Yes it is, but when one reads scripture or anything else, one must examine the context in which the word appears, not just make assumptions based upon something that one saw somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
|
Yes it is, but when one reads scripture or anything else, one must examine the context in which the word appears, not just make assumptions based upon something that one saw somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
The context is clear in John 6.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Jesus speaks of His flesh availing to eternal life.
And then Jesus speaks of THE flesh availing nothing.
It couldn't be clearer.
Sincerely,
De Maria
I believe that it is extremely clear, and cannot imagine how anyone who was not imposing their own theological system or that of their denomination could mistake what it is saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
We've been through this route once already - want to do it again?
The same verse that says "The Flesh", also refers to "The Spirit".
The same word in Greek is used for "The".
Are you saying that this does not refer to the Holy Spirit, but rather that any spirit can give life? Be consistent.
De Maria, Hi I'm back. What I meant bt a religious tradition, is that perhaps, you may have an understanding of the meaning, even though it may differ from mine, but the average Catholic has no idea, they learn a few stories but hardly, if ever read it for themselves.
I was brought up a Catholic, all my family are Catholics, but not one of them read the Bible. I even ask people that I meet, who are Catholic, about 1 in 10 actually own a Bible, but I haven't found one that actually reads it.
They believe in the traditions of men, perpetrated by the Universal Church, (Catholic Church, as you know), ask any one of them to explain the meaning of "saved by faith and not works", if you got one sensible answer out of 100, then you would be doing good.
The normal answer would be along the lines "I'm a Catholic!"
Every Catholic that I know, including me, when I was one, thinks nothing of going to a fortune teller, reading and believing Astrology, their star signs etc, believing in chance and luck, swear and curse, using Jesus name as a curse, getting outragously drunk, (I've even seen priests do this whilst carousing with women at a bar, they were regulars,) having sex out of marriage, using drugs, cheating, stealing,etc and still they consider themselves "good Catholics" and going to heaven, "just because they are Catholics". They may go to confession now and then, and go to Church, just to fulfill their religious duty.
Ask them anything about God or Jesus, and they either no nothing, or only the Christmas and easter story, or they say angrily, "I don't want to talk about that rubbish!"
They don't change, unless their lifestyle forces them to, through illness or prison.
A lot of good it does them, as far as I am concerned, you are welcome to your traditions, but I would much prefer the Power of God.
Just how many souls are you really saving, I think it would be better if they heeded the Lord's command,"
Rev. 18
4Then I heard another voice from heaven say:
"Come out of her, my people,
So that you will not share in her sins,
So that you will not receive any of her plagues;
5for her sins are piled up to heaven,
And God has remembered her crimes.
I'm sure that you know that many people believe the Mystery Babylon in Revelation is the Catholic Church, I hope it isn't, but I suspect that it is.
Mark 7
5So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?"
6He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
" 'These people honor me with their lips,
But their hearts are far from me.
7They worship me in vain;
Their teachings are but rules taught by men.' 8You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."
Keep smilin' :)
Exactly the social club + entitlement because you are this religion or that is what first made me wake up. I even remember back in the early 70's my church youth group met at one of the members house and had a drinking party and they dared the one guy to drink a bottle as fast as he could and he died. The pastor came and they covered up any blame on anybody's part. The whole incident made me realize how can you go to church for 2 hours a week and then live like the devil for the rest time. The guys in the church would stare at their watches in the fall and point at the watches for the pastor to know he was on his final countdown so they could get out early enough to get home to watch the football game.
I have said for years that even drug dealers say they are Christian because their grandma raised them TELLING them they are Christian so on grandma's word alone they believe it so.
The Bible Matt 7 even says that the do gooders of the Church will say Lord, Lord did we not [do all these good works] in your name and he will say depart from me
I am being consistent. It is you who is being inconsistent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Jesus consistently refers to HIS Flesh.
Then He refers to THE Flesh.
Obvious difference there.
So, it is you imposing your presuppositions into Scripture just as you imposed your presuppositions into Cardinal Newman's statement as has already been demonstrated.
Sincerely,
De Maria
Well, I find the same problem with the average Protestant. They know a few lines of Scripture which have generally been taught to them in a twisted manner. So although they recognized Scripture verses, they don't know Scripture at all because they don't know the true meaning of the words.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Wilson
But Catholics listen to Scripture read every time they go to Mass and the interpretation of the Scripture is correct. Therefore, though they can't name a chapter and verse, they know the truth rather than a lie.
Do they go to Mass?Quote:
I was brought up a Catholic, all my family are Catholics, but not one of them read the Bible. I even ask people that I meet, who are Catholic, about 1 in 10 actually own a Bible, but I haven't found one that actually reads it.
Next time you go to Mass with your family, listen to the readings and the homily.
That is a perfect example Pete. Lets see what Scripture says:Quote:
They believe in the traditions of men, perpetrated by the Universal Church, (Catholic Church, as you know), ask any one of them to explain the meaning of "saved by faith and not works", if you got one sensible answer out of 100, then you would be doing good.
James 2 24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?
OH MY!! The Catholic doctrine. And most Catholics know that they have to do good deeds in order to get into heaven Pete. Be honest. Isn't that true? Because Protestants accuse us of a "works" theology.
Oh, but wait, you've probably been taught that St. Paul said, saved by faith ALONE.
Ephesians 2 8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God;
Romans 3:28 For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law.
Why that just says saved THROUGH faith. And nowhere is the word "alone" to be found unless you have a copy of Martin Luther's Bible wherein he added that word to Scripture.
But that's hard to understand. It almost seems as though St. Paul is contradicting St. James. And Scripture is clear, St. Paul does say things in a manner hard to understand.
2 Peter 3 15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.
So what does St. Paul understand by faith? Lets look at Hebrews 11:
4 By faith Abel offered to God a sacrifice
7 By faith Noe, ..., framed the ark for the saving of his house,
8 By faith he that is called Abraham, obeyed to go out into a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
In other words, St. Paul knows that by faith we obey, by faith we work and if we don't work that means we don't have faith.
EXACTLY!! In other words, I'm a member of the TRUE Church of Jesus Christ:Quote:
The normal answer would be along the lines "I'm a Catholic!"
Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Up to this point, I thought you were sincere. But I'll be upfront. You are lying.Quote:
Every Catholic that I know, including me, when I was one, thinks nothing of going to a fortune teller, reading and believing Astrology, their star signs etc, believing in chance and luck, swear and curse, using Jesus name as a curse, getting outragously drunk, (I've even seen priests do this whilst carousing with women at a bar, they were regulars,) having sex out of marriage, using drugs, cheating, stealing,etc and still they consider themselves "good Catholics" and going to heaven, "just because they are Catholics".
But I'll ask you one thing just to see what you say. Was your mother Catholic? And does she fall in this category as well?
Nothing wrong with fulfilling religious duty.Quote:
They may go to confession now and then, and go to Church, just to fulfill their religious duty.
You paint with a broad brush. I also know many non Catholics who don't like to talk about religion.Quote:
Ask them anything about God or Jesus, and they either no nothing, or only the Christmas and easter story, or they say angrily, "I don't want to talk about that rubbish!"
Unless you have some sort of reliable data to support this strange idea of yours, I must pass it off as simply anti-Catholic invention.Quote:
They don't change, unless their lifestyle forces them to, through illness or prison.
If you understood Scripture, you'd know that our Traditions are the Word of God.Quote:
A lot of good it does them, as far as I am concerned, you are welcome to your traditions, but I would much prefer the Power of God.
2 Thessalonians 2 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
Again because you don't understand Scripture and are simply listening to anti-Catholic babble. Let me show you:Quote:
Just how many souls are you really saving, I think it would be better if they heeded the Lord's command,"
Rev. 18
4Then I heard another voice from heaven say:
"Come out of her, my people,
so that you will not share in her sins,
so that you will not receive any of her plagues;
5for her sins are piled up to heaven,
and God has remembered her crimes.
I'm sure that you know that many people believe the Mystery Babylon in Revelation is the Catholic Church, I hope it isn't, but I suspect that it is.
Babylon is described as "that great city":
Rev 17: 18And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
Rev 18: 10Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! For in one hour is thy judgment come.
The "great city" is the city in which Jesus was crucified:
Rev 11: 8And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. . The Kings of the earth gathered in Jerusalem to crucify Christ.
Rev 17: 2With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication
Acts 4: 26The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. 27For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Babylon and Jerusalem are built on seven mountains:
Revelation 17: 9And here is the understanding that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, upon which the woman sitteth, and they are seven kings:
Jerusalem is built on seven mountains: Mt. Goath, Mt. Gareb, Mt. Acra, Mt. Bezetha, Mt. Zion, Mt. Ophel, and Mt. Moriah.
Babylon is destroyed by fire:
Rev 18: 8Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire
Jerusalem is destroyed by fire:
Ez 23: 25And I will set my jealousy against thee, and they shall deal furiously with thee: they shall take away thy nose and thine ears; and thy remnant shall fall by the sword: they shall take thy sons and thy daughters; and thy residue shall be devoured by the fire.
God calls His people out of that city:
Rev 18: 4And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
Paul calls people out of Jerusalem:
Heb 13: 12Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. 13Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. 14For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.
I'm smiling because you are showing how Satan has fooled you. Let me ask you, did Jesus condemn all traditions in this verse?Quote:
Mark 7
5So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?"
6He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.' 8You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."
Keep smilin' :)
Because as I read it, he only condemned traditions OF MEN. Now, the Catholic Church keeps traditions. While you keep Scripture alone. That contradicts Scriptures clear teaching:
2 Thessalonians 2 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
But let me show you a well known secret. It is well known that the Churches which came from the Reform traditions have no leader. Or, to be more precise, they each have a leader. That is what the many headed dragon represents.
Apocalypse 12 3 And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems:
Thus this dragon represents the Protestant Churches which have no true leader but many small leaders which are led by the Anti-Christ. That is why these Churches added divorce and remarriage to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, even though Jesus said:
Mark 10 11 And he saith to them: Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
And these Churches permit contraception and masturbation even though the Word of God clearly teaches:
Genesis 1 28 And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.
Some of these Churches even permit homosexual clergy. Homosexuality, an abominable sin in the eyes of God:
Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense [sic] of their error which was meet."
And many other sins have these Churches legitimized in the name of Jesus Christ. But Christ is clear:
Matthew 7 21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Still smiling?
Sincerely,
De Maria
You are applying two different definitions to the same word used in the same context, the same sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Hardly consistent. You are using neither consistent grammar nor sound interpretation.
You can keep insisting that we must all ignore grammar and the context and fall in line with your denomination because you say that we must, but if you expect us to all turn off our brains and do so, you are sadly mistaken.
I'll let reasonable people decide between your interpretations and the Church's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Your explanation leads to the conclusion that Christ's flesh avails nothing.
The Church's explanation leads to the conclusion that Christ's flesh imparts the Holy Spirit and therefore avails much. This is consistent with the Incarnation. Christ's becoming flesh is definitely profitable for us.
Sincerely,
De Maria
De Maria, hey there, a little hot under the collar are we, sorry, I was probably not very gracious towards the Catholic church, just that it is full of hypocrites, that's all, how-ever not all, I have heard that there are some true believers in there, perhaps your one?
What I mean to say about the attitude of many of the Catholic persuasion, is that they are superstitious, and that, to the extreme.
Yes my parents and my sisters go to mass, though my father can't at the moment as he is in a nursing home.
He has been going to the same Catholic Church in Port Macquarie for 35 years. I asked him who his friends were there once, he told me he doesn't know anybody to talk to.
Now he is in a nursing home, and the only visitors he gets is from family. Where is his spiritual leader, who knows, obviously, he doesn't care about his sheep, even his faithful ones.
Faith without works is dead, I certainly agree, in Hebrews 11, it also says that without faith, it is impossible to please God.
If I say that I believe and then go off and act like the rest of the world, with no mind to follow the way of Christ, then certainly, that faith is dead.
What are you believing God for now, or are you just walking in those things that bring you comfort, like your traditions.
When was the last time you told your people that we healed by the stripes of Jesus (Isaiah 53 : 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
When did you lay hands on some-one and stand for their healing, when was the last time you gave a prophetic word to some-one, do miracles happen in your church, how about dreams and visions, when did you see some-one set free from drug addiction or demonic control after just receiving and believing the words of Jesus, how about the deaf hearing, or the blind seeing, or the crippled walking? Do you have faith to believe for these things, would you preach this in your church, would you tell some-one dying from Aids that God can heal them, what about a child dying from leukemia, would you tell the parents that Jesus can heal that child?
Well, I have been a part of this type of Church, and not only in one Church, many Churches believe for these same things and have put their faith into action and have had the victory.
I have experienced many of these myself, I have been healed, delivered, set free from a number of addictions and illnesses.
If I hadn't come to the Lord when I was 35, I would surely be dead now or in prison. God spoke to me, audibly, and told me to get baptised by full immersion.
I was just leaving a fellow's place, whom I had gone to kill, it was my second attempt. The first time, about 12 months before, an angel stopped me, (at least I believe it was an angel), as as I was holding this fellow by the throat and punching him to death, this angel stepped between us and said "That's enough, go home", he was about 6'8" and powerfully built. There was no-one in the street before hand.
So what do you believe God for, to go to Purgatory for a couple of million years or so.
I tried to get back to God through the Catholic church for many years,.
Whenever I went to a town to work or live, I would go to the Presbytery and make an appointment to talk to the priest.
All but one, had no idea about the questions I had, and all I was asking them was to tell me how to live my life according to Gods word.
The last one, told me that I had to be humbled, so as I went to see him weekly, he told me to lean forward and offer him my head so that he could pull out some hair.
He said that this would make me subject to him, whatever he meant by that, I'm not sure.
He said that he did to the altar boys all the time.
I thought, "he's supposed to be my spiritual leader, he must know what he is doing), so I offered my head, whenever he told me to, and I must say, it hurt when he pulled out my hair. I was 34 at the time.
One night, he said that to humble me, he was going to take me from the presbytery, down the main street, along the breakwall of the "Beautiful Hastings River" ( bit of tourism advert there!) back along the breakwall, back up the main street and back to the presbytery, with my head under his arm!
That would take about 1 hour to walk that distance.
I went home and thought about it, and rang him up and said that if God can forgive me, I can forgive those that hurt me, and said lets forget about it.
That was the last time I was going to the catholic church for help, that was weird!
You mean between what the Bible says and your denomination's interpretation, because that is what we are discussing.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Eating His flesh is the context, and He (Jesus) says that eating it avails nothing - that He used His flesh as symbolic of the Spirit and the word.Quote:
Your explanation leads to the conclusion that Christ's flesh avails nothing.
No, unlike you, I can distinguish between YOUR OPINIONS and what Scripture says.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Again, Jesus says that eating His flesh (and drinking His Blood) avails to eternal life:Quote:
Eating His flesh is the context, and He (Jesus) says that eating it avails nothing - that He used His flesh as symbolic of the Spirit and the word.
Here we see it negatively stated.
John 6 54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
In other words, if you don't eat MY Flesh and drink MY Blood, you have not life in you.
Then we see it positively:
John 6 55 He that eateth MY flesh, and drinketh MY blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.
In other words, if you eat My Flesh and drink My Blood, you have everlasting life.
Note finally, that He says, "THE" flesh profiteth nothing.
64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.
If He meant to deny what He had previously said, He would have said,
MY Flesh and MY Blood profiteth nothing.
But He didn't. He clearly distinguished the difference between His Flesh and THE flesh.
Sincerely,
De Maria
Heh heh heh - got to start sniping eh? Must be running short of arguments!Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
If you stop there without reading Jesus' explanation, then you are relying on your own private interpretation. I'll take Jesus' interpretation over that of any man any day.Quote:
Again, Jesus says that eating His flesh (and drinking His Blood) avails to eternal life:
Here we see it negatively stated.
John 6 54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
Scripture says:Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
John 3:16-18
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
NKJV
HUH?Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
So you have to be a "loyal" member of the Catholic Church or you don't go to heaven? :confused:
Please clarify... because your posts seems to be TOTALLY against the teachings of the Church.
Thanks.
Even though I agree that saintjoan is not right in their statementQuote:
Originally Posted by ScottRC
WHERE did she say 'Catholic' Church and were do you get the impression that they are TOTALLY against the teachings of the Church when it looks like they seem to believe that through the church the only way to be saved.
De Marie even says herself that the Catholic Church is the only True religion
saintjoan
It depends upon whether they are saved.
What is necessary to be saved? You have to be brought into spiritual contact with the saving death of Jesus by faith and baptism and loyal membership in his Church, by love of God and neighbors, proved by obedience to His commandments, by the sacraments, especially Holy Communion, by prayer, and good works and by final perseverance, that is persevering God's friendship grace until death. A Catechism for Adults, Rev. William J. Cogan
Why yes, that is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
And I agree with what I've read by St. Joan and ScottRC to this point.
I believe what St. Joan has reasonably left out is what is contained in paragraph 847 of the Catholic Catechism:
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 3 ARTICLE 9 PARAGRAPH 3
But lets be real. Its hard to include every single detail of every single doctrine in a short summary.
Sincerely,
De Maria
So it wasn't that she was wrong as scott implied but his question would seem to contradict the Catholic teaching and saint joan's reply was actually that she left something out.
Actually, that is the teaching of the Roman Church. I posted a link to the information on here (cannot remember if it was the same thread) not too long ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottRC
Not in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
I don't see that either. Show me.Quote:
as scott implied but his question would seem to contradict the Catholic teaching
Correct. That is what I see. Either of them may correct me if I'm wrong.Quote:
and saint joan's reply was actually that she left something out.
Sincerely,
De Maria
No on both counts. But you seem to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Well, I've gone all the way through the entire Bread of Life discourse with you several times.Quote:
If you stop there without reading Jesus' explanation, then you are relying on your own private interpretation. I'll take Jesus' interpretation over that of any man any day.
Again, Jesus is always talking about His Flesh when it avails to eternal life.
But He specifically says, "THE" flesh avails nothing.
Now, if He meant to contradict what He was saying, I believe He would say, "My flesh and My blood" avail nothing. Because throughout the Bread of Life discourse He says that His flesh and His Blood avail to eternal life.
Sincerely,
De Maria
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
You must have left out paragraph number 847 which I have copied prior.Quote:
N0help4u agrees: yeah I am surprised he didn't KNOW that already!!
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 847
Sincerely,
De Maria
You cannot simply divide up sentences into parts and interpret them the way that you want out of the context of not just the sentence, but of the whole paragraph and chapter.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
I understand and the claim is that they are saved through the church though they don't know it. But let's look at what one of your "infallible popes" said:Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
"Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins... "
"Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
(Source: UNAM SANCTAM, Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302)
Was Pope Boniface VIII wrong? Or is this a case where your tradition contradicts itself?
My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that there are different perspectives on the resurrection.
One perspective if OBJECTIVE andETERNAL and the other is SUBJECTIVE and TEMPORAL.
We, who dwell on this earth have no ability in human logic except to consider the resurrection within the scope of TIME; ( temporal, with a beginning and an end). To us the resurrection is in the future. Could be today, but still, it's in the future and not now.
My opinion is that when a person dies they "exit time" and are in the eternal(which we can't even understand).
Scripture says that the resurrection will all be on one "day". We'll all meet together at that "time". From our perspective those resurrected are now "asleep". We don't have any relationship with them "now". Yet, their resurrection will be ours and ours theirs.
We don't precede them, they don't precede us. Therefore, they are NOT looking down from heaven on us. They have not entered into the judgement and not already separated to heaven or hell... according to our temporal perspective.
Heb 9:26-28
26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as man is destined to die once , and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
NIV
(I am not a Chilaist and so see no value in arguing about another resurrection.)
I keep telling you that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Neither.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Which tradition do you think is violated here? Or do you mean doctrine? And where do you consider Pope Boniface to have erred?
1. The doctrine of Papal infallibility is not violated because Pope Boniface was not addressing the whole Church.
Papal Bulls must be taken in context of the situation in which they are addressing.
Pope Boniface was not speaking to the entire Church but to a certain group of French Catholics who were rebelling against the Church. Therefore, this was not intended as a universal teaching but as a warning to any Catholics who willfully disobey the Pope and the Church. And of course to any Catholics who wanted to create a schism.
2. The doctrine of Nulla Salus, no salvation outside the Church is not violated because he is addressing Catholics who are threatening to leave the Church. Not people who are not aware of the Church or her doctrines.
3. Every human creature is subject to the Pontiff because he is Jesus' vicar or representative. Jesus' gave him the mandate to "feed my sheep". This is true whether the individual is aware of it or not.
4. Recognizing that the Pontiff is addressing Catholics in this Papal document, the assumption is that "every human being" to which he is referring has not willfully rejected the Church and thus the authority of the Pontiff who rules over her.
So, no, I see no error here.
Sincerely,
De Maria
You cannot wriggle out of it that easily.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
He proclaims it under the authority of God, for example:Quote:
1. The doctrine of Papal infallibility is not violated because Pope Boniface was not addressing the whole Church.
However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other and temporal authority, subjected to spiritual power. For since the Apostle said: "There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God", but they would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.
Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God, unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth . Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
Is your argument therefore that he was wrong, wrongly invoked the name of God and is therefore a false prophet?
It's a very simple argument which he is using to persuade the rebels not to separate from the Church and to submit to her authority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
He is simply explaining that all authority is from God. Therefore, if they resist the authority of the Church, they are resisting God.
Luke 10 16 He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.
Very simple logic.
Oh and it is absolutely true. Anyone who rejects the Church, knowing she is the Body of Christ and the Household of God, rejects God and is lost.
Sincerely,
De Maria
You did not answer my question.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
I told you before, I don't answer loaded questions. You'll have to be satisfied with my response. Here it is again so you don't have to research it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Sincerely,Quote:
It's a very simple argument which he is using to persuade the rebels not to separate from the Church and to submit to her authority.
He is simply explaining that all authority is from God. Therefore, if they resist the authority of the Church, they are resisting God.
Luke 10 16 He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.
Very simple logic.
Oh and it is absolutely true. Anyone who rejects the Church, knowing she is the Body of Christ and the Household of God, rejects God and is lost.
De Maria
I understand that you don't answer questions. Especially when you have no option but to accept that your argument makes that pope a false prophet. Your only other options are to accept that it contradicts your denominational tradition.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
saintjoan,Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
What would you say about Pope Honorius who was excommunicated for heresy.
Was the infallible Honorius in error, or the subsequent infallible Popes who excommunicated Him?
Ignore logic and the Bible for the sake of the Roman Church? But God is a God of reason:Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
Isa 1:18
18 "Come now, and let us reason together,"
Says the LORD,
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
They shall be as white as snow;
Though they are red like crimson,
They shall be as wool.
NKJV
That would mean that logic was give to us by God.
Then what you are telling us is that the popes have been changing doctrine of the Roman Church over the centuries, moving ever further from Biblical teachings. Is that correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
Close but not quite correct. I think you meant to say that our final authority must not be logic or OUR PRIVATE interpretation of the Word of God.Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
You see, the Traditions of the Church are the Word of God. Therefore our final authority is the Word of God as it is explained by the Church.
97 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God" (DV 10) in which, as in a mirror, the pilgrim Church contemplates God, the source of all her riches.
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/newrep...eply&p=1214295
Sincerely,
De Maria
New truths? Veneration of angels and dead saints?Quote:
Originally Posted by saintjoan
LOL!! Ok you got me!
The jig is up. You aren't Catholic. The list below is from an anti-Catholic website entitled
ROMES HERETICAL INVENTIONS
Rome's Heretical Inventions
For a while I thought you were a Catholic who simply misunderstood the Catechism.
Well, let me assure you, the Church does not teach new truths. Everyone of these truths is more ancient than even the Catholic Church:
The following references are from the Old Testament which is Before Christ (i.e. BC).
2 Machabees 12 46 It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.Quote:
300 AD. Prayers for the dead
Ezechiel 9 4 And the Lord said to him: Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem: and mark Thau upon the foreheads of the men that sigh, and mourn for all the abominations that are committed in the midst thereof.Quote:
300 AD. Making the sign of the cross
6 Utterly destroy old and young, maidens, children and women: but upon whomsoever you shall see Thau, kill him not, and begin ye at my sanctuary. So they began at the ancient men who mere before the house.
Correction, the Church teaches that the saints are alive in Christ. It is only Protestant theology that teaches that those who die in Christ do not have eternal life.Quote:
375 AD. Veneration of angels and dead saints
1 John 5 13 These things I write to you, that you may know that you have eternal life, you who believe in the name of the Son of God.
And yes we do venerate the Saints because even touching their bones can heal.
4 Kings 13 21 And some that were burying a man, saw the rovers, and cast the body into the sepulchre of Eliseus. And when it had touched the bones of Eliseus, the man came to life, and stood upon his feet.
Josue 5 14 And he answered: No: but I am prince of the host of the Lord, and now I am come.15 Josue fell on his face to the ground. And worshipping, add: What saith my lord to his servant?
1 Kings 4 4 So the people sent to Silo, and they brought from thence the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts sitting upon the cherubims: and the two sons of Heli, Ophni and Phinees, were with the ark of the covenant of God.Quote:
375 AD. Use of images in worship
Note that both the ark and the cherubims are images.
Can't go to BC sources for this since Jesus established the Mass. But, the Apostles were already celebrating daily:Quote:
394 AD. The mass as a daily celebration
Acts Of Apostles 2 46 And continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they took their meat with gladness and simplicity of heart;
Again, this is traced to the Apostles.Quote:
431 AD. The beginning of the exaltation of Mary; The term mother of God applied at the council of Ephesus
Luke 1 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
John 2 1 And the third day, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother of Jesus was there.
James 5 14 Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.Quote:
526 AD. Extreme Unction. (Last Rites)
1 Corinthians 3 15 If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.Quote:
593 AD. Doctrine of purgatory
The Roots of Purgatory
The very first prayer to Mary is recorded in Scripture by St. Luke and it is an angel saying the prayer:Quote:
600 AD. Prayers to Mary and dead saints
Luke 1 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
And again, those who die in Christ are not dead but have eternal life.
We venerate the cross, images and relics of the Saints. The Cross is of course a relic of Jesus Christ our Lord.Quote:
786 AD. Worship of cross, images and relics
1 Corinthians 1 23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness:
Acts Of Apostles 19 11 And God wrought by the hand of Paul more than common miracles. 12 So that even there were brought from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the wicked spirits went out of them.
Saints are alive. But yeah, that is true. Before 995, the Saints were canonized by the people based upon their prayers answered. These Saints were remembered by tradition of the faithful.Quote:
995 AD. Canonization of dead saints
Close to the truth. But not quite true. Celibacy in the priesthood was already voluntary practiced in the time of the Apostles. It was in fact, recommended by St. Paul:Quote:
1079 AD. Celibacy of priesthood
1 Cor 7 8 But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I.....32 But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. 33 But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided.
However, the Church began to formally enforce the discipline in the Roman rite around the year 1000.
True. Although priests were counting their prayers with beads and stones before Christ. And although the prayers and meditations of the Rosary are in the Bible. The actual entire Rosary was not put together until around the year 1000.Quote:
1090 AD. The Rosary
No, actually Jesus makes a pretty good explanation of indulgences here:Quote:
1190 AD. Indulgences
Mark 12 43 And calling his disciples together, he saith to them: Amen I say to you, this poor widow hath cast in more than all they who have cast into the treasury.
Jesus explains transubstantiation here:Quote:
1215 AD. Transubstantiation
John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.
John 20 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.Quote:
1215 AD. Auricular confessions of sins to a priest
You must mean apart from the Mass. We have always adored the Host. St. Augustine lived in the early centuries and he said:Quote:
1120 AD. The adoration of the host
Nobody eats this flesh without previously adoring it. {Enarr. in Ps. 98, 9; on p.387}
True. That was in response to a heresy which claimed that communion had to be in both forms in order to be effective.Quote:
1414 AD. Cup forbidden to the people at communion
But Jesus said:
John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever
Therefore eating the Bread of Life fulfills the command.
True, but prayers to the dead that they may be loosed from their sins was taught before Christ as has been shown. And purgatory is described in many places in Scripture. Therefore, proclaiming the dogma simply confirms the ancient teaching.Quote:
1439 AD. Purgatory proclaimed as dogma
Correct.Quote:
1439 AD. The doctrine of the seven sacraments confirmed
Again simply confirming the Scriptural teaching:Quote:
1545 AD. Tradition declared of equal authority with Bible by Council of Trent
2 Thessalonians 2 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
No, this is the approximate year that they were removed from the Bible in Protestant versions. The Catholic Apocrypha have never been in the Bible. What the Protestants call Apocrypha is what Catholics call the Deuterocanonicals. A completely different set of books than the Catholic Apocrypha.Quote:
1546 AD. Apocryphal books added to the Bible
The Deuterocanonicals have always been in the Catholic Bible and were first removed from the Jewish version of the Scriptures in 100 ad. The reason they took them out is because they were in the version used by Jesus Christ whom they detested.
However, Christians kept them in the Bible until the time of Luther. Unbelievably, Luther then proceeded to take them out. He also wanted to throw out St. James and the Epistle to the Hebrews but there was too much resistance to that idea so he was forced to keep them in the Bible.
Anyway, the Catholic Bible containing 73 books has been so since 300 ad when the Catholic Church canonized the bible:
There was a constant history of faithful people from Paul's time through the Apostolic and Post Apostolic Church.
Melito, bishop of Sardis, an ancient city of Asia Minor (see Rev 3), c. 170 AD produced the first known Christian attempt at an Old Testament canon. His list maintains the Septuagint order of books but contains only the Old Testament protocanonicals minus the Book of Esther.
The Council of Laodicea, c. 360, produced a list of books similar to today's canon. This was one of the Church's earliest decisions on a canon.
Pope Damasus, 366-384, in his Decree, listed the books of today's canon.
The Council of Rome, 382, was the forum which prompted Pope Damasus' Decree.
Bishop Exuperius of Toulouse wrote to Pope Innocent I in 405 requesting a list of canonical books. Pope Innocent listed the present canon.
The Council of Hippo, a local north Africa council of bishops created the list of the Old and New Testament books in 393 which is the same as the Roman Catholic list today.
The Council of Carthage, a local north Africa council of bishops created the same list of canonical books in 397. This is the council which many Protestant and Evangelical Christians take as the authority for the New Testament canon of books. The Old Testament canon from the same council is identical to Roman Catholic canon today. Another Council of Carthage in 419 offered the same list of canonical books.
Since the Roman Catholic Church does not define truths unless errors abound on the matter, Roman Catholic Christians look to the Council of Florence, an ecumenical council in 1441 for the first definitive list of canonical books.
The final infallible definition of canonical books for Roman Catholic Christians came from the Council of Trent in 1556 in the face of the errors of the Reformers who rejected seven Old Testament books from the canon of scripture to that time.
The Canon of the Bible
This is inferred from Scripture:Quote:
1854 Immaculate conception of Mary
Genesis 3
15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.
and has been taught by Christians from the early centuries:
The Early Church Fathers believed that Mary was full of grace and thus sinless.
Justin Martyr
[Jesus] became man by the Virgin so that the course that was taken by disobedience in the beginning through the agency of the serpent might be also the very course by which it would be put down. Eve, a virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent and bore disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One being born of her is the Son of God. And she replied, "Be it done unto me according to your word" (Luke 1:38) (Dialogue with Trypho 100 [A.D. 155]).
http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_imma...conception.htm
True. That is from Scripture:Quote:
1870 Infallibility of the pope in matters of faith and morals proclaimed by Vatican Council
Matthew 16 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.
Apocalypse 12 1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars:Quote:
1950 Assumption of the Virgin Mary
From Scripture:Quote:
1965 Mary proclaimed mother of the church
Apocalypse 12 17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Sincerely,
De Maria
You conceded yesterday that your denomination promotes man's understanding which is private interpretation. So are you saying that your denomination is wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
They cannot both be - we have shown contradictions. God does not contradict Himself.Quote:
You see, the Traditions of the Church are the Word of God. Therefore our final authority is the Word of God as it is explained by the Church.
De Maria, I think that your problem is that you don't have a relationship with Jesus, you don't even know Him.
You may know about Him, but you don't really KNOW Him as you best friend, some-one whom you would confide in, before you you seek advice from anybody else.
But you DO have religion, BOY, do you have religion!
I went onto a Catholic website and was reading the Catechism, it truly is mesmerizing.
I can see how people want to accept it as truth, it sure fits with what Paul said to Timothy about the last days, 2 Tim 4
3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
And as he writes in Timothy about the end time church,"having a form of godliness but denying the power there-of."
Where's the power in your church, when was the last time some-one was healed or delivered from demons or raised from the dead.
From the Florida revivals, the last count was 16 people raised from the dead!
Of course, you would deny that power, why, you might say, would God work miracles in a "Prostestant" Church and not the Catholic Church.
I will give you a hint, because His power is not there!
You have to have a personal relationship with Jesus, or else He will say,
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
24Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
Get to know Jesus as your best friend, it's a must!
Peace.:)
Nope. Where is it written that man's understanding MEANS private interpretation. Are you a man? Do you understand the Scripture? Then you have a man's understanding of Scripture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
So your statement is proven false. Obviously, every Christian must have an understanding of the Word of God. And Scripture ITSELF commands that we must obey those men whom have been appointed our leaders:
Hebrews 13 7 Remember your prelates who have spoken the word of God to you; whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation,
Read my comments which you quoted. I said that the Word of God is final authority. I didn't say that man's understanding was final authority. Obviously there can only be ONE final authority. But there can be many authorities at different levels. God has said that we must obey and follow the faith of our leaders as I've proven above. And there are many prooftexts which tell us that we must obey our leaders. Nowhere did I say that they were both final authority.Quote:
They cannot both be - we have shown contradictions. God does not contradict Himself.
Sincerely,
De Maria
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:05 AM. |