Should the Bible be.....placed aside?

[Corki]

I didn’t make those posts up.** I copied and paste **them. I’m not the one bearing false witness. Although if the CC has something to hide then that’s not my fault. I presented it to you.

Well, you copied and pasted passages without properly citing your sources. That’s plagiarism, which is a form of lying, which is bearing false witness. If you want a real dialogue, do some real research.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

Okay I got one.

There are numerous quotes/books that can be found where higher up members of your faith is in complete opposition to the Bible. (its up to you to search it) The Bible speaks of these things happening.

Some of the commandments have even been twisted by the catholic church. (just search it) When God plainly said His Law does not change. Why was this done? Are you saying that God is perfect but His Law isn’t good enough? So man should add on or change it right? Wrong…

You have accused me of getting false material but you have failed to use the Bible to prove your beliefs to be biblical.

How can you go to Heaven when you don’t think God’s Law is good enough and the only thing we need?

Why do you only use the Bible when it is beneficial to you? When it’s not, you refer to something else.

Why is it up to us to find these? We aren’t the ones presenting an issue, you are. You are making some pretty bold (and frankly offensive) statements here. If you aren’t willing to make some concrete and real points of discussion, a discussion cannot take place.

Besides, you are forgetting that it was the catholic church who gave you the bible. You accuse us of disregarding scrpiture, but let me remind you it was PROTESTANTS that chopped out SEVEN WHOLE BOOKS OUT OF THE BIBLE. So don’t try to tell us that WE are the ones walking away from scripture…

 

[Teneas]

I feel like I am wasting my energy now.

Then stop. You won’t convert any here over to you side by constantly bashing us. I highly doubt that any here that are Catholic could be converted to another faith anyway.

 

[adstrinity]

And while we’re at it, if you’re busy PM’ing people anyway, how about asking the mods to lock this thread because your original premise was based on falsehoods that you had inadvertently put both, not knowing them to be false?

Yes, I think that’s a good idea. Has anybody notified the mods? I will since the question has been asked and answered.

I have stepped out of the box and compared many religions to what the Bible says and they are all unbiblical. Catholicism is not the True church of God. Books have been written to support their beliefs. They are in complete opposition to the Bible. You are even defending the belief of not putting the Bible first over any book.

Nobody has said that. Nobody. You are again ascribing your fallible beliefs to what you want Catholics to believe. Nobody has defended the practice of not putting the BIble first over any book.

I have nothing to say to you. I will continue to ignore you. You like to throw in personal attacks and change the direction of threads when scripture is unfamiliar to you.

Ignored

Just thought I should let you know

Sweet! :extrahappy:

So anyway, let’s for the record point out that this poster in this thread has demonstrated a reluctance to do research before posting stuff, and ignores those who ask questions with uncomfortable answers.

Of not I asked him to answer how he reconciles a certain portion of scripture to his view and he informs me that scripture is unfamiliar to me (I’ve read the bible in its entirety on more than one occasion, and it is for that reason I am no longer a “bible believing Christian”.) He also accuses me of "personal attacks in a strangely personal attack.

To quote the late Sir Winston Churchill, “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”

Yes, I agree. With everything you have said here. He has basically muffed his ears and said, “LALALALALALALALAI’MNOTLISTENINGLALALALALALALALA”. He was called on something, asked to give an answer from the Bible, and he views a simple question as a personal attack.

I didn’t make those posts up. I copied and paste them. I’m not the one bearing false witness. Although if the CC has something to hide then that’s not my fault. I presented it to you.

You did present it to us, and we did your work by finding out that, again, THIS SOURCE YOU CITED NEVER EXISTED, IT WAS FICTIONAL, ALL OF IT. The quote was made up and the title it gave as a source never existed. It’s not that somebody ascribed this allegation to an existing magazine or journal, but, those who made up this lie made up that this “National Catholic” or whatever it was called, also existed, which it is proved never to have.

Oh. Oh wait, are you saying that this DID exist and somehow the Catholic Church, in a huge conspiracy somehow covered all this up? …Well, where’s that in the Bible?

Anyway, yes, I think this thread needs to be closed. You started a thread with the intention to attack and when nobody took the bait and furthermore, pointed out that what you said was foundless, and nothing further needed to be said, you continued to spout erronious rhetoric.

I think I can speak for everybody here; we’d respect you so much more if you admit that what you stated in your initial post is in error, that quote was never said by any bishop, that magazine NEVER existed (or, if you can prove it did, by all means, do so), and, for whatever reason, you still cannot accept the Truth of the Catholic Church, but, at least you do not believe that Catholics believe the Pope is God, or whatever the context was.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

Nobody has said that. Nobody. You are again ascribing your fallible beliefs to what you want Catholics to believe. Nobody has defended the practice of not putting the BIble first over any book.

Yes, I agree. With everything you have said here. He has basically muffed his ears and said, “LALALALALALALALAI’MNOTLISTENINGLALALALALALALALA”. He was called on something, asked to give an answer from the Bible, and he views a simple question as a personal attack.

I found this appropriate.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[adstrinity]

I found this appropriate.

http://i524.photobucket.com/albums/cc329/all-in-flynn/TheStrawman.jpg

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! snort! Oh man, I have to remeber this thread to search for this later.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! snort! Oh man, I have to remeber this thread to search for this later.

just type “strawman” into a google image search

 

[adelore]

I provided the quotes, all you have to do is a little research.

If someone came to me with these such claims (a person of higher office speaking blasphemy) I would immediately research it. But instead, many of you have decided to simply say it is out of context.

Why would a person of a higher office make such a statement? Wouldn’t that person know the confusion that he could cause amongst others. I would not take this situation lightly.

If this was out of context, then why is the pope still referred to as the “Lord God”?

Also, Jesus does not need a representative on earth. Jesus is the Word and he is always with us. Jesus is our representative…period, no one else. The pope has to be perfect to be a representative of our Lord and Saviour. To be a representative, must means he can save us as well? To be a representative, must means we can enter to the Father through the pope? To be a representative must means the pope is the Son whom died for our sins.

The pope can’t be a representative of our Saviour when he is in need of the Saviour.

No merit can come from anything or anyone on this earth. Those things aren’t divine.

Why would a person of a **higher office **make such a statement?

As we have Asked you many times…where’s the Links to Prove such a statement. Many people on here have searched and can’t come up with one. Since you know…Where the Proof is, by all means Share it! Show us the Link!

And who is this person of a Higher Office…? By all means Prove this too. (since you seem to say you know it.)

Also, Jesus **does not need **a representative on earth. You are Very Right in this statement, (See I do give credit where credit is due )

Yes Jesus did not Need a Representative on Earth. However He knew mankind Would need one, so Jesus DID pick Peter to be the first Pope…

**why is the pope still referred to as the “Lord God”? ** Who says he is? You’ll never hear a Catholic Say the Pope is the Lord God. But by all means do tell who is saying such a thing. Shame on them for misleading you!

If in doubt about anything that is Catholic and what **forsure the Catholic Church says **or feels…by all means go to this link http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm

If the mood moves you…don’t take any of our word for it…you can always **call the Vatican. ** Plenty of phone numbers on this webpage for you. http://www.vatican.va/faq/index_en.htm

No one better than the Vatican, truely knows all the Catholic Answers to anyones Questions about what Catholic Church teaches, pratices, or teaches.

Now I’m going to ask you a question. Why would you choose the name Truthseeker? Are you truely seeking “Truth” or just what “you think” is the truth and yet you really have no proof of what you say. Nor do you care to seek Truth out.

A **Truth Seeker **really seaches and wants the truth…they are open minded when searching for Truth and will do their “Homework” until they have researched every possibility. This is something that Clearly by your postings you do not do.

If you want Truths about Catholics, ask Catholics or go to the Vatican webpage. If you want Truths about Lutherns, ask Lutherns or go to the Luthern Homepage. If you want to know what JW’s believe, by all means ask them, or go to the Watch Tower home page.

But to take some tidbit of information that you get, (without really checking it out for yourself) from someone, who is not a Catholic, that’s like you comming to me and trusting that I can tell you if you have cancer. I can “Guess” or I can say this or that…but why would you trust me on my information if I’m not a Doctor?

Truth Seeker123 Re: Should the Bible be…placed aside?

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmcrae
What do you think the CC has to hide, and how does it have anything to do with me posting, or not?

If I tell you, you will attack me and so will about 6 others, which is too many people to talk to at once. If you want to talk to me, pm me.

---

Now this is interesting…You think the CC has something to hide? You think we will “attack you”? Of course I know you mean on what our replies might be in our postings to what you have to say. Or is the truth, that you are afraid we can “clear up” any “misconseptions” you might have?

You see Truthseeker, I highly doubt there is anyone here who is going to browbeat you into becomming a Catholic, that’s just not the way we are. If you don’t believe in the Catholic Ways, then you wouldn’t make a good Catholic anyway. But by all means, since you don’t really know anything about the Catholic Religion, Ask us, we will share with you about Catholics and what we believe. Simple as that, no strings attached.

But meanwhile…at least Live up to your sign on name as be a Real Truth Seeker. (you may not agree with the Truth about Catholics, but at least get True information.)

May God Bless you in the Struggle you are having…

 

[adelore]

Truth Seeker, I will Pray for you and the confussion that you seem to be having being able to sort out Truths and Non-Truths.

I will also pray to Our Father in Heaven that you will learn to be honest and live up to your sign in name…Truth Seeker.

May God

 

[Justin_Mee]

Since you seem bent on bashing what catholics believe, you need to fist know what catholics believe. This is what we are trying to tell you. Get a copy of the catechism and read it. When you find things that in your opinion go against scripture, we can talk about those. I am willing to bet all my money, future, and health that there isn’t a passage anywhere in scripture that says “Catholics believe the pope is god himself!” so you are already reaching outside of scripture.

As someone who frequents many newsgroups and posts on few, Truth Seeker may or may not be anti-Catholic. He may or may not have ever stepped foot inside any church. One thing he is though is a TROLL. They frequent blogs all over cyberspace and rattle as many chains as possible. Then they are off to the next blog with another identity. They get a real kick out of making outrageous statements. They make an initial run, then post one-liners to keep the pot stirred. Sometimes the best thing we can do is just say no to replies because nothing we say or document will ever be enough. Truth is not what they are Seeking. Just my opinion.

 

[Answersplease]

Should the Bible be tossed aside to fit these statements?

 

[graceandglory]

Give me scripture and I will listen.

*** Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you***. 1 Corinthians 11:2

Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. Phil. 4:9

***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 *** 1 Thess. 2:15

But you won’t listen. You will deny Scripture here, because it’s not what you want it to say. Certainly when Paul says tradition, or “oral” (you will say) he means the bible. (Which at that time was only in Old Testament form)

But if you are honest and teachable, you would lay aside your own pride, and research the claims of the Catholic Church.
scripturecatholic.com/scripture_alone.html
If they are false, reject it. Go ahead, line for line, go right down the list and show where the doctrine is unbiblical.

If there is truth that you don’t like, tell Jesus about it, “Lord I believe, help my unbelief.” You have to be willing to go after God’s truth with all your heart. Read Proverbs. ***You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free. ***

As a recent convert, I had to have this mindset, Lord, I want YOU, and I want your truth, even if it’s in the Catholic Church. I don’t understand, but I’m willing to be teachable and learn. ***God rejects the proud, but gives grace to the humble. ***

 

[PJM]

=patrick457;6147888]Now for the Leo XIII quote:

The quote in the actual encyclical (called Sapientiae Christianae in Latin), paragraph 22, says the following:

Now, as the Apostle Paul urges, this unanimity ought to be perfect. Christian faith reposes not on human but on divine authority, for what God has revealed “we believe not on account of the intrinsic evidence of the truth perceived by the natural light of our reason, but on account of the authority of God revealing, who cannot be deceived nor Himself deceive.”
It follows as a consequence that whatever things are manifestly revealed by God we must receive with a similar and equal assent. To refuse to believe any one of them is equivalent to rejecting them all, for those at once destroy the very groundwork of faith who deny that God has spoken to men, or who bring into doubt His infinite truth and wisdom.
To determine, however, which are the doctrines divinely revealed belongs to the teaching Church, to whom God has entrusted the safekeeping and interpretation of His utterances. But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires, together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself. This obedience should, however, be perfect, because it is enjoined by faith itself, and has this in common with faith, that it cannot be given in shreds; nay, were it not absolute and perfect in every particular, it might wear the name of obedience, but its essence would disappear. Christian usage attaches such value to this perfection of obedience that it has been, and will ever be, accounted the distinguishing mark by which we are able to recognize Catholics.
Admirably does the following passage from St. Thomas Aquinas set before us the right view: “The formal object of faith is primary truth, as it is shown forth in the holy Scriptures, and in the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the fountainhead of truth. It follows, therefore, that he who does not adhere, as to an infallible divine rule, to the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the primary truth manifested in the holy Scriptures, possesses not the habit of faith; but matters of faith he holds otherwise than true faith. Now, it is evident that he who clings to the doctrines of the Church as to an infallible rule yields his assent to everything the Church teaches; but otherwise, if with reference to what the Church teaches he holds what he likes but does not hold what he does not like, he adheres not to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will.”
​

Even a cursory reading of the Encyclical would show that Pope Leo XIII refers to God as if He was a separate entity - quite unlikely if you’re claiming to be God in human flesh!

Now, obedience to the pope “as to God Himself” may make some feel queasy. But once again, from a Catholic lens, this is not too surprising. After all, since Catholics believe that God commissioned the Pope as his visible vicar (representative) in the government of the Church, it would not be repugnant to render submission or obedience to him, just as it would not be repugnant to listen to a king’s representative and obey what he orders in the king’s name. Still, (contrary to what some may think) we need to stress once again that Catholics do not hold the Pope as being equal or even superior to God, as his title Vicar of Christ shows. Think about this for a moment. How can a vicar, or a representative be superior to the one who has sent him? “No servant is greater than his master” indeed.

By the way, I might include the third quote at part three, so stay tuned.

Very well done, good and faitful servant:thumbsup:

Thank you

 

[agent_grey]

Is the Holy spirit God?
Can only God Forgive sins?
Does God have the authority to delegate authority?
Is Yeshua the word of God?
Did Yeshua give the appostles the power to forgive sins?
Did Yeshua put the Holy Spirit in the appostles?
Did the appostles appoint a succesor in the office that was once held by Judas?
Did the succesor of Judas recieve the Holy Spirit?
Is the successor of Judas equal to the other appostles?

I could go on but I think the point is made.

 

[TheQuestioner]

Though the first two quotes were explained, I am still looking for an explanation on the third. I researched it myself but only found it on anti-Catholic and Seventh Day Adventist sites. I doubt this one exists or is true either.

 

[PJM]

=TheQuestioner;6152933]Though the first two quotes were explained, I am still looking for an explanation on the third. I researched it myself but only found it on anti-Catholic and Seventh Day Adventist sites. I doubt this one exists or is true either.

***Might there be an absense of truth here?

Should not one presented “with truth” either accept it or give evidence of how such facts are not true? Or is this about spoutin off?

We ought to know the rules of engagement:shrug:

Love and prayer friends,***

 

[KathleenGee]

When this fellow placed the thread topic, it was one of those loaded ones…

Well one good productive thing I got was the photo of the strawman…so now I finally know what he looks like.

 

[PJM]

=TheQuestioner;6152933]Though the first two quotes were explained, I am still looking for an explanation on the third. I researched it myself but only found it on anti-Catholic and Seventh Day Adventist sites. I doubt this one exists or is true either.

Friend, what is the THIRD quote?

maybe we can help?