C
Cathdefender
Guest
Who cares what Pro101 says anymore, he couldn’t even answer a simple question. That did it for me.
- Status
G
grandfather
Guest
D
distracted
Guest
po18guy;3789053:
I don’t see anyone saying that.
and it occurs to me:
If you are so sure of your beliefs, why do you keep trying to argue, argue, argue… the same old stuff…?
Why is it so imporant to change the minds of Catholics who never will change their minds? We know too much…
Don’t u think it is a sin to waste time???
I’d say that wasting time ought to get you about… hmmm… maybe 10 years in Purgatory, at least…
D
distracted
Guest
I don’t mean to be rude or anything, but the thought occurs to me (can’t help what i am thinking, can i??)… that anyone who believes that kind of thing is… like either… never mind, i can’t say it without sounding rude…
P
Protestant101
Guest
I don’t mind if you present arguments to my beliefs; but you are doing somethng else here; and apparently, you are very angry. I have said a number of times that I will not even try to answer all questions and comments posted to me; I am only one, and there are many of you, all wanting responses from me. I do my best, and if you need to respond to me this way because of it; then I can only leave you to it.
I remain far from convinced about Catholicism, mostly due to this kind of thing. I have been called a lot of nasty things here. All because I have challenged your beliefs. And all because I did not somehow miraculously “convert” to catholicism from all your ranting and name calling. It’s amazing how much some think they know about me just from being on the internet a bit here together. I also get many unanswered questions here; but is this reason for us to tear one another apart?
I find all the many challenges to my beliefs here enlightening and educational, I do not regret any of it, to be honest, but I cannot see a reason for all the adjectives being hurled at me/about me.
Catholics appear to get most offended when the claimed authority to their church is challenged; for that is really what all your comments boil down to here.
I don’t believe that any church has the authority to add purgatory to the great doctrines of the Bible. While I have not been able to give detailed responses to all the challengers on that point, I have tried to give a few simple reasons why I see things the way I do.
I suppose you just want me to dry up and blow away, but I am not yet sure if this is on my list of things to do.
P
Protestant101
Guest
Apparently, you are allowed on this forum to question my sanity.
BTW; can you tell me, What is “sanity?”
P
Protestant101
Guest
Every time you tell me some supposed “truth” a bunch of new questions and new angles start running through my mind. If that offends you I am sorry. You said that I “misrespresent Catholic beliefs” here on this forum; but I must inform you that I am definitely not here to do that. I am here to “compare and contrast” our respective beliefs, as the stated forum guidelines describe it. I do not even come here to represent the Adventist Church; I in no way speak for them; only what I believe and why. Not everything I believe comes from Adventism. So you get to hear a mix, but it’s what I believe.
You go ahead and “report.” I will wait here.
W
wanner47
Guest
Protestant101, how did the Church use the Bible in 107 AD?Every time you tell me some supposed “truth” a bunch of new questions and new angles start running through my mind. If that offends you I am sorry. You said that I “misrespresent Catholic beliefs” here on this forum; but I must inform you that I am definitely not here to do that. I am here to “compare and contrast” our respective beliefs, as the stated forum guidelines describe it. I do not even come here to represent the Adventist Church; I in no way speak for them; only what I believe and why. Not everything I believe comes from Adventism. So you get to hear a mix, but it’s what I believe.
You go ahead and “report.” I will wait here.
J
JRKH
Guest
Very nicely Played P101. Now you get to be the “wounded party”. Sorry, I don’t buy that. You’re a big boy and if you have the time to spend here posting and discussing, you should have the time to address the questions posed to you.
I appreciate that it can be difficult to answer adequately every question posed, but that does not account for those questions you choose to ignore becasue the don’t interest you. You seem to have sufficient time to post your arguments and pose your questions. I have personally seen you insist on getting an answer to some question and then adamately refuse to answer someone elses question.
You also had the time to express how Catholics Denigrate the bible, and to dismiss posts as “Proving Nothing”.
Since there have been a lot of comments made here so I’m not sure which ones you are "Boiling Down’.
I’ll Gladly subscribe to getting offended when the authority of the Church is challanged, particularly when She is accused of Denegrating the Very Book She Cherishes so much.
However you do believe that an individual has the right to remove entire books from the bible.
Not at all. What we want is for you to engage in debate in a sincere and respectful way.
Peace
James
po18guy
Well-known member
You were on grandfather’s case. Come after me if you must. I brought vegetarianism up.
NOT TRUE. STOP IT! Christ’s blood paid for every sin. Period. You have been told this 101 times!
Does the SDA church have no concept of dealing with post-baptismal sin? Let’s make it simple: Say you sin. Really big. You forget to go directly to God for forgiveness, then you die. Is that grave sin just magically erased? If so, then no one on earth must repent or seek forgiveness, since you claim it’s automatic.
Catholic and Orthodox churches teach that you carry that sin with you, since you have not repented, have not sought forgiveness. What happens to it? Catholic and Orthodox teach that you must be cleansed of that sin, which clings to your soul at the moment of death, before you enter the Kingdom, since nothing unclean can enter Heaven.
This is simple as a stone axe.
NOT TRUE. STOP IT! Mary is the sole exception, and you know that, and you know why we believe it.
**NOT TRUE! STOP IT! **It is your DELIBERATE untruths about Catholic teaching that gets you the attention. I know that the SDA teaches it is a sin to lie. You know the truth about the Catholicism, yet you keep repeating untruths about it. Why?
And, with all this “abuse”, you keep coming back. And, repeating untruths. You need to go to confession as much as I do.
C
Cathdefender
Guest
But I’ll say it for you…ignorance?I don’t mean to be rude or anything, but the thought occurs to me (can’t help what i am thinking, can i??)… that anyone who believes that kind of thing is… like either… never mind, i can’t say it without sounding rude…
C
Cathdefender
Guest
Already tried to ask him this question…he will not answer it…join me in a cup of coffee waiting??:coffeeread:
P
Protestant101
Guest
They read it, the same as we do now; and it was sometimes spoken. But this question is a different topic than the purgatory one, so lets pick it up in the correct thread.
G
grandfather
Guest
How did the Christians in 107 know which books were in the Bible? Any idea when the New Testament canon or list of books we call the Bible was compiled? Who decided which of the ancient books were to be included and excluded? What authority did they have to make such a decision? Why do you believe they got it right? What was the doctrinal position on things like praying for the dead and sacraments of the people believe who produced this collection of books and declared them to be God’s word?
These are not theological questions. The answers are revealed in the historical record.
T
The_GreyPilgrim
Guest
Purgatory is not for the purging of sin. Purgatory is for any remaining temporal punishment that must be endured as a result of previous sins committed but reconciled before death.
Scripture:
Rev 21:[27] But nothing unclean shall enter it(heaven), nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
[13] David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die.
Nathan tells David that his sin is forgiven.
[14] Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child that is born to you shall die."
[15] Then Nathan went to his house.
And the LORD struck the child that Uri’ah’s wife bore to David, and it became sick.
Yet David is still punished for the sin he committed…
[16] David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in and lay all night upon the ground.
[17] And the elders of his house stood beside him, to raise him from the ground; but he would not, nor did he eat food with them.
[18] On the seventh day the child died.
1 Corinthians 3:
[13] each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day(Judgement Day) will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done.
[14] If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward.
[15] If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
How will one suffer loss as through fire though he himself will be saved?
Hebrews 12:22] But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering,
[23] and to the assembly of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven, and to a judge who is God of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
So there are four priciples, all taken from scripture, which point to this “place” which the Catholic Church calls Purgatory:
3)That there is a place, besides heaven or hell, where one suffers loss as through fire but is saved.
4)That there is a place where the souls of just men are made perfect.
Scripture:
Rev 21:[27] But nothing unclean shall enter it(heaven), nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
[13] David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die.
Nathan tells David that his sin is forgiven.
[14] Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child that is born to you shall die."
[15] Then Nathan went to his house.
And the LORD struck the child that Uri’ah’s wife bore to David, and it became sick.
Yet David is still punished for the sin he committed…
[16] David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in and lay all night upon the ground.
[17] And the elders of his house stood beside him, to raise him from the ground; but he would not, nor did he eat food with them.
[18] On the seventh day the child died.
1 Corinthians 3:
[13] each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day(Judgement Day) will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done.
[14] If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward.
[15] If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
How will one suffer loss as through fire though he himself will be saved?
Hebrews 12:22] But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering,
[23] and to the assembly of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven, and to a judge who is God of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
So there are four priciples, all taken from scripture, which point to this “place” which the Catholic Church calls Purgatory:
- Nothing unclean shall enter heaven.
3)That there is a place, besides heaven or hell, where one suffers loss as through fire but is saved.
4)That there is a place where the souls of just men are made perfect.
P
Protestant101
Guest
Absolutely none of these Scriptures proves anything about a “place” called “purgatory.”
P
Protestant101
Guest
Your lubricious despisals of anything I say here are so holey and uplifting. Thankyou.
But I do have reasons for thinking that Catholics are taught by their leadership to lessen the authority of the Bible; to denigrate it to the point where it does not have the authority that God intended it to have in the Church; and God did intend that the Bible have FULL unhindered authority in His Church; and in His people. There are so many places where "the [Catholic] Church can be shown to minimize the Bible’s authority: Papal Rome Against The Bible
In answer to the question about how did people use the Bible in 107 BC:
Before (and after) 107 BC or earlier, we can see how that the Bible itself declares that there was a definite fixed collection of sacred writings, known to us today of course, as the Bible. In tracing the history of the formation of the OT it is helpful to begin with the use of such terms as “the scriptures,” “the holy scriptures” etc., because in the NT these all make it evident that there was a definite, fixed, and authoritative collection of sacred writings among the Jews in and well before the 1st cent. of our era: (Mt 21:42; 22:29; Lk 24:32; Jn 5:39; Acts 17:2, 11; 18:24; Rom 1:2; 2 Ti 3:15).
While Catholics like to lay claim to writing the Bible, and how the Bible is actually “Catholic;” all they really did, as did many others, was to affirm in their various Councils what the Bible already states/ed. They were not the “authors” of the Bible; they didn’t write God’s Holy Word! They are not in charge of God’s Holy Word, all this is based on the assumptive claim that they are the “true Church,” or “the early Church;” but they are neither. They are A Church, not THE Church. Catholics are just one of the many Christian denominations striking out for supremacy and authority in the religious world. (continued in my next post)
P
Protestant101
Guest
The earliest Christian writer to apply the term “Canon” to the collection of Bible books recognized as the rule of faith and practice was Origen (c. 185 c. 254), who said no one should use for the proof of doctrine books not included among the canonized Scriptures (Commentary on Matt., section 28). Some years later Athanasius (c. 293-373) designated the whole collection of sacred books the canon. Thus the term came to mean the catalogue or list of sacred books accepted as inspired, normative, sacred, and authoritative.
According to the Our Sunday Visitor Encyclopedia of Catholic History, (under Origen) St. Jerome helped secure the condemnation of Origen’s radical teachings by Pope Anastasius I in 400; but it also states there in the Catholic Encyclopedia of History that “elements of Origenism would endure into the sixth century.” I wonder, have some elements endured to our day?
Should Origen’s writings re “Canon” be one of those things that “endure?” Of course, because he was not the only one who came to this kind of conclusion about the Bible. Others, non-Catholics included, before and after Origen did the same, and affirmed what we know as the current canon of the Bible.
The catalogue or list of sacred books accepted as inspired, normative, sacred, and authoritative is first and foremost not even subject to Church authority; only to the Church’s affirmation, and authoritative only to the point where extra Biblical writings such as Apocrypha are rejected, as the subject is studied into, and the information is uncovered.
The OT was the Bible of the early Christian church. Even after the followers of Jesus broke away from Judaism they retained the sacred books which they came to call the OT. This was due largely to the fact that Jesus Christ, their Lord, had used these writings and endorsed them as authoritative (Mt 5:17-19; 21:42; 22:29; Mk 10:6-9; 12:29, 36, et cetera).
Jesus regarded His life and mission as a fulfillment of promises and prophecies contained in them (Mt 26:54; Mk 14:49; Lk 4:21; 22:16, 37; 24:24-27, 44, 45; Jn 4:39; 10:35; 13:18; 15:25; 17:12). Our Lord has been the One to initially endorse what is Scripture, not a Church!!
With such endorsement the Christians could not discard the OT scriptures as Jewish, but rather accepted them as inspired Christian books. The endorsement of Jesus is what makes Scripture “Canon” no Church can ever do this which is only for God to do. Christ canonized Scripture, not the Church.
According to the book of Acts the earliest Christian preachers likewise used these documents as authoritative revelations of God’s will (Acts 1:16; 2:16-21; 8:35; 17:2, 3, 11, 17; 18:4, 19, 24-28; 19:8; 28:23). The epistles also show that the early Christians accepted the OT as the inspired, authoritative word of God (Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 15:3, 4; 2 Ti 3:15-17; 2 Pe 1:20, 21).
Purgatory is not in the Protestant Canon of Scripture. 1 Cor.3 is all the proof we need.
According to the Our Sunday Visitor Encyclopedia of Catholic History, (under Origen) St. Jerome helped secure the condemnation of Origen’s radical teachings by Pope Anastasius I in 400; but it also states there in the Catholic Encyclopedia of History that “elements of Origenism would endure into the sixth century.” I wonder, have some elements endured to our day?
Should Origen’s writings re “Canon” be one of those things that “endure?” Of course, because he was not the only one who came to this kind of conclusion about the Bible. Others, non-Catholics included, before and after Origen did the same, and affirmed what we know as the current canon of the Bible.
The catalogue or list of sacred books accepted as inspired, normative, sacred, and authoritative is first and foremost not even subject to Church authority; only to the Church’s affirmation, and authoritative only to the point where extra Biblical writings such as Apocrypha are rejected, as the subject is studied into, and the information is uncovered.
The OT was the Bible of the early Christian church. Even after the followers of Jesus broke away from Judaism they retained the sacred books which they came to call the OT. This was due largely to the fact that Jesus Christ, their Lord, had used these writings and endorsed them as authoritative (Mt 5:17-19; 21:42; 22:29; Mk 10:6-9; 12:29, 36, et cetera).
Jesus regarded His life and mission as a fulfillment of promises and prophecies contained in them (Mt 26:54; Mk 14:49; Lk 4:21; 22:16, 37; 24:24-27, 44, 45; Jn 4:39; 10:35; 13:18; 15:25; 17:12). Our Lord has been the One to initially endorse what is Scripture, not a Church!!
With such endorsement the Christians could not discard the OT scriptures as Jewish, but rather accepted them as inspired Christian books. The endorsement of Jesus is what makes Scripture “Canon” no Church can ever do this which is only for God to do. Christ canonized Scripture, not the Church.
According to the book of Acts the earliest Christian preachers likewise used these documents as authoritative revelations of God’s will (Acts 1:16; 2:16-21; 8:35; 17:2, 3, 11, 17; 18:4, 19, 24-28; 19:8; 28:23). The epistles also show that the early Christians accepted the OT as the inspired, authoritative word of God (Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 15:3, 4; 2 Ti 3:15-17; 2 Pe 1:20, 21).
Purgatory is not in the Protestant Canon of Scripture. 1 Cor.3 is all the proof we need.
D
dosdog
Guest
1 Corinthians 15
49 Therefore as we have borne the image of the earthly, let us bear also the image of the heavenly. 50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God: neither shall corruption possess incorruption.
51 Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall all indeed rise again: but we shall not all be changed. 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall rise again incorruptible: and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption; and this mortal must put on immortality.
49 Therefore as we have borne the image of the earthly, let us bear also the image of the heavenly. 50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God: neither shall corruption possess incorruption.
51 Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall all indeed rise again: but we shall not all be changed. 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall rise again incorruptible: and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption; and this mortal must put on immortality.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Not really about it being a “place” its more about conquering the Seven Capital Vices (seven deadly sins) that man is plagued with.
- Status