Play by Play v. Color Commentary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
rr1213 said:
Please tell me that this contention that John the Baptist never sinned has not been dogmatically defined/proclaimed by the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Why? Would it really matter to you personally either way?
 
rr1213 said:
Truly, “all have sinned” doesn’t mean “all have sinned”. “No one is righteous” doesn’t mean “no one is righteous”. The amazing passage from Romans proclaiming that “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” actually reveals an unnecessary sacrifice because the world is full of sinless people. We are not in bondage to sin but, rather there are all of these sinless people around us…Mary, John the Baptist, John’s parents…who is next?

Please tell me that this contention that John the Baptist never sinned has not been dogmatically defined/proclaimed by the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
“My flesh is real food” really means “My flesh has nothing to do with food - I’m speaking only of spiritual encouragement.”

“Not by faith alone” really means “not by a special type of faith not specified in the Bible alone”.

“You are Peter and on this rock” really means “you are Peter and upon myself (or your confession - I haven’t decided yet), I will build my church.”

“Confess your sins to one another” really means “confess your sins to God alone.”

“Blessed are you among women” really means “you’re no different from anyone else.”

“Baptism now saves you” really means “you are saved by saying the sinner’s prayer and you can be baptized as a public testimony if you want to.”

“This IS my body” really means “this is not my body; it’s just bread symbolizing my body.”

“He will lead you into ALL truth” really means “you’re on your own to figure out what you think is true and what is not. Good luck.”

Anyone else have any contributions for this list?
 
rr1213 said:
Let’s assume for a moment that John the Baptist was washed of his original sin in the womb at the time of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth. Yes, John was greatest among those born of women, but also he is least among the kingdom of God. We also are washed of our orginal sin at the time of baptism yet we still sin. We have no reason to believe that in this sense John is different from the 10 Billion (or whatever) other people who have lived on the earth during the course of history.
Click to expand...
There are four possibilities:
  1. No Original Sin. Personal Sin. (Adam and Eve)
  2. Original sin, Personal Sin. (all of us)
  3. Original sin. No Personal Sin. (John the Baptist???)
  4. No Original Sin. No Personal Sin. (Mary - the New Eve)
 
Randy_Carson said:
“My flesh is real food” really means “My flesh has nothing to do with food - I’m speaking only of spiritual encouragement.”

“Not by faith alone” really means “not by a special type of faith not specified in the Bible alone”.

“You are Peter and on this rock” really means “you are Peter and upon myself (or your confession - I haven’t decided yet), I will build my church.”

“Confess your sins to one another” really means “confess your sins to God alone.”

“Blessed are you among women” really means “you’re no different from anyone else.”

“Baptism now saves you” really means “you are saved by saying the sinner’s prayer and you can be baptized as a public testimony if you want to.”

“This IS my body” really means “this is not my body; it’s just bread symbolizing my body.”

“He will lead you into ALL truth” really means “you’re on your own to figure out what you think is true and what is not. Good luck.”

Anyone else have any contributions for this list?
Click to expand...
Irony will get you nowhere. At least not this type of irony. All you have done is take the most extreme evangelical positions and made caricatures of them. And I don’t buy most of these positions anyway in their real form, let alone the caricatures.
 
rr1213 said:
You were raised in an evangelical church, the Methodist Church, why do you think it would matter to me?
Click to expand...
What Randy may be alluding to, is that no matter whether John the Baptist, Zechariah, Elizabeth, or any other member of the NT or OT is sinless or not is irrelevant.

God may have made special exceptions for these people, like He did with the Good Thief, but just as winning the lottery is not a sound investment strategy, expecting to win the Divine Intervention Lottery is not a sound Salvation strategy.

We know the rules of the New Covenant, and unless God makes a special exception for us, we need to follow the rules set up for us within the New Covenant.
 
Randy_Carson said:
There are four possibilities:
  1. No Original Sin. Personal Sin. (Adam and Eve)
  2. Original sin, Personal Sin. (all of us)
  3. Original sin. No Personal Sin. (John the Baptist???)
  4. No Original Sin. No Personal Sin. (Mary - the New Eve)
Click to expand...
I think you have made an error with number 3. It is impossible for you to refrain from all sin if you are subject to original sin because your nature is corrupted by the fall. Likewise, it is conceivable but highly unlikely that if you were born without original sin that you might refrain from personal sin.
 
NotWorthy said:
What Randy may be alluding to, is that no matter whether John the Baptist, Zechariah, Elizabeth, or any other member of the NT or OT is sinless or not is irrelevant.

God may have made special exceptions for these people, like He did with the Good Thief, but just as winning the lottery is not a sound investment strategy, expecting to win the Divine Intervention Lottery is not a sound Salvation strategy.

We know the rules of the New Covenant, and unless God makes a special exception for us, we need to follow the rules set up for us within the New Covenant.
Click to expand...
You’re right that if God decides to make a special exception He is sovereign and such exception is not my business. Nonetheless, it matters if the Catholic Church declares John the Baptist, or his parents, to be sinless because this would be contrary to the teaching of Scripture. Respectfully, the Church’s teaching regarding the Immaculate Conception is a stretch to begin with…to extend the concept, or a related concept, to other persons, notably persons who are not the Mother of God, is not merited by Scripture.
 
rr1213 said:
You’re right that if God decides to make a special exception He is sovereign and such exception is not my business. Nonetheless, it matters if the Catholic Church declares John the Baptist, or his parents, to be sinless because this would be contrary to the teaching of Scripture. Respectfully, the Church’s teaching regarding the Immaculate Conception is a stretch to begin with…to extend the concept, or a related concept, to other persons, notably persons who are not the Mother of God, is not merited by Scripture.
Click to expand...
RR, your “stretch” was accepted by Theologians far, far more knowledgable than you and I (put together) for over 1000 years, with little or no doubts raised, even including the first years of the Reformation.

As for me, I’ll go with Scripture and Tradition.
 
NotWorthy said:
RR, your “stretch” was accepted by Theologians far, far more knowledgable than you and I (put together) for over 1000 years, with little or no doubts raised, even including the first years of the Reformation.

As for me, I’ll go with Scripture and Tradition.
Click to expand...
If you want to contend that there is a long-held tradition that Mary did not sin, I’ll agree with that. It was not undisputed though, even in ancient times. Take a look at the online Catholic Encyclopedia article on the IC and the ECF who believed that Mary did sin, albeit in a small, small way. Further, as you know, that tradition was not dogmatically definined until the 1850s.
Nonethess, I understand the Catholic teaching on this issue although I do no agree with it. Making the case for someone other than Mary I don’t understand.
 
rr1213 said:
You were raised in an evangelical church, the Methodist Church, why do you think it would matter to me?
Click to expand...
I don’t think it matters one whit to you what the Catholic Church teaches. Consequently, when you say “please don’t tell me the Catholic Church teaches this”, the question is meaningless because what the Catholic Church does or does not teach has no bearing on your life.

You were probably asking a rhetorical question for effect. You could have said, “Omigosh, I can’t believe you idiots believe this” with about the same impact.
 
rr1213 said:
Of course.
Click to expand...
As should all Christians. However, I picked up a book by Ron Rhodes at a Lifeway Christian bookstore the other day, and one of his “10 Most Important Things To Say To Catholics” is that Mary is not the Mother of God.

At least a few of your fellow Protestants are modern day Nestorians.
 
rr1213 said:
If you want to contend that there is a long-held tradition that Mary did not sin, I’ll agree with that. It was not undisputed though, even in ancient times. Take a look at the online Catholic Encyclopedia article on the IC and the ECF who believed that Mary did sin, albeit in a small, small way. Further, as you know, that tradition was not dogmatically definined until the 1850s.
Nonethess, I understand the Catholic teaching on this issue although I do no agree with it. Making the case for someone other than Mary I don’t understand.
Click to expand...
True, but accepted Church teaching and Dogmatic Church teaching are often on different scales, timewise. A vast majority of our teachings are not dogmatically defined (IMHO), and do not get dogmatically defined except to counter a challenge to the teaching of the church. That’s why you see so many that sprung out of Trent, in counter to the Reformation.

The NT Canon was not Dogmatically defined until, what, the 1500’s? But we saw the accepted Church teaching on this in the 390’s.

Mary’s Immaculate Conception was a long-accepted teaching. Yes, there were arguments, but relatively minor compared to other hurdles (can you spell “pope”?).

BTW, the Dogma of the IC was demanded of the Pope by the Faithful, rather than to counter any heretical arguements.
 
Randy_Carson said:
I don’t think it matters one whit to you what the Catholic Church teaches. Consequently, when you say “please don’t tell me the Catholic Church teaches this”, the question is meaningless because what the Catholic Church does or does not teach has no bearing on your life.

You were probably asking a rhetorical question for effect. You could have said, “Omigosh, I can’t believe you idiots believe this” with about the same impact.
Click to expand...
You’re wrong Randy. My family is actively considering converting to the Catholic Church so what it teaches is important to me on a personal basis apart from the intellectual/theological angle. My point was that you were Protestant so you should know why I, as a Protestant, would have issues about the Church teaching that John the Baptist was without sin. Moreover, you can see a million and one threads here on CA about Protestants who have problems accepting that Mary was without sin, let alone John the Baptist. You’ve personally participated in many of these threads.

When Protestants dispute with Catholics about the Marian doctrines one of the common Catholic responses goes something like: “But this isn’t about Mary, who by the way always points to her son, this is about Jesus…the Marian doctrines are important because of what they tell us about Jesus.” The same principle applies with respect to John the Baptist and whether or not the Church declares that he was without sin. Such a declaration would not be important per se because of what it would say about John (who most certainly is in heaven as we speak) but, instead, for what it would say about the Catholic Church and her faithfulness to the Scriptures.
 
Randy_Carson said:
As should all Christians. However, I picked up a book by Ron Rhodes at a Lifeway Christian bookstore the other day, and one of his “10 Most Important Things To Say To Catholics” is that Mary is not the Mother of God.

At least a few of your fellow Protestants are modern day Nestorians.
Click to expand...
No doubt.
 
rr1213 said:
Irony will get you nowhere. At least not this type of irony. All you have done is take the most extreme evangelical positions and made caricatures of them. And I don’t buy most of these positions anyway in their real form, let alone the caricatures.
Click to expand...
The last of my caricatures was a bit over the edge (though it still contains a kernel of truth).

However, which of the other statements do not reflect the actual positions of most non-Catholics?
 
rr1213 said:
You’re wrong Randy. My family is actively considering converting to the Catholic Church so what it teaches is important to me on a personal basis apart from the intellectual/theological angle. My point was that you were Protestant so you should know why I, as a Protestant, would have issues about the Church teaching that John the Baptist was without sin. Moreover, you can see a million and one threads here on CA about Protestants who have problems accepting that Mary was without sin, let alone John the Baptist. You’ve personally participated in many of these threads.

When Protestants dispute with Catholics about the Marian doctrines one of the common Catholic responses goes something like: “But this isn’t about Mary, who by the way always points to her son, this is about Jesus…the Marian doctrines are important because of what they tell us about Jesus.” The same principle applies with respect to John the Baptist and whether or not the Church declares that he was without sin. Such a declaration would not be important per se because of what it would say about John (who most certainly is in heaven as we speak) but, instead, for what it would say about the Catholic Church and her faithfulness to the Scriptures.
Click to expand...
RR1213-

I wish to apologize most sincerely.

I did not realize that your family is considering “crossing the Tiber”, and this explains why I have often felt a kinship in some of your posts while scratching my head over others. You’re a “work in progress”! And I’m thrilled to hear you may be joining us. Soon I hope!:clapping:

As for the John the Baptist stuff, I have no probably stating openly that what I have written is just my own theorizing and speculating. I have never read a Church document that commented on the sinlessness of JtB.

I throw out the ideas, however, to give some pause to those non-C’s who seek to bring down Mary by having them think a little more deeply (probably for the first time) about JtB.

Again, my apologies for my comments toward you. I’ll try to remember your “in training” status in the future. 🙂

Peace.
 
Randy_Carson said:
The last of my caricatures was a bit over the edge (though it still contains a kernel of truth).

However, which of the other statements do not reflect the actual positions of most non-Catholics?
Click to expand...
As I noted previously, I would differ from many Protestants as to many of these propositions. If you are talking about most Protestants, however, I think the following would not be accurate:

*“Blessed are you among women” really means “you’re no different from anyone else.”

“He will lead you into ALL truth” really means “you’re on your own to figure out what you think is true and what is not. Good luck.”*

Putting aside the caricatures for a moment, I don’t think most Protestants believe that Mary is no different from anyone else. She gave birth to Jesus and the Scriptures say she is blessed for all time. We refer to Mary in both the Apostles and Nicene Creeds. She is clearly different from everyone else, not that most Protestants would believe in the IC.

As for the second one, Protestants rely on Scripture and the Holy Spirit to lead us into truth. We do not believe that we’re “on our own”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top