Posted on 01/23/2014 9:29:40 PM PST by NKP_Vet
1. Best One-Sentence Summary: I am convinced that the Catholic Church conforms much more closely to all of the biblical data, offers the only coherent view of the history of Christianity (i.e., Christian, apostolic Tradition), and possesses the most profound and sublime Christian morality, spirituality, social ethic, and philosophy.
2. Alternate: I am a Catholic because I sincerely believe, by virtue of much cumulative evidence, that Catholicism is true, and that the Catholic Church is the visible Church divinely-established by our Lord Jesus, against which the gates of hell cannot and will not prevail (Mt 16:18), thereby possessing an authority to which I feel bound in Christian duty to submit.
3. 2nd Alternate: I left Protestantism because it was seriously deficient in its interpretation of the Bible (e.g., "faith alone" and many other "Catholic" doctrines - see evidences below), inconsistently selective in its espousal of various Catholic Traditions (e.g., the Canon of the Bible), inadequate in its ecclesiology, lacking a sensible view of Christian history (e.g., "Scripture alone"), compromised morally (e.g., contraception, divorce), and unbiblically schismatic, anarchical, and relativistic. I don't therefore believe that Protestantism is all bad (not by a long shot), but these are some of the major deficiencies I eventually saw as fatal to the "theory" of Protestantism, over against Catholicism. All Catholics must regard baptized, Nicene, Chalcedonian Protestants as Christians.
4. Catholicism isn't formally divided and sectarian (Jn 17:20-23; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 1:10-13).
5. Catholic unity makes Christianity and Jesus more believable to the world (Jn 17:23).
6. Catholicism, because of its unified, complete, fully supernatural Christian vision, mitigates against secularization and humanism.
7. Catholicism avoids an unbiblical individualism which undermines Christian community (e.g., 1 Cor 12:25-26).
8. Catholicism avoids theological relativism, by means of dogmatic certainty and the centrality of the papacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at ourcatholicfaith.org ...
John 6:53
"Unless You Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink His Blood You Have No Life In You"
I’ll tell you what’s relevant. What’s relevant is what the Holy Spirit said through the prophets and apostles which God through His mercy and grace preserved for us today in what we call scripture. Here’s the bottom line.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8-9
If the apostles didn’t teach it then it’s considered “another gospel” and the person who teaches something the apostles did not teach is to be considered accursed. You can play word games and split hairs all you want to justify the apostasy of the Catholic beliefs but the Holy Spirit through Paul told us to see if what you teach is true by searching scripture.
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
When I search the scriptures I can’t find things the Catholics teach. In fact I find things from paganism which God condemned.
Deuteronomy 12:30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. 31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God
The Catholic Church readily admits they take from pagan rituals and customs.
“We need not shrink from admitting that candles, like incense and lustral water, were commonly employed in pagan worship and the rites paid to the dead. But the Church from a very early period took them into her service, just as she adopted many other things indifferent in themselves, which seemed proper to enhance the splendor of religious ceremonial. We must not forget that most of these adjuncts to worship, like music, lights, perfumes, ablutions, floral decorations, canopies, fans, screens, bells, vestments etc. were not identified with any idolatrous cult in particular; but they were common to almost all cults” (Catholic Encyclopedia, III, 246.)
“When we give or receive Christmas gifts; or hang green wreaths in our homes and churches, how many of us know that we are probably observing pagan customs...the god, Woden, in Norse Mythology, descends upon the earth yearly between December 25th and January 6th to bless mankind...But pagan though they be, they are beautiful customs. They help inspire us with the spirit of 'good will to men', even as the sublime service of our Church reminds us of the ‘peace on earth’ which the babe of Bethlehem came to bestow” (Externals of the Catholic Church, 140).
Paul taught out of the scriptures not some unreliable word of mouth or supposed tradition.
Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
Jesus said the Sadducees were in error not because they didn’t know tradition but because they didn’t know scripture.
Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Every person who desires the promise of salvation should respond to anything not taught in scripture the same way Jesus responded to Satan.
Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written
All who read this should understand that scripture is very clear that if a person comes teaching something that wasn’t recorded in scripture that person is to be considered accursed by God.
Peter believed the writings of Paul to be scripture as he included them with scripture.
2 Peter 3:15b. As also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given him, [16] as in all his letters, speaking concerning these matters, in which some things are hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES. [17] You then, beloved ones, being forewarned, watch lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being let away with the delusion of the lawless.
Let’s see what scripture says concerning the concept of “queen of heaven”.
Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.
And again in Jeremiah 44 we see what God’s attitude is about the “queen of heaven”.
The concept of a “queen of heaven” was not taught by the apostles and let’s see what they say about teaching what they didn’t teach.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8-9
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, and “Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
Mary is our mother, and she is the queen of heaven.
Which is most certainly NOT what that verse in Luke says.
Show us ONE place in Scripture where we are instructed or permitted to pray TO anyone besides God.
Well then , if you are correct then Rome is even more a radically different church, since it did not recognize the multitudinous quotes and references to Scripture which came before it, and the books thereof which make up the bulk of out Bible, and thus Christianity has less of a historical Scriptural foundation than Islam.
Of course this is absurd. Scripture is not restricted to the OT, nor was there no authoritative reference to Scripture before Rome provided her indisputable canon (which took over 1400 years after the last book was written).
Thus when I said that the church began upon scriptural substantiation, by which the Lord Jesus and his apostles establish their truth claims, I am being entirely correct.
And in addition, as Old Testament Scripture provides for writings and as well as men of God being recognized as such, which was essentially do to their unique enduring divine qualities and attestation - and which did not require an assuredly infallible magisterium - therefore it provides for the New Testament additions being recognized as holy writ as well.
Almighty God provided abundant supernatural divine attestation of the authority of Moses, confirmatory of the faith of Abraham, and whose (Moses) writings became the standard for obedience and testing truth claims, with additional complementary writings being recognized as divine and being added to what he wrote.
Like men of God, the powers that be are to affirm this stature, but whether they do or do not, both men and writings of God are what they are, and God often raised up men from without the magisterium to reprove it, but whom the latter often rejected. And therefore the church began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses, and rejected the authority of the Son of God. (Mk. 11:28-33)
You have it all exactly backwards. It was the Church that produced the Scriptures, used them liturgically, and distinguished between those to be considered inspired and those not.
Rather, you are exalting your church above the Scriptures, not only ignoring that the bulk of the Bible we hold was established as Scripture before there ever was a church of Rome, but in essence what you are doing is making the church the supreme authority, not Scripture upon which the church establishes its truth claims.
For while the church did recognize writings as being of God, this affirmation required conformity with that which was previously written and was already established as being of God. In other words Old Testament Scripture, upon which substantiation Christ and the apostles establishes truth claims, (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.) was the judge of the new, which was complementary to and conflationary with it.
And if recognizing writings as being of God makes one the supreme authority, in the form of the magisterium, then the church should have submitted to the scribes and the Pharisees.
Jesus told the Apostles to spread out through the world, to teach, and to baptize. In other words, to be the Church. The Scriptures they wrote contain not one word from Jesus telling them to write one word.
You are uncritically parroting an invalid RC polemic, which in essence makes the written word superfluous, for what you are saying with your argument from silence is that to be the church is simply to spread the word, but not write it. And yet you invoke the written word in order to do so. And which presumes that in order to spread the word of God, and for us to know about it, then the written word was not necessary or superfluous. And which in essence reveals the attitude of many Catholics, for indeed , actual scriptural warrant for many of her doctrines is indeed superfluous, as you yourself presumes to be the supreme authority. But which is cultic not Christian.
However, the fact is that we know about Christ because of what is written.
But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (John 20:31)
In addition, the "Jesus only" hermeneutic is itself invalid, for the Lord said nothing specific about many things, thus homosexuals employ this "red letter hermeneutic" enough to justify their perverse love. However, as seen from the below, even only using the red letter hermeneutic, it is clear that He established His truth claims upon scriptural substantiation and upheld the written word as being the assured word of God.
For it was not tradition that he quoted to the devil in stating that, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Matthew 4:4) but "it is written." Nor was it tradition that he opened the eyes of the disciples to, but the Scriptures, and in doing so and affirmation of the tripartite Palestinian Canon is indicated.
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. (Luke 24:44)
Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (Luke 24:45)
And rather than the written word being superfluous, both Christ and the writers of the Gospels abundantly referenced the Old Testament:
Mat. 1:22; 2:5,15,17,18; 3:3; 4:4,6,7,10,14,15; 5:17,18,33,38,43; 8:4,17; 9:13; 11:10; 12:3,5,17-21,40,41; 13:14,15,35; 14:3,4,7-9;19:4,5,17-19; 21:4,5,13,16,42; 22:24,29,31,32,37,39,43,44; 23:35;24:15; 26:24,31,54,56; 27:9,10,35; Mark 1:2,44; 7:3,10; 9:12,13; 10:4,5; 11:17; 12:10,19,24,26 13:14; 14:21,47,49; 15:28; Lk. 2:22,23.24; 3:4,5,6; 4:4,6-8,10,12,16,17,18,20,25-27; 5:14; 7:27; 8:10; 10:26,27; 16:29,31; 18:20,31; 19:46; 20:17,18, 28,37,42,43; 22:37; 23:30; 24:25.27,32,44,45,46; Jn. 1:45; 2:17,22; 3:14; 5:39,45-47; 6:31,45; 7:19,22,23,38,42,51,52; 8:5,17; 9:26; 10:34,35; 12:14,15,38-41; 15:25; 17:12; 19:24,28,36,37; 20:9,31; 21:24
Moreover, the Lord specifically stated that He had many more things to say, which he promised to add, (Jn. 16:12-14) and in which is seen even more references to the the old Testament.
Therefore, the written word is the assured word of God, and it was by scriptural substantiation the church established it's truth claims, and not under the premise of an perpetual assuredly infallible magisterium of men being the supreme authority on truth. which again, is cultic.
You must ask yourself, how did men have assurance that and itinerant preacher was the Christ when he was rejected by those who had were the stewards of Scripture, having historical dissent, and inheritor of the promises of God? (Rm. 3:2; 9:4).
We ALL know that LUTHER is the supreme villain!!
Kind of ironic, eh?
Oh, you mean the name Mary is not mentioned in Luke’s gospel. I guess he was talking about Rosie O’Donnell.
Or do you mean it doesn’t really say “full of grace”. Come on. Hit me with your best shot.
The words spoken to Mary were no different then were spoken to Jael in Judges. In fact, Jael was called blessed above women. Mary was called blessed among women.
Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Judges 5:24 Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be,
Those words were also spoken of Noah, Moses, and David.
Why is it necessary for Scripture to say anything about it? It makes sense to do so.
The notion that the blessed in Heaven are inert and powerless (unlike ourselves) and have no desire or ability to exercise charity toward the living flies in the face of common sense.
Their doing so detracts from the glory due to God precisely as much as your feeding dinner to your children is an insult to God.
Or, is this what you believe: “You don’t trust God to feed your children, so you do it yourself!”
Why is it necessary for Scripture to say anything about it? It makes sense to do so.
The notion that the blessed in Heaven are inert and powerless (unlike ourselves) and have no desire or ability to exercise charity toward the living flies in the face of common sense.
Their doing so detracts from the glory due to God precisely as much as your feeding dinner to your children is an insult to God.
Or, is this what you believe: “You don’t trust God to feed your children, so you do it yourself!”
I realize I may be spinning my wheels due to the fact that, to a Catholic, it doesn't appear to matter what Christ says: only what the Catholic bureaucracy says.
For example, even though Christ used the plain words, "call no many father on the earth," the Catholic bureaucracy completely ignored him--even mocked him--by declaring that all priests and above in the bureaucracy will be called "father."
Therefore, even if he used the exact word, "bureaucracy," he would probably be ignored. This passage shows his contempt for bureaucracies in general (which would include the entire hierarchy of the Catholic bureaucracy: )
"Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." (Mark 10:42-45)
Anyone in the Catholic bureaucracy that says they follow Christ is not a straight-shooter. Those working outside the bureaucracy, like Mother Theresa, and many in the congregations would qualify because they follow the Good Samaritan rule. As Luther implied, there are some Christians in the Catholic "Church."
And then there is this. Saint Paul said:
"And having food and raiment let us be therewith content." (1 Tim 6:8)
Therefore, it is safe to conclude, from the plain words of our beloved Saint Paul, that those who wear wildly extravagant clothing and adornments and live and work in luxurious surroundings, all by the donations of the membership, would be instantly disqualified as one of "those following Christ." The same rule would apply to the leaders of Christian mega-churches who draw million-dollar salaries from the church members, and live and work in luxury. They have their reward.
Philip
Scripture doesn’t mention automobiles, airplanes, computers, etc.
I presume you use all of these things.
So, Catholics occasionally use candles, incense, bells, etc.
What’s the problem?
Show me one place in Scripture where we are instructed how to shoe a horse.
And yet we do it. Because it is reasonable.
We don’t NEED explicit permission or instruction in Scripture in order to do things that are patently reasonable.
Show me one place in Scripture where we are instructed how to shoe a horse.
And yet we do it. Because it is reasonable.
We don’t NEED explicit permission or instruction in Scripture in order to do things that are patently reasonable.
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8-9
Deuteronomy 12:30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. 31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
Scripture in some places condemns idolatry.
So what? Catholics don’t practice idolatry.
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.