K
Kaninchen
Guest
Perhaps CAF should come up with a foot-stamping smiley, then you’d have to write less.
- Status
D
Denise1957
Guest
It would be nice to have a foot-stamping smiley, but it wouldn’t be able to take the place of proper explanations, from a Catholic perspective. Words, and sometimes a lot of them, are needed for that. 
K
kildare
Guest
Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD. Leviticus 19:18
It goes for both Jews and Catholics, is the heart of what both believe, and yet is often cast aside at the first opportunity by both!
It goes for both Jews and Catholics, is the heart of what both believe, and yet is often cast aside at the first opportunity by both!
R
rinnie
Guest
Where in the world did what I said get so out of hand by saying that I do not need to study scripture to have the truth revealed to me because the Holy Spirit has done this for me every single Sunday in the Catholic Church.
Every single sunday we have the O.T that shows where Christ lived out every part of it in the N.T.
I said that we do not need to READ the word as it is revealed to us in scripture we have the CC. We got it all. What is missing in the Catholic Church that we are missing for our Salvation.
Jesus Christ did it all. He lived out every single thing that was told in the O.T. What is it that I said that denotes the O.T. The N.T shows us Christ fulfilled the O.T.
To say that I am wrong you simply have to do ONE simple thing. Show me ONE thing in the O.T. that Jesus Christ did not fulfill.
Do it, show me. All I said is simply this and let me repeat myself. Once and for all. If there is anything that we need to follow, know, it is revealed to us in the Catholic Church. We do not need to know scripture Old or New to know this.
Jesus left us his Spirit the Holy Spirit the Holy Catholic Apostolic Church to lead us to all Truth. Where do you feel that I misled anyone in saying the RCC is all that I need.
Please show me where the teaching of the RCC has ever taken away the teaching of any part of this first novel you have talked about.
We are taught EVERYTHING Jesus Christ is the new Adam. The blessed Mother is the New Eve. Please show me where this is not Catholikc Teaching.
If you are not saying that I am saying this I apologize. But if you are please prove this claim
K
kildare
Guest
Abraham rejoiced to see the day of our lord.
Rinnie. Far be it from me to accuse you of anything. I’m merely pointing out the unity of Christ with the works of the Lord an his chosen people in the OT.
You have too. I hope there was no misunderstanding
Rinnie. Far be it from me to accuse you of anything. I’m merely pointing out the unity of Christ with the works of the Lord an his chosen people in the OT.
You have too. I hope there was no misunderstanding
R
rinnie
Guest
I am glad! I was not quite sure but I am now.
R
rinnie
Guest
You missed my point. I am saying God did not leave us ONLY scripture, if God only left us only scripture we would be a SS faith. Do you see my point. It was never that the word of God in the O.T and the N.T was unimportant. That was not my point at all. My Point was and let me make it Clearer God Left us the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church is not just scripture that we can make say what we want it to say. God left us the Catholic Church that TEACHES SCRIPTURE to keep in light with the O.T.Do you not see where this happened in the O.T. How they were talking the word of God and making it what they wanted it to do. How they were forcing the People in the temple to abandon the old and give money to the temple. Jesus told them (chairty begins at home) I am sure you get my point.
That is the biggest problem with SS it is not always tied in property into the O.T. You can’t have the word of God with just one book. The O.T is just as important to us as the N.T.
Where the problem begins is most of the O.T was already lived out through Jesus. Everything that was said to happen did indeed happen. The N.T. is where we are now.
The N.T showed us that the O.T was indeed fulfilled it was the Old Law. Now we have the New Law and that is why we live now. The N.T is an on going book. It is where we are now. To have the N.T fulfilled like the O.T is to have Jesus return like it said it would.
We know how that is going to happen he told us. He will come back down through the clouds the same way he left. But that us only his human body. His Holy Spirit is here today with us in the Church leading us.
R
rinnie
Guest
Actually it is the total opposite. It is the lens of the O.T that we can come to a clear understanding of the N.T not vice versa.
I do not see where you think that the Church had abandoned the O.T. The O.T is just as important to the Catholic faith as the N.T.
If I somehow led you to believe that the CC was only based on the N.T please let me be the first to clear this up.
All that I said is the O.T was fulfilled through Jesus Christ. He did all that was predicted. We no longer have to go by the Old law we now have the New Law.
But that in no way wipes out the commandmemts of God. We still must live by the ten commandments. Jesus did not change them.
Jesus opened up heaven for us and paid for our sins on the cross. We now can enter heaven he took away death. He made it possible for us to be forgiven here on earth by repentance (confession). He gave us the Bread from heaven his body and blood again in the Church. This is all possible now in the Church. Everything is in the Church that we need for Eternal life.
The Savior of the world that was to be sent in the O.T has been sent. He did all that was said needed to be done. One of his last words on the cross told us that. He said simply it is FINISHED. And it was. He fulfilled Scripture. The O.L was fulfilled.
R
rinnie
Guest
But it is fact let it be written. Was it not written. Just like 2=2=4 was it not written and history to understand this is basic math.
God never left us anything that was not History. He left us a Church. There is your proof. Now if you say this did not happen and there were no Apostles you have people who have testified to this.
People can say anything they want. You can have a person say to you right now that they do not believe George Washington was our president. What can you do? You have history to prove this. Just like we have Popes in History who can prove this.
But how can you say to someone I showed you history. And they say well I don’t believe you. You just made it up.
See what I am saying. You cannot make anyone believe something they want to reject no matter what you do.
But we do not ONLY have faith, we have HISTORY. We have both. Our History our proof is we can show the Church that was started at Pentecost. We have the Popes from St Peter on to prove this.
But look even today, many protestants still reject History. They deny that the first Church was the CC. There is nothing we can do. But we do have proof its here today. The Church its still here and can be shown from History it has survived. But as I said people will still reject Truth there is nothing you can do.
God gave us 2 things Reason and History. If you reject Reason and History what can a person do. Nothing.You can’t teach someone who reject’s both. Am athiest will accept some history but reject other. Where is the reason there.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
I’ve come to the conclusion that you haven’t got the slightest idea of what I was talking about.
M
mdrummer5
Guest
Your comparison to George Washington is flawed given that there was record of his life while he was living it, there were documents he wrote and signed and portraits painted of him while he was still alive. In fact it’s been awhile but if I recall my school days I learned about George Washington in history class because the entire world accepts his existence as fact. Anyone who argues otherwise or that 2+2 =/=4 is simply crazy. The gospels were not written until at least 15 years after Jesus’ death. For an atheist or anyone who doesn’t believe the NT this is a strong argument, heck as one who believes it’s a strong argument. It is undeniably possible that elements of the gospels could have been made up. I personally don’t believe they were but I’m not so blind to logic that I refuse to see the possibility.But it is fact let it be written. Was it not written. Just like 2=2=4 was it not written and history to understand this is basic math.
God never left us anything that was not History. He left us a Church. There is your proof. Now if you say this did not happen and there were no Apostles you have people who have testified to this.
People can say anything they want. You can have a person say to you right now that they do not believe George Washington was our president. What can you do? You have history to prove this. Just like we have Popes in History who can prove this.
But how can you say to someone I showed you history. And they say well I don’t believe you. You just made it up.
See what I am saying. You cannot make anyone believe something they want to reject no matter what you do.
But we do not ONLY have faith, we have HISTORY. We have both. Our History our proof is we can show the Church that was started at Pentecost. We have the Popes from St Peter on to prove this.
But look even today, many protestants still reject History. They deny that the first Church was the CC. There is nothing we can do. But we do have proof its here today. The Church its still here and can be shown from History it has survived. But as I said people will still reject Truth there is nothing you can do.
You can’t teach someone who reject’s both. Am athiest will accept some history but reject other. Where is the reason there.
Fact is indisputable. One of the books I’ve read recently (which I recommend to anyone) is The Case for Christ. In it every person the author interviews is a devout Christian who makes their living studying theology, specifically Christianity. This is what they do… all day every day. And while they are easily considered experts in the field, when presented with the objection of the gospels being written after Christ’s death (or any other objection for that matter) and asked whether or not it poses a problem in the reliability of them they don’t respond with “no and here’s why”… it’s “I don’t think so” not “I know this to be false” or “I know this to be true”. It’s all theory. Faith is just a matter of which theory one chooses to believe in.
R
rinnie
Guest
You are missing what I am saying. You could show someone a picture, birth certificate, etc. If they refuse to accept the evidence at hand and say that it was all made us there is nothing you can do to convince them otherwise.
Jesus said it himself. If someone refuses to accept the truth there is nothing you can do to make them. Like the story of the RIch man tells it all. He said let me go back and tell my brothers what I know now. Like our lord said it does not matter if they will not accept my word they are not going to accept yours. That is the Point. Nothing will convince them.
Do you really think that if Jesus signed something it would make a difference? Were not the Disciples and Apostles there, and did not thousands testify to the truth. Like Jesus said you either accept it or you don’t.
As far as a picture of George Washington someone could show you a picture taken in that era of Uncle Bob and even you could not see the difference. My point is if someone is determined to not accept the truth as Christ told us, nothing you can do or say will convince them otherwise.
But yet the ironic part of the whole thing is people will accept GW but not Jesus Christ. What about Adam and Eve are they questioned? I don’t know I am asking. But I believe my point has been driven.
R
rinnie
Guest
Also let me say one more thing. Your most educated Catholic’s are your ex-protestants who tried to prove the CC wrong. When they could not dispute a fact in their mind, while on the outside may have even showed where doubt could come into play on our side, the doubt was really in their own mind and could not ignore it any longer.
M
mdrummer5
Guest
No I’m not. I understand what you’re saying… you’re saying that Jesus’ being the Son of God is a fact and you’re wrong. I share your belief that he is… but it’s not a fact.
R
rinnie
Guest
:yup:
R
rinnie
Guest
But with aside what I am saying is we do not have the power to make anyone believe anything they do not want to believe.
Just like we canf orce people to do things, we still cannot tell them how to think, what to feel and what to believe. God made sure of that.
He gave everyone free will to accept or reject anything they want in their heart. That is how much he loves us. He would never force his love on us. But he wants us to have it, and is always there to freely give it. That’s another fact
By the way this is a little off the subject but today is world prayer day. People of all faiths and walks of life are called together to pray together in one place. Pretty neat huh! :yup:
Just like we canf orce people to do things, we still cannot tell them how to think, what to feel and what to believe. God made sure of that.
He gave everyone free will to accept or reject anything they want in their heart. That is how much he loves us. He would never force his love on us. But he wants us to have it, and is always there to freely give it. That’s another fact
By the way this is a little off the subject but today is world prayer day. People of all faiths and walks of life are called together to pray together in one place. Pretty neat huh!
:yup:
R
rinnie
Guest
But I am saying that there is History to back up what we believe also. We have Popes who have things that are written also. We have Bishops who have oral teachings that came down from the Original Apostles. It is just not faith in God alone. We do have things we can validate.
We can trace the Catholic Church to the Church of Pentecost just by saying St Peter was there and the Pope are direct decendants from him. We do have more then faith we also have History.
And the fact is Christ did say he was the Son of God. Christ did say he would die on the cross and raise again and he did. We have witnesses to this. That is a fact. Christ did everything in the O. T. that was predicted this is a fact. Sworn by the Apostles.
And this is not only by faith. Because why did many who did not believe in faith believe after they saw it with their own eyes. Our own doubting Thomas for one. As Jesus said Thomas you believe because you have seen, but blessed are those who believe who do not see.
So the fact is Jesus said he would die and rise again and he did. that is a fact.
M
mdrummer5
Guest
You simply don’t comprehend the difference between fact and opinion. The fact that none of this was recorded until several years after Christ’s death suggests to nonbelievers that parts of it are fictional. You can not prove they are not. So, it’s not fact. You can site the testimony of witnesses all you want to and I’m inclined to agree that they’re compelling arguments and they are in fact why I believe (among other reasons)… but they still can’t be proven to be factual. You and I accept them as factual because of our faith… but they can not be proven as such.
However, I can see that you’ve taken the strength in your belief to the dangerous point of refusing to acknowledge other beliefs as plausible because you would have to concede that you might be wrong (which is simply a matter of pride) so we can just agree to disagree. I won’t debate with someone who refuses to accept the fact that they might be wrong.
However, I can see that you’ve taken the strength in your belief to the dangerous point of refusing to acknowledge other beliefs as plausible because you would have to concede that you might be wrong (which is simply a matter of pride) so we can just agree to disagree. I won’t debate with someone who refuses to accept the fact that they might be wrong.
K
kildare
Guest
I guess all “facts” in history should come with a health warning. World war I has now gone out of living memory and even though there is photographic and film evidence, we know that much of the footage was restaged in the 20s. What might a future historian make of the myth of the great war? Maybe it’s an extreme example bit my point is that much of the “Jesus never even existed” literature that we get nowadays exploits this very issue - namely the credibility of ancient historic documents and unfortunately I don’t think it is a reasonable analysis at all.
So we can take it as historic fact ( not scientific fact) that Jesus, Peter and Paul existed as real historic figures, like Mohammed or Martin Luther. The religion is therefore not a myth but an invention of real people, one of whom claimed to be the Son of God. Your perfectly entitled to reject the claims but the claims in themselves are not a fictitious fabrication of some later folks
So we can take it as historic fact ( not scientific fact) that Jesus, Peter and Paul existed as real historic figures, like Mohammed or Martin Luther. The religion is therefore not a myth but an invention of real people, one of whom claimed to be the Son of God. Your perfectly entitled to reject the claims but the claims in themselves are not a fictitious fabrication of some later folks
K
Kaninchen
Guest
There comes a point in these sorts of discussions where one has said what one wants to say and, to save giving continual offence, one should say no more.
The thing is, however, that demanding that “we should accept or reject the face value of the NT” because you consider no other interpretation as being valid is something you are welcome to demand but that’s not something others have to go along with.
- Status