SPLIT: Is Confession not necessary?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sdtouchton
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cite your source please.šŸ™‚

The only blame I lay on the Church, is instilling within me, a superstitious belief in an invisible supernatural God that can read my mind.

A belief so strongly imprinted within my psyche at a very young age, that it was most difficult to overcome, for fear of eternal damnation in a horrific place called Hell.
Why would you want to overcome fear of eternal damnation? That’s almost like saying you don’t care whether your soul is damned.
 
No. You believe that the Universe came from somewhere other than God. I would like to know from where and how.

And if you say that you don’t know from where or how, then you cannot say that there is no God, because by your own admission you do not know.
Of course I don’t know if there is or isn’t a God. I’ve come to the conclusion, that it is extremely and absolutely most unlikely that any such God exists.

Do you really believe, that if something’s cause is not known, it must have had a supernatural cause?

Where did your God come from? How convenient, it was decided that your God had to have been uncaused. :rolleyes:
 
Why would you want to overcome fear of eternal damnation? That’s almost like saying you don’t care whether your soul is damned.
Overcome the fear of eternal damnation, meaning learning to understand and accept that there is no such thing as eternal damnation, nor hell.
 
A believer can embrace his faith and a non-believer will be perplexed at how many a good a believer will go to his death rather than give up that faith or give his whole life up on a thing the none believer can’t see.
You mean like the faithful servants of Allah, the Jihadist’s responsible for 9/11?

Yes, that is most perplexing, how faith does that to people.
 
Now hell is another topic altogether and I do believe
He’d be absent to you there and you’d have every reason
to be afraid. I gave you, much earlier in this thread the links
to the Last Things, did you read them?
( yes I read them)

Hell, is a place that is created by God, so if that is where I go, I can take solace knowing I am carrying out my role in Gods mysterious plan and I will stand in awe, while gazing up an endless sea of torment and feel a joy deep in my heart, knowing that Gods wonder is ever present, as God is the architect and creator of all.

( Including Hell, don’t pretend he isn’t)
 
Mabe if I ask this question about the Holy Bible one million times Ralphy will answer it once:

Ralphy: what do you think the bible means when it says that Jesus BREATHED on the disciples and gave them the power to forgive and RETAIN sin?

What does ā€œRETAIN sinā€ mean to you Ralphy?

Did Jesus give you the power to ā€œRETAIN sinā€?

Why would Jesus want the disciples to have the power to not only forgive but ā€œRETAIN sinā€?

If the disciples could ā€œRETAIN sinā€ why do you find it so impossible to believe that their successors the priests would not have the power to ā€œRETAIN sinā€ in the sacrament of Reconciliation?

Ralphy if you really believe the bible like you say you do you must come to grips with the significance of Jesus who is God BREATHING on the disicples.

The only other time God BREATHED on anyone was on Adam.

Protestants claim they believe in ā€œGOD BREATHEDā€ scripture.

Do you believe as much in Jesus BREATHING on the disicples and giving them the power to forgive and ā€œRETAIN sinā€ as stated in the ā€œGod BREATHEDā€ scriptures? Or do you just believe whatever parts of the bible you choose to Ralphy?

You can run away from such questions here Ralphy and never answer them.

I personally believe that Ralphy is much too smart to do that since he would know about the scripture where Jesus says that we are to love God ā€œwith our whole mindā€.

What does your ā€œwhole mindā€ tell you Ralphy about Jesus BREATHING on the disciples and giving them the power to forgive and ā€œREAIN sinā€?
 
Overcome the fear of eternal damnation, meaning learning to understand and accept that there is no such thing as eternal damnation, nor hell.
Seems to me like just another case of ā€˜the smartest man in the room is too smart to need God.’

If so, I’ll be happy to be a fool.
 
Where did your God come from? How convenient, it was decided that your God had to have been uncaused. :rolleyes:
But this convenience is in fact highly logical and reachable by natural reason alone.
From natural law alone we see a ā€œcause and effectā€ in every thing. From this law and from the reach of science we now know that the universe had a beginning. The Big Bang theory is looking to be very viable. Something not subject to time-and-space had to initiate ā€œtimeā€ and ā€œspaceā€ - to kick it all off - the first tick of time - the first particle of matter. The phrase ā€œlet there be lightā€ explains it all! In light we have both the particle/mass nature of light as well as the wave nature of light with wavelength and period. In light we have both time and space in one mechanism. So the question becomes ā€œwho or whatā€ spoke the words that made light flash into the utter darkness of oblivion to illumine and start it all?

It had to be God or an agent of God - that first prime mover. From the giver of light all things come. There is not chicken and egg dilemma there is a DNA delimma. Where did the first strand of DNA come from? Light and light from Grace and from the twinkle in God’s eye arising from His own Beatitude with Himself in contemplating His Nature in The Trinity of His Godhead.

ā€œLet there be lightā€ my friend - its so clear.

James
 
In Catholicism the confession is not to the priest but Jesus who is present at any confession. šŸ˜‰

I guess you could ask if the person doing confession does not know they are confessing to Jesus does it change anything? IMO the answer is NO. Why? Because we all know that Jesus is ALL KNOWING and so no matter if we believe we are confessing to just a priest or not that we are indeed confessing to Jesus.
Why does a priest have to represent God, He does a wonderful job at representing Himself, and as born again christians, we can go directly to God, to the very Throne of Grace. You get a better deal when you go to the manufacture rather than a dealer. Ralph
 
Mabe if I ask this question about the Holy Bible one million times Ralphy will answer it once:

Ralphy: what do you think the bible means when it says that Jesus BREATHED on the disciples and gave them the power to forgive and RETAIN sin?

What does ā€œRETAIN sinā€ mean to you Ralphy?

Did Jesus give you the power to ā€œRETAIN sinā€?

Why would Jesus want the disciples to have the power to not only forgive but ā€œRETAIN sinā€?

If the disciples could ā€œRETAIN sinā€ why do you find it so impossible to believe that their successors the priests would not have the power to ā€œRETAIN sinā€ in the sacrament of Reconciliation?

Ralphy if you really believe the bible like you say you do you must come to grips with the significance of Jesus who is God BREATHING on the disicples.

The only other time God BREATHED on anyone was on Adam.

Protestants claim they believe in ā€œGOD BREATHEDā€ scripture.

Do you believe as much in Jesus BREATHING on the disicples and giving them the power to forgive and ā€œRETAIN sinā€ as stated in the ā€œGod BREATHEDā€ scriptures? Or do you just believe whatever parts of the bible you choose to Ralphy?

You can run away from such questions here Ralphy and never answer them.

I personally believe that Ralphy is much too smart to do that since he would know about the scripture where Jesus says that we are to love God ā€œwith our whole mindā€.

What does your ā€œwhole mindā€ tell you Ralphy about Jesus BREATHING on the disciples and giving them the power to forgive and ā€œREAIN sinā€?
The bible tells me that the disciples are dead and that I find nothing was passed on to anyone else after they were gone. I believe that the Holy Spirit is our guide and director today as he come in to dwell after we ars saved. Any thing or power given to the disciples at the time that Christ was with them is finished, except through the eyes of the Roman catholic church, which makes up own stories. If anything was passed on in the Roman catholic church it seems to have run out of power. ralph
 
Yes, you are correct ralphy. And when an apostolic priest absolves sins Jesus is in fact right there ā€œin persona Christiā€ speaking through His priest and assuring the repentant sinner that her sins are forgiven and giving the graces necessary to overcome and resist the temptations again in the future.

James
The apostolic people are all gone from this earth and Jesus said: ā€œno one comes to the Father but by Meā€, He did not say to go to a priest. That is very clear in scripture. Ralph
 
The apostolic people are all gone from this earth and Jesus said: ā€œno one comes to the Father but by Meā€, He did not say to go to a priest. That is very clear in scripture. Ralph
Sorry, but you are incorrect. The first Christians had no doubts about how to determine which was the true Church and which doctrines the true teachings of Christ. The test was simple: Just trace the apostolic succession of the claimants.

Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles. All over the world, all Catholic bishops are part of a lineage that goes back to the time of the apostles, something that is impossible in Protestant denominations (most of which do not even claim to have bishops).

The role of apostolic succession in preserving true doctrine is illustrated in the Bible. To make sure that the apostles’ teachings would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, ā€œ[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others alsoā€ (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach.

The Church Fathers, who were links in that chain of succession, regularly appealed to apostolic succession as a test for whether Catholics or heretics had correct doctrine. This was necessary because heretics simply put their own interpretations, even bizarre ones, on Scripture. Clearly, something other than Scripture had to be used as an ultimate test of doctrine in these cases.

Thus the early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes, ā€œ[W]here in practice was [the] apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for itā€ (Early Christian Doctrines, 37).

For the early Fathers, ā€œthe identity of the oral tradition with the original revelation is guaranteed by the unbroken succession of bishops in the great sees going back lineally to the apostles. . . . [A]n additional safeguard is supplied by the Holy Spirit, for the message committed was to the Church, and the Church is the home of the Spirit. Indeed, the Church’s bishops are . . . Spirit-endowed men who have been vouchsafed ā€˜an infallible charism of truthā€™ā€ (ibid.).

Thus on the basis of experience the Fathers could be ā€œprofoundly convinced of the futility of arguing with heretics merely on the basis of Scripture. The skill and success with which they twisted its plain meaning made it impossible to reach any decisive conclusion in that fieldā€ (ibid., 41).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top