Is there hope for me even though I am not Roman Catholic?

[CalmDownWisWins]

Quote:
Since your authority for knowing truth is “Pope Whatis”, and ours is, to you, “The Corrupt Usurping AUTHORITY who claims to BE God”,

CalmDownWisWins, I am sorry you see me as “The Corrupt Usurping AUTHORITY”.

That’s not what I meant. I meant that YOU see OUR authority as a “Corrupt Usurping Authority”. That may not be entirely accurate, of course, as I was being somewhat hyperbolic so as to balance our actual view that you consider yourself the “Pope” of your “church”, as you are allowed, as only a Pope is, to decide what doctrine is correct and which incorrect to you “yourself”, “yourself” being your “church membership” as we would define “church membership” (meaning: “signers-on to a **single **set of doctrine”).

I find it amazing that just a few posts back when I declared the core of my belief,

Quote whatisthetruth:
BTW, I now believe that salvation can only be found through Jesus Christ.
No church, prayer, person or book can save a soul.
Even just believing Jesus does not save you.
I believe, believing in Jesus is evidence of the faithful and there is a big difference between believing and believing in Jesus Christ.

I believe, the resouces I listed, help in directing the “path” to salvation, but I believe the only way to be saved is first by faith in Jesus Christ and then act according to God’s word as evidence of that faith.

to which you replied,

Quote CalmD:
WOW! That’s exactly what I believe too!

When you exclaimed that WOW, I realized, if nothing else, we believe in the same God, the same Jesus Christ.

May I ask you what caused you to reply with a WOW!!?

Because using my definitions of the terms you used to describe your beliefs in that segment, I fully agree with them.

The problem is that my definitions of many of those terms aren’t the same as your definitions of many of those same terms.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

CalmDownWisWins, just like I have done to take a breath and realize the reason for you posting the way you did, may I ask you to do the same as to why I would say Jesus the “rock” has many soft spots.

I understand what you mean, now, by what you said. I was making it clear that the interpretation of “soft spots” to mean what I took it to mean was an unacceptable meaning, and hopefully you agree that there are no “soft spots” allowable as I was negatively interpreting that to mean.

We (most likely) fully agree that an “unstable foundation” is a bad thing for an important structure to be built on, and also that God’s mercy is truly infinite and accessible to the truly humble.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Did you see I answered your question about accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior?.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost…&postcount=206

THE ABOVE LINK IS MALFORMED and doesn’t go anywhere! (Probably a copying/pasting error.)

God bless you,

Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from you again.

Lets keep our conversation going.

What do you say?

Why would I be here to talk if I wasn’t interested in talking?

Actually, you’ll find it very difficult to get rid of me, as I appear to have this rather OCD-like compulsion to answer any missive sent me, or face some wacky demon which makes me twitch for upwards of an hour.

I had this same “problem” as a kid with having to run to a dictionary regardless of what I was doing to find the meaning of a word that I’d just heard but didn’t understand. Or at least write it down so that I wouldn’t lose it, or my mind in losing an opportunity to discover something new.

 

[whatisthetruth]

That’s not what I meant. I meant that YOU see OUR authority as a “Corrupt Usurping Authority”.

**Well I misread again. sorry about that.

But please do not put words in my mouth, In NO NO No Way do I see you as Corrupt Usurping Authority.

You are on my side, Jesus side, How do you feel I see you as Corrupt **

That may not be entirely accurate, of course, as I was being somewhat hyperbolic so as to balance our actual view that you consider yourself the “Pope” of your “church”, as you are allowed, as only a Pope is, to decide what doctrine is correct and which incorrect to you “yourself”, “yourself” being your “church membership” as we would define “church membership” (meaning: “signers-on to a **single **set of doctrine”).

I love the way you say “pope of my church” but I understand, I think why you would say that.

Because using my definitions of the terms you used to describe your beliefs in that segment, I fully agree with them.

**The problem **is that my definitions of many of those terms aren’t the same as your definitions of many of those same terms

Agree that can be a problem .

 

[whatisthetruth]

Originally Posted by whatisthetruth
Did you see I answered your question about accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior?.

THE ABOVE LINK IS MALFORMED and doesn’t go anywhere! (Probably a copying/pasting error.)

I corrected it

206 this thread​

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3258832&postcount=206

Why would I be here to talk if I wasn’t interested in talking?

Good

Actually, you’ll find it very difficult to get rid of me, as I appear to have this rather OCD-like compulsion to answer any missive sent me, or face some wacky demon which makes me twitch for upwards of an hour.

this is a good thing:thumbsup:

I had this same “problem” as a kid with having to run to a dictionary regardless of what I was doing to find the meaning of a word that I’d just heard but didn’t understand. Or at least write it down so that I wouldn’t lose it, or my mind in losing an opportunity to discover something new.

I am always winning to learn something new too

blessings

 

[whatisthetruth]

I understand what you mean, now, by what you said. I was making it clear that the interpretation of “soft spots” to mean what I took it to mean was an unacceptable meaning, and hopefully you agree that there are no “soft spots” allowable as I was negatively interpreting that to mean.

We (most likely) fully agree that an “unstable foundation” is a bad thing for an important structure to be built on, and also that God’s mercy is truly infinite and accessible to the truly humble.

Right On Bro

 

[whatisthetruth]

I said the former quoted-bit to show you what we see when someone justifies a private revelation in an unjustifiable way, by not checking that private revelation with the Church.

I said the latter quoted-bit to inform you of what private revelation is, and how it can be dangerous.

So, since the the latter quote exposes a danger, and the former quote is our typical reaction to the exposure OF dangers, they are linked. The former is our reaction to this danger. The latter is our description of the origins of that danger.

i understand , I try not to be dangerous,

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

I [am] happy to say you are witnessing evidence of my rock hard faith which Satan will need to work extra hard to break.

I do not mind saying again, you and a lot of people here might just have harder rocks of faith than I do.

You know, this is a hard thing to hear.

I’m not to care how “hard” your “rock” is, but only to tell you the truth as best I can so that you might have as much of the truth as possible.

In my opinion, any “softness” of your “rock” which gets you closer to the truth is a good thing and a “strength”, just as any “weakness/flimsiness” in a theory is an opportunity to have some observation “break” it so that we can learn something new from the breaking, which is it’s “strength”.

I try to keep my “theories” about theology as “weak and flimsy” as possible, mostly by demuring to the “eldest (most tested) experts” available and relying on my personal interpretations of public and private revelation as little as conceivably possible!

That doesn’t mean that I don’t try to best apply the truths thus found as a basis for my behavior, as that is what faith and morals are FOR, but I see no need to re-invent the wheel but rather build my faith on the backs of giants.

One of the big problems I see with the protestant world is that the mistaken idea that “if it’s not invented here it isn’t real!” has the effect of needing, through sheer practicality, to simplify theology to “bare essentials” to accomodate the limited time that each “congregant” (I don’t know the proper term) has to re-invent, via re-experience, those doctrines which are the bare necessities of what God says to do for our salvation.

One thing I noticed in my varied ramblings is that we really DON’T need to do the UTMOST POSSIBLE to be Godly, such as to become monks who are priests who are entirely consumed with constant prayer in abject denial of all other stimuli and/or responsibilities, but rather we need to follow our vocation, our call from God, to best serve God in a way which is most thorough within the bounds of that vocation, and leave our inability to do more than that to the mercy of God.

I happen to believe, for good reason, that God has made it easiest to accomplish our vocation of “normal person” by the gifts of the sacraments to mankind, and that anyone who is a “normal person” is bound to do those things as minimum standard requirements. To not do so WITH PROPER INTENT (which not all do, certainly!) is to increase our presumption of God’s mercy, which is not a good thing and very risky.

But I’m left, ultimately, to leave the choice of other’s choice of God instead of their non-God-comforts to them and God, yet again stating the blindingly obvious, and will content myself to have honest and persistent conversation with them to temper their “hard spots” and pulverize their “soft spots” so that truth is shored up in them such that they better understand and use it for the salvation of themselves and mankind.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisthetruth
I enjoy this way of communicating a lot better, thank you CalmDownWisWins

God bless you

truth

That’s good because only the two of you have any idea at all of which one of you is saying what in these dialogues. It is exhausting to read these things interminable posts formatted this way.

Oh well. Don’tcha just LOVE threaded conversations?

How is it that I can keep track of our conversation and you can’t? One way you find find useful is to go to the “end” of a quote-thread and quote-link back to where you want to pick up the conversation, and then use the “back” button to move forward through the sub-thread.

OR, you could simply view it as a true threaded conversation, and pick the start of an interesting “quoted sub-thread” and follow it forward.

OR, you can do as you like and usually do, as this is not atypical of the structure of conversations like this if you’ve been paying attention to LONG threads of the past.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

True; I can’t tell one from the other.

Could it be possible for you guys to just use traditional quotes, instead of the dizzying array of rainbow colours, font changes, and bolding, etc.?

I’m not using anything but “indents”, and I’m chopping his interspersed LONG posts into little bitty pieces.

I would DEFINATELY suggest to Whatis that he not do the multi-colored “inside quotes inappropriately” interspersed posts, though!

I agree. His posts are tricky to deal with, but I’ve gotten pretty good at “posting surgery”.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Originally Posted by CalmDownWisWins
That’s not what I meant. I meant that YOU see OUR authority as a “Corrupt Usurping Authority”.
Well I misread again. sorry about that.

But please do not put words in my mouth, In NO NO No Way do I see you as Corrupt Usurping Authority.

You are on my side, Jesus side, How do you feel I see you as Corrupt

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…!

You misunderstand yet AGAIN! I don’t think you see ME as a “Corrupt Usurping Authority”. I think you see “The Church having a Pope” as the “Corrupt Usurping Authority”.

…and as I said, that may be inaccurate, though it is the very basis for most protestant rejection of Church authority.

 

[whatisthetruth]

You know, this is a hard thing to hear.

I’m not to care how “hard” your “rock” is, but only to tell you the truth as best I can so that you might have as much of the truth as possible.

My sentiments too with anyone I talk to

In my opinion, any “softness” of your “rock” which gets you closer to the truth is a good thing and a “strength”, just as any “weakness/flimsiness” in a theory is an opportunity to have some observation “break” it so that we can learn something new from the breaking, which is it’s “strength”.

true

I try to keep my “theories” about theology as “weak and flimsy” as possible, mostly by demuring to the “eldest (most tested) experts” available and relying on my personal interpretations of public and private revelation as little as conceivably possible!

sometimes our personal opinions/thoeries come out when they shouldn’t, I am guilty

That doesn’t mean that I don’t try to best apply the truths thus found as a basis for my behavior, as that is what faith and morals are FOR,

absolutely

but I see no need to re-invent the wheel

me neither, but our differences in understanding one of another may seem that the other is re inventing the wheel

but rather build my faith on the backs of giants.

especially Jesus Christ

One of the big problems I see with the protestant world is that the mistaken idea that “if it’s not invented here it isn’t real!” has the effect of needing, through sheer practicality, to simplify theology to “bare essentials” to accomodate the limited time that each “congregant” (I don’t know the proper term) has to re-invent, via re-experience, those doctrines which are the bare necessities of what God says to do for our salvation.

I “hear” your struggle to reason this in your mind
I honestly believe we are all God’s work in progress.

I will throw this out.

My pastor likes to says,

I believe God sees us Christians as a bunch of used to B’s being tranformed into God’s wanna B’s"

thank you for caring

truth

 

[whatisthetruth]

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…!

You misunderstand yet AGAIN! I don’t think you see ME as a “Corrupt Usurping Authority”. I think you see “The Church having a Pope” as the “Corrupt Usurping Authority”.

…and as I said, that may be inaccurate, though it is the very basis for most protestant rejection of Church authority.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

to myself, dummy me.

ok now I gotcha.

Want to know something?

I loved Pope John Paul, I watched his funeral. I watched the election for the new pope and when the smoke signaled the new pope was chosen, I witnessed it. I was amazed at how fast the agreed on Cardinal Ratzinger for thier new Pope .

I prayed for them to find a Godly man for the Catholic church.
I listened to His first speech and I was very impressed.

I have no question the sincerity of Pope Benedict XVI

in 33 AD there was Jesus at the head of the table, and his chosen twelve

Today in similiar fashion is Pope Benedict XVI at the head of Rome and the chosen annointed Apostolic succesion, all who worship Jesus I have no doubt.

These ordinary men at one time in thier life recieved a calling from God to do what they are doing. I admire thier faithfulness and comittment to the cause.

BTW the nuns of the church are jsut as faithful. My aunt is a nun.
we often talk about our faith now more than I was when I was a Catholic.

We have a total understanding one of another. She has not indicated to me at one time her prayer for me to come back to the Catholic church. We realize we both have Jesus in our hearts.

Does the Catholic church have a corrupt authority in Pope Benedict XVI in my opinion or belief? Absolutely Not

Could it be in someone elses opinion or believe?
possibly, only because they do not understand the way of the Roman Catholic Church.

Like I said before in the thread, an “outsider” may look in and see the Catholic church “worshipping” Pope Benedict XVI as God due to all the security, and publicity the Pope attracts.

Lets face it the Pope John Paul was all over the world and the world new it thanks to all the media coverage.

The message of hope and peace he gave around the world was second to none.

Just like you and I are finding out, we all bring the same message but in a different way.

The message is the love of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ

 

[whatisthetruth]

by mercygate
That’s good because only the two of you have any idea at all of which one of you is saying what in these dialogues. It is exhausting to read these things interminable posts formatted this way.

jmcrae
True; I can’t tell one from the other.

Could it be possible for you guys to just use traditional quotes, instead of the dizzying array of rainbow colours, font changes, and bolding, etc

I’m not using anything but “indents”, and I’m chopping his interspersed LONG posts into little bitty pieces.

I would DEFINATELY suggest to Whatis that he not do the multi-colored “inside quotes inappropriately” interspersed posts, though!

I agree. His posts are tricky to deal with, but I’ve gotten pretty good at “posting surgery”.

I am sorry , thank you for letting me know

I will stop using colors and start using the quotes so you understand better,

I aim to please

Is this better?

 

[Zooey]

The problem is that my definitions of many of those terms aren’t the same as your definitions of many of those same terms.

This happens a lot…
I have been here at CAF for years now, and sometimes, I still have to go back & re-read what someone has posted, translating it in my head…

I have learned this much: Catholics and Protestants use the** same** words to mean** different** things; also, Catholics and Protestants use** different** words to mean the same things.
Maybe its because my Mama was an English teacher, and I grew up around the need to define terms. Maybe its because my great-grandmother & I used to speak only [Holland] Dutch to each other when I was a little girl, and I never knew that, until I was grown up, & told my grandmother that “I wish I had learned some Dutch from Granma while she was still here with us”, and she looked at e, and said, “But you** did**!!”
Anyhow, I seem to have a feel for when this kind of thing is happening. I used to “translate” a lot around here, in early days, just to get people past some of the roadblocks to understanding…
And I have written this, & I realize that I should say, that the EO’s probably use still different terms from all of us, and are as frustrated as anybody else when people don’t “get it”.

Everybody here is guilty at times, of not mentally translating, or at least of asking, “Just what do you mean by [whatever term you are discussing]??” It helps. It really does…(Just my:twocents: )…

& to all…
Zooey

 

[whatisthetruth]

This happens a lot…
I have been here at CAF for years now, and sometimes, I still have to go back & re-read what someone has posted, translating it in my head…

I have learned this much: Catholics and Protestants use the** same** words to mean** different** things; also, Catholics and Protestants use** different** words to mean the same things.
Maybe its because my Mama was an English teacher, and I grew up around the need to define terms. Maybe its because my great-grandmother & I used to speak only [Holland] Dutch to each other when I was a little girl, and I never knew that, until I was grown up, & told my grandmother that “I wish I had learned some Dutch from Granma while she was still here with us”, and she looked at e, and said, “But you** did**!!”
Anyhow, I seem to have a feel for when this kind of thing is happening. I used to “translate” a lot around here, in early days, just to get people past some of the roadblocks to understanding…
And I have written this, & I realize that I should say, that the EO’s probably use still different terms from all of us, and are as frustrated as anybody else when people don’t “get it”.

Everybody here is guilty at times, of not mentally translating, or at least of asking, “Just what do you mean by [whatever term you are discussing]??” It helps. It really does…(Just my:twocents…

& to all…
Zooey

Hi Zooey,

welcome aboard and excellent point, one that is priceless.

Correct me if I am wrong, but here may be a good illustration.

If I say “I am engaged”

You may ask me “when is the wedding” IF you are in America

however

you may ask me “who are you talking to ‘engaged with’ on the phone” IF you are in England.

just my :twocents:

 

[Zooey]

Hi Zooey,

welcome aboard and excellent point, one that is priceless.

Correct me if I am wrong, but here may be a good illustration.

If I say “I am engaged”

You may ask me “when is the wedding” IF you are in America

however

you may ask me “who are you talking to ‘engaged with’ on the phone” IF you are in England.

just my :twocents:

:yup:

 

[whatisthetruth]

:yup:

BTW Zooey, I love your Cat.

Check this out and enjoy

WHYGODMADEPETS PART 2 (mostly Cats)

WHYGODMADEPETS PArt 1 (mostly Dogs)

 

[jmcrae]

Is this better?

Yes, MUCH, thank you!!

 

[Philthy]

Hi WhatistheTruth -

Did you miss this post from page 18? I especially wanted an answer to the last question…

**

whatisthetruth:

My personal salvation was promised to me, by faith according to God’s word, directly from God and the bible as per the scenario I described above.

**
**Which, when you think about it, makes one wonder why you really started a thread titled"Is there hope for me…?" when, in fact, you dont actually question whether there is hope for you - you are certain of it. **
**I mean once you are certain of it - and it doesnt get any surer than “God told me so” - how can you possibly come to dialogue genuinely looking for answers? You already have the answer you seek. Correct? **
**And while we are being honest, the particular wording that you use as your personal revelation from God of " if I should die right now…" is something I’ve heard from about a hundred people before and that takes away some of its luster. Im telling you this not to discourage you, but just so you can appreciate my perspective. **

whatisthetruth:

Do I take it from you saying,

“this simply has to do with being honest”, that you felt at any time I was being any less than honest in what I posted here???
You’re a right brained, touchy feely type - I tend to be more left brained and am more logical/analytical. You are a little less concerned with and/or capable of articulating yourself precisely. I dont think you are being dishonest - you simply didnt - and dont - realize how your comments are sometimes loose and unclear. That can make them appear to be purposely evasive, when in fact, you simply didnt realize all the ambiguities created by your wording. I’ll stop talking now because I can tell Im overanalyzing and you probably couldnt care less!

**Can I ask you a question? When (as in what year) were you born again? **