H
Hisalone
Guest
I have, some of my favorite saints of God were Catholic.
To understand the Catholic Church history you need to read some of the accounts that were written by those that were destroyed by her.
- Status
To understand the Catholic Church history you need to read some of the accounts that were written by those that were destroyed by her.
H
Hisalone
Guest
Hi Brian thanks for attempting to mediate this discussion.
I do not buy the Catholic definition of themselves. They are not who they say they are. They are not the first century church, they are radically different.As you can see this does not sit well with them.
How do you approach Christianity? From a Jewish perspective or from a Protestants?
U
ufamtobie
Guest
H
Hisalone
Guest
The two Francis’ Xavier and Assisi
R
Robbinson
Guest
Hi Hisalone:
Re: your last question, I have an inherent bias of looking at Christianity from a Jewish perspective as that is my heritage and background, and is also the “lense” through which the initial recipients of the gospel (jews) would have understood and studied the gospel message.
That being said, I recognize that very early in church history (as recorded in Acts) and as part of God’s explicit plan in his commissioning of Paul to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (and as fortold in Isaiah that the Messiah would become a light to the Gentile nations), the gospel was spread throughout the nations and ultimately the Gentiles (as a culture, and bringing their perpesctive) dominated Christianity. This is God’s plan until after the full allotment of Gentiles come in.
So - I while I do believe it is very important to understand the Jewish roots of the faith in order to fully appreciate the richness and teachings of the apostles (Jews largely teaching and preaching to jews), I also recognize that scripture suggests it was not God’s plan to make “Christianity” another expression of Judaism (at least not an expression necessarily bearing a start resemblance to the Mosaic law and the traditions of Judaism). That debate was had in Acts (Jerusalem counsel) and evidence of that debate (and its resolution) appears in Galations and Hebrews.
As to whether the Catholic Church has remained true to the teachings of the apostles - that is a different/larger question.
Blessings,
Brian
L
Lampo
Guest
Do you like this St. Francis?
“Let us run to Mary, and, as her little children, cast ourselves into her arms with a perfect confidence.”
– St. Francis de Sales
H
Hisalone
Guest
Thanks for your answer.
Does your Sunday service more resemble a Catholic Mass or a Protestant service.
H
Hisalone
Guest
As I said in the another post No one got it all right except one,--------------- not even SolaChristo
R
Robbinson
Guest
We worship in a Protestant Church (Christian Missionary Alliance).
That being said, I find the liturgy of the Catholic mass very interesting. I’m happy to have a PM exchange with you so as not to de-rail the thread.
Blessings,
Brian
L
Lampo
Guest
No one got it all right according to whom?
H
happilycatholic
Guest
I wonder if our Jewish brothers and sisters would say our Bible is Jewish
The Bible is the Word of the Lord. It “belongs” only unto Him who inspired it. It rightly cannot be named or claimed only taken freely as a gift.
Cherish it. Don’t argue over it.
HC
H
happilycatholic
Guest
Hisalone:
I would respectfully respond that Christ came to this world to effect change. Change is not an idication of error. The Church is the *living *body of our Lord, not a dead stagnant body, but a living, breathing, growing and ever-changing body.
If change bothers you in such a way, you should convert and remain Orthodox Jew. That would be the only way you could possibly avoid change.
One other note, the Church does not rely on any man to define it. It has been defined for over 2000 years. And insomuch as you percieve the effect your personal definition has on it’s members as “not sitting well”, you are mistaken. What doesn’t sit well is not your opinion, but the fact that your opinion infers much more than the Church’s position. Your opinion clearly infers that those that are catholic are less than what they believe they are.
That is judgement (based on a less than accurate definition of the Church) plain and simple. That is what doesn’t sit well with catholics.
God Bless.
HC
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Hisalone, Which books of the Old Testament did the Apostles accept as Scripture? Did they accept the 46 books as in the Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible or the 39 books as in the King James version? The Septuagint was accepted among the Hellenistic sect of Judaism (of which St. Paul was a member) and this canon did indeed include the same Old Testament books as the present-day Catholic Bible. In addition, the entire New Testament was written in Greek (Hellenist) with the exception of the Gospel of St. Matthew, which was written in Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ). Over 85% of the quotes from the Old Testament that are used in the New Testament are from the Septuagint. The Palestinian Old Testament canon was not compiled until between 70-90 A.D. and then, it was done so by the non-Christian Jews in violent reaction to early Judeo-Christianity. The Palestinian canon was the one chosen by Martin Luther based on the acceptance of it by the 16th century German-Jewish community of Luther’s time. This canon excludes the seven books that were accepted by the Apostles as Scripture. Why was the canon of the Protestant Old Testament decided by Jews and not Christians? In addition, why did Luther attempt to eliminate the Book of St. James and the Book of Revelation? Is it because the first contradicted his dogma of “faith alone” as opposed to grace, faith and works “combined?” And the second book proving the Catholic Church’s stance on nothing “impure” entering into Heaven therefore “necessitating” purgation ?
H
Hisalone
Guest
Was Jesus a Palestinian Jew or an Alexandrian Jew?
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Thats a good question may be thats some thing you can check it out and let us know,
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
What did Martin Luther, the Protestant Reformer, state about the Bible? In his “Commentary On St. John,” he stated the following: “We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we have received It from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of It at all.” Regardless of what non-Catholic Christians may think or say, according to secular, objective historians, the Catholic Church alone preserved Sacred Scripture throughout the persecution of the Roman Empire and during the Dark Ages. All non-Catholic Christian denominations owe the existence of the Bible to the Catholic Church alone. Why did God choose the Catholic Church to preserve Scripture if It is not His Church?
H
happilycatholic
Guest
Respectfully to all Christian Brothers and Sisters:
I think we must be careful in our endeavors to try and find who is the rightful “owner” or the “church” who must be given all that is “owed” to it for the trust of the Inspired Word of God.
While I do believe that God intrusted His Word to the Holy Catholic Church, I do not believe the Church owns the Holy Scriptures, nor do I believe the Church’s position on the matter is that the whole of the Christian community has a dept to pay to her for canonizing of the Scriptures and subsequent safe-keeping of them.
IMHO, the Church takes on the safe-keeping as a commission, a Holy Assignment of sorts that comes with much responsibility and accountability.
That, cannot be reconciled with ownership.
I would say please let’s not diminish God’s Word to something to argue over like chattel. Let’s suffice it to say, as Christians we are thankful that the Lord, by and through His own means perserved the Holy Scriptures for all mankind.
K?
HC
I think we must be careful in our endeavors to try and find who is the rightful “owner” or the “church” who must be given all that is “owed” to it for the trust of the Inspired Word of God.
While I do believe that God intrusted His Word to the Holy Catholic Church, I do not believe the Church owns the Holy Scriptures, nor do I believe the Church’s position on the matter is that the whole of the Christian community has a dept to pay to her for canonizing of the Scriptures and subsequent safe-keeping of them.
IMHO, the Church takes on the safe-keeping as a commission, a Holy Assignment of sorts that comes with much responsibility and accountability.
That, cannot be reconciled with ownership.
I would say please let’s not diminish God’s Word to something to argue over like chattel. Let’s suffice it to say, as Christians we are thankful that the Lord, by and through His own means perserved the Holy Scriptures for all mankind.
K?
HC
R
Robbinson
Guest
Beautifully said.
A
AwGusTeen
Guest
I see – and who would that be? Can you provide us with those sources?
S
Sword_Brethren
Guest
The 1st century church was devoid of Luther’s practices and customs. There was no doctines of, Justification by faith, sacramental union, the priesthood is universal, no visible Church,and sola scripture. All these doctrines were made up by Luther. I know it is hard for you to come to terms with that. Your beliefs are nothing like that of the 1st century church.
- Status