Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Great Heresies [Open]
Catholic.com ^

Posted on 05/20/2008 7:45:05 AM PDT by NYer

From Christianity’s beginnings, the Church has been attacked by those introducing false teachings, or heresies.

The Bible warned us this would happen. Paul told his young protégé, Timothy, "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths" (2 Tim. 4:3–4).

  What Is Heresy?

Heresy is an emotionally loaded term that is often misused. It is not the same thing as incredulity, schism, apostasy, or other sins against faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him" (CCC 2089).

To commit heresy, one must refuse to be corrected. A person who is ready to be corrected or who is unaware that what he has been saying is against Church teaching is not a heretic.

A person must be baptized to commit heresy. This means that movements that have split off from or been influenced by Christianity, but that do not practice baptism (or do not practice valid baptism), are not heresies, but separate religions. Examples include Muslims, who do not practice baptism, and Jehovah’s Witnesses, who do not practice valid baptism.

Finally, the doubt or denial involved in heresy must concern a matter that has been revealed by God and solemnly defined by the Church (for example, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the sacrifice of the Mass, the pope’s infallibility, or the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary).

It is important to distinguish heresy from schism and apostasy. In schism, one separates from the Catholic Church without repudiating a defined doctrine. An example of a contemporary schism is the Society of St. Pius X—the "Lefebvrists" or followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre—who separated from the Church in the late 1980s, but who have not denied Catholic doctrines. In apostasy, one totally repudiates the Christian faith and no longer even claims to be a Christian.

With this in mind, let’s look at some of the major heresies of Church history and when they began.

 

The Circumcisers (1st Century)

The Circumcision heresy may be summed up in the words of Acts 15:1: "But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’"

Many of the early Christians were Jews, who brought to the Christian faith many of their former practices. They recognized in Jesus the Messiah predicted by the prophets and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Because circumcision had been required in the Old Testament for membership in God’s covenant, many thought it would also be required for membership in the New Covenant that Christ had come to inaugurate. They believed one must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic law to come to Christ. In other words, one had to become a Jew to become a Christian.

But God made it clear to Peter in Acts 10 that Gentiles are acceptable to God and may be baptized and become Christians without circumcision. The same teaching was vigorously defended by Paul in his epistles to the Romans and the Galatians—to areas where the Circumcision heresy had spread.

 

Gnosticism (1st and 2nd Centuries)

"Matter is evil!" was the cry of the Gnostics. This idea was borrowed from certain Greek philosophers. It stood against Catholic teaching, not only because it contradicts Genesis 1:31 ("And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good") and other scriptures, but because it denies the Incarnation. If matter is evil, then Jesus Christ could not be true God and true man, for Christ is in no way evil. Thus many Gnostics denied the Incarnation, claiming that Christ only appeared to be a man, but that his humanity was an illusion. Some Gnostics, recognizing that the Old Testament taught that God created matter, claimed that the God of the Jews was an evil deity who was distinct from the New Testament God of Jesus Christ. They also proposed belief in many divine beings, known as "aeons," who mediated between man and the ultimate, unreachable God. The lowest of these aeons, the one who had contact with men, was supposed to be Jesus Christ.

 

Montanism (Late 2nd Century)

Montanus began his career innocently enough through preaching a return to penance and fervor. His movement also emphasized the continuance of miraculous gifts, such as speaking in tongues and prophecy. However, he also claimed that his teachings were above those of the Church, and soon he began to teach Christ’s imminent return in his home town in Phrygia. There were also statements that Montanus himself either was, or at least specially spoke for, the Paraclete that Jesus had promised would come (in reality, the Holy Spirit).

 

Sabellianism (Early 3rd Century)

The Sabellianists taught that Jesus Christ and God the Father were not distinct persons, but two aspects or offices of one person. According to them, the three persons of the Trinity exist only in God’s relation to man, not in objective reality.

 

Arianism (4th Century)

Arius taught that Christ was a creature made by God. By disguising his heresy using orthodox or near-orthodox terminology, he was able to sow great confusion in the Church. He was able to muster the support of many bishops, while others excommunicated him.

Arianism was solemnly condemned in 325 at the First Council of Nicaea, which defined the divinity of Christ, and in 381 at the First Council of Constantinople, which defined the divinity of the Holy Spirit. These two councils gave us the Nicene creed, which Catholics recite at Mass every Sunday.

 

Pelagianism (5th Century)

Pelagius denied that we inherit original sin from Adam’s sin in the Garden and claimed that we become sinful only through the bad example of the sinful community into which we are born. Conversely, he denied that we inherit righteousness as a result of Christ’s death on the cross and said that we become personally righteous by instruction and imitation in the Christian community, following the example of Christ. Pelagius stated that man is born morally neutral and can achieve heaven under his own powers. According to him, God’s grace is not truly necessary, but merely makes easier an otherwise difficult task.

 

Semi-Pelagianism (5th Century)

After Augustine refuted the teachings of Pelagius, some tried a modified version of his system. This, too, ended in heresy by claiming that humans can reach out to God under their own power, without God’s grace; that once a person has entered a state of grace, one can retain it through one’s efforts, without further grace from God; and that natural human effort alone can give one some claim to receiving grace, though not strictly merit it.

 

Nestorianism (5th Century)

This heresy about the person of Christ was initiated by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, who denied Mary the title of Theotokos (Greek: "God-bearer" or, less literally, "Mother of God"). Nestorius claimed that she only bore Christ’s human nature in her womb, and proposed the alternative title Christotokos ("Christ-bearer" or "Mother of Christ").

Orthodox Catholic theologians recognized that Nestorius’s theory would fracture Christ into two separate persons (one human and one divine, joined in a sort of loose unity), only one of whom was in her womb. The Church reacted in 431 with the Council of Ephesus, defining that Mary can be properly referred to as the Mother of God, not in the sense that she is older than God or the source of God, but in the sense that the person she carried in her womb was, in fact, God incarnate ("in the flesh").

There is some doubt whether Nestorius himself held the heresy his statements imply, and in this century, the Assyrian Church of the East, historically regarded as a Nestorian church, has signed a fully orthodox joint declaration on Christology with the Catholic Church and rejects Nestorianism. It is now in the process of coming into full ecclesial communion with the Catholic Church.

 

Monophysitism (5th Century)

Monophysitism originated as a reaction to Nestorianism. The Monophysites (led by a man named Eutyches) were horrified by Nestorius’s implication that Christ was two people with two different natures (human and divine). They went to the other extreme, claiming that Christ was one person with only one nature (a fusion of human and divine elements). They are thus known as Monophysites because of their claim that Christ had only one nature (Greek: mono = one; physis = nature).

Orthodox Catholic theologians recognized that Monophysitism was as bad as Nestorianism because it denied Christ’s full humanity and full divinity. If Christ did not have a fully human nature, then he would not be fully human, and if he did not have a fully divine nature then he was not fully divine.

 

Iconoclasm (7th and 8th Centuries)

This heresy arose when a group of people known as iconoclasts (literally, "icon smashers") appeared, who claimed that it was sinful to make pictures and statues of Christ and the saints, despite the fact that in the Bible, God had commanded the making of religious statues (Ex. 25:18–20; 1 Chr. 28:18–19), including symbolic representations of Christ (cf. Num. 21:8–9 with John 3:14).

 

Catharism (11th Century)

Catharism was a complicated mix of non-Christian religions reworked with Christian terminology. The Cathars had many different sects; they had in common a teaching that the world was created by an evil deity (so matter was evil) and we must worship the good deity instead.

The Albigensians formed one of the largest Cathar sects. They taught that the spirit was created by God, and was good, while the body was created by an evil god, and the spirit must be freed from the body. Having children was one of the greatest evils, since it entailed imprisoning another "spirit" in flesh. Logically, marriage was forbidden, though fornication was permitted. Tremendous fasts and severe mortifications of all kinds were practiced, and their leaders went about in voluntary poverty.

 

Protestantism (16th Century)

Protestant groups display a wide variety of different doctrines. However, virtually all claim to believe in the teachings of sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone"—the idea that we must use only the Bible when forming our theology) and sola fide ("by faith alone"— the idea that we are justified by faith only).

The great diversity of Protestant doctrines stems from the doctrine of private judgment, which denies the infallible authority of the Church and claims that each individual is to interpret Scripture for himself. This idea is rejected in 2 Peter 1:20, where we are told the first rule of Bible interpretation: "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation." A significant feature of this heresy is the attempt to pit the Church "against" the Bible, denying that the magisterium has any infallible authority to teach and interpret Scripture.

The doctrine of private judgment has resulted in an enormous number of different denominations. According to The Christian Sourcebook, there are approximately 20-30,000 denominations, with 270 new ones being formed each year. Virtually all of these are Protestant.

 

Jansenism (17th Century)

Jansenius, bishop of Ypres, France, initiated this heresy with a paper he wrote on Augustine, which redefined the doctrine of grace. Among other doctrines, his followers denied that Christ died for all men, but claimed that he died only for those who will be finally saved (the elect). This and other Jansenist errors were officially condemned by Pope Innocent X in 1653.

Heresies have been with us from the Church’s beginning. They even have been started by Church leaders, who were then corrected by councils and popes. Fortunately, we have Christ’s promise that heresies will never prevail against the Church, for he told Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The Church is truly, in Paul’s words, "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Theology
KEYWORDS: heresy; history
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700701-720721-740 ... 1,121-1,138 next last
To: Marysecretary

Matt 18:

13
When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”
14
They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16
Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17
Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.
18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Here Jesus asked the question, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” The apostles responded, “Some say John the Baptizer, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Our Lord then turned to them and point-blank asked them, “And you, who do you say that I am?”

Peter, still officially known as Simon, replied, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Our Lord recognized that this answer was grace-motivated: “No mere man has revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.”

Because of this response, Our Lord said to Peter first, “You are ‘Rock,’ and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The name change itself from Simon to Peter indicates the apostle being called to a special role of leadership; recall how Abram’s name was changed to Abraham, or Jacob’s to Israel, or Saul’s to Paul when each of them was called to assume a special role of leadership among God’s people.

The word “rock” also has special significance. On one hand, to be called “rock” was a Semitic expression designating the solid foundation upon which a community would be built. For instance, Abraham was considered “rock” because he was the father of the Jewish people (and we, too, refer to him as our father in faith) and the one with whom the covenant was first made.

On the other hand, no one except God was called specifically “rock,” nor was it ever used as a proper name except for God. To give the name “rock” to Peter indicates that Our Lord entrusted to him a special authority. Some anti-papal parties try to play linguistic games with the original Greek Gospel text where the masculine gender word “petros,” meaning a small moveable rock, refers to Peter, while the feminine gender word “petra,” meaning a massive immovable rock, refers to the foundation of the Church. However, in the Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is believed to be the original language of Matthew’s Gospel, the word “kepha,” meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction of difference in meaning. The gender problem arises when translating from Aramaic to Greek and using the proper form to modify the masculine word “Peter” or feminine word “Church.”

The “Gates of Hell” is also an interesting semitic expression. The heaviest forces were positioned at the gates; so this expression captures the great war-making power of a nation. Here this expression refers to the powers opposed to what Our Lord is establishing — the Church. (A similar expression is used in reference to Our Lord in Acts 2:24: “God freed Him from the bitter pangs of hell, however, and raised Him up again, for it was impossible that death should keep its hold on Him.”) Jesus associated Peter and his office so closely with Himself that he became a visible force for protecting the Church and keeping back the power of hell.

Second, Jesus says, “I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Old Testament, the “number two” person in the kingdom literally held the keys. In Isaiah 22:19-22 we find a reference to Eliakim, the master of the palace of King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18: 17ff) and keeper of the keys. As a sign of his position, the one who held the keys represented the king, acted with his authority, and had to act in accord with the king’s mind. Therefore, Peter and each of his successors represent Our Lord on this earth as His vicar and lead the faithful flock of the Church to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Finally, Jesus says, “Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” This is rabbinic terminology. A rabbi could bind, declaring an act forbidden or excommunicating a person for serious sin; or, a rabbi could loose, declaring an act permissible or reconciling an excommunicated sinner to the community. Here Christ entrusted a special authority to Peter to preserve, interpret and teach His truth. In all, this understanding of Matthew 16 was unchallenged until the Protestant leaders wanted to legitimize their rejection of papal authority and the office of the pope. Even the Orthodox Churches recognize the pope as the successor of Peter; however, they do not honor his binding jurisdiction over the whole Church but only grant him a position of “first among equals.”

Peter’s role in the New Testament further substantiates the Catholic belief concerning the papacy and what Jesus said in Matthew 16. Peter held a preeminent position among the apostles. He is always listed first (Mt 10:1-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13) and is sometimes the only one mentioned (Lk 9:32). He speaks for the apostles (Mt 18:21; Mk 8:28; Lk 12:41; Jn 6:69). When Our Lord selects a group of three for some special event, such as the Transfiguration, Peter is in the first position. Our Lord chose Peter’s boat to teach. At Pentecost, Peter preached to the crowds and told of the mission of the Church (Acts 2:14-40). He performed the first miraculous healing (Acts 3:6-7). Peter also received the revelation that Gentiles were to be baptized (Acts 10: 9-48) and sided with Paul against the need for circumcision (Acts 15). At the end of his life, Peter was crucified, but in his humility asked to be crucified upside down.

As Catholics, we believe that the authority given to Peter did not end with his life, but was handed on to his successors. The earliest writings attest to this belief. St. Irenaeus (d. 202) in his “Adversus haereses” describes how the Church at Rome was founded by Sts. Peter and Paul and traced the handing on of the office of Peter through Linus, Cletus (also called Anacletus) and so on through the twelve successors to the pope of his own day, Pope Eleutherius. Tertullian (d. 250) in “De praescriptione haereticorum” asserted the same point, as did Origen (D. 254) in his “Commentaries on John,” St. Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258) in his “The Unity of the Catholic Church,” and many others.

from http://www.catholicherald.com/saunders/97ws/saun970626.htm.

Are you claiming that not only were these great Church Fathers and theologians incorrect, but so was Jesus?


701 posted on 05/23/2008 9:21:33 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
However, in the Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is believed to be the original language of Matthew’s Gospel, the word “kepha,” meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction of difference in meaning.
702 posted on 05/23/2008 9:26:02 AM PDT by Petronski (Scripture & Tradition must be accepted & honored w/equal sentiments of devotion & reverence. CCC 82)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: annalex
I am not trying to inflate my exposure to Protestantism, but regular Baptist church attendance (not every week, but still fairly regular), and two Bible studies with the Baptist flock, and a friendship with a Calvinist pastor, and the regular participation in FR religion threads should count for something, again, especially since the claim of scripture sufficiency is made.

Sure it accounts for something but so litle of that something that it is meaningless in the big picture.

No problem. :)

703 posted on 05/23/2008 9:28:52 AM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
Cletus

First Pope from up in the holler. Cletus is Da MAN!

704 posted on 05/23/2008 9:31:24 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

***However, in the Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is believed to be the original language of Matthew’s Gospel, the word “kepha,” meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction of difference in meaning.***

How can we possibly claim that since every Bible Believer (tm) knows that the KJV was the Scripture that Jesus used.


705 posted on 05/23/2008 9:31:57 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 702 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

***First Pope from up in the holler. Cletus is Da MAN!***

:)


706 posted on 05/23/2008 9:34:21 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 704 | View Replies]

To: annalex
When my Church is attacked with regularity I counterattack. When Protestant discuss matters of interest to them, I stay out. Show me when I barged into a Protestant discussion on FR. Get yourself a religion that isn't based on protesting other religions, and you wouldn't believe what peace that will be. Better still, get yourself a religion that actually respects the scripture.

I can just feel the love.

Better still, get yourself a religion that actually respects the scripture.

Good advice. That's exactly the reason I swam the Tiber. (The other way!

707 posted on 05/23/2008 9:34:25 AM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 602 | View Replies]

To: Petronski; MarkBsnr
However, in the Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is believed to be the original language of Matthew’s Gospel, the word “kepha,” meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction of difference in meaning.

Haven't we been through this, on those occasions when the Lord wanted to ridicule and demean His Disciples (and this happened EVERY TIME he was speaking to Peter), He would switch from His native Aramaic to classical Greek. He did this to show how stupid and worthless He thought the disciples He PERSONALLY chose really were.

708 posted on 05/23/2008 9:35:21 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 702 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
I'm instantly reminded of that ridiculous claim of the deep spiritual significance of one verse or another having "the Rock" starting with a capital R.


709 posted on 05/23/2008 9:35:25 AM PDT by Petronski (Scripture & Tradition must be accepted & honored w/equal sentiments of devotion & reverence. CCC 82)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 705 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

**snort**


710 posted on 05/23/2008 9:36:32 AM PDT by Petronski (Scripture & Tradition must be accepted & honored w/equal sentiments of devotion & reverence. CCC 82)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 704 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; Petronski
How can we possibly claim that since every Bible Believer (tm) knows that the KJV was the Scripture that Jesus used.

Yep, doncha know that King James actually WROTE the Bible.

711 posted on 05/23/2008 9:38:24 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 705 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

***Haven’t we been through this, on those occasions when the Lord wanted to ridicule and demean His Disciples (and this happened EVERY TIME he was speaking to Peter), He would switch from His native Aramaic to classical Greek. He did this to show how stupid and worthless He thought the disciples He PERSONALLY chose really were.***

I’m still waiting for the KJV version of the Dead Sea Scrolls to be discovered.


712 posted on 05/23/2008 9:40:31 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 708 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same...

This is a good working definition, unfortunately for Roman Catholics though, so detailed (and rather arbitrary) is their list of dogma (or truths) "which must be believed in with divine and Catholic faith" that virtually all Roman Catholics are arguably heretical (I'm sure here on FR too...) in some sense.

Even the current catechism is many pages long--and I sincerely doubt, of the few Roman Catholics who have even read and studied it, anyone accepts it all without reservation. And that is not the exhaustive list of dogma either.(What is the exhaustive infallible list of RC dogma anyway?)

When essentials get confused with non-essentials legalism and its bitter fruit proliferates.

I'm sure this is why things like the Apostles Creed, and the Nicene Creed are quite short. The Christians of that day--a universal Church Catholic (notice I didn't say "Roman")--believed those were the essentials, or dogma, which must be believed.

Comparatively, everything else is minor.

713 posted on 05/23/2008 9:42:01 AM PDT by AnalogReigns ("They sow the wind, and reap the whirlwind..." (Hosea 8:7))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

***I’m instantly reminded of that ridiculous claim of the deep spiritual significance of one verse or another having “the Rock” starting with a capital R.***

The mouth breathers might take umbrage, though, since the Rock is a successful WWE wrestler turned bad film actor and they might think that the KJV was referring to him.


714 posted on 05/23/2008 9:42:24 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 709 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

Dan Rather just found it near a Kinko’s in Texas, he is authenticating it as we speak.


715 posted on 05/23/2008 9:43:02 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 712 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; Petronski

IIRC, there was an anti-Catholic FReeper a few years back who believed that Saint Timothy had actually written an epistle to himself.

I’ve also seen on here where Timothy received copies of ALL apostolic correspondence and that he then determined which belonged in canon and in what order. I guess he was the only one on all of the apostles’ email lists.


716 posted on 05/23/2008 9:46:03 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 714 | View Replies]

To: annalex
If I do, shouldn't you correct my misundertandings of Protestantism rather than multiply your own misunderstandings of Catholicism?

I have neither the time, patience, nor will to correct your misunderstandings of Protestantism. First, you must have an open mind, a willingness to listen, and the dedication to independent study. I can detect none of these in our exchanges.

"...rather than multiply your own misunderstandings of Catholicism?"

Example(s) please.

717 posted on 05/23/2008 9:47:23 AM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 617 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE; annalex
I have neither the time, patience, nor will to correct your misunderstandings of Protestantism.

But you are quite content to tell us all what is wrong with Catholicism?

First, you must have an open mind, a willingness to listen, and the dedication to independent study. I can detect none of these in our exchanges.

Can you give us examples of where you have demonstrated this with regards to Catholicism?

718 posted on 05/23/2008 9:49:25 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 717 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

***Yep, doncha know that King James actually WROTE the Bible.***

The Bible - created just for you by the same folks that created the WCF. I’ll even bet that some of them believe that there wasn’t a Bible before the Reformers happened. I know that there is a large contingent that believes that we added to the OT.

Perhaps the Reformers wrote the Bible verbatim whilst channelling each of the Scripture writers at night when utilizing heavy doses of laudanum. The nightly visitors, of course, spoke in the Lord’s English.


719 posted on 05/23/2008 9:49:50 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
created just for you by the same folks that created the WCF

Worker's Compensation Fund??

720 posted on 05/23/2008 9:52:10 AM PDT by colorcountry (To anger a conservative, lie to him. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700701-720721-740 ... 1,121-1,138 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson