The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 162

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Threads 1-50

Threads 51-100

Threads 101-150

Thread 151	Thread 152	Thread 153	Thread 154	Thread 155	Thread 156	Thread 157
Thread 158<;/a>	Thread 159	Thread 160

The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 161

[malakhi]

Are you the product of a Catholic school education? I think it shows and gives you a sometimes prejudicial viewpoint.

What an inane comment. I attended public schools for eight years, a Catholic high school for four years, and then private, non-sectarian universities for six years. I hardly think my view of history is warped by some supposed "Catholic school prejudice". If anything, I would argue that YOUR perspective is warped by your desire to see no evil perpetrated by Protestants.

The things you describe cannot be truly described as religious oppression, relative to the rest of the world.

I didn't know our standard was what other countries do. I thought we measured ourselves against what is objectively right. If you think that we have no history as a nation of religious oppression, then I suggest you go back and read your history books. "Tolerance" was not a virtue back then.

There are many Protestants in America that have been "oppressed" by Catholics

Do tell.

[malakhi]

How did we get the seperation of church and state? It's those same (mostly Protestant) founders that put it in the first place. And why? As a remedy against what happened to them in Europe. It was to keep the state out of the church.They wanted no state churches, total freedom of religion and worship as each chooses.

Have you studied history? What you say sounds nice, but simply is untrue. The First Amendment was put in place to place to prevent Congress from establishing a state religion. It was given that the individual states retained the right to do this. In fact, the official "established religion" of the Commonwealth of Virginia was the Episcopal Church.

I was talking about the Roman Catholic church itself that is, in essence, fascist.

I expect the Catholics will be all over you for this. I have a question. How are you defining "fascist"?

[malakhi]

From what I understand of it.... the first step is to recognize that there is a "higher power". Need an introduction?

LOL! "Higher power..." Does that mean Jim Rob, or the forum moderators? ;o)

[malakhi]

Is that satisfactory?

Somewhat. I understand the point you are making, but I still think one should be cautious about drawing theological conclusions from the connotations of a Greek word used by the gospel writer perhaps 50 years after Jesus spoke, in Aramaic. If, as I think you do, you use it as a support rather than as the centerpiece of your interpretation, then I think its fine.

[malakhi]

Hi TRD! Thanks for the extra detail.

[Conlan]

To anyone:

Hi. I'm new here. And I'm Catholic. On other websites the Catholic/Protestant debate is pure crap, nothing but insults. But from what I've seen of this thread, it's basically an argument of what church is the real one and when it was established. Is there a different thread for specific issues of doctrine (i.e., Mary, Eucharist, etc.) or is this the place for that too?

Through my studies, I've found that most who object to Catholic doctrines, don't understand them, getting all of their info from anti-Catholic sources. I'd like to try to clear a little stuff up if I can. (Not the issues of what's the "true" church; I think we're all Christian and more similar than different) Maybe I'm way too late here.

[hopefulpilgrim]

Hi angelo! Sorry I'm just now able to get back to the thread to thank you for telling me (or us) your story. I admire your intellectual honesty. I don't like it when I or anyone else simply regurgitate answers that they have memorized or were taught to automatically give. I grew up in a Christian family, and went to a Christian university, so a lot of MY answers are of the "regurgitated" sort because of all the indoctrination...NOT that I'm unthankful for it, for it had a purpose. It has only been in the last 5 years or so that I have really questioned my own beliefs and searched for reasons for believing what I believe. Not everything is black & white...my mind seems so shallow when it comes to learning deep truths. Some things in Scripture do seem to be inconsistent---for instance, a child of God who sins. 1 John says that Christ's blood continues to cleanse him if he walks in the light...it also says that Christ forgives and cleanses him when he CONFESSES his sins to Him...It also says that IF he sins, he has an Advocate, Jesus Christ, that will represent him before the Father. Jude says that God is able to keep the child of God from stumbling and will make him stand in God's presence blameless. Paul says that God's wrath awaits those who are selfishly ambitious and disobedient, yet I know of Christians who are selfish....Does this mean that His wrath will be poured out on them? Or what about the instance of judgment? Paul assures us that there is no condemnation on those who are in Christ Jesus. Yet he says we will be judged according to what we have done, whether it be good or bad. These matters, and others like them, have to be searched out---and one day, it will "click"---and the Holy Spirit (whom I believe to be God) will illumine my mind, I trust, as I continue to study and pray. I'm a very logical person, and unless something makes sense to me, I'm not able to accept it. The incarnation, to me, is VERY logical---the reasons for it, that is. I see Christ everywhere I turn in the OT. The incarnation is fulfilled prophecy. His propitiatory sacrifice on the Cross is totally logical and I have no trouble accepting it...and receiving HIM as my Deliverer and Lord. Yet other things, especially concerning living the Christian life are not always logical to me. I can honestly see why Roman Catholics want to look to their Church for all the answers...it isn't quite so taxing to the brain. But I think they miss out on a lot in the long run. This is only my opinion, and it's probably not worth a plug nickel. Anyway, I so enjoyed reading your "story," and I sincerely hope that God will reveal His Son in you as He did in Paul, who WAS called Saul. But I have often wondered, my being a believer in the Messiah, JESUS, what God will "do" with Jews who love Him and are committed to Him and to the Scriptures, yet just can't accept Christ Jesus as the Promised One. Have you thought of this?

Thank you for overseeing this thread and adding a different perspective to things. We all appreciate it. Yours truly, Hopefulpilgrim

[IMRight]

Maybe I'm way too late here.

Too late for some, but you're always welcome. I think that you'll find just about every topic you could wish for covered the tens of thousands of posts on this chain. Pick any topic you like and I can guarantee that "two or three" will gather to instruct you in your error and a couple of us may jump in to defend you.

I'm not a regular player here (there are more important things going on in the world), but I can tell you that there is not exactly a lack of understanding of Catholic doctrine, just a childish need to focus on the differences... creating straw men and showing how big we are by knocking them down.

Welcome

[pegleg]

Of course, the Catholic church materialized out of thin air. Don't you think that the Catholic church had a human founder or founders.

No. The Catholic Church was divinely founded by Christ himself. Christ appointed the first earthly leader, which was Peter. Christ also promised to protect his church and said he who hears you, hears me.

No Protestant Church can claim this. They are founded by men, or women, based on their unique understanding of scripture interpretation.

[pegleg]

Not at all. I was responding to your reply to OLD REGGIE's #317:
"ALL CHRISTIANS TRACE THEIR BEGINNING TO THE FORMATION OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH."

Sorry, it was OLD REGGIE and the other Protestants who are dodging my question. As I mentioned, my original post was to refute the silly claim the Baptist denomination has been around since the time of the Apostles. OLD REGGIE and the rest of those who have responded, have not attempted to answer this. It really shouldn’t be that difficult, either they were or they weren’t. If by OLD REGGIE’s response he claims they were, he has not provided a shred of evidence to back it up. Just a fluff statement about all Christians.

The truth of the matter is every single church can trace their beginning. In the case of the Catholic/Orthodox Churches, it is to the time of the Apostles. In the case of any Protestant Church, it is from the reformation. In the case of the so called “I’m not a Protestant”, it is from the Fundamentalist movement of the early 19th century.

[pegleg]

Hi. I'm new here. And I'm Catholic. On other websites the Catholic/Protestant debate is pure crap, nothing but insults.

You've come to the right place.

But from what I've seen of this thread, it's basically an argument of what church is the real one and when it was established.

Not really. This is about the 100th time we've covered this. We've been at this so long subjects are starting to repeat themselves.

Is there a different thread for specific issues of doctrine (i.e., Mary, Eucharist, etc.) or is this the place for that too?

All these items have been covered here and are sure to be covered again. The best way to start a discussion about a topic you're interested in is to throw out a question or make a statement regarding one of our Catholic beliefs. It won't be long before someone comes at you with the same old tired argument about why you are wrong.

Welcome to the party.

[Havoc]

Why then aren't your Orthodox? Will you claim St. Peter was never in Antioch? or that he was never Bishop of Antioch? Will you claim that St. James was never in Jerusalem? or that he was never Bishop of Jerusalem? that St. Mark never went to Alexandria to take the episcopate of that city? that St. Timothy was not Bishop of Crete? Do you deny the succession of bishops in right line from those established by the Apostles who evangelized the churches of Corinth, Colossae, Ephesus, Laodicea,... (fill in every local Church mentioned in the New Testament save Rome) down to today?

Ya'll don't buy into the primacy issue. You just buy most of their doctrine & dogma. You reject the trivial and hold onto the really bad stuff. That's like the difference between two guys hiring twin Hookers - dressed the same except that one has a barrett in her hair and the other doesn't..

[the808bass]

No Protestant Church can claim this.

Uh...sure we can. And we have just as much right as the Catholics. The fact that you claim that and then point to Protestants as "begun by humans" shows your foundation for belief. Nothing more, nothing less.

They are founded by men, or women, based on their unique understanding of scripture interpretation.

And that makes us different from you How, exactly?

[al_c]

FR wouldn't let me address this to "ALL" or "Everyone," so I just put my name in the recipient box.

Good morning, everbody. Boy, it's sure nice to be back at work so I can relax! ;o) Also, I haven't been able to get a solid connection to the web at home ... not sure why, though.

Monday, October 15, 2001
Saint Teresa of Avila, virgin and doctor - Memorial

First Reading: Responsorial Psalm: Gospel:

Romans 1:1-7 or Romans 8:22-27 Psalms 98:1-4 Luke 11:29-32 Before prayer, endeavor to realize whose Presence you are approaching, and to whom you are about to speak. We can never fully understand how we ought to behave towards God, before whom the angels tremble.  --St. Teresa of Avila

--------------------

From wau.org ...

This is an evil generation that seeks a sign.
(Luke 11:29)

Many people saw the signs and wonders that Jesus performed. They were undeniable--healings, exorcisms, a multiplication of food. Why then did they ask for more signs? Theirs was a search not for signs but for meaning. Though they had seen the miraculous, they missed the message conveyed in them: Jesus Christ is Lord.

Reading Jesus' words, we may begin to wonder whether we should even bother trying to be a "sign." Of course we should! May we never let the unbelief of some spoil the chance for belief in others. Just think: For every hundred people who didn't believe in Jesus, one person did--Peter, John, Mary Magdalene, Paul. Can we really deny the people of our age the same opportunity?

Do you know that Christ is in you? Do you believe that your very presence in a crowded room can have noticeable effect? You are the salt of the earth and light for the world. The closer you get to Jesus, the more "salty" you will become. People will notice Christ in you and become thirsty for his presence. And the closer you get to Jesus, the more brightly your light will shine to a world trapped in darkness and sin. As it grows brighter, your light can draw members of your family, friends, and even strangers to Jesus. Your witness need not be dramatic or miraculous, but it can be very effective.

Every day in prayer, let God transform you more and more into the image of his Son. Then, as you go about your day, let him speak through your words and deeds. You can be a sign to this world. Live the gospel, and you will preach the gospel. Make a friend with the love of Christ, and you will make a convert. Be Jesus to the people in your life, and you will share Jesus.

"Father, fill me with unconditional love for my neighbor. Jesus, transform my heart and mind. Holy Spirit, let your light shine through me. Holy Trinity, make me into the person you created me to be."

--------------------

Have a great day, everyone.

[pegleg]

Uh...sure we can. And we have just as much right as the Catholics. The fact that you claim that and then point to Protestants as "begun by humans" shows your foundation for belief. Nothing more, nothing less.

Unless you can prove the origin of your church was during Apostolic times you cannot claim this. The foundation of my belief is based on Matthew 16:18. Christ established the church.

And that makes us different from you How, exactly?

We received the full deposit of faith from Christ and the Apostles. We also received the promise of Christ to be with his Church and protect it for all time. No Protestant Church can claim this. All Protestant arguments are based upon one of several false notions. One is that somehow this Church Christ established went awry and it took a reformer to straighten it out. Another is this Church Christ established has always been around but it was invisible for 1500 + years. Another is your subset theory. All of these theories are false because it would render the promise of Christ to be worthless and there is no credible evidence to support any of them.

[malakhi]

Move
to
The New Christian Chronicles!!!

At your own pace...

[malakhi]

Greetings, Conlan! New voices are always welcome here.

[OLD REGGIE]

"Thin skin" for reacting to the comparison of any of us to terrorists? If one of the Catholics made this sort of accusation against any of you, I would have reacted in exactly the same way. I thought it was over the line. As I said to Havoc, above, we're all on the same side when it comes to defending our nation.
------------------------------------------------------------

At this point I have no intention to go back to the original post which caused this furor. When I read it I believed he was comparing blind obedience to any man or organization as the kind of mindset which could, and has caused, tragedies throughout history. I didn't see it as an accusation of any kind.

Subject over and done. Peace.

[OLD REGGIE]

"Well, they didn't just materialize from thin air. Even a bible christian whose only contact with christianity is through the gospels (an impossible example, but to make the point...), the gospels still come from "the formation of the christian church". Despite how they may have branched off since that time, all christians ARE descended from that early church. It is tautological. If they weren't, they wouldn't be christian."
============================================================

Angelo, he (pegleg) doesn't accept the gospels. His source is The Catechism. You might just as well go outdoors and try to talk sense to a stone.

[OLD REGGIE]

Look up the Pequot Wars in any history. Read William Bradford. The Pilgrims were not Quaker-like. The wars between the indians and the New Englanders go right up to the French and Indian Wars.

Thanks for the info. I will do so (some time).