[N0help4u]

Doctrine simply means what the Church believes, teaches and follows. So you have the things Sndbay said, baptism, incorporating Jesus' birth and death into pagan holidays, fish Friday, waving incense and many many other things that churches do in the name of Jesus that have nothing to do with Jesus... that is how I say that.

[Tj3]

Doctrine simply means what the Church believes, teaches and follows. So you have the things Sndbay said, baptism, incorporating Jesus' birth and death into pagan holidays, fish Friday, waving incense and many many other things that churches do in the name of Jesus that have nothing to do with Jesus....that is how I say that.

The Bible also teaches doctrine, but not all church doctrine comes from scripture.

[JoeT777]

I would discern this as untrue because I see many churches that have changed what Christ suffered to accomplish.

Lists of changes can be shown such as baptizing innocent new born babies at birth, baptism without full coverage in of water,( a paganism feast) rather then passover feast where the lamb of Christ our passover, and a huge doubt taught to say we are still with sin, and not knowing we were set free from sin by the blood of Christ.

Christ brought division between those that do not believe in HIS WORD, and those that have faith in Christ.

Those that overcome are connected in unity with the Fire of Spiritual Truth in our Father, and the Holy Spirit when baptized. And have been set free from the curse of sin, having no more sin by the blood of Christ.

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will

Eph 14:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive

You make at least two erroneous suppositions. The first is that the Church (RC) negotiates what it's doctrines. All doctrines, revealed are Divine Truth and disciplines of the Church are the result of Christ's teachings which have been passed down through the ages by the Apostles and their successors. This is the teaching Magisterium of the Church and is headed by the Pope who is made infallible with the strength of the Holy Spirit. And holding that entrance into the Kingdom of God requires (necessitates, has need of, is pre-requisite, a precondition), then baptizing children would seem to me to be a natural thing; notwithstanding the absence of any Scriptural prohibition.

Christ didn't bring division. In fact he prayed that ”all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (John 17: 21)

Addressing the second supposition: I can't see how (or for what reason) that one would insist that Christ Himself would bring division, especially given John 17:21. So the contention is that God was incarnate in man to bring division? He says himself I came to give testimony to the God's Truth, (Cf. John 18:37). Why would a man let alone God do such a thing; do you not recall a “house divided cannot stand”?

Added note: The Catholic Church does not depend on uniformity, rather it is one of unity.

JoeT

[JoeT777]

Doctrine simply means what the Church believes, teaches and follows.

Doctrine refers to the knowledge imparted by teaching. It’s has the same meaning as catechesis. ‘Doctrine’ is a principle taught, not an the establishment of the principle. The principles taught by the Roman Catholic Church are Divine morals and ethics.

So you have the things Sndbay said, baptism

Baptism is an absolute necessity to enter into the Kingdom of God. : Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5) i.e. principle taught by Christ.

incorporating Jesus' birth and death into pagan holidays

Many have shown that that Christ’s Birthday can be shown to be on or about December 25. And if it isn’t how is it that it’s a pagan holiday. Is it a pagan holiday today?

fish Friday

Wow, that hurts! No fish Friday? You mean all this time we Catholics have been fasting for no reason? Praying for no reason?

…waving incense…

There are a couple of people I know who need a double dose – you know they seem to be rather odoriferous.

… and many many other things that churches do in the name of Jesus that have nothing to do with Jesus....that is how I say that.

And if there were "many many other things" it would seem to me that you could list one valid complaint. There doesn’t seem to be any substantial complaints here.

JoeT

[N0help4u]

There is baptism as Jesus taught and there is baptism as the church does.

Don't you know anything about the history of Christmas and Easter and how the church changed the dates of Jesus' birth and death to these pagan holidays? Also I would like to see your references for Jesus being born on Dec 25th. I have seen much to the contrary. Also Easter is celebrated on different days within a month or so, so how could that be the day of Jesus resurrection?

It may be a reason to you to eat fish on Fridays but it is a tradition of man not Biblical.

[JoeT777]

[QUOTE=N0help4u;1818825]There is baptism as Jesus taught and there is baptism as the church does.

Don't you know anything about the history of Christmas and Easter and how the church changed the dates of Jesus' birth and death to these pagan holidays? Also I would like to see your references for Jesus being born on Dec 25th. I have seen much to the contrary. Also Easter is celebrated on different days within a month or so, so how could that be the day of Jesus resurrection?



In what way is the baptism Jesus taught different from what the Chruch teaches?

And what dates would you prefer for Christ's birthday? The first Easter was on Passover, remember?

How does the tradition of fasting affect our faith negatively?


JoeT

[N0help4u]

Infant baptism, sprinkling.

The point isn't what I prefer but WHY would the Church choose pagan holidays to celebrate Jesus birthday?
Even with Easter and Passover being the same day why is it Christian tradition to celebrate with Easter eggs?

[JoeT777]

Infant baptism, sprinkling.

The point isn't what I prefer but WHY would the Church choose pagan holidays to celebrate Jesus birthday?
Even with Easter and Passover being the same day why is it Christian tradition to celebrate with Easter eggs?

The date for Christmas was unsettled for many centuries. The Gospels don’t give us any help. Back dating from Zachary’s Temple service can render Christ’s birth in late December. But all the computations based on the Temples feast days are unreliable. An approach was made using Old Testament festivals suggests a September date. Among the theories already discussed is the following:

The well-known solar feast...of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on 25 December, has a strong claim on the responsibility for our December date. For the history of the solar cult, its position in the Roman Empire, and syncretism with Mithraism, see Cumont's epoch-making "Textes et Monuments" etc., I, ii, 4, 6, p. 355. …

The earliest rapprochement of the births of Christ and the sun is in Cyprian, "De pasch. Comp.", xix, "O quam præclare providentia ut illo die quo natus est Sol . . . nasceretur Christus." — "O, how wonderfully acted Providence that on that day on which that Sun was born . . . Christ should be born."

In the fourth century, Chrysostom, "del Solst. Et Æquin." (II, p. 118, ed. 1588), says: "Sed et dominus noster nascitur mense decembris . . . VIII Kal. Ian. . . . Sed et Invicti Natalem appelant. Quis utique tam invictus nisi dominus noster? . . . Vel quod dicant Solis esse natalem, ipse est Sol iustitiæ." — "But Our Lord, too, is born in the month of December . . . the eight before the calends of January [25 December] . . ., But they call it the 'Birthday of the Unconquered'. Who indeed is so unconquered as Our Lord . . .? Or, if they say that it is the birthday of the Sun, He is the Sun of Justice."

Already Tertullian (Apol., 16; cf. Ad. Nat., I, 13; Orig. c. Cels., VIII, 67, etc) had to assert that Sol was not the Christians' God; Augustine (Tract xxxiv, in Joan. In P.L., XXXV, 1652) denounces the heretical identification of Christ with Sol.

Pope Leo I (Serm. xxxvii in nat. dom., VII, 4; xxii, II, 6 in P.L., LIV, 218 and 198) bitterly reproves solar survivals — Christians, on the very doorstep of the Apostles' basilica, turn to adore the rising sun. Sun-worship has bequeathed features to modern popular worship in Armenia, where Christians had once temporarily and externally conformed to the cult of the material sun (Cumont, op. cit., p. 356).

But even should a deliberate and legitimate "baptism" of a pagan feast be seen here no more than the transference of the date need be supposed. The "mountain-birth" of Mithra and Christ's in the "grotto" have nothing in common: Mithra's adoring shepherds (Cumont, op. cit., I, ii, 4, p. 304 sqq.) are rather borrowed from Christian sources than vice versa. (Source: CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Christmas )

What is the importance of a Christian feast being substituted for a pagan feast? This seems logical when teaching pagans Christianity; substitute Christian observances for pagan ones.

To my knowledge Easter eggs can’t necessarily be attributed to Catholics. And if Easter eggs could be attributed to Catholics I don’t understand how this would affect one’s faith. It’s a custom my family participates in – to my knowledge none of them have been struck by lightning yet.

JoeT

[sndbay]

Christ didn't bring division. In fact he prayed that ”all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (John 17: 21)

Addressing the second supposition: I can't see how (or for what reason) that one would insist that Christ Himself would bring division, especially given John 17:21. So the contention is that God was incarnate in man to bring division? He says himself I came to give testimony to the God's Truth, (Cf. John 18:37). Why would a man let alone God do such a thing; do you not recall a “house divided cannot stand”?
JoeT

Obviously you are not reading what I have posted and said. Go back to read post #69 that does reference Luke 12:51-52. The division is between evil and godly.


The Father Son and Holy Spirit delivered what is possible in godly unity by faith.
Eph 4:5-6 One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.


To confirm what I posted refer: Posting #78

Eph 14:13[/B] Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive

[N0help4u]

(Luke 12:51) - "Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two, and two against three..."

Most people that have used times and events in the Bible have come up with September 29th as Jesus' birth day.

Here is just one of many links I have read on the subject
When Was Jesus Born? - 144000.net

[JoeT777]

Obviously you are not reading what I have posted and said. Go back to read post #69 that does reference Luke 12:51-52. The division is between evil and godly.


The Father Son and Holy Spirit delivered what is possible in godly unity by faith.
Eph 4:5-6 One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.


To confirm what I posted refer: Posting #78

Well Ok, I stand corrected. But, if you weren't so confounded cryptic I wouldn't make that kind of mistake.

[sndbay]

In what way is the baptism Jesus taught diffrent from what the Chruch teaches?

Baptism was suffered by both John and Christ. (Matthew 3:15-16) And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water.

And what dates would you prefer for Christ's birthday?

September 29


From Conception, according to Jewish reckoning 280 days. AND Gentile reckoning 280 The chart of birth offered:
Day JEWISH Month Gentile Day

1 Tebeth 1st ( Dec 25-26) December 7days
2 Dec 26-27
3 Dec 27-28

8 Tebeth 8th ( Jan 1-2 )
Tebeth total 29 days

Sebat 30 days January 31 days
Adar 29 days February 29 days
Nisan 30 March 31
Zif 29 April 30
Sivan 30 May 31
Thammuz 29 June 30
AB 30 July 31
Elul 29 August 31
Ethanim 15 September 29
280 280 280

Concluded: 15TH of ETHANIM = SEPTEMBER 29, EMMUNUAL BORN


Luke 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth
Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Luke 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Luke 1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

Plus Luke 2:2 thr 2:7 give evidence to register of tax which was the first tax made by Cyrenius under the emperor Caesar Augustus Luke 2:1... The Roman government keep documents for these registeries. and the time frame of this new first and new tax.

sufficiency in conception being Dec 24 on the eve of Mary's journey to her cousin Elizabeth. Elizabeth by scripture was with her Priest husband who was scheduled according to the course as written.

The first Easter was on Passover, remember?

Have you read how the single word Easter was determined, and then written in place of Passover. Christ and the disciples spoke of Passover , and it was called Passover feast.
Refer: 1 Cr 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us

[sndbay]

Sorry to say I will not be able to continue this thread any further. Vacation time, and a flight leaving in the early hours..

God's peace to you all..

[jenniepepsi]

I think you guys could argue and argue and argue and you will NEVER convince each other that one of you is absolutely correct.

[Tj3]

Doctrine refers to the knowledge imparted by teaching. It’s has the same meaning as catechesis. ‘Doctrine’ is a principle taught, not an the establishment of the principle. The principles taught by the Roman Catholic Church are Divine morals and ethics.

Manmade if not found in scripture.

Baptism is an absolute necessity to enter into the Kingdom of God. : Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5) i.e. principle taught by Christ.

Jesus explained here, as you were shown previously, that he was speaking of the physical birth and then being born again in the spirit. Nowhere in scripture does it say that water baptism is essential for salvation. If so, then Jesus lied to the thief on the cross, and there would be no hope for any of the OT saints.

[Tj3]

Sorry to say I will not be able to continue this thread any further. Vacation time, and a flight leaving in the early hours..

God's peace to you all..

Have a safe trip!

[JoeT777]

(Luke 12:51) - "Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two, and two against three..."

Most people that have used times and events in the Bible have come up with September 29th as Jesus' birth day.

Here is just one of many links I have read on the subject
When Was Jesus Born? - 144000.net

There are many who start the 40 week count during the feast of Purim, depending on the year about 14 and 15 Adar (Feb.-March). Purim is a feast commemorating freedom; the deliverance recorded in the Book of Esther - interesting Christ is conceived to free us during the feast of freedom. As I've been told this gets us within a few days of Dec. 25. Even still, it's just as questionable as any other computation.


Assuming September 29th is correct, then how does this affect the holiness of the Roman Catholic Church?

JoeT

[Tj3]

i think you guys could argue and argue and argue and you will NEVER convince eachother that one of you is absolutely correct.

The truth is that I am not going to convince anyone of a spiritual truth - it is only the work of the Holy Spirit on the heart of someone else who is willing to submit to God word that will convince another person of the truth found in God's word. Some use God word as the standard of truth (as I do), others rely on the teachings of the men in leadership of their church, and others rely upon other men for their teachings.

[jenniepepsi]

The truth is that I am not going to convince anyone of a spiritual truth - it is only the work of the Holy Spirit on the heart of someone else who is willing to submit to God word that will convince another person of the truth found in God's word.

You are right. But doesn't God want us to spread the word? The holy spirit cannot come into someone's heart if they do not hear the word... right?

[galveston]

My own position is this:

Any tradition NOT endorsed or started by Jesus or the Apostles, including Paul is not equal to those traditions clearly written down in the Bible.

The Jews added many traditions to the Law of Moses, and so-called orthodox churches have done the same thing to scriptures. Not good!