Refuting a Protestant History Teacher

[Ultramontain]

Again, pick your battles.
Removal is not as easy as your think.

You cannot remove a professor (with tenure) because you disagree with her interpretation of history and theology.

It takes an act of God.

Shes in her first year…Not going to be hard, its a battle i can win pretty easy. (Trust me, my brother had 2 teachers removed in his first year, teachers come easy, and go easy here).

 

[Ultramontain]

You said (typed) the truth in such a charitable way.

Maybe English is his or her second language (or Ultramontain is typing from a phone).

No, severely Dyslexic. (spelling has alto correct, but my grammar stills sucks)

 

[Ultramontain]

As a former Protestant college prof who is now a Catholic college prof, and who teaches at a state school after having served at more and less ardently sectarian schools, I can tell you that approaching any faculty or any administration in the spirit and by the methods you are doing will definitely not accomplish anything good. Your messages are illiterate, defiant, and reflective of an unteachable spirit. Using recordings in this manner is unethical and borderline illegal. You will definitely hurt your relationships with the faculty, and while they may try to avoid retaliation (we usually do), they can’t help but think of you as a poor student who is unwilling to learn.

Now, if you want to help your classmates, what you need to do is ask questions which lead your professor to acknowledge the Protestant dependence on Catholic sources. There is no flowering of original-language study of Scripture without Erasmus, no return to first principles and original texts without what Protestants will call “proto-Reformers” like Nicholas of Lyra and a variety of Franciscan spiritual and intellectual seekers; there is no Luther without Augustine, and no Augustine without the primacy of the Roman See; etc. etc. And there is no reliable text of Scripture without the conciliar process of canonization and the monastic devotion to the text. When you have done your homework well enough to agree strategically with your prof, then you are in a position to do some good. In the meantime, you’d be wise to back WAAY off.

Learn to ask sincere questions, and to “agree with thine adversary quickly.” And remember that “even a fool, when he shuts his mouth, is considered wise.”

1. My teacher gave permission for the recording.
2. My class in not graded on theology, this is entirely non-related to our overall class goal.
3. My grades so far as as follows: 100, 96, 86 I am well above the class average.
4. My class mates, write down these things as facts, and they are not made up lies, or silly superstition, if she wished to go into it, she should present these in a non-offensive historical context, “Catholics think this” __ “Protestants think this” Rather then

[The church was spiritually dead, they were just repeating the same rituals over and over, They lost the holy spirit, and the protestants starting with Luther brought it back]

 

[Ultramontain]

Hi,

As you are a student of history, I feel you will obviously know far more about the subject area than me. However, as far as I am aware, the protestant split-off from the Catholic faith came about when King Henry the VIII was refused yet another divorce by the Catholic Church. Enraged through arrogance and an inflated view of his own status and importance, he stated words to the effect of (not an actual quote, but in the correct ball-park) “who are you to deny me a divorce, I am the King of England, I PROTEST, I will start my own church”. The statement “I protest” is in fact, as I understand it, the origin of the term ‘protestant’. So the choice is clear; do we follow a church founded by an obese, narcissistic, gluttonous, psychotic multiple murderer, or the church founded by the ACTUAL SON OF GOD. Not rocket science me thinks!

God bless

Well, she hates Anglicans two…So i don’t have to worry about that to much, but i did have to correct her on their behalf twice.

 

[Ultramontain]

Hi,

As you are a student of history, I feel you will obviously know far more about the subject area than me. However, as far as I am aware, the protestant split-off from the Catholic faith came about when King Henry the VIII was refused yet another divorce by the Catholic Church. Enraged through arrogance and an inflated view of his own status and importance, he stated words to the effect of (not an actual quote, but in the correct ball-park) “who are you to deny me a divorce, I am the King of England, I PROTEST, I will start my own church”. The statement “I protest” is in fact, as I understand it, the origin of the term ‘protestant’. So the choice is clear; do we follow a church founded by an obese, narcissistic, gluttonous, psychotic multiple murderer, or the church founded by the ACTUAL SON OF GOD. Not rocket science me thinks!

God bless

Well, she seems to hates Anglicans two…So i don’t have to worry about that to much, but i did have to correct her on their behalf twice.

 

[White_Tree]

I don’t want to tell you how to handle this situation, because I don’t know all of the details.

But do you really want to make this woman lose her job over this? Many of the other posters have been trying to discourage you by telling you that you might not win this battle. But is this a battle you really want to win?

It’s hard to get a job as a history professor. And there’s not a lot of other career options for someone with those credentials. Let’s say you actually succeed in getting this person kicked out of the university. Now she has to face unemployment in a very tough job market, with a blemish on her resume, because she got kicked out of her last job.

Do you really want to subject another human being to that sort of hardship because you had a difference of opinion?

You said she’s in her first year. I suspect that means she’s right out of grad school. She’s still young, and has a lot to learn about the world, and about her field. Maybe you could help her with that. I suspect you probably have a lot to learn from each other. If you care that much about (changing) her opinions, maybe you could schedule some time to chat with her in an informal setting after the class is over. (I say after the class is over since that will allow you to share ideas with each other without one of you having authority over the other).

What seems important in this situation is not who is right, but rather what is right. And like I said, I don’t know the situation fully, but it doesn’t seem right to me to try to make someone lose their job because they said something you disagreed with.

Furthermore, from your description, it sounds like you and she are really not so different. You implied that she was really just repeating things that her pastor told her, that she didn’t really know what she was talking about. But (and I ask you this with complete sincerity and kindness, with no intention of insulting or offending you), do you really know what you are talking about? Or are you just espousing the ideas of your pastor or parents? And if you really do have total and complete knowledge of the topics over which you would presume to have her fired, then why are you coming onto a forum and asking a bunch of strangers on the Internet to help you make your arguments?

I ask you that not because I want to insult you, or “put you in your place,” or anything like that. I just think you should sincerely reflect on whether or not this woman is that different from you after all. It seems to me like you are seeking to cause a great deal of suffering to another person, because she did something that (from my observation) is really not so different from what you are doing, which is espousing opinions that she has not fully researched or verified, and passing them off to others as fact.

And that’s fine. We all do that, to a degree. But is that really a reason to try to get someone fired? Especially if you are doing it too.

 

[fpesce]

Shes in her first year…Not going to be hard, its a battle i can win pretty easy. (Trust me, my brother had 2 teachers removed in his first year, teachers come easy, and go easy here).

Enough said… Hard hearted and not looking to promote Jesus, just force everyone to believe the way you believe and hate everyone that doesn’t think like you do.

My friend you are not helping God’s cause, just your own. Change your ways.

 

[Ultramontain]

I don’t want to tell you how to handle this situation, because I don’t know all of the details.

But do you really want to make this woman lose her job over this? Many of the other posters have been trying to discourage you by telling you that you might not win this battle. But is this a battle you really want to win?

It’s hard to get a job as a history professor. And there’s not a lot of other career options for someone with those credentials. Let’s say you actually succeed in getting this person kicked out of the university. Now she has to face unemployment in a very tough job market, with a blemish on her resume, because she got kicked out of her last job.

Do you really want to subject another human being to that sort of hardship because you had a difference of opinion?

You said she’s in her first year. I suspect that means she’s right out of grad school. She’s still young, and has a lot to learn about the world, and about her field. Maybe you could help her with that. I suspect you probably have a lot to learn from each other. If you care that much about (changing) her opinions, maybe you could schedule some time to chat with her in an informal setting after the class is over. (I say after the class is over since that will allow you to share ideas with each other without one of you having authority over the other).

What seems important in this situation is not who is right, but rather what is right. And like I said, I don’t know the situation fully, but it doesn’t seem right to me to try to make someone lose their job because they said something you disagreed with.

Furthermore, from your description, it sounds like you and she are really not so different. You implied that she was really just repeating things that her pastor told her, that she didn’t really know what she was talking about. But (and I ask you this with complete sincerity and kindness, with no intention of insulting or offending you), do you really know what you are talking about? Or are you just espousing the ideas of your pastor or parents? And if you really do have total and complete knowledge of the topics over which you would presume to have her fired, then why are you coming onto a forum and asking a bunch of strangers on the Internet to help you make your arguments?

I ask you that not because I want to insult you, or “put you in your place,” or anything like that. I just think you should sincerely reflect on whether or not this woman is that different from you after all. It seems to me like you are seeking to cause a great deal of suffering to another person, because she did something that (from my observation) is really not so different from what you are doing, which is espousing opinions that she has not fully researched or verified, and passing them off to others as fact.

And that’s fine. We all do that, to a degree. But is that really a reason to try to get someone fired? Especially if you are doing it too.

No, i don’t want to cost anyone a job, but i’m also not going to allow her to do the following

1. Lie Catholics think, and teach (about 4 times a day).
2. Lie about History/cannon law
3. Lie about Judaism
4. Rewrite history of theology
5. Preach about how the Holy Spirit was only present in Protestant churches.
6. Lie about rites she has never taken part in
7. Lie about the contents of the bible ( i don’t think she has read it).
8. Lie about the Pope
9. add in “there were a FEW good priests” after every insulting the vast majority of good Priests as if to make it ok (both modern living priests and the time period ones).
10. claims of “added books”
11. claim of Martin Luther being many things hes not.
    …I think you get the point mate?

My class has nothing to do with theology, last class she started going over the “immaculate deception” and pointing out exactly how “wrong” we were.

This is the kind of think i expect in a debate, not a lecture in a public college.

I’m sorry, i can not tolerate such a historical revision, this is not education, its a attempt at conversion, and while i will do nothing if she stops her preaching, unless that happens i’ll send a formal complaint of this to the school’s department head, until then the best way for her to get the idea (i think at least) is to prove her wrong on anything theological she says…When said we made up confession i pulled up a biblical verse for it, and she has yet to bring it up again, in the mean time i don’t want the other kids in this class to be told lies which will later causes some Catholic more problems when they can say “My History teacher showed me…whatever”

If i do nothing, she keeps this up, and does it to more and more kids, for every class she can change the minds of 25 kids or so times however many classes she teaches.

 

[StevieD]

If I were you I would agree with her to deal with these matters point by point and get her to nominate the most important. Then just research the Catholic perspective and scriptural foundation for that belief or practice on this site and take the information to her. Even if you agree to differ before moving on then at least she knows why we believe what we believe about each point covered. By the end of this process, she might be wary about making anti-Catholic gibes.

 

[Ultramontain]

If I were you I would agree with her to deal with these matters point by point and get her to nominate the most important. Then just research the Catholic perspective and scriptural foundation for that belief or practice on this site and take the information to her. Even if you agree to differ before moving on then at least she knows why we believe what we believe about each point covered. By the end of this process, she might be wary about making anti-Catholic gibes.

I asked to do it her office hours, but she has none, so she asked me to do it in class whenever i had a problem…when i do that she works her way around them, so now i document the evidence (currently a 5 page paper for this incident) and bring them up in the start of class.

She normally stops making fun of the items i do this for when she see’s how baseless her statements are. however i can’t really say anything when she says “The church was really a dead religion” because well, the underlining insanity of the statement, would take me a year to sort out, and involve converting her.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Hi,

As you are a student of history, I feel you will obviously know far more about the subject area than me. However, as far as I am aware, the protestant split-off from the Catholic faith came about when King Henry the VIII was refused yet another divorce by the Catholic Church. Enraged through arrogance and an inflated view of his own status and importance, he stated words to the effect of (not an actual quote, but in the correct ball-park) “who are you to deny me a divorce, I am the King of England, I PROTEST, I will start my own church”. The statement “I protest” is in fact, as I understand it, the origin of the term ‘protestant’. So the choice is clear; do we follow a church founded by an obese, narcissistic, gluttonous, psychotic multiple murderer, or the church founded by the ACTUAL SON OF GOD. Not rocket science me thinks!

God bless

Actually, it started with Martin Luther, an ex-Catholic priest (Augustinian monk). And it wouldn’t have gotten much traction without the support of certain German feifdoms (little kingdoms), who thought that if they could support Martin Luther and split from the Church, they could grab all the lands that the Church owned in the monasteries, etc., who usually owned very nice vineyards, etc. It would have been worth a lot of money. They could’ve cared less about the theology of anything. It was pure greed.

Martin Luther actually identified a problem with certain priests, etc., in the Church, over abuses of selling indulgences, but rather than try to work to fix things from within, he got mad and left the Church. Then, he began deconstruction all known Catholic theology. He reasoned that because indulgences were sold, then the theology behind indulgences were wrong. And in if there weren’t indulgences, then there must not be Purgatory. And if there wasn’t Purgatory, there was no need to say Mass for those who had died. And if you didn’t need Mass, you didn’t need priests to say Mass. And if you didn’t need priests, you didn’t need bishops to consecrate them as priests. And you if you didn’t need bishops, you certainly didn’t need the Pope to make them bishops. He ended up deconstructing everything, ending up with two brand new doctrines made up out of thin air: Sola Scriptura (the Bible alone as our source of Christ’s truth) and Sola Fide (we are saved by faith alone). Neither doctrine can be supported by Scripture, which makes the whole thing kind of strange. And because it relies on personal interpretation of Scripture, which St. Peter warned against in 2 Peter 1:20, Protestantism has a built-in flaw that leads to continuous splintering into more and more denominations. We are currently in the thousands now of man-made denominations, all believing something different, stemming from personal interpretation of Scripture. Jesus only founded one Church, the Catholic Church. There were no others till 1054 A.D., when the Orthodox split off. Protestantism didn’t begin till 1517 A.D. The Church of England wasn’t founded till 1534 A.D., when Henry wanted to be able to divorce and remarry, and the Pope told him no, so he created his own church. But Martin Luther and his group had already separated.

 

[hazcompat]

please be charitable.

scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html

peace

 

[kozlosap]

No, i don’t want to cost anyone a job, but i’m also not going to allow her to do the following

1. Lie Catholics think, and teach (about 4 times a day).
2. Lie about History/cannon law
3. Lie about Judaism
4. Rewrite history of theology
5. Preach about how the Holy Spirit was only present in Protestant churches.
6. Lie about rites she has never taken part in
7. Lie about the contents of the bible ( i don’t think she has read it).
8. Lie about the Pope
9. add in “there were a FEW good priests” after every insulting the vast majority of good Priests as if to make it ok (both modern living priests and the time period ones).
10. claims of “added books”
11. claim of Martin Luther being many things hes not.
    …I think you get the point mate?

!

My class has nothing to do with theology, last class she started going over the “immaculate deception” and pointing out exactly how “wrong” we were.

This is the kind of think i expect in a debate, not a lecture in a public college.

I’m sorry, i can not tolerate such a historical revision, this is not education, its a attempt at conversion, and while i will do nothing if she stops her preaching, unless that happens i’ll send a formal complaint of this to the school’s department head, until then the best way for her to get the idea (i think at least) is to prove her wrong on anything theological she says…When said we made up confession i pulled up a biblical verse for it, and she has yet to bring it up again, in the mean time i don’t want the other kids in this class to be told lies which will later causes some Catholic more problems when they can say “My History teacher showed me…whatever”

If i do nothing, she keeps this up, and does it to more and more kids, for every class she can change the minds of 25 kids or so times however many classes she teaches.

So now I’ll ask a somewhat pertinent question. Do you have a bachelor’s degree? Master’s degree, doctorate, JD, MBA OR MD? I bet that your instructor has at least a BA. Could you go and apply to teach history at an university and be hired? School is for us to learn to maccept and not accept what we consider “the truth”. College freshman who are not used to a free academic atmosphere are likely to be baffled at how to survive. You do not survive by getting teachers fired because you don’t agree with them on matters of religion and theology.
If after a week in class, you don’t like the instruction, drop the class and find a new one. How will you ever hold a professional job if you aren’t able to problem solve and collaborate? Please remember that Jesus and his actions teach us how we should live and how to treat others… Some days that fact is easy to overlook

 

[Hounchell1945]

So here is the short of my set up, I am in a Renaissance and Reformation class, with a Protestant Teacher, who loves to take pot shots at the RCC, I can intellectually argue her into a corner with extreme easy, however she then say something about its not in the bible or get around it some other way.

What i am seeking to do is to biblical prove, or at least provide a understanding of Catholic though so that the Children she is corrupting will hear both sides of the story.

I will have her removed from her position at the end of the year, i have had to many problems with her over this, while shes a sweet lady and all, shes a moron who claims to know Catholic teaching when she has only what her pastor told her clearly.

In short what i would like is any and all biblical citations for any of the following and or anything i can use to quickly explain it to her, and the class (time is extremely limited in class)

===Bible needed===

-Veneration of Mary.

-Queen of Heaven.

I know somewhere there is shown the Jewish practice of the King’s mother is queen anyone know where?

You stated in your first post that this was a class for “Reformation”… that is what it is.
And that is what it sounds like… The Reformation beginnings were from three Major
counties if I recall my history lessons… Germany, England and France… were all progressive theological descents according to the Catholic Church and assents according to the non-catholic churches… of the Reformation periods…

Do not be mislead into believing that the first groups which went against the teachings of the Catholic church begun with the above mentioned Reformation groups…

There has been many groups and heretics which rose up against the Church from the very beginning of Christianity. Actually there is only five books of the New Testament which were written for the Christian person according to the writers… the other books, were written to voice out the church’s protesting of what these “other groups” were attempting to pass off to the early churches which were not near a Bishop of the area…

Actually the Reformation thrust against the Catholic Church did not start off with any heretic voices… it is kind of interesting that within fifty years from the time Martin Luther pinned his notice for the debate on the doors of the church. all 95 complaints he made were recognized as improper and the Catholic Church responded by rectifying those claims Luther made… and changed them all to what Luther had requested…

However, he went from those complaints to actually teaching heretic views…
such as each person had as much right to have an infallible view of theology.
This was later in his life, but up to that point, he did not teach anything against
the teachings of the Catholic church…

My point is: This Reformation period was “progressive”… and what is …is.

And there is always a possibility that this particular teacher may be using her method
as her method… She might be inflaming Catholics in her class on purpose in order to get the ball rolling where as she can teach her lessons with more emotions and interest from the students… if she can get them inflamed enough to speak up and begin an educational debate between the Catholics of the Class and the non-Catholics…

From your obvious sensitive reaction to her method… it sounds like she has got you going… and if you feel confident enough you might feel her out by asking a few questions in regards to what she is doing…

Mention to her, that from some of her remarks, is she not aware that she is being “insensitive” to the Catholics in her classroom? And if her class is open for debate on some of her remarks, or statements of her view of the Reformation period…

 

[TimothyH]

===Bible needed===

-Veneration of Mary.

-Queen of Heaven.

Many Catholic Marian beliefs and practices fall right into place when we undersand the history of who Queens were in both the Old Testament and much of the ancient world.

Simply put, Mary is a Queen, and this is clearly evident in the Bible.

There is no doubt that Jesus is our King. The whole theme of Matthew’s Gospel is Jesus and his kingdom; the announcement of the kingdom, descriptions of the kingdom, the establishment of the kingdom, the tearing down of the old kingdom. Jesus spends all of Chapter 13 of Matthews Gospel giving parables about what his kingdom will be like.

When the people saw the sign he had done, they said, “This is truly the Prophet, the one who is to come into the world.” Since Jesus knew that they were going to come and carry him off to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain alone. (John 6:14-15)

The people around Jesus recognized him as thier King. It’s undeniable.

And we must always remember that the Old Testament is the story of God preparing his people to accept their Messiah, preparing Israel and the whole world to accept their King. And when we look at all the Kings of the Old Testament who come before Jesus and prefigure Jesus, we find a curious fact about who these Kings appointed to be their Queens.

Then Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, and the king stood up to meet her and paid her homage. Then he sat down upon his throne, and a throne was provided for the king’s mother, who sat at his right. (1 Kings 2:19)

Bathsheba was King David’s wife but was the mother of King Solomon. No one in the kingdom was higher than the king, yet Solomon pays homage to his mother and seats her in a throne on his right. This is because Bathsheba is not only Solomon’s mother but she is also the queen.

Kings in the ancient world often took wives as part of a military alliance, exchanging daugters with the king he made an alliance with. This had the advantage of placing a daugther right in the midst of the royal court of his ally where she could report back to her father. But the king would never appoint the blood relative of another king to the second highest position in the kingdom. To do so was too great a risk, and so a king would often give the throne and the crown to the only person whom he could trust - his mother. That is why we see Solomon bring a throne for his mother, and why he pays homage to his mother. Bathsheba is not only Solomon’s mother, but she is also Solomon’s Queen.

The Hebrew word for queen-mother or literally “Grand lady” is Gebirah. We see references to the Gebirah elswhere in the Old Testament.

Jehu met the kinsmen of Ahazi’ah king of Judah, and he said, “Who are you?” And they answered, "We are the kinsmen of Ahazi’ah, and we came down to visit the royal princes and the sons of the queen mother."
(2 Kings 10:13)

This was after King Jeconiah and the queen mother, the court officials, the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, the artisans and smiths had left Jerusalem. (Jerimiah 29:2)

The various kings throught he centuries are listed in the Books of Kings and the Books of Chronicals, and with every king, the queen-mother is also listed.

In the eighteenth year of King Jeroboam, son of Nebat, Abijam became king of Judah; he reigned three years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Maacah, daughter of Abishalom. (1 Kings 15:1-2)

In the eighteenth year of King Jeroboam, Abijah became king of Judah; he reigned three years in Jerusalem. His mother was named Micaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. (2 Chronicals 13:1-2)

Uzziah was sixteen years old when he became king, and he reigned fifty-two years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Jecoliah, from Jerusalem. (2 Chronicals 26:3)

There are twenty seven verses like this! When God repeats something two or three times he is trying to tell us something. When God repeats something twenty seven times we had better pay attention! God is telling us who the mothers of the kings were because God is telling us that the mother of the king was a queen.

*A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. (Revelation 12:1) *

We can argue who the woman in Revelation 12 is but the fact that she wears a crown is clear. Only kings and queens wear crowns. The woman is clearly a queen. The woman is described as giving birth to a male child who rules the nations, and this description of a son who rules nations and his mother who wears a crown is abosolutely consistent with a with the Old Testament kings and their Gebirah. The fact that the woman’s son in Revelation 12 is “Caught up to God and his throne” leads most Christians to believe that the child is Jesus. The mother can represent the Church, but we can’t ignore the plain meaning of the text, that the woman is a mother with a crown and her son rules nations and is caught up to God. The woman is clearly Mary and her son can only be Jesus.

In every kingdom, the Queen is second only to the King. If Jesus is King of kings, then Mary is Jesus’ Queen and all on earth must bow before Jesus the King and his Queen. If Jesus is King in heaven then Mary is his Queen, and all the angels and saints bow before the King and his Queen.

If all the angels and saints bow before Mary, Queen of Heaven and Earth, then shouldn’t we?

-Tim-

 

[Nicea325]

So here is the short of my set up, I am in a Renaissance and Reformation class, with a Protestant Teacher, who loves to take pot shots at the RCC, I can intellectually argue her into a corner with extreme easy, however she then say something about its not in the bible or get around it some other way.

What i am seeking to do is to biblical prove, or at least provide a understanding of Catholic though so that the Children she is corrupting will hear both sides of the story.

I will have her removed from her position at the end of the year, i have had to many problems with her over this, while shes a sweet lady and all, shes a moron who claims to know Catholic teaching when she has only what her pastor told her clearly.

In short what i would like is any and all biblical citations for any of the following and or anything i can use to quickly explain it to her, and the class (time is extremely limited in class)

===Bible needed===

-Veneration of Mary.

-Queen of Heaven.

I know somewhere there is shown the Jewish practice of the King’s mother is queen anyone know where?

Here is what I usually ask someone who always attacking the church:

Do you feel threatened by the Catholic Church or obviously something about it attracts you to it?

 

[PJM]

=Ultramontain

REPLY to Post:
**Friend R-U aware that space is limited on the Forum:**D

**Refffuting a Protestant History Teacher ** post #1

What i am seeking to do is to biblical prove, or at least provide a understanding of Catholic though so that the Children she is corrupting will hear both sides of the story.

Veneration of Mary [BUT NOT WORSHIP!]
Lk. 1:26-35 “Mother of GOD”
Rev. Chapter 12 is likely the most direct reference

**Queen of Heaven **
There is no direct bible reference. But the History of the “King’s Mother” being Queen is supported by 2 Chr.15: 16, and jer.29:2

2Chr.15: 16 “Even Ma’acah, his mother, King Asa removed from being queen mother because she had made an abominable image for Ashe’rah.”

Jer.29: 2 “This was after King Jeconi’ah, and the queen mother, the eunuchs, the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, ”

Immaculate conception.
This is NOT clearly articulated BUT is included in Lk. 1:26-28 IN THE Douay Rheims Bible **http://www.drbo.org/ **“FULL OF GRACE” = w/o any sin at all

Claims the Sacraments are not in the New Testament.
Baptism: Jn. 3:5; Mt. 3:11
Confirmation: Jn.20:1-22
Eucharist: Mt. 26:26-28; Mk. 14: 22-24; Lk.22: 19-21; Jn. 6: ALL “51-55”; Paul 1st. Cor. 11: 23-29
Confession: Jn. 20:19-23
Marriage: Mt. 5:31-32
Holy Orders: Jn. 15:16; 1st. Tim. 4:14-16; Acts 1:15-25
Last Rites: James 5:14-16

Role of works in salvation (I need a quicker explanation then i can give

If I were to ask YOU to describe the MESSAGE of the ENTIRE Bible in ONE WORD. Would “LOVE” not be an excellent reply? Love= WORKS [James 2 and Jn.13:34]

Not by Faith alone proofs.
Jn. 3:5, 3:35-36, Mt. 19:17; 5:19; Rom. 6:14; Jn.20:23; Rom. 3:24 [tons more]

Church banned reading of the bible Is there ANY of this in there?
SEND ME a Private Message on this one 4 the rest of the facts Here’s WHY: 2nd. Pet. 1:16-21, Jn.14:26, Acts 20:28, Rom.10:17, Mt.3:9-12, 2nd. Pet.3:14-17, 2nd. Tim. 4: 1-4

Church banned English Translations
Latin was the was/IS the Universal Language of the CC and the Douay Rheims was published in “common languages” about 50 YEARS B4 the KJB & the first FULL common language Bible [church of England had one B4, BUT greatly modified]

I am also hoping for, if anyone can provide anything related to the languages being read, i know most people who could read, would have read Latin, and all people who could not read…could not read English, or any other language. It maybe a dead end, but its a idea.

Again send Me a Pri… Msg. if you want more info; I have it.

God Bless,
Pat [PJM] on the Forum

 

[lynnehelen]

There is an extremely good Catholic apologist out there named Gus Lloyd, he has a radio show and does speaking engagements, I don’t know how you can reach him but he used to host the morning show on the local Catholic radio station here (Tampa Bay Area) and now they are broadcasting his talks. He is Extremely well-versed in Biblical quotation and a humble and holy man. His explanation of the Biblical support for the eucharist was so simple and his honesty and sincerity so plain that any doubt I may still have had on this subject as a person with strong Protestant influences was completely eradicated.

I don’t know if this helps.

 

[fisherman_carl]

So here is the short of my set up, I am in a Renaissance and Reformation class, with a Protestant Teacher, who loves to take pot shots at the RCC, I can intellectually argue her into a corner with extreme easy, however she then say something about its not in the bible or get around it some other way.

Ask her where sola scripture is in the bible. It’s not there. Sola scriptura refutes itself.

Scripture is inspired because the writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write them. Sacred Tradition is also inspired for the same reasons. For Catholics the inspired word of God comes to us through 2 ways, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. For Protestants, they only accept Sacred Scripture and accuse us of adding to the bible. While we accuse them of the opposite, removing part of God’s word from both Sacred Tradition and Scripture (deuterocanonicals).

The idea that the early Christians followed the bible and the bible alone is a Protestant fairy tale. If you read the writings of the early Christians you find they accept both Scripture and Tradition as well as Apostolic Succession. The bible wasn’t even canonized until the 4th century. Christians were to submit to the bishops in all matters of faith and doctrine.

Take for example the doctrine of the Trinity. This did not come about by each person reading their own bible and under their own authority. It was an ecumenical council of the Church guided by the Holy Spirit that decided on that. And it became binding on the whole Church so that the Arians were overthrown.

The canon of the bible did not come about by sola scriptura. There is no inspired table of contents in the bible. The canon was the result of the Church deciding which books were inspired. In fact tradition was needed in order to determine the books of the bible.

“Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.”

• 2 Th 2:15

 

[fisherman_carl]

I will have her removed from her position at the end of the year, i have had to many problems with her over this, while shes a sweet lady and all, shes a moron who claims to know Catholic teaching when she has only what her pastor told her clearly.

I wouldn’t make it my goal to have her fired. She could be fired if she is incompetent. If she is incompetent then maybe this should be addressed with her superiors. However, if it is just a difference of opinion then the goal should be to educate her, not destroy her.

Catholic bashing is one of the last great prejudices. It is commonly accepted in the secular world. One could only pray for them and try to educate them.