Posted on 01/05/2002 11:55:52 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
Be my guest.
It is "worth it" .. but another time. ~~ OK, but don't forget.
I shan't. But you've got a lot to learn. All in due time.
Calvin's Institutes are constantly buttressed with observations from the patristics. ~~ Yes, yes, and also constantly buttressed by Scriptural quotations ripped from their proper contexts.
That is what you've been taught to believe, it's true.
Protestants do not disrespect the patristic scholarship. RC's have just been taught to think that we do. ~~ Yet another fairy tale.
That is what you've been taught to believe, it's true.
Absolutely. I happily agree. More tomorrow, then, God willing. ~~ Why not right now?
Because presently I'm enjoying God's gift of beer, and I have to mow my lawn, transfer an IRA, and prepare a multi-million ultra-short municipal bond portfolio proposal tomorrow (foolish me, I forgot that this Monday was a holiday, and filled my schedule). Explanation enough?
In short, if you are content to enter the discussion in good faith and in due time, I should like nothing better.
But I'm hardly at your beck and call. Good grief. ;-)
Best,
OP
Thanks, daddy. Quick question -- have you ever been told that you perhaps take yourself a little too seriously?
That is what you've been taught to believe, it's true.
Actually, no, I've read the Institutes, so I know first-hand the manipulations of Calvin.
In short, if you are content to enter the discussion in good faith and in due time, I should like nothing better.
Again, unless you get outta the grandstand, things won't go very far. And if you insist on delaying, okay, but I go back on duty tomorrow.
Sure.
Sometimes even by people whose opinion I respect.
You could get there, but you've got a long way to go.
But, hey... I'm an open-minded sort. Who knows?
That is what you've been taught to believe, it's true. ~~ Actually, no, I've read the Institutes, so I know first-hand the manipulations of Calvin.
That is what you've been taught to believe, it's true.
In short, if you are content to enter the discussion in good faith and in due time, I should like nothing better. ~~ Again, unless you get outta the grandstand, things won't go very far. And if you insist on delaying, okay, but I go back on duty tomorrow.
No harm done; all in due time.
God will have you, or He won't. I am just His fountain pen.
Best,
OP
I am content to lurk here, for the most part, but I am not letting this one go by, OPie. You have outdone even yourself in the outrageous arrogance of this post. Even if you could go back and produce a "swinish" post of Squire's, it would just be the excuse to post this way, not any sort of justification.
You project your own faults onto Squire. You demand charity and good faith from him, but offer him neither in return, boasting that you will crush his arguments and tear them apart (in that order).
Squire has made a fine response in his #1054. He did not get hooked. So far, the score is Squire 1, OPie 0, and OPie is on the sidelines with a self-inflicted injury.
You justify this behavior, I suppose, as pre-debate psychological warfare, but this is how to lead people away from the truth about Christ and His Church. You ought to be leading people toward it, in humility, charity, and good faith.
You write: My temptation is simply to shake my sandals and move on.
Please do, only leave out the shaking off the dust of your feet. I would not be so cavalier with the Master's instructions to His disciples. You need to emulate His example much better before you propose to represent Him.
Ouch. I think.
You could get there, but you've got a long way to go.
I guess this brings to mind the quote of the great St. Teresa of Avila, "the further I approach the great light of God, the further I seem to be from it."
That is what you've been taught to believe, it's true.
No, I've actuall...oh...never mind. I don't think you care to know the truth.
No harm done; all in due time.
Sure. I'm sympathetic with your workload. Except that back when I was practicing law, one of my partners once said, "Hey, once you've done a few of these big transactions, no prob. A monkey can do the documents." And, too, I'm sitting in front of a big-ole textbook of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and I'm gonna get pimped out the arse tomorrow afternoon by an attending. But I'm willing to now discuss doctrine with you. I have noted, but will not further highlight, that I have twice offered you the opportunity to here and now defend the foundational doctrine of Protestantism, sola Scriptura, and you have twice refused to do so.
God will have you, or He won't.
Actually he already does. So does his holy Mother.
I am just His fountain pen.
Really? I'm his table leg.
Mormon, under the Acts of the Council of Nicaea, you are not even permitted to offer evidence in an Ecumenical Council.
If "squire" has any familiarity with the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, he will agree with me that those who maintain a false affirmation of the Trinity are not admitted to the councils of Rome and her so-called "separated brethren" (i.e., Protestants).
Rather, both Rome and the Reformers stand together in urging all Mormons everywhere to Repent of your Mormonism.
For unless you repent, you too shall all perish.
EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALVUM
Outside the True Church of Christ, there is No Salvation.
Repent.
I noticed that! doc makes many representations about Augustine, but I have never seen him back them up with a quotation.
Have fun sparring with OPie!
I note that you do not respond to any of the points I made, you just go after me personally. You buttress my "argument".
I think it is funny that you are now clinging to Rome's skirts. Squire 1, OPie -1.
You write: Outside the True Church of Christ, there is No Salvation.
Quite correct, but we will give you another chance.
Heh, heh.
...he will agree with me that those who maintain a false affirmation of the Trinity are not admitted to the councils of Rome and her so-called "separated brethren" (i.e., Protestants).
I'm not sure what you mean by your phrase "admitted to the councils of Rome." Do you?
Of course, if you speak of an Ecumenical Council, only the bishops of the Catholic world have a voice. Members of both other denominations and religions are admitted only as observers.
Rather, both Rome and the Reformers stand together in urging all Mormons everywhere to Repent of your Mormonism.
Actually, the teaching of the Catholic Church, as repeated in Pope Pius XII's encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, is that any non-Catholic (that includes both you and White Mountain) can be saved if (1) he remains non-Catholic through no personal fault or vincible ignorance; (2) he follows the dictates of the religion to which he adheres: and (3) he at all times conforms to the dictates of the Natural Law.
EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALVUM Outside the True Church of Christ, there is No Salvation.
This statement is true as far as it goes, but it is commonly misunderstood, and, sadly, I think you misunderstand it. The teaching of Catholicism is that all people (both Catholic and non-Catholic) can be saved (for the non-Catholics, they must satisfy the conditions stated above), but they are saved through the offices of the Catholic Church. There are many people saved through the Catholic Church, then, who are not even Catholic -- and perhaps who are even anti-Catholic. This was the clarification that Pius XII's Mystici Corporis Christi made to the common misunderstanding of Boniface VIII's Unam Sanctam.
Repent.
A good counsel for all of us.
I am clinging to the priestly robes of Christ.
Outside of which, are all confessing Mormons.
EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALVUM
Outside the True Church of Christ, there is No Salvation.
Repent.
That's in Matthew somewhere isn't it?
That, of course, is a presumptuous statement, but "Quite correct, but God will give you another chance." sounds just as presumptuous.
At any rate, I do not think you have exhausted all hope just yet.
It is to laugh. But listen, since the other Protestants on the thread have refused to answer my question, maybe you can give it a shot. The Protestants believe that all Divine Revelation is to be found in Scripture alone. To be true, this belief must itself be part of Divine Revelation, and, therefore, must be found in Scripture.
Would you please point me to the citation in Scripture that states that all Divine Revelation is found in Scripture alone? Thanks.
I think it is more a convenient argument than anything. Alot of dogma doesn't seem to have alot of direct scriptural basis but is inferred. Such as the trinity doctrine. It is an inference in my opinion. I have often thought it possible to infer that Paul was the anti-christ as he was the only person who never met Jesus and some of his teachings appear to directly contradict Christ. And that Christ warned of people who would come later and claim to be speaking for him...(queue twilight zone music).
I'm wierd that way.
No prob and no offense taken. It's hard to tell tone on these postings -- I took your statement to be one of the lazy, almost pro forma "that's not in Scripture" responses that appear so often on these types of threads. I shouldn't have made that assumption.
Off now to begin the two-week Bataan Death March known as "Gynecological Oncology." Have a good day.
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.