Protestant service last night.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ron_Obvious
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
andrewtx
Code:
Wow! Quite a jump from a Church of Christ to Eastern Orthodoxy. Yes, now that you mention it, I believe it was a church in Abilene, maybe Highland Park CofC? They once had a weekly radio broadcast that I sometimes would hear. "Herald of Truth" possibly? Too long ago to have a clear memory of what it was called.

 I am somewhat acquainted with the Orthodox Church (Antioch branch) in that years ago, when i was writing a book dealing with different faiths, I had a depth conversation with a priest in Brooklyn of that group, as I recall, I'm not up to date on how it's faring. I come from a mixed Catholic-Protestant heritage - French Canadian and Yankee Puritan antecedents - and have tended toward mainline Protestantism. Why? I possess an inquisitive mind, apparently, and seem discontent with insistence upon a precise set of doctrines and liturgies. My awe before God and God's creation is such that I doubt if the human mind has anywhere near the ability to comprehend it all. Fine. I'm willing to wait until the life to come, which I accept - though without pretending to know what and where that life is likely to be. As the scriptures say, I'm content to walk by faith and not by sight.

 Two of my hurdles. (1) The Bible. So much of it leaves me skeptical. Did God really command Joshua to slaughter everyone in Jericho except for a collaborator-prostitute and her family? Did Jesus really put a 'legion' (2000?) demons into pigs which then raced down a cliff to drown in a lake? What about Paul's statements that slaves should obey their masters and women should keep silent in the church? Etc. (2) The Church Fathers. I read them meticulously and for their era they had considerable wisdom. But because of when they wrote they included much superstition, false information, and confused commentary. Some churches hold them up as authorities. I found them interesting but seriously flawed.

 On the other hand, I respect the various traditions that differ from my own perspective. I do have trouble, however, with any church, whether the CofC or the RCC which insist that it alone embraces and teaches the fullness of truth.

  A blessed Easter. Do you celebrate it on April 8 or April 15? My doctor is Coptic and for him it's April 15. I realize that Coptic Orthodoxy differs a mite from most other Orthodox bodies.
We use the revised Julian and celebrate on the 8th. We call it Pascha from the Greek.
If an orthodox church was unavailable, I don’t know what I would do.

The Catholic church seems to be entering a “marriage of convience” with Fundamental Protestants over the subject of abortion (which I too oppose) and ultra-conservative politics which I oppose, being poor and having had a stroke.

If there were no Orthodox church I would Probably go to an Anglo/Catholic Episcopal church, with trepidations.

One major difference between the Catholic chruch and the cofC is that the CC teaches their are other Christians called seperated Brethren, while the cofC claims to be the only Christians. How I don’t know since they have only existed since 1906.

I guess by the cofC everyone born before that goes to hell.
 
I am old enough to remember ‘before Vatican II’. Catholics were told that it was a serious sin to attend a Protestant church. There was little if any cooperation between Protestants and Catholics. Since I have a mixed Catholic and Protestant heritage I recall baptisms, weddings and funerals that had to be skipped because they were in the wrong church. Even during the early stages of the civil rights movements, Catholic priests (apart from the Berrigans) kept a distance because they were not supposed to associate with Protestants. Clergy associations had existed for years, but no priests joined until after Vatican II. Etc., etc. Now I was quite young, but I don’t recall any soup kitchens or food banks sponsored jointly by Catholics and Protestants. Possibly a few existed? But I do recall the clear Catholic edict against ecumenical relationships with Protestants.
 
I am old enough to remember ‘before Vatican II’. Catholics were told that it was a serious sin to attend a Protestant church. There was little if any cooperation between Protestants and Catholics. Since I have a mixed Catholic and Protestant heritage I recall baptisms, weddings and funerals that had to be skipped because they were in the wrong church. Even during the early stages of the civil rights movements, Catholic priests (apart from the Berrigans) kept a distance because they were not supposed to associate with Protestants. Clergy associations had existed for years, but no priests joined until after Vatican II. Etc., etc. Now I was quite young, but I don’t recall any soup kitchens or food banks sponsored jointly by Catholics and Protestants. Possibly a few existed? But I do recall the clear Catholic edict against ecumenical relationships with Protestants.
Code:
  Then, it must have been 1963, during Vatican II - wow! almost overnight we began to have ecumenical services, Catholic priests joined clergy groups, etc. Suddenly it was no longer a sin to worship in a Protestant church, attend a Protestant baptism or wedding, and Protestants no longer were heretics but 'separated brothers and sisters'. Clergy even began to have 'ecumenical' wedding ceremonies which was a total change from the past. Before that, as I recall, a Catholic priest could officiate at a Catholic-Protestant wedding only in the rectory and not in the Church. The Protestant had to sign an agreement to bring up the children in the Catholic faith. Etc.

  It is important to present correctly the situation prior to Vatican II,
We need to remember that this situation worked and continues to work both ways. Many protestants have never and would never attend anything Catholic.
 
The difference was that the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church specifically warned against attending a Protestant service. It was a serious sin. As I mentioned, I recall how family members missed baptisms, weddings and funerals because they were held in Protestant churches.
Code:
  This is ancient history, now irrelevant perhaps. I simply was responding to an earlier posting which seemed to be stating that Catholics and Protestants held soup kitchen, food banks, etc., together before Vatican II. That poster explained later that she had missed the word 'together'.

  There has been plenty of silly prejudice among Christians of various varieties. Most Catholics I know do not go along with the idea that there is only one true church. Protestants seem to divided in this fashion. Mainline Protestants are very ecumenical, and they emphasize that there is only one God of us all, and while they may have a favorite denomination or two God doesn't care which one we join. Most of them even respect non-Christian faiths. Evangelical Protestants are not denominational (mostly, except some hardshell Baptists). However, they do emphasize that 'no one cometh unto the Father' but through Christ - quoting the words of Jesus. They are more likely to condemn non-Christian religion.

    I think that many posters here on CAF do not represent most present-day Catholics who have abandoned the former teaching that the CC alone possesses the full glory of truth. 

   Isn't it sad that religion has so often been a barrier when it should be a bridge? Can you imagine Jesus condemning people to hell because they are Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, etc.? I can't. Narrow-minded, arrogant bigots likely upset him far more.
 
The difference was that the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church specifically warned against attending a Protestant service. It was a serious sin. As I mentioned, I recall how family members missed baptisms, weddings and funerals because they were held in Protestant churches.
Code:
  This is ancient history, now irrelevant perhaps. I simply was responding to an earlier posting which seemed to be stating that Catholics and Protestants held soup kitchen, food banks, etc., together before Vatican II. That poster explained later that she had missed the word 'together'.

  There has been plenty of silly prejudice among Christians of various varieties**. Most Catholics I know do not go along with the idea that there is only one true church. **Protestants seem to divided in this fashion. Mainline Protestants are very ecumenical, and they emphasize that there is only one God of us all, and while they may have a favorite denomination or two God doesn't care which one we join. Most of them even respect non-Christian faiths. Evangelical Protestants are not denominational (mostly, except some hardshell Baptists). However, they do emphasize that 'no one cometh unto the Father' but through Christ - quoting the words of Jesus. They are more likely to condemn non-Christian religion.

    I think that many posters here on CAF do not represent most present-day Catholics who have abandoned the former teaching that the CC alone possesses the full glory of truth. 

   Isn't it sad that religion has so often been a barrier when it should be a bridge? Can you imagine Jesus condemning people to hell because they are Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, etc.? I can't. Narrow-minded, arrogant bigots likely upset him far more.
Roy,

You consider yourself Christian and as a Christian it is not out of order to consider correction…remind your Catholic friends to pay more attention at mass when they recite the Nicene Creed as to what we believe…
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
Remind them that this formula from Nicea was to solidify beliefs against error and point out that when they recite it that it is not “I believe”…it is “We believe” and they are out of synch…👍
 
JL: Catholics are considered easy picken because they are seen as ignorant of the bible. Most Catholics who convert to other denomination are ignorant of the bible and even the Catholic faith. However most Protestants who convert to Catholic know the bible and can see those things you point out such as Eucharist etc…
There is some truth to this:) I am a recent convert to the Catholic Church and so very happy to be Catholic, but it was a road of study through scripture and the early Church fathers, history, apologetics that finally convinced me that this is where I belong. Along the way I’ve met many Catholics very ignorant to scriptures and their rich faith, it’s sad. I pray that the Lord revives His Church!

mlz
 
Code:
   Isn't it sad that religion has so often been a barrier when it should be a bridge? Can you imagine Jesus condemning people to hell because they are Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, etc.? I can't. Narrow-minded, arrogant bigots likely upset him far more.
But Jesus wasn’t a hippie. He offered welcome to anyone–whether Jewish, Roman, Samaritan, or Canaanite–who was open to finding and following the truth wherever it led. Many Buddhists and other non-Christians must be in this category.

Still, Christ had some very strong language for those who knowingly refused to pay Christ heed, whether out of lukewarmness or hard-heartedness.

From Matthew chapter ten:

[34] “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
[35] For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
[36] and a man’s foes will be those of his own household.
[37] He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;
[38] and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
[39] He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.”

From Luke chapter nineteen:

[11] As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately.
[12] He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive a kingdom and then return.
[13] Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten pounds, and said to them, Trade with these till I come.' [14] But his citizens hated him and sent an embassy after him, saying, We do not want this man to reign over us.’
[15] When he returned, having received the kingdom, he commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by trading.
[16] The first came before him, saying, Lord, your pound has made ten pounds more.' [17] And he said to him, Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’
[18] And the second came, saying, Lord, your pound has made five pounds.' [19] And he said to him, And you are to be over five cities.’
[20] Then another came, saying, Lord, here is your pound, which I kept laid away in a napkin; [21] for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man; you take up what you did not lay down, and reap what you did not sow.' [22] He said to him, I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow?
[23] Why then did you not put my money into the bank, and at my coming I should have collected it with interest?’
[24] And he said to those who stood by, Take the pound from him, and give it to him who has the ten pounds.' [25] (And they said to him, Lord, he has ten pounds!’)
[26] `I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
[27] But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me.’”

Let’s avoid making this matter into a false dichotomy consisting of the options “all religions are equally valid ways to heaven” and “all religions and their followers are the tools of Satan deserving our mockery and contempt”.

We can take a third way–“O most respected family, friends, acquaintances, and neighbours, Christ is risen!” (I wouldn’t actually speak in this fashion–it’s just for effect.)
 
But Jesus wasn’t a hippie. He offered welcome to anyone–whether Jewish, Roman, Samaritan, or Canaanite–who was open to finding and following the truth wherever it led. Many Buddhists and other non-Christians must be in this category.

Still, Christ had some very strong language for those who knowingly and stubbornly rejected him.

From Matthew chapter ten:

[34] “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
[35] For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
[36] and a man’s foes will be those of his own household.
[37] He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;
[38] and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
[39] He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.”

From Luke chapter nineteen:

[11] As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately.
[12] He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive a kingdom and then return.
[13] Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten pounds, and said to them, Trade with these till I come.' [14] But his citizens hated him and sent an embassy after him, saying, We do not want this man to reign over us.’
[15] When he returned, having received the kingdom, he commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by trading.
[16] The first came before him, saying, Lord, your pound has made ten pounds more.' [17] And he said to him, Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’
[18] And the second came, saying, Lord, your pound has made five pounds.' [19] And he said to him, And you are to be over five cities.’
[20] Then another came, saying, Lord, here is your pound, which I kept laid away in a napkin; [21] for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man; you take up what you did not lay down, and reap what you did not sow.' [22] He said to him, I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow?
[23] Why then did you not put my money into the bank, and at my coming I should have collected it with interest?’
[24] And he said to those who stood by, Take the pound from him, and give it to him who has the ten pounds.' [25] (And they said to him, Lord, he has ten pounds!’)
[26] `I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
[27] But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me.’”

Let’s avoid making this matter into a false dichotomy consisting of the options “all religions are equally valid ways to heaven” and “all religions and their followers are the tools of Satan deserving our mockery and contempt”.

We can take a third way–“O most respected family, friends, acquaintances, and neighbours, Christ is risen!” (I wouldn’t actually speak in this fashion–it’s just for effect.)
Nice thoughts Oh respected Trebor…but thoust shoudist Know that Roy does not believith that the Bible is Scripture…and that jades your thoughts…also know that Roy is a person of polls and statistics with a constant tirade of what he believes to be needed change and what the forum needs…ie a liberal approach…

Oh my…look Dick…funny funny dog…see the dog run…it gets old after awhile…
 
Code:
  There has been plenty of silly prejudice among Christians of various varieties. Most Catholics I know do not go along with the idea that there is only one true church. Protestants seem to divided in this fashion. Mainline Protestants are very ecumenical, and they emphasize that there is only one God of us all, and while they may have a favorite denomination or two God doesn't care which one we join. Most of them even respect non-Christian faiths. Evangelical Protestants are not denominational (mostly, except some hardshell Baptists). However, they do emphasize that 'no one cometh unto the Father' but through Christ - quoting the words of Jesus. They are more likely to condemn non-Christian religion..
This is only partly true. Yes, protestants are divided among what they believe. True.
There are many protestants who feel the denomination they attend is right and others are just simply mistaken and then there are those that outright accuse other protestant denominations of not even being Christian. There are not very many protestants faiths that accept non-Christian faiths as a way to salvation. They may respect them but that’s it.

Evangelical christians call themselves non-denominational but if you research behind most of them you will find they come out of particular denominations. Where I live there are several “non-denominational churches.” Methodist, Mennonite, Church of Christ, Christian denomination, even one that made it’s way from the Amish.
Code:
 I think that many posters here on CAF do not represent most present-day Catholics who have abandoned the former teaching that the CC alone possesses the full glory of truth. ..
Even if there were only ten people left in the world that held to the truth that the fullness of faith is found in the Catholic church, it would still be true. Truth is truth no matter how many people believe it. We will continue to pray for those who are confused to the truth. You yourself could point out the truth to them. Remind them that the Catholic church holds the fullness of truth.
Code:
 Isn't it sad that religion has so often been a barrier when it should be a bridge? Can you imagine Jesus condemning people to hell because they are Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, etc.? I can't. Narrow-minded, arrogant bigots likely upset him far more.
Every one is a sinner. Everyone needs that bridge. The only bridge there is, is Jesus Christ and the place to fully experience and know Him is in the Catholic church. It has stood through time. Religion is only a barrier to those who make it one by refusing to listen.
 
This is only partly true. Yes, protestants are divided among what they believe. True.
There are many protestants who feel the denomination they attend is right and others are just simply mistaken and then there are those that outright accuse other protestant denominations of not even being Christian. There are not very many protestants faiths that accept non-Christian faiths as a way to salvation. They may respect them but that’s it.

Evangelical christians call themselves non-denominational but if you research behind most of them you will find they come out of particular denominations. Where I live there are several “non-denominational churches.” Methodist, Mennonite, Church of Christ, Christian denomination, even one that made it’s way from the Amish.

Even if there were only ten people left in the world that held to the truth that the fullness of faith is found in the Catholic church, it would still be true. Truth is truth no matter how many people believe it. We will continue to pray for those who are confused to the truth. You yourself could point out the truth to them. Remind them that the Catholic church holds the fullness of truth.
Code:
**
Every one is a sinner. Everyone needs that bridge. The only bridge there is, is Jesus Christ and the place to fully experience and know Him is in the Catholic church. **It has stood through time. Religion is only a barrier to those who make it one by refusing to listen.
Paul would say that the Church is the mystery hidden for all ages through which the manifold wisdom of God is known through which the gentiles are made fellow heirs…in other words the Church is the Body of Christ and the only way to Christ is by the mystery hidden for all ages Christ.
 
Roy,

You consider yourself Christian and as a Christian it is not out of order to consider correction…remind your Catholic friends to pay more attention at mass when they recite the Nicene Creed as to what we believe…

Remind them that this formula from Nicea was to solidify beliefs against error and point out that when they recite it that it is not “I believe”…it is “We believe” and they are out of synch…👍
The new translation has: “I believe” because is is our individual call to believe in the creed.
 
Somewhere I saw a button which read: “God is much too big to be contained fully in only one religion” (or words to that effect). Amen to that. Feeble efforts of true believers to argue that they alone embrace the true faith is - in my view - contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.
Code:
  I don't profess to know all that much about God. Frankly, I don't believe any one of us does. We're called upon to walk by faith and not by sight. It behooves us to walk humbly with our God (Micah 6:8?). In fact, Micah pretty well sums up our religious obligation: "He has showed you, O man, what is good, and what does the Lord require of you? To act justly, and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God."

  This emphasis on being saved either by right doctrine or by proper church affiliation strikes me as contrary to Matt. 25, the parable of the Good Samaritan and other teachings of Christ.

  On the other hand, if you feel led to believe that your faith alone is true and everyone else is off target, and this gives you comfort and assurance, fine. In this vast and uncertain world we all need sources of strength and validity. I would only suggest that carried to an extreme this can easily develop into arrogance and bigotry. I think a better approach would be to "think and let think". "agree to disagree", etc.

   God bless everybody - no exceptions.
 
The new translation has: “I believe” because is is our individual call to believe in the creed.
M,

Then Roy should remind his Catholic friends as to what it is they recite ever Sunday at mass and what they profess as “I believe”…🙂
 
Code:
  On the other hand, if you feel led to believe that your faith alone is true and everyone else is off target, and this gives you comfort and assurance, fine. In this vast and uncertain world we all need sources of strength and validity. I would only suggest that carried to an extreme this can easily develop into arrogance and bigotry. I think a better approach would be to "think and let think". "agree to disagree", etc.
Roy5, respectfully, this post comes across as “you Catholics think you know the truth, but truth is relative - if only you would open your eyes and ears!”

If moral relativism gives you a source of comfort and perceived enlightenment, then fine. I would suggest to you, Roy, that carried to an extreme your version also leads to arrogance and bigotry. What’s more, it leads to the breakdown of family values (divorce), the killing of innocents (abortion), and other societal ills.

[BIBLEDRB]John 8:32[/BIBLEDRB]
 
Somewhere I saw a button which read: “God is much too big to be contained fully in only one religion” (or words to that effect). Amen to that. Feeble efforts of true believers to argue that they alone embrace the true faith is - in my view - contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.
Code:
  I don't profess to know all that much about God. Frankly, I don't believe any one of us does. We're called upon to walk by faith and not by sight. It behooves us to walk humbly with our God (Micah 6:8?). In fact, Micah pretty well sums up our religious obligation: "He has showed you, O man, what is good, and what does the Lord require of you? To act justly, and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God."

  This emphasis on being saved either by right doctrine or by proper church affiliation strikes me as contrary to Matt. 25, the parable of the Good Samaritan and other teachings of Christ.

  On the other hand, if you feel led to believe that your faith alone is true and everyone else is off target, and this gives you comfort and assurance, fine. In this vast and uncertain world we all need sources of strength and validity. I would only suggest that carried to an extreme this can easily develop into arrogance and bigotry. I think a better approach would be to "think and let think". "agree to disagree", etc.

   God bless everybody - no exceptions.
Roy,

You profess that you do not believe that the Bible is Scripture and yet you quote it?

You may want to look at the other story of the Samaritan woman…Jesus tells the woman at the well…you worship what you do not know and we worship what we know…You pick and choose what you want to believe to support what you believe and remain totally lost in my opinion.
 
There’s lots of truth and inspiration in the Bible. However, do you believe that we should not allow a witch to live? (Ex. 22:18) What about executing everyone who sacrifices to any god except the Lord? (Ex. 22:20) See many other verses that we don’t follow - such as found in Ex. 21, Lev. 20, Deut. 22-23. etc. Yes, and I even have trouble with Jesus casting a legion (2000?) demons into pigs which rush down into a lake and are drowned. I also don’t agree with St. Paul when he writes that slaves should obey their masters - which sounds like an endorsement of slavery to me - and that women should remain silent in the church. When I go to Mass it is often that a woman reads the scripture or perhaps sings a solo. I like that,
Code:
  Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood, and the Tower of Babel make spiritual points but they certainly aren't history. I want an intelligent religion not one based on myths or parables. We need to use our brains and be selective about what scripture we view as binding. Would Jesus join with the ancient Hebrews and shout joyfully: "Saul has killed his thousands, but David has killed his ten thousands!"? Would the wisest man in the world, Solomon, according to scripture, have 700 wives and 300 concubines? Good example of family values or what? And what do you do with II Kings 2:23-25? Elisha is bald, kids mock is baldness, Elisha calls down the curse of God, two bears come out of the woods and maul 42 youngsters! Please! Give me a break! 

 Many other questions. If Moses wrote the first five books, how come he is called the 'meekest man on earth' and his death and burial are recorded therein? If the Bible is without error, how come the two genealogies of Jesus (both traced through Joseph, by the way) disagree? We could go on and on.

 Biblical fundamentalists, whether Catholic or Protestant, simply close their eyes to all this. They're not interested in truth so much as affirming what they already believe. They race all over the Bible - proof-texting we call it, quoting a verse from here and a verse from there. Fine, if it suits them. My brain insists upon an intelligent faith, not blind faith. I feel that I honor God by using the brain he gave me and not leaving it outside the church door.

 "Even the devil can quote scripture." War-makers love to cite the bloody genocide ordered by God in the Old Testament. A tooth for a tooth....that's in the Bible. I go with Jesus who said" Ye have heard it said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I say unto you...."
 
There’s lots of truth and inspiration in the Bible. However, do you believe that we should not allow a witch to live?** (Ex. 22:18) What about executing everyone who sacrifices to any god except the Lord? (Ex. 22:20) See many other verses that we don’t follow - such as found in Ex. 21, Lev. 20, Deut. 22-23. etc. Yes, and I even have trouble with Jesus casting a legion (2000?) **demons into pigs which rush down into a lake and are drowned. I also don’t agree with St. Paul when he writes that slaves should obey their masters - which sounds like an endorsement of slavery to me - and that women should remain silent in the church. When I go to Mass it is often that a woman reads the scripture or perhaps sings a solo. I like that,
Code:
  Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood, and the Tower of Babel make spiritual points but they certainly aren't history. I want an intelligent religion not one based on myths or parables. We need to use our brains and be selective about what scripture we view as binding. Would Jesus join with the ancient Hebrews and shout joyfully: "Saul has killed his thousands, but David has killed his ten thousands!"? Would the wisest man in the world, Solomon, according to scripture, have 700 wives and 300 concubines? Good example of family values or what? And what do you do with II Kings 2:23-25? Elisha is bald, kids mock is baldness, Elisha calls down the curse of God, two bears come out of the woods and maul 42 youngsters! Please! Give me a break! 

 Many other questions. If Moses wrote the first five books, how come he is called the 'meekest man on earth' and his death and burial are recorded therein? If the Bible is without error, how come the two genealogies of Jesus (both traced through Joseph, by the way) disagree? We could go on and on.

 Biblical fundamentalists, whether Catholic or Protestant, simply close their eyes to all this. They're not interested in truth so much as affirming what they already believe. They race all over the Bible - proof-texting we call it, quoting a verse from here and a verse from there. Fine, if it suits them. My brain insists upon an intelligent faith, not blind faith. I feel that I honor God by using the brain he gave me and not leaving it outside the church door.

 "Even the devil can quote scripture." War-makers love to cite the bloody genocide ordered by God in the Old Testament. A tooth for a tooth....that's in the Bible. I go with Jesus who said" Ye have heard it said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I say unto you...."
Roy,

There is the Old Testament and Old Covenant and we are in the New Covenant.
 
Code:
 Biblical fundamentalists, whether Catholic or Protestant, simply close their eyes to all this.
Roy5, what in the world is a Catholic “biblical fundamentalist”?
They’re not interested in truth so much as affirming what they already believe. They race all over the Bible - proof-texting we call it, quoting a verse from here and a verse from there. Fine, if it suits them. My brain insists upon an intelligent faith, not blind faith. I feel that I honor God by using the brain he gave me and not leaving it outside the church door.
Ad ignominiam…
“Even the devil can quote scripture.” War-makers love to cite the bloody genocide ordered by God in the Old Testament. A tooth for a tooth…that’s in the Bible. I go with Jesus who said" Ye have heard it said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I say unto you…"
You appear to engage in your own proof-texting here.
 
Catholic fundamentalists are like Protestant fundamentalists. We see plenty of them here on CAF. They jump on a text, often out of context, in Genesis or a verse from the Psalms, perhaps others from a prophet or an epistle or Revelation, and they put this mishmash together with a Gospel passage to support this or that doctrine. Both types of proof-texters do it continually. Shoddy scholarship starting with a conclusion and then seeking to justify it.
Code:
 Now, if we are under the new Covenant, can we discount the Old Testament? Certainly that is not what Christianity teaches. They treat the OT as 'God's Word' also, and believe those tales about Adam and Eve, the plagues inflicted on the Egyptians, Jehovah God's demands for genocide against tribes whose land the ancient Hebrews were invading, etc. The Catholics even go with more books in the OT than Protestants. (The Protestant OT coincides with what you will find at your neighborhood synagogue, by the way, but I don't take sides in that unimportant debate.)

  Jesus, it seems to me, clearly goes against the OT law in his Sermon on the Mount. Ye have heard it said, but I say unto you.... With that Jesus amends the laws found in the New Testament. Divorce (for a man) was easy in the OT. Jesus taught otherwise. Killing the enemy was okay in the OT. Jesus said something about loving our enemy! "Do good to them that hate you!" Wow! 

  This notion that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God simply is against common sense. The Bible has many factual errors, plus tons of contradictions and plenty of myths, folklore, and parables. We need to be selective when we deal with the Bible, using our brains and common sense - plus historic understanding and research.  Fundamentalists avoid doing that. 

  But God bless 'em anyway. They probably will get to heaven as surely as you and I. We are, after all, saved by grace and not by any doctrine or church connection. Thank the Lord for that. Much of the Old Testament depicts God as full of wrath, eager to strike down whole nations, who kills (for example) the oldest son in every Egyptian home and orders the massacre of entire peoples. If you want to view God that way, go ahead. I prefer to think of God as merciful, just, forgiving, and filled with love. I myself find that this is the message of Jesus,who came to show us the way.

   God bless Catholics, Protestants and people of every creed, color, culture and country. Let's make religion a bridge and not a barrier.
 
Roy5, respectfully, this post comes across as “you Catholics think you know the truth, but truth is relative - if only you would open your eyes and ears!”

If moral relativism gives you a source of comfort and perceived enlightenment, then fine. I would suggest to you, Roy, that carried to an extreme your version also leads to arrogance and bigotry. What’s more, it leads to the breakdown of family values (divorce), the killing of innocents (abortion), and other societal ills.

[BIBLEDRB]John 8:32[/BIBLEDRB]
Haha. Amen. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top