Our Lady of Guadlalupe
|
|
|
Posted on 12/12/2001 7:21:41 AM PST by Cap'n Crunch
It's all in there. But be careful, you might just become Catholic.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
Go for it!
When you see that, scroll down just a bit further to one of his writigs entitled "On Holy Virginity," I think you will find it quite beautiful, and enlightening.
Several other saints wrote about Holy Virginity also.
Col 2:8 8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. (NIV) "
Do you think that someone grounded in their faith is going to go against what scripture says by the writings of old church fathers, some of them writing more than 300 years after Christ? Unless you can show some proof that these men had anymore insight into the bible than say a Biily Graham your argument is foolish. The early church fathers and the scholars of today have one thing in common. They are fallible men. The time of their birth in relationship to the birth of Christ has nothing to do with their knowing the truth.In all due respect, you would be better off studying the scriptures that were inspired by God instead of looking for writings of men that have the same error in doctrine that you do.
Basically your argument is that these men prove what you believe. The Mormons do this, they can point you to Joseph Smith as proof of their beliefs. The JW,s and all the rest do the same thing.
We believe you are wrong and no matter how many writings from infallible men you point us too doesn't change that.
Narrow is the gate... few find it (Paraphrase). Heresy does not become a truth because of the number of people who believe it.
One last thought. Augustine wrote that we should believe nothing that can't be backed by scripture. Do you agree with him on this? I find it funny that I never hear this mentioned about this cornerstone of Christian belief.
There are writings by the Apostles themselves, so you mean to say that for one moment they wrote the inspired word of God and the next minute they were completely clueless?
Curious that so many of them, some of them direct disciples of the Apostles, wrote the same thing.
If you have the entire thing on CD, why don't you try reading it? Doesn't sound to me that you have. If you had, then at the very least you would understand the Catholic position because it is the same today as it was from Pentecost.
If these holy men had not stood up and defended truth, it would have been awash years ago. The evidence of that is the many heresies which they crushed throughout the centuries.
Hopefully we can agree on that point.
The short answer is: Mary comes as a pregnant woman because she is coming to a completely pagan land. To them Jesus hasn't been born yet because they haven't heard the Good News. It had to be something drastic and it had to get the attention of everyone. You really have to go into the history of this culture to understand what they believed and why the apparition of Mary turned them toward Christianity.
The Jews are forever gratefull that the catholics put their stamp of approval on the Old Testament.(/sarcasm) No rabbinical body decided upon the canon of the Old Testament. The canon was recognized by Israel and available as it was being written.
Daniel, a captive in Babylon, had a copy of Jeremiah written only a few years earlier and was studying it as scripture (Daniel 9:2). How is it that the Jews were able, through the Spirit of God to determine what was inspired yet we, according to you, would have no idea what was scripture unless the Catholic Church told us.
The Synod of Antioch, in A.D. 266, denounced the doctrine od Paul of Samasota as "foreign to the ecclisiastical canon". The Council of Nicea in 325 refers to "the Canon";and the Council of Laodicea said that only 'canonized' books of both the Old and New Testaments be read in church.
Yet none of those Councils deemed it necessary to list the canonized books, indicating that they were already well-known and accepted by common Christians the same way the Jews accepted their scripture.
It wasn't until the Third council of Carthage, in A.D.397 do we have the first decision on the canon. That is rather late if without it Christians didn't know what books were in the Old and new Testaments and therefore couldn't use them as Rome claims today.
The arrogance of Rome on this subject is sickening. Putting their so called "Stamp of approval" on what was already known and claiming authority on it is disgusting.
According to Paul, ordinary Christians are to judge what is truth (1 Corintians 14:37) and it was Peter who refered to Pauls writings as scripture long before Jerome.
Sorry but we can't agree even on this point.
It never fails when you debate Catholics. Eventually you get to the truth. You put as much faith in the writings and tradition of man as you do to the inspired word. Of course you have to do this or your faith, which is based mainly on non-biblical doctrine would crumble like a house of cards.
Please name one church father whos writings are considered to be the inspired word of God? (Please don't try the argument that Rome can deem them inspired. I refuted that claim in my last post on Rome canonizing scripture)
You claim you love to study the history of the Church try this.
The Pharisees claimed that Jesus was wrong. They were the guardians of the truth. They could trace their lineage back to Abraham. They had scripture and sacred "tradition" on their side. Sound familiar to you? It should you have basically used this same argument. this is what Jesus thought of their claim.
" Mark 7:8-9 8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." 9 And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! (NIV)
Mark 7:13 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that." (NIV)
Matt 15:7-9 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: 8 "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'" (NIV) "
So much for church history.
"I mean, we can point to the fathers, but who can "scripture only" people point to from history other than Paul? "If I have to make a choice between all the church Fathers or Paul, I'll take Paul. I'll stake my salvation on his writings over any early church fathers.
Who would we need to point too?
"Where are all these people who believed "scripture only?" Where and what are their writings? Which Church did they belong to? "
Where are they? Some in heaven, some here on earth.
Their writings? It's called the Word of God.
Which church do they belong to? You really need to look to the bible to understand what the church is. You "belong" to a church. We belong to Jesus and are the "church".
1 Pet 2:9 9 "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God",
We have Jesus as our authority, you have a pope. You have a priesthood, we are that royal priesthood.
Peter,who you claim head of your church, wrote this. He contradicts your doctrine of the priesthood.
Now I know you can point me to hundreds of writings over the last 2000 years to show me what Peter really meant, as seen through the eyes of your church. Don't bother. Peter has been silent for 2000 years on this. Unless he comes back and writes again I think I'll take him at his last writing on the subject.
As is typical in debates with Catholics I can't recall you using the bible as proof for any of your arguments. If you want to debate Scripture fine I'll respond to that. While the writings of the early church fathers are interesteing to read I find debating them on doctrinal matters useless unless,as I asked before, you can show me some proof that ANY of the writings by the early fathers are considered inspired by God.
I'll pray that God lifts the blinders from your eyes and you begin to look to Him for your answers not Jerome.
If you care to freepmail me I'll be overjoyed to continue the discussion, since we seem to be the last two posting.
If not, I wish you peace. Cap'n.
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Saint of the Day Ping List.
Our Lady of Guadlalupe
|
|
|
Roses bloomed
in December
on a hill,
unexpected promise
to a bishop
who had his doubts.
A faithful hand
gathered them
perhaps unsure
why he had been given
this mission,
but still willing to obey.
As they cascaded to the floor
one by one,
revealing a mystery
to the amazement
of those gathered,
did you smile, Lady,
at their wonder
that the mundane
could be shattered
by the touch
of a loving God?
Is that the image on the tilma, or is it a painting?
BUMP
ignorance ( of Scriptures ) thine name is joshua. Tell me, when was father Abraham justified? before Isaac was born, or after? And if you are brave enough to venture any kind of rational response, try another one: in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament, who is the Final arbiter of greivances between two believers? Scripture, or the Church?
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.
