Catholic teaching not found in the Bible

[someotherguy]

Well, it doesn’t mean that you can deny the existence of the plain text of the Scriptures, and then impose a meaning on them that doesn’t show up anywhere else in the text.

I don’t. I deny your insistence on taking a verse or even a phrase here and there out of context with no regard for context or for the analogy of scripture.

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t. I deny your insistence on taking a verse or even a phrase here and there out of context with no regard for context or for the analogy of scripture.

I am looking at the context. The context is literal.

The only analogy I can come up with is that we, too, will rise from our graves and have eternal life.

We will do this in a literal manner; not metaphorically (because what good is metaphorical eternal life?), so again, we are dealing with a literal analogy.

 

[sandusky]

what good is metaphorical eternal life?

It’s about as good as the eternal life that you can lose.

 

[jmcrae]

It’s about as good as the eternal life that you can lose.

We all have eternal life; the question is, where are we going to spend it? Which direction you are heading, is where you’ll end up.

 

[someotherguy]

I am looking at the context. The context is literal.

OK. What is there in the context to show that it is literal?

Do you believe in the analogy of scripture?

The only analogy I can come up with is that we, too, will rise from our graves and have eternal life.

First, there are no analogies in scripture.

Second, if it’s a literal event, as you claim, then why do you have to make it an analogy?

we are dealing with a literal analogy.

A “literal analogy”? Is that like a “born again Roman Catholic”?

 

[jmcrae]

OK. What is there in the context to show that it is literal?

Do you believe in the analogy of scripture?

I believe in all four modes of Scripture - literal, metaphorical, analogical, and anagogical.

Second, if it’s a literal event, as you claim, then why do you have to make it an analogy?

It’s not “either/or”. Most of Scripture comes to us under all four modes at the same time.

A “literal analogy”? Is that like a “born again Roman Catholic”?

“Analogy” is a technical theological term that refers to an event in Scripture or faith history that is to be (either will be through the course of historical events, or by means of active obedience on our part) imitated by us at some point along our Christian journey.

Analogies can be metaphorical, yes. For example the analogy of the Cross is not that we literally carry crosses and walk the Via Dolorosa, but rather that we live out our faith in the circumstances that we are given. (Although carrying a cross and walking the Via Dolorosa in a literal manner doesn’t actually hurt anything, either - for certain people, it might even be a good spiritual exercise. The metaphorical aspect doesn’t preclude a literal aspect, as long as the person doesn’t limit himself to that.)

 

[someotherguy]

I believe in all four modes of Scripture - literal, metaphorical, analogical, and anagogical.

There are no analogies in scripture.

“Analogy” is a technical theological term that refers to an event in Scripture or faith history that is to be (either will be through the course of historical events, or by means of active obedience on our part) imitated by us at some point along our Christian journey.

Oh, OK. That’s quite a bit different from the commonly accepted definition of analogy, which is a fictional story meant to impart a lesson.

Analogies can be metaphorical, yes. For example the analogy of the Cross is not that we literally carry crosses and walk the Via Dolorosa, but rather that we live out our faith in the circumstances that we are given. (Although carrying a cross and walking the Via Dolorosa in a literal manner doesn’t actually hurt anything, either - for certain people, it might even be a good spiritual exercise. The metaphorical aspect doesn’t preclude a literal aspect, as long as the person doesn’t limit himself to that.)

That’s not an analogy.

 

[jmcrae]

There are no analogies in scripture.

I have no idea what you mean when you say this. I agree that there are no “analogies” in Scripture; however, it has been accepted Christian teaching since the beginning of time that one of the four modes of Scripture is the analogical mode.

Oh, OK. That’s quite a bit different from the commonly accepted definition of analogy, which is a fictional story meant to impart a lesson.

No kidding.

That’s not an analogy.

Right, it’s not. It’s analogical.

 

[Camron]

As long as you hold onto that sin, God cannot save you.

Excuse me but belief in the Communion of Saints is not a sin. Indeed, if this is your only real form of argument, then you have nothing to argue against. Belief in the Communion of Saints is a blessing from God, something which you apparently lack, something which many here are trying to help you with.

I can’t help it if your only real point for replying to me at this point is to provoke yet another response. If that’s all you’re up to then your own reasons for believing in God are indeed a joke which will be revealed to you on Judgment Day.

I’m sorry but trolling Catholic websites in an effort to ignore Catholic teachings is considered neither a Corporal nor a Spiritual Work of Mercy. Burying the dead, however, is considered a Corporal Work of Mercy. And right now many people in this thread are quite mercifully burying your dead arguments against the Communion of Saints in case you haven’t noticed. This is related to another Work of Mercy, but one that is Spiritual in nature: Instructing the Ignorant, something which you need much instruction in.

Anyone who claims that Elijah is dead simply because he went up to heaven, even though the Bible quite clearly says he is alive and is expected to return again, is truly ignorant of the Biblical principles of the arguments presented so far.

Likewise, anyone who can claim that the Saints who rose in Israel when Jesus died weren’t really alive is again truly ignorant of the Biblical principles of the arguments presented.

I’m sorry but regarding this particular topic you are indeed very ignorant of some of the Key Biblical principles necessary to understand these arguments. So please take the little Protestant “Bible only” pacifier out of your mouth and pay attention to the spiritually logical divinely revealed answers being given by many posters for you here in this thread. In doing this you will be able to actually rise above your own Biblical ignorance and mature into the Fullness of Truth found in the Catholic Faith, the Church that Jesus Himself actually founded.

 

[sandusky]

We all have eternal life; the question is, where are we going to spend it? Which direction you are heading, is where you’ll end up.

Not so, Judith. :nope:

Eternal life has a specific theological connotation; namely, it is that life into which one is brought, by God, to live forever in His Kingdom, and in His presence.

Those who don’t obtain that favor, suffer the second death (Rev 20:6, 14; 21:8), and rather than obtaining eternal life, they obtain eternal fire (Mt 18:8; 25:41).

They are excluded from God’s presence, and from His Kingdom, and they pay the penalty of eternal destruction.

 

[mercygate]

Actually, this is not the only thread I’ve been in and I’ve cited scripture numerous times, only to have it completely ignored.

Unfortunately, THIS is the thread on which you accuse “us” of ignoring your scriptural citations – which are absent.

 

[Camron]

First, you’re not 2,000 years old.

First, neither are you.

But we Catholics can point toward a continuity of belief which has existed alongside the Bible for around 2000 years. You can’t do this at all, not even to 1000 years.

Second, I know you’re not doing it because I’ve caught several of you taking scripture out of context and, so far, none of you even knows what the analogy of scripture is.

Second, we know you’re not doing it because we’ve caught you taking the Bible out of context and, so far, you don’t even know how an Analogical Sense of Scripture is even defined.

Pay attention to jmcrae on this one. He (or she?) is currently explaining this distinction to you for your edification toward the True Christian faith found Fully only in the Catholic Church.

Actually, I am doing it.

Doing what, distorting the Scriptures to your own destruction just as Peter warns about?

Stick with the arguments and drop this lame form of argument someotherguy. Then, and only then, will you perhaps become a catholicguy.

 

[someotherguy]

First, neither are you.

That’s right, but I’m not the one who claimed to be 2,000 years old.

But we Catholics can point toward a continuity of belief which has existed alongside the Bible for around 2000 years. You can’t do this at all, not even to 1000 years.

Actually, I can. That is, unless you’re going to deny that we share a common history.

we know you’re not doing it because we’ve caught you taking the Bible out of context

Really? Can you give me an example?

and, so far, you don’t even know how an Analogical Sense of Scripture is even defined.

Start a thread on hermeneutics and I’ll be happy to school you there.

Pay atention to jmcrae on this one. He (or she?) is currently explaining this distinction to you for your edification toward the True Christian faith found Fully only in the Catholic Church.

Right. You mean the same guy who believes that angels are dead humans and doesn’t know whether or not the bread and wine is the literal body of Christ?

Doing what, distorting the Scriptures to your own destruction just as Peter warns about?

No, going with the context and analogy of scripture.

Stick with the arguments and drop this lame form of argument someotherguy. Then, and only then, will you perhaps become a catholicguy.

No, I’m not going to walk away from Christ to become a Roman Catholic.

 

[jmcrae]

Not so, Judith. :nope:

Eternal life has a specific theological connotation; namely, it is that life into which one is brought, by God, to live forever in His Kingdom, and in His presence.

Those who don’t obtain that favor, suffer the second death (Rev 20:6, 14; 21:8), and rather than obtaining eternal life, they obtain eternal fire (Mt 18:8; 25:41).

They are excluded from God’s presence, and from His Kingdom, and they pay the penalty of eternal destruction.

I was making a pun.

My point still stands; how we behave towards God right now has a direct influence on our ultimate destination. Nobody receives eternal life in the sense of being in Heaven until after they have been judged.

We can evaluate how we’re doing at this present moment, and know where we’d end up if we were to die this very moment, but nobody can predict the next 40-60 years of their life and know for a fact that they’ll still be walking with Jesus at the end of that time; there are many who are assured of their salvation in their youth, and then over time lose their faith for various reasons. There are plenty of 90 year old atheists who were “born again” when they were 20.

 

[jmcrae]

No, I’m not going to walk away from Christ to become a Roman Catholic.

You’d be walking towards Christ, if you became Catholic. (Whether Roman, or Ukranian or other kind of Catholic wouldn’t matter, really, as long as you were in full communion with the Successor of Peter, the Pope).

 

[Camron]

No, I’m not going to walk away from Christ to become a Roman Catholic.

That’s right. You’re going to walk toward Christ to become a Catholic (Roman or otherwise). I thought you would have figured this out by now.

Edit: How did those videos on Youtube go by the way?

 

[someotherguy]

Camron,
God bless you. I’m praying for you.

 

[someotherguy]

Edit: How did those videos on Youtube go by the way?

I wouldn’t know. I don’t have any videos on YouTube.

 

[Camron]

Camron,
God bless you. I’m praying for you.

Yes, and apparently those prayers would abruptly stop if I were dead, right?

Anyway, I think making a statement like “Roman Catholicism has Satan’s fingerprints all over it. Don’t blame Jesus for that.” goes well beyond what is permitted in a fair exchange of ideas between Catholics and other non-Catholic religions.

I will be placing you on my ignore list now. Thanks for your time.

Edit: It appears that you removed this part and I thank you for that. However, I do think that some of your thoughts really are ultimately anti-Catholic in nature.

Please enjoy your time here.

 

[someotherguy]

Yes, and apparently those prayers would abruptly stop if I were dead, right?

Dead people don’t need our prayers.

They’re either in Hell, in which case your prayers won’t do them any good, or they’re in Heaven and have no need for their prayers.

Anyway, I think making a statement like “Roman Catholicism has Satan’s fingerprints all over it. Don’t blame Jesus for that.” goes well beyond what is permitted in a fair exchange of ideas between Catholics and other non-Catholic religions.

But you think that all of the personal attacks and name calling against me is OK?