Free Republic… Under the pope

[RevelationDavid]

I’m sure this post won’t stay up long… But as a born-again evangelical I no longer feel comfortable on this site. It has become openly and aggressively pro Catholic. Catholicism is heresy.

Thank you Jim for putting so much effort into this clearinghouse of ideas… But the bombardment of papers nonsense can a longer be tolerated by me.

God bless all who proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord. God bless America

[Manly Warrior]

Looks like you are correct, given the profoundly anti-Jesus comments the majority of RC types provided.

Me, I’ll stay and try to be a good witness, even if many papists are not nice. Who knows....maybe in time the Sanhedrin will “zot” me too.

But I won’t leave til then.

[Albion Wilde]

The simpler answer to your frustrations is to avoid caucus discussions to which you do not belong. You can always re-post an article for non-caucus discussion later.

Why confuse a brittle ideologue by suggesting flexibility? :-)

[imardmd1]

Well said!

(Tho I don't know of any independent fundamental KJV Baptist churches that tolerate any kind of perversion, bro. Maybe SBC or GARB affiliates do this?)

[pbear8]

There are many such articles, here is but one -

In May and July 1844, Philadelphia suffered some of the bloodiest rioting of the antebellum period, as anti-immigrant mobs attacked Irish-American homes and Roman Catholic churches before being suppressed by the militia. The violence was part of a wave of riots that convulsed American cities starting in the 1830s. Yet even amid this tumult, they stand out for their duration, itself a product of nativist determination to use xenophobia for political gain. In the aftermath of the riots, shocked Philadelphians began debating new methods of maintaining order, a discussion that contributed to the consolidation of Philadelphia County in 1854.

https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/archive/nativist-riots-of-1844/

[Gamecock]

Except Protestants are systematically barred from posting here.

[Albion Wilde]

"You know you can avoid all religious postings by setting your preferences to News?"

Do you have a link to the instructions to do this because I haven't found a way to do that and I was a certified computer tech at one time.

Agree -- I've never found a way to permanently take a topic out of the general Forum feed by adjusting your Account Preferences.

But you can go on the front Forum page to the list of Topics in a blue "Browse by Forum" box at the top of the Forum page and select "News/Activism" instead of "Everything."

That should do the trick. If there is a hot item in the other areas such as "Announcements", it will still show up at in the list in the sidebar. You can configure the sidebar on your Account Preferences page. You reach that page by hittiing "Account" at the very top of the Forum page and go to the "Manage Blocks" link.

[metmom]

You made the assertion.

It’s your responsibility to back it up, not ours to do your leg work for you.

If you can’t or won’t support your claims, then nobody is obligated in the least to believe any of them. We can just chalk it up to wishful thinking on your part.

[metmom]

No, you're one of the many flavors of Protestant so by definition you accept the only the OT minus seven books that were in the Septuagint for nearly 1800 years prior to Christ.

Catholics definitions of things are meaningless, as is your opinion of what we must and must not *accept*.

[dunblak]

Assume that you are long gone now but if not, it would be worthwhile for you to consider that the truth of Christianity is from God. Denominations are the work of Godly men who are imperfect. Hopefully, you will establish your own relationship with God through prayer and personal spirituality. Many of us have and we can be tolerant of any denomination, knowing they are all, including your’s, imperfect, but trying to bring others to the Lord. God have mercy on you.

[dunblak]

Assume that you are long gone now but if not, it would be worthwhile for you to consider that the truth of Christianity is from God. Denominations are the work of Godly men who are imperfect. Hopefully, you will establish your own relationship with God through prayer and personal spirituality. Many of us have and we can be tolerant of any denomination, knowing they are all, including your’s, imperfect, but trying to bring others to the Lord. God have mercy on you.

[imardmd1]

Sure. Just double-click on "News/Activism"

I usually click on "Everything," but if I only want to select out things on the Religion Forum, I just double-click on "Religion." Changes everything instantly.

[Luircin]

Oh PLEASE.

Roman Catholicism didn’t even have an infallable canon until decades after Luther.

Even Luther’s Roman contemporaries were ‘taking books out of the Bible’ as the claim goes.

[daniel1212]

That is exactly correct. What’s more, I’m seeing fewer and fewer Catholic threads and those I do see have few comments.

That is not reality, but they are almost daily posted, and the only religious threads that see a lot of posts are the provocative ones, mostly by RCs.

Just within about the last month: Why Does The Shroud of Turin Still Exist?1,287 of 1,287

Be Catholic to Save the World 50 of 120

97 of 289

Why Heretics Hate Mary... 903 of 1,039

Poll: 7 in 10 US Catholics Don’t Believe in Real Presence 64 of 68

What Is Better, Catholic or Protestant? < 491 of 556/p>

Was St. Paul a Poor Preacher? 153 of 205

Jesus Challenges the Scribe 27 of 54

[RegulatorCountry]

You’ve got a sect of Catholics who have decided to congregate here known as sede vacantists, who believe themselves literally more Catholic than the Pope, and this precedes the current Marxist apostate Francis.

Ignore them, or rub their noses in the fact that they’re de facto Protestant. They’re not representative of Catholics as a whole.

[daniel1212]

Maybe you'd be happier in a country with a Protestant state church, where Catholics have to shut up or go to prison?

You mean a small sect like the KKK, or worldwide church, in which obedience to its head required:

Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure,...to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church ;

But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated..that he may declare the ruler’s vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance Canons of the Ecumenical Fourth Lateran Council (canon 3), 1215: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp

The head of state or ruler must, within ten days after the accusation, complete the following tasks: the destruction of the houses, the imposition of the fines, the consigning and dividing-up of the valuables that have been found or seized , all of which have already been described in this decree. He must obtain all fines in coin within three months, and divide them up in the manner to be set forth hereafter, and convict of crime those who cannot pay, and hold them in prison until they can ....

The head of state or ruler must divide up all the property of the heretics that is seized or discovered by the aforesaid officials , and the fines exacted from these heretics, in the form and manner following: one-third shall go to the government of the state or district. The second as a reward of the industry of the office shall go to the officials who handled this particular case. The third shall be deposited in some secure place to be kept by the aforesaid Diocesan bishop and inquisitors,and spent as they shall think fit to promote the faith and extirpate{11} heretics, this policy prevailing in spite of any statute that has been or shall be enacted against this dividing-up of the heretics' property . - Pope Innocent IV, Ad extirpanda :

To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority , as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago... ei=1s48UInqOafi0gHiooDYDg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=greater%20than%20that%20of%20Seraphim%20and%20Cherubim&f=true)

"The Church has the right,..to admonish or warn its members, ecclesiastical or lay, who have not conformed to its laws and also, if needful to punish them by physical means, that is, coercive jurisdiction." - Catholic encyclopedia, Jurisdiction (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08567a.htm)

Innocent’s Bull prescribes that captured heretics, being "murderers of souls as well as robbers of God’s sacraments and of the Christian faith, . . . are to be coerced – as are thieves and bandits – into confessing their errors and accusing others, although one must stop short of danger to life or limb." — Bull Ad Extirpanda (Bullarium Romanorum Pontificum, vol. 3 [Turin: Franco, Fory & Dalmazzo, 1858], Lex 25, p. 556a.) (http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt119.html)

Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors): "[It is error to believe that] The (Catholic) Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect." Section V, Errors Concerning the Church and Her Rights, #24. (http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P9SYLL.HTM)

For many RCs, these were the "good ol' days." Which unscriptural use of the sword of men early Prots had to unlearn.

[daniel1212]

See above

[daniel1212]

No, you're one of the many flavors of Protestant so by definition you accept the only the OT minus seven books that were in the Septuagint for nearly 1800 years prior to Christ.

You mean parroting what you can only wish could be established:

Catholics argue that since Christ and the NT quotes from the LXX then we must accept the books we call the apocrypha. However, this presumes that the Septuagint was a uniform body of texts in the time of Christ which contained all the apocryphal books at that time, but for which there is no historical evidence. The earliest existing Greek manuscripts which contain some of them date from the 4th Century and are understood to have been placed therein by Christians.

Philo of Alexandria (1st c A.D.) states that only the Torah (the first 5 books of the O.T.) was commissioned to be translated, leaving the rest of the O.T. following in later centuries, and in an order that is not altogether clear, nor do all LXX manuscripts have the same apocryphal books and names.

Edward Earle Ellis writes, “No two Septuagint codices contain the same apocrypha, and no uniform Septuagint ‘Bible’ was ever the subject of discussion in the patristic church. In view of these facts the Septuagint codices appear to have been originally intended more as service books than as a defined and normative canon of Scripture,” (E. E. Ellis, The Old Testament in Early Christianity [Baker 1992], 34-35.

British scholar R. T. Beckwith states, Philo of Alexandria's writings show it to have been the same as the Palestinian. He refers to the three familiar sections, and he ascribes inspiration to many books in all three, but never to any of the Apocrypha....The Apocrypha were known in the church from the start, but the further back one goes, the more rarely are they treated as inspired. (Roger T. Beckwith, "The Canon of the Old Testament" in Phillip Comfort, The Origin of the Bible [Wheaton: Tyndale House, 2003] pp. 57-64)

Manuscripts of anything like the capacity of Codex Alexandrinus were not used in the first centuries of the Christian era, and since in the second century AD the Jews seem largely to have discarded the Septuagint…there can be no real doubt that the comprehensive codices of the Septuagint, which start appearing in the fourth century AD, are all of Christian origin.

Nor is there agreement between the codices which the Apocrypha include...Moreover, all three codices [Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus], according to Kenyon, were produced in Egypt, yet the contemporary Christian lists of the biblical books drawn up in Egypt by Athanasius and (very likely) pseudo-Athanasius are much more critical, excluding all apocryphal books from the canon, and putting them in a separate appendix. (Roger Beckwith, [Anglican priest, Oxford BD and Lambeth DD], The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church [Eerdmans 1986], p. 382, 383; http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/01/legendary-alexandrian-canon.html)

Likewise Gleason Archer affirms,

Even in the case of the Septuagint, the apocryphal books maintain a rather uncertain existence. The Codex Vaticanus (B) lacks [besides 3 and 4] 1 and 2 Maccabees (canonical, according to Rome), but includes 1 Esdras (non-canonical, according to Rome). The Sinaiticus (Aleph) omits Baruch (canonical, according to Rome), but includes 4 Maccabees (non-canonical, according to Rome)... Thus it turns out that even the three earliest MSS or the LXX show considerable uncertainty as to which books constitute the list of the Apocrypha.. (Archer, Gleason L., Jr., "A Survey of Old Testament Introduction", Moody Press, Chicago, IL, Rev. 1974, p. 75; http://www.provethebible.net/T2-Integ/B-1101.htm)

The German historian Martin Hengel writes, “Sinaiticus contains Barnabas and Hermas, Alexandrinus 1 and 2 Clement.” “Codex Alexandrinus...includes the LXX as we know it in Rahlfs’ edition, with all four books of Maccabees and the fourteen Odes appended to Psalms.” “...the Odes (sometimes varied in number), attested from the fifth century in all Greek Psalm manuscripts, contain three New Testament ‘psalms’: the Magnificat, the Benedictus, the Nunc Dimittis from Luke’s birth narrative, and the conclusion of the hymn that begins with the ‘Gloria in Excelsis.’ This underlines the fact that the LXX, although, itself consisting of a collection of Jewish documents, wishes to be a Christian book.” (Martin Hengel, The Septuagint as Christian Scripture [Baker 2004], pp. 57-59)

Also,

The Targums did not include these books, nor the earliest versions of the Peshitta, and the apocryphal books are seen to have been later additions, and later versions of the LXX varied in regard to which books of the apocrypha they contained. “Nor is there agreement between the codices which of the Apocrypha include. (Eerdmans 1986), 382. The two most complete targums (translations of the Hebrew Bible into Aramaic which date from the first century to the Middel Ages) contain all the books of the Hebrew Bible except Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel.

And Cyril of Jerusalem, whose list rejected the apocrypha (except for Baruch) exhorts his readers to “read the Divine Scriptures, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, these that have been translated by the Seventy-two Interpreters,” the latter referring to the Septuagint but not as including the apocrypha. (http://www.bible-researcher.com/cyril.html)

Furthermore, if quoting from some of the Septuagint means the whole is sanctioned, then since the Psalms of Solomon, which is not part of any scriptural canon, is found in copies of the Septuagint as is Psalm 151, and 3 and 4 Maccabees (Vaticanus [early 4th century] does not include any of the Maccabean books, while Sinaiticus [early 4th century] includes 1 and 4 Maccabees and Alexandrinus [early 5th century] includes 1, 2, 3, and 4 Maccabees and the Psalms of Solomon), then we would be bound to accept them as well.

Moreover, simply because Scripture quotes from a source does not make the whole of it canonical, as Scripture can include an inspired utterance such as from Enoch, (Jude. 1:14,15; Enoch 1:9) but the book of Enoch as a whole is not Scripture. (Enoch also tells of over 400 foot height angelic offspring, and of angels (stars) procreating with oxen to produce elephants, camels and donkeys: 7:12-15; 86:1-5.)

By accepting only that subset, you loudly proclaim that not only is the Holy Spirit imperfect and incapable of keeping error from being accepted into the canon for so many centuries, and therefore deny the Holy Trinity,

Now we must address your reasoning, for just what kind of false dilemma logic is that? You might as well argue that if you accept that there can be typos in Biblical mss and the Vulgate then it means you loudly proclaim that the Holy Spirit is imperfect and incapable of keeping any type of errors from being part of the Bible, however discernible by later .

The problems with the Vulgate were such that no one version of it was set forth and resulted in the scandal of the Sistine Vulgate by the zealous Pope Sixtus V to make (via the Bull Aeternus Ille, March 1590) his very faulty revision of the Vulgate “the authorized Vulgate of the Tridentine Council,” and excommunicated those who deviated from it. Which resulted the death (perhaps by RC hands) of its fanatical papal translator.

But rather than your "either/or reasoning, we have the Scriptural reality of stewardship, in which while God could have kept man from both any sins or mistakes - and does so to varying degrees - yet there are limits,. and He allows men to sin and makes mistakes, and thus exhorts them to be "good stewards of the manifold grace of God," and will accomplish His purposes despite faulty men and magisteriums.

In addition we have a false premise:

but also in essence assert that the Holy Spirit worked hand in hand with Satan to lead people astray by leaving those books in the Old Testament for about 1800 years.

Which not only means you accuse the EOs of letting the devil have a hand in their slightly larger canon, but it presumes that the deuteros was indisputably defined as being part of the OT for about 1800 years. And if debate was allowed, then (consistent with your logic) you can be charged with loudly proclaiming that the Holy Spirit is imperfect and incapable of preventing confusion about the canon in the Catholic church for so many centuries.

So, by definition (as per your logic), you absolutely do deny there is a Holy Trinity if you allow any kind of errors in Biblical mss and copies, and confusion about the canon due to lack of infallible judgment.

For in reality, scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon - after the death of Luther.

The Catholic Encyclopedia states as regards the Middle Ages,

In the Latin Church, all through the Middle Ages [5th century to the 15th century] we find evidence of hesitation about the character of the deuterocanonicals. There is a current friendly to them, another one distinctly unfavourable to their authority and sacredness, while wavering between the two are a number of writers whose veneration for these books is tempered by some perplexity as to their exact standing, and among those we note St. Thomas Aquinas. Few are found to unequivocally acknowledge their canonicity. The prevailing attitude of Western medieval authors is substantially that of the Greek Fathers. The chief cause of this phenomenon in the West is to be sought in the influence, direct and indirect, of St. Jerome's depreciating Prologus (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm)

what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Matthew 7:2)

"So [consistent with your either/or reasoning and false premise] the next time you try and claim that the Holy Spirit leads you remember that by definition you assert that the Holy Spirit works with Satan, not Christ." have a nice day

[Terry L Smith]

The words “free republic”, include whether ‘the papers’ are derived from catholic, protestant, mormon, or pagan, with the express exclusion of mohammedanism, which destroys ‘freedom’.

[Terry L Smith]

The words “free republic”, include whether ‘the papers’ are derived from catholic, protestant, mormon, or pagan, with the express exclusion of mohammedanism, which destroys ‘freedom’.

[ronniesgal]

hi, and thank you!!