List of Un-Biblical Catholic Practices

[jmcrae]

There was also once this program in which he taught that the Woman in Revelation 12 is not Mary (as Catholics believe) , but Israel.

He’s actually not wrong that it’s Israel - but he’s wrong that it’s not Mary.

That particular passage can be interpreted on three different levels of metaphor; one being Israel, one being Mary, and the third being the Church.

One of the great things about the Church’s interpretation of Scripture is that it is multidimensional - there is all kinds of room for valid, theologically sound interpretations of texts that, on the surface, may seem to be about distinctly different things, but when we put them together, we come to a much deeper understanding than a surface, literal interpretation can give us.

Not that the literal interpretation isn’t also very important - the literal interpretation is the starting place, and the metaphor(s), anagogue(s), or moral lesson(s) ought not to contradict the plain sense of the literal reading.

 

[Zooey]

Cause we all know Palestine, Rome, Patmos and all the other places the NT was originally written were well supplied with kings named James
.

[SIGN]
The :whacky: Little:whacky: Voices in :whacky: Jack Chick’s Head say: "Anyplace that doesn’t have a King Named James is Evil & Worshipping Idols, Or Else the :bowdown: :bowdown: Name James Would Be Among Them!!!
Woe to the Jameless! Woe, woe, I say, http://bestsmileys.com/silly/14.gifwoe!!!
[/SIGN]

 

[patrick457]

He’s actually not wrong that it’s Israel - but he’s wrong that it’s not Mary.

That particular passage can be interpreted on three different levels of metaphor; one being Israel, one being Mary, and the third being the Church.

One of the great things about the Church’s interpretation of Scripture is that it is multidimensional - there is all kinds of room for valid, theologically sound interpretations of texts that, on the surface, may seem to be about distinctly different things, but when we put them together, we come to a much deeper understanding than a surface, literal interpretation can give us.

Not that the literal interpretation isn’t also very important - the literal interpretation is the starting place, and the metaphor(s), anagogue(s), or moral lesson(s) ought not to contradict the plain sense of the literal reading.

jmcrae,
Thanks for the explanation.
So it’s another simple case of Mariaphobia.

I guess anti-Catholics think Catholics do Mariolatry;
Catholics think Anti-Catholics have Mariaphobia.

 

[patrick457]

[SIGN]
The :whacky: Little:whacky: Voices in :whacky: Jack Chick’s Head say: "Anyplace that doesn’t have a King Named James is Evil & Worshipping Idols, Or Else the :bowdown: :bowdown: Name James Would Be Among Them!!!
Woe to the Jameless! Woe, woe, I say, http://bestsmileys.com/silly/14.gifwoe!!!
[/SIGN]

But what about those countries that does not have a King?
OH NO!!! (Does Emperors count? if not, at least that’s an explanation why he does not like Constantine).

 

[JOE_OBERR]

In a thread started by Sixtus entitled, ironically, “Why do Protestants slander us?”, sandmountainsli posted the following list which he said was e-mailed to him. I already began answering these accusations in the original thread by giving proof that the dates are false. Then I when I got down to the claims of Transubstantiation and Confessions, I realized this list should have its own thread. It’s so blatantly wrong!

Comments anyone?

I would simply respond with: “Where did Jesus say all Christian doctrine and practice must be supported from bible verses?”

The answer of course is that he didn’t, either in Scripture (or in Tradition). I would say next: “Since Jesus didn’t say it, it must be a tradition of men (started or popularized by Martin Luther) which is not found in the holy, inspired Word of God found in Scripture. Therefore, we must avoid traditions of men which claim to be from God when in fact they are not, but simply a thought/whim/fancy that popped into someone’s head”

By answering such questions directly one accepts the presupposition in the question, namely, that all christian doctrine/practice MUST be supported by bible verses. Which is total nonsense. The Church has never taught that,

Thanks, Joe

 

[mercygate]

I bet they have electric lights & central heat in winter, though!! And I want to see where in the Bible ( KJV only!) they found the Biblical permission for those!

Well of course!! I once had a KJV-onlyist that I was telling about having my great-grandmother’s Dutch Bible that she brought over from Holland with her, when they emigrated back in the 19th century, & the first question I was asked was: “Oh! But is that the:whacky::whacky: Dutch King James?”:whacky: :whacky:
I only wish I was kidding…

Not entirely a joke. I have a 19th Century Greek bible that is back-translated from the King James Version into Greek.