D
Dokimas
Guest
BTW, why do you care if my argument is valid?
Please give me the name of the man, or men, that founded the Catholic Church, and when...
- Status
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Through an interpretation of scriptures, I believe Christ gave the Church the assurance He would be with it until the consummation of the world and not leave them as orphans, not knowing which way to go. He told the men He chose and appointed over His Church that He would send the Holy Spirit to them, teaching them ALL truth.
The Church didn’t tell me to join it. I converted through scriptures and reasoning and I approached them. I believe the Holy Spirit has me where He wants me to be.
Scriptures definitely tell us of an authoritative Church. Scriptures do not tell us that scriptures are the final authority, to be judged individually. It is illogical to think that everyone can read scriptures on their own and be of one mind and judgment. We need to be led, one flock, one shepherd.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I care when I see someone deny every aspect of Catholicism, publically. You have continued to tell Catholics they are wrong. It all boils down to authority. Authority is defined in scriptures and through the tradition of the Church. Scriptures do not give every individual authority to interpret the inspired word of God. It is frustrating to see individuals claim a correct interpretation over the Church, who has kept the scriptures throughout history for us to have in our possession today.
If your argument was valid, I would admit it was. Also know, I will question every argument made against Catholicism. I want to follow His will and if anyone could convince me it’s not through what I believe is His Church, I try to keep my heart and mind open to His will.
G
guanophore
Guest
Well, let’s see. We know that the CC is the one founded by Christ because this is what has been passed down to us through the Apostolic Succession. It is supported by the Scriptures, the early Church fathers, and history.
You are right, we believe this not because the CC told us so, but because it is an objective Truth. It is true that the CC has embraced this Truth, and passed it on to us.
Now, if you determine when you are right the same way that we do, then you are embracing a tradition that you have received. It also stands to reason that you should be able to historically support your belief.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Hey guanophore,
I bolded a part of your post. I like the way you worded it.
As I tried to explain in my post, it was my belief that led me to the Catholic Church, when I converted. The Church doesn’t force beliefs. One makes a conscience decision to believe. My beliefs were in line with what the Church teaches.
It amazes me when someone asserts ‘you believe what your Church tells you to believe’. It almost seems like a ‘slur’, the same as some use the term ‘Roman’. Either way, it really has no impact on a discussion, other than the appearance of ‘nothing else left to say’.
G
guanophore
Guest
You are right, this is used as a slur often here at CAF. However, that is because people reject the Apostolic Authority to correctly pass down the Teachings. They think the only remnant of authenticity is Scripture.It amazes me when someone asserts ‘you believe what your Church tells you to believe’. It almost seems like a ‘slur’, the same as some use the term ‘Roman’. Either way, it really has no impact on a discussion, other than the appearance of ‘nothing else left to say’.
Without realizing it, they are saying that God is a liar, or a weakling. He is unable to preserve His Word where He placed it to reside in the Church.
1 Thess 2:13-14
13 We also constantly give thanks to God for this, that when you received the word of God that you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word but as what it really is, God’s word, which is also at work in you believers.
They seem to think that the Word of God received by the Church, at work in the Church, was corrupted somehow, that human frailty was stronger than the immutable Truth, and tainted it.
They seem to beleive that, though God did deliever his Word to the Church, He failed in His promise to preserve that Church in “all Truth”, He orphaned her, though He promised He would not. That he lied when He said the gates of Hell shall not prevail, because teaching error is what causes souls to pass through the gates of hell.
D
Dokimas
Guest
Is that a private interpretation? If not, then it’s from your church which is circular reasoning.
Agreed.
The bold parts are how I arrived where I am. Thank you for helping me verbalize an answer to you.
D
Dokimas
Guest
Mistake; sorry.
D
Dokimas
Guest
So your church told you. Okay, no big deal. That’s a good reason. I just have different reasons why I’ve concluded what I’ve concluded. Please read my response to Prodical. He said it well for me.
You seem to be contradicting yourself.
Thank you for your opinion.
D
Dokimas
Guest
Do you know how many times those from the CC have told me I believe what I believe because my pastor or my church told me to believe what I believe. Were they using it as a ‘slur’?It amazes me when someone asserts ‘you believe what your Church tells you to believe’. It almost seems like a ‘slur’, the same as some use the term ‘Roman’. Either way, it really has no impact on a discussion, other than the appearance of ‘nothing else left to say’.
BTW, I am responsible for what I believe, not my pastor, not my church. I will stand before God by myself and answer for myself.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
It was because of MY interpretation and understanding of scriptures that I sought out the Catholic Church, where I discovered my interpretation matched the Church’s interpretation, those that the Church provided. I also realized I was interpreting scriptures in light of His Church that He built.
So, you’re saying you ‘believe’ you’re correct and sometimes incorrect? Does that mean you might be incorrect about some of your stances against some of the aspects of Catholicism?
See the difference is, interpretation of scriptures, with or without authority. I’ve seen too many twists, not necessarily from you, in scripture interpretations. Twists that seem to be in avoidance of agreeing with anything Catholic.
Scriptures are a very easy read, if you pray for the gifts of the Holy Spirit and read them in the light of His authoritative Church. Scriptures plainly speak of an authority and several parts are addressed specifically to men of the Church, either by Christ or in letters and epistles from some of the Apostles. While we can learn from all scriptures, it is inappropriate to apply everything individually, unless you are of the apostolic succession with the imposition of hands.
The other thing that I find irritating, again not necessarily from you, is when people of today automatically discount writings from the early Church fathers. They were the first Christians. They know how Christianity was originally practiced and some of them received what they knew directly from the Apostles. Too many times I have seen them discounted for some modern day theologian, again for what appears to be the purpose of disagreeing with anything Catholic.
I’ve seen a poster on these forums state they would rather be atheist than Catholic.
There are some, here and out in the world, that really despise the Catholic Church, to some shocking degrees. Then there are those who have been mislead about the Catholic Church and would rather maintain what they’ve been told than listen to the truth.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
It maybe a ‘tit for tat’ situation.
There are no perfect people anywhere…on earth.We all will be judged accordingly and we are all responsible for what we believe. Christ warned those in authoritative positions, whether appointed or not, of leading people astray through what they taught.
D
Dokimas
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
Thank you for taking a much more friendly approach. God bless you.It maybe a ‘tit for tat’ situation.
We all will be judged accordingly and we are all responsible for what we believe. Christ warned those in authoritative positions, whether appointed or not, of leading people astray through what they taught.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
Yes, I think I understand your position. It is wonderful to cherish the gifts of God; in my opinion the Blood of Jesus is the most precious gift.
God be with you and yours.
C
Cinette
Guest
*Thank you and Petergee for this information. I thought that his Mother’s influence had prevailed on Constantine. I shall do some checking.
*
G
guanophore
Guest
The ability to interpret scripture was taught to the Aposltes by Christ. It is His perspective that was committed to them, and that has been passed on to us. The Church only holds the Divine Deposit of Faith. She is not the Source. Jesus is the Source.
C
Cinette
Guest
It was because of MY interpretation and understanding of scriptures that I sought out the Catholic Church, where I discovered my interpretation matched the Church’s interpretation, those that the Church provided. I also realized I was interpreting scriptures in light of His Church that He built.
…
The other thing that I find irritating, again not necessarily from you, is when people of today automatically discount writings from the early Church fathers. They were the first Christians. They know how Christianity was originally practiced and some of them received what they knew directly from the Apostles. Too many times I have seen them discounted for some modern day theologian, again for what appears to be the purpose of disagreeing with anything Catholic.
I’ve seen a poster on these forums state they would rather be atheist than Catholic.
There are some, here and out in the world, that really despise the Catholic Church, to some shocking degrees. Then there are those who have been mislead about the Catholic Church and would rather maintain what they’ve been told than listen to the truth.Very sad. These people do not realise what they are refuting - they are depriving themselves of the fullness of truth. Really very sad indeed:sad_yes:
R
Radical
Guest
That seems like an odd way to put things…perhaps you misunderstood the poster? Perhaps the guy feels that, based on historical evidence, there is a better case to be made for the proposition that the resurrection of Christ is mere legend than there is for the proposition that the CC is the one true Church. That would make more sense to me…Or if the guy preferred atheism, then I guess it would be that, based on (historical) evidence, there is a better case to be made for the proposition that there is no God than there is for the proposition that the CC is God’s one true Church.
well let’s keep in mind that we all think that we have a handle on the truth…a person who rejects the CC as the one true Church does so b/c he believes that such a claim is against the truth. From his prespective, the people that believe the CC to be the one true Church are those who are misled. Perhaps we should acknowledge that the truth (as to the CC being the one true Church) is not so obvious that reasonable, intelligent and spiritual people can not end up on the opposite sides of this issue. Perhaps we shouldn’t merely declare that those on the other side are stubborn or self-destructive…just saying…
- Status