SPLIT: From Fatima...Images & the Salvation of Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter newbie1234
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Am I missing something because I haven’t read some earlier posts?
We (Catholics) say the Nicene Creed at Mass so why do you include us in your grouping of those who do not say it.
I was not actually creating such a group. Rather, I was stating that I would not be Catholic or Calvinist (both of whom say the Nicene Creed), United Pentecostal (some of whom say the Nicene Creed), or any group that would not say the Nicene Creed.
 
Maybe I could. Forgive me if I don’t though. I’ll think about it. I don’t understand though, why you guys haven’t come across that concept in reading the Bible. If we have, how come you haven’t?
We read from the Bible 3 times on sundays during Mass. In fact, half of the Mass is focused on Scripture. Not only have we read it, but we were the ones who put it together. How do you know whether the Gospel of Thomas should be included in canon or not? The Eastern Bishops (Bishop of Antioch, pretty much Bishops of cities in the eastern part of the Roman Empire) thought that it should be included, whereas the Western Bishops had some reservations. So it wasn't included. There were disagreements as to what books belong and which ones don't. Luckily, we had papal authority that had the final say. After that, there have been no arguments until 1000 years laters when Luther took out Maccabees because it supported purgatory and praying for the dead. So the question arises, "Why would protestants accept the authority of one former Augustinian monk and not an entire roomful of Bishops, who were superior in knowledge and authority and knew what they were doing?"
 
“Why would protestants accept the authority of one former Augustinian monk and not an entire roomful of Bishops, who were superior in knowledge and authority and knew what they were doing?”
Maybe because Protestants don’t put much weight in faulty arguments based on authority.

You can have a room full of bishops who deny that Evolution happened, or that the earth goes around the sun. That isn’t going to give me much of a second thought about it.

Just because smart people say something doesn’t make it so.
 
Maybe I could. Forgive me if I don’t though. I’ll think about it. I don’t understand though, why you guys haven’t come across that concept in reading the Bible. If we have, how come you haven’t?
Respectfully, because nowhere in the Bible does it tell us it has all been written down now, only follow the written word.

Lots of places telling us to follow the written AND the oral, with no distiction made between the two. Places where in fact it tells us that if everything Christ did was written, all the books in the world could not contain it. ETC.

Nowhere does the doctrine of scripture alone arise until 1500 years after Christ. Smells like a doctrine that has “come along” that scripture warns us against.

Ah darn:o here I go spouting off topic again.

Maybe someone else will start the topic and you could contribute?

Your sister in Christ,
Maria
 
Plus, no where does it say we must accept Jesus as our personal Lord and Savior. In fact, Jesus is for everyone, not just a personal Lord, because that leads to creating another faith, because said person can see Jesus differently than another person. We need to look at the Bible for guidance. Be careful though. Remember when Jesus was tempted in the desert by Satan? Satan quoted scripture, and Jesus gave him the correct interpretation of said scripture. If Satan, in all his cleverness, couldn’t interpret scripture correctly, how can we fallible beings possibly pull it off?
 
I was not actually creating such a group. Rather, I was stating that I would not be Catholic or Calvinist (both of whom say the Nicene Creed), United Pentecostal (some of whom say the Nicene Creed),** or any group that would not say the Nicene Creed**.
Head-scratching time, am I missing something here ? :confused:
 
I’m confused too. You want to join a church that says the Nicene Creed or a church that doesn’t?
 
Not so. See, the Bible nowhere COMMANDS us to baptize infants. I am different than the normal Baptist though where I don’t believe it matters. I was baptized again but even if I hadn’t been it would not matter. The fact is I was baptized when I was an infant and I came to faith when I was older. Both “requirements” so to speak were fulfilled. Baptism is a good thing but does the timing of it REALLY matter in the overall scheme of things? I don’t think so.
This is off topic , but the fact is that entire households were baptized Brian and that would have included not only the family’s infants but the infants of their slaves and servants as well.

I think we talked before a bit about Polycarp. I suggest you read the account of his martyrdom and explain to me how that 86 year old man says he has been a Christian for 86 years if he was not infant baptized? (Tip: It’s in Chapter IX) Since he was a disciple of St. John how do you figure he got that wrong then? 🙂
Pax tecum,
 
I’m confused too. You want to join a church that says the Nicene Creed or a church that doesn’t?
I want to be part of any Church, the majority of whom would recite the Nicene Creed, except for Calvinists and Catholics.
 
I’m sure you can make an educated guess - in fact I’m surprised the Holy Spirit hasn’t told you already 😉
The Holy Spirit has done exactly that.
I don’t know who it is. I imagine it is an artists conception of what Mary looked like.
 
Just because smart people say something doesn’t make it so.
Amen, this brings to mind a point my pastor frequently recites…
Don’t end up 12" away from salvation, the 12" between the head and the heart.
 
It is indeed very true that smart people --or indeed any people–saying something is so doesn’t make it so.

OTOH, if something IS so, it is going to be so whether you, or I, or the Dalai Lama, believe it is so.

We have to be careful not to be too prejudiced. And we also have to be careful that we aren’t too prideful. Because while I don’t consider that “just because Pope X said so” is a 100% guarantee that something ‘is so’ because it is a “Pope” who said it. . .I must note that, because Christ said such things as “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it”. . .because of other scripture, because of sacred tradition, and because of the Holy Spirit, when it comes to matters of faith and morals, when it comes to matters of teaching which are part of the deposit of the faith, if Pope X says so, it is because he is Vicar of Christ and He is saying so through the charism of infallibility given by the Holy Spirit, through which the Spirit guides us to all truth.

So I’m not just agreeing with something because ‘smart people say so’ or “he’s the pope so I have to”. I will agree and believe because GOD said so. My shepherd is the Lord; there is nothing I shall want.
 
Halleys is a bible handbook.
What is your question?
Oh, I thought you were referring to a comet. 😃 Do you give the bible interpretations presented in the Halley’s “bible handbook” the same authority as the Bible itself? Otherwise, I don’t know why your comment that Halley’s did not list the uninspired books that were included in the “Origen Canon”, was meant to be an authoritative statement. And why do you need Halley’s handbook anyway, since the Bible alone should be sufficient for you to study the faith?

If the Bible alone is sufficient, why are you consulting with your minister and a Bible handbook?
 
The Holy Spirit has done exactly that.
I don’t know who it is. I imagine it is an artists conception of what Mary looked like.
Eireann, tell him - is that an artist’s conception of what Mary looked like?

I’ll provide part of the answer … no nein nyet nada :nope:
 
Are we done with this thread yet, or is this going to be an eternal flame?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top