Posted on 07/26/2013 2:04:17 PM PDT by NYer
You wrote:
“Write whom?”
The man you were talking about.
“No Catholic on this forum will answer such a question,”
I did.
“and the subject of the article has made it clear that origins (and thus the historical details of Genesis) aren’t important.”
I don’t think that’s what he believes. If you’re afraid to write him, fine. It’s just an email.
you wrote:
“No Catholic is even theoretically capable of acknowledging that I have a legitimate point about anything.”
That’s not true. I long ago admitted you have a point. The problem is that you seem obsessive about it and incapable of focusing on anything else. I can’t remember a time when you posted about anything else. That’s not normal or healthy to say the least.
“No Catholic on this forum will answer such a question,”
I did.
You know what? You're right! You did. You said you didn't believe in evolution. But you never seem to mind too much when your co-religionists are running around saying there was no Adam and Eve, and I believe you said once that John 6 was more certain than Genesis 1 because in the latter "no one was there." Well, that wasn't true, of course, since the Author was there, but . . . point is, you don't believe in evolution, but it doesn't bother you very much, nor do you seem to care when co-religionists make evolutionism into a quasi-dogma that separates "true chrstians" from "bibliolatrous heretics."
“and the subject of the article has made it clear that origins (and thus the historical details of Genesis) aren’t important.”
I don’t think that’s what he believes. If you’re afraid to write him, fine. It’s just an email.
If he didn't believe in evolution, no Catholic FReeper would be pushing him as a heroic convert--especially not NYer. Nevertheless I'll e-mail him. It's not like I'm going to read something in response that I've never read before.
“If he didn’t believe in evolution, no Catholic FReeper would be pushing him as a heroic convert—especially not NYer.”
Actually I would have posted about him but I didn’t know he published a book. I did, however, if I am not mistaken, link to his article on his conversion last year : http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/09/i-fought-the-church-and-the-church-won/
“Nevertheless I’ll e-mail him. It’s not like I’m going to read something in response that I’ve never read before.”
I’m glad you’ll write to him. Even if you get a response you don’t like, you lose nothing but a few minutes time.
>> “I don’t understand the bickering on this forum between Catholics and protestants. All who believe in the one true Judeo-Christian God are welcome to post here.” <<
.
Perhaps the answer to your quandry lies in the identity of the ‘God’ each group worships.
You have taken the assumption that we all worship the same God, but simply reading the posts of the various parties does show differences in the basic attrributes of our Gods.
Jews and the majority of protestants voice a belief in a God who left us his inerrant and complete word, and noted therein (Deuteronomy 4, and REvelation 22) that nothing was to be added to or taken away from that word.
Catholics, on the other hand operate on an apparent assumption that the word is incomplete, and in places completely wrong (the many places that call out Mary’s children) and requires special secret additions to the word that were only given orally.
How can those two sets of assumprions occupy the same space peacefully?
Please give it a rest.
Thanks, Jim.
And the big mistake all chrstians make about Judaism is that it is just pre-incarnation chrstianity, or chrstianity without J*sus. It is no such thing, which is why chrstians simply cannot seem to understand why Jews reject J*sus. The very mission, role, and even status of Mashiach are totally different in one than in the other.
Even the most pro-Jewish chrstian only knows the Hebrew Bible through a lifelong assumption of the authority of the "new testament." Without this assumption, distinctions become much more clear.
Jason Stellman just announced his defection to Romanism in these words:
Immature Christians are often troubled by conversion stories like Jason's. Look! A minister joined Rome! Look, another joined Islam! Another became a Mormon! Look how many have left the faith and become agnostic or even atheist! There must be something wrong! Such immaturity is borne out of an ignorance of the context of the early Church. The little epistle of First John shows us that even during the days when the Apostles still lived, apostasy was rampant. Opposition was everywhere. False teachers flourished. And the young Christian body could see, out there in the fellowships of the anti-Christs, those who had once stood with them and made a profession of faith. Has Christ failed? Is the Gospel without power? No, the problem here is a false assumption: that it is God's intention for the church to ever live in ease, without opposition, without false brethren and false teachers to battle, without persecution from the world, and tribulation within. No one who seriously reads the NT literature would come to that conclusion, but sadly, that is the idea many have. John told the young believers,
There is a reason for apostasy: "so that it would be shown that they all are not of us." The gospel drives out the hypocrite, the false professor. In fact, if hypocrites and false professors are comfortable in your church, then you have a good reason to question whether the gospel is being preached with clarity and power. Christ knows His sheep. They hear His voice. They do not listen to a man who claims to be the Vicar of Christ, who arrogantly allows himself to be called "Holy Father." They are satisfied with His Word, which is why false teachers tirelessly seek to inculcate dissatisfaction and distrust in the Word. That is how they get the false disciples to follow them. And we see it happen every day. We should expect to see it happening every day. It is a fulfillment of God's Word.
Can't find anything in his testimony that explains his action. The only thing I found is this comment:
Nice to see that he considers how we worship a "cult". You're welcome to him Rome.
” In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. “ (Mt. 18:16; 2 Corinthians 13:1; cf. Nu 35:30; De 17:6; 19:15; 1Ki 21:10,13; )
I know plenty of Karaite Jews that accept only Torah and Tanakh, and do not respect the tokanot and ma’asim of the rabbis.
The world is changing rather rapidly in this respect. Yehova is calling his remnant out of Israel.
As for the vowels, they are noted in a substantial portion of the masorite scriptures; its just certain words that have the vowel points omitted, and even those sometimes have the vowel points present.
One has to search to find them.
As for the differences in the interpretation of the role of Messiach, much of that is from a culture with a broken heart. Not that many ‘Christians’ have such a great understanding either. They want desperately for Messiach to have invented a new faith, rather than re-affirm the existing on as he did. They want victory over the Jews, rather than the grafting in that the NT really presents.
Its not our job to sort it out; Messiach will do that when he comes with his angels.
We have scientific laws governing how systems behave and we have miracles. Feel free to interpret the existence of both of these as you wish.
You made your comments as statements of fact.
If you can not back them up, they are not credible.
If you expect people to take them seriously, people need more than the say so of an anonymous internet poster.
We language Nazis cannot allow sentiment to muddle our thinking.
“XX-year anniversary” is a redundancy, no matter who says it.
There is a tradition in Judaism that when writing God’s name on something that can be destroyed, it should be altered in such a way that it cannot be defaced or destroyed, either by accident or on purpose. Defacing the name of G-d would be taking it in vain.
I would also be careful of insulting Jewish practices. The Jews kept the light of G-d alive through centuries of persecution. First, we tried to enslave them. Then we attempted to conquer the land G-d gave them. Finally we succeeded by getting them to worship idols(*). After we successfully took them from G-d, we conquered them and scattered the ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom. Eventually we took the Southern Kingdom and destroyed G-d’s House and took them out of the land. When we allowed them back in, we placed people there to try and trick and deceive the Jews. While we allowed them to rebuild the Temple, it lacked the splendor Solomon’s Temple had. During the Seleucid Kingdom, we desecrated the Temple, abrogated their laws, and denied them the seal of the Covenant (bris). Then Jesus came along and said that while most of what they believed was rightly ordered, it was wrong. While they persecuted the Church(^) for a short period of time, it is nothing compared to the centuries of persecution they had been subjected to. Then when they were fed up with Rome and decided to revolt, we chose to ignore them and stay out of the conflict. The Temple was physically destroyed. After we conquered the Roman Empire, we did oppress and persecute them, sometimes for fun and sport, other times out of Malice. When we took the Holy Land from the Muslims, we massacred Jews. Then after several more centuries of persecution, certain people decided enough was not enough and attempted to wipe the Jews off the face of the Earth.
I am sure G-d appreciates that after 3+ millennia of persecution, the Jews still try to be faithful to their religion.
(*) The idols referred to here are idols that by their very nature are opposed to G-d.
(^) Before claiming they crucified Jesus, we all did by our sins.
We have laws of science and miracles. The former is ordered power; the latter is absolute. I am hardly the first person to say this.
As a matter of fact, Western science depended on the development of this idea.
Mary is still dead.
Am I here AFTER they showed up??
The Jews based a significant portion of their religion on the use of tradition. Jesus at times criticizes the extent of this reliance; he does not however, criticize the reliance. When talking about the Pharisees, he comments that they teach with authority even though they are hypocrites.
What Catholics teach about Mary’s children is that they are spiritual children, not biological children.
"What MUST we do...
John 6:28
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.