Proclaiming the bride and not the bridegroom

  • Thread starter Thread starter 2nd_Adam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
izoid said:
Awesome. Now that you have accepted his apostolic authority you can now believe everything that he teaches since you heard or read it first hand. You are very close to converting…just say this prayer and…😉
Click to expand...
No pigs allowed in my church!!!😃

Oh wait, I forgot I am already in…my bad, come on in adam.:o
 
Lapey said:
No pigs allowed in my church!!!😃

Oh wait, I forgot I am already in…my bad, come on in adam.:o
Click to expand...
Why would I want to be in Adam? I’m united by faith to the 2nd Adam? 😃 Somtimes it’s dfficult to understand each other, but are you saying your church is in adam? 😛
 
Monica4316 said:
We proclaim Christ when we proclaim the truth of His Church
Click to expand...
Since some on here think I do not have the fullness of truth, could you please proclaim Christ and the truth of His Church to me to see where we disagree? Thanks sister in Christ!
 
2nd_Adam said:
So, why is your Catholic hope different than my hope in Christ?
Click to expand...
It is different because you reject parts of the Gospel that have been handed down to us from the Apostles. One of those is that Jesus died to sanctify His Bride, and will never be separated from her.
2nd_Adam said:
I think the bridegroom is sufficient for those who put their hope in Him alone.
Click to expand...
Indeed, it does appear that you are quite content with your truncated version of the Gospel.

One has to wonder what motivates you to come to a place like CAF, since you claim what you have is sufficient already. 🤷
 
izoid said:
History is history my friend. Unlike your theology the facts of history are set in stone. It is very unfortunate that you refuse to acknowledge the truth of history and choose to interpret scriptures in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
I think 2nd is right, izoid. History is written by people, and by definition is biased. That is why one should not confine oneself to one point of view. The study of the early church from the Pagan perspective has equal value. They are the ones who accused the disciples of Jesus of “drownding their infants and eating their God”. Kinda sheds an interesting light on the practices of the early Christians, does it not? 😃
 
guanophore said:
I think 2nd is right, izoid. History is written by people, and by definition is biased. That is why one should not confine oneself to one point of view. The study of the early church from the Pagan perspective has equal value. They are the ones who accused the disciples of Jesus of “drownding their infants and eating their God”. Kinda sheds an interesting light on the practices of the early Christians, does it not? 😃
Click to expand...
This is my point exactly. When we study history we get a great picture of the practices of the day. When one source makes claims that ae backed up by an opposing source it is pretty clear as to what the truth is.

When I came to the Catholic Church I studied history from a protestant history book. It all pointed to writings of the early fathers. I then went to those writings to determine what it was that they taught. I then looked at Roman secular historians and confirmed that their understandng of the church was similar to the ECF’s. The secular accounts ascribed negative connotations to the practices but they did, never the less, confirm the existence of those practices.

When we take what we learned as a whole, we will be in a much stronger position to understand scriptures. To read the Bible in a vacuum, with no historical context, we will always miss the mark.
 
On April 24th 2008, I took the vow to reject Satan, all his works and empty promises and to live my life as a follower of Christ. On that day I received the Sacrament of Confirmation. (quote from Catechism 1303):
Code: 
"(...) Confirmation brings an increase and deepening of baptismal grace:
    * it roots us more deeply in the divine filiation which makes us cry, "Abba! Father!";
    * it unites us more firmly to Christ;
    * it increases the gifts of the Holy Spirit in us;
    * it renders our bond with the Church more perfect;
    * it gives us a special strength of the Holy Spirit to spread and defend the faith by word and action as true witnesses of Christ, to confess the name of Christ boldly, and never to be ashamed of the Cross (...)"
Catholics are indeed called to proclaim the bridegroom.
 
2nd_Adam said:
Why would I want to be in Adam? I’m united by faith to the 2nd Adam? 😃 Somtimes it’s dfficult to understand each other, but are you saying your church is in adam? 😛
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was half asleep. I meant that there were no pigs allowed in my Hcurch, RCC.

Then I remembered I was already in, so that couldn’t be true…me being a pig and all.

Therefore you, 2nd Adam, are welcome to come home, tusk and all!!!
 
Originally Posted by 2nd Adam
So, why is your Catholic hope different than my hope in Christ?
Click to expand...
guanophore said:
It is different because you reject parts of the Gospel that have been handed down to us from the Apostles. One of those is that Jesus died to sanctify His Bride, and will never be separated from her.
Click to expand...
You know Protestants believe this too!

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. - Apostolic Teaching
 
Lapey said:
Sorry, I was half asleep. I meant that there were no pigs allowed in my Hcurch, RCC.

Then I remembered I was already in, so that couldn’t be true…me being a pig and all.

Therefore you, 2nd Adam, are welcome to come home, tusk and all!!!
Click to expand...
I think Pope Leo would disagree with you about the tusk and all.
 
2nd_Adam said:
Reformed Christians that I knew used to joke about newspaper exegesis since many of us came from Arminian churches obsessed with the secret rapture. Do you believe in history exegesis? I do think history is valid in understanding the Scriptures, but not using bias fallible history to nullify truths from the Scriptures. Should we use the Catholic version of history or the Protestant version of history?
Click to expand...
I would say factual history would be the wisest choice.

That just happens to be the same as the Catholic one.
 
Dancelittleewok said:
How many times I’ve told you that you’re not gonna get any friends by endorsing that book?
Click to expand...
I was trying to make a point that history books are bias. However, we can trust the Holy Scriptures as a trustworthy history book.
 
2nd_Adam said:
I was trying to make a point that history books are bias. However, we can trust the Holy Scriptures as a trustworthy history book.
Click to expand...
We just doesn’t mean the Holy Scriptures need to be seen without the lens of history, i.e. the ECFs whom lived in the time of the Apostles whom give witness to what they actually believed. The creation of the Bible itself is also within the realms of history as well so it too has a history story as well.
 
2nd_Adam said:
I freely choose to be a Cafeteria catholic.
Click to expand...
Calling yourself a Cafeteria catholic is referring to yourself with a derogatory term.

Cafeteria catholic is a mockery of a catholic. You seem more like a fundamentalist who tries to win over catholics who don’t know their faith well. 😉
 
DihydrogenOxide said:
Calling yourself a Cafeteria catholic is referring to yourself with a derogatory term.

Cafeteria catholic is a mockery of a catholic. You seem more like a fundamentalist who tries to win over catholics who don’t know their faith well. 😉
Click to expand...
I’m catholic who adheres to the Apostles Creed. Being a Cafeteria catholic is not related to being a Cafeteria Catholic.
 
Dancelittleewok said:
We just doesn’t mean the Holy Scriptures need to be seen without the lens of history, i.e. the ECFs whom lived in the time of the Apostles whom give witness to what they actually believed. The creation of the Bible itself is also within the realms of history as well so it too has a history story as well.
Click to expand...
I have posted that history is important in interperting the Scriptures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top