P
PRmerger
Guest
So an infallible Magisterium produced the infallible Scriptures! Not a group of fallible men like moondweller proposed.
- Status
P
PRmerger
Guest
Yup. If one wants clarity–and credibility–spelling correctly and using correct grammar is a must.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Eh, I’m no hero. I just try not to drink the cool-aid that is occasionally passed around on internet discussion forums.
Before I respond to that, let me ask you a little question to test your knowledge of Catholicism. True or false: according to Catholic teaching, the Pope is infallible whenever he speaks on faith and morals?
S
sambos671
Guest
However, I consider this forum to be closer to dialogue than academic writing. The spoken language is often full of gramatical errors.
S
sambos671
Guest
I would say the Infallible Holy Spirit produced the Infallible Magesterium and the Holy Scriptures using fallible men.So an infallible Magisterium produced the infallible Scriptures! Not a group of fallible men like moondweller proposed.
P
Peter_J
Guest
I agree with you to an extent. Yes, they were fallible men; but they exercised infallibility when they wrote books of the bible. (In a way, it would be correct to say “St. Paul was infallible when he wrote Romans.” Of course, if you left out the qualifier and just said “St. Paul was infallible”, then that would be a problem.)
P
PRmerger
Guest
Well, yes. The Magisterium is certainly not infallible of their own accord!
M
Memaw
Guest
Yes we do have plenty of evidence. Christ founded a Church, (just one) on St. Peter and promised that the gates of Hell will not prevail against it. He promised that HIS Church would not ever teach error. That HE would be with HIS Church till the 'end of time. He gave HIS Church all of the 7 Sacraments. He sent the Holy Spirit to be with HIS Church to protect its teachings from error. It is the Holy Spirit that works thru fallible men such as the Pope and Bishops in union with the Pope. We can trust them because of the Holy Spirit and Christ’s promise. Christ’s Church is the ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC church that can and does trace it beginning to Jesus. If you read the writings of the Early Church Fathers and also the Acts of the Apostles as well as what Jesus said to Peter in Sacred Scriptures. And compare the true teaching of the Catholic Church with the teachings of other denominations you will see that the Catholic Church has been and always will be faithful to what Jesus taught. The Holy Spirit will not allow anything else. Our Doctrine does not change with the times. God Bless, Memaw
M
moondweller
Guest
My friend, you cannot question or reason against those whom you claim (and they assert) to be “infallible.” It is not yours to reason but to obediently accept.Moondweller, have you read Pope John Paul II’s magnficent encyclical “Fides et Ratio” (Faith and Reason). It’s a treatise on the virtue of using our reason to understand the faith that has been given to us.
Have you read anything by Aquinas whose writings speak to our testing and examination of what is being taught. Incidentally, the Catholic Church canonized him as a saint, so I’m certain his writings are not contrary to her doctrine.
Wasn’t it St. Anselm who described “faith seeking understanding”?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Do you obediantly accept Christ? You don’t try to understand his teachings on salvation, on faith, on sin? You simply blindly accept, Moondweller?
Are you a parent? If so, what do you tell your children about Jesus? Only that they must obediantly accept whatever you tell them, or do you try to appeal to their reason and intellect?
M
moondweller
Guest
Your “thumbs up” indicates to me that what I wrote flew over your head.Indeed!
M
moondweller
Guest
Oh Perry, please STOP! Minor differences within a denomination don’t make many denominations. They’re still one denomination. There aren’t thousands of Protestant denominations as is falsely asserted by modern RC apologists. Don’t just repeat what people tell you.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Since I’m only 4’ 11", it’s entirely probable that it did fly over my head!Your “thumbs up” indicates to me that what I wrote flew over your head.
M
moondweller
Guest
True. But I didn’t need to answer that question for you to answer mine.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Do the math, moondweller. There are THOUSANDS of doctrines–each contradicting the other. And if the doctrinal differences are enough that a pastor will split from his original church to found his own church because if his differing interpretations of Scripture, then it’s certainly not a “minor difference” to him.
Mathematically, if you take the list below and take all the different permutations of belief and acceptance of the issues below (not all issues are even listed) there’s thousands of doctrines. (list provided by another poster, ProdigalSon)
Baptism
Rapture
Tongues (some believe others are not saved if they don’t speak in tongues)
Divorce
Abortion
Once saved, always saved
Music or no music (Singing or no singing)
Women pastors, no women pastors
Hell, or no hell
The Eucharist (Communion)
Sola scriptura/private interpretation
Ordination
Trinity vs. unitarianism
Church leadership, or no leadership
Head coverings or no head coverings
Health and wealth gospel
Drinking allowed, drinking not allowed)
Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
Judge others, don’t judge others
What’s a sin, what is not a sin
Charity or no charity (help one another or let them help
themselves
M
moondweller
Guest
You are making it extremely apparent that you have no idea what constitutes a “denomination.” Though it is true that Protestants need to do their homework on the tenets of RC’ism, RCs need to do theirs on Protestant denominations. Don’t just repeat what you’ve been told.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Let’s just take the first few items on the list ProdigalSon provided:
Baptism
Rapture
Tongues (some believe others are not saved if they don’t speak in tongues)
There’s already dozens of different denominations which each have differing views of the above.
-Baptism is an ordinance/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues
-Baptism is required for salvation/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues
-Baptism is required but only by immersion/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues
-Baptism is required but can be by immersion or sprinkling/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues.
See what I mean?
M
moondweller
Guest
PR, your response does not at all address the content my comment.
M
moondweller
Guest
You still have no idea what a denomination actually is. So please, do your homework.Let’s just take the first few items on the list ProdigalSon provided:
Baptism
Rapture
Tongues (some believe others are not saved if they don’t speak in tongues)
There’s already dozens of different denominations which each have differing views of the above.
-Baptism is an ordinance/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues
-Baptism is required for salvation/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues
-Baptism is required but only by immersion/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues
-Baptism is required but can be by immersion or sprinkling/there is no rapture/one must speak in tongues.
See what I mean?
S
sambos671
Guest
Just out of curiosity would you lump Independent Fundalmentalist Baptist, Southern Convention Baptist, and Freewill Baptist together as one baptist denomination? Would you lump Assemblies of God and Church of God together and Jesus Only Pentecostals together? Where do the Nazarenes fit in? How about the multitude of churches that are mega and independent like the Crystal Cathedral? Or Joel Olsteens Church?
- Status