Other religion (including Orthodox and Protestantism) are not of God.

Oh yes religion is good if it brings the people nearer to God.

If I were against catholic church, I would have left long long time ago.

But there are some people who think that religion is above everything. As if religious truths are above/ equal to God.

Religion has two attributes :

• of God
• of a group of people

When one serves religion because of defending his position and his group, he does not necessarily serving God.

To serve God, one has to have an attitude of “searching the Truth”. To stop searching the Truth is an error in itself. So an attitude of “fixing the truth” in “definitions” without any “pondering” at all is an error in itself. It’s not the definitions etc, but the attitude itself is wrong. God can’t be describe by definitons in imperfect human language. God can only be discribed in a man. To know God is to be like Him. Definitions and rules of religion can only help us cognitively, but God help us.

May God bless us all.

 

[system]

francisca:

Oh yes religion is good if it brings the people nearer to God.

If I were against catholic church, I would have left long long time ago.

Do correct your erroneous position as I have shown. Your position is incompatible with the Catholic faith.

But there are some people who think that religion is above everything. As if religious truths are above/ equal to God.

The Truth within the Catholic faith is of God. God has protected the teachings of the Church from error.

Religion has two attributes :

• of God
• of a group of people

When one serves religion because of defending his position and his group, he does not necessarily serving God.

The Catholic Church is the body of Christ. Of course I would protect fellow Catholic as part of body of Christ. Because if one part of the body is sick than the whole feel the effect.

And why make dichotomy?

religion is not a dirty word. Only those silly neo-secularist thinks that “oh, organized religion is bad, but God is good”

These people made up an erroneous dichotomy because they want to serve God anyway they want. Yet, God has sent prophets and teachers (Eph 4:11-15) to instruct people what to do.

To serve God, one has to have an attitude of “searching the Truth”. To stop searching the Truth is an error in itself. So an attitude of “fixing the truth” in “definitions” without any “pondering” at all is an error in itself. It’s not the definitions etc, but the attitude itself is wrong. God can’t be describe by definitons in imperfect human language. God can only be discribed in a man. To know God is to be like Him. Definitions and rules of religion can only help us cognitively, but God help us.

May God bless us all.

The definitions of the Canon stated in by the Catholic Church is safeguarded by the Holy Spirit, whihc is God Himself.

The Bible is the word of God and full of definitions.

The dogma of the faith is GIVEN BY GOD to HELP men. It is to be FOLLOWED.

With your attitude I might as well throw the Bible in the dumpster and do whatever I want as long as I said to my deluded self that I love God with my own erroneous ways.