Scripture and Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter teachccd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chellow said:
Read your own post you said Eastern Orthodox not Eastern Christian church.

**Forgive me **on Origen, your right according to what I found Origen is a Church Father. My was understanding that if one is condemned they are not Church Fathers, it seem I’m wrong, but that doesn’t mean all his writing are infallible.

ovrlnd.com/Universalism/Origen.html

newadvent.org/fathers/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen


http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/churchfathers.html
Click to expand...
You are correct that none of Origen’s writings were infallible. In fact, since the apostles, there have been no writings that are infallible. Infallibility ended when the apostles were all gone. They had no power to pass that on. That’s why the writings of all those who were not apostles are said to be for reading purposes and some historical value. They are not to be used for faith and moral beliefs.

That doesn’t mean that Origen’s writings were always true or not true. He was simply a man, like all the men who have followed him. All writers since the apostles have simply stated their opinions. None are infallible, including the ones who are called popes.
 
Old_Scholar said:
All writers since the apostles have simply stated their opinions. None are infallible, including the ones who are called popes.
Click to expand...
Not according to Catholic Theology.

So there ya go again, either you accept Tradition and the Magestarium or not. It’s that simple. All of Catholic Theology is moot to one like Old Scholar.

And all of his and other “I’m right and all of Catholicism is wrong” fall on deaf ears to us who do accept Tradtion.

This thread has ceased to become amusing…bye bye!
 
Old_Scholar said:
You are correct that none of Origen’s writings were infallible. In fact, since the apostles, there have been no writings that are infallible. Infallibility ended when the apostles were all gone. They had no power to pass that on. That’s why the writings of all those who were not apostles are said to be for reading purposes and some historical value. They are not to be used for faith and moral beliefs.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm, Old “Scholar” - I guess that would make Jesus a liar when he told the Apostles:
"But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming." - John 16:13

Don’t run this time - Respond.
 
Newbie2 said:
Not according to Catholic Theology.

So there ya go again, either you accept Tradition and the Magestarium or not. It’s that simple. All of Catholic Theology is moot to one like Old Scholar.

And all of his and other “I’m right and all of Catholicism is wrong” fall on deaf ears to us who do accept Tradtion.

This thread has ceased to become amusing…bye bye!
Click to expand...
I can’t accept any tradition that is not found in the Bible. To do so is simply to believe in fairy tales. Who knows where it came from or who started it or even if it’s anywhere near the truth?

If you believe a story can be handed down for hundreds of years without error then you are certainly unique.
 
Old_Scholar said:
I can’t accept any tradition that is not found in the Bible.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe you. Do you celibrate birthday’s, give wedding gift’s, send greeting card’s? Where are these traditions found in the Bible?
 
elvisman said:
Hmmmm, Old “Scholar” - I guess that would make Jesus a liar when he told the Apostles:
"But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming." - John 16:13

Don’t run this time - Respond.
Click to expand...
And the Spirit came and he guided them to all truth, just as Christ predicted. That’s why they wrote down all the Spirit had taught them so that it would be preserved forever. They also knew their knowledge would disappear with them unless they wrote it down. Read Peter and see what he had to say about why he wrote everything down. Read the early church fathers where they also repeated the Scriptures and see that you won’t find any *new *doctrine in their writings. All that came very much later after the RCC was corrupted.
 
davidv said:
I don’t believe you. Do you celibrate birthday’s, give wedding gift’s, send greeting card’s? Where are these traditions found in the Bible?
Click to expand...
Yes I do all those things but this is not the kind of tradition we are talking about. When the RCC speaks of Tradition with a large T, they call it Holy Tradition and it pertains to things that involve faith and morals. That is the Tradition that needs to have a solid foundation in Scripture or it is false.

Regular tradition such as you mention is never denied and is a necessary part of our everyday life, but that is not the kind of tradition Catholics refer to.
 
davidv said:
That’s how the Bible as you have it today came about. Do you believe it has errors?
Click to expand...
The Bible I have today has been unchanged and did not come to be by oral teaching. It was written down and has bee preserved that way. The Dead Sea Scrolls proved that the Bible was unchanged for thousands of years and the one we have today is accurate.

The Bible may contain some translation errors but they will be restricted to mispelling, misunderstanding of words, etc. There is nothing that pertains to faith or morals that God has allowed to be in error in Scripture. He has protected that very carefully.
 
Old_Scholar said:
And the Spirit came and he guided them to all truth, just as Christ predicted. That’s why they wrote down all the Spirit had taught them so that it would be preserved forever. They also knew their knowledge would disappear with them unless they wrote it down. Read Peter and see what he had to say about why he wrote everything down. Read the early church fathers where they also repeated the Scriptures and see that you won’t find any *new *doctrine in their writings. All that came very much later after the RCC was corrupted.
Click to expand...
**How dare you come here and called Our Church corrupted!!!??

How do you like it someone called your Mother, the Whore of Babylon? **
 
I’m getting sick and tired of NNC telling us our Church corrupted. This pathetic and insulting. Speaking lies of the Catholic Church concerning moral and faith is just arrogant and stupid.
 
Old_Scholar said:
The Bible I have today has been unchanged and did not come to be by oral teaching. It was written down and has bee preserved that way. The Dead Sea Scrolls proved that the Bible was unchanged for thousands of years and the one we have today is accurate.

The Bible may contain some translation errors but they will be restricted to mispelling, misunderstanding of words, etc. There is nothing that pertains to faith or morals that God has allowed to be in error in Scripture. He has protected that very carefully.
Click to expand...
And just who made sure that the Bible is unchange? The Catholic Church. The one and the same that you disparagingly call “roman”.
 
Old_Scholar said:
And the Spirit came and he guided them to all truth, just as Christ predicted. That’s why they wrote down all the Spirit had taught them so that it would be preserved forever. They also knew their knowledge would disappear with them unless they wrote it down. Read Peter and see what he had to say about why he wrote everything down. Read the early church fathers where they also repeated the Scriptures and see that you won’t find any *new *doctrine in their writings. All that came very much later after the RCC was corrupted.
Click to expand...
So, according to YOUR logic - twisted and convoluted as it is - the Holy Spirit comes only once and disappears forever.
**So far on this thread you have accused, attacked, lied, taken Scripture out of context and displayed blatant hypocrisy. **Sounds to me like YOU’VE become corrupt.
You’re nothing but an antagonist, and exactly what Jesus warned about in Matt. 10:16. If you werent, you would have addressed the many posts that answered your attacks, insted of running and lying.
I will pray that you see the light of the Lord’s True Church, wherein lies the FULLNESS of TRUTH.
 
Old_Scholar said:
Yes I do all those things but this is not the kind of tradition we are talking about. When the RCC speaks of Tradition with a large T, they call it Holy Tradition and it pertains to things that involve faith and morals. That is the Tradition that needs to have a solid foundation in Scripture or it is false.

Regular tradition such as you mention is never denied and is a necessary part of our everyday life, but that is not the kind of tradition Catholics refer to.
Click to expand...
Hmmm - is that so?

2 Thess 2:15
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 Thess 3:6
**We instruct you, brothers, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus Christ, to shun any brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us. **
Point to one Catholic Tradition that does not have Biblical roots. If you can’t cease and desist with the ignorant assaults. It’s really getting embarrassing for you . . .
 
elvisman said:
This is speaking specifically of the Commandments.
Click to expand...
Oh, I see. So we’re supposed to believe that, when it comes to the Commandments, God wants us to not add or take away, but when it comes to other commands and directions in the Bible, we can go ahead and do whatever we want with them - add, take away, disregard, etc… Wow, you sure have a skewed view of our Lord and His Holy Word.
I brought up Ignatius of Antioch only to prove wrong your false assertion that the Catholic Church didn’t exist until much later. It’s a good thing that I lumped you in with the other Anti-Catholic, Old “Scholar”****. BOTH of you make false accusations, then, when proven wrong, you take my answers out of context - but HE usually runs away.
Click to expand...
What is known of Ignatius of Antioch is very little. Roman Catholics often use him as “proof” that the Roman Catholic Church is the oldest Christian Church. The fact is that there is nothing about Ignatius to suggest he was Roman Catholic, especially since there was no formal Roman Catholic structure. The Bishops that existed at the time he lived were not Roman Catholic, and did not hold the sort of authority they do today in the Roman Catholic Church. Further more, what is known of Ignatius centers mainly around two causes he fought for, the authority of the NT (or what would become the NT), and the truth that Jesus’ suffering was not merely apparent. Your elevation of the man is for the most part, unwarranted. His was an early Church Father, but he is NOT proof that the Roman Catholic Church is the oldest Christian Church.
These Rites are all in Communion with Rome – YOU’RE not. Besides, I don’t “loathe” anybody. I PRAY for spiritually prideful anti-Catholic such as yourself.
Click to expand...
You say you “pray” for me. Why? How do you approach God and tell Him that you have judged me, and that I’m a spiritually prideful “anti-Catholic” that should go to hell? How is it that you make these judgements. Don’t you know that Christ died for me, just as he did for you?

They are not all in communion with Rome. If they were, why are they distinct? In addition, the Protestant denominations you speak of as being “fractured” are not. They all agree with the foundational Christian truths of the Bible. The differences can be compared to those we find among the various Rites I cited. Differences in practice, methodology, are seen, but are for the most part non-divisonal. Further, the last Rite I cited to you officially seperated from, and still has friction with the RCC, precisely because they claim today’s RCC gave way too much to Rome during it’s formation.
It’s “unclear”?? Read your history, pal. Hitler rejected any notion of a Christian God – AND the Pope rejected HIM. As for your once-again ignorant remarks about the Church and the Third Reich, that’s been disproved, ad-nauseum, so I won’t waste my breath. Golda Meir herself said to the General Assembly of the United Nations: "During the ten years of Nazi terror, when our people went through the horrors of martyrdom, the Pope raised his voice to condemn the persecutors and commiserate with the victims."
Click to expand...
You’re a CLASSIC anti-Catholic because you spew out unfounded and ridiculous venom against the Church and present it as fact.
Suggest a book to me that shows me what my Church actually teaches. This should be entertaining.:whistle:
Click to expand...
With regard to your vitriolic comments above, you are simply mistaken in your understanding of history. Many Catholics have written books about Hitler, and how we’re all wrong about his life.This is presumebly done to distance themselves from the man, and the embarassment that time in history is to the Roman Catholic Church.
 
elvisman - I won’t respond to you again, because I feel you’re too angry to dialog with. I’m ashamed of you because you call yourself a Catholic, but make hurtful comments to others, and you act as if those who disagree with you are lower than dirt.

I understand your sensitivity to some of these arguments. I can see you’re a person after God’s heart; but you must understand that we need to follow the example of Jesus. Jesus loved those who disagreed with Him, as much as loved those who agreed with Him. In fact, He said “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick … I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

So, if you feel I’m attacking you, please try to help me understand. If you feel I’m wrong, please help me to see correctly. If I’m lost, please help me find my way, but realize this: if you come off to others on this forum as angry, hateful, and full of vengence as you did to me, you will alienate them. You will push them further from the truth, and the Catholic Church that you love.

Blessings to you, and may you find a closer relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Mike
 
Mike_Patrick said:
Oh, I see. So we’re supposed to believe that, when it comes to the Commandments, God wants us to not add or take away, but when it comes to other commands and directions in the Bible, we can go ahead and do whatever we want with them - add, take away, disregard, etc… Wow, you sure have a skewed view of our Lord and His Holy Word.
Click to expand...
We have not skewed anything. You Protestants have the nerve to remove 7 Deutrocanonical Books in the Bible.
What is known of Ignatius of Antioch is very little. Roman Catholics often use him as “proof” that the Roman Catholic Church is the oldest Christian Church. The fact is that there is nothing about Ignatius to suggest he was Roman Catholic, especially since there was no formal Roman Catholic structure. The Bishops that existed at the time he lived were not Roman Catholic, and did not hold the sort of authority they do today in the Roman Catholic Church. Further more, what is known of Ignatius centers mainly around two causes he fought for, the authority of the NT (or what would become the NT), and the truth that Jesus’ suffering was not merely apparent. Your elevation of the man is for the most part, unwarranted. His was an early Church Father, but he is NOT proof that the Roman Catholic Church is the oldest Christian Church.
Click to expand...
Really. We know St. Ignatius of Antioch was a disciple of St. John, the Apostle and so was St. Polycarp. He was the bishop of Antioch and lived around 107-110 AD. He was eaten by lions and told his Christians community not to stop him from being martyred for the faith.

St. Ignatius was not the only one. There is also Clement of Rome who live in 90 AD. He is the companion and friend of St. Peter and St. Paul, and the third successor of St. Peter.
They are not all in communion with Rome. If they were, why are they distinct? In addition, the Protestant denominations you speak of as being “fractured” are not. They all agree with the foundational Christian truths of the Bible. The differences can be compared to those we find among the various Rites I cited. Differences in practice, methodology, are seen, but are for the most part non-divisonal. Further, the last Rite I cited to you officially seperated from, and still has friction with the RCC, precisely because they claim today’s RCC gave way too much to Rome during it’s formation.
Click to expand...
A little history my friend. Before the East-West Schism. The Church composed of five Patriarchiates, Rome, Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Constantinople. Constantinople came out last.

The Church was founded on Peter and St Paul, Antioch by Peter, Jerusalem by St. James, Alexandria by Mark, and Constantinople by St. Andrew. Of these five Patriarchiates, Rome held the first authority.

The Early Church bear four marks. It is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.
With regard to your vitriolic comments above, you are simply mistaken in your understanding of history. Many Catholics have written books about Hitler, and how we’re all wrong about his life.This is presumebly done to distance themselves from the man, and the embarassment that time in history is to the Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
The members of the Catholic Church are sinners. There have been things that Catholics have done wrong and there those Catholics who have done the right thing. There have been Catholics who saved Jews like Oscar Schlinder, Pope Pius XII, and others. In this world, there both good and bad Catholics. I would like to say Protestants fair no better. They have killed Catholics during the hundred years years. During the reign of Queen Elizabeth, many Catholics were killed and discriminated against. They could not even practice their faith in England.
 
Mike_Patrick said:
elvisman - I won’t respond to you again, because I feel you’re too angry to dialog with. I’m ashamed of you because you call yourself a Catholic, but make hurtful comments to others, and you act as if those who disagree with you are lower than dirt.

I understand your sensitivity to some of these arguments. I can see you’re a person after God’s heart; but you must understand that we need to follow the example of Jesus. Jesus loved those who disagreed with Him, as much as loved those who agreed with Him. In fact, He said “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick … I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

So, if you feel I’m attacking you, please try to help me understand. If you feel I’m wrong, please help me to see correctly. If I’m lost, please help me find my way, but realize this: if you come off to others on this forum as angry, hateful, and full of vengence as you did to me, you will alienate them. You will push them further from the truth, and the Catholic Church that you love.

Blessings to you, and may you find a closer relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Mike
Click to expand...
Wrong. You won’t dialogue with me anymore because you cannot intelligently answer my retorts to your venemous attacks and outright lies about the Catholic Church. At least - at the very least, I have not lied to make my points as you have.
If my replies appear vitriolic, it’s because I grow weary of the ever-increasing, antagonistic and uncharitable assaults against my faith by half-witted anti-Catholics.
I am one Catholic who will not stand for that sort of thing.
Again, I pray that you will see the light of the Fullness of Truth.
 
elvisman said:
Wrong. You won’t dialogue with me anymore because you cannot intelligently answer my retorts to your venemous attacks and outright lies about the Catholic Church. At least - at the very least, I have not lied to make my points as you have.
If my replies appear vitriolic, it’s because I grow weary of the ever-increasing, antagonistic and uncharitable assaults against my faith by half-witted anti-Catholics.
I am one Catholic who will not stand for that sort of thing.
Again, I pray that you will see the light of the Fullness of Truth.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the Club of Catholics fed up with Protestants who have an Anti-Catholic agenda. I thought I wasn’t the only one on this.

There is one thing for certain, I will not compromise my Catholic faith for any new doctrine founded in Protestantism. Protestantism is brand new invited by Martin Luther.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top