Posted on 09/27/2014 11:05:41 AM PDT by Gamecock
>>This belief was ancient, dating back to the apostles themselves.<<
.
No, this pagan attachment to Semiramis by proxy in the name of “Mary” dates back over 4000 years, and falsely accusing the apostles of this sin does you no honor.
.
You can call this “polemic” for all you want, but the sola scriptura adherents are thankfully a fast-disappearing fringe group confined mostly to North America and scorned even by eminent Protestant theologians. Playing street theologian won’t do. This is the stuff for the Billy Grahams, Joel Osteens, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jim Jones, David Koresh-type congregations.
Petrine authority is now accepted not only by the long line of Catholic intellectuals, historical and ancient language scholars, theologians, and major university departments across the world but also, as you have been repeatedly reminded on this thread, by a number of illustrious Episcopalian (e.g. Henry Newman) and Protestant theologians who have converted to Catholicism including the President of the National Evangelical Theological Society (Francis Beckwith) to say nothing of the saints or martyrs.
We have been debating on this thread for quite some time and we now know why its next to impossible to get through to this crowd whose best arguments is to embrace a lazy form Christianity sans any need for belief in the Eucharist, the Mass, the Sacraments, etc. Theirs is a “Church” with 35,000 denominations and where each corner street Foursquare congregation stylized as First this or First that, or Reformed this or that or First AME or First ABC, or First XYZ are all valid “expressions” of the Word of God. They have in common with the pastors of the “gay-marriage” congregations their denial of Petrine authority. They fail to see how inherently contradictory and absurd such a proposition of multiple interpretations are. Sadly, these folks can only be viewed as Oprah-type students of the Word of God. Let’s pray and hope they will do some serious reading.
What verses do y’all use to justify AOM? I have not seen one valid verse.
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Name one such group that denies sola scripture. I have been to many Protestant churches over the years and not a one had that opinion.
Actually it more of the same propaganda substituting for a polemic. For all your reliance upon historical decent = present authenticity and men of letters, professing themselves wise but who became fools for Rome, this is simply not how the church began,
while those who hold most strongly to the supremacy of Scripture are far more unified in most basic beliefs than the overall fruit of those whom Rome counts and treats as members in life and in death. Which is were it counts, and what we do constitutes the evidence of what we really believe.
“As has been mentioned many times, if you (or any poster) is too thinskinned for the open threads, they should not be on them.”
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin said, “Accuse others of what you do.”
The fang and claw crowd wants to deflect attention from the circumstances of this set-to, which are these:
This particular kerfluffle began with one or more of the fang and claw protestants hitting the abuse button over something I said.
It started with *them* being thin-skinned. To hide this, they immediately started slinging accusations that *others* are being too sensitive.
Occasionally I am motivated to comment on the bias in the moderating here. I don’t really know why, because it is the very tone the management wants.
In the final analysis, though, it was not I who brought the moderator in with false accusations of “mind reading.” It was the fang and claw protestants that wanted to ensure that the strongest arguments against them are stifled, and, whether he did so knowingly or not, the moderator became their cat’s paw.
Remember Sinkspur.
Well then; WHY is there SO much about HER in Catholicism?
Incredible!
Says who?
Is this in them 'books' that Luther 'removed'?
Sad... whatever has convinced you that Rome's version is the only game in town?
I think you might be right.
Hardly ANYONE knows what the Scriptures say these days.
Luke 18:8b
... when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?"
...”God can do anything, therefore (fill in the blank) happened*, are doomed”....
But it works very well currently for anyone who desires to have a religious following, and maintaining the loyalty of that following....for they can adapt and change what is needed to continue the facade, and build on it with more “dazzle”......catholic leadership have been doing so for centuries because it works easily with regard to their followers....The “pattern” was established long ago and today’s membership follows that “pattern”.
...find Rosary beads
...find Holy water
...find His flesh in a wafer
...find His mother High and Lifted up
...find His image still on a cross
...find millions of dollars spent on fancy clothes, buildings and other things
...find His word subjugated to BEING voted upon as to what it really MEANS
...find various body parts of saints carried thru the streets of the world
What was it you said?
Remember Torquemada
Before we examine those verses, however, I should note that one of the errors of Martin Luther condemned by Pope Leo X in his papal bull Exsurge Domine (June 15, 1520) was Luther’s belief that “Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.” In other words, while the Catholic Church bases the doctrine of Purgatory on both Scripture and Tradition, Scripture itself is sufficient to prove the existence of Purgatory.
The chief Old Testament verse that indicates the necessity of purgation after death (and thus implies a place or state where such purgation takes place—hence the name Purgatory) is 2 Maccabees 12:46:
It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.
If everyone who dies goes immediately to Heaven or to Hell, then this verse would be nonsense. Those who are in Heaven have no need of prayer, “that they may be loosed from sins”; those who are in Hell are unable to benefit from such prayers, because there is no escape from Hell—damnation is eternal.
Thus, there must be a third place or state, in which some of the dead are currently in the process of being “loosed from sins.” (A side note: Martin Luther argued that 1 and 2 Maccabees did not belong in the canon of the Old Testament, even though they had been accepted by the universal Church from the time that the canon was settled. Thus his contention, condemned by Pope Leo, that “Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.”)
Saint Peter and Saint Paul both speak of “trials” that are compared with a “cleansing fire.” In 1 Peter 1:6-7, Saint Peter refers to our necessary trials in this world:
Wherein you shall greatly rejoice, if now you must be for a little time made sorrowful in divers temptations: That the trial of your faith (much more precious than gold which is tried by the fire) may be found unto praise and glory and honour at the appearing of Jesus Christ.
And in 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, Saint Paul extends this image into the life after this one:
Every man’s work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work, of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.
But “he himself shall be saved.” Again, the Church recognized from the beginning that Saint Paul cannot be talking here about those in the fires of Hell, because those are fires of torment, not of purgation—no one whose actions place him in Hell will ever leave it. Rather, this verse is the basis of the Church’s belief that all those who undergo purgation after their earthly life ends (those whom we call the Poor Souls in Purgatory) are assured of entrance into Heaven.
Christ Himself, in Matthew 12:31-32, speaks of forgiveness in this age (here on earth, as in 1 Peter 1:6-7) and in the world to come (as in 1 Corinthians 3:13-15):
Therefore I say to you: Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.
If all souls go directly either to Heaven or to Hell, then there is no forgiveness in the world to come. But if that is so, why would Christ mention the possibility of such forgiveness?
—Scott Richert
More at the link: http://catholicism.about.com/b/2010/02/11/reader-question-is-there-a-scriptural-basis-for-purgatory.htm
“What was it you said?”
Having seen a given poster informed of a given fact on numerous occasions, I came to the conclusion that the poster was aware of that fact.
This, apparently, constitutes “mind-reading” — when it is convenient.
“Remember Torquemada”
Which one? The one that exists only in what James Michener called “the Black Legend,” or the historical figure?
He also wrote that no one who could say, I am a Jew, I have always been a Jew, and everyone has always known that I am a Jew, was ever punished by the Inquisition.
>> “You can call this “polemic” for all you want, but the sola scriptura adherents are thankfully a fast-disappearing fringe group...” <<
.
This was prophesied by Paul in his letters to the Thessalonians. He called it a “falling away.”
.
No surprise that a catholic would be encouraged by such.
.
>> “He also wrote that no one who could say, I am a Jew, I have always been a Jew, and everyone has always known that I am a Jew, was ever punished by the Inquisition.” <<
.
He was a fool and a liar!
.
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.