Personal interpretation

[TobyLue]

It isn’t a matter of church documents at all. It is only about what you worship.

This is what is worrisome about doggg. Things are explained to him, things cited, things quoted about what Catholics worship but he seems to be acting like a 6 year old. “neener, neener, yes you do, yes you do”.
I went through most of this thread and he likes to ask questions but when those questions are answered and is asked to provide answer to questions asked of him he dodges them like the plague because he is not able to answer them.
Also, it is not very Christian of him that he has been asked more then once and in a very kind manner and Christian way to please refer to the CC as the CC but he continues to keep using RCC. I know that it was explained to him that the term RCC was used as a derogatory way, and apparently because he feels that the CC is not the true church he will continue to use the derogatory RCC instead of the proper name The Catholic Church or CC.

This, doggg, is not showing charity. Or, does yout church preach that you are not to respect others and to go ahead and use terms that will incite and insult them?

Also you are making false accusations which have been debunked but as I said you continue your 6 year old “neener, neener, yes you do, yes you do” rhetoric.

Doggg, if you are unable to answer as to where we got the bible, and what did the early Christians use, who by the way, most were illiterate, you actually have no leg to stand on. You stand on your own personal interpretation which your not even sure if you are interpreting it correctly or not!

If I have a problem with certain part of scripture, I thank Jesus that he left me a Church to go to for clarification. Who do you go to? Oh, you will probably say that you trust the Holy Spirit to guide you. But still you dont know for sure if it is the Holy Spirit or a holey spirit that is giving you the answer.

To me even if I were to hear a loud boom and say “This is God speaking and I am giving you the correct interpretation”, I still need to test it and go to the Church that Jesus left us with because he said that the Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth; not the Bible, not or fuzzy-wuzzy feeling. Jesus didnt leave us with something that would keep us guessing.

As a matter a fact, I know that you cant even answer these simple questions. How do you know the bible is the bible? Where does it say in the Bible, that Jesus (God) commanded anybody to write down a book or your KJV? Even if the Bible were to say, “This is the Word of God”, how would you know it? Simply because it says in a book? What if I were to write a book and make the same claim, would that make it God’s word? The LDS claim the BOM is the Word of God, why not believe them. The Muslims claim the Koran is the Word of God, why not believe them?

 

[TobyLue]

But I’m a Christian. Therefore, I ought to be willing take a risk and bring you a very important message if I care about you. I don’t want to offend any of you! If I knew of some way to tell you these things without any pain, I sure would.

Oh, and Catholics are not Christians? You say you bring a very important message, but that is very close to proselytizing and that is against forum rules. So far you have not given any messages, but dodge question after question and acted uncharitably towards those you have been very patient in explaining to you and you are preaching against a Catholic Church that does not exist.
Actually you ARE offending Catholics here by your continual use of “RCC” (and it seems you take pleasure in doing so) instead of the proper name of the Church that Jesus founded as The Catholic Church", or simply the CC.

 

[TobyLue]

If I stop answering your questions and act like I’m evading them, it is because I really would prefer NOT to be banned.

I have yet to see a question asked of you that would cause you to be banned if you answer it in a charitable manner. So why not take a whack at it?

And if you get banned than you can go back to your church and make the claim that those Catholic’s dont want to hear the truth like I have seen others from different forums.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Doggg,

You would do well to document your opinions with evidence.

As I see it, your position seems to enflame others with outrageous statements and then refuse to give souce for basing these statements on. For example, your insulting comparison between the ancient Hebrews worshiping the Egyptian calf idol with Catholic belief in Christ saying that His Church - the ONE He founded on Peter (Matt 16:18) will withstand the Gates of Hell.

What takes place between you and the Monitors is not my business. When you fail to be factual, when you fail to be logical and when you fail to stay on the thread - you tend to wander hopelessly off course. Such wandering cry out for a course correction

“Personal Interpretation” totally deviates from the Word of God - for it sets up everyone the sole authority on how Scripture is to be understood. So, here we have a book that is over 2000 years old - and the illusion is that anyone can pick it up and understand what is really being said. In Acts 8:31 we have the Ethopian with totally accurate insight - he recognized his profound limitations. At that moment, God sent a messanger - one of His Apostles - to explain the Scripture. This is where the action is - and this Ethopian was far closer in time to Christ and the culture of the area than we are!

Try a few facts - even if they don’t conform to your bias against the Catholic Church.

God bless

What do you want me to respond to? You didn’t say.

I’ve already been warned tonight by the moderator that I’m in danger of being banned. If I stop answering your questions and act like I’m evading them, it is because I really would prefer NOT to be banned. Please understand my situation. What I’m trying to tell you probably can’t be said in a way that is pleasant for Catholics to hear. But I’m a Christian. Therefore, I ought to be willing take a risk and bring you a very important message if I care about you. I don’t want to offend any of you! If I knew of some way to tell you these things without any pain, I sure would.

 

[Doggg]

As a matter a fact, I know that you cant even answer these simple questions. How do you know the bible is the bible? Where does it say in the Bible, that Jesus (God) commanded anybody to write down a book or your KJV? Even if the Bible were to say, “This is the Word of God”, how would you know it? Simply because it says in a book? What if I were to write a book and make the same claim, would that make it God’s word? The LDS claim the BOM is the Word of God, why not believe them. The Muslims claim the Koran is the Word of God, why not believe them?

Your point is well taken. By your questions, I can see that you are looking for objective facts and not subjective personal interpretations.

I started this topic mainly to demonstrate that in spite of RC claims to infallible knowledge obtained from the alleged infallible magisterium, the whole “chain” cannot be any stronger than the weakest link in the chain, which is the personal interpretation link. It is as though many Catholics demand infallible non-subjective knowledge…which, if we had such knowledge, would make faith completely unnecessary.

My conclusion is that the whole of Christian life can be summed up by FAITH IN JESUS, not faith in some alleged infallible religious institution by which genuine faith (in Jesus) is mocked as if it were a silly and useless thing.

 

[SacredHeart1987]

It has been explained on this forum that it is wrong to interpret the bible on our own. Why is that wrong? What is the correct way to interpret the bible?

I interpret scripture in light of Catholic teaching.

 

[Cinette]

As I’ve already pointed out, the apostles we read about in the NT apparently knew nothing about any popes. This, among other things, would certainly disqualify the RCC.

*And I would like to point out that the Apostles and Disciples of the NT knew nothing about jet engines, telephones, computers,…etc …and Sola Scriptura!!

Disqualify the RCC for what? By the way the official name of our Church is The Catholic Church. Learn to get it right.

*

 

[Cinette]

You are being really childish. …

To answer your question… First of all, it is not my “personal interpretation” of Catholic teachings. The Catholic Church teaches that it will not recognize secular divorce. Again, this is not my interpretation. The Church is clear on this. Anybody who has relations with anybody “divorced” in the secular world is in a state of mortal sin.

The Catholic teaching on divorce is more extensive than that. A marriage must be both lawful and valid and the Church will look at the validity of a marriage and execute justice. This is a topic for another thread.

Keep in mind this is not necessarily what I think. The way I think about unity and Christ’s promise is exactly as the Epistles taught. St. Paul himself mentions his own authority over the people in the Corinthians.

If you think the thousands of denominations are in unity, then have fun “being in unity” with denominations who do not believe in the Trinity, the inerrancy of the Bible, the infallibility of the Bible, Christ’s divinity, hell, free will, predestination, one God, reason, going to church, etc… And have fun “being in unity” with denominations who believe in one God, three gods, Trinity, no Trinity salvation by faith alone, salvation by faith and works, Christ as prophet only, Purgatory, no Purgatory, Real Presence of Jesus’ Body and Blood, no presence of body or blood, authority outside Scripture, no authority outside Scripture, Baptism as sacrament, Baptism as mere symbol, etc…

Yeah… Does not sound so “united”, does it? If you are right, then Christ has miserably failed. If the Catholic Church is right, then Christ has, is and will continue to fulfill His promise. The latter statement is the correct one. I have proved it also. But, I will post my proof again.

*You have a great deal of patience GreggAlvarez - muito paciencia!

*

 

[benedictus2]

In your opinion, can a person worship what he or she praises? At some rather extreme point, doesn’t praise sometimes turn into worship?

Sometimes perhaps for those who are ignorant of their faith.

But not if you know the truth.

 

[benedictus2]

Your point is well taken. You are looking for objective facts and not subjective interpretations. We have come full-circle in our discussion.

I started this topic mainly to demonstrate that in spite of RC claims to infallible knowledge obtained from the alleged infallible magisterium, the whole “chain” cannot be any stronger than the weakest link in that chain, which is the personal interpretation link.

I think what you are trying to say here is that it begins to be petitio principii - begging the question.

But… not quite.

If I was debating an atheist, your point makes sense. But not with a Christian.

You see, with a Christian what stops this from being circular is the fact that we both hold the Bible to inerrant.

Now, if you don’t hold the Bible to be inerrant then obviously this does not work.

But if you don’t hold the Bible to be inerrant, then you are not a Christian so this whole question of personal interpretation becomes nonsense.

The Bible then is reduced to another fiction the interpretation of which does not really matter. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit becomes questionable and so does every article of the Christian faith.

Basically, all you’ve done with this comment is bracket yourself along with the atheists.

It is as though many RC’s demand infallible non-subjective truth…which, if we had such a thing, would make faith completely unnecessary.

Why would it make faith unnecessary? How would the fact that there has to be an objective truth nullify faith.

My conclusion is that the whole of Christian life can be summed up by FAITH in Jesus, not FAITH in some alleged infallible religious institution by which genuine faith (in Jesus) is mocked as if it were a silly and useless thing.

Aaah but faith in Jesus means exactly that, belief in Him and He SAID A LOT OF THINGS WHICH YOU DO NOT BELIEVE. One of them is that He established a Church and that He said eat my body, drink my blood.

How can you claim to have faith when you disregard so much of what Christ said?

 

[PRmerger]

In your opinion, can a person worship what he or she praises? At some rather extreme point, doesn’t praise sometimes turn into worship?

Of course.



But, as there has never been a single Magisterial document that proclaims that Catholics must worship Catholicism (how :whacky: is this propostion! I must say that in all my years on the CAFs hearing objections to my faith, this is the first time I’ve ever encountered this criticism), there is no need to bark up this tree.

I just as soon might say that those who praise the Bible can turn their praise and affection into worship of the Bible.

 

[PRmerger]

This is a SERIOUS figment - in fact, it is the only one that counts as far as I can determine from Doggg’s posts! Without this figment of the Catholic Church … well … there really would only reality to consider…

Indeed.

There is nothing–no objection to Catholicism --that cannot be refuted. Thus, one needs to create a Catholicism which exists only in the anti-Catholic imaginations in order to persist in being anti-Catholic.

 

[PRmerger]

I’ve already been warned tonight by the moderator that I’m in danger of being banned. If I stop answering your questions and act like I’m evading them, it is because I really would prefer NOT to be banned.

This is an absurd argument. “I must avoid answering questions so I won’t be banned”

Just so all are clear: there are a multitude of charitable non-Catholic posters who seem to be able to defend their arguments, answer questions posed to them and challenge Catholics without getting banned.

What was clear was that the questions posed by Catholics here (i.e. “Where did the Bible come from if not the CC?”) were never considered before by some non-Catholics. And when challenged on this, did not have an answer.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Doggg,

Let me point out the problems in the approach you have chosen…

Your point is well taken. By your questions, I can see that you are looking for objective facts and not subjective personal interpretations.

It appears that you are treating ‘objective fact’ as some kind of impediment to ‘personal interpretations’. Ultimately, if there are no facts then we become like the ancient Greeks looking at the heavens and naming stars and constellations to match the pagan gods they have created. Everything is done from whole cloth - and while they make for interesting stories - this is a sad way to approach eternity since Christ has come and purchased our salvation with His Blood.

I started this topic mainly to demonstrate that in spite of RC claims to infallible knowledge obtained from the alleged infallible magisterium, the whole “chain” cannot be any stronger than the weakest link in the chain, which is the personal interpretation link.

One of the problems with having an opinion on everything without the facts to back it up is that those who differ with you do not even have to aim - they just pull the ‘logic trigger’ and your argument is destroyed.

Let’s see how this works in practice…

Matt 16:18 Christ founds His Chruch on Peter, tells him that the Gates of Hell will not prevail and gives him the Keys to the Kingdom as a sign of Peter’s unique authority. Note, there were not eleven others sets of keys that Christ handed out that day.

John 14:26 Christ promises that the Holy Spirit will come and remind the Apostles - the First Bishops of the Catholic Church of all that Chirst taught them (please note, CC is an acceptable abbreviation, but RC is meaningless except in the demeaning sense used by Protestants who boast about not being lead by the men Christ put in charge of His Church - a truly curious statement from splinter groups claiming to want to follow Christ - but, to do so on their terms)

John 16:13 Christ promises that the Holy Spirt will guide His Church - and this means that it can not teach error, it can not teach people to leave Christ and form their own man-made religion and can not teach that merely saying, “Lord!! Lord!” (it appears that Christ anticipated the SF heresy) would they be saved (Matt 7:21).

Your cliche about the '…weakest link…" should immediately invite you to re-examine your own chain - one of the 30,000+ ‘chains’ dangling around that can not support the weight of their own man-made doctrines.

Bottom line: Christ founded His Church on Peter, and Peter began leading the Church after Christ ascended into heaven. Christ did not leave us orphans (John 14:18) and the successors to Peter NEVER taught error - and, we have Christ’s Word on that. So, who are you going to believe - Christ or some 16th (or later) Century malcontent who missed the entire point of Divine Guidance being able to work through sinful men - and that includes sinful Popes.

It is as though many Catholics demand infallible non-subjective knowledge…which, if we had such knowledge, would make faith completely unnecessary.

So, you do not think Faith is necessary, Doggg? In the above verses I have quoted and referenced we have the Words of Christ - and we are expected to believe. Look at all of the false arguements offered by Protestants on why these very clearly stated Words should not be believed. When I ask myself, “Self, how can they deny what is plainly written?” the answer I get back is that it has nothing to do with the Words of Scripture - it has everything with an agenda. There must be an on-going argument to justify the voluntary split with the Church of Christ (and, that would be the Catholic Church) or else they would have to return. Human pride has simply blocked that approach.

My conclusion is that the whole of Christian life can be summed up by FAITH IN JESUS, not faith in some alleged infallible religious institution by which genuine faith (in Jesus) is mocked as if it were a silly and useless thing.

Let me invite you to read the 25th Chapter of Matthew. There are three very interesting stories as to why such claimed ‘faith without works’ is really dead - and leads to eternal death.

We have a story of 10 virgins - five were wise and five were foolish … and we have to ask ourselves just what did foolish mean. In my opinion this does not mean stupid - rather they chose to do things their own way. Note at the end of the paable, the door is shut against them - the Bridegroom does not change His Mind and say something like, “Aw, they were pretty good girls…and lets them in!” Nope they stay out in the cold.

The lazy servant - knew the Master … or, at least thought he did! And, looks what his laziness (doing things his way and NOT Christ’s Way) cost him. Please recall, Christ founded a Church for a reason - and, we are to use the means provided by Christ.

Finally, the group who claimed they would have done good if they had actually seen Christ in the hungry, naked and imprisoned. They do not come to a good end.

As I see it, the issue really comes to down to Faith. Either you believe Christ and that means EVERYTHING HE SAID - or - you are on your own. Please note there is not a lot of grey area between these two positions.

I invite you to respond with a reasoned argument to this presentation.

 

[TobyLue]

Doggg

My conclusion is that the whole of Christian life can be summed up by** FAITH IN JESUS**, not faith in some alleged infallible religious institution by which genuine faith (in Jesus) is mocked as if it were a silly and useless thing.

Exactly!!! Now you got it. We Catholics DO HAVE FAITH IN JESUS. But what is that faith?
Faith that we believe in what Jesus said. Faith that Jesus’ words were true when he said “Upon this rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH” Which Church was it and is it still around
Faith In Jesus that He spoke the truth when he said that the gates of hell would not prevail. Upon who? His Church.
Faith in Jesus when He said “This IS my Body, This IS my Blood”
Faith in Jesus when He said “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Faith in Jesus when He said “I will not leave you orphans”.

So you see dogg, we DO have faith in Jesus, and He left us the means to know if what we perceive as Faith is true and not just our own personal feelings, or our own PERSONAL INTERPRETATIONS, that can lead us astray. Again as has been pointed out to you, look at what personal interpretation has done in 500 years; thousand of different denominations, of which the one you belong to falls in that same error.

Faith in Jesus that HE left us a church, and not a book. And it is that Church that tells us that that book is the word of God.

Faith in Jesus that He left us a Church that can, with the authority received from that same Jesus, make the claim that IT IS INFALLIBLE.

If the Church is not infallible, then that same Church could have error in compiling the Bible from those hundreds of letters and gospels that were floating around, and we are all hopelessly lost as we have no guarantee that what is stated in that book is the true Jesus, the true God.

How did you learn about Jesus, doggg? Did He manifest Himself to you one day, or did you read Him in a book. How do you know that that book is true?
I dont know if you said it or someone else said that the Bible is infallible. That is NOT true. That bible is NOT infallible, but it is inerrent. (sp) The Church through its authority given to Her by Jesus, makes that claim and it has to be infallible to make such a claim. Without the infallibility of the Church you would never have known who Jesus was and is.

Oh, and we don’t mock Jesus. We believe in His every word. It is YOU who mocks Jesus by claiming His Church is " some alleged infallible religious institution by which genuine faith (in Jesus) is mocked." Be careful, you are very close to calling Jesus a liar.

 

[inkaneer]

How many times do we have to go over and over and over the same plowed ground??? Don’t you people see that Dogg is not posing legitimate questions as he is making statements as an automatron. He is not here to learn about Catholicism as he is to evangelize his heresy. Now you have been more than gracious to him, it is time to cast him off. This thread ran its course long time ago and should have been locked then.

 

[Ben_F]

This “argument” can go both ways and hence, not be a good argument at all.

By the same token, one can purposely NOT read into the text what IS there.

I can say, “Jesus did not mean that the Apostles ACTUALLY forgive and that we are supposed to confess our sins to them. He did not give them that authority.”

Seems like non-Catholics are the one reading into the texts what is not there and then NOT read into the text what IS there.

Kind of like “This is my body”. Non-Catholics read “This is my body, but not really.”

Whose sins you forgive are forgiven. Where anywhere, in the Scriptures or elsewhere, does it give us a way to handle the problem of sin? I know of no other writings that gives us a specific way to confess our sins. There are writings in scriptures that tell us to confess and our sins will be forgiven, but not how to confess. This is how Jesus wants us to do it. My non Catholic brothers and sisters may do it another way, but this is the way Jesus wants us to do it. God bless:thumbsup:

 

[TobyLue]

Let us all pray for doggg

I can see that you have very strong faith in your religion. But that is not the faith that saves. It amounts to the worship of a religion, not much different from that of Muslim extremists. If the RCC ever starts to proclaim that there is no salvation outside of the RCC,** run away from Rome, and run away fast! **It is nothing but the worship of a religion. It is idol worship, and it is not a tiny sin!

I know that doggg is banned but for the sake of others - I have seen some accuse Catholics of worshiping a religion, however, they fail to see the log in their eye as **they worship their own personal interpretation **of scripture. They in other words are telling God, they will worship Him according to their own standards and they know better the He does.

The “…run away from Rome and run away fast” is proselytizing. My answer to that is they need to runaway from their own personal interpretation and run away fast, etc.

All these objections to the CC remind me of the words in scripture “…did God really say…” (Gen.)

God bless …

 

[PRmerger]

Doggg, if you are unable to answer as to where we got the bible, and what did the early Christans use, who by the way, most were illiterate, you actually have no leg to stand on.

Indeed. I truly believe that most non-Catholics have never–not even once–thought about how the Bible came to be.

Once that question is addressed by non-Catholics, what logic dictates is these truths:

-“Scripture alone” is untenable, for without the Church there would be no Scripture.

-there is indeed an infallible authority. Otherwise, these non-Catholic Christians would have to acknowledge that there is an error in these Scriptures that the Church discerned.

Clearly, these non-Catholic Christians profess that the Bible is inerrant. Therefore, the authority which declared these Scriptures to be theopneustos is inerrant as well.

There is no other logical way to look at this.

You stand on your own personal interpretation which your not even sure if you are interpreting it correctly or not!

Exactly. And, by this paradigm of personal interpretation apart from the Catholic faith, there is no way to tell another reader of Scripture, “Your interpretation is incorrect. Scripture does NOT state that there are many gods.”

 

[gtrenewed]

Indeed. I truly believe that most non-Catholics have never–not even once–thought about how the Bible came to be.

Having been a bible school trained protestant pastor before reverting, this is not entirely true.

They look at the early church as small ‘c’ catholic/universal church. They see it as God delivering scripture through the apostles and then guiding the councils to protect what was given. The CC as an organization in their view betrayed the Apostles at some point in time. While they believe there are some Christians in the CC, it is in spite of, not because of.

They see Jesus as protecting His people who ‘follow’ Him. For instance, let’s say that a blessing comes to you from God but through a less than Godly person. God made sure you were blessed like the OT prophet, Balam, who was stopped by his donkey from being slain by the angel. In their understanding, scripture came to them in spite of the CC not because of it.

However, they don’t really look past the Apostles at how the first church believed and behaved. They really can’t for they would see the Mass and the Eucharist as the real presence of Jesus.

I have seen you present this arguement many times but your point is not understood because they see scripture delivered and protected by the Holy Spirit. I am not suggesting you stop making the arguement for it is true and maybe it will effect someone but it never effected me as one would have hoped.