P
- Status
P
PJM
Guest
No, here;s whyGod’s blessings to you as well.
Then what about those who are still alive when Christ returns? Wouldn’t they still have to have their sins purged as well?
Rita
God’s Mercy is Grater than our sins. Which is why Sacramental Confession AND Indulgences exist to begin with.
So long as the soul does not have unconfessed; unforgiven MORTAL sins 1: Jn 5:16-17; God;s Mercy will take effect BECAUSE they have persevered until the END:thumbsup:
Matthew 10:22
And you shall be hated by all men for my name’ s sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.
Matthew 24:13
But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved
God Bless you,
Patrick
P
PJM
Guest
That friend is a PROFOUND question.
The best answer that I can think of is this:
**
Isaiah 55: 6-11**
"Seek ye the Lord, while he may be found: call upon him, while he is near. [7] Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unjust man his thoughts, and let him return to the Lord, and he will have mercy on him, and to our God: for he is bountiful to forgive. [8] For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts. And as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return no more thither, but soak the earth, and water it, and make it to spring, and give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it"
God is OUR Creator and has every right to do with US whatever please Him.
Who is to say how much these Souls would have suffered Prior to the End times? What ever the answer we can KNOW that God found it to be sufficient. That dear friend is apart of our FAITH.
** Hebrews 11:1**
Now faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not
.God Bless you
P
PJM
Guest
P
PJM
Guest
Hi Jerry
The Catholic Position is not private interpretation Here’s why:
Mt 16: 18-19
" And I say toYOU That thou art Peter; and upon [YOU!] this rock** I will build my church,** and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19]** And I will give to YOU [All of]** the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever YOUshalt bind upon earth,** it shall be bound also in heaven**: and whatsoever YOU shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in
heaven.
** Jn 17: 16-20**
[hey are not of the world, as I also am not of the world. **Sanctify THEM in truth.[God cannot deny Himself] Thy word is truth. [18] **As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. ** **This means exactly what ot say’s: WITH God;s Power AND Authority [limited from God’s of course; BUT always sufficient]**19] And for THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;"
No other Faith or Church can make this same claim and prove ir except Chrost Catholic Church. Amen!
** Mt. 28:19-20**
"Going therefore, teach YOU all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOUall days, even to the consummation of the world."
This command by Christ the direct Order is give directly to and exclusively to the Apostles and their successors. Which is WHY the CC alone CAN and DOES share and teach the fullness of God’s truths.
God Bless you,
Patrick
D
drac16
Guest
I watched a movie about Martin Luther and, in the movie, it showed catholics paying homage to things like a feather from Gabriel’s wings, a coin from Judas Iscariot’s betrayal and a set of stairs that catholics kiss (down on their hands and knees). I was curious, so I asked.Yes
May I ask why you ask?
We have relics in Islam, but we don’t believe that we’ll get an indulgence by paying homage to them. For instance, on the Hajj pilgrimage, pilgrims will kiss a black stone that fell out of Heaven.
G
gazelam
Guest
PJM,Thank you!
Here’s what your missing
Mt 16:18-19 "And I say to YOU!That thou art Peter; and [YOU]upon this rock** I will build my church,[singular]** and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to YOU! [ALL OF] the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.
What you sharing is classified as a “Church PRACTICE” & as such are changeable
Church Doctrines and Dogma are unchangeable.
Having taught Pre-Confirmation Prep for 3 years and being a lifelong Catholic I have seen MANY Confirmed; and each time [not that it matters] it was done with Both hands.
What makes the Sacrament VALID & Licit is the WORDS, the FORM & and the Materials [in this case holy oil]
Thank you so much for sharing
Much thanks for the time spent answering everyone’s questions. Regarding church practice (changeable) vs church doctrine (unchangeable), where is the line drawn? For example, is the need to receive communion a practice or a doctrine? Could the CC decide that it’s no longer necessary for the laity to receive communion? Or could confession be changed to a confession to God only in prayer as opposed to confession to a priest? Which practices does the CC believe it can change?
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Just side commenting here, Gazelam, all that is in our catechism are doctrines of faith that cannot be changed to mean something they are not.
The term, ‘limbo’, was a theological opinion, but never a defined doctrine, and so you cannot find it in the catechism. There was too much reference to it when I was growing up regarding what happened to unbaptized babies. The only response the Church can say is that we entrust them to God’s mercy and reflect the position of Christ towards children.
What is in the catechism is what is comprised of what we describe as our faith.
The term, ‘limbo’, was a theological opinion, but never a defined doctrine, and so you cannot find it in the catechism. There was too much reference to it when I was growing up regarding what happened to unbaptized babies. The only response the Church can say is that we entrust them to God’s mercy and reflect the position of Christ towards children.
What is in the catechism is what is comprised of what we describe as our faith.
G
gazelam
Guest
KathleenGee,
I appreciate your comment. In post #18 of this thread I asked about the form of Catholic confirmation (i.e., laying on hands vs a single hand). CCC 1300 partially states “the sacrament of Confirmation is conferred through the anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by the laying on of the hand”. (In the past I saw a confirmation mass in which the bishop laid a single hand on the forehead of each confirmand.) In post #31 PJM responded that the confirmation form is a church practice, not a doctrine. Do you disagree with him since the form is described in the CCC? Also, I had understood that celibacy of Catholic ministers is a practice/discipline and not doctrine. CCC 1579 states “All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate”. Is the celibacy requirement really a doctrine? Thanks!
E
eazyduzit
Guest
Patrick,Friend IT IS NOT SO PROMISED IN JOHN
Here are the 2 Infallible rules for RIGHT understanding of the Bible
[1] It what you believe does not align fully with the CC its wrong and needs to be changed
[2] NEVER-EVER can, may or does one verse; passage; or teaching have the authority or the POWER to make void; invalidate or override another verse; passage or teaching
Were this even the slightest possibity it WOULD invalidate the entire bible
2nd. Tim. 3:16-17"All scripture,[IS] inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work".
2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 “You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
Here’s what your both missing in brief.
[1] You’re way is the OT. OLD Covenant way which has been overridden by the New Covenant: Jesus; grace and His Church. It was then admitted and permitted by God; NOW it is NOT the precise and mandated way Jesus Choose to have man’s sins forgiven.
[2] In a previous post a detailed this information. But if I were a betting man {I’m not, which is great part of the reason I AM a Catholic]; I’d give a MILLION to One Odds on praying to God directly and having your sins actually forgiven.
WHY: Because we ARE sinners. And soon sin and asking God for forgiveness which essentially requires BOTH sincere contrition; evidenced by an altered life style AND specifically; precisely and perfectly doing so for love or God; NOT fear of hell. It is GOD himself who determines if your action MEET His criteria. It is PRECISELY this reason; known by God that He Instituted Sacramental-Confession where “contrition” has to be “sincere: BUT NOT perfect. And this is a HUGE difference in sin forgiveness because it is the manner Commanded and demanded by our God. Amen!
What you’re doing is effective dictating to God how He God MUST forgive your sins. This seems to me to be VERY imprudent.
God Bless you,
Patrick
It makes no logic to use one verse to invalidate all the other promises of forgiveness in the bible.What it means is that your understanding of this particular verse is off the mark and out of harmony.
Second, if the Catholic priest has the same power as Peter, then he should be able to know my sins without my having to tell him as Peter did in the case of Ananias and Saphira in Acts.5.
He cannot, so he doesn’t have the same power.
Jesus did not give a Sacrament of Reconciliation, but he gave the church the commission to discern who truly repents and who might not if there seems to be any question.
B
blanchardman
Guest
PJM thank you for your replies. Both will require some time to digest.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Hi Gazelam! Happy New Year! Blessings to you and your loved ones!
I have not read all of PJM’s posting here, so it may be context of doctrines of faith and others of the sacraments. The doctrines define all our beliefs. The Catholic Catechism is beautiful. The Prologue is a great read as well because it gives you the perspective of reading and learning Catholic beliefs.
The Catechism begins with the Prologue, then our Profession of Faith – the breakdown of our Creed, the core tenants of our faith. Part 2 is the celebration of the Christian Mystery – here the liturgy and the sacraments are defined. Part 3 is Life in Christ. And Part 4 is prayer, our basic relationship with God centered on fulfilling His will.
Confirmation is one of the 7 sacraments and is in the Catechism. It is defining.
One can go to the book of Revelations and read the mysterious passage of the Lamb with 7 eyes. Watching…the eye…I visited a church that had the remains of an ancient Roman martyr and above the altar, there was a stained glass window of one eye…the every watching and caring eye of God.
Christ watches over us, He is the good shepherd, He ministers to us in the 7 sacraments.
The sacrament of Trinitarian baptism, confession, the Eucharist, and confirmation are rites of initiation into the fullness of active faith in the Church.
Trinitarian baptism – in the broadest sense -0 allows the baptized as now a member of the universal Catholic Church, but not fully received into the life of the Church through the rest of the sacraments.
We receive the Holy Spirit at baptism. We receive a final sealing, a strengthening, a grace of standing up for our faith in face of persecution through the sacrament of Confirmation.
There is a movement in the Church to return confirmation back to the time when one receives all rest of the sacraments of initiation. Unfortunately, there was this popular movement to have something for the teens, so confirmation was moved up to be a teen age based rite, but at that age, they are more into socializing and being in groups, and defining themselves as emerging adults.
The sacraments are concrete. We can touch them. Water, fire, bread and wine are ordinary elements of every day life. But when they become sacraments, these humble, ordinary means of life now break into the greater reality of the divine, the Word Made Flesh.
Likewise, there has been this ongoing perception that Catholics don’t read the bible. For myself, as a cradle Catholic, I came to get the best instruction of Sacred Scriptures at the Mass, at the every day homily. It also would reflect the time of our liturgical year or a particular saint in living out the Word of God in a heroic but simple, ordinary way. After hearing the Word, I receive the Eucharist that brings life to the Word, and gives me grace to make the personal crosses I carry so light, that the Eucharist facilitates me in forgetting myself to instead serve others in the Lord.
I was just stepping in and did not follow all of PJM’s
I have not read all of PJM’s posting here, so it may be context of doctrines of faith and others of the sacraments. The doctrines define all our beliefs. The Catholic Catechism is beautiful. The Prologue is a great read as well because it gives you the perspective of reading and learning Catholic beliefs.
The Catechism begins with the Prologue, then our Profession of Faith – the breakdown of our Creed, the core tenants of our faith. Part 2 is the celebration of the Christian Mystery – here the liturgy and the sacraments are defined. Part 3 is Life in Christ. And Part 4 is prayer, our basic relationship with God centered on fulfilling His will.
Confirmation is one of the 7 sacraments and is in the Catechism. It is defining.
One can go to the book of Revelations and read the mysterious passage of the Lamb with 7 eyes. Watching…the eye…I visited a church that had the remains of an ancient Roman martyr and above the altar, there was a stained glass window of one eye…the every watching and caring eye of God.
Christ watches over us, He is the good shepherd, He ministers to us in the 7 sacraments.
The sacrament of Trinitarian baptism, confession, the Eucharist, and confirmation are rites of initiation into the fullness of active faith in the Church.
Trinitarian baptism – in the broadest sense -0 allows the baptized as now a member of the universal Catholic Church, but not fully received into the life of the Church through the rest of the sacraments.
We receive the Holy Spirit at baptism. We receive a final sealing, a strengthening, a grace of standing up for our faith in face of persecution through the sacrament of Confirmation.
There is a movement in the Church to return confirmation back to the time when one receives all rest of the sacraments of initiation. Unfortunately, there was this popular movement to have something for the teens, so confirmation was moved up to be a teen age based rite, but at that age, they are more into socializing and being in groups, and defining themselves as emerging adults.
The sacraments are concrete. We can touch them. Water, fire, bread and wine are ordinary elements of every day life. But when they become sacraments, these humble, ordinary means of life now break into the greater reality of the divine, the Word Made Flesh.
Likewise, there has been this ongoing perception that Catholics don’t read the bible. For myself, as a cradle Catholic, I came to get the best instruction of Sacred Scriptures at the Mass, at the every day homily. It also would reflect the time of our liturgical year or a particular saint in living out the Word of God in a heroic but simple, ordinary way. After hearing the Word, I receive the Eucharist that brings life to the Word, and gives me grace to make the personal crosses I carry so light, that the Eucharist facilitates me in forgetting myself to instead serve others in the Lord.
I was just stepping in and did not follow all of PJM’s
B
benhur
Guest
HI e,
Agree that reconciliation is not a ‘sacrament’ and indeed the church/apostles/us are “commissioned”. So the church is commissioned with “reconciliation”. This is what Christ was concerned with during the days before His Ascension. That was His focal point with the apostles, getting them ready for the ‘commission’, and not much new teaching. That is why I think John 20:23 is not instituting a sacrament, which would have been a new teaching, a new experience, something they had not practiced or done for any part of the three years. We also know explicitly that the commission was to preach the gospel, the gospel of forgiveness of sins thru Christ , the gospel of reconciliation.
Furthermore, I think we all agree that sins can be forgiven or remitted thru confession, but how do apostles ‘retain’ sin thru the sacrament? Does not make sense. I have not heard ,though I suppose is possible, of a priest saying your , "sorry, your sins are "retained’ , not forgiven. Not sure you need a sacrament for that. For sure, explicitly in scripture, if you are not baptized or do not become a believer in the Blood thru the Gospel, you are at enmity with God, unreconciled, and still in your sins. Hence the preaching, proclaiming of the gospel commission meets the explicit criteria for sin remittance or sin retaining as found in John 20. This is NT. And as you say, we nor the apostles are gifted beyond that commission, and have with giftings, even signs to discern acceptance of that gospel(but only to a degree), but not necessarily to know the specific inner “sincerity” and forgiveness of individual sins, a condition only God knows. The OT even limits the priest who does not have sacramental pretense to forgive perfectly as does C priesthood. That is why once a year the priest offered sacrifice to cover the unknown, the unconfessed sin. It was understood that the confessor and the priest could not meet all of God’s righteous conditions for forgiveness thru out the year. It is a big step to say the priest today or a sacrament today, can cover all or meet all conditions for forgiveness of sins.
Blessings
P
PJM
Guest
As a FYI, EACH of the “things” you mention as relics; are NOT:shrug: They each sound fraudulent to me.
Thanks for posting,
Patrick
B
benhur
Guest
Oh so it is OT to confess directly to God? I thought it was also OT to at times also go thru the priest?. Actually it is my understanding that the C does both today also, just that it is always both (to God first ,then the priest). I thought before entering the confessional one reviews, or examines their behavior before, and with the Lord’s help,as David did by saying if there be anything unclean in me Lord…That is, there is suppose to be a pre-confessional time of personal conversation with God, specifically in reviewing one’s actions and any sins, in an attitude of sorrow, and of needing/asking forgiveness from the present Lord. Only then is one ready to go into the confessional, and verbalize and act out what was supposed to spiritually already happened-confess and ask for forgiveness with assurance.
I am a firm believer in dispensations and testaments. I am also a firm believer that God is the same then and now. Sometimes the difference is only in broadness or level of His mercy and grace. But for sure the OT saints were at times filled with the Holy Host but not permanently ,and sometimes empowered by Him. OT saints were regenerated, saved by faith unto good works, made perfect, covered by the promise of the Blood etc. I mean Job was “perfect”, Enoch was taken, David had a heart after God. Of course today His Spirit is poured and indwellslike never before, and not to select few and to select nation, or peoples. That is why I do not want to restrict forgiveness to an old way , of thru a priestly class (though, as you say, directly to God is old way also, but now thru universal priesthood found in Melchizdek).
Well ,that is what the CC teaches, and if one really believes it, all non sacramental confessors are doomed, unless of course they die shortly after water baptism or commit no mortal sins.
Well one of us is doing this for sure (dictating to God and not from God), and the CC certainly has dictated more on the subject. I suppose it would be better to err with less words than with more.
Blessings Patrick
P
PJM
Guest
I suspect [personally] both
The priesthood seems to have to flow from the Pope; Papacy and One True Church. Each of which are points of Protestant denial. And this is logical IF they are going to have any grounds biblical or otherwise as justification to be apart of a faith competing with the One Jesus taught, established and intended to pass on through the CC.
I disassociate Baptism from Sacramental Confession as Baptism can be received validly and licitly only one time; whereas Sacramental Confession is Christ “elixir” for the ongoing forgiveness of mans’s sins; the way Jesus WOULD and does have us restore one’s “lost” Justification.
The idea that one can be always saved unconditionally, is simply a failed attempt at
one-ups-menship. Having no foundation in reality or truth.
Luther and Calvin both understood that their personal beliefs; knowingly in competition with Christ would in an absolute sense have to be be “sold” to take hold. They therefore intentionally or not; made their beliefs easier to understand and FAR easier to follow. Salesmanship, pure and simple… Did thay actually believe what they taught. SURE! But just as surely it was couched to SELL.
However they absolutely cannot contradict the clarity Oj John 20:19-23 without rendering God being wrong or God’s Bible teachiung is error. Wither being a possibility; so the passages you point out are not therefore being rightly understood.
Also agree that history/tradition can help. I doubt anyone knowledgeable 'sacramentalist" here would deny the evolving of the confessional (while not denying its apostolic roots). I firmly believe the apostles did not here confessions of baptized Christians as practiced/taught today. I also firmly believe the earliest church confessed to the God (even to Him with in themselves), and one to another(could have been an elder /priest), and at times to the congregation when appropriate. Lastly, I firmly believe you also have strong and obvious evidences of further historical /traditional development of the current CC doctrine /practice. We only differ in belief of its apostolic roots.
Blessings
The RCC us a Living Church with a Living Faith. Of course FORMALIZED [read as Defied Doctrines] evolved over a period of time. BUT that is evidence that the practices and beliefs existed PRIOR to them being declafred. Belief and practice is what Doctines are formed FROM.
God Bless you my friend
BTW
I have completed the document on Catholic and Protestant Justification beliefs and differences Send me a private message if you’d like to receive it. Too large for CAF…
P
PJM
Guest
A Doctrine is a matter of Faith-belief"
A “practice” is the way; the manner that the Believe is exercised.
Does that clarify it for you? If not please let me know.
Regards Holy Communion: It is BOTH a Doctrine [In fact his is a also a DOGMA] and it’s practice in mandated at least yearly [usually in Easter-tide]
NO, the CC could not determine or teach that this practice is no longer “necessary” as a PART of the Body of beliefs of the Catholic Faith. Here’s why:
1st. Cor, 11:23-30
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. [24] And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. [25] In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood**: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.**
[26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. [29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. [30] Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep" Sleep" here means Spiritual death: Hell.]
Confession is also a NO and for the same reason; neither man; NOR the Church has the Power or Authority to overrule what Christ Himself TAUGHT
:John 20:21-23
"
[21] He [JESUS] said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. [22] When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. [23] Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.
Things like rules for fasting
Church & Mass postures
Feast Day’s honoring Saints [the dates not the belief]
Mass times [needs to be at least one Saturday evening and again on Sunday]
The use of Latin within the Mass
Some; BUT Not all of the words used in various prayers
Accreditation times and conditions for Indulgences [But NOT Indulgences themselves]
[For the repayment of the Temporal Punishment that all sins accrue]
Are a few examples
Thanks for asking,
God Bless you,
Patrick
P
PJM
Guest
Agreed! Well done, thanks for the clairification:thumbsup:
B
benhur
Guest
Hi PJM,
It is* not clear* at all that the apostles were first to preach the gospel , of forgiveness of sins even at baptism, and then thereafter of forgiveness of post baptismal sins thru confessional to a priestly class. That is not an explicit rendering of John 20:23 that you support. One must answer then the significance of Jesus breathing into them the Holy Ghost .One must answer the difference between this and Pentecost. One must answer how does laying of hands equal breathing into, and do we not all have the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, or is it just the priestly class? .
It is implied to me to me why the Lord signified the union of the Holy Ghost and the apostles (and us). We are told all manner of sin can be forgiven, save the blaspheming of the Holy Ghost .This sin can not be remitted but is retained. Just as we know that sins are remitted thru acceptance of the gospel and retained thru rejection of the gospel. Why ? Because the gospel is God breathed, the words of any believer and of the apostles are God breathed.That is The Holy Spirit does three things: convicts of sin, and of judgement, and of righteousness in Christ. Now the apostles speak with authority of the Holy Ghost and can retain /remit sin, based upon a persons acceptance or rejection of the Holy Spirit speaking, thru the apostles… This was the focus of their ‘mission’. Why would Christ give a new teaching just before His ascension, and to something not practiced by them as they went out two by two previously ? There is no evidence that even Christ held confessional time. Most sins were forgiven upon first encounter with Christ. Folks did not come back to Him from time to time during the next two or three years thereafter for ‘confession’ that I recall
No, sorry about the rambling, but John 20 does not clearly show the Sacrament. Understand your implication of John 20, but it is not explicit.
Blessings
P
PJM
Guest
First of all try to understand WHY Protestants differ on this teaching; which HIGHLY significantly is carried OVER [now completed; fulfilled and perfected by Jesus] from God’s choice to USE His OT-Priest for sin forgiveness:
Lev.5: 13 “Thus the priest shall make atonement for him for the sin which he has committed in any one of these things, and he shall be forgiven. And the remainder shall be for the priest, as in the cereal offering." … Lev.6:7 “and the priest shall make atonement for him before the LORD, and he shall be forgiven for any of the things which one may do and thereby become guilty."
As Luther is THOUGHT to have said; these sins were covered over like snow on a dung heap." BUT Not through imparted powers and authority GRANTED to His Church
Catholic Actually have the Power and Authority to forgive sins in Christ name
Jn. 17:18-20 & again in 20:21
[18] As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. [19] And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me & 20:21 “[21] He said therefore to them again:** Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you”** MEANING WITH HIS AUTHORITY!
Christ One True Church had already existed WITH obviously God’s intended Faith beliefs for more than 1,500 years before the reformation which selectively changed them to meed their personal idea of what Christ should have taught. What Christ DID choose to teach was obvious even to these revolutionist. As was TASK they embraced; namely to overthrow; to kill idf possible Christ Catholic Church.
In order to have any chance at all in accomplishing this they recognized that what ever they did it would HAVE to be easier to understand and FAR easier to LIVE than the demands of Catholicism.
Romans 1:25 Jesus speaking “Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen”
**
2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 “You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place**, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
2nd. Peter 3: 14-17 “Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability
ALL of the key’s to heaven single gate [Mt 16: 18] “MY CHURCH” singular] were given by Jesus to Peter and his successors. & Jesus commanded directly’ precisely and exclusively Peter & Successors only to Cf. TEACH “ALL THAT I HAVE TAUGHT TO YOU!” Mt 28:18-20
Just as yahweh Choise for a reason JUST One Chosen People; Jesus did likewaise; calling HIS “chosen people” MY Church"
The passages you reference are OPEN to interpretation BUT only BY those guided and protected by the Holy Spirit. The Bible dear friend is a Catholic Bokk written [NT] By and FOR other Catholics.The ONLY Christian faith to exist anywhere in the world until the Great Easter Schism of 1054 AD.
Jn 17:17-20
"Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truth [God cannot deny Himself] . As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. [19] And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;
Jesus HIMSELF is the warraty of Catholic Faith & Moral truth. No other faith or church can make AND support such a claim:thumbsup:
Great questions, thanks
- Status