False Prophets the most used comeback!

[PRmerger]

and then you are trying to tell me that God provided no further guidance to mankind for another 2000 years through His Prophets?

Nope.

That’s why we have a Church.

Surely, this goes against any past historical evidence…and surely we need His guidance now, more than ever…

Yep. That’s why we have a Church. (At least, one of the reasons we have His Body here on earth)

As has been clearly stated in Mark 7:6, God reveals His Will to man when Tradition becomes a barrier between God and man, something which has repetitively happened in Judaism, Christianity and Islam:

Sure.

There is no doubt that God will send True Prophets to continuously guide mankind, and will do so forever and ever, for human beings will always exist, and civilization will forever advance…

That’s begging the question, Servant.

I had to ask myself: Would God give the Bread of Life to only one favored people and give stones to all others?

The Catholic Church provides Him to All. All are welcome to join us at the Table and become One with us and One with Him.

If we, who are imperfect, know how to give good gifts to our children, how much more so does the God Christ revealed know how to give gifts to those who ask?

His gift is there for you to partake at every Catholic Church around the globe, Servant.

Come and become fully joined to our family and then join us at His Table!

 

[PRmerger]

Given the current status of teaching in regards to Catholicism now calling interfaith marriages ok, wouldn’t you say that this is a relativisation of Truth?

Some truth is indeed relative. For example: it was true that the legal drinking age was 18. Now it is 21 in my state.

The CC does have truths regarding practices and disciplinary matters that have indeed changed.

However, the doctrines and dogmas are not relative and cannot change.

 

[Servant19]

Sure.

Your teachings here are not that of a Prophet, Servant.

I test them against the canon of what was revealed, once for all, and where it is in conformity to the Truth, I say

But, no, you are not a Prophet. As if.

No. When you say, “We must love our brothers and sisters!” that is not something “outside the Church”.

I tested what you said, and say: yep. That’s true.

Your teaching of loving our brethren is not outside the Church at all.

1 John makes no mention of “teachings”… it talks about false prophets.

You are either a false prophet in which case what you teach may have random amounts of truth and falsehoods in it, or you are a True Prophet in which case EVERYTHING you say is Truth.

The reality is that prophets are not to be found “within” the Church, otherwise why would you be asked to “test” them?

I am not a prophet, PR, heavens no, it is Baha’u’llah whom you are testing.

True Prophets, like Baha’u’llah were prophecied to be manifested by God in 1John, it is plain as day to see…and if He is a true Prophet, everything He says is the new Gospel, revealed in the new Jerusalem.

If you deny it, the question is why would 1John prophecy a true Prophet to come and for 2000 years nothing has been provided by God? Especially in this critical juncture in human history?

.

 

[PRmerger]

1 John makes no mention of “teachings”… it talks about false prophets.

LOL!

How does one separate a prophet from his teachings?

 

[Vouthon]

Given the current status of teaching in regards to Catholicism now calling interfaith marriages ok, wouldn’t you say that this is a relativisation of Truth?

.

If it is alright for me to butt in I would say “no”, because they were already accepted as a social reality in Roman times, even if not ideal. St. Monica, the mother of Augustine, was married to a pagan officer. Her parents brought her up Christian but married her to an older, pagan man named Patricius.

There is no Catholic doctrine explicitly condemning interfaith marriage, merely educated opinions in different social contexts, for example with Augustine being tolerant of it in the 4th century AD, while Gratian was intolerant of the practice in the 12th century. You can find no continuity of ‘teaching’. So I do not think one can relativize a truth that was never a truth in the first place.

It was merely a pastoral discouragement for social reasons (maintaining the Catholic identity of a confessional state). In a pluralistic society the dynamics are very different.

 

[Servant19]

Nope.

That’s why we have a Church.

Yep. That’s why we have a Church. (At least, one of the reasons we have His Body here on earth)

PR, John 16 CLEARLY talks about a “HE”, not a body such as the Church.
The guidance which will provide further Truth comes from a HE.

Besides, what Truth has the Church provided that Apostles could not “bear” at the time???

The Catholic Church provides Him to All. All are welcome to join us at the Table and become One with us and One with Him.

His gift is there for you to partake at every Catholic Church around the globe, Servant.

Come and become fully joined to our family and then join us at His Table!

Thankyou dear friend. I appreciate the gesture, but cannot see how Baha’u’llah could not be the Return of Jesus with a new name (as prophecies in Revelations)…it baffles me how some cannot see it also, dumbfounds me even…



.

 

[Servant19]

LOL!

How does one separate a prophet from his teachings?

Of course, but you wrote “I test them against the canon of what was revealed, once for all, and where it is in conformity to the Truth…”

Why would you need to test them at all?

If a Prophet comes along and says EXACTLY the same things as the Canon, there is NOTHING to test.

Why doesn’t Baha’u’llah just come along and just re-write the ENTIRE Catechism and the NT and say, “these are my thoughts”…what exactly are you testing here? You would likely still deny Him for saying nothing new!!

Think about the passage in 1 John long and hard. The Truth is in there and its undeniable…

.

 

[Vouthon]

The reality is that prophets are not to be found “within” the Church, otherwise why would you be asked to “test” them?

Actually brother, “prophets” were an accepted class of people within the early church along with apostles, presbyter-bishops and deacons. The Didache (70-100 AD) has a whole section telling newly baptized Christians how to take care of wandering prophets and their role in church services:

Chapter 11. Concerning Teachers, Apostles, and Prophets. Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. But if the teacher himself turns and teaches another doctrine to the destruction of this, hear him not. But if he teaches so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord. But concerning the apostles and prophets, act according to the decree of the Gospel. Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord. But he shall not remain more than one day; or two days, if there’s a need. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet. And when the apostle goes away, let him take nothing but bread until he lodges. If he asks for money, he is a false prophet. And every prophet who speaks in the Spirit you shall neither try nor judge; for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven. But not every one who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet; but only if he holds the ways of the Lord. Therefore from their ways shall the false prophet and the prophet be known. And every prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it, unless he is indeed a false prophet. And every prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do what he teaches, is a false prophet. And every prophet, proved true, working unto the mystery of the Church in the world, yet not teaching others to do what he himself does, shall not be judged among you, for with God he has his judgment; for so did also the ancient prophets. But whoever says in the Spirit, Give me money, or something else, you shall not listen to him. But if he tells you to give for others’ sake who are in need, let no one judge him

…

Chapter 13. Support of Prophets. But every true prophet who wants to live among you is worthy of his support. So also a true teacher is himself worthy, as the workman, of his support. Every first-fruit, therefore, of the products of wine-press and threshing-floor, of oxen and of sheep, you shall take and give to the prophets, for they are your high priests. But if you have no prophet, give it to the poor. If you make a batch of dough, take the first-fruit and give according to the commandment. So also when you open a jar of wine or of oil, take the first-fruit and give it to the prophets; and of money (silver) and clothing and every possession, take the first-fruit, as it may seem good to you, and give according to the commandment.

The spirit of prophecy is understood by Christians to have been poured out on all the baptized who share in the prophetic ministry of Jesus. Any Christian can therefore, under the impulse of the Holy Spirit, ‘prophesy’. Indeed it need not be limited to within the confines of the Catholic Church.

However we cannot accept revelations which claim to supersede the Christian dispensation:

10. What is the value of private revelations?

While not belonging to the deposit of faith, private revelations may help a person to live the faith as long as they lead us to Christ. The Magisterium of the Church, which has the duty of evaluating such private revelations, cannot accept those which claim to surpass or correct that definitive Revelation which is Christ.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

 

[PRmerger]

PR, John 16 CLEARLY talks about a “HE”, not a body such as the Church.
The guidance which will provide further Truth comes from a HE.

I dunno. This person looks like a HE to me:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...vWUQbudDCoLDtidaaNQkwneQ6QnnvygJoqKzaMWE0zTn6

Besides, what Truth has the Church provided that Apostles could not “bear” at the time???

The Trinity is one that comes to mind.

Thankyou dear friend. I appreciate the gesture, but cannot see how Baha’u’llah could not be the Return of Jesus with a new name (as prophecies in Revelations)…it baffles me how some cannot see it also, dumbfounds me even…

.

Because Bahaullah says things which are contrary to the faith given once for all to the saints.

And he does things which are contrary to love.

And claiming to be Him, when we already have Him in our world, is bizarre.

 

[PRmerger]

Of course, but you wrote “I test them against the canon of what was revealed, once for all, and where it is in conformity to the Truth…”

Why would you need to test them at all?

So we can know whether accept or deny what this person professes.

If a Prophet comes along and says EXACTLY the same things as the Canon, there is NOTHING to test.

When we look at what this person says, and examine it, that is called “testing”, Servant.

If we discern that it is in conformity to the faith, given once for all, to the Church, we say

Why doesn’t Baha’u’llah just come along and just re-write the ENTIRE Catechism and the NT and say, “these are my thoughts”…what exactly are you testing here? You would likely still deny Him for saying nothing new!!

No. I wouldn’t deny him at all if he said everything the Catechism and NT say.

Not. At. All.

There’s lots of non-Catholic folks here who profess that which the Catechism and NT says and I deny them not at all where they are in conformity.

 

[Servant19]

I dunno. This person looks like a HE to me:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...vWUQbudDCoLDtidaaNQkwneQ6QnnvygJoqKzaMWE0zTn6

So Pope Francis is the Spirit of Truth???

The Trinity is one that comes to mind.

The Trinity was formulated by a “He”? A single Person formulated the Trinity?
Even so, what is it about the Trinity that the Apostles could not possibly “bear right now”??

And he does things which are contrary to love.

Wow! Really???

What exactly are you referring to?

.

 

[PRmerger]

So Pope Francis is the Spirit of Truth???

He proclaims the Spirit of Truth.

The Trinity was formulated by a “He”? A single Person formulated the Trinity?

The Trinity is an example of what Jesus said He would give the Apostles that they couldn’t bear.

So yes, a single Person formulated the Trinity. His name is Jesus.

Even so, what is it about the Trinity that the Apostles could not possibly “bear right now”??

That which these folks can’t bear:

google.com/#q=%22christians+who+deny+the+trinity%22

 

[Servant19]

So we can know whether accept or deny what this person professes.

Why would you need to accept or deny?

You have the canon…nothing more is needed right?
Why even LOOK at anyone else’s teachings. Shut your eyes and test nothing…

When we look at what this person says, and examine it, that is called “testing”, Servant.

If we discern that it is in conformity to the faith, given once for all, to the Church, we say

But am I right in saying that you believe that John was basically saying that a “True Prophet” is only a person who effectively “regurgitates” the entire Catechism of the Catholic Church?

That’s what you believe right?

No. I wouldn’t deny him at all if he said everything the Catechism and NT say.

Not. At. All.

As I said, just look straight and keep your eyes closed all at the same time

There’s lots of non-Catholic folks here who profess that which the Catechism and NT says and I deny them not at all where they are in conformity.

That’s not testing, it’s called “fruit-picking”

.

 

[PRmerger]

Why would you need to accept or deny?

So I can know whether to accept or deny Satan and the lies which he whispers.

You have the canon…nothing more is needed right?
Why even LOOK at anyone else’s teachings. Shut your eyes and test nothing…

Because we are commanded to use our minds, Servant. And to test everything.

But am I right in saying that you believe that John was basically saying that a “True Prophet” is only a person who effectively “regurgitates” the entire Catechism of the Catholic Church?

That’s like saying, “It’s ridiculous to say that a true mathematician is only a person who effectively ‘regurgitates’ math facts.”

:whacky:

As I said, just look straight and keep your eyes closed all at the same time

Careful, Servant.

You cannot come to the CAFs and insult members here.

Maybe someone will report this. I dunno. I hope not for it is good for you to be here and dialogue with those who are consonant with the Truth, given once for all.

That’s not testing, it’s called “fruit-picking”

I don’t have a problem with that. I pick the ripe fruit and discard the rotten ones.

I rather like that analogy.

 

[eddie_too]

some of the non-christians incorrectly interpret john 16 as meaning that whoever Jesus might send to provide information to them that the apostles at that time could not bear (perhaps understand?) would reject the Church Jesus founded and which the Holy Spirit guides.

i see absolutely nothing in John 16 that indicates that Jesus intended to eliminate His Church by sending some special man to do it.

in fact, if one takes the New Testament as a whole, it is clear that Jesus intended His Church to be His sacrament of salvation for all mankind through out time unto the end of this world.

picking one verse out of John 16 and using it to proclaim the RCC as false is absurd and obviously on its face, WRONG.

that is what bahaullah did. that is a major, although not the only, reason why bahaullah is a clearly and totally a false prophet.

 

[Servant19]

The Trinity is an example of what Jesus said He would give the Apostles that they couldn’t bear.

So yes, a single Person formulated the Trinity. His name is Jesus.

So Jesus gave the Apostles the Trinity, then told them that they can’t bear it now, only to give it to them again through the Spirit of Truth???

I’m seriously confused by your posts PR

.

 

[eddie_too]

it is not unusual, but it is still unacceptable, that some people are convinced that they see what the RCC through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, its origin from the Incarnate Word, its two thousand year history and its tens of thousands of saints, scholars, theologians and faithful did not see.

somehow, people living in virtual isolation, see somethings that the RCC does not and has never seen; and, most certainly, these people see things that there is no record of having been passed down to us by the apostles and their successors.

for the RC, it often comes down to John 6, not John 16. many if not most RCs, relate deeply and significantly to the words of St. Peter found in John 6, to whom would we go.

 

[Servant19]

So I can know whether to accept or deny Satan and the lies which he whispers.

You would accept Satan?

Surely even looking at ANYTHING outside the canon is Satan no? Why would you even need to look anywhere else?

Because we are commanded to use our minds, Servant. And to test everything.

Why? Use your mind on a more thorough understanding of the canon. EVERYTHING else is not worthy of testing. But I don’t read that from John…

That’s like saying, “It’s ridiculous to say that a true mathematician is only a person who effectively ‘regurgitates’ math facts.”

:whacky:

No, its actually saying that only mathematicians that say 1+2=3 are true mathematicians. All other mathematicians are actually just plumbers…

Careful, Servant.

You cannot come to the CAFs and insult members here.

Maybe someone will report this. I dunno. I hope not for it is good for you to be here and dialogue with those who are consonant with the Truth, given once for all.

Come on PR, I am only asking you to not bother testing anything else, and just look at the canon only, obviously with a bit of tongue in cheek and humour.

I enjoy your gif’s and don’t find them offensive, enjoy my slight banter with you too. I have love in my heart for you and I’ve expressed that several times in several threads

I don’t have a problem with that. I pick the ripe fruit and discard the rotten ones.

I rather like that analogy.

But its still not testing. To truly test, you bring the fruit tree home

.

 

[Vouthon]

I don’t have a problem with that. I pick the ripe fruit and discard the rotten ones.

I rather like that analogy.

Yep, I must be a fruit-picker then too Cardinal Newman evidently was too, describing the church thus:

"…What man is amid the brute creation, such is the Church among the schools of the world; and as Adam gave names to the animals about him, so has the Church from the first looked round upon the earth, noting and visiting the doctrines she found there. She began in Chaldea, and then sojourned among the Canannites, and went down into Egypt, and thence passed into Arabia, till she rested in her own land. Next she encountered the merchants of Tyre, and the wisdom of the East country, and the luxury of Sheba. Then she was carried away to Babylon, and wandered to the schools of Greece. And wherever she went, in trouble or in triumph, still she was a living spirit, the mind and voice of the Most High; ‘sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them and asking them questions;’ claiming to herself what they said rightly, correcting their errors, supplying their defects, completing their beginnings, expanding their surmises, and thus gradually by means of them enlarging the range and refining the sense of her own teaching. So far then from her creed being of doubtful credit because it resembles foreign theologies, we even hold that one special way in which Providence has imparted divine knowledge to us has been by enabling her to draw and collect it together out of the world, and, in this sense, as in others, to ‘suck the milk of the Gentiles and to suck the breast of kings.’

How far in fact this process has gone, is a question of history; and we believe it has before now been grossly exaggerated and misrepresented by those who, like Mr. Milman, have thought that its existence told against Catholic doctrine; but so little antecedent difficulty have we in the matter, that we could readily grant, unless it were a question of fact not of theory, that Balaam was an Eastern sage, or a Sibyl was inspired, or Solomon learnt of the sons of Mahol, or Moses was a scholar of the Egyptian hierophants. We are not distressed to be told that the doctrine of the angelic host came from Babylon, while we know that they did sing at the Nativity; nor that the vision of a Mediator is in Philo, if in very deed {382} He died for us on Calvary. Nor are we afraid to allow, that, even after His coming, the Church has been a treasure-house, giving forth things old and new, casting the gold of fresh tributaries into her refiner’s fire, or stamping upon her own, as time required it, a deeper impress of her Master’s image…"

- Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman (Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, 1845, p.358)

 

[Servant19]

Actually brother, “prophets” were an accepted class of people within the early church along with apostles, presbyter-bishops and deacons. The Didache (70-100 AD) has a whole section telling newly baptized Christians how to take care of wandering prophets and their role in church services:

The spirit of prophecy is understood by Christians to have been poured out on all the baptized who share in the prophetic ministry of Jesus. Any Christian can therefore, under the impulse of the Holy Spirit, ‘prophesy’. Indeed it need not be limited to within the confines of the Catholic Church.

However we cannot accept revelations which claim to supersede the Christian dispensation:

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

Thankyou brother Vouthon.

I want to acknowledge your post and commend you for sharing your thoughts.

Would you say any prophets exist today in the CC?
If so, which are true and which are false?

.