Infallibility: Will someone evaluate this article for me?

[mercygate]

My comments are directed more at the teaching and understanding of the Catholic faith particularly with people in my age group. I attended Catholic high school in the 1960’s. I don’t know what they teach now. I know the traditions of the Church and it’s just odd to watch people put such a big emphasis on abstaining from meat on holy days and be so obedient with that teaching but on the same day they will use the Lord’s name in vain and do and say other things that I wouldn’t want to mention here.

Find me five Catholics who “put a big emphasis on abstaining from meat on holy days” and I’ll give you five dollars.

Honestly. You sound like you are targeting the supposed absurdity of this point in order to sidestep something bigger.

 

[po18guy]

My comments are directed more at the teaching and understanding of the Catholic faith particularly with people in my age group. I attended Catholic high school in the 1960’s. I don’t know what they teach now. I know the traditions of the Church and it’s just odd to watch people put such a big emphasis on abstaining from meat on holy days and be so obedient with that teaching but on the same day they will use the Lord’s name in vain and do and say other things that I wouldn’t want to mention here.

I wouldn’t worry about those around you. Each of us has enough to worry about with our own failures and sins. Know what? You can always pray for them. It sounds like you have been away from the Catholic Church for some time. If you are truly seeking the most profound Christian tradition there is, well, you’re home. Get a copy of Catholicism for Dummies and browse it at your leisure. I’m guessing that virtually all of your questions are answered in that book, by the two authors who have the authority to give proper answers. One is Fr. John Trigilio, who is on Catholic Answers’ radio show frequently.

Give it a try. You’re Italian. Where else you gonna go?

 

[mercygate]

Give it a try. You’re Italian. Where else you gonna go?

. . . to paraphrase St. Peter.

 

[ron77nyc]

.
So, how can I be sure the Early Fathers had it right? Then I would assume the authority really was given to the church leaders and would stay that way, even when they did things that seemed anti-christian in my view. I’m going to post another thread asking, "Why were there no more “apostles” appointed after the apostles. Why were they only bishops? " That’s another Mormon argument for why Christians lost authority…because only apostles had it. so stay tuned…

Here are some Mormon doctrines. Know who you are dealing with. From contenderministries.org

Mormon Views of God & Christ

---

But I fear, lest any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. for if he that preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if we receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. II Corinthians 11:3,4

---

This warning from Paul makes it clear that we should beware of those complicating the gospel and declaring another messiah; even though they claim their messiah is the Jesus of the Bible.

One of the main fundamentals of orthodox Christianity is belief in the virgin birth of the Savior. Statements from the LDS church leaders show that they have a different view of Christ. Bruce McConkie, a Mormon Apostle, teaches in his book, Mormon Doctrine, “Christ was begotten by an immortal father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers.” (p. 547) Joseph Fielding Smith, tenth President and Prophet of the Mormon Church claimed, “Christ not begotten of Holy Ghost…He was not born without the aid of Man and that Man was God!” (Doctrines of Salvation, 1:18). By worshipping such a being the Mormons fall under the condemnation of Romans one by changing “the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man” (1:23).

The Jesus of Mormonism was also a polygamist. Mormon Apostle, Orson Pratt states on page 172 of his book, The Seer, “it will be seen that the great Messiah, who was the founder of the Christian religion, was a polygamist.” Orson Hyde, also a Mormon Apostle, taught “It will be born in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee…no less person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion.” (Journal of Discourses 4:259).

The Jesus of the Bible created all things. Colossians 1:16, “For by Him all things were created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible, and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by Him and for Him.” The God of Mormonism however needed help. In the book Mormon Doctrine, page 169, the LDS Church teaches that Jesus was helped by many when creating the earth, including the help of Joseph Smith! "Michael or Adam was one of these. Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Peter, James and John, Joseph Smith, and many other noble and great ones played a part in the great creative enterprise.

Colossians 1:16 causes even more problems when you look at the Mormon doctrine concerning Jesus and Satan. The Bible teaches that Jesus created all things including the devil, however Mormon doctrine teaches that Jesus and Satan are “spirit-brothers”. Milton R. Hunter, who was a member of the First Council of the Seventies writes in his book, The Gospel Through the Ages, “The appointment of Jesus to be the Savior of the world was contested by one of the other sons of God. He was called, Lucifer, son of the morning. Haughty, ambitious, and covetous of power and glory, this spirit-brother of Jesus desperately tried to become the Savior of mankind.” (page 15)

The Bible teaches that Jesus is the only giver of salvation and that no man cometh unto the Father but by Him (John 3:16 & John 17:6). The Jesus of Mormonism claims no such authority. Mormonism teaches that in order to be saved on must believe in Joseph Smith, their founder, as well as believe in their Jesus. In his book Doctrines of Salvation, 1:189, Joseph Fielding Smith proclaims, “NO SALVATION WITHOUT ACCEPTING JOSEPH SMITH”. Brigham Young said, “From the day the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, Junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are.” He also said, “No man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of god without the consent of Joseph Smith” (Journal of Discourses, 7:289).

In short, Mormons worship a Jesus who they claim was a polygamist and the spirit-brother of Satan. They believe in a Jesus who was not always god and whose blood does not cover all sins. The Jesus of the Mormon Church is not the Jesus of the Bible.

 

[po18guy]

Here are some Mormon doctrines. Know who you are dealing with. From contenderministries.org

Mormon Views of God & Christ

---

In short, Mormons worship a Jesus who they claim was a polygamist and the spirit-brother of Satan. They believe in a Jesus who was not always god and whose blood does not cover all sins. The Jesus of the Mormon Church is not the Jesus of the Bible.

Nicely summed up in your concluding paragraph. It is clear that we are two different religions. We have a choice of following Christ, or Joseph Smith.

 

[ron77nyc]

Nicely summed up in your concluding paragraph. It is clear that we are two different religions. We have a choice of following Christ, or Joseph Smith.

Thanks but I didn’t write it. I got it from a website mentioned at the top of my post. contenderministries.org

 

[mesl4]

The Bible teaches that Jesus is the only giver of salvation and that no man cometh unto the Father but by Him (John 3:16 & John 17:6). The Jesus of Mormonism claims no such authority. Mormonism teaches that in order to be saved on must believe in Joseph Smith, their founder, as well as believe in their Jesus. In his book Doctrines of Salvation, 1:189, Joseph Fielding Smith proclaims, “NO SALVATION WITHOUT ACCEPTING JOSEPH SMITH”. Brigham Young said, “From the day the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, Junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are.” He also said, “No man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of god without the consent of Joseph Smith” (Journal of Discourses, 7:289). .

Just to make sure…Catholics don’t do that w/Mary do they? Seems like a little bit. In order to be saved one must believe in the doctrines of the church, including the dogmas about Mary. So we have to believe in Mary to be saved. Also Catholics pretty much say no salvation w/out Mary by calling her Mediatrix/co-redeemer, if she wouldn’t have had Jesus there would be no salvation. etc. The mormons would never pray to Joseph Smith, or call him co-redeemer/Mediatrix,etc. They would say the same as you about him, “that his job is always to point people to God/Christ, never to seek his own glory.” They don’t build churches in his name or burn candles in his name or anything like that though like Catholics do w/Mary. You guys really seem to put Mary in the same position. How is that different?

 

[po18guy]

Just to make sure…Catholics don’t do that w/Mary do they? Seems like a little bit. In order to be saved one must believe in the doctrines of the church, including the dogmas about Mary. So we have to believe in Mary to be saved. Also Catholics pretty much say no salvation w/out Mary by calling her Mediatrix/co-redeemer, if she wouldn’t have had Jesus there would be no salvation. etc. The mormons would never pray to Joseph Smith, or call him co-redeemer/Mediatrix,etc. They would say the same as you about him, “that his job is always to point people to God/Christ, never to seek his own glory.” They don’t build churches in his name or burn candles in his name or anything like that though like Catholics do w/Mary. You guys really seem to put Mary in the same position. How is that different?

Mary is in scripture, the most blessed of all women. Joseph Smith is mentioned only indirectly as regards false prophets. There are world’s of differences. True religion vs. false religion. Mother vs. con artist. Truth vs. hallucinations.

Think about this: the eternal Triune God chose Mary from all eternity as the teen-ager that would carry new life - eternal life to the world. Christ chose His own mother from before the founding of the world. What could she have possibly accomplished as a teen-aged girl from a forgotten, tiny settlement in the holy land to merit such grace? What could she have done in her short life?

You are lacking in pre-Protestant theology here. Luther thought much the same of Mary as has always the Catholic church. What has changed in the past 500 years? Lutherans have abandoned Luther to a great extent. You really ned to read up on this.

The best advice given in all of scripture? John 2:5 “Do whatever He tells you” Who said these words? Mary.

Here are two prior posts of mine that might help you with this:

forums.catholic-questions.org/private.php?do=showpm&pmid=539771

forums.catholic-questions.org/private.php?do=showpm&pmid=539774

 

[mesl4]

You are lacking in pre-Protestant theology here. Luther thought much the same of Mary as has always the Catholic church. What has changed in the past 500 years? Lutherans have abandoned Luther to a great extent. You really ned to read up on this.

 

[mesl4]

Here are two prior posts of mine that might help you with this:

forums.catholic-questions.org/private.php?do=showpm&pmid=539771

forums.catholic-questions.org/private.php?do=showpm&pmid=539774

I’m sorry, these links don’t work

 

[po18guy]

I’m sorry, these links don’t work

We don’t need Mary for salvation, since Christ is our Savior. However, her veneration is from the earliest days, beginning with God, then to Elizabeth, then John received her as his own mother, and on to modern times. She was absolutely necessary, her “Yes” to the Angel Gabriel was necessary, for the Lord’s plan to come to fruition. Joe Smith is clearly a false prophet, since he and those like him are mentioned numerous times in scripture. Mary is not false, since she came before the incarnation of Christ. Modern Protestant theory regarding Mary (varies widely and wildly amongst the 30,000+ denominations) ranges from mild veneration to outright slander. I will not sit in the judgment seat of Christ only to explain why I degraded His mother.

Since the links don’t function, here’s the text:

It was only Mary: who was present and necessary at the Annunciation; whose words of obedience allowed the Holy Spirit to act; who visited Elizabeth while she carried John Baptist in her aged womb; who was at the Presentation on the eighth day (even though a normal woman would have been considered “unclean” under the Mosaic law and excluded from the Temple); who was directly addressed by Simeon; who was present at the wedding feast in Cana; whose words of obedience (“Do whatever he tells you”) began Christ’s public ministry; who remained with Christ throughout His teaching; who was not scattered when the Shepherd was struck; who was present at the crucifixion; who Christ Himself, in His last physical act on earth before dying (John 19:26-27), gave to the beloved disciple (John) as his mother; and who was present when the Apostles received the Holy Spirit. If all of this, as well as all that I have missed, is not evidence of her very special role in God’s final Covenant with man, what is?

Would the pure and perfect God choose sin, which He hates, to carry His Covenant to us?

Through Eve’s disobedience, mankind was lost to sin. Through Mary’s obedience, mankind was restored to God. No normal woman would have been filled with grace or chosenby God for this role. If she had sin, she would not have been full of grace.

The evidence abounds, but only if you look for it. Non-Catholics are generally not taught to look for this, but it’s there in scripture.

Post 2:

There was to be only one woman in the course of eternity destined to give God a human nature. Did He send the angel Gabriel to a run-of-the-mill girl? No. Since Mary was so young, what on earth could she have accomplished as a teenager to be addressed as “full of grace” or “highly favored” by the Angel Gabriel? No one else in scripture was so addressed - especially not by the angel Gabriel, who stands in God’s presence. Since nothing is written about Mary prior to the annunciation other than Isaiah 7:14, we firmly believe that she was “highly favored” by God, Who preserved her from sin. Consider the contrast from scripture:

Psalm 30:7 (of King David) O LORD, when you favored me, you made my mountain stand firm;

Luke 1:28
The angel went to her (Mary) and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

Luke 1:43 (Elizabeth) But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

King David, and Elizabeth, by their own reckoning, were “favored”. Only Mary was “highly favored”, spoken by the Angel of the Lord, not by her own reckoning. Yet, we absolutely believe that Mary was created, 100% human, just as you or I - only that God, her Savior, preserved her from sin because of the absolutely unique role He had for her.

Her messenger and God’s mission came directly from the Throne of the Most High. He alone gave her a personal mission, one requiring her to honor Him and in turn be honored, (Luke 1:48) to give human nature to God at the risk of her own flesh. Can you see the parallel with Christ Himself here? Both Adam and Eve were conceived without sin, and both were created to be the major part of God’s plan, the only part of creation which could return the Father’s love. It is consistent that God would act in the same way (preserving Mary from sin to bear Christ’s sinless nature) as He introduced His plan of man’s redemption.

Veneration of Mary often appears as worship to unbelievers, or those who do not practice as Catholics do. Catholic practice can be difficult to understand, as God Himself is difficult to understand. Our practices came from Him, and bear His same mysterious ways.

Now, know that I was Catholic for almost two decades before the Lord revealed the truth about Mary to me. Such is God. He sends His Spirit where He wills, and when He wills. The fact that I am here, defending church teaching on Mary, is a miracle in itself.

I would rather explain to the Lord why I venerated His chosen, than why I denigrated her memory, especially since her veneration is in Luke 1:48.

Ever wonder why Mary was not petrified, or did not fall to earth upon the appearance of Gabriel, Who stands in God’s presence? Elsewhere in scripture, men have always been fearful at the appearance of lesser Angels to them.

Something to ponder. Clearly, there’s something to all of this. And, the Church did not choose her, God did.

Christ’s peace.

 

[ron77nyc]

Just to make sure…Catholics don’t do that w/Mary do they?
I agree with you on that. I am a Catholic but I rely on the bible as the true apostolic teaching. There is only one savior.

 

[ron77nyc]

Just to make sure…Catholics don’t do that w/Mary do they? Seems like a little bit. In order to be saved one must believe in the doctrines of the church, including the dogmas about Mary. So we have to believe in Mary to be saved. Also Catholics pretty much say no salvation w/out Mary by calling her Mediatrix/co-redeemer,

 

[ron77nyc]

Just to make sure…Catholics don’t do that w/Mary do they? Seems like a little bit. In order to be saved one must believe in the doctrines of the church, including the dogmas about Mary. So we have to believe in Mary to be saved. Also Catholics pretty much say no salvation w/out Mary by calling her Mediatrix/co-redeemer, if she wouldn’t have had Jesus there would be no salvation. etc. The mormons would never pray to Joseph Smith, or call him co-redeemer/Mediatrix,etc. They would say the same as you about him, “that his job is always to point people to God/Christ, never to seek his own glory.” They don’t build churches in his name or burn candles in his name or anything like that though like Catholics do w/Mary. You guys really seem to put Mary in the same position. How is that different?

I agree with you about that. I use the bible to see what is true. If I were to be admitted as a new convert to Catholicism I wouldn’t pass the test. Not only I but many Catholics I know. In reality there is no more unity among Catholics than any other religion. People always have differences of opinion. I have even heard some priests who do not agree with all the teachings of the Church.

 

[po18guy]

I agree with you about that. I use the bible to see what is true. If I were to be admitted as a new convert to Catholicism I wouldn’t pass the test. Not only I but many Catholics I know. In reality there is no more unity among Catholics than any other religion. People always have differences of opinion. I have even heard some priests who do not agree with all the teachings of the Church.

But, who says the bible is true? Someone had to have the leading of the Holy Spirit to write scripture in the first place. Someone had to have authority to canonize the bible that we use for all truth. Someone had to argue and debate, and pray and argue more over scripture for almost four centuries before assembling the bible from the vast amount of writings available. That authority was given by our Lord Jesus to His church, which continues in that same, God-given authority. If you trust the bible, you must also trust the Catholic Church, which is responsible for the bible. The two are inseparable, as much as man tries.

It was not the Episcopalians, the Anglicans, the Pentecostals, the Baptists, the Methodists, the “non-denoms” or any other faith community that presented the bible to the world. It was the Catholic Church and no other, because no other existed. Christ gave the authority to no other. He founded one church. That church has been tested for 1,975 years and found to be true. That you do not yet trust it is the true matter at hand.

Ron and Maya, you have ben lead astray by faith traditions that have no authority to canonize scripture, and no authority to interpret scripture. This naturally lead to error, which persists to this day. Some of them, in essence, preach the “different Gospel” that is spoken of in scripture, not the Catholic. Some preach that you need not be baptized. Many preach that the Eucharist is “symbolic”, which is contrary to scripture, and not what the church has taught from day one. This different Gospel has naturally developed and later became necessary to remain separated from the One True Church.

Essentially, man’s ego in “doing it my way” and forming his own churches, with his own preferences and beliefs, has lead to all divisions in Christendom. Uniting it is our collective job, and we plead with you to study Christ’s One Church and to pray over it, not to argue and debate here. The Lord Himself, via the leading of the Holy Spirit, will reveal all truth to you.

Christ’s peace be always with you.

 

[ron77nyc]

Essentially, man’s ego in “doing it my way” and forming his own churches, with his own preferences and beliefs, has lead to all divisions in Christendom. Uniting it is our collective job, and we plead with you to study Christ’s One Church and to pray over it, not to argue and debate here. The Lord Himself, via the leading of the Holy Spirit, will reveal all truth to you.

Christ’s peace be always with you.

There are many false teachings floating around Catholicism as well as all other religions. Although the RC Church never officially taught certain false teachings they were allowed to exist for hundreds of years. 2 such teachings are the worship of the Blessed Mother and the recrucifying of our Lord at every Mass. Even though the Catholic Church inspired by the Holy Spirit put the Bible together; let’s give credit to Judaism for the Old Testament; anyone could read it and understand the Gospel message and many other spiritual teachings of Jesus such as faith, forgiveness, humility, giving to the poor and persistence in prayer. A child could understand all these. If people were studying their bibles they would see through all false teaching. The Bereans were known for this and they were not Catholic. To say you must be a Catholic or consult a Roman Catholic official teaching to understand the bible is like saying the only way to play the piano is to take classical music instruction from a college professor.

 

[mercygate]

Essentially, man’s ego in “doing it my way” and forming his own churches, with his own preferences and beliefs, has lead to all divisions in Christendom. Uniting it is our collective job, and we plead with you to study Christ’s One Church and to pray over it, not to argue and debate here. The Lord Himself, via the leading of the Holy Spirit, will reveal all truth to you.

Christ’s peace be always with you.

There are many false teachings floating around Catholicism as well as all other religions. Although the RC Church never officially taught certain false teachings they were allowed to exist for hundreds of years. 2 such teachings are the worship of the Blessed Mother and the recrucifying of our Lord at every Mass.

Perhaps you would be so good as to indicate the paragraphs in the Catechism where these teachings are found?

Even though the Catholic Church inspired by the Holy Spirit put the Bible together; let’s give credit to Judaism for the Old Testament; anyone could read it and understand the Gospel message and many other spiritual teachings of Jesus such as faith, forgiveness, humility, giving to the poor and persistence in prayer. A child could understand all these. If people were studying their bibles they would see through all false teaching. The Bereans were known for this and they were not Catholic. To say you must be a Catholic or consult a Roman Catholic official teaching to understand the bible is like saying the only way to play the piano is to take classical music instruction from a college professor.

First, thank you for recognizing that the Cahtolic Church was inspired by the Holy Spirit in putting the Bible together.

How could the Holy Spirit inspire such a thing without also inspiring the Church to understand Christian doctrine? Doctrine shapes the canon, not the other way around. One of the criteria for the canonicity of NT books was that they not contradict other scriptures OR the teaching of the Church.

The Church was up and running before the first syllable of the New Testament was penned.

Egg = Church. Chicken = New Testament.

The teaching of the Church is the lens through which Scripture is read with perspicuity. If the Bible were the sole source of Christian faith, then the Jehovah’s Witnesses would not claim that Jesus is not divine. There would be no such thing as Oneness Pentecostals. There would be no controversy over the efficacy of Baptism, the necessity of Baptism or whether infants receive grace through Baptism.

As for the OT, the “Jews” are our forbears in faith; that the Church chose to canonize Jewish scriptures makes the OT writings “Christian” – just as we recognize Abraham, Moses, Elijah, et al as Saints of the Church.

 

[ron77nyc]

Perhaps you would be so good as to indicate the paragraphs in the Catechism where these teachings are found?
**
I said they were not official teachings but were allowed to go on without correction for many years. The Baltimore Catechism agrees with the Bible.**​

First, thank you for recognizing that the Cahtolic Church was inspired by the Holy Spirit in putting the Bible together.

      **  Yes. I wish all Catholic Churches had BIBLE instead of BINGO. I used to attend a Catholic bible study and it was excellent.**------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How could the Holy Spirit inspire such a thing without also inspiring the Church to understand Christian doctrine? Doctrine shapes the canon, not the other way around. One of the criteria for the canonicity of NT books was that they not contradict other scriptures OR the teaching of the Church.

The Church was up and running before the first syllable of the New Testament was penned.

Egg = Church. Chicken = New Testament.

           ** The book of Acts is the early church. No mention of the word Catholic. Revelation has letters to the churches. No mention there either.  When Jesus forgave people He didn’t ask what church they went to.**-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The teaching of the Church is the lens through which Scripture is read with perspicuity. If the Bible were the sole source of Christian faith, then the Jehovah’s Witnesses would not claim that Jesus is not divine. There would be no such thing as Oneness Pentecostals. There would be no controversy over the efficacy of Baptism, the necessity of Baptism or whether infants receive grace through Baptism.

        **        The divinity of Jesus is in the Old Testament and John 1 and Revelation. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have a corrupt bible and like the Catholics they are taught that only their officials are qualified to interpret it. If they read a real bible the truth would set them free. As far as all the other denominations….they have too much time on their hands. The early Christians were thrown to the lions because of their faith in the resurrected Jesus. If persecution came to this country our persecutors would not care about our doctrines. You would be persecuted for your faith in God.**-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the OT, the “Jews” are our forbears in faith; that the Church chose to canonize Jewish scriptures makes the OT writings “Christian” – just as we recognize Abraham, Moses, Elijah, et al as Saints of the Church.

** I know. The epistle to the Romans says we are grafted in.....not the other way around. That's very offensive to a Jewish Christian.**

 

[mercygate]

**The book of Acts is the early church. No mention of the word Catholic. **

The word Catholic means universal or “whole.” There is definitely a reference to the “whole Church” in Acts.

**Revelation has letters to the churches. No mention there either. **

The churches in Revelation are “particular” churches that are members of the “whole Church.” The church in Philadelphia was part of the “whole” – or Catholic – Church. The church in Laodicea was part of the “whole” Church. The churches in the New Testament were in full communion with one another. They did not preach ‘different’ gospels. They were not “denominations.” Even Paul pow-wowed with the church in Jerusalem and boasted that the “pillars” affirmed that he was preaching the *same *gospel they were preaching.

**When Jesus forgave people He didn’t ask what church they went to. **

That would be partly because the Church had not yet been born from His pierced side on Calvary.

Today, the normative way in which He forgives sins is through His Body – the Church – in the sacrament of Confession.

The teaching of the Church is the lens through which Scripture is read with perspicuity. If the Bible were the sole source of Christian faith, then the Jehovah’s Witnesses would not claim that Jesus is not divine. There would be no such thing as Oneness Pentecostals. There would be no controversy over the efficacy of Baptism, the necessity of Baptism or whether infants receive grace through Baptism.

**The divinity of Jesus is in the Old Testament and John 1 and Revelation. **

ONLY a Christian sees Jesus in the Old Testament. It took Paul three years in Arabia to “see” Jesus in the Old Testament. [Disclaimer: mercygate’s private theory – that Paul spent those three Arabian years with his precious “parchments” being instructed by the Holy Spirit.]

Both John 1 and Revelation were written well after the Church was up and running. Revelation nearly failed to make the canon. Eusebius, in 325 A.D., lists it among the disputed books, and there was a lot of resistance for several decades after that. It was the Church that put Revelation in the Bible.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses have a corrupt bible . . .

Correct. And so does everybody else who rejects the Deuterocanonical books.

** and like the Catholics they are taught that only their officials are qualified to interpret it. If they read a real bible the truth would set them free. **

The difference, of course, is that the Church that WROTE the New Testament is in a position to know what her Scriptures mean, and she has been commissioned as the privileged vehicle sent by Our Lord to “make disciples of all nations.” The JWs picked up a Bible 1800 years after the events described in the New Testament, treated it as an isolated, self-generated, free-standing artifact, and concluded that Jesus is St. Michael the Archangel. The Bible is not self-explanatory.

As far as all the other denominations….they have too much time on their hands. The early Christians were thrown to the lions because of their faith in the resurrected Jesus. If persecution came to this country our persecutors would not care about our doctrines. You would be persecuted for your faith in God.

For which I would hope go rejoicing to the flames hand in hand with you, singing “Nearer, My God, to Thee.”

As for the OT, the Jews are our forbears in faith; that the Church chose to canonize Jewish scriptures makes the OT writings “Christian” – just as we recognize Abraham, Moses, Elijah, et al as Saints of the Church.

ron77nyc:

**I know. The epistle to the Romans says we are grafted in…not the other way around. That’s very offensive to a Jewish Christian. **

I do not know any Jewish Christians who are offended that we venerate as Saints the Patriarchs, Prophets, and other holy ones of the Old Testament.

 

[ron77nyc]

The word Catholic means universal or “whole.” There is definitely a reference to the “whole Church” in Acts.

The churches in Revelation are “particular” churches that are members of the “whole Church.” The church in Philadelphia was part of the “whole” – or Catholic – Church. The church in Laodicea was part of the “whole” Church. The churches in the New Testament were in full communion with one another. They did not preach ‘different’ gospels.

So then would you say that all who preach the same gospel are part of the same body of Christ?​

They were not “denominations.” Even Paul pow-wowed with the church in Jerusalem and boasted that the “pillars” affirmed that he was preaching the *same *gospel they were preaching. That would be partly because the Church had not yet been born from His pierced side on Calvary.

Today, the normative way in which He forgives sins is through His Body – the Church – in the sacrament of Confession.

**So if a person makes a death bed confession do you think God will forgive him? If a person was not raised in the Catholic faith do you think God will forgive him? Do you think there is a Catholic section in heaven and He loves them more than anyone else? **​

ONLY a Christian sees Jesus in the Old Testament. It took Paul three years in Arabia to “see” Jesus in the Old Testament. [Disclaimer: mercygate’s private theory – that Paul spent those three Arabian years with his precious “parchments” being instructed by the Holy Spirit.]

Both John 1 and Revelation were written well after the Church was up and running. Revelation nearly failed to make the canon. Eusebius, in 325 A.D., lists it among the disputed books, and there was a lot of resistance for several decades after that. It was the Church that put Revelation in the Bible. Correct. And so does everybody else who rejects the Deuterocanonical books.

I accept those books if that’s what you mean.​

** and like the Catholics they are taught that only their officials are qualified to interpret it. If they read a real bible the truth would set them free. **

The difference, of course, is that the Church that WROTE the New Testament is in a position to know what her Scriptures mean, and she has been commissioned as the privileged vehicle sent by Our Lord to “make disciples of all nations.” The JWs picked up a Bible 1800 years after the events described in the New Testament, treated it as an isolated, self-generated, free-standing artifact, and concluded that Jesus is St. Michael the Archangel. The Bible is not self-explanatory.For which I would hope go rejoicing to the flames hand in hand with you, singing “Nearer, My God, to Thee.”

As I said in one of my previous posts anyone who picks up a real bible can gain simple spiritual truths such as forgiveness, faith, perseverence in prayer, humility, etc. weather they are Catholic or not. God blesses all people who do what is right in his sight (Acts 10)

.

**Are you saying you hope I burn in hell? **​

I do not know any Jewish Christians who are offended that we venerate as Saints the Patriarchs, Prophets, and other holy ones of the Old Testament.

Do you know any Jewish Christians? I think if anyone were qualified to interpret the bible it would be a Jewish Christian because they know all about Jewish Tradition and customs which are sprinkled throughout the New Testament.The problem is is that the Jews were thrown out of the church in it’s early stages.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------