Pope Benedict Clears Way For Cardinal John Newman To Become First English Saint In 40 Years

Daily Mail (UK) ^ | July 03rd 2009

[SkyPilot]

Bludgeoning someone about the head with one's religion speaks more to aggression and hostility than true belief

"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?

Matthew 23:33

A real bludgeon then - this guy. I mean, how dare he speak out like that?

What is important is to point out false teaching. Anger is another matter - and you have falsely accused those who point out false teaching as having aggression.

You are wrong. Your attempt to psychoanalyze is strange. But, I forgive you.

Ephesians 4:26 “In your anger do not sin”: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry."

[trisham]

If you're comparing yourself to Christ, for shame.

[SkyPilot]

Again - you accuse and you have no problem with what you are doing?

I am not Him - and neither are you. I called you on your false accusation and I pointed out (with a Biblical reference) that Christ Himself had righteous anger with false teaching.

At this point, we could go back and forth with that - but let's boil it down.

What is really motivating you? Is it my criticism of false Catholic teaching? Just be honest with me.

Thanks.

[trisham]

I honestly mean every post I have made. Including the last one.

[SkyPilot]

I am OK with that.

Please tell me. Be honest. To yourself and to Him. What is your motivation for entering this discussion? Where do you stand?

I'll tell you mine. I am a former Catholic who became a Biblical Christian - and I think the Catholic church teaches false doctrine.

You?

[trisham]

Right. A former Catholic.

[SkyPilot]

Right. A former Catholic.

Yes. That's me. I have no problem sharing what I am. Wow. This is harder than I thought it would be. OK - let's try again. Please read the question in the post above. I can cut and paste it if you wish.

[Steelfish]

No- Catholics seeks the intercession of saints- very much like the wedding guests went to Mary when they were short of wine. Through the power of Christ, St. Peter cured the blind- (see Acts of the Apostles). St. Anthony performed many miracles while on earth.

[xzins]

I believe in miracles...that was not my point.

My point is about prayer that Catholics do NOT pray TO saints. As I remember it, it was in distinction to praying TO God. What do you think? Should a different preposition be used?

[Chesterbelloc]

This is nice to hear. I got a first edition of “Apologia Pro Vita Sua” about a decade ago. It was such a beautiful bound book I almost felt bad opening it up and reading it. I’ve been meaning to read “Grammar of Assent” when I get the time. Newman has a clear lucid style that is an easy read.

[SkyPilot]

No- Catholics seeks the intercession of saints- very much like the wedding guests went to Mary when they were short of wine.

Which "saint" is that? Saint Dionysus, or Saint Lydia of Perpetual Motion?

"Saint" Anthony? What other false gods do you worship? Where in the Bible does anything you said support this?

I am not trying to drive too fine a point here, but for readers of this thread I hope they can see the insanity that is strange and weird Catholic teaching.

[Steelfish]

You really need to read up on the Catholic Church before displaying your ignorance. We don’t worship saints, we venerate them- just like you would venerate the pic of a deceased relative.

[SkyPilot]

You really need to read up on the Catholic Church before displaying your ignorance.

Sure. Read up what? The Bible? Please tell me where. I say please with all due seriousness.

I know that is a concept that isn't too popular with Catholics obsessed with Liturgically weirdness that isn't Biblical. But I'll play along.

You tell me what to read in order to disabuse or convince me of what Catholics believe?

We don’t worship saints, we venerate them- just like you would venerate the pic of a deceased relative.

Those are dead people.

[fdcc]

Never mind.....

Why? I still have two questions:

1) How do you explain the tremendous disagreement among those who believe that the Bible is entirely clear to its readers and that it is the sole rule of faith?

and

2) Are you aware of what Paul tells us is the pillar and foundation of truth?

[SkyPilot]

1) How do you explain the tremendous disagreement among those who believe that the Bible is entirely clear to its readers and that it is the sole rule of faith?

The un-Godly hate the Godly. There are two sides to this war. It has always been so. If it wasn't, the Egyptians would have just loved the little dickens out of the Israelites.

Do you really believe there is not a struggle between good and evil?

2) Are you aware of what Paul tells us is the pillar and foundation of truth?

Jesus Christ.

Read 1 Corinthians.

You should watch this. The whole thing. Invest a few minutes.

Take care.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1R2ACGW_en&q=james%20kennedy%20video&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1R2ACGW_en&q=james+kennedy+video&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv&start=10

[SkyPilot]

This is just a great video too.

http://vodpod.com/watch/569542-kirk-cameron-interviews-ravi-zacharias

[greyfoxx39]

If you're comparing yourself to Christ, for shame.

There is nothing in SP's post alluding to what you posted....for shame.

Another attempt on the FR to cast stones at those who do no more than speak the truth.

SP said and he is correct, "What is important is to point out false teaching. Anger is another matter - and you have falsely accused those who point out false teaching as having aggression."

We see it all the time."

[fdcc]

I asked:

1) How do you explain the tremendous disagreement among those who believe that the Bible is entirely clear to its readers and that it is the sole rule of faith?

You wrote:

The un-Godly hate the Godly. There are two sides to this war. It has always been so. If it wasn't, the Egyptians would have just loved the little dickens out of the Israelites.

Do you really believe there is not a struggle between good and evil?

Allow me to clarify. There are dozens of issues on which sincere believers in the creed of "the Bible alone and the Bible is clear" disagree. Is Baptism necessary for salvation? Is the baptism of infants proper or even effective? Is Holy Communion a remembrance or a sacrament? Is it truly the body and blood of Jesus? Etc. These are important questions.

I wrote:

2) Are you aware of what Paul tells us is the pillar and foundation of truth?

You replied:

Jesus Christ. Read 1 Corinthians.

I should have put "pillar and foundation" in quotes. See 1 Timothy 3:15. Paul tells us the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

[SkyPilot]

There are dozens of issues on which sincere believers in the creed of "the Bible alone and the Bible is clear" disagree. Is Baptism necessary for salvation? Is the baptism of infants proper or even effective? Is Holy Communion a remembrance or a sacrament? Is it truly the body and blood of Jesus? Etc. These are important questions. All of those are excellent questions.

You are right to raise them and I admire you for them. Really. They are profound and you show a great deal of wisdom by asking them.

Water baptism is not necessary for salvation. God says we are justified by Faith only, not by water baptism - any more that you could argue that circumcision is necessary for Salvation.

Ephesians. 2:8 and Romans. 5:1.

It is Faith He wants, not ceremony and tradition.

Baptism is a great tradition, and seeing people (including my daughter) baptized was one of the most moving things I have ever witnessed. They give their testimony before everyone, and it is just a wonderful celebration of the acceptance of God. It is not, however, necessary, and certainly not for infants.

Infant baptism is actually ridiculous when you think about it.

Do you really think that God has rejected souls that came to him on battlefields, or on their death beds, because they didn't get a Catholic water baptism? What if they got an adult Catholic baptism, or a teen age Catholic baptism, vis a vis an infant baptism? Is one more valid than the other?

Is that what is in the Bible?

No.

Perhaps we can next perform infant marriage? It is your heart that God wants. I believe there is an age of Innocence in children. Infant baptism is not necessary for Salvation.

Is Holy Communion a remembrance or a sacrament?

Christ said to do it in remembrance of Him. Where did he mention a "sacrament?"

He didn't.

A "sacrament" is a Catholic invention, it is not in the Bible.

Paul tells us the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

The "Church" is Christ's body of believers. Not the Vatican. Does it say the Vatican? This is the problem most Catholics have. They think they have the only path to Christ by tradition, buildings, and geography. That isn't what Christ said. It isn't what God says. It isn't what Paul (inspired by the Holy Spirit) wrote. Why this debate continues is both frustrating and tragic.

[fdcc]

Thank you for your kind words. I'm not especially interested in fleshing out doctrinal issues. I want to explore the underlying "the Bible contains everything we need to know and the Bible is clear to the well-meaning reader" idea. This seems so obviously false to me.

For just one example, your understanding of baptism can be justified from scripture perhaps, but so can mine. What do you make of passages such as

1) Jesus' words to Nicodemus in John 3:5 "Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit."

2) Romans 6:3-7.

3) Acts 2:38 or 22:16.

or

4) 1 Peter 3:21

It seems that baptism is essential in some way for salvation here.

So you've read the scriptures and found one thing, I've read and found something else. How do we determine what is true?

For that matter, what did Christians do before the scriptures were written, agreed upon, and widely available?