The Big Discovery [by David, former Presbyterian]

Journeyof ImperfectSaint.blogspot.com ^ | October 4, 2009 | David

[Salvation]

Sunday, October 4, 2009

The Big Discovery

        I made some good friends outside my church and found out that they were all Catholics.  Now, I did not know much about Catholicism at the time.  By the way, the Mass did seem somewhat mysterious to me externally.  In fact, what little I had heard from other church members was all negative.  There was a Mrs. J at my church, who had just retired from her missionary post in China.  She was such a kind and endearing soul to all.  One day she got back from visiting someone at a hospital and looked extremely sad and disturbed.  It turned out that when she got to the hospital room, she saw that a Catholic priest was already there with the patient.  Now the question was if the patient would ever get to heaven. 

 

        Nevertheless, my Catholic friends all looked quite normal and happy.  Then could the Catholic Church, the largest church in the the world, be in error?  It so happened that at that time I was also beginning to question my Protestant faith.  The fact that there were numerous different denominations around the world bothered me.  Also, as a Protestant, whether you're a minister or lay person, you are free to marry and divorce any number of times.  It's hard to see that Jesus would be happy with these two facts.  Since I am the kind of person who always likes to find the answer to any question that's important, I decided to look into Catholicism.

 

        I made up my mind not to talk to anyone about my investigation.  I was single then and had a lot of free time to myself.  The local public library housed an excellent collection of books on Catholicism, so I started borrowing books on the subject.  I read every weekend, even taking notes as I read.  The went on for over a year.  I read all those books that viciously attack the Catholic Church too, but somehow they did not affect me much because I sensed that these attacks could not have been prompted by the Holy Spirit.  The books that really helped me were the ones on early Church history.  I could see that the continuity was there and the beliefs and practices of the early Church had been preserved to this day in the Catholic Church.  The only conclusion I could come to was that the Catholic Church was indeed the church Jesus had come and established.  Like Christ himself, the Church, being his body, must be accepted (or rejected) totally, with no middle ground. 

 

        Here's some advice for those who seek the truth.  Your chances of success will greatly improve if, first, you start out with a completely open mind and secondly, go to the source(s) directly to get the facts.  Many who misunderstand the Catholic Church today have already made up their mind that the Church is wrong, thus never bothering to pick up a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to find out what the Church really teaches.  This is being close-minded. 

[metmom]

You just can’t win, can you?

[Natural Law]

"So much for unity within Catholicism."

Your posts need to come with a disclaimer. No one is going to take seriously the opinions on Christianity from someone who refuses to proclaim Jesus is Lord or declare their love for Him. We are commanded above all else to love God and each other and good works are the measure of this love.

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. - 1 John 2:22

"Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person." - 1 John 2:4

"For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord." - Jude 1:4

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. - 1 Timothy 4:1-2

I pray that you return to the Grace of our Lord and find His peace.

[daniel1212]

So it seems. I actually oppose a practice of simply cut and pasting arguments or inks from others as a substitute for forming your own main arguments, rather than supplementing them or for substantiation, but when making assertions in a open forum doctrinal discussion to what an entity thinks, or to back up an argument, it should be the norm to give substantiation with references, and often the material itself (esp. since some shown an aversion to looking at linked material).

I have been even censured because once i only gave the author and the source to a quote from 1621 that i found on the web, but not the link to it (which i should have) and the researcher who originally provided it (whom i did not know), and so was charged by a Catholic with both plagiarizing and copyright infringement.

[metmom]

Your posts need to come with a disclaimer. No one is going to take seriously the opinions on Christianity from someone who refuses to proclaim Jesus is Lord or declare their love for Him.

Since Catholics don't take non-Catholics seriously to begin with, it's a moot point.

Because if it wasn't that, there'd be other excuse to reject what I say.

[Jvette]

****Based on what??? Based on scripture, that’s what...****

St. Athanasius certainly did know that the Bishops decision came from God, through the Words of Scripture and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

For the comprehension impaired, here is St. Athanasius’ statement summed in four words.

“The Church has spoken.”

****None of the speakers you refer to were ‘inspired’ by God, that is...Many of them were obviously inspired by man’s wisdon; philosophy...****

Sure.

As Gamaliel said, Acts 38And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: 39But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

[Jvette]

****And this is a public forum where others are engaged.****

I understand what you do and why, I just don’t care for it and don’t spend my time reading the lengthy and quite boring stuff cut and pasted from other sites.

I prefer to speak in my own words and to read what others have to say in theirs.

No offense. But, what you are doing in posting to me is a waste of your time.

[Iscool]

He was very good at this too, for it is faith AND works.

Not one or the other.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

[Salvation]

Now check out the book of James.

[Jvette]

****Have you missed all the times He appealed to Scripture when rebuking Satan, the religious leaders, the disciples? Do a word search for “it is written”, you’ll see how many times our Lord prefaced His words with such. ****

That’s okay, it was a trick question.

I knew you couldn’t answer that question, because Jesus never specifically taught about Sola Scriptura, which is the claim you made.

Remember, even Satan quoted Scripture to Jesus. Knowing Scripture is not enough.

***Jesus’ ministry was a constant appeal to the Scriptures because He came for the Jews chiefly (the lost sheep of the house of Israel) and the Gentiles would not have been swayed by an appeal to the Jewish Scriptures***

Hardly, Jesus used Scripture but He also expanded on what He quoted, actually going beyond what what was written in Scripture.

And, twenty six times! Whew! But how many times is Jesus quoted in the New Testament? Many times more than 26, but then who’s counting? And if you google “list everything Jesus said”, you will find article after article discussing the times Jesus contradicted the Old Testament in something He said or did.

John 5:39, As you quoted it.

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”

The full quote, .

John 5:39 You study[a] the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me,

and let’s not forget the 40th verse there....

40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

And, also, let us not forget the context of the saying and to whom it was spoken.

Constant appeal? Hardly. Jesus used the Old Testament to lead the Apostles to know who He is. It was the way He confirmed His authority to say and do what He did, but the New Testament Messiah, Jesus the Christ, was nothing like what the Jewish people expected and hoped for, based on their knowledge of Scripture.

*****I reject the idea that he needs to be cherry-picked to find “usable” confirmation about the Bible and its place in theirs and our lives.****

I never said you cherry picked St. Athanasius.

I disputed the interpretation of the quote. I disputed that he said what was posited by you and I never said anything about the rest of his work other than to note that he never refuted St. Ambrose’s writing about the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.

I also never said that St. Athanasius was not a strong adherent and student of Scripture, but he was also a strong adherent and supporter of the Church and her authority to interpret Scripture and speak authoritatively about doctrine.

*****I am curious why, if Catholics’ own catechism expresses support for the belief in the Divinely-inspired, infallible Holy Scriptures, it comes across here that so many sound like they do not accept that doctrine?****

It comes across to those who wish to think that is the case, but it couldn’t be further from reality. What seems to go over the head of non Catholic Christians of undeclared or unknown denominations is that Catholics here reject what the above mentioned teach regarding Scripture. They believe in ALL of the Scripture and accept that Jesus founded A church with His authority and the promise of His continued guidance and presence through the gift of the Holy Spirit.

*****So why is there such a battle over the sufficiency of Scripture? Do you think God omitted critical truths in His revelation?*****

Omitted critical truths? No, all truths may be found there, in fact the Catholic has a deeper understanding of those truths than the non Catholic Christian of undeclared or unknown denominations.

As St. Paul said, 2I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, 3for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men? 4For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not mere men?

[Jvette]

I’m sorry, I thought you would be able to make the connection between your post and mine.

As in I gave you examples of details of what is written in the New Testament were given to the Church at a later date.

God reveals everything in His own time. Jesus didn’t say, “I will send you the Paraclete to lead you into all truth and remind you of what I told you, but that offer expires on January 1st, 100AD.”

I answered your question, with examples in the form of questions.

Didn’t mean to confuse you.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

it never ceases to amaze me that those who attack the Church try and use the words of a Catholic Church Father.

Athanasius, like all Catholics have for 2,000 years, believed in “one baptism for the forgiveness of sins”

when the Baptists appeared on the world scene in the 16th century, they rejected this doctrine contained in the Nicene Creed that Athanasius played such a huge part in.

so anyone who is a Baptist today must think Athanasius taught a “false gospel”, yet they quote him ( any sword to use against the Church! )

of course Athanasius would strongly condemn the Baptist and try and convert them into the Church, just as he did the followers of ARIUS.

[metmom]

Remember, even Satan quoted Scripture to Jesus. Knowing Scripture is not enough.

If it isn't enough, why did Jesus quote Scripture back at Satan?

Scripture is enough or else Jesus would have used something else to combat Satan.

When Satan tempted Eve in the garden, his first line of attack was against the word of God. He started with *Did God REALLY say.....*?

Her problem was that she did not know what God really said for whatever reason and she misquoted the very little word (Scripture) they had.

When Satan tempted Jesus in the wilderness, Jesus succeeded where Adam and Eve failed. Jesus CORRECTLY quoted and applied Scripture, the TRUTH of God.

Satan could not defeat Jesus because He succeeded where Adam and Eve failed, in that area.

Knowledge of Scripture is critical to defeating the lies of the enemy, even when he misuses Scripture to lead people astray.

That's why reading, memorizing, and meditating on the word is so essential to a Christian's growth and maturity and victory over sin and the enemy in their lives.

Anything that does not line up with the revealed word of God is a lie from the enemy. Scripture CANNOT contradict itself.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Jvette, the ultimate irony is the very people who attack the concept of Sacred Tradition, honor it each and every time they open their Bible and accept 27 books in the NT as canonical. without Catholic Sacred Tradition, BB et al would not have a clue if James was actually Scripure or if the Gospel of Peter or the Shepard of Hermes is Scripture.
i know, i have asked them many times how they know what the proper canon is since there is no inspired Book that gives us a table of contents and the only answer they can give is, get ready for it, TRADITION!

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

“Scripture CANNOT contradict itself”

agreed.....2 Thessalonians 2:15 “so then, brethern, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter”

since the Church was there to receive the teaching from the Apostles, the Church is the only one who can stand firm.
one of these traditions taught by the Apostles not explicitly taught by the Scriptures is infant baptism.
the Church received the practice from the Apostles, yet there are some today who hold to a doctrine they call “believers baptism”

so the Scriptures can’t contradict themselves and the Scriptures condemn “sola scriptura”.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

haha, one who claims to have been Catholic at one point should know that Ukrainian Catholics and Roman Catholics are both Catholics in communion with Rome.

so much for those who claim to have been Catholic at one point!

[boatbums]

As Gamaliel said, Acts 38And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: 39But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

I'm not looking to start another argument, but this quote from Gamaliel (an UNbeliever in Jesus as Messiah) has been used on more than a few occasions to try to "prove" the Roman Catholic Church must be of God since it is still around all these years later. I have a few problems with using this statement as a proof text of sorts. First of all, there are myriad religions FAR from anywhere close to being "of God" - some that go back millennium before Roman Catholicism or all of Christianity, for that matter. Secondly, Gamaliel was NOT speaking by inspiration of God but giving his own opinion. And lastly, the second part of his statement is obviously true since no one is capable of destroying what God has determined he will do. It's just Gamaliel's first part - that if it be of man, it will come to nothing - that is provably untrue. The whole world is filled with man-made religions and, eventually, they WILL all be found to be wrong because, on that day, EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is LORD to the glory of God the Father. But, just as if Gamaliel was thinking this would happen in his lifetime, we don't know when this will come to pass so it is not a proper method to judge if a truth claim is genuine or not. God gave us Holy Scripture for that purpose.

[Natural Law]

"Satan could not defeat Jesus because He succeeded where Adam and Eve failed, in that area."

Satan could not defeat Jesus because He is God, not because He could out debate Satan. Although you continue to deny it, Jesus IS God.

[boatbums]

No offense. But, what you are doing in posting to me is a waste of your time.

I thank God he does it anyway. It may not be helpful to you, but it sure is to many others. Not everyone is cut out for the task of apologetics, but for those interested in it, the method Daniel1212 uses is most helpful and relevant. Keep it up, Daniel!

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

NL, it must be embarrassing to believe in a God that can’t keep the Church from going apostate in the second century and must be “restored” either in the 16th, 19th or 20th century ( depending on what new doctrine they decide to follow and they think the Scriptures teach that no one believed before then )
i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again, if you can’t find 10 Christians you would worship with in every century since Jesus ascended, you probably are following a false gospel.
for example, if you don’t believe baptism is for the remission of sins and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, you can’t find anyone you could worship with before the 16th century. follower of a false gospel?? you decide.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Matthew 24:10-14

and many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. AND MANY FALSE PROPHETS WILL ARISE AND LEAD MANY ASTRAY. and because wickedness is multiplied, most men’s love will grow cold. but he who endures to the end will be saved. and this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throuout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come.

we are seeing this prophecy played out before our eyes.