Posted on 07/13/2020 7:27:43 PM PDT by metmom
True dat. I left the Catholic Church, once I started reading the Bible for myself, I found that either the Bible is correct, or the Catholic Church is correct, but no way on God’s green earth, can both be correct. 😁🤗🤑😊
I was always a super rebellious person, so when the priests and nuns told me I couldn’t read the Bible, without a priest to interpret it for me, what do you suppose was the first thing I did? I picked up a Bible, and read and interpreted it for myself, just to spite them. My original intent, was to “in your face” spite them. As I read, however, I became convinced I had to leave the church, so, I LEFT, never to return. 😁🤪🤣 I am comfortable with that. 👍
So???
The izlamaniac religion teaches 'infallibly' that it's ok to rape your female conquests...And you should kill those you encounter who will not turn to your religion...
United Airlines says, 'you're safer flying with us'...
Your infallible Church does not teach what God teaches...And God does not teach what your Church teaches...So who cares what your Church teaches...We care only in what God teaches...
All those ghosts of Mary that your religion claims have been seen and heard, and all all those customs that your religion has picked up over the years; what makes you think they came from God???
” I found that either the Bible is correct, or the Catholic Church is correct, but no way on God’s green earth, can both be correct.”
+1
I heard people share the gospel of grace then read Scripture.
Eventually, He wooed me to entrust myself to Him alone.
I’m so grateful.
I would never go back to dead rituals and paganism...
Except funerals and weddings!
I’m catholic, but not Catholic.
Yep. Last year, I went to my brother in law’s wedding. If I recall, I may have even sent you some pictures. They had tons of graven images. It was a huge building, I have seen many other huge Catholic Church buildings, bigger than I have seen in the states. In a place, where many people don’t even get enough to eat, it is appalling to see this. I would call it extortion. I did, however, have the pleasure of leading my brother in law’s wife and her sister out of the Catholic Church. It was beautiful. Since they were English majors in college, they are fluent in English, and I didn’t need any help to present the TRUE gospel to them. They asked why, what I was showing them, was different, from they had been taught as Catholics? I didn’t want to tell them they were in a cult. I just said, read this Bible, and you can’t go wrong. 😁🤗
My brother in Law, is a different story. He doesn’t speak hardly any English. 👎
😁 Got it bro. My son is in his last phase of training. When a USAF officer graduates from pilot training, the USAF doesn’t simply point them to their aircraft, and tell them to go fly it. They give the new pilots, familiarity training, before they let them fly combat missions by themselves. 😁
“I did, however, have the pleasure of leading my brother in law’s wife and her sister out of the Catholic Church.“
+1
What seems clear is that Catholics are singularly unable to separate Jesus Christ from the Catholic church, tht one can follow Jesus WITHOUT following Catholicism.
And that one can reject Catholicism and it’s false doctrines and yet be true to Christ.
Jesus is not Catholicism and Catholicism is NOT Jesus.
Jesus only is the one who saves as HE is the one who died for us, in our place. Catholicism can’t save as it’s a religious system of works and not one person is ever saved by law keeping or works doing.
And another newsflash for Catholics is that one does not need to go through Catholicism to learn about Jesus and believe in Him. That’s what Scripture, His Word, is for.
And guilt.
Don’t forget the guilt trips.
Where?
Just not a Catholic.
Yeah; metoo.
Thanks for the update! Always enjoy hearing about your son’s adventures!
MM, I am surprised at you. Don’t you know, you are supposed to take someone’s word for it? We all know that truth by assertion, really IS truth. NOT 😁🤣🤑🤪😀🤗👎 Actually, you are right. WHERE is the documentary evidence? Simple answer, I don’t believe there is any. 😁🤗😀😊
Well, I keep getting told that *sacred tradition* is that word of mouth stuff, and we all know how well the game of Telephone worked out as kids.
No, he can’t. I know when he was a toddler, he could understand Tagalog, even though he couldn’t actually speak it. Today, he only speaks English. 🤗
Once again you are resorting to argument by mere question-begging assertions, of what you can only wish was substantiated as True, that the Word of God is RC Sacred Tradition passed down from Jesus. Rather than the veracity of distinctive Catholic teachings being based upon substantiation, esp. Scriptural substantiation in word and in power as was the Truth claims of the NT church, instead - as said and ignored - for a faithful Catholic their confidence is based upon the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial veracity.
Consider the (assumed) Assumption, belief in which was made a requirement over 1700 years after the alleged event occurred, as as admitted by one of your popular apologists,
"where is the proof from Scripture? Strictly, there is none. It was the Catholic Church that was commissioned by Christ to teach all nations and to teach them infallibly. The mere fact that the Church teaches the doctrine of the Assumption as definitely true is a guarantee that it is true.” — Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 275.
And as for substantiation, Ratzinger himself admitted,
Before Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was defined, all theological faculties in the world were consulted for their opinion. Our teachers' answer was emphatically negative... Altaner, the patrologist from Wurzburg¦had proven in a scientifically persuasive manner that the doctrine of Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was unknown before the 5C; this doctrine, therefore, he argued, could not belong to the "apostolic tradition. And this was his conclusion, which my teachers at Munich shared.
But...subsequent "remembering" (cf. Jn 16:4, for instance) can come to recognize what it has not caught sight of previously ["caught sight of?" Because there was nothing to see in the earliest period where it should have been, before a fable developed] .." (Joseph Ratzinger, Milestones (Ignatius, n.d.), pp. 58-59; emp. mine).
More doumentation on this here, by the grace of God.
Which "remembering" of what fails to be documented where it ought to be found is consistent with the wishful premise of Manning, which I provided to you before:
It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine... I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity....Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves...The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour. — Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Archbishop of Westminster, The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, reprinted with no date), pp. 227-228.
In contrast to your faith in your church, the apostles established their Truth claims upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, and God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 119; Psalm 102:18; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;
Thus as is abundantly evidenced , as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.
It was not because oral tradition preserved the Word of God that brought about a national revival, but because of the wholly inspired-of-God written word:
And Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord. And Hilkiah delivered the book to Shaphan. (2 Chronicles 34:15)
Then Shaphan the scribe told the king, saying, Hilkiah the priest hath given me a book. And Shaphan read it before the king. And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he rent his clothes. (2 Chronicles 34:18-19)
And the king went up into the house of the Lord, and all the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the priests, and the Levites, and all the people, great and small: and he read in their ears all the words of the book of the covenant that was found in the house of the Lord. And the king stood in his place, and made a covenant before the Lord, to walk after the Lord, and to keep his commandments, and his testimonies, and his statutes, with all his heart, and with all his soul, to perform the words of the covenant which are written in this book. (2 Chronicles 34:30-31)
Moreover, men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and also provide new public revelation thereby (in conflation with what had been written), neither of popes and councils claim to do. Yet even the veracity of preaching of apostles was subject to testing by Scripture
And thus as for them, Scripture is the supreme standard as the only wholly God-inspired and faithful substantive word of God, as understood by the NT church, which understanding is shown in Acts - Rev, showing how they understood the gospels, and in which distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest.
As you have indicated that you are a lapsed catholic, yet you reject the Catholic Church, the authority of the Pope, the Mass, the Sacraments, The Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist.
Indeed, for to be a NT Christian (though in heart and deed I certain come short of all i should be) is to reject the errors of the Catholic Church, the authority of the Pope, the Mass, the Sacraments, The Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. praying to created beings in Heaven, and all other distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed .
You may believe whatever you want and criticize the Catholic Church (our many sins and errors)but you should avoid telling lies about the Catholic faith (8th Commandment).
Rather, your desperate charge makes you guilty of lying, since you have not and cannot prove that I have been "telling lies about the Catholic faith, and which I document, unlike you.
The Church is a holy mystery because of her origin in the Holy Trinity...
Which is simply more recourse to parroting vain assertions which are contrary to what is documented. Do some RCs hope to obtain some sort of indulgence for such blind defense of your elitist false-gospel church?
So by leaving the Catholic Church and forgoing your obligations, do you believe that God will forgive your mortal sins if you fail to make a good confession before your death?
More recourse to question-begging logical fallacy, while based upon the well-documented facts of the ecclesiastical deformation that is Rome, the question is, do you think that by not leaving the Catholic Church but trusting in her self-proclaimed ensured veracity and treasury of merits, with her Indulgences and the hope of perfection thru her Purgatory in order to become good enough to enter Heaven, do you believe that God will forgive your mortal sins if you fail to become born again by Scriptural justification by effectual heart-purifying faith (Acts 10:43; 15:7-9) before your death?
Catholicism (and liberal Protestantism and Antinomianism) has tragically become as the gate of Hell to multitudes, to their horror.
. Yes the Church has liberal and conservative members
And you expect that we should leave conservative evangelical fellowships and make Ted Kennedy Catholics our brethren? Rather, Scripture commands
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?...Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2 Corinthians 6:14,17-18)
I come too short myself in all I should be and so many great men such as Jonathan Edwards, Matthew Henry and such were, without compromising by fellowship with Rome with its liberalism as well as false doctrines.
If you preach a church, then you must defend that church, while if you preach a faith, then that i what you defend. Faith and fellowship do go together, but the latter is not an object of faith, as it is for Catholics.
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.