Protestants: Tackle This

[Prodigal_Son1]

It was not until 1854 that Pope Pius IX, with the support of the overwhelming majority of Roman Catholic bishops, whom he had consulted between 1851–1853, promulgated the papal bull Ineffabilis Deus (Latin for “Ineffable God”), which defined ex cathedra the dogma of the Immaculate Conception:

In 1439 the dispute was brought before the Council of Basle where the University of Paris, formerly opposed to the doctrine, proved to be its most ardent advocate, asking for a dogmatical definition. After it had been discussed for two years, the bishops declared the Immaculate Conception to be a doctrine which was pious, consonant with Catholic worship, Catholic faith, right reason, and Holy Scripture; nor, said they, was it henceforth allowable to preach or declare to the contrary.

Sixtus IV eventually issued bull Grave Nimis, threatening excommunication to those of either opinion.
So dissention does exist even within the Catholic Church. It’s how the dissention is handled that’s different.

This is just one example. You mentioned the Reformation earlier.

It’s the church body that determines the dogma and doctrine.

Teachings that are endangered by the times, challenges, require infallible decisions.

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.

Now, you asserted there was not one interpretation for the first thousand years. At this point I requested that you, “Please enlighten me with other interpretations, from groups you’re willing to affiliate yourself with.” You quoted that request in this post I’ve quoted, but you did not answer the request. The reason I asked that is because of the heresies through the first thousand years. The groups with their own interpretations had teachings that no one of today is willing to defend, much less affliate themself with.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Okay Protestants, here’s something for you to tackle:

Several years ago I showed a Baptist co-worker of mine James 2:20 (“faith without works is dead”) and Revelation 20:12 (“And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds”). She looked at me and said, “You’re right Jean. They DO say that!” She was so disturbed by the Bible verses and that she wasn’t doing any good deeds/works that she just had to go to her Pastor about it. And she did.

In fact, she came back to work that Monday and told me that after she showed her Pastor those 2 verses, he looked directly at her and told her, “Yeah, they’re there, but they don’t mean anything.” He also added not to worry about them so she didn’t. She was actually quite relieved to know those Biblical verses did not mean anything.

As a Catholic and like most, if not all, I take the whole Bible into consideration.

It seems that if something in the Bible does not jive with Protestant beliefs it is either there and does not mean anything OR it is there and we Catholics just are not interpreting it right.

As a Catholic, it bothers me and offends me even that it always comes down to is either there and does not mean anything OR it is there and we Catholics just are not interpreting it right. In some ways, it is even insulting to me.

Why is it Catholics are always wrong and Protestants are always right? Why can’t Catholics ever be right? Or, would that be too threatening to most Protestants? I mean… if Catholics are right it somehow shatters all of what they believe in, righht?

I am sorry, but either the entire Bible means something or it means nothing. You cannot say 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 means something and is important YET disregard James 2:20 or Revelation 20:12 like it does not exist.

this is a good one. at least he didnt say that Catholics added those passages.

 

[Jean_1958]

I see you are from North Chicago. Go visit Pastor Frank Senn and the good folks at Immanuel Lutheran in Evanston and your experience and perspectives on “protestants” will change.

ilcevanston.org/index.php?page=pastor

IowaJay,

Thanks for the link. Evanston is indeed close to where I live. I checked out the site and I was impressed by Pastor Senn’s background.

Jean

 

[larkin31]

Teachings that are endangered by the times, challenges, require infallible decisions.

Now, you asserted there was not one interpretation for the first thousand years. At this point I requested that you, “Please enlighten me with other interpretations, from groups you’re willing to affiliate yourself with.” You quoted that request in this post I’ve quoted, but you did not answer the request. The reason I asked that is because of the heresies through the first thousand years. The groups with their own interpretations had teachings that no one of today is willing to defend, much less affliate themself with.

There are Gnostics today. What do you mean that “no one of today is willing to defend them”???

Here is one web site that lists their history, their beliefs, their “churches”.

gnosis.org/eghome.htm

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

There are Gnostics today. What do you mean that “no one of today is willing to defend them”???

Here is one web site that lists their history, their beliefs, their “churches”.

gnosis.org/eghome.htm

Thanks for correcting me. What I meant is, no Christian is willing to defend or affliate themselves with.

**Gnosticism

(Greek: gnosis, knowledge)

Salvation by knowledge. Gnostics were people who claimed to know mysteries of the universe; various pantheistic sects, antedating the Christian era and lasting to the 5th century and borrowing the formulas of various religious, particularly of Christianity, to express their view of matter as inimical to spirit, and of the universe as a depravation of the Deity. It is an extinct force, so far as religion is concerned today, but there are survivals of it in Swedenborgianism, New Thought, and in some of the sects of Occultism.

New Thought

A form of philosophy based on the progressive ability of mankind, which its adherents have collected into a more or less definite system, though they deny the applicability of that term. Its fundamental ideas are:
that God is omnipresent and immanent in all created things
that man is a divine soul “a microcosm of God”
that he is under the domination of universal law
New Thought denies all idea of atonement, regarding evil “as only misdirected energy.” Its purpose is, through thought, to direct that energy properly. It recognizes no authority save the voice of the soul speaking to each individual, hence each man’s actions are determined solely by and for himself.**

More details of Gnosticism.

Read that link and tell me that you are willing to affliate yourself or defend their beliefs. For that matter read the Gnostic Catechism from the link you provided and then come defend them or claim affliation.

The problem you present yourself with is the abscence of any supporting documentation from the Apostles or their successors. There were most certainly heretics in those times, evident by the writings of St. Paul.

 

[graceandglory]

False. Patently false. Which thousand years, first of all, do you mean? Do you know your religious history?h else orthodoxy do you require? Why would you require more than agreement on the Creed?

Man, you are seriously a loose cannon. Start speaking with respect or you’ll be history in no time.

 

[larkin31]

Man, you are seriously a loose cannon. Start speaking with respect or you’ll be history in no time.

What disrespect? The thread asks Protestants to “Tackle this”. So here I am, tackling the challenges.

What is with you folks? All I said was that the generalization about Catholic history was false. Which it was. And I and other posters have shown so.

This is really no big deal, I thought.

 

[larkin31]

Thanks for correcting me. What I meant is, no Christian is willing to defend or affliate themselves with.

More details of Gnosticism.

Read that link and tell me that you are willing to affliate yourself or defend their beliefs. For that matter read the Gnostic Catechism from the link you provided and then come defend them or claim affliation.

The problem you present yourself with is the abscence of any supporting documentation from the Apostles or their successors. There were most certainly heretics in those times, evident by the writings of St. Paul.

What you said was that the Church has never had variation of interpretation. That is not true. And as we have pointed out (a few of us here), simply to state that they must not have been Christians is to dodge the issue by definition (stacking the deck: “If one holds these views, then you are not Christian–or Catholic”).

 

[SnakeMauler]

Okay Protestants, here’s something for you to tackle:

Several years ago I showed a Baptist co-worker of mine James 2:20 (“faith without works is dead”) and Revelation 20:12 (“And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds”). She looked at me and said, “You’re right Jean. They DO say that!” She was so disturbed by the Bible verses and that she wasn’t doing any good deeds/works that she just had to go to her Pastor about it. And she did.

In fact, she came back to work that Monday and told me that after she showed her Pastor those 2 verses, he looked directly at her and told her, “Yeah, they’re there, but they don’t mean anything.” He also added not to worry about them so she didn’t. She was actually quite relieved to know those Biblical verses did not mean anything.

As a Catholic and like most, if not all, I take the whole Bible into consideration.

It seems that if something in the Bible does not jive with Protestant beliefs it is either there and does not mean anything OR it is there and we Catholics just are not interpreting it right.

As a Catholic, it bothers me and offends me even that it always comes down to is either there and does not mean anything OR it is there and we Catholics just are not interpreting it right. In some ways, it is even insulting to me.

Why is it Catholics are always wrong and Protestants are always right? Why can’t Catholics ever be right? Or, would that be too threatening to most Protestants? I mean… if Catholics are right it somehow shatters all of what they believe in, righht?

I am sorry, but either the entire Bible means something or it means nothing. You cannot say 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 means something and is important YET disregard James 2:20 or Revelation 20:12 like it does not exist.

Catholics are actually always right because our church was founded in the 1st century by Jesus Christ himself. Protestants might have interesting ideas, however, there’s really no point in having them, as what Jesus wants is right here in the Catholic Church, and has been for two thousand years.

 

[Jars_of_Clay_1]

Catholics are actually always right because our church was founded in the 1st century by Jesus Christ himself. Protestants might have interesting ideas, however, there’s really no point in having them, as what Jesus wants is right here in the Catholic Church, and has been for two thousand years.

WHAT??? Oh, my Lord!!! I love it! That has got to be the funniest darn post I’ve read on this forum yet! (Like really, you’re not serious are you? Please say you’re not serious because I just may never stop laughing!) Yes-sir-re! Us Protestants ummmm…we have interesting ideas, but there is just no point in having them. Bawww-hawww-hawww! You’re always right huh? OOOOO-KAAAAY!

People, people, people…Jesus Christ founded HIS church. From there on out everyone has been playing the “telephone game,” including Catholics. Guess what? I’m not going to prove it to you. I can’t. Not until you’re ready to step away from the cult!

Oh, I’m going to bed - this was really the icing on the cake. Thanks for the laugh SnakeMauler! Hopefully I can shake off all those “Protestant” ideas in my sleep never to have them again.

 

[shawn38]

Several years ago I showed a Baptist co-worker of mine James 2:20 (“faith without works is dead”) and Revelation 20:12. She looked at me and said, “You’re right Jean. They DO say that!” She was so disturbed by the Bible verses and that she wasn’t doing any good deeds/works that she just had to go to her Pastor about it. And she did…

James 2 I addressed earlier. No need to repeat myself.

Rev 20:12 applies to the judgment of works. So does 1 Cor 3:12.

1 Cor 3:12 ‘If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. 14 If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15 If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.’

…after she showed her Pastor those 2 verses, he looked directly at her and told her, “Yeah, they’re there, but they don’t mean anything.” …

She must have misunderstood or misspoke specifically because her pastor knows it’s there. He knows all scripture is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

 

[shawn38]

Catholics are actually always right because our church was founded in the 1st century by Jesus Christ himself. Protestants might have interesting ideas, however, there’s really no point in having them, as what Jesus wants is right here in the Catholic Church, and has been for two thousand years.

Always or in matters of faith? I disagree in both instances. This is off topic again.

 

[graceandglory]

What disrespect? The thread asks Protestants to “Tackle this”. So here I am, tackling the challenges.

**What is with you folks? **All I said was that the generalization about Catholic history was false. Which it was. And I and other posters have shown so.

This is really no big deal, I thought.

Saying something is false means nothing. PROVE IT. Show me where I am wrong.

You are rude and disrespectful to people who you are responding to. Respond to ideas, not the people. Even right here, you are showing your disrespect, when you say, **“what is with you folks?” **You will be banned soon if you don’t shape up.

You have brought NOTHING to the table. If Catholics are so IGNORANT, teach us.

 

[graceandglory]

WHAT??? ** Oh, my Lord!!! ** I love it! That has got to be the funniest darn post I’ve read on this forum yet! (Like really, you’re not serious are you? Please say you’re not serious because I just may never stop laughing!) Yes-sir-re! Us Protestants ummmm…we have interesting ideas, but there is just no point in having them. Bawww-hawww-hawww! You’re always right huh? OOOOO-KAAAAY!

People, people, people…Jesus Christ founded HIS church. From there on out everyone has been playing the “telephone game,” including Catholics. Guess what? I’m not going to prove it to you. I can’t. Not until you’re ready to step away from the cult!

Oh, I’m going to bed - this was really the icing on the cake. Thanks for the laugh SnakeMauler! Hopefully I can shake off all those “Protestant” ideas in my sleep never to have them again.

Wow, mocking and taking the Lord’s name in vain in one post. How charitable of a Christian you are.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Wow, mocking and taking the Lord’s name in vain in one post. How charitable of a Christian you are.

And that poster refers to Catholicism as a ‘cult’.

Some of our new visitors need to read the rules of the forums…

CONDUCT RULES
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of personal attacks, threats, and crude or sexually-explicit language, rude comments and innuendo.
Do not use abbreviated terms such as “Prots” or “radtrad” etc. that may be offensive to the group to which they refer. Full names are best.
Do not use character substitutions in proper names, such as “Amerikkkans” or “Demonrats” or “Repubicans” etc.
Inappropriate or offensive graphics, links, or profile entries are not permitted.
Messages should be short. Do not post lengthy replies (especially replies that consist largely of quotes from an earlier message).
Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.
Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.

 

[fishisgood]

Catholics (the people in the Church) are not always right… they are human. I think what protestants cant wrap their head around (for the most part) is that… The institution of the Catholic Church has had 2000 years of discourse, councels, access to the Gospels, Fathers ect way before anyone… well because its the Church and these things are hers. When the Church has reformed ITSELF or ridded its self of bad doctrin (nosticism ect) it has reformed with in ITSELF… It is Catholic belief that only it since it was handed the keys can reform itself (no good Catholic will tell you it hasnt needed change)… It can not come from the outside which is what protestantism is… it is outside the Church it is splintered and unhealthy… it is constantly going through reforming its self with no authority that is why it constantly dies and recreates its self over 33000 times. It is the constant human fitting of scripture into our own compartmentalized box of our mind.

 

[shawn38]

Still the same brother. Works are done out of our love of God. His love obligates us to do no less.

I appeal to you that it is not the same. The motive behind performing the works are polar opposites. Works out of love are of the Spirit and glorify God. Works out of obligation glorify yourself.

Titus 3:5 states it best. Though they’ve performed works of justice, it wasn’t those works that saved them. It is God’s mercy and grace that saves us. In verse 8 we have the belief in place, for they have already been saved, and are told to excel in good works.

These works will be judged, but regardless those in Christ Jesus will be saved.
1 Cor 3:12-15

Titus 3:5 Not by the works of justice, which we have done, but according to his mercy, he saved us, by the laver of regeneration, and renovation of the Holy Ghost; 6 Whom he hath poured forth upon us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Savior: 7 That, being justified by his grace, we may be heirs, according to hope of life everlasting. 8 It is a faithful saying: and these things I will have thee affirm constantly: that they, who believe in God, may be careful to excel in good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

1 Cor 3:12If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. 14If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I appeal to you that it is not the same. The motive behind performing the works are polar opposites. Works out of love are of the Spirit and glorify God. Works out of obligation glorify yourself.

So someone who does work out of their love for God is glorifying themself? No, I do not believe that. It is purely semantics and to try and continue on in any other direction is only trying to maintain that there is a difference, or keep a divide, between us.

Faith is a gift from God, Works is our response to God’s love. We owe that to Him, or are obligated to do that. It speaks the same. When God’s love motivates us to do His works, it is all to His glory.

 

[shawn38]

So someone who does work out of their love for God is glorifying themself?

If you’re obligated to work as a condition to secure salvation:

 You're performing works for selfish reasons (ie achieving salvation), 
 You lack the certainty of your salvation for how do you know if your works were
      sufficient enough to merit grace, 
 You're are glorifying God out of compulsion, not faith.

This theology becomes a yoke to those believing it.

Gal 5:1 Stand fast, and be not held again under the yoke of bondage… 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision: but faith that worketh by charity.

Performing works out of charity and works out of compulsion/obligation is not a matter of semantics.

I’d venture a guess that you don’t look at politicians working a soup kitchen in the same light as Joe Smoe.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I appeal to you that it is not the same. The motive behind performing the works are polar opposites. Works out of love are of the Spirit and glorify God. Works out of obligation glorify yourself.

Titus 3:5 states it best. Though they’ve performed works of justice, it wasn’t those works that saved them. It is God’s mercy and grace that saves us. In verse 8 we have the belief in place, for they have already been saved, and are told to excel in good works.

These works will be judged, but regardless those in Christ Jesus will be saved.
1 Cor 3:12-15

Titus 3:5 Not by the works of justice, which we have done, but according to his mercy, he saved us, by the laver of regeneration, and renovation of the Holy Ghost; 6 Whom he hath poured forth upon us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Savior: 7 That, being justified by his grace, we may be heirs, according to hope of life everlasting. 8 It is a faithful saying: and these things I will have thee affirm constantly: that they, who believe in God, may be careful to excel in good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

1 Cor 3:12If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. 14If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.

what you have to understand is although the Gospel says that we have been saved through Baptism, Faith, and so forth, it does not mean that we cannot loose this Salvation. we all know it is by the Grace of God. we all know this. Jesus told us this when He came to witness to the Truth and was put to death. once one come into the Church, believes and is baptized he is given instruction on what he must do from that point on. the conversion of sinners does not stop with Baptism and just Faith. there are many things that he must learn within the Faith. he must persevere in the Faith, he must put in practice his Faith by doing all the things Jesus told us to do. Jesus stablished a Church to teach us on how to persever on the Faith. it is not about going to a building to listen to a pastor preach in a verse of the Bible. it is so much more than that. only the CC can reveal to us what the Faith is all about. the Sacraments. Jesus gave us the Sacraments.