Leeann, a question for you and anyone else who might like to answer.

[RobHom]

Here is the question you asked:
"You made mention of being guided by the Holy Spirit at times… and I believe it was in relation to when reading the Bible.

The question is: If you believe that you are being guided by the Holy Spirit, how do you know with certainty that it is specifically the Holy Spirit, and not another spirit…even one of a nefarious nature?

Its a serious question."

I didn’t see anything in your question about “feelings”. Relying on “feelings” for guidance is a dangerous thing to do. This is why knowing the Scriptures is a far superior way to know if the HS is guiding you since the Scriptures have their source in Him.

There was nothing in the OP about feelings, it was a further explanation of the question. I disagree that “one’s feelings” or intuitiveness is dangerous to use. More often than not…gut reactions are right, unless one is just naturally prone to foolish decisions. Merely relying on scripture to tell you that the Holy Spirit is guiding you is more dangerous…because you seem to automatically believe it to be so, when it may not be.

Look at verse 6 where John where John exhorts his readers that they can know this guidance by “by listening to the apostles” which we know to be the NT.

That in and of itself is not proof, or an answer to the question.

Now we know there are many teachings in the church that were not taught by the apostles. Take the “Tresasury of Merit” as an example of something the apostles never taught.

You keep saying that…but you have yet to provide proof of anything that does not crumble under the Biblical proofs that the Catholic Church has to support its teachings.

Treasury of Merit??? That’s a new one. Where do you come up with these things. I’ve been a Catholic my entire life…58 years now and I have never heard of such a thing…

 

[justasking4]

RobHom;4312925]
justasking4
Now we know there are many teachings in the church that were not taught by the apostles. Take the “Tresasury of Merit” as an example of something the apostles never taught.

RobHom
You keep saying that…but you have yet to provide proof of anything that does not crumble under the Biblical proofs that the Catholic Church has to support its teachings.

Treasury of Merit??? That’s a new one. Where do you come up with these things. I’ve been a Catholic my entire life…58 years now and I have never heard of such a thing…

Here is what the catechism says about this:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches this about the Treasury of Merit:

1476 We also call these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the Church’s treasury, which is “not the sum total of the material goods which have accumulated during the course of the centuries. On the contrary the ‘treasury of the Church’ is the infinite value, which can never be exhausted, which Christ’s merits have before God. They were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and merits of his Redemption exist and find their efficacy.”

1477 “This treasury includes as well the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense, unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good works of all the saints, all those who have followed in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have made their lives holy and carried out the mission in the unity of the Mystical Body.”

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Look at verse 6 where John where John exhorts his readers that they can know this guidance by “by listening to the apostles” which we know to be the NT. Now we know there are many teachings in the church that were not taught by the apostles. Take the “Treasury of Merit” as an example of something the apostles never taught.

This is where Catholics differ with your interpretation of verse 6. You say listening to the apostles means the NT. We say it means listening to the Church from which came the Scriptures and the Tradition passed down orally and in writing. The Church has teachings that aren’t explicitly found in Scripture but are there implicitly.

It is the tradition of some Protestant churches that anything not explicitly found in scripture is irrelevant. However, these same churches do accept some things, some ‘Catholic’ teachings, like the doctrine of the Trinity. The NT doesn’t explicitly teach one God in three divine persons and never uses the term trinity but this is the teaching of the apostles.

 

[sandusky]

It is the tradition of some Protestant churches that anything not explicitly found in scripture is irrelevant. However, these same churches do accept some things, some ‘Catholic’ teachings, like the doctrine of the Trinity. The NT doesn’t explicitly teach one God in three divine persons and never uses the term trinity but this is the teaching of the apostles.

The reason that some RC traditions are adhered to by non-Cs is that they can be demonstrated from Scripture. One of those “traditions,” is the Trinity, which is discerned from scripture.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Here is what the catechism says about this:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches this about the Treasury of Merit:

1476 We also call these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the Church’s treasury, which is “not the sum total of the material goods which have accumulated during the course of the centuries. On the contrary the ‘treasury of the Church’ is the infinite value, which can never be exhausted, which Christ’s merits have before God. They were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and merits of his Redemption exist and find their efficacy.”

1477 “This treasury includes as well the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense, unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good works of all the saints, all those who have followed in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have made their lives holy and carried out the mission in the unity of the Mystical Body.”

Are you saying this isn’t biblical? Remember when Paul says, “I live, not I but Christ living in me”. The good works of all those who are joined to Christ through baptism are united to Christ’s works which save us. They have value to God. They are, in a sense, added to Christ’s merits. But, since his merits are infinite, our merits are not ‘needed’ but they are accepted by the Father. As Paul said he made up in his body what was lacking in the work of Christ(sorry I don’t have the exact wording handy). Of course, nothing was lacking in Christ’s sacrifice except our participation in it. So this ‘treasury of merit’ is the Church’s reflection on this truth.

 

[RobHom]

I did some “Googling” and here’s what I came up with:

1. The Buddhists are big on it: kadampa.org/en/books/great-treasury-of-merit
2. This one though does go into some detail regarding the issue, and you really should read the page. Its the blog of a fellow who is a Catholic Convert who was formerly an Episcopalian Priest. Very interesting reading …and he even provides “Biblical Justifications”! cantuar.blogspot.com/2006/06/indulgences-and-treasury-of-merit.html
3. This page is an in depth set of writing on indulgences and prayer and also has tons of footnoted Biblical Justifications.
   newadvent.org/library/docs_pa06id.htm

Additionally within # 2 & # 3 you will find that the Apostles did in fact teach about these things and they are Biblically justified.

From link # 3:

***The Apostles themselves, in fact, exhorted their disciples to pray for the salvation of sinners.[23] This very ancient usage of the Church has blessedly persevered,[24] particularly in the practice of penitents invoking the intercession of the entire community,[25] and when the dead are assisted with suffrages, particularly through the offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice.[26] Good works, particularly those which human frailty finds difficult, were also offered to God for the salvation of sinners from the Church’s most ancient times.[27] And since the sufferings of the martyrs for the faith and for the law of God were considered of great value, penitents used to turn to the martyrs, to be helped by their merits to obtain from the bishops a more speedy reconciliation.[28] Indeed the prayer and good works of the upright were considered to be of so great value that it could be asserted the penitent was washed, cleansed and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people.[29] ***

The numbers relate to the sources in the footnotes.

Thank you for posting your comments. But once again you go down in flames…proving your lack both of knowledge and understanding of Catholicism and its supreme legitimacy.

You have too much time on your hands, and waste it on things you neither understand or believe. Can you not find a more beneficial or productive use of your time and efforts?

 

[Claire_from_DE]

The reason that some RC traditions are adhered to by non-Cs is that they can be demonstrated from Scripture. One of those “traditions,” is the Trinity, which is discerned from scripture.

I’m not convinced that the Trinity could be discerned solely from scripture if it had not already been taught by the Catholic church prior to the reformation.

 

[sandusky]

I’m not convinced that the Trinity could be discerned solely from scripture if it had not already been taught by the Catholic church prior to the reformation.

You’re wrong, however, from where do you think the Fathers got it?

 

[RobHom]

The reason that some RC traditions are adhered to by non-Cs is that they can be demonstrated from Scripture. One of those “traditions,” is the Trinity, which is discerned from scripture.

I think that if you and others could lay aside all of the preconceived notions that you have…and actually spent some time learning about the beliefs of Catholics…you would come to find that the Church’s Teachings and Traditions are Biblically justified and valid.

The justifications are linked in my previous posts.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

The reason that some RC traditions are adhered to by non-Cs is that they can be demonstrated from Scripture. One of those “traditions,” is the Trinity, which is discerned from scripture.

Here’s one that many protestants reject:

John 20
21Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

And this:

John 6
53Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.

1 cor 11

27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.

 

[JMJ_coder]

You’re wrong, however, from where do you think the Fathers got it?

From the Deposit of Faith handed down from the Apostles and which has continued to be handed down to this present day in the Catholic Church.

 

[JMJ_coder]

I’m not convinced that the Trinity could be discerned solely from scripture if it had not already been taught by the Catholic church prior to the reformation.

You are correct. And there are several groups that, true to the logical conclusions of sola scriptura and where that heresy leads, have rejected the Trinity.

 

[JMJ_coder]

You made mention of being guided by the Holy Spirit at times… and I believe it was in relation to when reading the Bible.

The question is: If you believe that you are being guided by the Holy Spirit, how do you know with certainty that it is specifically the Holy Spirit, and not another spirit…even one of a nefarious nature?

Its a serious question.

I think a big problem is that they assume that it is the Holy Spirit, without discernment - and even with the belief that they cannot be deceived by the devil (after all, they are way to smart and sophisticated for that ). But, any spirit that drives you from the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church is not a holy spirit.

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

I think a big problem is that they assume that it is the Holy Spirit, without discernment - and even with the belief that they cannot be deceived by the devil (after all, they are way to smart and sophisticated for that ). But, any spirit that drives you from the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church is not a holy spirit.

Tread carefully.

 

[piperspop]

So if I have this correct, the way to check on whether one is being guided by the Holy Spirit or an evil spirit is to check with the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching and history.

So when do we re-start the inquisition, created by a papal bull?

That was a fun time, the Holy Ghost must have really been off his game then, eh?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

So if I have this correct, the way to check on whether one is being guided by the Holy Spirit or an evil spirit is to check with the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching and history.

So when do we re-start the inquisition, created by a papal bull?

That was a fun time, the Holy Ghost must have really been off his game then, eh?

You know little about the inquisitions.

newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

 

[piperspop]

You know little about the inquisitions.

newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

I know this:

Pope John Paul II himself didn’t entirely agree with all of his predecessors. He declared the Inquisition, which was established by a Papal Bull under Sixtus IV (1471-1484), the "greatest error in Church history."

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I know this:

Pope John Paul II himself didn’t entirely agree with all of his predecessors. He declared the Inquisition, which was established by a Papal Bull under Sixtus IV (1471-1484), the "greatest error in Church history."

True enough.

However, it has nothing to do with Church doctrine, which is the key point that seems to have eluded you.

 

[Ag_not]

I know this:

Pope John Paul II himself didn’t entirely agree with all of his predecessors. He declared the Inquisition, which was established by a Papal Bull under Sixtus IV (1471-1484), the "greatest error in Church history."

Didnt Luther write Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants resulting in the death of some 100,000 peasants, jews and christians included?
They were indeed imperfect times.

Can you direct me to where a head of the Lutheran Church has publicly apologised for the distruction wrought through Lutherism in the middle ages?

 

[sandusky]

From the Deposit of Faith handed down from the Apostles and which has continued to be handed down to this present day in the Catholic Church.

They understood it from the scripture.