Catholocism the only true choice

[Church_Militant]

Is that a serious question. It was the moment he accepted Christ as his savior. Was that when the scales fell off. I would think so because the text seems to indicate that. But therre would be a degree of speculation on anyones part to say otherwise would it not?

Since St Paul is often discussed in this thread… I ask you… when was St. Paul saved"

Was it when he, as a rabbi, taught the OT?

Was it when he was struck on the road to Damascus?

Was it when his eyes were opened?

Exactly!
And what exactly was the gospel that was preached to him that day?

Acts 22:12 And one Ananias, a man according to the law, having testimony of all the Jews who dwelt there, 13 Coming to me, and standing by me, said to me: Brother Saul, look up. And I the same hour looked upon him. 14 But he said: The God of our fathers hath preordained thee that thou shouldst know his will, and see the Just One, and shouldst hear the voice from his mouth. 15 For thou shalt be his witness to all men, of those things which thou hast seen and heard. 16 And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name.

 

[Church_Militant]

For someone who claims to only recieve interpretation from the church. You must be busy with communication with bishops each and every minute to have such numerous opinions on so many scripture verses. Are you sure you understood so many things correctly from your church bishops?

Look at the dodge here!

No substantive response. No discussion of scripture. Nothing but some rhetorical claptrap. The fact is that drakowski has long been a student to scripture and the teachings of the Catholic Church because he came from a fairly a-C background to conversion, you might rethink your remarks and hope to discuss things with him in better faith.

I hope you can see how crazy that thought is. As I am sure you recieved very little if any of this from your bishop.

Unfortunately for you any Catholic can access the teachings of the church and Dan probably has more of them to hand than you’d believe.

I will address your issues in another post for size reasons

This, I’ll believe when I see it…

 

[Church_Militant]

As always I offer proof as anyone else who is a non-cath does on this site and you cannot accept it. My proof is in the Word of God.

No! the fact is that you offer your own interpretations of selected passages of scripture. Often while ignoring or twisting a passage or verse to fit your adopted theology

Yours is in the cath church and their writings.

Rhetorical bunkum! We have buried you in scripture and just because it does not agree with your pet interpretations you discount it.

BTW, effective immediately I am asking you to abode by the forum rules and cease abbreviating Catholic to cath. The rules here specifically forbid us to do that. Henceforth, you need to both use the full name Catholic and capitalize it or expect to be reported to the moderators. If you cannot post with respect for our faith, whether you agree or not then you need not post.

Mine is in the finished work of the cross

More rhetoric. As if this is not what the Catholic Church preaches.

CCC 517 Christ’s whole life is a mystery of redemption. Redemption comes to us above all through the blood of his cross, but this mystery is at work throughout Christ’s entire life:

• already in his Incarnation through which by becoming poor he enriches us with his poverty;

• in his hidden life which by his submission atones for our disobedience;

• in his word which purifies its hearers;

• in his healings and exorcisms by which “he took our infirmities and bore our diseases”;

• and in his Resurrection by which he justifies us.

Yours is in the decisions of the pope and your works

More rhetorical propaganda without a shred of truth.

CCC 2447 The works of mercy are charitable actions by which we come to the aid of our neighbor in his spiritual and bodily necessities. Instructing, advising, consoling, comforting are spiritual works of mercy, as are forgiving and bearing wrongs patiently. The corporal works of mercy consist especially in feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and imprisoned, and burying the dead. Among all these, giving alms to the poor is one of the chief witnesses to fraternal charity: it is also a work of justice pleasing to God:

He who has two coats, let him share with him who has none and he who has food must do likewise. But give for alms those things which are within; and behold, everything is clean for you. If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?

Where is what we believe and are taught not scriptural?

Mine is a salvation by grace for I am not worthy

Again, error!

CCC 2003 Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” “benefit.” Whatever their character - sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues - charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.

Yours is in the ability of Mary to appeal for you

Show me this in the authentic teachings of the Catholic Church. You can’t…such does not exist!

Mine is in the direct relationship with my Father and my ability to bring my sins to Him

in direct contradiction to the expressed teachings of the Bible, which you reject out of disbelief and wrong teaching.

Yours is in a priest and the amount of pennence you have to do

By the very commission of Christ Himself, as has been plainly shown to you. How can you claim to believe the Bible and yet set aside its straightforward teachings to embrace the errant new winds of doctrines of men?

Mine is by being indwelt and sealed in the Holy Spirit

None of which you have so far demonstrated to us and in fact you have displayed such errors in teachings and lack of Christian charity to us that one wonders based upon the fruit seen so far.

Yours is by rituals of infant baptism, confirmation mass and the eucharist

In every case expressions of the same living faith that the New Testament church lived by.

One suspects that you reject these because you have too much pride to even consider that what you have been taught by well meaning people with Bibles might actually be errant heresy.

You have an alter
My alter is Christ

Nowhere in the Word of God in Our Lord called an altar and I defy you to produce such a scripture because I know it does not exist. This is another glaring example of twisted remarks and teachings that emanate from the various modern post reformation step children.

As I said my proof is in the Word of God.

I can’t tell because of all the errors that you have been instructed on by my Catholic brothers and sisters and I.

When we show you from the Word of God your errors, all you do is disagree and ignore what we offer. Why? I already know why…because you have already made up your mind that the Catholic faith can never be right, which is a false and dishonest premise under which to approach any discussion with anyone.

If you want to preach and proselytize, the you are in the wrong place and doing a very poor job of it.

If you really wish to discuss faith issues with catholics then you will have to do far better than you have so far.

Thanks be to Him because if it was in me I would blow it for sure.

“It is right to give Him thanks and praise!”

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Does that mean you dont have an answer? If Christ FINISHED the work on the cross why do I have to take ACTION to accept him as my savior? Either his work was complete or it was not.

First are you trying to say that Christ did not finnish his work on the cross. That Christ, after taking on the sins, pay attention now, the sins of the world and then said “it is finnished” That he came to “fullfill the law”. That after all this, he failed to finnish it after all? ???
WOW! Yes you can accept him or reject him as a cc you more than likely accepted the cc but rejected Christ as evidenced by your post.
I suggest that you and MrS refer to a study in Hebrews

 

[backfrmthebrink]

No! the fact is that you offer your own interpretations of selected passages of scripture. Often while ignoring or twisting a passage or verse to fit your adopted theology Rhetorical bunkum! We have buried you in scripture and just because it does not agree with your pet interpretations you discount it.

BTW, effective immediately I am asking you to abode by the forum rules and cease abbreviating Catholic to cath. The rules here specifically forbid us to do that. Henceforth, you need to both use the full name Catholic and capitalize it or expect to be reported to the moderators. If you cannot post with respect for our faith, whether you agree or not then you need not post.More rhetoric. As if this is not what the Catholic Church preaches.
More rhetorical propaganda without a shred of truth.Where is what we believe and are taught not scriptural?Again, error!Show me this in the authentic teachings of the Catholic Church. You can’t…such does not exist!in direct contradiction to the expressed teachings of the Bible, which you reject out of disbelief and wrong teaching.By the very commission of Christ Himself, as has been plainly shown to you. How can you claim to believe the Bible and yet set aside its straightforward teachings to embrace the errant new winds of doctrines of men?None of which you have so far demonstrated to us and in fact you have displayed such errors in teachings and lack of Christian charity to us that one wonders based upon the fruit seen so far. In every case expressions of the same living faith that the New Testament church lived by.

One suspects that you reject these because you have too much pride to even consider that what you have been taught by well meaning people with Bibles might actually be errant heresy.
Nowhere in the Word of God in Our Lord called an altar and I defy you to produce such a scripture because I know it does not exist. This is another glaring example of twisted remarks and teachings that emanate from the various modern post reformation step children.I can’t tell because of all the errors that you have been instructed on by my Catholic brothers and sisters and I.

When we show you from the Word of God your errors, all you do is disagree and ignore what we offer. Why? I already know why…because you have already made up your mind that the Catholic faith can never be right, which is a false and dishonest premise under which to approach any discussion with anyone.

If you want to preach and proselytize, the you are in the wrong place and doing a very poor job of it.

If you really wish to discuss faith issues with catholics then you will have to do far better than you have so far. “It is right to give Him thanks and praise!”

First funny how you are denying your own church’s prayers and doctrines. Holy mary mother of God (she was not the mother of God a very important use of words here) pray for us sinners (you have one mediator the man Christ Jesus, no other name under heaven) now and at the hour of our death (because you have not salvation. You cannot not know the peace inb the anticipation of death that Paul talks about in being absent from the body) You mention heretic teachings that is exactly what the cc is. AND YOU KNOW IT! For that and that alone you may stand condemned. If I were you and you really worship our Lord I would fall on my knees and pray for His forgiveness and leave Mary (who does not hear you) out of it.
I never said that the cc is wrong about everything. It has started in me an awareness of things of God and a love for my Lord. I am gratefull eternally that as well God showed me truth so that He could grow my faith. You are so lost and as usual those lost cannot see it despite Gods words. If He chooses to soften your hearts He will. This is not my fight but the Lords. As said best in Jude, Let the Lord rebuke you! and btw He will.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

as for the ab of catholic to cath or cc I have seen even the stanchiest of posters here do that as well. Sorry I will not and If they boot me then so be it. I do not give that cc respect given to my Lord. May God forgive you for your idolitry

 

[backfrmthebrink]

You said Militant Rhetorical bunkum! We have buried you in scripture and just because it does not agree with your pet interpretations you discount it.
You have never buired me in anything scripturally. You use only your own writings and then don’t even hold to them.
I factually give you a list of just a few things that the cc teaches in contradiction to scripture funny how you never see the facts.
I suggest that you get a book “The Gospel According to Rome” study that. I suspect you do not have the courage though as it will lay out in easy to follow form what the Bible teaches and next to it what the cc teaches. Should be easy for you to follow. If you want to learn the truth of what you have chosen death for.

 

[onetimeposter]

First funny how you are denying your own church’s prayers and doctrines. Holy mary mother of God (she was not the mother of God a very important use of words here) pray for us sinners (you have one mediator the man Christ Jesus, no other name under heaven) now and at the hour of our death (because you have not salvation. You cannot not know the peace inb the anticipation of death that Paul talks about in being absent from the body) You mention heretic teachings that is exactly what the cc is. AND YOU KNOW IT! For that and that alone you may stand condemned. If I were you and you really worship our Lord I would fall on my knees and pray for His forgiveness and leave Mary (who does not hear you) out of it.
I never said that the cc is wrong about everything. It has started in me an awareness of things of God and a love for my Lord. I am gratefull eternally that as well God showed me truth so that He could grow my faith. You are so lost and as usual those lost cannot see it despite Gods words. If He chooses to soften your hearts He will. This is not my fight but the Lords. As said best in Jude, Let the Lord rebuke you! and btw He will.

---

I’ve been taking a look at the history of protestant reformation. Allister McGrath’s, Christianity’s Dangerous Idea.

What I find fascinating is the reformation was directed by the intellectual elite, regional disputes and the failure in the very beginning to come to any consensus on Biblical interpretation.

There was from the very start a complete inability to any consensus on what the scriptures are communicating.

I have also browsed through a lot of Protestant web sites, mostly evangelical Bible sites. I was taken aback at the blatant mis-information posted on these sites about the Catholic Faith.

I fail to see how any Protestant can claim to have the authentic truth on any matter.

 

[wisdomseeker]

prove that the Church of Jesus Christ is suppost to be invisible body.

where in the Bible says that the Church is invisible? i am waiting for your reply.

**Tertullian
“If we desire indeed to act the part of open enemies, not merely of secret offenders, would there be any lacking of strength, whether of numbers or resources?” “We are but of yesterday and we have already filled every place among you – cities, islands, fortresses, towns, marketplaces, the very camp, tribes, companies, palace, senate and forum. We have left nothing for you but the temples of your idols, for now it is the immense number of Christians which make your enemies so few, almost all the inhabitants of your various cities being followers of Christ.” **

does this look like an invisible church to you?

---

 

[backfrmthebrink]

The church is not a building or an institution. This is easy. But you have to again study the Word. The church (Kurious english sp in greek) means those who belong to the Lord and the Latin Ekklesia, eng sp in Latin) means those who are being called out. The people, It is where we derive our word church from. When Christ said He would build His Kurious (sp will vary when translated to english sp) and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. What did He mean that if it didn’t the church building would go to hell? No that the people would. Again it refers to Those who belong to the Lord. called out, His church.

 

[SIA]

The church is not a building or an institution. This is easy. But you have to again study the Word. The church (Kurious english sp in greek) means those who belong to the Lord and the Latin Ekklesia, eng sp in Latin) means those who are being called out. The people, It is where we derive our word church from. When Christ said He would build His Kurious (sp will vary when translated to english sp) and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. What did He mean that if it didn’t the church building would go to hell? No that the people would. Again it refers to Those who belong to the Lord. called out, His church.

very well said.

 

[SIA]

---

I’ve been taking a look at the history of protestant reformation. Allister McGrath’s, Christianity’s Dangerous Idea.

What I find fascinating is the reformation was directed by the intellectual elite, regional disputes and the failure in the very beginning to come to any consensus on Biblical interpretation.

There was from the very start a complete inability to any consensus on what the scriptures are communicating.

I have also browsed through a lot of Protestant web sites, mostly evangelical Bible sites. I was taken aback at the blatant mis-information posted on these sites about the Catholic Faith.

I fail to see how any Protestant can claim to have the authentic truth on any matter.

You fail to see alot. There are many books supposedly about the Reformation that are just plainly biased Catholic disdain for it. This appears to just be another of those.

 

[onetimeposter]

You fail to see alot. There are many books supposedly about the Reformation that are just plainly biased Catholic disdain for it. This appears to just be another of those.

Sir, the author of the book I am reading is a very serious Protestant. This book is written by a Protestant, a Protestant who seems to have no fear in telling the truth of how the reformation came to be. You immediately assume a Catholic Bias, a knee jerk reaction in ignorantce does you no favours.

If you actually read the book, you would see that the author spends an inordinate amount of time on Catholic scandal, Catholic corruption, Catholic error etc… I assure you,this book does not have a pro Catholic stance.

---

In September 2008, McGrath will take up the newly-established Chair of Theology, Ministry and Education in the Department of Education and Professional Studies at King’s College, London. He will serve as the academic leader of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture, and be involved in theological research and the professional development of clergy from a range of Christian denominations.

McGrath was born in Belfast, Northern Ireland and grew up in Downpatrick, County Down, where he attended Down High School. In September 1966 he became a pupil at the Methodist College Belfast, where his studies focused on mathematics, physics and chemistry. He went up to Wadham College, Oxford in 1971 and gained first class honours in chemistry in 1975. He began research in molecular biophysics in the Oxford University Department of Biochemistry under the supervision of Professor Sir George Radda, FRS and was elected to an E.P.A. Cephalosporin Research Studentship at Linacre College, Oxford, for the academic year 1975-6, and to a Domus Senior Scholarship at Merton College, Oxford, for the period 1976-8. During these three years, he carried out scientific research alongside studying for the Oxford University Final Honour School of Theology[1]. He was awarded an Oxford D.Phil. for his research in molecular biophysics (December 1977), and gained first class honours in Theology in June 1978.

McGrath then left Oxford to work at Cambridge University, where he also studied for ordination into the Church of England. In September 1980, he was ordained deacon, and began work as a curate at St Leonard’s Parish Church, Wollaton, Nottingham, in the English East Midlands. In 1983, he was appointed lecturer in Christian doctrine and ethics at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, and a member of the Oxford University Faculty of Theology. McGrath spent the fall semester of 1990 as the Ezra Squire Tipple Visiting Professor of Historical Theology at the Divinity School of Drew University, Madison, New Jersey[1].

 

[wisdomseeker]

The church is not a building or an institution. This is easy. But you have to again study the Word. The church (Kurious english sp in greek) means those who belong to the Lord and the Latin Ekklesia, eng sp in Latin) means those who are being called out. The people, It is where we derive our word church from. When Christ said He would build His Kurious (sp will vary when translated to english sp) and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. What did He mean that if it didn’t the church building would go to hell? No that the people would. Again it refers to Those who belong to the Lord. called out, His church.

Show where in the Bible says the Church is invisible and everyone has authority to enterpret SS and the Body of Christ is people with different beliefs.

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrneans, 6:2, 106AD
"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of Our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again. THEY WHO DENY THE GIFT OF GOD ARE PERISHING IN THEIR DISPUTES."

 

[estesbob]

First are you trying to say that Christ did not finnish his work on the cross. That Christ, after taking on the sins, pay attention now, the sins of the world and then said “it is finnished” That he came to “fullfill the law”. That after all this, he failed to finnish it after all? ???
WOW! Yes you can accept him or reject him as a cc you more than likely accepted the cc but rejected Christ as evidenced by your post.
I suggest that you and MrS refer to a study in Hebrews

Nice dodge but as usual you dont adress the question. You say Christ finished his owrk on the cross. Then you say that I have to acknowledge him as my persaonl savior. So that means he didnt finish his work on the cross. You cant have it both ways. Either everyone is desitned for heaven the day they are born OR everyone is required to do something to be saved.

The truth is what you claim is not supporteed by Scripture . it is a twisted distortion of a very few verses of scripture.

I have done many Scripture studies on Hebrews, The most extensive when I was in the Seminary. of course i suspect you would reject it out of hand since we also looked at the insights into Hebrews by the Church fathers-men you say have little to say as those who came along 1500 years later were much wiser.

 

[estesbob]

The church is not a building or an institution. This is easy. But you have to again study the Word. The church (Kurious english sp in greek) means those who belong to the Lord and the Latin Ekklesia, eng sp in Latin) means those who are being called out. The people, It is where we derive our word church from. When Christ said He would build His Kurious (sp will vary when translated to english sp) and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. What did He mean that if it didn’t the church building would go to hell? No that the people would. Again it refers to Those who belong to the Lord. called out, His church.

You have done a great job of proving the Chuch is not a building-but then of course nobody claimed it was. You have shown nothing to prove your contention that that the church is nothin more than an invisible body of people holding diametrically opposed views , on the nature of Christ and the means of salvation.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

You have done a great job of proving the Chuch is not a building-but then of course nobody claimed it was. You have shown nothing to prove your contention that that the church is nothin more than an invisible body of people holding diametrically opposed views , on the nature of Christ and the means of salvation.

Isn’t it funny how I produce for you time and again things you cannot refute to only then change the questions or focus. In the words of some pro wrestler, “ Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions”
I don’t thin that you have a point do you? but thanks for the compliment on doing a great job. God not I though.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Nice dodge but as usual you dont adress the question. You say Christ finished his owrk on the cross. Then you say that I have to acknowledge him as my persaonl savior. So that means he didnt finish his work on the cross. You cant have it both ways. Either everyone is desitned for heaven the day they are born OR everyone is required to do something to be saved.

The truth is what you claim is not supporteed by Scripture . it is a twisted distortion of a very few verses of scripture.

I have done many Scripture studies on Hebrews, The most extensive when I was in the Seminary. of course i suspect you would reject it out of hand since we also looked at the insights into Hebrews by the Church fathers-men you say have little to say as those who came along 1500 years later were much wiser.

sorry nice try. I have supported the finished work of the cross. Yes you do have to believe. That belief, a saving faith will WILL be supported by works typically but as in the case for the Galations it is often corrupted by works. Now you can if you choose to cal it that refer to faith as a work. I do not. but does that matter really? I do not believe that there needs to be an “alter call” I believe that faith in Christ is a matter of the heart don’t you agree? Now if by that reason it is a matter of the heart and Christ will give us a new heart as we have been made a new creation then it remains that just as Paul says, we are sealed for what God has started in us He will finish. The cross is the triumph over sin, an act of God on the part of man. Salvation is an act of God for man not an act of man for God. My God will not fail at this. Why do you choose to argue these points? Are you really that far removed from all this?
I am glad that you studied Hebrew so well. That is great:thumbsup: I think then that you would agree that the bulk of text on salvation suggests that you cannot loose it and that we are secure. If not how on earth do you study? BTW it would be greek in any event,

 

[backfrmthebrink]

are there any Priests here. Will you tell me how much time is dedicated % wise to the study of scripture in the Seminary? Be honest now for I have sources that tell me none to little. Yes they are Priests.

 

[MrS]

You said Militant Rhetorical bunkum! We have buried you in scripture and just because it does not agree with your pet interpretations you discount it.
You have never buired me in anything scripturally. You use only your own writings and then don’t even hold to them.
I factually give you a list of just a few things that the cc teaches in contradiction to scripture funny how you never see the facts.
I suggest that you get a book “The Gospel According to Rome” study that. I suspect you do not have the courage though as it will lay out in easy to follow form what the Bible teaches and next to it what the cc teaches. Should be easy for you to follow. If you want to learn the truth of what you have chosen death for.

I have the book… many copies.

And I offer them to any non-Catholic who is interested in faulting the Catholic Church… if

If they will also take a copy of
The Gospel According to James McCarthy by Gary Michuta

and read them both. That is fair.

If you would promise to do the same, I will even send you a copy.

or…

you can go to this site and read them both at the same time…
bringyou.to/apologetics/a101.htm section I

bringyou.to/apologetics/a102.htm section II

bringyou.to/apologetics/a103.htm section III

bringyou.to/apologetics/a64.htm section IV

“Should be easy for you to follow. If you want to learn the truth of what you have chosen death for”

Then, after we have both listened to both sides, we can discuss.

So…I have accepted your challenge to read the book you suggest, now will you at least accept the challange I offer … and you don’t even have to buy the book.

May God give you the courage to do so.

.