Your TOP TEN!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ziggamafu
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Ziggamafu

Guest
You are face to face with a (miraculously) open-minded, Fundamentalist, King-James-Only, Reformed, Baptist, Protestant.

What are the TOP TEN evidences, supports, proofs, etc. that the Catholic Church of Rome really is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that Christ wills all of his sheep to belong to? We’re not talking “defense” on this side of the court, we’re talking “offense”! So no excusing Catholic beliefs! 😃
 
Okay, if you are saying open-minded and Fundamentalist in the same sentence, I must assume that the person is not a committed Fundamentalist. Essentially, this person is really a “free agent Christian”. However, that is a hard assumption to make considering the other qualifications that you’ve used. A KJV-Only Fundamentalist is usually about as doctrinally set in his was as the Pope. But, I’ll play along with the hypothetical situation.
  1. If the assertion that the bible is the sole rule of faith, what did the evangelizers use until 397 when the canon of the New Testament was set? What was the sole rule of faith up to that point. If the verbal testamony of the Church was authoritative during the begining of Christianity, why is it not valid now? Where in the bible does it say that the verbal authority of the church becomes invalid after a specific date?
  2. If Christ was only speaking hypothetically about eating His body and drinking his blood in John chapter 6, why didn’t he clarify His position when many of the people that were following him left, claiming his teaching was too hard?
  3. If Peter doesn’t have a pre-eminent place in Christian history, why is he always listed first when the Apostles are named. Why is only Peter given the task of “feeding his sheep”? Why is only Peter given the keys? Why does Peter have the vision of “the unclean” in Acts, not Paul? Why is it Peter who first starts witnessing after the Pentacost?
  4. If baptism isn’t necessary, but rather a symbolic show of faith, why does Peter claim that baptism is what saves you? Why does Paul call it the “new circumcision”? Why does Paul say “we die with Christ in baptism”? Why does Christ say that one must be “born of water and spirit” and then go baptize people with the disciples immediately thereafter? Why did Christ himself get baptized?
  5. If works are not necessary, why was Jesus’ ministry centered around doing good works? Didn’t Jesus demonstrate His power through good works? Didn’t Jesus command us to “do the will of the Father”. Doesn’t the word “do” imply activity? Isn’t loving God and neighbor something that requires action?
  6. If Mary isn’t the Mother of God, why did Elizabeth call her that while under the influence of the Holy Spirit? If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is God, doesn’t that make Mary the Mother of God, or is there some point at which Jesus is not God?
  7. If Jesus didn’t intend a sacremental Church and establish a ministerial priesthood, why did he give certain powers and authority to only the disciples? He didn’t give the power to forgive sins to everyone, He didn’t celebrate the last supper with everyone, why is this?
  8. If salvation is a one time, once and for all event, why did Jesus say “Not everyone who says ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father”, and “he who persists to the end will be saved”?
  9. If the Church was not intended to have a hierarchal structure, why does Paul mention in several different letters, the qualifications of the offices within the Church?
  10. If Christ intended to have a multitude of independent churches, why did he say He wasbuilding his Church (singular). Why does Paul exhort everyone to be of one mind and one body?
 
40.png
Ziggamafu:
You are face to face with a (miraculously) open-minded, Fundamentalist, King-James-Only, Reformed, Baptist, Protestant.

What are the TOP TEN evidences, supports, proofs, etc. that the Catholic Church of Rome really is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that Christ wills all of his sheep to belong to? We’re not talking “defense” on this side of the court, we’re talking “offense”! So no excusing Catholic beliefs! 😃
Is he Fundamentalist, Reformed or Baptist? The three don’t really go together. Well Fundamentalist and Baptist do. But the Reformed at quite different than Fundamentalists and Baptists. Sorry to nit-pick but it is like saying a" Catholic, Lutheran, Methodists NAB-only type". Some of these things don’t go together. 🙂

Mel
 
That is simply awesome, Apologia. That should go on an apologetics cheat-sheet or glossy index card.
 
Excellent list, Apologia! 👍 I think I’ll save a copy. If reputation points were still in use, I’d give you a fist ful of them!:cool:
 
Very cool. 👍 Can you copy and paste that into a new post and put verse references into each question you state? It really would be a good cheat sheet…

Anyone else care to try and add to the list?

Oh, and one can be Calvinist (Reformed) while being a Baptist who uses the King James Bible only and stick to the Fundamentalist mentality of that “old time religion”; Sola Scriptora, Sola Fide, holding to a crazy list of rules and taking 100% of the Bible literally.
 
40.png
Ziggamafu:
Oh, and one can be Calvinist (Reformed) while being a Baptist who uses the King James Bible only and stick to the Fundamentalist mentality of that “old time religion”; Sola Scriptora, Sola Fide, holding to a crazy list of rules and taking 100% of the Bible literally.
Not consistantly. And they would have a hard time finding a place to worship. You can’t be both a Presbyterian (a Reformed Church) and a Baptist. Reformed Baptist is really just a Baptist with a small bit of Calvinistic Predestination instead of Arminianism. They tend to reject every other aspect of the Reformed faith. Reformed is a system. They are not KJV-only, they baptize their babies and they are not strict memorialists. And they tend to drink and dance. So they are not really fundies either. 😃

I was Reformed and they are decidedly non-fundamentalist even anti.

Mel
 
40.png
Melchior:
Not consistantly. And they would have a hard time finding a place to worship. You can’t be both a Presbyterian (a Reformed Church) and a Baptist. Reformed Baptist is really just a Baptist with a small bit of Calvinistic Predestination instead of Arminianism. They tend to reject every other aspect of the Reformed faith. Reformed is a system. They are not KJV-only, they baptize their babies and they are not strict memorialists. And they tend to drink and dance. So they are not really fundies either. 😃

I was Reformed and they are decidedly non-fundamentalist even anti.

Mel
Wow…you know, I think it just further shows the fragmented denominations of Protestantism because I grew up in Michigan and every church my family went to (four of them, while I was around) was exactly what I posted. They would put themselves under the labels and then qualify them by saying things like, “just because we feel we most identify with many of the teachings these groups have a traditional history of, it doesn’t mean we agree at all times with everything they teach.” Yet it was always claimed that they were the church closest to the Truth. Crazy, huh?
 
40.png
Ziggamafu:
Wow…you know, I think it just further shows the fragmented denominations of Protestantism because I grew up in Michigan and every church my family went to (four of them, while I was around) was exactly what I posted. They would put themselves under the labels and then qualify them by saying things like, “just because we feel we most identify with many of the teachings these groups have a traditional history of, it doesn’t mean we agree at all times with everything they teach.” Yet it was always claimed that they were the church closest to the Truth. Crazy, huh?
I agree. It is crazy. Every man his own Pope.

Mel
 
and now I get a few emails every day that promise I can get ordained throught the Internet. I can be a Reverend!
 
In my city we have an evangelical church that started as a man preaching from a microwave cart to 9 people and now it has become one giant assembly of God church. By the way, there’s another one not to far away and both are competing. But why, I mean there is only one Bible??? They say the Bible is so easy to understand.
 
Hi,

I am not catholic and read a NKJV bible and I believe it is an authoritive work. Jesus gave testimony to the old testament and the new was written by people, who like Jesus, had works as a witness to their position in Christ or were direct close associates of the apostles. The bible tells me to hold onto the truth I have because overriding all of this is the Holy Spirit the real author. Now since I have the Holy Spirit as Comforter and Guide there is not any need to keep updating the Holy Scripture after the chosen apostles had finished their witnessing. If you need the extra written word handed down by various people I would ask you where is the Holy Spirit in your life. You seem to be looking other than to Jesus and the Holy Spirit for your answers. Why can’t you trust Him to lead you. The more writings you follow the greater the chance of being led astray. Doesnt the bible say that satan can disguise himself as an angel of light. Who here is prideful enough to think they can recognise this disguised angel of light.

One of my problems with the catholic faith, and I know so very little about it, is all the rules you have. Now if you believe in these rules then they are true for you and if you break them you have sinned. This is the very reason Christ came, to free you from sinning through rules and laws. Rules and laws are for the flesh, striving to live in obedience to the Holy Spirit means you are under grace. There is a huge difference. I dont understand why you keep looking for rules as if there was some comfort there. In rules, you must end up guilty.

Your only strength is in the Holy Spirit. In Him you will overcome. Knowledge and rules wont help strenghten you, but knowledge will help you recognise the Truth. The Catholic rules seem to teach overcoming the flesh is achieved through punishing it. If you use physical force you are 1) Damaging God’s Holy Temple 2) Not listening to the Holy Spirit and racing ahead of God’s timing and trying to do it by your own strength. If you perserve in these acts you willl grieve the Holy Spirit and He will turn His face away and an evil spirit will come into your life.
edwin
 
Your only strength is in the Holy Spirit.
My strength is in Jesus-Christ.

“And behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age.” (Matt 28:20)

“And I also, I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my assembly, and hades’ gates shall not prevail against it.” (Matt 16:18)
 
Welcome Edwin,
40.png
edwinG:
Hi,I am not catholic and read a NKJV bible and I believe it is an authoritive work.
No one here is disputing any particular version of Scripture, that’s one main point they were making, there are several, use them all. Some are better for general readability, some are better for serious study, and some are better for literal translation, etc. I, as a Catholic, often associate people who will only use one translation, and reject any other, as being closed minded. It’s an obvious prejudice of mine, please forgive me. As long as you use Scripture as was canonized in the 4th century, and includes all of the books used by our Lord, Jesus the Christ. Some protestant bibles do not include all of the Old Testament, books which our savior used. They reject books used by Jesus. I sincerely hope you use a complete bible.
40.png
edwinG:
Jesus gave testimony to the old testament and the new was written by people, who like Jesus, had works as a witness to their position in Christ or were direct close associates of the apostles.
Well, yes and no, the people who wrote Scripture were not “like Jesus”. Sorry, no one has ever or will ever be “like Jesus”, He is God. I am not saying I believe there is error in Scripture, there is none, however, it is written by man, inspired by God. Another valid point is that the languages spoken in biblical times are very different to modern languages. Even though the original Word contains no errors, meanings and teachings can be misconstrued by translations. We must always keep in mind the message, ( 2 Tm 3,14) not the language.
40.png
edwinG:
The bible tells me to hold onto the truth I have because overriding all of this is the Holy Spirit the real author.
the bible tells you also to hold on to the traditions passed down to you. To hold on to the “oral” as well as the written. Jesus did not tell His Apostles to write a book. “The Church of the living God” is the “pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tm 3,14-15), not (only) the Written Word.
40.png
edwinG:
Now since I have the Holy Spirit as Comforter and Guide there is not any need to keep updating the Holy Scripture after the chosen apostles had finished their witnessing.
Who has updated Holy Scripture? Are you referring to the Bible as Scripture, or are you discussing all Scripture to include Tradition?
40.png
edwinG:
If you need the extra written word handed down by various people I would ask you where is the Holy Spirit in your life.
The fact that the Holy Spirit is still with us today, as our Lord promised, would lead me to conclude that not only is the written word to be followed but the Church that Jesus established.
This is turning into a silly debate; “them” against “us” and that is not Christian. As you said” One of my problems with the catholic faith, and I know so very little about it”. I agree, one of the problems is you “know so very little about it”, you’ve been fed anti-Catholic rhetoric so long you know no better. I invite you to learn, the more you learn about the Catholic Church the closer you’ll come to the Church Jesus established. I strongly recommend a book written by Karl Keating, “Catholicism and Fundamentalism”
May the peace and love of our Lord, Jesus the Christ, be with you and may the Holy Spirit guide you to truth.
Tom
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top