Distrust Of Reason

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholicfriend
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Catholicfriend:
No, i don’t know what Bible you’re reading from, but the text in greek does not say ;Foundation, it says: bulwark or buttress,
or support NOT foundation! The church is to be a support for The Word (Truth), not it’s foundation CHRIST ALREADY IS THAT FOUNDATION! SORRY, I DON’T BUY THAT!
GOD BLESS
CATHOLICFRIEND 👍
 
40.png
Catholicfriend:
MAYBE IT IS A MISCONCEPTION ABOUT THE TEXT OR SOMETHING, I DON’T KNOW
GOD BLESS
CATHOLIC 👍 FRIEND
 
I am starting to read this link you have posted, I believe this should be a new thread, as it kinda branches out into other topics.

We have gone into several directions, and in order to answer the questions properly we should stick to one or two per thread, or else nothing gets addressed fully.

I have to go to a friends house, but when I get back I will answer your question as best as I can. I have only been back in the Catholic Church for about 9 months and am still learning but have found every answer best explained in the Catholic Church, so as every other time there is an answer to your questions and mine.

God Bless
Scylla
 
40.png
Catholicfriend:
please read this all catholics!:knoxseminary.org/Prospective/Faculty/KnoxPulpit/rreymond_rcc.html#_ftn4
Click to expand...
The article that you provided is from a Presbyterian seminary named after the man who invented the Presbyterian faith. From that site:

Our model: Scottish reformer, John Knox. Future leaders inspired with his commitment, fervor, and fire will cry from their hearts for their own homelands – and the world – just as he did, with his now famous prayer: “Lord, give me Scotland, or I die!”
**
This is Christianity filtered through a man named John Knox 400 years ago. Why am I supposed to take this seriously?

Who founded your church?

prayertools.com/Founders.htm

John Knox? Yes. We know about him: newadvent.org/cathen/08680a.htm
 
I have come back and I will try and explain my answer as best as possible.

I feel I should address the little discussion you had with someone else here about the foundation, Catholics do believe that Christ is the foundation, he is the founder of the Church which then put the Bible together.

Forgive me if I do not explain things very clearly as I am still pretty new to the faith.

Catholics do not claim to be the entire Church as there is the Church in Heaven also. We join them in worship as best as we can, since we are imperfect human beings.

This is why we join the heavenly worship evident in saying Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, as you can read in revelation there is continuous worship of God in heaven with His Church in heaven.

The Church on earth is then united with the Church in heaven in worship at the Mass as best as we can here on earth.

Does that explain it ok?

I read the article and all I can say is wow, this guy is a little scary to me.

He seems to have a love of scripture and but a strong distaste for the Catholic Church. Here is my amateur explanation of what I have a problem with believing in his article.

He first off doesn’t like it that the Catholic Church which in maintaining that all salvation comes through Christ, allows for God’s mercy in those who have not rejected Him but just unknowingly not followed into full communion with the Church.

Who are we to damn anybody? God is the judge and the Church recognizes that, who are we to say they are going to Hell.
Yet he seems to have a problem with that.

In addition to that he takes the Catholic Church believe in salvation by God’s Grace, through faith working in love and characterizes it as salvation by faith and works. He then says that the Catholic Churches rejection of a belief in Faith Alone saving by just a mental assent is wrong?

Very few people once they study it, do they believe in salvation by mental assent of Faith Alone?

What the real problem I believe with the article is he is taking his traditional understanding of scripture and since the Catholic Church does not agree with it, says it is wrong.

That is like me saying that I believe that you need to handle snakes (like those groups do in the south somewhere) you don’t believe it, well I guess you are not a Biblically based Church then.

One other thing, and I really don’t like to do this since I find it a lot nicer just to try and explain things, is this,
He says that the Bible is infallible, which makes a mockery of the Bible as it is inerrant, infallible would mean we would all come to the exact same understanding and true beliefs based upon it, yet this clearly isn’t so in the myriad of different interpretations based directly upon all the different understandings of it.

Or is this gentleman stating that his interpretation is infallible? Or there is no such thing as truth and it is just ones point of view that makes it the truth.

God Bless
Scylla
 
Catholicfriend:

Please give us your catechesis of I Tim 3:15.

Which Church is Paul talking about?

Since you don’t buy the Catholic position that Paul was referring to, I’d like to know exactly who this “household of God” is?

in XT
 
40.png
scylla:
I have come back and I will try and explain my answer as best as possible.

I feel I should address the little discussion you had with someone else here about the foundation, Catholics do believe that Christ is the foundation, he is the founder of the Church which then put the Bible together.

Forgive me if I do not explain things very clearly as I am still pretty new to the faith.

Catholics do not claim to be the entire Church as there is the Church in Heaven also. We join them in worship as best as we can, since we are imperfect human beings.

This is why we join the heavenly worship evident in saying Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, as you can read in revelation there is continuous worship of God in heaven with His Church in heaven.

The Church on earth is then united with the Church in heaven in worship at the Mass as best as we can here on earth.

Does that explain it ok?

I read the article and all I can say is wow, this guy is a little scary to me.

He seems to have a love of scripture and but a strong distaste for the Catholic Church. Here is my amateur explanation of what I have a problem with believing in his article.

He first off doesn’t like it that the Catholic Church which in maintaining that all salvation comes through Christ, allows for God’s mercy in those who have not rejected Him but just unknowingly not followed into full communion with the Church.

Who are we to damn anybody? God is the judge and the Church recognizes that, who are we to say they are going to Hell.
Yet he seems to have a problem with that.

In addition to that he takes the Catholic Church believe in salvation by God’s Grace, through faith working in love and characterizes it as salvation by faith and works. He then says that the Catholic Churches rejection of a belief in Faith Alone saving by just a mental assent is wrong?

Very few people once they study it, do they believe in salvation by mental assent of Faith Alone?

What the real problem I believe with the article is he is taking his traditional understanding of scripture and since the Catholic Church does not agree with it, says it is wrong.

That is like me saying that I believe that you need to handle snakes (like those groups do in the south somewhere) you don’t believe it, well I guess you are not a Biblically based Church then.

One other thing, and I really don’t like to do this since I find it a lot nicer just to try and explain things, is this,
He says that the Bible is infallible, which makes a mockery of the Bible as it is inerrant, infallible would mean we would all come to the exact same understanding and true beliefs based upon it, yet this clearly isn’t so in the myriad of different interpretations based directly upon all the different understandings of it.

Or is this gentleman stating that his interpretation is infallible? Or there is no such thing as truth and it is just ones point of view that makes it the truth.

God Bless
Scylla
Click to expand...
Hello Scylla, i am trying to explain to you, using that link from Knox seminary. To show you that, if the Church is goin where the
" teaching and preaching" doesn’t go hand in hand, one have to wonder what is wrong with it’s “foundation” as you call it.

As an Evangelical Protestant i have four guiding principles:
  1. THE PRESERVATION OF THE GOSPEL
  2. LEARNING FROM HISTORY
  3. MAINTAINING NEGATIVES
  4. NO SUBTRACTIONS OR ADDITIONS
You can check them up, if you like. It takes to long time to explain them now, maybe later. And when you talk about the Bible and use words like infallible or/and inerrant and call it mockery ; infallible or inerrant, frightens you i think, because your Pope is infallible and that makes the Word inerrant. But it is the same thing here as always, this play with words gets you nowhere.
And i shall try to explain 1 Tim 3:15 for you: "The task of the Ekklesia is to defend and protect the Truth. God’s <> is not a building, it’s an expression for Ekklesia. It was not a privatecompany Timothy had to take care of, it was the <>.The believers are God’s house or sanctuary(1Cor.3:16; 7:19; 2Cor.6:16), after all God lives there. The Ekklesia becomes a <> for the truth of the Gospel trough hearing God’s Word and act on it(Matt.13:9,10,11), through hide(keep) it in the heart(Ps.119:11), through rightly handling of it(2 Tim 2:15) and holding fast to it(Phil.2:16).

God bless
Catholicfriend 👍
 
40.png
AquinasXVI:
Catholicfriend:

Please give us your catechesis of I Tim 3:15.

Which Church is Paul talking about?

Since you don’t buy the Catholic position that Paul was referring to, I’d like to know exactly who this “household of God” is?

in XT
Click to expand...
I shall try to explain 1 Tim 3:15 for you: "The task of the Ekklesia is to defend and protect the Truth. God’s <> is not a building, it’s an expression for Ekklesia. It was not a privatecompany Timothy had to take care of, it was the <>.The believers are God’s house or sanctuary(1Cor.3:16; 7:19; 2Cor.6:16), after all God lives there. The Ekklesia becomes a <> for the truth of the Gospel through hearing God’s Word and act on it(Matt.13:9,10,11), through hide(keep) it in the heart(Ps.119:11), through rightly handling of it(2 Tim 2:15) and holding fast to it(Phil.2:16).

God bless
Catholicfriend 👍
 
Hmm. It looks as though CF has not read www.scripturecatholic.com .

Another suggested reading is the book *Where we got the Bible and our debt to the Catholic Church. *You can read it in its entirety here:

geocities.com/militantis/biblecontents.html#introduction

``We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all" - Martin Luther (Commentary on St. John)

Quote from: columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html

Ah, if you could only see the irony of evangelizing to Catholics by using bible quotes, Catholicfriend. :nope:
 
Catholicfriend:

EXCELLENT! You just described the Catholic Church.

in XT.
 
40.png
Eden:
Hmm. It looks as though CF has not read www.scripturecatholic.com . ``We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all" - Martin Luther (Commentary on St. John)

Quote from: columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html

Ah, if you could only see the irony of evangelizing to Catholics by using bible quotes, Catholicfriend. :nope:
Click to expand...
God also spoke through a donkey, that didnt make the donkey infallible. :rolleyes:
 
The reason I said mockery is that there is no evidence that it is true. I am not frightened, I read the link and it is a commendable theory, and I am not playing with words, I am just trying to be precise.

The mockery of the Church is seen to me like this, Christ says that the Church can resolve disputes, yet if we have an invisible Church with competing intepretations then you cannot resolve disputes. If I don’t believe you can baptize babies like a Lutheran and I go to an Evangelical to resolve it am I just going to the Church that goes along with my opinion?

Also if I look historically, I can see that the interpretation of an invisible Church is an innovation of the reformers. The early Church didn’t know about it as far as I can see.

Now as far as the teaching and preaching, as a Catholic with a Catholic understanding of Scripture it fits perfectly. It just doesn’t match up with Evangelical interpretation of Scripture. But just because of that, that doesn’t mean that it is unscriptural, it is just a different intepretation. I will read the article again tonight, but I will give you the courtesy again. Yet it to me it really seems unscriptural, yet that might just be my interpretation.

Lutherans\Methodists\Anglicans\Orthodox\Catholic all believe in a radically different understanding of the Lord’s Supper compared to Evangelicals. Are they all wrong? Did it take 1600 years for the truth to finally come out?
We can go on with many different core beliefs, and if you would like, in my spare time we can start a thread on each one.

God Bless
Scylla
 
40.png
kaycee:
God also spoke through a donkey, that didnt make the donkey infallible. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Jesus didn’t found His Church on the donkey, or give it the keys to the kingdom.

I find it so odd that Protestants cannot accept the idea that God could possibly grant protection from error in teaching in matters of faith and morals (which is what infallibility is—a negative protection), though presumably they have no problem with God inspiring the authors of the books of the Bible to set down His Word without screwing up the main message. A Protestant God has His hands tied, I guess: “Infallibility? Nope, sorry, I’m only God, you know”.
 
40.png
Catholicfriend:
Please read your own cathechism 1136 (with footnotes) WHAT IS THAT!? Your Bible wiew is covered up with philosophical ideas, to make your own ideas show.
Sorry i don’t buy that.
God bless
Catholicfriend 👍
Click to expand...
You seem to hold that philosophy is in opposition to theology. Where do you come up with that idea?

further, you seem to take the position that if it is not written in the Bible, it should not be allowed; not only is that not in the Bible, but the creeds which most churchs hold to have parts that come from reflection on what the Bible tells us, and are not directly stated in the Bible - for example, the Trinity.
 
Catholic Friend,

I am a revert from protestantism. One of the things that brought me back home to the Catholic church is this:

There are many protestant denominations that all say they are right and everyone else is wrong(a little exaggeration but follow me here.).
So i thought how can everyone be right. Only one will be right and everyone else is wrong.

I saw a church that can trace it’s roots all the way back to our Lord Jesus Himself. Everything that is taught and beleived by Catholics was taught by Jesus to the Apostles and handed down through the generations to us today. Then a few hundred years ago the protestant churches come about saying you Catholics are wrong and it just took off from there.

Think about it. Are you gonna follow the teachings of men like Luther and Calvin or are you gonna follow the teachings of our Lord jesus?
 
Hello friends!. Thank you for all your replys, i haven’t been able to send replys, because i am studying to become child-care teacher.
I have been reading, and am reading Chesterton, Karl Keating(Catholicism and fundamentalism) and Henry Nouwen. good, good… 🙂

This thread i have started(distrust of reason), looks like it’s both theoretically and reasonably confronted with good arguments, and i’m resigning from any further discussion in it!. But if there is anybody who wants to discuss any topic…you’re welcome to do so! But it’s seems reasonable enough for me! But my distrust for reason has been that you can not make reason out of faith, but faith makes reason! …(if you know what i mean) My biggest apologies to those who have been hurt by discussing with me!! :crying:
I’M SO SOORRYY, MAY GOD FORGIVE ME! :banghead:

The Catholic thought is becoming more and more clear to me! THANK YOU GOD IN JESUS CHRIST! :amen:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top