Name 3 reasons you are not Catholic (yet).

  • Thread starter Thread starter cckz7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You are just trying to be a bully “I am calling your bluff”
Who cares. Your ignorance shows in the fact that you have thrown up a smoke screen and have not answered any of my questions. You simply go on the attack like a vulture looking for crumbs of rotten meat to make yourself look glorius taking away the questions asked. Is that the best you can do. Are you a Jesuit. You certainly act like one.

Bet you would like another inquisition. Then only you could ask the question and give the answers and then burn me at the stake.
Above, you offered to give the history of the Goths. I think that would be interesting to read. What is the history of the Goths?

GKC
 
Because she is a Protestant herself.
And how is that relevant?

Are you suggesting that Protestants think the Body of Christ is confined to Protestants? You really don’t know much about Protestants, do you? (Sure, some Protestants think this, but most do not.)

Edwin
 
You are just trying to be a bully “I am calling your bluff”
Who cares. Your ignorance shows in the fact that you have thrown up a smoke screen and have not answered any of my questions. You simply go on the attack like a vulture looking for crumbs of rotten meat to make yourself look glorius taking away the questions asked. Is that the best you can do. Are you a Jesuit. You certainly act like one.

Bet you would like another inquisition. Then only you could ask the question and give the answers and then burn me at the stake.
Sorry Edwin! I just have to laugh!
The idea of an Anglican-Jesuit is funny to me…
Contarini said:
Exactly. I have no problems with Catholics saying that Anglicanism is heretical. I have a problem with Catholics misrepresenting Anglicanism or assuming that just because I’m not Catholic therefore I am hostile to Catholicism. I became Anglican to get closer to Catholicism!

Edwin
Oh, not everyone here is Catholic…
I would get to know people before “assuming” they are Catholic.

God Bless
 
You are just trying to be a bully “I am calling your bluff”
No, I’m trying to get to the truth. Post your evidence, or at least explain what you are talking about. It is not my fault that you can’t do this–calling me names will not help you.

Do you care about truth, or not?
Your ignorance shows in the fact that you have thrown up a smoke screen and have not answered any of my questions.
What questions? The only question you have asked me is how I know what I know about the Goths. And since you made the claim first, you have to back it up first. I’m simply challenging you in the light of common knowledge, which you can acquire by picking up any book (or even no doubt reading Wikipedia) about the late Roman Empire, or early Christianity, or Germanic languages.

I will be happy to be more specific when you produce your sources.

Edwin
 
Sorry Edwin! I just have to laugh!
The idea of an Anglican-Jesuit is funny to me…
It’s probably not funny to Lively Stone. Many fundamentalists believe that Jesuits regularly impersonate members of other churches.

You should read the Chick tract on the origins of the KJV sometime. It’s one of the less offensive (relatively!) and more hilarious tracts. It claims that many of the KJV translators were Jesuits, but King James posted guards to stand over them and make sure they didn’t change the translation. There is a cool picture of very grim-looking pikemen glaring at villainous Jesuit translators. The tract does not explain whether these were unusually well-educated pikemen, who understood Greek and Hebrew and thus could check the accuracy of the translation!

Edwin
 
It’s probably not funny to Lively Stone. Many fundamentalists believe that Jesuits regularly impersonate members of other churches.

You should read the Chick tract on the origins of the KJV sometime. It’s one of the less offensive (relatively!) and more hilarious tracts. It claims that many of the KJV translators were Jesuits, but King James posted guards to stand over them and make sure they didn’t change the translation. There is a cool picture of very grim-looking pikemen glaring at villainous Jesuit translators. The tract does not explain whether these were unusually well-educated pikemen, who understood Greek and Hebrew and thus could check the accuracy of the translation!

Edwin
How does that lyric from that song “Mr. Grinch” (Dr Seuss) go? I think it something like “I wouldn’t touch you with a thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole!”

That’s how I feel about Chick and his tracks. However, I’m personally trying to get over that feeling. After all how can I “defend” my faith (Catholicism) if I don’t know what “offense” has up their sleeve?

Well have a good one Edwin and God Bless.
 
How does that lyric from that song “Mr. Grinch” (Dr Seuss) go? I think it something like “I wouldn’t touch you with a thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole!”

That’s how I feel about Chick and his tracks. However, I’m personally trying to get over that feeling. After all how can I “defend” my faith (Catholicism) if I don’t know what “offense” has up their sleeve?

Well have a good one Edwin and God Bless.
I used to get those tracts all the time, thought they were great, now I consider them blasphemeous!
 
How does that lyric from that song “Mr. Grinch” (Dr Seuss) go? I think it something like “I wouldn’t touch you with a thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole!”

That’s how I feel about Chick and his tracks.
Oh, I feel the same way. I almost kept this particular one, because as I said it was a relatively innocuous and very funny example. (My wife–then my girlfriend or fiancee, I can’t remember which–found it inside a book in the stacks of the Duke Divinity School library where she worked. Apparently someone was going around sticking these tracts into the books with the idea of converting the liberals of the Divinity School, or something.) But I didn’t like to keep it around. And something like the “Death Cookie” tract–well, let’s just say that Lively Stone might be confirmed in his fears of my inquisitorial tendencies if he saw how I respond to that piece of filth and blasphemy!

Edwin
 
And how is that relevant?
You asked a question I answered.
Are you suggesting that Protestants think the Body of Christ is confined to Protestants?
Not at all I never said such a thing.
You really don’t know much about Protestants, do you? (Sure, some Protestants think this, but most do not.)
Protestants hold a wide range of different views. I do not claim to know all about Protestants but I do understand the fundamentals and causes of the reformation. I understand the doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide which are held with most Evangelicals. On the other hand I will admit that my knowledge of “high churches” is somewhat limited.

I also understand that some Protestants do hold the view that the Catholic Church is not part of the Body of Christ.
 
You asked a question I answered.
But it wasn’t an adequate answer, because you have no reason to think that by “the Body of Christ” SinginBeauty meant “Protestants.” Therefore your statement was illogical and unjust.
Right, but you don’t know that SinginBeauty is one of them.

Also, many evangelicals believe that the Body of Christ is the Invisible Church, so they might not want to say that organized churches are “part” of the Body (because some members of any given church are likely not to be true members of the Body).

Edwin
[/QUOTE]
 
Dont you know that by quoting the CCC is the SAME as quoting Joseph Smith, Mohammad, Jim Jones, David Koresh and other people who claim to be THE “church” and lead God’s people astray?.
Why would anyone know this, since you have given no evidence for it?

Edwin
 
But it wasn’t an adequate answer, because you have no reason to think that by “the Body of Christ” SinginBeauty meant “Protestants.” Therefore your statement was illogical and unjust.
I never said or thought such thing. I understood very well that SinginBeauty meant Protestants and Catholics as being the Body of Christ. So how is my statement illogical or unjust?
Right, but you don’t know that SinginBeauty is one of them.
I know for a fact that SinginBeauty is not one of them. I never thought or claimed otherwise. Maybe you need to re-read our posts.
Also, many evangelicals believe that the Body of Christ is the Invisible Church, so they might not want to say that organized churches are “part” of the Body (because some members of any given church are likely not to be true members of the Body).
If thats the case we must find a disorganized and disfunctional “church” to belong to the Body of Christ.

Any given “church” may not have true members in them.

That form reasoning is packed with error.
 
I never said or thought such thing. I understood very well that SinginBeauty meant Protestants and Catholics as being the Body of Christ.
Then what was the point of saying that Protestants only went back 500 years or so? In SiB’s theology, the Body of Christ could quite easily exist long before there were any Protestants.
If thats the case we must find a disorganized and disfunctional “church” to belong to the Body of Christ.
Or we should accept the fact that we belong to churches all of whose members are not part of the Body. However, generally evangelicals think that you should try to ensure that as many as possible are.

I do not agree with this theology–I’m just describing it. I grew up believing it, until a professor in college challenged it in ways I could not refute.

Edwin
 
“[A] scientific study of
Englishh” begins with “the
study of Gothic” (The First
Germanic Bible Translated From the Greek
By The Gothic Bishop Wulfila In The Fourth
Century, ed. G.H. Balg, New York: B.
Westermann & Co., 1891, p. v).

Gothic was a major world language spoken at the time of
Christ. It was spoken as early as the “300s B.C.” [300 years
before Christ]. “Goths had been recruited in increasing
numbers into the Roman army.” “[T]heir relations with the
adjacent Roman empire were close…receiving diplomatic
subsidies and sending soldiers to fight” for Rome. (World Book
Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, Chicago: Field Enterprises Inc., 1961, s.v. Goth; Cambridge
History of the Bible, Vol. II, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963, p. 344;
Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World, ed. G.W. Bowersock, Cambridge,
Mass: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999, s.v. Goths, p. 475.)

The Gothic language was then one of those spoken in the
book of Acts chapter 2, when the disciples “were all filled
with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other
tongues…of every nation under heaven.” “[E]very man
heard them speak in his own language” (Acts 2:4, 6, 7).
Those unnamed Christians who received this Gothic gospel
message, took it to the Goths, obeying Christ’s command to
“Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel” (Mark
16:15)…“unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

“[A]bout the middle of the second century [A.D. 150]” and
“the early centuries A.D. …[the Goths] swept southeastward
across Europe to the Black Sea.” God drew them from
Scandinavia to Scythia (modern Romania and Bulgaria) to
meet the recently completed New Testament half way. The
Goths “migrated into Scythia” and became part of the

“Barbarian, Scythian,” people mentioned in Paul’s letter to
the Colossians (3:11). “At this time a vast number of Goths
were Christians, their conversion having been effected by
those whom they had carried into captivity.” “A large part
of the nation became Christian about this time.” (The First
Germanic Bible, p. xiv; The Bible Through the Ages, ed. Robert V. Huber, Pleasantville,
New York: The Reader’s Digest Association, 1996, pp. 224, 225; Encyclopaedia
Britannica, 11th ed., New York: Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., 1910-1911, s.v. Goths,
s.v. Rome, map of Scythia, pp. 648-649.)
“During the preceding century Christianity had been
planted sporadically among the Goths beyond the Danube,
through the agency in part of Christian captives,…and in
part of merchants and traders.” “[T]he Goths were
acquainted with Christianity before Ulfilas, [also called
Wulfila, ‘the apostle’ to the Goths] through missionary
work in their territory…” “By Ulfilas’ time, the Visigoths
[West Goths] were aware of Christianity not only because
of their captives but also through the missionaries who had
come to preach among them.” (EB, s.v. Ulfilas; Camb. Hist. Vol. 2, p.

339; The Bible Through the Ages, p. 224.)

Gothic Bible & Ulfilas

The original New Testament was complete before

A.D. 100; the Gothic Bible must have been
translated immediately to fill the need of the nearby
Gothic Christians, following the pattern of the urgent
multiplying of the Gospel itself. Paul said,

“But now is made manifest, and by the
scriptures…made known to all nations”
(Rom. 16:26), “the word of the truth of the
gospel; Which is come unto you, as it is in
all the world; and bringeth forth fruit” (Col.
1:5, 6).

God promised “the thoughts of his heart to all generations”
(Ps. 33:11). Confirming this promise, even scholars
recognize that the Gothic alphabet [and Bible] may have
existed before the A.D. 350 edition, attributed to Ulfilas by
secular historian Philostorgius, writing in A.D. 433. (The First

Germanic Bible, p. xv; Late Antiquity, s.v. Philostorgius; Bruce Metzger, The Early
Versions, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977, pp. 376, 377, n. 4, 5.)

Still think I was bluffing. Now keep your word and quit picking topics that you actually know little about. Please give your resoures and quit being whiner, lurker Offer somthing constructive… Had to stop at 5000 words. If the forum would like more I can post more.

Jesus is still the LORD.
 
So are you saying that Mary DID NOT have free will??
Are you saying that God forced Mary to conceive??
Who needs to force? Mary was visited by an angel. What would YOU do? Say “no”? She submitted to God’s Will. That’s it.
 
Then what was the point of saying that Protestants only went back 500 years or so? In SiB’s theology, the Body of Christ could quite easily exist long before there were any Protestants.

Or we should accept the fact that we belong to churches all of whose members are not part of the Body. However, generally evangelicals think that you should try to ensure that as many as possible are.

I do not agree with this theology–I’m just describing it. I grew up believing it, until a professor in college challenged it in ways I could not refute.

Edwin
Pentecostals was with Jesus. The Church was born on Pentecost.
 
Why would anyone know this, since you have given no evidence for it?

Edwin
Some of the canons and traditions of the RCC contradicts Scripture and yet, because your pope says so, you put his words above the Word.
 
Pentecostals was with Jesus. The Church was born on Pentecost.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

If you think there’s any relationship between the modern Pentecostal denomination and what the Apostles were teaching at Pentecost you’re sadly deluded
 
Some of the canons and traditions of the RCC contradicts Scripture and yet, because your pope says so, you put his words above the Word.
No, we listen to the words of the Pope and Bishops precisely *because *THE WORD (Jesus, through the Holy Spirit) guides them (not so much the Pope as an individual) and protects them from error, as he promised to do. So The Word speaks now through their words - how else do you think he is still with us and still guiding us? Through your thousands of separate churches no two members of whom agree on even the most basic points if you ask them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top