P
PRmerger
Guest
Yep. When folks go off on their own, taking your concepts and morphing them into something else…that’s kind of puzzling and frustrating, isn’t it?
- Status
P
PRmerger
Guest
Again, that is like saying, “Yes, female mammals can make milk. Yes, female cows make milk. But it is a false conclusion to say that therefore cows are mammals.”
P
PRmerger
Guest
At the risk of sounding to Catholic to defend SSD),
Preach it, Brother Jon! :bowdown2:
But in the end, the Church spoke.
All of Christendom defers to her in this matter. At least as far as the canon of the NT
This is huge, Jon…
All of Christendom defers to the Church on this matter.
I am confused. You view Revelation, 2 John, 3 John, Hebrews differently than the “universally attested books”?
What infallibility means is that the Church did not err.
If you don’t believe she is infallible, then where do you believe she erred in discerning the 27 book canon of the NT?
P
PRmerger
Guest
That’s the beauty of it, Per Crucem. You don’t have to be infallible.
Because the Church already is.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Excellent.
So what rule and standard do you use to tell you that Hebrews is inspired?
P
PRmerger
Guest
So the church that you attended as an AoG is the same one you attend today?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Where are the souls that you are praying for? In hell? Can your prayers deliver them from hell?
In heaven? Why do saints in heaven need your prayers?
I don’t understand…
P
PRmerger
Guest
Excellent.
So are you comfortable with the state of “governance” of Christendom today?
Do you believe that the Rev. Fred Phelps is part of this apostolic leadership?
What about this guy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Luis_de_Jes%C3%BAs_Miranda
And this guy claims that the writings of St. Paul are satanic in origin? Do you believe he is part of the apostolic leadership? lasttrumpet.org/paul_false_apostle.htm
And how do we gauge this?
P
pocohombre
Guest
Yes thank you.There were seven letters to seven city churches(one of them Rome) that are believed authentic(7 others are spurious). Of the 7 he may mention bishops of most cities but none from Rome, though he wrote to the church at Rome. It is like hi father bill at antioch and hi father james at smyrna and hi father frank at philadelphia and hi folks at rome.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Can you rightly discern the Word from which to judge such things for yourself ? Does not the Body teach us to discern also, or do we just follow orders ? Are we not friends with the Almighty and He shares his “mysteries” with us ? Yes, there are special giftings, even offices and differing levels of faith etc. but there is also one baptism into His family,into His bloodline. Everything we need to fulfill our destiny and good works in the Lord are set and in motion,including His mode of governance.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Post # 940 may help for PR asked something similar.
I think you mean symbolic and literal from CC point of view. Hard to prove they believed in transubstantiation in 1st century.
Jews are allowed differing views. Don’t think that is the only one.
It is clear, and clear that we have two differing views. Interesting that both sides quote Augustine.
Yes, and right after Jesus said, “… this is my blood”, he said, " I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom is come."
The Tertullian quote (On Modesty-ch 21) has everything to do with suceession. He says Peters “gift” of keys, binding. losing was only for Peter.- “you presume that the power of binding and losing has derived to you, that is to every church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord,” Someone here quoted Tertullian and so I did also, though as you state some were kicked out for heresy like Tertullain, so he is problematic on some issues.
My point still stands that I don’t think Cyprian (based upon his interfacing with the bishop of Rome) would agree with the final evolution of the Papacy and including and up to the infallibility decree.
Of whom did Jesus refer to when he told the apostles that those who are for Christ are not against Him ? The apostles thought they had a “club” going during their 3 years with the earthly Lord but Jesus corrected them. Is there a club today ?
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
That’s just ridiculous.
He only mentions a specific bishop in the following letters:
letter to the Trallians
Letter to the magnesians
Letter to the Ephesians Note Onesimus is mentioned in Col 4:9 and Philemon 1:10…So Ignatius was discussing and praising this bishop and yet you reject his writings?
Writings such as:
“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. …] Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. …] Whatsoever [the bishop] shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.” (St. Ignatius: Letter to the Smyrnaeans; Ch 8)
“Let all things therefore be done by you with good order in Christ. Let the laity be subject to the deacons; the deacons to the presbyters; the presbyters to the bishop; the bishop to Christ, even as He is to the Father.” (St. Ignatius: Letter to the Smyrnaeans; Ch 9)
Hello"???
Do you say Onesimus disagreed?
P
PRmerger
Guest
You keep posting non-sequiturs, poco.
In your response to JonS above I was thinking, “Am I not in on the conversation between poco and Jon? Am I missing something? Why is poco talking about the 7 churches?” And then I realized, “Oh, poco is not really responding to JonS’s arguments.”
That is also what you are doing here in this response.
Please address my questions, poco. Thanks.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
If the Catholic Church had taken a wrong turn, Luther would have been correct to point that out.We don’t say that He did. There was a small hiccup in the late 15th, early 16th century. But the Lutheran Reformation corrected it. God is faithful
However, he didn’t just point the driver back to the highway it was supposed to be on. Luther got off the bus, or was thrown off after creating a commotion, and then built his own ox-cart based on new ideas (sola scriptura, sola fide, etc.) and continued on his merry way picking up passengers as he went.
The bus driver may have taken Luther’s directions back to the main highway into account, but it was the DRIVER who made the corrections you refer to…not Luther. Luther wasn’t steering the bus.
Finally, I’m not denying that the folks in the wagon will get to the ultimate destination that God intends, but I do deny that God ever intended for the crowd to rely on anyone other than the man that He licensed to drive the bus.
P
Per_Crucem
Guest
If I have to have an infallible authority to tell me what Scripture is, then what is the infallible authority that tells me the Church is infallible?That’s the beauty of it, Per Crucem. You don’t have to be infallible.
Because the Church already is.
P
Per_Crucem
Guest
No…God is outside of time, and so our prayers are eternally effectual. Can we say that the loved one we prayed for today who has been deceased for 200 years was not converted in their lifetime because of our prayers being answered by God when that individual was living? The same is true of their eternal rest and peace with the Lord. Purgatory is simply absent from eastern tradition, yet they’ve always prayed for the dead. Early church prayers for the dead had no referent to purgatory.Where are the souls that you are praying for? In hell? Can your prayers deliver them from hell?
In heaven? Why do saints in heaven need your prayers?
I don’t understand…
P
Per_Crucem
Guest
Sure…I understand that Randy. You don’t agree and that’s fine. Catholics and Lutherans are united by the same Holy Baptism. Not that the dividing issues aren’t important but at the end of the day…meh, not worth arguing over. IMO, the the way Christ and His gospel was obscured in the medieval church was enough to warrant Luther’s commotion. It still is.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Jesus
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
I feel this is not at all in conflict with the doctrine of purgatory.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Perhaps you would agree with this view of Purgatory;
"The transforming ‘moment’ of this encounter cannot be quantified by the measurements of earthly time. It is, indeed, not eternal but a transition, and yet trying to qualify it as of ‘short’ or ‘long’ duration on the basis of temporal measurements derived from physics would be naive and unproductive. The ‘temporal measure’ of this encounter lies in the unsoundable depths of existence, in a passing-over where we are burned ere we are transformed. To measure such Existenzzeit, such an ‘existential time,’ in terms of the time of this world would be to ignore the specificity of the human spirit in its simultaneous relationship with, and differentation from, the world.
. . .
"[Purgatory] is the inwardly necessary process of transformation in which a person becomes capable of Christ, capable of God and thus capable of unity with the whole communion of saints.
. . .
“Encounter with the Lord is this transformation.”…
–Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life, p. 230-231
I have written extensively on Purgatory on my blog if your interested.
findingthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/2013/02/cs-lewis-believed-in-purgatory-rightly.html?m=0
- Status