second question for our non-catholic brethern

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey guys,
4…oops…no, 3 more posts before the 1000 post speedometer runs out.
 
=FathersKnowBest;11526441]It’s obvious, isn’t it?
They want to show that the Catholic Church is wrong, and therefore not divinely led.
Problem is, if they prove this, they prove too much, since this would prove that Jesus was unable to keep His promises, and thus Christianity is a fraud.
Click to expand...
RIGHT ON:)

Nicely put!
 
Eric_Hilbert said:
Hey guys,
4…oops…no, 3 more posts before the 1000 post speedometer runs out.
Click to expand...
Kliska said:
You don’t have to imagine it, you can research it.
Click to expand...
😃

Oh, Kliska. I can imagine your happiness that this thread is coming to a close and you may use that as an excuse for not answering what your “text crit” is that you have used for each of the 27 books of the NT canon, as well as the over 400 other ancient Christian texts that you would have needed to study in order to say, “I independently discerned the canon of the NT, without the CC!”

But there is still time!

Just a few posts left and you can tell us what your “text crit” is that you used.

As far as my researching it to look for others’ “text crit”, that’s an odd statement for you to make. Aren’t you quite proud of the fact that you don’t “blindly follow” anyone and come to your own conclusions? So why would you “blindly follow” someone else’s criteria?

And why would you assume that I would believe that you would “blindly follow” someone else’s criteria when you have asserted that you don’t ever do that here on the CAFs?

There’s still time for you to tell us what your “text crit” is.

And how it would include Hebrews but exclude the Epistle of Barnabas…

And how it would include James but exclude the Didache…

And how it would include the Gospel of Mark but exclude the Gospel of Judas…
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Originally Posted by Peter J
Perhaps some of our protestant friends have a problem with speaking to reasonable-minded Catholics. Or, at least, aren’t so comfortable with it.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t be surprised (since most things are 2-way streets); but I’ve specifically noticed that a lot of protestant posters here have almost a compulsion to respond to unreasonable statements from Catholics. Just saying. :o
Click to expand...
 
Peter_J said:
I wouldn’t be surprised (since most things are 2-way streets); but I’ve specifically noticed that a lot of protestant posters here have almost a compulsion to respond to unreasonable statements from Catholics. Just saying. :o
Click to expand...
That’s a 4-way stop, my friend. 😃
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
That’s a 4-way stop, my friend. 😃
Click to expand...
I was thinking of some kind of “feeding each other” analogy, but I haven’t worked out the details. (Just as well, I guess, since this thread will probably be closing soon. :))
 
We may not Agree on many things… But if is something we agree ( I hope) is this :

Jesus is the ONE, the Most Precious Men who ever existed, the Men- God to change the world, Our Lord is the Beginning and the end, the Savior and The way, there is nobody like Him, and one day He will come to Judge us… I hope it will be soon.

That is why I want to wish Everybody here the best Christmas, I Wish you and your families that the Precious and most beatiful Baby give you the joy, the Happinnes and many blessings today and all the days of your lives… Love for everyone 👍👍

Jesus I love you with all my heart …I’m yours My Lord !!!
 
eddie_too said:
why is it so important to non-catholics that Mary the Mother of God was born into sin and subsequently led a sinful life?
Click to expand...
There are a variety of views, but mostly it revolves around the scripture verse, “For all have sinned…” My personal view as a Lutheran (to which I’m allowed since for us the IC is adiaphoron) is that her sinlessness corresponds to the Incarnation. It could have happened at her conception, at the visitation of the angel, etc. And it could have lasted all of her life… or not.
Either way, it is a miracle of God that she was filled with grace/ highly favored, and she was unique in all of human history for this purpose. I give thanks to God for His hand in her life, and I give thanks to God that she, a humble teen Jewish girl, chose to do as God asked her to do.

46And Mary said,

“My soul magnifies the Lord,
47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48 for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant.
For behold, from now on all generations will call me blessed;
49 for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
50 And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation.
51 He has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
52 he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
53 he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent away empty.
54 He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
55 as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his offspring forever.”

Jon
 
eddie_too said:
those who deny the RC doctrine of the Immaculate Conception are saying they believe that Mary suffered from a fallen nature and consequently led a sinful life.

my puzzlement is as to why people might reject the doctrine of the IC and instead cling to the belief that the Mother of God possessed a fallen human nature and subsequently led a sinful life.

those who reject the IC have no logic or historical facts and only misinterpreted scripture to sustain their belief in Mary’s sinfulness.

so, why do they so avidly cling to the belief that Mary was not immaculately conceived?

where does this idea come from and how is it supported?
Click to expand...
I gave my view. As I understand it, the Orthodox are not impressed with the IC because their view of Original Sin doesn’t require she be immaculately conceived (I’m wiling to be corrected).

Jon
 
JonNC said:
I gave my view. As I understand it, the Orthodox are not impressed with the IC because their view of Original Sin doesn’t require she be immaculately conceived (I’m wiling to be corrected).

Jon
Click to expand...
Jon - didn’t notice it before, but love the poem in your signature…
 
PRmerger said:
😃

Oh, Kliska. I can imagine your happiness that this thread is coming to a close and you may use that as an excuse for not answering what your “text crit” is that you have used for each of the 27 books of the NT canon, as well as the over 400 other ancient Christian texts that you would have needed to study in order to say, “I independently discerned the canon of the NT, without the CC!”

But there is still time!

Just a few posts left and you can tell us what your “text crit” is that you used.

As far as my researching it to look for others’ “text crit”, that’s an odd statement for you to make. Aren’t you quite proud of the fact that you don’t “blindly follow” anyone and come to your own conclusions? So why would you “blindly follow” someone else’s criteria?

And why would you assume that I would believe that you would “blindly follow” someone else’s criteria when you have asserted that you don’t ever do that here on the CAFs?

There’s still time for you to tell us what your “text crit” is.

And how it would include Hebrews but exclude the Epistle of Barnabas…

And how it would include James but exclude the Didache…

And how it would include the Gospel of Mark but exclude the Gospel of Judas…
Click to expand...
Or blindly accept someone’s translation… Or blindly accept that the copy accurately depicts the original…
 
stewstew03 said:
Jon - didn’t notice it before, but love the poem in your signature…
Click to expand...
Thanks,
*What child is this *is my favorite Christmas hymn because of the second verse. So often in secular settings they exclude the part that validates the season: Nails, spear, shall pierce Him through, the cross be borne for me, for you.

Without the cross, Christmas means nothing.

A blessed Christmas to everyone.
Jon
 
JonNC said:
Thanks,
*What child is this *is my favorite Christmas hymn because of the second verse. So often in secular settings they exclude the part that validates the season: Nails, spear, shall pierce Him through, the cross be borne for me, for you.

Without the cross, Christmas means nothing.

A blessed Christmas to everyone.
Jon
Click to expand...
Yep - embarrassed I didn’t recognize it…

Merry Christmas!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top