Prove it!

[FidesSpesCarita]

You cannot prove that any church is the true church.

Baptists believe in Jesus. Lutherans believe in Jesus. Christians believe in Jesus. The church you attend with all its rites, rituals, and traditions are the way that particular denomination tries to honor Him and sadly we all fall short.

It is only HIS love for us that we are saved. As Christians, we should be worrying more about those who don’t know the love of Jesus and his free gift of love and salvation for all who seek Him.

Seek Him and you will find Him.

GAAAAAAAAAHHHHH Will the fatuity never end???

Compare the CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) to the beliefs and teachings of the Apostles (from which we distilled the Bible) and you will find them one and the same.

Look at the succession of Bishops, from Peter, first Bishop of Rome(simon thy name is peter and upon this rick…) to Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop of Rome.

Yes, there have been anti-popes at times, but there has only ever been ONE, TRUE, duly elected bishop of Rome.

GAH

Pax,

FSC

 

[Dokimas]

It has to do with your statement that the CC’s Sacred Tradition may be wrong in some of its teachings (i.e. fallible man’s interpretation)

Since it was through Sacred Tradition that the canon of Scripture was declared, you are asserting that this decision may be wrong, are you not?

You see the pickle you’ve put yourself into, Dokimas? Either ST is infallible, and the canon of Scripture is correct,

OR

ST is fallible and it may have erred in declaring Genesis inspired.

Yikes! You cannot even rest in the assurance that the Bible is correct in what’s been included and what’s been excluded?

Wrong logic. I’m not saying all ST is incorrect. On the other hand you seem to be saying all ST is always correct. I’m saying if ST matches with the Bible it’s correct and when it doesn’t match up with the Bible, it’s incorrect.​

Your logic seems to be like this: if I say 2 + 2 = 4 and am correct then when I say 2 + 5 = 10, I must be correct as well.​

The only Person to be correct 100% of the time is Jesus. To the degree we are lead by the Holy Spirit we do correct things and say correct things and understand correctly. NO ONE, IMO, does this 100% of the time.

 

[Dokimas]

I REALLY dont want to wade into this but Gosh it makes me upset when people dont show the holy mother respect…

so… using your logic above that the word “until” means that the antithesis (mary had other children) inevitably came to pass, what is your take on this verse:

Psalm 110
Of David. A psalm.
1 The LORD says to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”

2 The LORD will extend your mighty scepter from Zion;
you will rule in the midst of your enemies.

3 Your troops will be willing
on your day of battle.
Arrayed in holy majesty,
from the womb of the dawn
you will receive the dew of your youth.

The word until does NOT indicate an inevitable antithesis.

And for the sake of all that is sane and logical, PLEASE dont try to use the word brothers (adelphos) in this… Seriously. Its too pedantic and has already been explained too many times to be worth my while to discuss that word again.

If you really want, we can talk about the word kecharitoomene, (full of grace), but not adelphos.

sorry for the mini tirade, but I got frustrated with this.

Dominus vobiscum,

FSC

I have not disrespected Mary. I may have disrespected your belief of Mary in your mind and I can’t help that. I think she’s a wonder example of how Christians should be. I’ve used her as an example a number of times in teaching ideas from the Bible.​

The word ‘until’ represents a period of time between two things in both cases: all the Lord Jesus’ enemies are not defeated yet so they are not yet under His feet. Therefore, Ps 110 is a good example showing how Joseph did not ‘know’ Mary until after Jesus was born.​

I’ve read the CC point of view through poster like yourself on the ‘brothers and sisters’ issue. It’s very shallow IMO. The same word is used for the relationship between Peter and Andrew and between James and John. Wher they brothers or not. Look back at the passage where Jesus was told His mother and brothers where there to see Him. He had a very interesting response. The (name removed by moderator)act of His statement in reply is nullified if you but ‘cousin’ instead of brother in His reply. Are you a spiritual cousin of Jesus or a spiritual brother (or sister) of Jesus?

 

[PRmerger]

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Jesus is against artificial birth control.

Do you have any verses from Scripture to back you up?

 

[PRmerger]

Are you a spiritual cousin of Jesus or a spiritual brother (or sister) of Jesus?

Well, we Catholics are more than Jesus’ spiritual brother (or cousin) or adopted child.

We are his beloved spouse, united in the most intimate and sublime One Flesh Union.

How magnificent is that? :extrahappy:

 

[Jars_of_Clay_1]

GAAAAAAAAAHHHHH Will the fatuity never end???

Compare the CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) to the beliefs and teachings of the Apostles (from which we distilled the Bible) and you will find them one and the same.

Look at the succession of Bishops, from Peter, first Bishop of Rome(simon thy name is peter and upon this rick…) to Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop of Rome.

Yes, there have been anti-popes at times, but there has only ever been ONE, TRUE, duly elected bishop of Rome.

GAH

Pax,

FSC

Oh, my dear friend, that doesn’t make the Catholic church the one “true” church. Look at what the Catholic church has done over the years. Do you honestly think that Jesus would approve?

LOOK at the sins of your church and it’s leaders. In it’s simplest forms…Praying to idols? Eating fish on Fridays, praying to Mary, praying to saints, carrying medals in your cars for protection (lucky charms my friend), carrying around statues in the streets and putting money on them (the Catholic church does that in my town in NJ), lighting candles for prayers (pagens do that), etc. Can you show me the part where Jesus approved this? Hocus Pocus my friend.

You’ve long ago lost your focus on what is true. Very sad.

 

[Dokimas]

Well, we Catholics are more than Jesus’ spiritual brother (or cousin) or adopted child.

We are his beloved spouse, united in the most intimate and sublime One Flesh Union.

How magnificent is that? :extrahappy:

We are part of His beloved spouse. It is extremely wonderful. However that doesn’t answer the question (or observation).​

Why is it so bloomin’ wrong for Mary to have other children? Would it be sin for Mary? If so, based on what Bible verse? I’ve never seen nor has anyone shown me any evidence that God told her not to have more children.

 

[fbl9]

Oh, my dear friend, that doesn’t make the Catholic church the one “true” church. Look at what the Catholic church has done over the years. Do you honestly think that Jesus would approve?

because so many non catholics are great public sinners then those churchs are all false too…so by the standard you are using every single “church” is false.

LOOK at the sins of your church and it’s leaders. In it’s simplest forms…Praying to idols?

i never seen an idol being prayed to in the Church,better get your eyes checked.

Eating fish on Fridays,

i guess Jesus is evil He ate fish too and on a friday most likely.

praying to Mary, praying to saints,

asking for the help of one closer to God than you is evil,

carrying medals in your cars for protection (lucky charms my friend),

you better get that cross off your neck you pagan

carrying around statues in the streets and putting money on them (the Catholic church does that in my town in NJ), lighting candles for prayers (pagens do that),

yep pagans even beleived in a virginal birth you better erase that from scripture too.

etc. Can you show me the part where Jesus approved this? Hocus Pocus my friend.

You’ve long ago lost your focus on what is true. Very sad.

losing focus is still way better than being totally blind.

 

[Dokimas]

Then you have proof that Jesus is against artificial birth control? Please don’t use the verse on spilling sperm. That’s been dealt with on this forum; if you use it you must rip it from it’s context which could make your attempt a pretense.

 

[Dokimas]

Do you have any verses from Scripture to back you up?

Let’s look at the reason for marriage in the NT. Reading Paul, he’d want all of us to stay single so be can be more effective witnesses for Jesus. It’s hard to serve God when there’s a family involved. Paul says that if sexual passions can’t be controled, it is better to marry. If having chilcren was the command of God, Paul would not tell us not to marry. The reason he gives the okay if for sexual reasons. This is not a birth control teaching but it’s not a stretch to ‘read into’ a meaning that marriage is for sex (oneness, intimacy, closeness, physical love). There’s no NT command to have children. Why should there be when the Genesis command to replenish the earth is fulfilled. We don’t need more people. We need to preach the Gospel to those that are living now.​

I’ve not seen any ‘good’ verses about God’s hatred of birth control. The spilling of sperm being against birth control is WAY out of context.

 

[Dokimas]

It’s up to you to follow whom you will.​

Jesus is the Truth. Too bad Pilate didn’t understand that truth (I guess he could have confessed Jesus to be his Lord and Savior before he died).

 

[fbl9]

I’ve not seen any ‘good’ verses about God’s hatred of birth control. The spilling of sperm being against birth control is WAY out of context.

St.Paul’s 1st epistle to St.Timothy…2:15 Yet women will be saved by childbearing if they continue in faith and love and holiness with modesty.

 

[Dokimas]

St.Paul’s 1st epistle to St.Timothy…2:15 Yet women will be saved by childbearing if they continue in faith and love and holiness with modesty.

On one hand, one child fulfills this verse. However, maybe this verse doesn’t mean what you think. I’m not sure what I think it means, but I don’t think women gain enterence into the family of God (salvation) by having children.​

BTW, this doen’t say anything about birth control.

 

[fbl9]

, but I don’t think women gain enterence into the family of God (salvation) by having children.

and here i thought you took St.Paul at his word

BTW, this doen’t say anything about birth control.

note it doesn’t say by bearing a child but childbearing which is pluralistic.

Probably the topic for another thread but what is the purpose of marriage, if not for bearing children?

 

[PRmerger]

and here i thought you took St.Paul at his wordnote it doesn’t say by bearing a child but childbearing which is pluralistic.

Probably the topic for another thread but what is the purpose of marriage, if not for bearing children?

Well, I think Dokimas would respond: it’s to have sex.

And sterile sex at that.

That does not sound very sexy to me. I dunno.

 

[PRmerger]

We are part of His beloved spouse. It is extremely wonderful. However that doesn’t answer the question (or observation).

You are like a couple in a platonic relationship. You and Jesus are best buddies, but have no way to consummate your relationship.

It is only through the sublime and magnificent One Flesh Union that you can truly be One Flesh with him.

Why is it so bloomin’ wrong for Mary to have other children? Would it be sin for Mary? If so, based on what Bible verse? I’ve never seen nor has anyone shown me any evidence that God told her not to have more children.

First of all, every single doctrine on Mary only reinforces and emphasizes the divinity of Christ. Mary’s perpetual divinity provides us with an explanation of the utter and sheer numinous quality of th Godhead, dwelling in her womb.

Just like the Ark of the Covenant would not have held anything as jejune as some pretty rocks, after carrying the Divine Word, so, too Mary would not carry anything else–even another human soul–in her womb. It was anointed especially for Our Lord.

And, why did Mary question the angel Gabriel when she was told she would bear a child. “How can this be since I know not man?” I mean, she’s betrothed–which, in ancient Jewish culture, was essentially married. The logical response would be, “Wow! I can’t wait!”. Instead she is puzzled. Why? The only logical response is because she intended to be a consecrated virgin for the rest of her life!

 

[Jars_of_Clay_1]

because so many non catholics are great public sinners then those churchs are all false too…so by the standard you are using every single “church” is false.i never seen an idol being prayed to in the Church,better get your eyes checked.i guess Jesus is evil He ate fish too and on a friday most likely.asking for the help of one closer to God than you is evil,you better get that cross off your neck you paganyep pagans even beleived in a virginal birth you better erase that from scripture too.losing focus is still way better than being totally blind.

Wow, those are very strange responses.

Yes, there are false churches out there. But EVERY church falls short and the proof is in our exchange of words. Two different opinions that really aren’t worth a hill of beans. And it gets us nowhere, so I choose not to respond to most of your comments except for two:

1. 
   *]I don’t wear a cross friend. You probably should have asked me first before assuming such a thing.
   
   *]Did I say I didn’t believe in a virginal birth? I don’t think so.
   
   With all of our shortcomings, I’ll see you in heaven and we will both laugh at the ridiculousness of this “conversation.” I’m telling you that God cares not about any of these differences. He cares about our hearts and our belief in Him and our belief that He died for our sins.
   
   I choose to no longer contribute to “arguments” in this forum that would arouse pointless and ridiculous banter such as what I started here. I will try to lovingly state my opinions and if someone wants to get on their high-horse about something - so be it.
   
   As long as they don’t attack our Lord - that’s where I draw the line.
   
   To those who were exposed to this - I apologize. To the person that I incited to respond in a unfriendly manner - I also apologize.
   
   Forgive me.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Oh, my dear friend, that doesn’t make the Catholic church the one “true” church. Look at what the Catholic church has done over the years. Do you honestly think that Jesus would approve?

LOOK at the sins of your church and it’s leaders. In it’s simplest forms…Praying to idols? Eating fish on Fridays, praying to Mary, praying to saints, carrying medals in your cars for protection (lucky charms my friend), carrying around statues in the streets and putting money on them (the Catholic church does that in my town in NJ), lighting candles for prayers (pagens do that), etc. Can you show me the part where Jesus approved this? Hocus Pocus my friend.using the phrase “hocus Pocus” is disrespectful to Catholics as it is a mockery of the words Hoc est Corpus Meum.

You’ve long ago lost your focus on what is true. Very sad.

The rest was asked and answered. And the virgin birth comment was because you seem to throw out anything that has the appearance of paganism, regardless of its true source. Many (MANY) pagan religions believe in a great flood, should we cut that out of the bible since it is so obviously pagan? They wrote it before we did so we must have stolen it, correct? The only reason I get into these discussions is to correct misapprehensions regarding the Church. I am flawed, therefore my responses will be flawed (I am most definitely NOT a Pope), but if I can increase the understanding of one person, my headaches will be worth it. My purpose is not conversion, but increased understanding. I would like that clear. Disagreements should be discussed, but misunderstandings should be cleared.

I have not disrespected Mary. I may have disrespected your belief of Mary in your mind and I can’t help that. I think she’s a wonder example of how Christians should be. I’ve used her as an example a number of times in teaching ideas from the Bible. Might as well say Jesus was a “good example” of how to live, since he obviously was only doing the will of his Father we dont need to emulate him… How is this NOT disrespectful?​

The word ‘until’ represents a period of time between two things in both cases: all the Lord Jesus’ enemies are not defeated yet so they are not yet under His feet The point is, when all his enemies are under his feet, does he no longer sit at the right hand of God? It does say until, which, according to your logic, requires the antithesis to naturally come to pass. Flawed logic will get you but ONE thing… Therefore, Ps 110 is a good example showing how Joseph did not ‘know’ Mary until after Jesus was born.​

I’ve read the CC point of view through poster like yourself on the ‘brothers and sisters’ issue. It’s very shallow IMO. The same word is used for the relationship between Peter and Andrew and between James and John. Wher they brothers or not. Look back at the passage where Jesus was told His mother and brothers where there to see Him. He had a very interesting response. The (name removed by moderator)act of His statement in reply is nullified if you but ‘cousin’ instead of brother in His reply. Are you a spiritual cousin of Jesus or a spiritual brother (or sister) of Jesus?See PRMergers comment below. But the Adelphos discussion is absolutely solid. Denial of the multiple meanings of the word shows ignorance of history, apathy to the truth, or pride in your own intellect at being better able to understand it than scholars who spend lifetimes in study.

You are like a couple in a platonic relationship. You and Jesus are best buddies, but have no way to consummate your relationship.

It is only through the sublime and magnificent One Flesh Union that you can truly be One Flesh with him.

First of all, every single doctrine on Mary only reinforces and emphasizes the divinity of Christ. Mary’s perpetual divinity provides us with an explanation of the utter and sheer numinous quality of th Godhead, dwelling in her womb. To go back to my roots for a moment “AMEN SISTER!!!”

Just like the Ark of the Covenant would not have held anything as jejune as some pretty rocks, after carrying the Divine Word, so, too Mary would not carry anything else–even another human soul–in her womb. It was anointed especially for Our Lord.see the comment previous

And, why did Mary question the angel Gabriel when she was told she would bear a child. “How can this be since I know not man?” I mean, she’s betrothed–which, in ancient Jewish culture, was essentially married. The logical response would be, “Wow! I can’t wait!”. Instead she is puzzled. Why? The only logical response is because she intended to be a consecrated virgin for the rest of her life!

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Wow, those are very strange responses.

Yes, there are false churches out there. But EVERY church falls short and the proof is in our exchange of words. Two different opinions that really aren’t worth a hill of beans. And it gets us nowhere, so I choose not to respond to most of your comments except for two:

1. 
   *]I don’t wear a cross friend. You probably should have asked me first before assuming such a thing.
   
   *]Did I say I didn’t believe in a virginal birth? I don’t think so.
   
   With all of our shortcomings, I’ll see you in heaven and we will both laugh at the ridiculousness of this “conversation.” I’m telling you that God cares not about any of these differences. He cares about our hearts and our belief in Him and our belief that He died for our sins.
   
   I choose to no longer contribute to “arguments” in this forum that would arouse pointless and ridiculous banter such as what I started here. I will try to lovingly state my opinions and if someone wants to get on their high-horse about something - so be it.
   
   As long as they don’t attack our Lord - that’s where I draw the line.
   
   To those who were exposed to this - I apologize. To the person that I incited to respond in a unfriendly manner - I also apologize.
   
   Forgive me.

1. 
   I should apologize here as well, I tend to overreact when I see people insulting my family, or assuming they know what is true without consulting an authoritative source. So many protestants get caught making assumptions about what they read in the bible without consulting any scholarly source. THey are like children who read HG Wells Outline of the History of the World and then think they can explain the political structure behind the 100 years war. Lack of understanding + Pride = Incorrect theology. And to teach incorrect theology is VERY dangerous…
   
   That being said, MANY MANY Catholics fall into the “well, father says this, so its true” trap. (pet peeve of mine) I cannot stand that kind of apathetic acceptance of something spoken with authority. We should all seek understanding with Faith and reason (plug for JPII encyclical… great stuff) Those things that we understand without the guidance of Faith (and through faith the holy spirit) we do not truly understand. Part of that understanding must come from reading about the Church fathers, the doctors of the church, the writings of the saints. Without these things we will constantly be reinventing the wheel. If I want to know how to build a bicycle, do I learn how to make gears by trial and error, or do I read a book on it?
   
   Again, sorry for the rant. And sorry for the red. I got carried away… (the red was super annoying… I edited it out)
   
   Dominus vobiscum,
   
   FSC

 

[guanophore]

I really, really, really don’t care…

People do not become invested in things that don’t matter to them. Clearly you have significant feeling and interest in these matters, which demonstrate that you DO care. You may wish you did not, but Someone drew you here to CAF, and you are wrestling with how your beliefs differ from what the Apostles believed and taught.

I have stated I could be wrong about what I believe. Can the CC be wrong? Can you say the same for you, in the light that you think as long as you believe what the CC teaches, you can’t be wrong?

No, the Catholic Church has Jesus as her Head, and the HS as her Soul. These divine elements are what make her infallible.

Individuals can benefit from the gift of infallibility to the extent that they are in unity with that Divine Source. When individuals depart from that unity, then yes, they can (and usually are) wrong.

This was what happened during the Reformation. They misperceived that it was men who needed reform, not the doctrine.