Protestants: Could you please do us all a favor??

[guanophore]

Sorry it never says or implies that

Acutally, it does. Keys are given to persons in a position of authority. A statement of faith, as authoritative as it may be, cannot put the key into the lock. This is an activity that requires a person.

**

You have, it does not now nor ever will say what the RCC made up

**

This is true, to an extent. The “RCC” (which does not exist)
does not “make things up”. The Latin Rite is part of 22 other sui juris churches that are all in communion with the bishop of Rome. None of them"make things up" as you have implied here.

You are also correctg that the Holy Scriptures do not say anything “made up” by the “RCC”. All of the NT is produced by the Catholic Church, and represents what the Apostles believed and taught. None of it is “made up”.

 

[guanophore]

Your still ignoring the context and picking one verse apart. With that verse in context there is no way that Christ was talking about making Peter anything. To say what the RCC speculates is forcing the text into something that does not fit.

Yes, I am sure it seems that way to you. However, if you look back into scripture about the names that God changed, I think it will become clear that He did so to change their identity and mission.

Catholics have not need to “pick one verse apart” as Protestants do. This is because Catholics still have the Apostolic Tradition preserved in the Church, as they commanded. In fact, that verse is all about"making Peter anything". His identity was changed from Simon, to Peter(the Rock). Paul even affirms this. You are pulling at strings to justify your disbedience the the authority appointed by Christ.

 

[Worthy5]

I don’t read where Jesus said His church would never teach error. In fact God the Holy Spirit said in the Scriptures He inspired that just as false prophets rose up among the people of Israel, so there WILL BE false teachers that rise up within the church (2 Pet. 2:1). What makes a false teacher? Teaching false doctrines.Actually Jesus said about the church He was about to build on the confession of Peter that the gates HADES (not Hell, “gehenna”) will not overpower it (Matt. 16:18). The gates of Hades to the Jew designated death (equivalent to sheol in Hebrew). Therefore Christ was simply stating that the the believing church, founded on the truth of Christ’s Person and sacrificial work, would not be held captive by death (physical or spiritual). Jesus Himself was the “first fruits” of the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:20-23). His church, which He was about to build on the truth of His Messiahship, will then follow in like manner at His coming for her (Jn. 14:1-3; 1Thess. 4:15-18; 1 Cor. 15:51-58).Actually Jesus said, speaking to His Apostles, that He had much more to say to them but they could not bear them now. But when the Holy Spirit comes, He would guide them into all truth (read Jn. 16:12-15). He (the H.S.) did just that, and what truths He disclosed to them was subsequently written and preserved in Holy Spirit, God-breathed (theopneustos) Scriptures.Yes, that’s what you’re told and that’s what you believe. It’s, quintessentially, what makes you RC. Yes, that’s what you’re told and that’s what you believe. It’s what makes you RC.Don’t you think that’s a rather futile request by someone who believes the hierarchy of the RCC is equivalent to Christ Himself?

Very good MW, you are at least starting to reference some historic text-albeit in a very small amount. Now be careful, your posts are getting rather long, it appears you are working hard to discern your interpretations-something that would not seem so necessary if the light of the Spirit is guiding you making scripture so clearly understood.

Watch out, you are making your interpretations with a sound of confidence, do not look now but your mind is wanting to display certainty-before you know it you will be speaking infallibly. Of course, you have not indicated where you received your authority to interpret nor have you laid a foundation to show that the Bible is in fact what it says it is-divine revelation. I am still not certain how you came to that conclusion. Just curious though.

 

[1beleevr]

prmerger:Can you go church shopping online? That seems to be a big deal with catholics lately. What if the person who is leaving the catholic church tells you to pound sand, or they don’ need or want your prayers! Church shopping, it’s an idea whose time has come! And you do know who the Truth is, don’t you? And do you thik it’s possible for God to use people to accomplish His plans? Paul didn’t stay in one place, did he? Isaiah said,“Here am I, send me.”

 

[zigzeigler]

So while in a “serious” study of your “faith,” what stopped you in your tracks is what Newman said on behalf of a dead man he never knew.

You do realize that Newman has no authority to speak on behalf of Athanasius, don’t you? And what brought you to RCIA was only the personal opinion of one man’s claim would be the thought and action of another man - one, in fact, he never knew. Interesting, indeed.

Hmm. The person I was replying to observed that studying the history of Christianity led her to Catholicism. Me too. I could not think that the Catholic Church had been wrong for centuries and centuries as it passed on what it received from the Lord Himself (in the form of the New Testament AND in the form of Tradition) and that it took someone in the 16th or 17th or 18th or 19th or 20th to discover the real “truth.”

Groucho Marx said he would not belong to a club that would have him as a member. I decided that I did not want to belong to a church I had to form myself. I don’t pick and choose now among people’s opinions. I place my trust in the organization the Lord formed and the one he promised would be preserved until the end of time.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Because in context the theopneustos Scriptures reveal that Christ was speaking figuratively since He was right there speaking to them clothed in the body that was yet to sacrificed.Because in respect to “elders” (presbuteros/episkopos) the theopneustos Scriptures mention only males in that ecclesiastic office.Because the theopneustos Scriptures specifies no “day of worship” to be set aside for the church Christ is presently building; and the seventh day was “sabbath day,” a day of rest (cessation of labor), not a day of worship, according to the Law of Moses. And the church is not under the Law of Moses with its “letters engraved on stones.” Because the theopneustos Scriptures mention her other sons by name, and they mention she had daughters as well (Mk. 6:3); and that Joseph refrained from having sexual relations with her until after the birth of Jesus (Matt. 1:25).Because the theopneustos Scriptures reveal that the work of salvation was finished at the cross of Christ and His finished, sacrificial work is applied to the believer, in full, at the moment belief in Him. And they record the words of Jesus Himself who said of the true believer that he “has” eternal life, and that he does not come into judgment but “has” passed out of death into life (Jn. 5:24).Because nowhere in the theopneustos Scriptures are infants ever recorded as being baptized - only those who had personally believed in Christ. First belief, then ritual baptism.Because the theopneustos Scriptures reveal the Father as God; the Son as God; and the Holy Spirit as God. Three Persons, one God.

IOW, everything what we need to know pertaining to God and man’s salvation is right there recorded in the Scriptures which the Holy Spirit Himself inspired.

Thanks for all these answers. I appreciate learning more about what your particular denomination believes.

However, the point is that if we had representatives from all of the other denominations participating in this thread, they would be arguing different viewpoints - viewpoints that are conflicting and contradictory.

How is this possible if all of you “Bible” Christians claim to be led by the Spirit and “rightly dividing” the Word of God?

 

[moondweller]

Hey MD,

The Scriptures have no “authority.” Only intelligent beings can have and wield authority. The Scriptures are words in a book. They have no “meaning” until meaning is given to them by a living being. This is plain common sense. Of course, common sense is not really common these days. ****Paul writes:Gal 3:22 "But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."Looks to me like Scripture does wield authority. After all, it is the Word of God and His Word is authority.

Infallibility means that no error is allowed.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Yes I’m aware that my view of how scripture presents predestination and grace is not in line with contemporary Catholic soteriology. I simply think the CC has been all over the place on this issue throughout history (just look at its pronouncement at the Council of Carthage where they affirmed Augustine’s theology, and denounced Pelagianism as a heresy). So frankly I don’t give much credence to Catholic theology (IMO a simple reading of the bible “cover to cover” debunks its view).

A simple reading of the Bible debunks Catholic theology? ALL of Catholic theology? That’s a pretty big statement.

I guess as the maxim goes, if you disagree with the CC today … give it ten years & they’ll change their mind (their theology seems to shift direction like the wind). They’re almost as bad as the protestants

I see. So, if someone disagrees with the Church’s teaching on the resurrection of Jesus (as the atheists do), or with the doctrine of Purgatory or the Immaculate Conception (as the Protestants do) or with the Church’s stand on birth control (as even many Catholics do), you only have to wait 10 years before these teachings will change?

Bad examples? Okay…could you then cite some specific examples of Church doctrine that is different today than it was in 1999? No? How about 1899? 1599? I’m nt particularly interested in seeing some esoteric bit of trivia from the Council of Carthage or from some fourth century pope who is alleged to have taught something heretical…I want to see some support for your allegation that the Catholic Church changes its teachings “like the wind”.

Humble, I’ve come late to this thread. In fact, I don’t even know what it is about, and the title gives nothing away. But I am curious…if you had to articulate in just a few words what your biggest issue with the Catholic Church is - the real reason you left, what would it be?

Thanks.

 

[Memaw]

Paul writes:Gal 3:22 "But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."Looks to me like Scripture does wield authority. After all, it is the Word of God and His Word is authority.No, my friend, infallibility means one cannot error.

md, FYI, infallibility means freedom from error, which Jesus promised HIS Church.
And Impeccability means the absolute impossibility of Jesus Christ to sin. Jesus alone is impeccable. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Peter_J]

prmerger:Can you go church shopping online? That seems to be a big deal with catholics lately. What if the person who is leaving the catholic church tells you to pound sand, or they don’ need or want your prayers! Church shopping, it’s an idea whose time has come! And you do know who the Truth is, don’t you? And do you thik it’s possible for God to use people to accomplish His plans? Paul didn’t stay in one place, did he? Isaiah said,“Here am I, send me.”

I believe that most of us – whether Catholic or Protestant, whether conservative or liberal – are too quick to engage in church shopping.

Have you ever read what C.S. Lewis said on the matter?

 

[Peter_J]

infallibility means one cannot err-]or/-].

Correct.

For example, quite a lot of Christians – Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant alike – believe that St. Peter was divinely protected from writing anything erroneous in First Peter and Second Peter.

 

[moondweller]

Correct.

For example, quite a lot of Christians – Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant alike – believe that St. Peter was divinely protected from writing anything erroneous in First Peter and Second Peter.

Error/err - same thing.

No. The Scriptures are a completely different phenomenon. They’re theopneustos: God-breathed. Or are you suggesting that a Papal encyclical is theopneustos, hence, Scripture? If so, I would call that position heretical.

 

[moondweller]

md, FYI, infallibility means freedom from error, which Jesus promised HIS Church.

Can you show me where it’s recorded that Jesus said HIS church is infallible? The church is made up of many members, so every member would of necessity be infallible.

Are you at all aware of the doctrine controversies throughout church history?

And Impeccability means the absolute impossibility of Jesus Christ to sin. Jesus alone is impeccable. God Bless, Memaw

Ah-huh.

 

[1beleevr]

prmerger: Just an addendum to post#796; even if I were church shopping, why would I go to a catholic website? Is your religion for sale?

 

[SteveGC]

Error/err - same thing.

Err is the verb. Error is the noun. Peter J was simply correcting grammar, I think. Probably unnecessary - but some people, like my mom, always felt a need to make it grammatically correct.

moondweller:

No. The Scriptures are a completely different phenomenon. They’re theopneustos: God-breathed. Or are you suggesting that a Papal encyclical is theopneustos, hence, Scripture? .

Where does it say that “theopneustos” is only for Scripture? God breathed into Adam, and hence YOU, did He not? So, you and I are God-breathed. Further, God breathed onto the 12, and prophets, and OT writers…people, not books. So it seems that many things in God’s creation are “theopneustos”, no? Not just Scripture. I’m sure you recognize all that…but fail to recognize, nay acknowledge, the fact that there are people alive today who are still God-breathed in the same regard as the apostles were…with the authority from Christ to shepherd His flock.

moondweller:

If so, I would call that position **heretical **

I just love it when a non-Catholic uses this word with respect to Christian thought…snatching it right out from under the nose of The Church, where the term originally signified those teachings that were outside of Her sacred deposit of faith.

 

[Memaw]

I believe that most of us – whether Catholic or Protestant, whether conservative or liberal – are too quick to engage in church shopping.

Have you ever read what C.S. Lewis said on the matter?

Speak for yourself, John, er Peter. When you have the fullness of TRUTH, why look for anything less??? God Bless, Memaw

 

[Peter_J]

Err is the verb. Error is the noun.

Exactly. I was just trying to use the words correctly, not make an issue out of them.

No. The Scriptures are a completely different phenomenon. They’re theopneustos: God-breathed. Or are you suggesting that a Papal encyclical is theopneustos, hence, Scripture? If so, I would call that position heretical.

What I was saying is this: First and Second Peter are infallible documents (and quite a lot of Christians agree with me). Do you take issue with that?

 

[distracted]

Error/err - same thing.

No. The Scriptures are a completely different phenomenon. They’re theopneustos: God-breathed. Or are you suggesting that a Papal encyclical is theopneustos, hence, Scripture? If so, I would call that position heretical.

so did God just tell a bunch of men to put togehter a Bible in the 4th century… and after that said “That’s all you need. I’m not speaking to you anymore.”

no, he gave us a Chruch to speak to us throughout the centuries…

When the bible was put together (by the Cahtolic Church)… there was no arificial birth control (to speak of)… there was no stem cell research… test tube babies…

we need a Church to guide us in these and all moral problems…

 

[Peter_J]

1beleevr,

Earlier I mentioned C.S. Lewis on the subject of “church shopping”. (He didn’t actually use that phrase, but that is a popular term for it, along with “parish shopping” and “congregation shopping”.) Anyhow, in case you haven’t read it, here’s a quote from Lewis’ character Screwtape (a real devil):

MY DEAR WORMWOOD,
You mentioned casually in your last letter that the patient has continued to attend one church, and one only, since he was converted, and that he is not wholly pleased with it. May I ask what you are about? Why have I no report on the causes of his fidelity to the parish church? Do you realise that unless it is due to indifference it is a very bad thing? Surely you know that if a man can’t be cured of churchgoing, the next best thing is to send him all over the neighbourhood looking for the church that “suits” him until he becomes a taster or connoisseur of churches.
The reasons are obvious. In the first place the parochial organisation should always be attacked, because, being a unity of place and not of likings, it brings people of different classes and psychology together in the kind of unity the Enemy desires. The congregational principle, on the other hand, makes each church into a kind of club, and finally, if all goes well, into a coterie or faction. In the second place, the search for a “suitable” church makes the man a critic where the Enemy wants him to be a pupil. What He wants of the layman in church is an attitude which may, indeed, be critical in the sense of rejecting what is false or unhelpful, but which is wholly uncritical in the sense that it does not appraise—does not waste time in thinking about what it rejects, but lays itself open in uncommenting, humble receptivity to any nourishment that is going. (You see how grovelling, how unspiritual, how irredeemably vulgar He is!) This attitude, especially during sermons, creates the condition (most hostile to our whole policy) in which platitudes can become really audible to a human soul. There is hardly any sermon, or any book, which may not be dangerous to us if it is received in this temper. So pray bestir yourself and send this fool the round of the neighbouring churches as soon as possible. Your record up to date has not given us much satisfaction.

• The Screwtape Letters

 

[Truismfinest]

If you really believe the way you say you do, then you have my deepest sympathy. You are a man without a reason for hope. The moment you leave ‘this ole world’, you are going to be in for one BIG shock. I’d love to see the look on your face at that moment. Not really, I don’t want to be anywhere around. Its hard to believe you were once a Catholic and walked away with nothing more than this. You have my sincerest prayers for your re-conversion. I pray the Blessed Mother will be able to bring you back home to her SON. God Bless, Memaw

Christ has given us the opportunity and expressed the meaning of unconditional Love in which we have the opportunity to obtain through the church and faith. Since the time of creation of man the presents of the Holy Spirit you may say incarnated the world in which exist all mankind; now with the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the birth of Pentecost our bodies became the temple of the Holy spirit to reign with Gods’ church and Gods’ creation. The Resurrection of Christ is one of the GREATEST VICTORIES of mankind in hopes of obtaining Heaven on earth in which the Catholic Church teaches the new testament of LIVING FAITH along with the success of the ecumenical council also known as the Second Vatican II. The presents of Jesus love is found in the Church for instance the celebration of the Holy mass praying with sincerity of reunion amongst our brother in reign with the Holy Spirit; instead of some diversity of criticism you may find else where. I hope and pray with all the holy soul in christ this may have help some with the understanding of Christ LOVE.