Protestants listen up...part II

[toddvetter]

toddvetter:
Do you believe that Jesus is God made man

I believe jesus is the son of man born according the the flesh just as many verses in your bible tells you…

question is what does it mean to be born according to the flesh? I know i was born according to the flesh and so were you.

I belive Jesus has the spirit of God enter him when the daniel prophecy said messiah the prince would come. I believe God declared a prophecy in Psalms 2:7 which was declared on the day of his baptism which ancient text confirm.

As a son of man he showed mankind how to achieve this through the baptism of water (repentance) and the baptism of spirit.

See page 33-35

thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/death%20and%20resurrection%20time%20line.pdf

God bless,. It’s been wonderful sharing with you…

 

[greycaddis]

Toddvetter
Are you a jehova whitness

 

[racing59]

That would explain a lot of things to me on the thread Todd posted.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

This thread sure has gotten away from the question posed in the original post. While I don’t expect this thread to be about my posts, I’m a bit annoyed to see it shift its focus to Todd’s undecipherable rants. Could we perhaps return to the discussion on infallibility and Scripture?

I’ve reported him for his links and advise others to do the same. He clearly has an agenda to push his anti-Catholic links by posting them in numerous places on different forums.

I apologize for the trainwreck he has turned this thread into.

Back on topic, I read your post and it might be semantics that separate us. The Protestants who claim that their, and only their, interpretation is correct are espousing infallibility of their interpretation.

Scriptures are inerrant, but man’s interpretation is not and certainly subject to mistakes. Scriptures do not support sola scriptura and they speak against private interpretation and following those who wrest scriptures.

Now, if we deny sola scriptura it’s because scriptures tell us the Church of the living God is the pillar and ground of truth. They also tell us that the manifold wisdom of God may be made known through the Church.

The Church is where the authors of the New Testament came from. The Church defined the canon of the New Testament. The Church preserved the scriptures for the reformation to take them and start rejecting Church interpretations because of their own private interpretations.

Martin Luther, leader of the Protestant reformation, conceded that the Bible came from the Catholic Church.

“We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists (Catholics)–that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it."

The canon of the New Testament was defined in 360AD. The faith and the Church grew without a New Testament.

Christ promised to be with His Church until the consummation of the world and said, “…and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Where did He speak the same about the New Testament scriptures? Where did Christ write anything or have anything scribed? He didn’t, He taught through oral tradition. That’s why Catholics believe in scriptures plus tradition, through His Church.

 

[Louie1983]

At one point in my life i was an Athiest who denied God. If i now deny i was an athiest does it mean it didnt’ happen? We cannot deny our past. This is a valid peice of history from our Christian forfathers that Prophecy is a light to.

If you take time to review the information sent to you this will be clear.

I hope we can all be humble and yearn to searve God alone in this life. by doing so we serve others by plucking the plank from our eye.

God bless,. It’s been wonderful sharing with you…

My point exactly! I’m not saying to deny that you were an atheist means it didn’t happen. I’m saying that history shows you were in error by being athiest (i’m assuming this because now you believe in god). We cannot deny our past, the church has nothing to eny, it has been preaching the truth for 2000 years (this my friend - history clearly demonstrates).

 

[Eleve]

I think Todd just made your case for you.Some one has to have infallible teaching or the whole thing breaks down to chaos.

Actually, I was making the case that you do not need infallibility in order to discuss Scripture. In fact, infallibility is what ends discussion; once an answer has been dogmatically defined, it is no longer subject to any discussion or interpretation* at all. I agree that infallible teaching is necessary for harmony, but only in a tautological sense; as long as one infallible leader remains unquestioned, there will be no disputes, but any mistakes made because the claim of infallibility is wrong will never be corrected.

This is not to say that I reject the possibility of infallible revelation and teaching — I am still seeking an authentic call to faith — but I do not think that this example clinches the argument so easily as you think.

*Of course, the specific wording that defines a dogma may leave room for discussion (such as the question of Mary’s death before the Assumption), but the matters nailed down in the dogma itself are by definition beyond discussion.

And peace be also with you.

 

[racing59]

I’ve reported him for his links and advise others to do the same. He clearly has an agenda to push his anti-Catholic links by posting them in numerous places on different forums.

I apologize for the trainwreck he has turned this thread into.

Back on topic, I read your post and it might be semantics that separate us. The Protestants who claim that their, and only their, interpretation is correct are espousing infallibility of their interpretation.

Scriptures are inerrant, but man’s interpretation is not and certainly subject to mistakes. Scriptures do not support sola scriptura and they speak against private interpretation and following those who wrest scriptures.

Now, if we deny sola scriptura it’s because scriptures tell us the Church of the living God is the pillar and ground of truth. They also tell us that the manifold wisdom of God may be made known through the Church.

The Church is where the authors of the New Testament came from. The Church defined the canon of the New Testament. The Church preserved the scriptures for the reformation to take them and start rejecting Church interpretations because of their own private interpretations.

Martin Luther, leader of the Protestant reformation, conceded that the Bible came from the Catholic Church.

The canon of the New Testament was defined in 360AD. The faith and the Church grew without a New Testament.

Christ promised to be with His Church until the consummation of the world and said, “…and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Where did He speak the same about the New Testament scriptures? Where did Christ write anything or have anything scribed? He didn’t, He taught through oral tradition. That’s why Catholics believe in scriptures plus tradition, through His Church.

Hi Prodigal, You do bring up very valid points.Although I think Todd was doing more to support your case. Without guidance I see the point that was made here tonight, people can get themselves in real trouble warping everything. I’m starting to understand why Jesus would leave a infallible Chair to keep the Christian Church in line. I do believe Martin Luther had some justifiable complaints,but I understand that does not give us the right to change all the teachings. That does make sense. I think Todd was actually a blessing in disguise, because this is one Christian that it showed we have to have order and guidance.Also shows what ever the devil tries to do, the Lord turns it around for his glory.:bowdown2:
Peace be with you

 

[racing59]

Actually, I was making the case that you do not need infallibility in order to discuss Scripture. In fact, infallibility is what ends discussion; once an answer has been dogmatically defined, it is no longer subject to any discussion or interpretation* at all. I agree that infallible teaching is necessary for harmony, but only in a tautological sense; as long as one infallible leader remains unquestioned, there will be no disputes, but any mistakes made because the claim of infallibility is wrong will never be corrected.

This is not to say that I reject the possibility of infallible revelation and teaching — I am still seeking an authentic call to faith — but I do not think that this example clinches the argument so easily as you think.

*Of course, the specific wording that defines a dogma may leave room for discussion (such as the question of Mary’s death before the Assumption), but the matters nailed down in the dogma itself are by definition beyond discussion.

And peace be also with you.

Hi Eleve, not to change the thread but as far as Mary’s death and assumption it is a beautiful story you will find in the Early Fathers of the Church.If I’m not mistaken it was Gregory of Tours you will find it. It is well worth reading.
Peace

 

[Eleve]

Back on topic, I read your post and it might be semantics that separate us. The Protestants who claim that their, and only their, interpretation is correct are espousing infallibility of their interpretation.

I think you must be write, since my only significant disagreement with you in that post is in your word choice in the latter part of the quote.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “infallibility means more than exemption from actual error; it means exemption from the possibility of error.” I do not think that Protestant interpretors of Scripture generally make the latter claim. In some cases they may believe, with very high confidence, that their interpretations are indeed free from error, but they do not invoke the idea of divine protection from error that is fundamental to the Catholic concept of infallibility.

By analogy, I would claim with absolute certainty that 2 + 2 = 4. I do not claim any sort of infallibility for this statement — in fact, I know that it was taught to me by humans without any obvious divine assistance — but I would neither think that there is any chance that such a fundamental theorem could somehow be wrong. If, on the other hand, God told me that the Riemann Hypothesis (an unsolved problem in mathematics) is true, the revelation would be infallible. In neither case would there be any chance of error; however, the former case lacks the type of infallibility that Protestants normally reject.

Note that I am not a Protestant; I do not defend any particular doctrine of theirs, but I do not think that their beliefs are flawed in exactly the manner that you describe.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Hi Prodigal, You do bring up very valid points.Although I think Todd was doing more to support your case. Without guidance I see the point that was made here tonight, people can get themselves in real trouble warping everything. I’m starting to understand why Jesus would leave a infallible Chair to keep the Christian Church in line. I do believe Martin Luther had some justifiable complaints,but I understand that does not give us the right to change all the teachings. That does make sense. I think Todd was actually a blessing in disguise, because this is one Christian that it showed we have to have order and guidance.Also shows what ever the devil tries to do, the Lord turns it around for his glory.:bowdown2:
Peace be with you

The best analogy I’ve ever heard was about the founding fathers of this country. They wrote a constitution and did not mail it out to all Americans and say, “here, interpret this for yourselves.” That would have been Chaos. They established a legislative body to interpret that document for the American people.

Would an all knowing, all powerful God have done less than those mere men? No, certainly not. He gave us a Church so that we could be of full accord and one mind and one judgment. Can all the Protestant denominations claim full accord and being of one mind and judgment? No, not with Catholics and not among themselves.

They say that they agree on the “essentials”. Does scriptures reference doctrines/teachings as essentials and non-essentials? No. Where all Christians agree, I believe that truth comes from the Holy Spirit. The non-essentials that they disagree on cannot be from the Holy Spirit.

How did we come to such a diversity with some truths agreed on? The Catholic Church was the only Church until the great schism of 1054, then we had the East and West Churches, but both followed Catholic doctrines. Then in the 1500s, the Protestant reformation started and what they started with came from the Catholic Church. As the Protestants privately interpreted scriptures and split from each other, the things they had taken from the Catholic Church became diluted, but the “essentials” did not change. All Christian Churches have roots back to the Catholic Church, where the fulness of truth still exists.

 

[jam070406]

Hi Prodigal, You do bring up very valid points.Although I think Todd was doing more to support your case. Without guidance I see the point that was made here tonight, people can get themselves in real trouble warping everything. I’m starting to understand why Jesus would leave a infallible Chair to keep the Christian Church in line. I do believe Martin Luther had some justifiable complaints,but I understand that does not give us the right to change all the teachings. That does make sense. I think Todd was actually a blessing in disguise, because this is one Christian that it showed we have to have order and guidance.Also shows what ever the devil tries to do, the Lord turns it around for his glory.:bowdown2:
Peace be with you

Praise be to God! :extrahappy:

This post made my night.

 

[greycaddis]

The New testament was written in the Catholic community and most of the letters addressed problems that the early Church faced and it is catholic in whole.For meanings of scripture it is the Church that defines the meaning not the individual or a study group unless a priest heads the group.The Catholic Church has the Holy Spirit guiding it and only the Catholic Church.The Catholic Church teaches the complete truth.The Catholic Church is the body of Christ and Christ can have only one body.All other churches do not teach the complete truth.To be Christian you have to believe in the Trinity if you don’t you are not a Christian.

 

[toddvetter]

Toddvetter
Are you a jehova whitness

i do belive anyone having the spirit of god within them is a witness for Christ. For we cannot bare good fruit of our selves.

The denomination of witnesses with that name comprised of the earthly structure is still coming out of darkness of spiritual famine. they must find the spiritual structure that makes men solid. As you probably saw the fear and reprisal of some replies who wanted to reject the history they could not explain.

this is what happens when we are on shakey ground built by the traditions of men.

Those who seek God will find Him and dwell with him in them.

this was the promise of the messiah. Why do so many not believe His words to be true?

 

[Eleve]

Hi Eleve, not to change the thread but as far as Mary’s death and assumption it is a beautiful story you will find in the Early Fathers of the Church.If I’m not mistaken it was Gregory of Tours you will find it. It is well worth reading.
Peace

Thank you for pointing out that writing to me; Mariology is something that I am definitely interested in. I know that belief in the Assumption is very old, and present in a similar form in the Eastern Orthodox Church. I brought up the much more recent dogma of 1950 as an example that I have seen of a secondary question that is still left open by an otherwise infallible declaration.

Prodigal Son1: 1054 was not the first year of schism for the Church. The Oriental Orthodox Churches, including the Coptic Orthodox Church which I had heard of before I even bothered to study these things, became separated from the bishops of Rome and Constantinople after the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Earlier than that, the First Council of Ephesus led to the separation of the Assyrian Church of the East in 431.

 

[racing59]

i do belive anyone having the spirit of god within them is a witness for Christ. For we cannot bare good fruit of our selves.

The denomination of witnesses with that name comprised of the earthly structure is still coming out of darkness of spiritual famine. they must find the spiritual structure that makes men solid. As you probably saw the fear and reprisal of some replies who wanted to reject the history they could not explain.

this is what happens when we are on shakey ground built by the traditions of men.

Those who seek God will find Him and dwell with him in them.

this was the promise of the messiah. Why do so many not believe His words to be true?

Bless you Todd, because of your lack of authority and false message you bring on history,you have open my eyes to the need of the Chair of Peter. I wish to thank you for this. You have totally convince me the Catholic Church is the One, Holy, Apostolic, Church. Thank you again for your agenda, you made my night.:dancing:
Peace of Jesus Christ be with you

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

i do belive anyone having the spirit of god within them is a witness for Christ. For we cannot bare good fruit of our selves.

The denomination of witnesses with that name comprised of the earthly structure is still coming out of darkness of spiritual famine. they must find the spiritual structure that makes men solid. As you probably saw the fear and reprisal of some replies who wanted to reject the history they could not explain.

this is what happens when we are on shakey ground built by the traditions of men.

Those who seek God will find Him and dwell with him in them.

this was the promise of the messiah. Why do so many not believe His words to be true?

Are you a Messianic Jew?

It doesn’t really matter, you have interrupted many threads on these forums to get your anti-Catholic link out. You have rudely changed the topics of many threads. Now in theological discussions, topic changes are bound to happen, but the way you have abused it certainly appears to be a personal agenda that you feel you must stay with.

Now please follow the topic of the thread or go start a thread to “discuss” your theories.

You are in my prayers.

 

[greycaddis]

Todd
Unless you believe that Jesus is God you are not a true Follower of Jesus.Your theology is the theology of jehova witnesses and they distort the Bible.They have rewritten it to suit their own end.

 

[toddvetter]

from page 2-33 can anyone find any bible verse not represented as it is represented in our bibles when compared with real time and basic reality? this is a simple test for any person grounded in truth that is from God.

thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/death%20and%20resurrection%20time%20line.pdf

This will illustrate if the bible is what the Chrstian world claims it to be. I agree that it we have Rome to appreciate for preserving it in the state that it currently is in. I am grateful for that.

I Do caution myself to be called a christian for this simple fact; that it is a word which cannot be clearly defined yet God promised a solid people built on him.

The word Christian when your on the outside looking in is the picture purfect expample of confusion. Even with in the differing branches of the Catholic realms.

We have but to look at the entire Christian world from the outside looking in, to see the doctrinal confusions all claiming to be the truth, which can only be explained as differing in perception because they are built on half the truth. All are built on the bible, all speak according to the bible, yet none speak according to the Law and testimony (Isaiah 8:20), but God says if we build on him, the true Rock, we will be solid. Our perception of Solid when built on the bible comes from the “denominational tradition" we accept as the highest perception of Bible truth. The bible is not God for he does not live in things made with man’s hands! If my words are not true, bare witness

All Christians living today are forever learning and never coming to the truth, (God) the baptism of spirit. We all need to find that which is missing or lost (knowledge) to walk in God’s ways and be counted as a son or daughter of the heavenly parent. If your parent is a denomination on this earth your parent is of this earth. My parent is in heaven seated at the right hand of Glory and I can hear His voice as he promised me.

This is what I am told to speak before resting for the night.

Sweat dreams and God bless

 

[racing59]

from page 2-33 can anyone find any bible verse not represented as it is represented in our bibles when compared with real time and basic reality? this is a simple test for any person grounded in truth that is from God.

thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/death%20and%20resurrection%20time%20line.pdf

This will illustrate if the bible is what the Chrstian world claims it to be. I agree that it we have Rome to appreciate for preserving it in the state that it currently is in. I am grateful for that.

I Do caution myself to be called a christian for this simple fact; that it is a word which cannot be clearly defined yet God promised a solid people built on him.

The word Christian when your on the outside looking in is the picture purfect expample of confusion. Even with in the differing branches of the Catholic realms.

We have but to look at the entire Christian world from the outside looking in, to see the doctrinal confusions all claiming to be the truth, which can only be explained as differing in perception because they are built on half the truth. All are built on the bible, all speak according to the bible, yet none speak according to the Law and testimony (Isaiah 8:20), but God says if we build on him, the true Rock, we will be solid. Our perception of Solid when built on the bible comes from the “denominational tradition" we accept as the highest perception of Bible truth. The bible is not God for he does not live in things made with man’s hands! If my words are not true, bare witness

All Christians living today are forever learning and never coming to the truth, (God) the baptism of spirit. We all need to find that which is missing or lost (knowledge) to walk in God’s ways and be counted as a son or daughter of the heavenly parent. If your parent is a denomination on this earth your parent is of this earth. My parent is in heaven seated at the right hand of Glory and I can hear His voice as he promised me.

This is what I am told to speak before resting for the night.

Sweat dreams and God bless

Every knee will bow,ever tongue will confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord!:bowdown2:
Lord thank you for removing the scales from my eyes, now I ask that you remove them from Todds, this I pray in Jesus name. Amen

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Thank you for pointing out that writing to me; Mariology is something that I am definitely interested in. I know that belief in the Assumption is very old, and present in a similar form in the Eastern Orthodox Church. I brought up the much more recent dogma of 1950 as an example that I have seen of a secondary question that is still left open by an otherwise infallible declaration.

The reason some infallible declarations are made so late, is because the teaching became endangered.

For example, the final infallible definition of canonical books for Roman Catholic Christians came from the Council of Trent in 1556 in the face of the errors of the Reformers who rejected seven Old Testament books from the canon of scripture to that time.

Prodigal Son1: 1054 was not the first year of schism for the Church. The Oriental Orthodox Churches, including the Coptic Orthodox Church which I had heard of before I even bothered to study these things, became separated from the bishops of Rome and Constantinople after the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Earlier than that, the First Council of Ephesus led to the separation of the Assyrian Church of the East in 431.

I have to go back over those, but I’m pretty sure those that were not corrupted by “heresies” ended up with either the East or the West. I can look up my notes tomorrow, or maybe someone will come along and offer the information before that. It’s late and I’m still on shift (EMS).