Denominations which allow Women Pastors.

[Tom_Baum]

The story is an example of God punishing people with chaos and confusion.

Chaos and confusion is not an example of the will of God.

Thus, for you to claim that the Tower of Babel is an example of God willing us to be of different doctrines and teachings is untenable.

Unless you believe that God is okay with someone professing this:

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=20227&d=1403928673

Are you of the opinion that this is something good?

What, pray tell, do you mean by the “will of God”?

Are you saying that God does not use “Chaos and confusion” when God deems it appropriate?

I mentioned the “tower of Babel” when someone said that God is NOT a God of “chaos and confusion” where it is pretty clear that God uses everything available to God, including but not limited to chaos and confusion, to bring about His Will which is clearly stated as “that ALL be saved”.

I did not say “that the Tower of Babel is an example of God willing us to be of different doctrines and teachings”, what I stated was “Some of the “back and forth” reminds me of when the Apostles complained to Jesus about some that were speaking in His Name but weren’t in “lock-step” with the Apostles and what did Jesus say concerning this?”

Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?

As far as “Are you of the opinion that this is something good?”, I am of the opinion that there is more out there than the “example/s” that you and others use and that Jesus clearly said that he/she who is for Me is for Me whether or not their consciences are in their bodies or in some book or if their “dogma, doctrine, liturgy or whatever” is exactly what yours is.

When Jesus said that He would send the “Holy Spirit to guide…”, He meant to us not just to the “higher-ups”.

 

[PRmerger]

What, pray tell, do you mean by the “will of God”?

Are you saying that God does not use “Chaos and confusion” when God deems it appropriate?

I mentioned the “tower of Babel” when someone said that God is NOT a God of “chaos and confusion” where it is pretty clear that God uses everything available to God, including but not limited to chaos and confusion, to bring about His Will which is clearly stated as “that ALL be saved”.

I did not say “that the Tower of Babel is an example of God willing us to be of different doctrines and teachings”, what I stated was “Some of the “back and forth” reminds me of when the Apostles complained to Jesus about some that were speaking in His Name but weren’t in “lock-step” with the Apostles and what did Jesus say concerning this?”

Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?

As far as “Are you of the opinion that this is something good?”, I am of the opinion that there is more out there than the “example/s” that you and others use and that Jesus clearly said that he/she who is for Me is for Me whether or not their consciences are in their bodies or in some book or if their “dogma, doctrine, liturgy or whatever” is exactly what yours is.

When Jesus said that He would send the “Holy Spirit to guide…”, He meant to us not just to the “higher-ups”.

Could you answer my questions first please, Tom?

 

[PRmerger]

WWhen Jesus said that He would send the “Holy Spirit to guide…”, He meant to us not just to the “higher-ups”.

This is very Catholic.

Now, of course, the Holy Spirit will not lead us away from the gospel

And who could doubt that the Reverend Fred Phelps, who is not in “lock step” with the CC would claim that he is indeed preaching the gospel.

According to your paradigm, what are we to say to him?

 

[Tom_Baum]

Fair enough.

Catholicism was part of the discussion, then.

QED.

It’s not a semantics or vocabulary lesson I was explaining to you, Sy.

Rather, it’s a theological position. Very important distinction I was making for you.

I would hope that you will now be better informed and never use the term “Eucharistic Minister”, unless you are referring to a priest or deacon.

Again, the theology that is being posited is of great import. It is the foundation for understanding the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The priest is the ordinary minister of Holy Communion, because it is he who confects the Eucharist.

The lay ministers are merely the extra-ordinary distributors.

What, pray tell, is “confects the Eucharist”?

As far as “The lay ministers are merely the extra-ordinary distributors”, isn’t it that the priest and deacon are the ordinary and the “others” are the extra-ordinary ministers of the Eucharist?

 

[PRmerger]

What, pray tell, do you mean by the “will of God”?

What, pray tell, is “confects the Eucharist”?

I will answer both of your questions if you promise never ever to use the phrase “pray tell” with me ever again.

It’s superfluous.

Your questions would be better posed as “What do you mean by the ‘will of God’?”
And “What is ‘confects the Eucharist’?”

 

[PRmerger]

What, pray tell, is “confects the Eucharist”?

Sy? House Harkonnen?

Exhibit # 879977943 that Catholics do not know their faith.

As far as “The lay ministers are merely the extra-ordinary distributors”, isn’t it that the priest and deacon are the ordinary and the “others” are the extra-ordinary ministers of the Eucharist?

Yep. That’s exactly right.

 

[PRmerger]

Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?

You do realize, Tom, that you are professing a dogma here, yes?

Why do you permit yourself to profess dogma, but object to the CC doing the same?

 

[Tom_Baum]

Could you answer my questions first please, Tom?

Are you speaking about "

This would seem to be a apologia for this guy to be able to profess his beliefs, which are clearly not in “lock step” with the Apostles:

lasttrumpet.org/paul_false_apostle.htm

He believes that the writings of St. Paul are satanic.

And these folks were taught that eating grass would bring them closer to God. That’s clearly not in “lock-step” with the Apostles.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/...3lEfjOC_hM-jBH-T-2RrQIHsM1rUrukgVyDD3MdfkSZcH

Would you feel comfortable worshipping with either of these denominations?

"

I, personally, believe what you are asking is absurd but as far as talking with these people, I would welcome it.

I also believe that these various people have the right to worship as they see fit as long as they hurt no one or force no one.

I have “worshipped” with quite a few different denominations and also with Messianic Jews and Reform Jews.

I have also been to various bible studies, other than Catholic.

Did that answer your question, if indeed that was the question that you were referring to.

What about the whole post that I sent:

"What, pray tell, do you mean by the “will of God”?

Are you saying that God does not use “Chaos and confusion” when God deems it appropriate?

I mentioned the “tower of Babel” when someone said that God is NOT a God of “chaos and confusion” where it is pretty clear that God uses everything available to God, including but not limited to chaos and confusion, to bring about His Will which is clearly stated as “that ALL be saved”.

I did not say “that the Tower of Babel is an example of God willing us to be of different doctrines and teachings”, what I stated was “Some of the “back and forth” reminds me of when the Apostles complained to Jesus about some that were speaking in His Name but weren’t in “lock-step” with the Apostles and what did Jesus say concerning this?”

Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?

As far as “Are you of the opinion that this is something good?”, I am of the opinion that there is more out there than the “example/s” that you and others use and that Jesus clearly said that he/she who is for Me is for Me whether or not their consciences are in their bodies or in some book or if their “dogma, doctrine, liturgy or whatever” is exactly what yours is.

When Jesus said that He would send the “Holy Spirit to guide…”, He meant to us not just to the “higher-ups”."

 

[Stilldreamn]

Sy? House Harkonnen?

Exhibit # 879977943 that Catholics do not know their faith.

I have to admit that for a long time, I had no idea what “confect” meant in the context of what the priest does; and to this day, the word “confect” brings to mind those delicious little wedding cookies…covered with confectioners’ sugar.

Sometimes, my mind wanders in odd places.

 

[Porknpie]

When Jesus said that He would send the “Holy Spirit to guide…”, He meant to us not just to the “higher-ups”."

Hi Tom,

When Jesus said these words, take note of who he was talking to. He was not speaking to the crowds. He was speaking to his apostles, those that were his original Bishops of His Church. He promised to guide them to all Truth, them being … His Church.

PnP

 

[stewstew03]

…
Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?

You do realize, Tom, that you are professing a dogma here, yes?

As is this:

…
When Jesus said that He would send the “Holy Spirit to guide…”, He meant to us not just to the “higher-ups”."

(emphasis added)

 

[PRmerger]

Are you speaking about “”

I, personally, believe what you are asking is absurd but as far as talking with these people, I would welcome it.

No. I didn’t ask if you should “talk with these people”.

My question is more nuanced.

Giving you examples of Christian beliefs which are really whacky tells us that** all of us draw lines** where we say, “This is not consonant with Christian beliefs.”

You do it. I do it.

The Catholic Church does it.

I am asking you why you permit yourself to do this without permitting me or other Catholics, or the CC to do it.

Now you can say that you don’t draw lines, but that would be disingenuous.

Or foolish.

Because that means that you would worship with the Reverend Fred Phelps and feel just as comfortable proclaiming his dogma that God hates homosexuals as you are saying God loves homosexuals.

And that’s just

 

[PRmerger]

OMG I won’t even say what’s going through my mind. That is horrible. I am SOOOOO glad I’m not in the church any longer. SO glad.

What Seeker is professing is NOT Scriptural, Irishgal, nor is it consonant with Catholic teaching.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Yes. And that’s because in their denominations pastors are not priests.

I know Roman Catholics here think of TEC as Protestant and don’t consider their clergy to be priests and certainly don’t believe TEC has a valid Eucharist. But actually in TEC I know of a female whose title is priest in charge. She is a priest in their denomination.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I have been told, on this forum, that if you disagree with those things you are not Catholic.

While I do get your point about leaving when there’s disagreement, I will also just say I wouldn’t necessarily believe everything you’re told on an internet forum. Maybe PRMerger, who I’ve been told goes by the Catholic Church’s definition, will chime in with the definition for the benefit of readers.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

While I do get your point about leaving when there’s disagreement, I will also just say I wouldn’t necessarily believe everything you’re told on an internet forum. Maybe PRMerger, who I’ve been told goes by the Catholic Church’s definition will chime in with the definition for the benefit of readers.

Perhaps but I recall a lengthy discussion with PRMerger over the word, ‘Catholic’

 

[Sy_Noe]

Perhaps but I recall a lengthy discussion with PRMerger over the word, ‘Catholic’

Oh no my friend, now you have me worried this could get longer than I anticipated.

 

[TheSeeker2014]

TheSeeker,

I’m curious. Where did you get the term “nuggets”? Is this a term that you came up with or did a pastor speak in this way?

And what books are not full of nuggets?

PnP

Nuggets is my own description… and are you asking about books in the bible that are not full of nuggets? Or just books in general that talk about God?

 

[TheSeeker2014]

So what did you compare it to, when you studied it in your class, in order to know that it was theopneustos?

And you did this with all 27 books of the NT?

Also, did you read, pray about and study all the other over 400 ancient Christian texts that were rejected by the Catholic Church to see if they were actually theopneustos?

For example, you studied the Epistle of Barnabas? And the Shepherd of Hermas?

What was it about those texts that told you it wasn’t inspired?

yes. Took a year or two (worked on everyday) it was only the basics on them. example who wrote or who could be the writer from this and this as clues … ect
way of lift at that time and the traditions that was commonly held in that place and time. ect
no as I am only so old and have not had enough time and probably never will. That is a group project to decide over many many many books.

I cannot answer to those specific books you have mentioned… however I have studied the book of Enoch a little bit and it is usually seen as a false writing by most churches. I do believe it has quite a few truths in it that seem to be consistent to bits in the bible cannon we have today.

 

[TheSeeker2014]

And what was it about 3 John that told you it was inspired?

Did you know that 3 John doesn’t even mention Jesus–not even once!

How is it that you knew that it was God’s Word?

His sheep hears His voice and follows Him. They are led by the Spirit. Again… prayer. I do not have any other secrets except maybe comparison from other literature that I have read that I believe is true from the same process. Truth in the end always stands…