Sola Scriptura--now I get

[geno75]

montanaman:

I am continually amazed–despite experience–at what Protestants will do to wiggle out of their mangled theology. “Free association?” This is an actual idea among Protestants now? Whatever they’re calling it now, it’s still “church shopping.” It’s still “looking for something palatable to me.”

I’ll have to hang out here more. I always find it entertaining when they play these word games. You know, when “water” becomes “amniotic fluid,” “eat my flesh” becomes “remember my teachings” and “You are not justified by faith alone” means “You are justified by faith alone.”

The Keys of the Kingdom. Peter gets them and is handed down to all popes, and all catholics hope to enter into heaven under this teaching. Jesus doesnt tell us to “Repent, the kingdom of heaven is at hand, if your prayers are in unity with the pope.”

Everything Jesus asks us to do, he is given us the authority of heaven to destroy the works of the devil on this earth. Get over yourself.

Just dont be suprised when you reach the pearly gates and it is closed, it wont open for you. Then you hear a voice from inside-“Will you just use the keys I gave you when you proclaimed me Messiah and the Son of God!”

Now that could be entertaining!

 

[Mickey]

geno75:

Just dont be suprised when you reach the pearly gates and it is closed, it wont open for you.

Oh my, that is a very dangerous statement to direct at someone.

 

[montanaman]

Mickey:

Oh my, that is a very dangerous statement to direct at someone.

Meh. He’s probably not culpable. He’s been raised in a fantasyland where Catholics are medieval works-idolators and he’s part of that mythological “pure Christianity” like the “first Christians.” Naturally, when I don’t speak “Rabbit Hole” I seem like a reprobate.

 

[geno75]

Mickey:

Oh my, that is a very dangerous statement to direct at someone.

Read the whole statement for crying out loud, its just a joke about the keys he has to open the gates up with.

Man you people. Who is living in fantasy land now? depressing I tell ya.

 

[Mickey]

geno75:

Read the whole statement for crying out loud, its just a joke about the keys he has to open the gates up with.

Man you people. Who is living in fantasy land now? depressing I tell ya.

Your jokes are not amusing and your charity level seems to be well below the Mendoza line.

 

[geno75]

montanaman:

mythological “pure Christianity” like the "first Christians.QUOTE]

Wow, I dont want to know how deep your religious rabbit hole goes.

 

[montanaman]

geno75:

montanaman:

mythological “pure Christianity” like the "first Christians.QUOTE]

Wow, I dont want to know how deep your religious rabbit hole goes.

Then take the blue pill.

 

[Eden]

geno75:

The Keys of the Kingdom. Peter gets them and is handed down to all popes, and all catholics hope to enter into heaven under this teaching. Jesus doesnt tell us to “Repent, the kingdom of heaven is at hand, if your prayers are in unity with the pope.”

It is rather unfortunate that the testimony of the early Christians is not of value to you. I really believe the only reason you will not read what Christians wrote 1900, 1800, 1700 years ago is that it is not Protestant:

The Letter of Clement to James

Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus Himself, with His truthful mouth, named Peter (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D.** 221])

Cyprian

The Lord says to Peter: “I say to you,” he says, “that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .” [Matt. 16:18–19] On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was , but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church? (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D.* 251*]).

 

[NPS]

Originally Posted by** Angainor**
To “assemble” the cannon in much different than to “determine” the cannon. I would say “assemble”. What would you say?

I would say assemble

and determine. There were many spurious writings circulatiing at the time. The Church needed to determine which writings were divinely inspired–and then assemble those writings to form the canon.

It is a bit amusing when “Bible Christians” fast-forward through the first several hundred years of Christianity, then onward for 1700 more years with a quick stop at the “Reformation” and then time-machine it all to find themselves and other “True Christians” at the shelf of their Christian book store in order to shore up their preconcieved notions.

There were at one time over 50 “Gospels” and over a hundred “Acts” and “Epistles of ______”. It takes a church to figure it all out. God didn’t send His delivery trucks with a printed out manifest. “Sixty-six Books-in-One. Sign here, please. Oh, and if someone tries to deliver the old 72-Book version—those are out of date, trust me…”

 

[jim1130]

NPS:

It is a bit amusing when “Bible Christians” fast-forward through the first several hundred years of Christianity, then onward for 1700 more years with a quick stop at the “Reformation” and then time-machine it all to find themselves and other “True Christians” at the shelf of their Christian book store in order to shore up their preconcieved notions.

There were at one time over 50 “Gospels” and over a hundred “Acts” and “Epistles of ______”. It takes a church to figure it all out. God didn’t send His delivery trucks with a printed out manifest. “Sixty-six Books-in-One. Sign here, please. Oh, and if someone tries to deliver the old 72-Book version—those are out of date, trust me…”

Peace.

Actually, I thought that, during the Transfiguration when Christ spoke with Elijah and Moses, that the three divided up the Biblical workload. Christ told Elijah and Moses that, since there were so many books for the OT, those two handle the OT Canon and He, Christ, would handle the NT Canon. At least, that is what I am guessing the non-Catholics might consider.

Peace.

 

[montanaman]

Ironically, Protestants get the divine table of contents from the apocryphal “Gospel of Luther,” which, once it’s used for determining the canon, is then dropped and rejected as “non-canonical.”

 

[NPS]

montanaman:

Ironically, Protestants get the divine table of contents from the apocryphal “Gospel of Luther,” which, once it’s used for determining the canon, is then dropped and rejected as “non-canonical.”

Hey, don’t get cocky. I just read that you’re not getting IN.

Originally Posted by geno75
Just dont be suprised when you reach the pearly gates and it is closed, it wont open for you.

Wait…a…minute…Is he talking about ALL Catholics?!?

~GULP~ :crying:…But…what if I just believe what I wanna believe and am still “Catholic”—can I get IN then???

 

[montanaman]

NPS:

Hey, don’t get cocky. I just read that you’re not getting IN.

Heh. Look who’s talking, papist.

 

[Angainor]

Pax:

I’m still not sure that I get your full meaning. Sometimes I can be pretty dense. It is certainly within my basic human rights to disassociate myself from any religious affiliation to which I am attached. However, disassociating myself from the body of Christ through apostasy would be spiritual death. Other things could also mean spiritual death. If I knew and understood that the Catholic Church was, indeed, the Church established by Jesus and I refused to accept His Church then that would also mean spiritual death.

If someone is part of the body of Christ, they are part of the body of Christ. I don’t see how their conscientious decision on who to associate with could change that.

Pax:

I honestly want to know how a sincere non-Catholic Christian expects the unity “Jesus calls for” to be acheived.

True unity could only come from an honest testing of doctrine and agreement to the understanding of truth. Your dismissal of the testing of doctrine as “personal interpretation” (as if the Bible were blank pages and we are given no tools to improve our understanding of the truth) puts a wall between us that prevents any kind of true unity. Sure, you invite me over the wall, but only after I abandon my and my church’s (small c) understanding of truth and discard my conscience.

 

[Angainor]

montanaman:

I am continually amazed–despite experience–at what Protestants will do to wiggle out of their mangled theology. “Free association?” This is an actual idea among Protestants now? Whatever they’re calling it now, it’s still “church shopping.” It’s still “looking for something palatable to me.”

Yes, some people may abuse the right of free association and choose a church that gives them warm-fuzzies.

Done properly though, Protestant exercise of free association is nothing more than accepting their responsibility to choose to associate with that church (small c) that best “obey instruction to the letter”.
If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. 2 Thessalonians 3:14

 

[AquinasXVI]

Angainor:

Sure, you invite me over the wall, but only after I abandon my and my church’s (small c) understanding of truth and discard my conscience.

This is not so. Almost all testimonies of converts to the faith says the opposite of what you’re saying. The only thing you will abandon from your old ways is the heretical ideas imbedded in the faulty theology…all that is beautiful, noble and true from our separated bretheren is not only taken into the CC but welcomed. And as for conscience, whoever convinced you that your conscience is thrown out is speaking lies. We have this daily habit called the EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE. We account for all thoughts, deeds and words we’ve done throughout the day and weigh them accordingly…for the sins we ask for forgiveness and make resolutions to better it the next day. We also talk of the FORMATION OF CONSCIENCE, we compare our ethos to the ethic of the gospel in retreats and during spiritual direction and the advice given at confession and even during homilies.

Gracias.

in XT.

 

[DARichards]

Angainor:

Done properly though, Protestant exercise of free association is nothing more than accepting their responsibility to choose to associate with that church (small c) that best “obey instruction to the letter”.

Which gets back to one of my original questions…How do we determine which church (small c) that best “obey instruction to the letter” if as you said earlier:

Angainor:

Correct. There is no assurance of certainty.

 

[Angainor]

DARichards:

Which gets back to one of my original questions…How do we determine which church (small c) that best “obey instruction to the letter” if as you said earlier:

If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. 2 Thessalonians 3:14

You would have to ask the Thessalonians that. How could the Thessalonians be expected to be able to use their judgement to decide if someone is not obeying the instructions? Those instructions could be interpreted to mean anything.

 

[DARichards]

Huh???

 

[Angainor]

DARichards:

Which gets back to one of my original questions…How do we determine which church (small c) that best “obey instruction to the letter” if as you said earlier:

If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. 2 Thessalonians 3:14
Paul trusted the Thessalonians to interpret “this letter” (2 Thessalonians) and to recognize when someone wasn’t obeying the instructions therein.

We are expected to be able to recognize when people aren’t following the instructions. It is our responsibility.