Do modern Protestants know what they are protesting?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LDemontfort
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you believe that he did this under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? I mean, really, God-breathed, “I am the servant of the Breath of God” type of knowledge that he would only have because of the divinus inspiratus?

I don’t know of any Christian who doesn’t believe that Peter, Paul, M, M, L and J wrote their texts without the inspiration of the Holy Spirit…so…it’s weird to me to think that people think that Peter just happened to get things right, with the Holy Spirit guiding him.

Really?
To all my Protestant brethren (Tomi, Novo, Dave Noonan, dronald, Per Crucem?) who are espousing the “There is no such thing as a man who has been infallible” paradigm:

Are you really saying that the authors of the INSPIRED, theopneustos, holy Scriptures are NO DIFFERENT than a weather man who says, “It’s going to rain today”?

These authors just happened to get it right when they wrote their epistles?

Someone who is INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit just “got it right”?
 
To all my Protestant brethren (Tomi, Novo, Dave Noonan, dronald, Per Crucem?) who are espousing the “There is no such thing as a man who has been infallible” paradigm:

Are you really saying that the authors of the INSPIRED, theopneustos, holy Scriptures are NO DIFFERENT than a weather man who says, “It’s going to rain today”?

These authors just happened to get it right when they wrote their epistles?

Someone who is INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit just “got it right”?
Thomas asked for proof that Christ lives. “Show me. Let me see the definitive medical report that this is Christ in the flesh who lives”.
The authoritative word of the apostles was not enough for him. “Show me! (infallibly of course)”.

If a person does not believe that Christ entrusted his mission, his evangelium, his Church, to real people who proclaim him…
how can you believe that Christ was formed in the womb, walked the earth, preaching and teaching, dying a real death, rising to life? Is the incarnation real, or is not real? This is the heart of a believing Christian.

Did the scriptures in fact drop out of the sky, or was a Person born to a virgin who lived a real life?

Did he really share Himself fully with his brothers, or did he give just a theoretical piece of himself?
“I am the Way, the Truth, and the Theoretical Concept”?
 
Thomas asked for proof that Christ lives. “Show me. Let me see the definitive medical report that this is Christ in the flesh who lives”.
The authoritative word of the apostles was not enough for him. “Show me! (infallibly of course)”.

If a person does not believe that Christ entrusted his mission, his evangelium, his Church, to real people who proclaim him…
how can you believe that Christ was formed in the womb, walked the earth, preaching and teaching, dying a real death, rising to life? Is the incarnation real, or is not real? This is the heart of a believing Christian.

Did the scriptures in fact drop out of the sky, or was a Person born to a virgin who lived a real life?

Did he really share Himself fully with his brothers, or did he give just a theoretical piece of himself?
“I am the Way, the Truth, and the Theoretical Concept”?
👍
 
Can you please provide a source for this? I think that’s the first time I have heard a Catholic espouse OSAS :confused:
:rolleyes: sheesh

846
" Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuseeither to enter it or to remain in it.
 
Further, I think the entire passage is an allusion to Isa 22 where Shebna, the royal steward, loses his high office because he thinks only of himself and his own glory. Literarily, Peter as a character in Matthew always starts off ok, but ends up in big trouble. After the “Satan” remark, I see Peter as simply a deposed Shebna.
The king fired Shebna and in his place puts a new chief steward. Just Like Jesus fired the scribes and pharisees and put Peter head steward of His Kingdom.

As far as that Satan remark, Jesus gives the explanation later.

Satan asked to sift Peter and the apostles. And was obviously allowed. Jesus didn’t tell them this bit of news till AFTER the Last Supper.

Lk 22:
24 A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest μείζων. ]. 25 And he said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. 26 But not so with you; rather let the greatest μείζων ] among you become as the youngest, and the **leader ** γούμενος ] as one who serves. 27 For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves. 28 “You are those who have continued with me in my trials; 29 as my Father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint for you 30 that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you τοὺ ] that he might sift you τοὺ ] like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you σοῦ] that your faith may not fail; and when you σοῦ] have turned again, strengthen your brethren.”

All the apostles heard Jesus say this, and among other things, it obviously settled their argument over who among them is greatest among THEM…

  1. *]He confirms one of them would be greatest
    *]He is to be servant of all (btw, one of the titles of the pope is servant of the servants of God)
    *]he is to rule
    *]and it’s Peter, who Jesus prays for, to be able to do the Job Jesus wants him to do (and in extension all his successors :))

    So to your point:

    Satan was given permission to sift all of them like wheat (which means to seperate and divide). And they are only NOW hearing of this. Actually, Satan has BEEN sifting them all along. From their very selection as apostles. He’s the one who got them in that argument over authority in the upper room. (Satan loves to divide people over authority). That’s what Satan does. And he does it real good. Just look at protestantism, division on steroids in the 16th century and following. All dividing from and maintaining division from the Catholic Church that Jesus established. Satan divides what Jesus establishes, and Satan loves to get people in arguments over authority that Jesus puts in place.

    And Satan has been sifting the apostles from the beginning, and Jesus has seen Satan all along doing this.

    Guess what my friend, Satan is still sifting. He exploits where people are weak. And he sucker punches them.
    D:
    In contrast, you think the charism of infallibility does exist because people who claim infallibility tell you that it does. For me that’s just not enough.

    In summary, I also take issue with terms like “infallible statement” or “infallible teaching” because I think that infallibility can’t be applied to words–only (theoretically) to beings with agency.
    “He will lead you to all truth”. Who did Jesus say that to? And what does it mean?
 
So…Hubby stands on the porch, looks out at the heavy grey sky, the downpour on the horizon with flashes of lightning, the wind coming from it this-a-way and rain-smell, and tells me, “Looks like it might rain.” Is he being infallible?

“Sun will come up tomorrow,” he says,“More than likely.” Once again, is he being infallible?

“I haven’t had a peach pie like that since I was a boy,” he says. He HATES peach pie, which is why, but Social Obligations have forced him to eat the wretched thing. It is true, he has avoided it for DECADES. Is he being infallible?

“Tomi, you are the most beautiful woman in the world,” he tells me. Darn right. He IS infallible.
Here’s the definition of infallible teaching (contained in the highlighted section) following post #507

The subject must be on doctrine/dogma concerning faith and morals ONLY. Not any other subject. Not weather, economics, science etc etc etc, faith & morals alone. That way strawman arguments aren’t raised
 
To all my Protestant brethren (Tomi, Novo, Dave Noonan, dronald, Per Crucem?) who are espousing the “There is no such thing as a man who has been infallible” paradigm:

Are you really saying that the authors of the INSPIRED, theopneustos, holy Scriptures are NO DIFFERENT than a weather man who says, “It’s going to rain today”?

These authors just happened to get it right when they wrote their epistles?

Someone who is INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit just “got it right”?
And… how do they know the CC got it right at all? By what measure? :confused:
 
It is exhausting to be Catholic and defend and figure out what is the “De Fide” and what not (CCC, Ott, Denzinger, Encyclicals, Apostolic Exhortations, etc) from both Non-Catholics and Catholics. In a way it is a form of purgation while in the flesh.
Because it’s confusing. I never know what’s real or not in Catholicism.

Is Exsurge Domine, verse 33 binding forever?

“Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows: 33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.”

Or what about the Urban II?:

"Carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.”

And if not, would a layperson know to disagree?
 
To all my Protestant brethren (Tomi, Novo, Dave Noonan, dronald, Per Crucem?) who are espousing the “There is no such thing as a man who has been infallible” paradigm:

Are you really saying that the authors of the INSPIRED, theopneustos, holy Scriptures are NO DIFFERENT than a weather man who says, “It’s going to rain today”?

These authors just happened to get it right when they wrote their epistles?

Someone who is INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit just “got it right”?
I think there’s a difference between physical and spiritual things. Even Jesus pointed out that groups will notice when it will rain and storm yet not understand the spiritual things of this world.

I once did a long post on how Peter calls Paul’s letters Scripture, so we have Scripture affirming all of Paul’s letters. Paul quotes Luke and calls it Scripture so we know we can accept it too. John and Matthew were Apostles and Mark is essentially Peter’s Gospel and was “useful” to Paul’s ministry.

On top of this, Paul says the Scriptures are profitable, etc, etc. I see no reason to reject them.
 
Because it’s confusing. I never know what’s real or not in Catholicism.

Is Exsurge Domine, verse 33 binding forever?

“Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows: 33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.”

Or what about the Urban II?:

"Carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.”

And if not, would a layperson know to disagree?
The Church is organic. It lives, because it is Christ’s body, who lives. The whole of Tradition is living. It contains what happened in the past and speaks it in the present tense. The Church has a living Magisterium. Cultures and ways of thinking and speaking develop. Doctrines develop…the flower is not revealed in all it’s beauty at once. What we can be sure of is, through all of time Christ is united to a body of believers and guides it towards perfection.

What we should not do is confuse Christ’s guidance of his Church with human perfection. This is why the F word does not really apply in this discussion.

And a pope or anyone else for that matter, is not immune to error in “unofficial” matters, or to sin . Not every word we speak is a pronouncement of divine truth. Catholics do horrible damage to the body of Christ through sin and error.

So, yes, it does require a tremendous amount of trust to accept the Church.
 
I once did a long post on how Peter calls Paul’s letters Scripture, so we have Scripture affirming all of Paul’s letters.
Do we? Prove to me, apart from the Church’s discernment, that 2Peter is scripture.
Paul quotes Luke and calls it Scripture so we know we can accept it too. John and Matthew were Apostles and Mark is essentially Peter’s Gospel and was “useful” to Paul’s ministry.
And we know that these gospels had Apostolic origin because the Church confirms it.
The gospels themselves nowhere claim apostolic authorship.
On top of this, Paul says the Scriptures are profitable, etc, etc.
Yes. The Old Testament.

In all likelihood, the scriptures that St. Paul was referring to (the ones he was acquainted with from childhood) would have included the deuterocanon, since St. Timothy had a Greek father.

So, dronald, why to you go against scripture’s exhortation regarding the OT?
 
The Church is organic. It lives, because it is Christ’s body, who lives. The whole of Tradition is living. It contains what happened in the past and speaks it in the present tense. The Church has a living Magisterium. Cultures and ways of thinking and speaking develop. Doctrines develop…the flower is not revealed in all it’s beauty at once. What we can be sure of is, through all of time Christ is united to a body of believers and guides it towards perfection.

What we should not do is confuse Christ’s guidance of his Church with human perfection. This is why the F word does not really apply in this discussion.

And a pope or anyone else for that matter, is not immune to error in “unofficial” matters, or to sin . Not every word we speak is a pronouncement of divine truth. Catholics do horrible damage to the body of Christ through sin and error.

So, yes, it does require a tremendous amount of trust to accept the Church.
Exactly. That’s why I don’t disagree that the Catholic Church has much truth in it; but sometimes they muck up. Like any denomination.
 
Because it’s confusing. I never know what’s real or not in Catholicism.

Is Exsurge Domine, verse 33 binding forever?

“Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows: 33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.”

Or what about the Urban II?:

"Carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.”

And if not, would a layperson know to disagree?
The only thing that I would suggest it that verse 33 you are talking about "That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit says to me that the CC is saying that heretics are not to be burned as it is against the will of the Spirit to do so.
 
The only thing that I would suggest it that verse 33 you are talking about "That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit says to me that the CC is saying that heretics are not to be burned as it is against the will of the Spirit to do so.
No that’s incorrect. The Pope listed “That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit” as an error of Luther’s.
 
Because it’s confusing. I never know what’s real or not in Catholicism.

Is Exsurge Domine, verse 33 binding forever?

“Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows: 33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.”
Keep in mind, that’s what Luther said.

So what Luther was saying in effect, by bringing the HS into that statement, then when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah by fire, that was against the will of the HS?
d:
Or what about the Urban II?:

"Carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.”
The background of this was a speech

“In 1094 or 1095, Alexios I Komnenos, the Byzantine emperor, sent to the pope, Urban II, and asked for aid from the west against the Seljuq Turks, who taken nearly all of Asia Minor from him. At the council of Clermont Urban addressed a great crowd and urged all to go to the aid of the Greeks and to recover Palestine from the rule of the Muslims. The acts of the council have not been preserved, but we have five accounts of the speech of Urban which were written by men who were present and heard him.”

Here’s the context of the quote(s) you give.

"Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor. Behold! on this side will be the sorrowful and poor, on that, the rich; on this side, the enemies of the Lord, on that, his friends. Let those who go not put off the journey, but rent their lands and collect money for their expenses; and as soon as winter is over and spring comes, let hem eagerly set out on the way with God as their guide.”

fordham.edu/halsall/source/urban2-5vers.html

Don’t we see the same brutality and genocide today, by radical muslims towards the Easten Catholics and the Church? The choice they had was leave, convert, or die. And in many cases they weren’t even given the option to leave. It was convert or die on the spot.
 
Keep in mind, that’s what Luther said.

So what Luther was saying in effect, by bringing the HS into that statement, then when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah by fire, that was against the will of the HS?
We are living in the age of the New Covenant.

Luke 9:54 And when his disciples James and John saw it, they said, "Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them? "

55 But he turned and rebuked them. { Some manuscripts add b and he said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of Man came not to destroy people’s lives but to save them” b }​

It seems you and the Pope are thinking a lot like the Disciples here.
The background of this was a speech

“In 1094 or 1095, Alexios I Komnenos, the Byzantine emperor, sent to the pope, Urban II, and asked for aid from the west against the Seljuq Turks, who taken nearly all of Asia Minor from him. At the council of Clermont Urban addressed a great crowd and urged all to go to the aid of the Greeks and to recover Palestine from the rule of the Muslims. The acts of the council have not been preserved, but we have five accounts of the speech of Urban which were written by men who were present and heard him.”

Here’s the context of the quote(s) you give.

"Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor. Behold! on this side will be the sorrowful and poor, on that, the rich; on this side, the enemies of the Lord, on that, his friends. Let those who go not put off the journey, but rent their lands and collect money for their expenses; and as soon as winter is over and spring comes, let hem eagerly set out on the way with God as their guide.”

fordham.edu/halsall/source/urban2-5vers.html

Don’t we see the same brutality and genocide today, by radical muslims towards the Easten Catholics and the Church? The choice they had was leave, convert, or die. And in many cases they weren’t even given the option to leave. It was convert or die on the spot.
Go save them by force, fine. But don’t bring God into it. Don’t say “Christ commands it” because He didn’t, nor does He now. Nor did the Apostles lash back with war at the Romans.

Leave God out of it when it comes to killing the persecutors. If we don’t have the faith to trust that God will deliver us by peace, then perhaps we’ll go to war. Don’t however say that Christ commands it, and don’t say you’ll go to heaven for dying in battle.
 
We are living in the age of the New Covenant.

Luke 9:54 And when his disciples James and John saw it, they said, "Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them? "

55 But he turned and rebuked them. { Some manuscripts add b and he said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of Man came not to destroy people’s lives but to save them” b }​

It seems you and the Pope are thinking a lot like the Disciples here.
If you don’t like the OT reference to fire and God’s wrath, then let’s look at the NT references

You realize Jesus spoke more on hell than anyone …right? And His description of hell is
Mark 9:48

Hell is real. You’re not suggesting that a soul sent to the fires of hell by God is somehow against the will of the HS are you?
d:
Go save them by force, fine. But don’t bring God into it. Don’t say “Christ commands it” because He didn’t, nor does He now. Nor did the Apostles lash back with war at the Romans.

Leave God out of it when it comes to killing the persecutors. If we don’t have the faith to trust that God will deliver us by peace, then perhaps we’ll go to war. Don’t however say that Christ commands it, and don’t say you’ll go to heaven for dying in battle.
Elements of a just war 2309

God is on the side of the just.
 
So what Luther was saying in effect, by bringing the HS into that statement, then when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah by fire, that was against the will of the HS?
Again with the silly lawyer-tricks, playing games with the possible meaning of the text instead of trying honestly to figure out what it meant.

No one at the time–no one except for you and a few other desperate modern Catholics with the weird idea that Exsurge Domine must be defended in toto–thought that Luther was talking about anything God did. Everyone knew what he was talking about, including the Pope who condemned this statement. He was talking about the burning of heretics by the civil authorities with the approval (and often at the behest) of the Church.

Please stop pretending that this text meant anything else. You are just embarrassing yourself and distracting from the conversation.

Edwin
 
Please stop pretending that this text meant anything else. You are just embarrassing yourself and distracting from the conversation.

Edwin
While I disagree that he’s embarrassing himself, I do agree that this is distracting from the conversation, which may be why it was brought up (red herring).

I was hoping that someone would comment on my recent post #551.
 
Again with the silly lawyer-tricks, playing games with the possible meaning of the text instead of trying honestly to figure out what it meant.

No one at the time–no one except for you and a few other desperate modern Catholics with the weird idea that Exsurge Domine must be defended in toto–thought that Luther was talking about anything God did. Everyone knew what he was talking about, including the Pope who condemned this statement. He was talking about the burning of heretics by the civil authorities with the approval (and often at the behest) of the Church.

Please stop pretending that this text meant anything else. You are just embarrassing yourself and distracting from the conversation.

Edwin
Maybe you didn’t see what I posted to dronald
If you don’t like the OT reference to fire and God’s wrath, then let’s look at the NT references

You realize Jesus spoke more on hell than anyone …right? And His description of hell is
Mark 9:48

Hell is real. You’re not suggesting that a soul sent to the fires of hell by God is somehow against the will of the HS are you?
There’s no lawyer trick there. No game playing. No desperate wierd attempts here to answer a simple question.

You otoh should cool your jets.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top