I've been born again to a living hope through Jesus Christ. I have an inheritance in heaven that is imperishable. By God's power, it is being guarded

[freedomwriter]

Not only should you credit the Catholic church for giving you your bible because without it you wouldn’t have one. The Catholic church also compiled it. An historical fact.

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

You certainly have a lot to learn here my friend. **Without the Catholic church, you wouldn’t have a bible. It was compiled in the year 397 A.D. by the Council of Carthage. The Roman Pontiff decided what books would be in YOUR bible and what would not. ** Your so-called “glorious reformer”, Luther, came in and tossed out 7 books and that was that. Like the famous Cardinal Protestant turned Catholic once said:

To be deep in history, is to cease to be Protestant—John Henry Neuman

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

I just noticed your profile said “born again Catholic”, and you don’t know where the bible came from?

 

[po18guy]

When the Roman Emperor Constantine legalized the Christian faith, and ended the persecution of Christians with the Edict of Milan in 313, the church in Rome gained even further prominence. As the church in Rome allied itself with the Roman government, it continued to grow in it’s authority, and influence. As early as the 3rd century the leaders of the church in Rome were claiming for themselves a supremacy over other churches throughout the Empire when it came to matters of doctrine. And by the 6th century the Church in Rome was exercising jurisdiction over the churches. And thus, the Roman Catholic Church was born.

Was not the Church de facto established in Rome by the giants of the faith (Saints Peter and Paul) almost two hundred years before the Birth of Constantine? Could it be said that the later Roman government, whose head (Emperor Constantine the great) became Christian and who ordered the cessation of persecution of the Church, actually allied himself/itself with the Church, as much as the other way round?

I must reflect on just how the Church got to Rome in the first place, as well as who took it there, and for what reason. With both Peter and Paul ending up in Rome, was not the Church destined to be, and subsequently was headquartered there long before Constantine? And, did it not remain the same Church? If you allege that a somehow new Church was founded, I would have to see substantial shifts in doctrine and structure, rather that merely in the manner of treatment of that same Church by the surrounding governmental authority.

roman-empire.net/decline/constantine-index.html

 

[po18guy]

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

Your street cred is suffering here. First, please explain your religious affiliation. It appears to be rather murky or even, dare I say, deceptive.

Since Irenaeus (taught by Polycarp, who was taught by John) referred to the Church as “universal” as early as the year 107, shortly after the completion of the NT scriptures, how on earth can you claim that there was no universal Church? This is an amazing stretch, even for a Protestant to make.

 

[distracted]

When you say Church, is that somehow meant to exclude Orthodox Christians and Protestants in general?

In a sense, all Christians belong to the one church (body of belivers) of which Christ is the head. But Jesus gave us earthly “heads” … priests, bishops,to guide us in areas that are not… where it is not always so easy to comprehend God’s perfect will. a good example is stem cell research which many think is a great thing… and yet just because we humans CAN do something doesn’t mean we should… and the Church tells us that certain aspects of this kind of research are immoral. Test tube babies are immoral (for one thing you have to masturbate to get the sperm )… yet many would not think these thing were wrong if it weren’t for the Church … Obviously there were no such kinds of issues when the Church began 2000 yrs ago… so this is what i mainly meant by sayingthat we need the Church… to guide us into ALL truth… mere humans cannot do that… the Church is human but also divine… and its (ex cathedra) teachings can always be trusted because they come from God… Jesus Christ established His Church. There is only one … God is not the author of confusion…

" the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,

one cannot be working all the time… this psg probably refers to those times of rest when we are not really doing much for God… If a person does absolutely nothing that Jesus requires (helping the poor, praying for people… etc) he will not make it to Heaven… (St. Mt 25:31… Jesus says When I was hungry, you fed me, when i was ___________ [fill in the blanks] you cared for me…" Jesus didn’t always speak of eternal punshment… when he spoke of punishment… In some passages in the Bible it only speaks of punishment, not using the word Eternal… however, in this psg he does use the word… and it is addressed to those who never do anything for their brethren - )

Is your idea of “grace” one in which God pays you what you are due? Are you one who works, receives wages, or do you receive grace as a gift-

uh… are they mutually exclusive??? i say both… As someone once said Happiness is the result of doing the right thing… Grace is the result of doing what God wants… whether you choose to call what He wnts “works” or whatever… i guess its “works” if you don’t particualrly want to do it… some may not want to go to a soup kitchen to feed the poor… but if he does… he fulfills Mt 25:31 … (and he may end up actually liking it… )

We’re both Christians, you and I. Both of us want (and need) to receive the same gift after we die. I will receive it as a free gift, not as something God is obligated to give me. I am a sinner. I do not deserve salvation. It is not something I will ever deserve.

i agree, more or less… although in a very real sense, those who do what Jesus says DO deserve… well, maybe not Heaven or maybe not right away as soon as they die… but once Jesus is (shall we say) “done with” them, they will deserve it… (when done w/Purgatory)

or are you the sort of person who wants to receive salvation because you deserve it, God owes it to you, and it is your just wages? Which sort of person are you?

again, not mutually exclusive…
I.

If that is your Church teaching, I’ll certainly disagree with it. .

that is your choice… and if you want to find the RCC;'s exact teaching on grace and works, you should read the Catechism…

I know quite a few missionaries through my parents as well as through (and including) immediate friends, some of whom I’ll be living with in the fall. It kind of trips you out when you hear about what they’re up to. These are people who could easily be making inroads in business, finance, politics, or whatever, but instead they’re telling me about how they plan on fasting a few days each month if they don’t get enough support. There’s one guy who walked away from acting and modeling so he can get into ministry to victims of sex trafficking. These are the people I hang out with.

you are fortunate to know these kinds of people… .

but uh… why do they bother doing all that if they are saved regardless?? why not just “have faith” and uh… party hearty…

Well, that’s clear enough. So the only question remaining is the one I already asked: Once you do everything Jesus said, do you receive salvation as a just wage for a job well done? If you’re trying to communicate a different message, you should consider phrasing that differently. If that’s exactly what you meant, though, you got it just right.

One doesn’t do everything Jesus said just to get to Heaven… although that is not an altogether unworthy motive in my opinion… Why not love yourself that much? God is love… and we must “love others as we love ourselves” (Jesus said this)… but If we don’t love ourselves (enough to try to be with God in Heavne), how can we truly love someone else???

in any case… one does what Jesus wants (or should anyway) becaue s/he loves Jesus… When you love Jesus you will do any work He seems to want you to do… whether it is something you naturally like doing or not…

in any case, it hardly matters what a person’s motive is in following Crhist and we humans don’t kow the motives of others anyway… When someone asked Jesus waht he must do to enter heaven Jesus said to do the commandments and give up everything to follow Him… If someone does that he will get to Heaven… motives are not addressed here…

all that matters is doing everything Jesus said,

which involves belonging to His One true, original Church…

 

[distracted]

.

correction to Post #67:

actually what Jesus said in response to the question What must i do to obtain eternal life?" was Do the Commandments… That’s all he said but then he added that if one wants to be perfect (avoid Purgatory in the next life ???) he should give up his possessions to the poor and follow Him…

and Purgatory in the afterlife is supposed to be about 10 times worse (at LEAST) than doing your purgation on EArth…according to the saints… so… i would think we should try to be “perfect” here on Earth…

material possessons are not worth it…

 

[distracted]

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

Jewish pepole compiled the first part… and Catholics are just Jews who have Christ…

 

[jake23]

It sounds like freedom writer is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Ther are allot of deceitful poeple coming on here posing as Catholics when they are not! Isnt it sad that they claim to be christians and yet do such deceitful things? It is a fact! all evidence shows the Catholic church gave us the Bible, even Luther who started the religions that stand on quicksand says himself that we have the Catholic church to thank for the Bible!

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Jewish pepole compiled the first part… and Catholics are just Jews who have Christ…

No, the Catholic church compiled the WHOLE of the bible. Do you mean to say the writings of the OT were written by the Jews? When I say compiled, I mean the Catholic church DECIDED which books were to be contained and which were not.

 

[po18guy]

No, the Catholic church compiled the WHOLE of the bible. Do you mean to say the writings of the OT were written by the Jews? When I say compiled, I mean the Catholic church DECIDED which books were to be contained and which were not.

Correct. At the time of Christ, the Jews did not have a set canon of scripture. They set their canon in response to the rise of Christianity. It is that canon which Luther consulted 1,400+ years later when forming his own “church”. I note that Luther did not even want to keep the entire NT canon, seeking to reject James and Hebrews. Once you begin tearing scripture out, where do you stop?

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Correct. At the time of Christ, the Jews did not have a set canon of scripture. They set their canon in response to the rise of Christianity. It is that canon which Luther consulted 1,400+ years later when forming his own “church”. I note that Luther did not even want to keep the entire NT canon, seeking to reject James and Hebrews. Once you begin tearing scripture out, where do you stop?

 

[wmscott]

Was not the Church de facto established in Rome by the giants of the faith (Saints Peter and Paul) almost two hundred years before the Birth of Constantine? Could it be said that the later Roman government, whose head (Emperor Constantine the great) became Christian and who ordered the cessation of persecution of the Church, actually allied himself/itself with the Church, as much as the other way round?

I must reflect on just how the Church got to Rome in the first place, as well as who took it there, and for what reason. With both Peter and Paul ending up in Rome, was not the Church destined to be, and subsequently was headquartered there long before Constantine? And, did it not remain the same Church? If you allege that a somehow new Church was founded, I would have to see substantial shifts in doctrine and structure, rather that merely in the manner of treatment of that same Church by the surrounding governmental authority.

roman-empire.net/decline/constantine-index.html

Was Rome not the seat of civilization then? This could be why St Peter and St Paul headquartered there?

 

[distracted]

It sounds like freedom writer is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Ther are allot of deceitful poeple coming on here posing as Catholics when they are not! Isnt it sad that they claim to be christians and yet do such deceitful things? It is a fact! all evidence shows the Catholic church gave us the Bible, even Luther who started the religions that stand on quicksand says himself that we have the Catholic church to thank for the Bible!

yeah, i came to that same conclusion - that people were not always Catholic as they said…

it stands to reason the Catholic Church put the bible together because there was no New Testament until about 40 yrs after Jesus ascended… and at that time - Surprise Surprise!!! - there was only ONE… count em - ONE Church…

and uh… what church was that? Baptist? Methodist? Lutheran… uh… :hypno:

 

[wmscott]

Why would I credit the catholic church for the bible when they didn’t compil it. Study who were the writers of the bible and who declared it the canon of scripture. I dont know where you got your info but the catholic church didn’t have anything to do with compiling the bible.

Are you for real what revisionist history are you ascribing to? PLEASE provide some proof of this, I really have to see that.

 

[po18guy]

Was Rome not the seat of civilization then? This could be why St Peter and St Paul headquartered there?

Precisely. It was the center of the known world, and the source of oppression for both Jews and Christians. An obvious target for evangelization, then…

 

[po18guy]

Are you for real what revisionist history are you ascribing to? PLEASE provide some proof of this, I really have to see that.

The code words to watch for are “Rome” or “Roman”, “Constantine” and “Trent”. Certain Christian sects are obsessed with these terms. If they fail to show that the Catholic Church was a post-Apostolic era invention, it puts all of their claims at great risk.

 

[wmscott]

The code words to watch for are “Rome” or “Roman”, “Constantine” and “Trent”. Certain Christian sects are obsessed with these terms. If they fail to show that the Catholic Church was a post-Apostolic era invention, it puts all of their claims at great risk.

When I saw freedomwriters post about the Catholic Church having nothing to do with the compilation of the Bible, I was flabbergasted. I could not believe it. It was one of those jaw dropping moments.

 

[po18guy]

When I saw freedomwriters post about the Catholic Church having nothing to do with the compilation of the Bible, I was flabbergasted. I could not believe it. It was one of those jaw dropping moments.

Deconstructing his claimed religious affiliation, I believe it to mean a fallen away Catholic who is now fundamentalist Evangelical. Since all they have is the bible, it simply CANNOT be a Catholic document!