I'm calling on everyone here in this forum EXCEPT Catholics !!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ag_not
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AshleyBelle said:
I’m Catholic…but can I post on this thread if I’m here to give a hug?
:hug1:
Click to expand...
lol. You Sure can, Ashley! 👍 Catholics can, should post everywhere, letters to the editor too! :yyeess: :compcoff: :hey_bud:

Hugs are one of the most needed items, as well as working together, in love, to solve so many problems. :console::hug3: :blessyou:
 
Ingram said:
Justification by faith alone is a problem. Not insurmountable however. Rom 5;9 is no longer a problem for me. I don’t read this as as being counter to the Roman Catholic position.

Marian doctrine as co-redeemer is a mystery to me. Again, though, not insurmountable. It seems quite mystical to me (but then again, I tend to the mystical).

I’d have to say that I am open to the RCC positions, now. I’ve read quite a bit lately (last five years). About the Reformation history, Luther’s history, the positons of ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together). Also bits of the Catechism, where I’ve tried to understand the RCC positions.

Also I’m looking at the early Church Fathers, a negleted fount of learning that the evangelicals seem to discount.

The more I listen to evangelicals the less I want to be a part of there movement. And on that point, Roman Catholics are just as evangelical as the Evangelicals. A silly name, I think–Evangelicals–since the word simply means someone who spreads the Gospel, including Catholics.
Click to expand...
Wonderful studying, Ingram. 👍

There are So Many verses in the Bible that works are essential, faith alone being just a basic first step. :bible1: :highprayer: A Key one are James 2:26; 14-17; 19; 20; 24; Romans 2:13; James 4:17; Mathew 7:21;…

The historic key agreement of the Lutheran/Catholic negotiating committee a few years ago on ‘Faith Alone’ was that Works are the essential proof of Faith.
And any study of the earliest Church reveals one thing: the Centrality of the Real Presence Eucharist, and the Last Supper Feast liturgy, now known as the Mass. Indeed, the ‘Sign of Peace’ brought back by Vatican II was begun by the Apostles as the eastern ‘kiss of peace’ greeting by all attending the early Last Supper Feast/Consecration, it is thought because the Apostles recognized human nature feeling enmity, antagonism, jealousy by Some at early Mass. Is a rare Documentation of the Earliest Church practise in the recent softcover Mass of the early Christians/ Mike Aquilina/Our Sunday Visitor Mr Aquilina is a Convert, major author now. Ever watch Journey Home/EWTN? Is a classic series on Why Many Protestant Ministers convert to Catholic; Their thinking, wondering, research.
 
adstrinity said:
That’s right, I quoted the Catholic translation in context. We have this in our Bible’s, too. We wrote it, we believe it. We evangelize the world.

Jesus Christ is the Saviour of all Men (no other Saviour), but, that does not mean all men will be saved.
Click to expand...
First, catholics didn’t write it. Second, certainly they don’t believe it, you just said it yourself. Do you really understand the implications of your statement…“but that does not mean all men will be saved” in light of GOD’S Word that says…

For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, Who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe. (1 Timothy 4:10 KJVR)

These things command and teach. (1 Timothy 4:11 KJVR)

Do you really think God would inspire the writer to write “ESPECIALLY those that believe” for absolutely no reason? Have you stopped to think who the OTHER men are in this Scripture? The ones who aren’t “especially those that believe”. They are saved but they DON’T believe. Can you not see this? For once just think for yourself.

AND A SECOND WITNESS…

Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. (1 Corinthians 3:13 KJVR)

If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. (1 Corinthians 3:14 KJVR)

If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. (1 Corinthians 3:15 KJVR)

It is the WORKS of a man that will be burned NOT the man!
 
Well - I would have to say that I have only one reason - with many related sub-reasons. The main reason that I believe that the Catholic Church is wrong in it’s teachings and practice, is because when I read the Bible, I see nothing even remotely close to what I see in the Catholic Church. The dogmas of the Catholic Church are not well substantiated from the Scriptures - and the practices are only the effects of these dogmas.

*“A purity of doctrine leads to a purity of faith which then leads to a purity of life.” * - Crucified

[does it count to quote yourself? lol]
 
Crucified said:
Well - I would have to say that I have only one reason - with many related sub-reasons.
[SIGN]The main reason that I believe that the Catholic Church is wrong in it’s teachings and practice, is because when I read the Bible, I see nothing even remotely close to what I see in the Catholic Church[/SIGN]
Click to expand...
You are Bible Only? Where does God Ever say he is giving us The Book to Decide, teach everything? Nowhere.

Only the Catholic Church Lives the Bible as God intended. Know Each of the 7 Sacraments Our Lord began for His Church are in the Bible? :highprayer:

We have about a thousand posts about Sola Scriptura ‘disagreeing’ with Catholic Teaching Or practise. Don’t have time to renew those here. Each mistake easily refuted. Nowhere, Ever does Catholic Teaching Or practice conflict with the Bible. Not Any Place.

Hope you realize that there are millions of interpretations of Bible verses. There are not Millions of Holy Spirits causing different ‘readings’. Its Our individual readings that conflict. :Bible: :slapfight: :hey_bud:
Catholic Church Fathers wrote the New Testament. We know the Meanings and Culture Then. And Biblical languages. Were several. :bible1:
Have you never heard that the Bible was not written in modern English?
:blessyou:
Click to expand...
 
M_Oliver said:
First, catholics didn’t write it. Second, certainly they don’t believe it, you just said it yourself. Do you really understand the implications of your statement…“but that does not mean all men will be saved” in light of GOD’S Word that says…
Click to expand...
We wrote the Bible, we believe everything in the Bible. Please go back and re-read all 73 books of the Bible. Then, post all of the Bible here, not just selected verses. We believe all of what we wrote, not just the cherry picked sections we want to believe.

Blessed Mother of God, please give your graces to M_Oliver so that he may see the truth of Your Son and His Bride. In Jesus Christ’s Name, I ask you to pray this, Amen.
 
adstrinity said:
We wrote the Bible, we believe everything in the Bible. Please go back and re-read all 73 books of the Bible. Then, post all of the Bible here, not just selected verses. We believe all of what we wrote, not just the cherry picked sections we want to believe.

Blessed Mother of God, please give your graces to M_Oliver so that he may see the truth of Your Son and His Bride. Amen.
Click to expand...
Uh. Protestants hold to the 39 books of the Old Testiment and 27 books of the New Testiment 66 books all together. Catholics did not write 39 books. The Jews did under the inspiration of God. Alexandrian Jews wrote the Apocryphal books (Jerome’s wording “hidden”), your Deuterocanonical books, Of that the 6 books included in the Catholic OT are not regarded by most protestants. These Jews who wrote those six books are transplanted (Judean an Babylonian) Jews and questionable if God inspired their writings. Judith has obviousl historical flaws and tobit is definately a fictional story. Your arugment would be better off if you claimed that only Catholics wrote 27 books of the bible. Otherwise you are incorrect.
 
#585 Today, 5:51 pm
Crucified
New Member Join Date: November 13, 2008
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailka
Only the Catholic Church Lives the Bible as God intended.

[SIGN]How do you know that? [/SIGN]

*Because I’ve become a major Church and Bible student, since Returning to The Church 15 years ago. And are More than a Thousand posts This great Web alleging conflicts with the Bible. And Church Experts have often Said that, such as Fr Mitch Pacwa on EWTN, etc. *
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailka
Nowhere, Ever does Catholic Teaching Or practice conflict with the Bible. Not Any Place.

[SIGN]Again - How do you know that?[/SIGN]

Please see above reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailka
Have you never heard that the Bible was not written in modern English?

[SIGN]Are you mocking me?[/SIGN]

No! Sorry about misunderstanding. The Church teaches Respect for everyone, their ideas; and asks us to correct misunderstandings. (I confess to dry sense of humor 🤓 :whistle: :crutches:
And my Vivat Jesus means Jesus Lives, And Live in Jesus. Each of our sayings is Right On.
CHRIST IS MY RIGHTEOUSNESS
 
"Only the Catholic Church Lives the Bible as God intended. Nowhere, Ever does Catholic Teaching Or practice conflict with the Bible. Not Any Place"

And you know this because . . .

"Because I’ve become a major Church and Bible student, since Returning to The Church 15 years ago"

So you learned this from studying the Bible?

How do you know that your interpretations are correct?
 
Crucified said:
"Only the Catholic Church Lives the Bible as God intended. Nowhere, Ever does Catholic Teaching Or practice conflict with the Bible. Not Any Place"

And you know this because . . .

"Because I’ve become a major Church and Bible student, since Returning to The Church 15 years ago"

So you learned this from studying the Bible?

How do you know that your interpretations are correct?
Click to expand...
Please see my answers on Post 588. It ain’t My interpretations. I look to Experts, if I don’t understand. Live in Jesus, stepbrother in Christ. :hey_bud: :coolinoff:
 
sambos671 said:
Uh. Protestants hold to the 39 books of the Old Testiment and 27 books of the New Testiment 66 books all together. Catholics did not write 39 books. The Jews did under the inspiration of God. Alexandrian Jews wrote the Apocryphal books (Jerome’s wording “hidden”), your Deuterocanonical books, Of that the 6 books included in the Catholic OT are not regarded by most protestants. These Jews who wrote those six books are transplanted (Judean an Babylonian) Jews and questionable if God inspired their writings. Judith has obviousl historical flaws and tobit is definately a fictional story. Your arugment would be better off if you claimed that only Catholics wrote 27 books of the bible. Otherwise you are incorrect.
Click to expand...
Oh for the love of all things Holy & Nixon. The Catholics wrote The Bible because they Cannonized the Bible (all 73 books). The Catholic Church copied and re-copied all the books of the Bible both before and after the Canon was settled. Genesis’ Creation Story is a myth, and there are discrepancies in the Gospels, so what does it matter about Judith or IF Tobit is fiction (St. Raphael is real, though)? The message of God is there. The Bible exists as a means to reveal the divinity of Christ. Minimal is 73 books, one could have up to 81. Anything less is incomplete.
 
Sailka said:
Please see my answers on Post 588. It ain’t My interpretations. I look to Experts, if I don’t understand. Live in Jesus, stepbrother in Christ. :hey_bud: :coolinoff:
Click to expand...
Ok - now that is kinda my point.

How do you know that they are correct?

And again - once you receive an interpretation from these biblical experts - how do you know that you are understanding their interpretations correctly?
 
adstrinity said:
Oh for the love of all things Holy & Nixon. The Catholics wrote The Bible because they Cannonized the Bible (all 73 books). The Catholic Church copied and re-copied all the books of the Bible both before and after the Canon was settled. Genesis’ Creation Story is a myth, and there are discrepancies in the Gospels, so what does it matter about Judith or IF Tobit is fiction (St. Raphael is real, though)? The message of God is there. The Bible exists as a means to reveal the divinity of Christ. Minimal is 73 books, one could have up to 81. Anything less is incomplete.
Click to expand...
Oh for all things unholy and Mcgovern! Catholics did not write the entire bible they copied it from copies that were originally Jewish in origin. Jerome had doubts about the LXX and called the books hidden. The OT was first canonized by the JEWS long before Athenasius wrote down his preferance for the 27 books of the NT. Josephus even states that the greek books were not accept by the Jews. The Tanakh includes only the 39 books of the OT. And yes you could have up to 81 (if your coptic) if you include the Psuedopigraphia. Do you consider them inspired? And if Tobit is fictional then its a possiblity that Raphael is a character. Though Raphael is a function rather than a name.
 
Crucified said:
Ok - now that is kinda my point.

How do you know that they are correct?

And again - once you receive an interpretation from these biblical experts - how do you know that you are understanding their interpretations correctly?
Click to expand...
Again, if ‘every’ Church expert, Historian, and expert on New Testament cultures, meanings, symbolisms, languages all feel same way, looks pretty good to me too :grouphug: :highprayer: 🎉 :aok:

And some Catholic Bibles are heavily annotated with historical, cultural, Bible refererences, like the cheapest one: The New American Bible, by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (Was $6.95)
 
Dear friend in Christ,

Sorry about your luck:D But this IS A CATHOLIC FORUM.

If all you wish to do is bash us… OK, have at it. But a thought:
Might you have spent too much time in the Sun, and not enough time with THE SON?:o

You seem very filmiliar with the bible, GOOD FOR YOU!🙂 So if I were to ask you (I am) NOT that I AM, but if I were to ask you to tell me in ONE single word what the entire bible is about, what would that one word have to be? Hmmmmm?
M_Oliver said:
First, catholics didn’t write it. Second, certainly they don’t believe it, you just said it yourself. Do you really understand the implications of your statement…“but that does not mean all men will be saved” in light of GOD’S Word that says…

Opps:blush: And here I thought that the Apostles were Catholics. cause that is (fact) look in the KJV, the only, as in single as in ONE, as in “MY” and “church” and You" Peter, and “Thee rock” ect. All are sigular. Mt.16:13-20:rolleyes:
Do you really think God would inspire the writer to write “ESPECIALLY those that believe” for absolutely no reason? Have you stopped to think who the OTHER men are in this Scripture? The ones who aren’t “especially those that believe”. They are saved but they DON’T believe. Can you not see this? For once just think for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I am a Lutheran and there are no practices or teachings of the RCC I think are wrong. But you still called on me, right?😛
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top