The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

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

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[OLD REGGIE]

I think "countless" is safe at least.

Very true. That's why I used "countless". You will note I was brave enough to say "millions".

[Pelayo]

The term you objected to "countless millions" cannot be interpreted to mean "all".

No, but it usually means most. Besides, your argument against the Church was based upon the supposition that it does not teach the laity about God. This isn't even remotely true, our whole theology is based upon the belief the Jesus is God. In order for your argument against the Church to be serious you have to prove that a) most Catholics don't know God, and b) the Catholic Magisterium wants it that way.

[JHavard]

Would you please answer this question, I am taking a pole, Thank you, JH

From Post #2739

Please, I would like a response on a question that I think is important.

How many of us, believe God already knows whether or not we will be in his kingdom?

Yes or No please. and a comment if you feel like it, but I do need a majority response. Thank You in advance. JH

Please respond!

[OLD REGGIE]

Thanks for the link - sorry I missed it before. It wasn't really satisfactory - for one thing, it didn't contain a reference to one of the exerpts I had asked you about ("Against Pitiliana," I believe). I'm guessing from your method of citation that you haven't actually read the texts Augustine which you cited in previous posts, instead using exerpted phrases that are included in articles or essays that try to use Augustine's words to bolster the arguments you support. I think it would behoove you, if you haven't already, to actually go to the "source," to to speak, and read the full context of these quotes. You'll be surprised at what you find. There are several places online that contain St. Augustine's works - they're truly fascinating and spiritually uplifting.
------------------------------------------------------------

I read this Chapter. You, also will be surprised at what you find:

Petilianus

Quoted by Augustine in Contra litteras Petiliani II, 92, 202 = Apologeticum 5
=======================================================

CHAP. 6.--7. Furthermore, whether concerning Christ, or concerning His Church, or any other matter whatsoever which is connected with your faith and life, to say nothing of ourselves, who are by no means to be compared with him who said, "Though we," at any rate, as he went on to say, "Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which" ye have received in the lawful and evangelical Scripture, "let him be accursed."(10) While carrying out this principle of action in our dealings with you, and with all whom we desire to gain in Christ, and, amongst other things, while preaching the holy Church which we read of as promised in the epistles of God, and see to be fulfilled according to the promises in all nations of the world, we have earned, not the rendering of thanks, but the flames of hatred, from those whom we desire to have attracted into His most peaceful bosom; as though we had bound them fast in that party for which they cannot find any defense that they should make; or as though we so long before had given injunctions to prophets and apostles that they should insert in their books no proofs by which it might be shown that the party of Donatus was the Church of Christ. And we indeed, dear brethren, when we hear false charges brought against us by those whom we have offended by preaching the eloquence of truth, and confuting the vanity of error, have, as you know, the most abundant consolation. For if, in the matters which they lay to my charge, the testimony of my conscience does not stand against me in the sight of God, where no mortal eye can reach, not only ought I not to be cast down, but I should even rejoice and be exceeding glad, for great is my reward in heaven.(1) For in fact I ought to consider, not how bitter, but how false is what I hear, and how true He is in defense of whose name I am exposed to it, and to whom it is said, "Thy name is as ointment poured forth."(2) And deservedly does it smell sweet in all nations, though those who speak evil of us endeavor to confine its fragrance within one corner of Africa. Why therefore should we take amiss that we are reviled by men who thus detract from the glory of Christ, whose party and schism find offense in what was foretold so long before of His ascent into the heavens, and of the pouring forth of His name, as of the savor of ointment: "Be Thou exalted, O God, above the heavens: let Thy glory be above all the earth"?(3)
=====================================================

Taken from "The Early Church Fathers and Other Works" originally published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. in English in Edinburgh, Scotland, beginning in 1867. (LNPF I/IV, Schaff). The digital version is by The Electronic Bible Society, P.O. Box 701356, Dallas, TX 75370, 214-407-WORD.
-----------------------------------------------------------

The electronic form of this document is copyrighted. Copyright (c) Eternal Word Television Network 1996. Provided courtesy of: EWTN On-Line Services PO Box 3610 Manassas, VA 20108 Voice: 703-791-2576 Fax: 703-791-4250 Data: 703-791-4336 FTP: ftp.ewtn.com Telnet: ewtn.com WWW: http://www.ewtn.com. Email address: sysop@ewtn.com
==============================

Full Text Petilianus

[IMRight]

How many of us, believe God already knows whether or not we will be in his kingdom?

Yes.

What part of "omniscient" is hard to understand? :)

[OLD REGGIE]

No, but it usually means most. .
-----------------------------------------------------------

Mirriam Webster

count*less (adjective)

First appeared 1588

: too numerous to be counted : MYRIAD, MANY

It does not mean most, not now, not ever.
------------------------------------------------------------

Besides, your argument against the Church was based upon the supposition that it does not teach the laity about God. This isn't even remotely true, our whole theology is based upon the belief the Jesus is God.

You see things which are not there. Please read exactly what I have written, not what you believe I am thinking.
------------------------------------------------------------

In order for your argument against the Church to be serious you have to prove that a) most Catholics don't know God, and b) the Catholic Magisterium wants it that way

How in the world can you come to such a conclusion? Please get help from another source before you attempt an answer.
------------------------------------------------------------

[Conservative til I die]

Dude, I didn't misrepresent you. You said you were ignorant spiritually. I merely repeated that, and then stated my opinion that I would rather defer to 2000 years of Popes, Apostles, Church Fathers, Church Doctors, Saints, Mystics, and even Orthodox and Protestant writers on spiritual matters than someone who a) has been living for much less than 2000 years and b) considers themselves ignorant.

Next time, don't call yourself ignorant in public when trying to show how much smarter and superior you are.

[Conservative til I die]

Well, I guess this one has broken down into "You're an idiot!" "I know you are what am I!"

What a great witness you give.

[nobdysfool]

How many of us, believe God already knows whether or not we will be in His kingdom?

Yes, I believe He does. If He didn't, He wouldn't be omniscient, and therefore, not God.

By the Grace of God, I will be there, too.

[vmatt]

Next time, don't call yourself ignorant in public when trying to show how much smarter and superior you are.

I believe in admitting my weaknesses and limitations. If you put my words in context, something you have accused me of not doing, you would see that I also said everyone is ignorant to some extent. I have not tried to show anything about myself and am not superior to anyone. I care only what God thinks of me. Why don't we spend what time we have left attempting to find the truth?

[nobdysfool]

(I)stated my opinion that I would rather defer to 2000 years of Popes, Apostles, Church Fathers, Church Doctors, Saints, Mystics, and even Orthodox and Protestant writers on spiritual matters than someone who a) has been living for much less than 2000 years and b) considers themselves ignorant.

Looks to me like you seek knowledge and understanding from any source but the One you should be seeking it from: Jesus Christ, the Lord, via the Holy Spirit. Of course, in order to do that, you must know Jesus intimately and personally and directly. Somehow, I don't think the Catholic Church is encouraging that. It's not a part of their established Dogma, as far as I've been able to discern. It wasn't until the 20th century that the Mass was conducted in a parishioner's native language, it was in Latin, which no one speaks on a daily basis. Also, I wasn't aware that one of the qualifications for acceptance of authority to speak on spiritual matters was a 2000 year life-span. That alone would invalidate any of your other sources, and leave you only with Jesus Christ as your basis of authority, which you obviously are not following.

God desires a personal relationship with each of His people. That's what Jesus died for, to reconcile us to God, so we could have fellowship with Him. Anything that puts something or someone between God and any of His people is not scriptural, and contrary to the teachings of Jesus, the Apostles, and the Word of God.

[dignan3]

[Does] God already [know] whether or not we will be in his kingdom?

Yes.

Pray for John Paul II

[JHavard]

Would you care to answer the question on post 3343, you are one of the last ones still to answer? Thanks, JH

[hopefulpilgrim]

I have a question for you, do you believe marriage is a sacrament?

Pelayo, hi. First of all, I want to clarify terms:

1. When catholics speak of "grace," they mean "power" or "enablement." So when they say that this-or-that "confers grace," they mean that this-or-that gives one the power to be righteous. Is this correct?

2. According to the CAT. CAT. (catholic catechism), a sacrament is "a thing perceptible to the senses, which, on the grounds of Divine institution, possesses the power both of effecting and signifying sanctity and righteousness." In other words, a sacrament contains and causes sanctifying power in the person who partakes of the sacrament....Right?

Let me know if I am correct in the meaning of these terms, OK?....and then I will answer you question about marriage being a sacrament. Thanks and God bless you, HopefulPilgrim

[hopefulpilgrim]

Yes, God knows...He exists in all places in all time---everywhere and "everywhen," as ksen put it the other day. Ps. 139:4 "Even before there is a word on my tongue, behold, O LORD, Thou dost know it all."

[Conservative til I die]

I believe that Protestantism is harmful to the faith of millions myself. By allowing people to be their own popes and make up their own doctrine as they see fit (i.e., God will bend to my will, and not vice-versa), the further one gets from the Reformation, the worse and worse the beliefs of the followers

OK, I'm going to weigh in on this one..."allowing people to be their own popes"? Where do you get that? That's not part of Protestant thought! Make up their own doctrine? Hardly!

Really? The proof is in the pudding. 28,000+ Protestant denominations, ranging from people who believe merely in Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide (most mainstream Protestant groups) to people that believe Jesus was Michael the Archangel (Jehovah's Witnesses) to people that believe there is no Trinity (Jehovah's Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals) to people that believe we must celebrate the Jewish holidays (the Worldwide Church of God before they changed their ways) to those who believe dancing, rock music, and playing cards damns you to hell (some of the extremely conservative Baptist groups) to those who believe in polygamy (Mormons) to those who believe in living as if in the 16th century (Amish). Each one of those groups was founded by a man or woman. And that man or woman acted as if they were their own Pope, making infallible decrees on doctrine, such as the aforementioned beliefs on the Trinity, Christ's nature and identity, what we need to do to receive salvation, how we are to live, etc. Some of these leaders have even called themselves Prophets (Charles Russell of Jehovah's Witnesses, Mary Baker Eddy of Christian Science, Ellen White of 7th Day Adventists, etc.)

THey may not call themselves Popes, but they sure as heck act like popes. Or even super-popes, prophets, or in some extreme cases, the Son of God or God Himself.

And everytime there is a new split in one of these denominations, with the congregation splitting due to some doctrinal matter, the leaders are acting as their own Popes, with their flock following them. Of course, there are also the non-denominational folks who believe all you need is a Bible, a little privacy, and enough concentration to talk to Jesus. All they have as their own interpretation of the Bible, which 99 times out of 100 is different than another person doing the same thing. Who's wrong? Who's right?

Do you read your Bible?

Not since Thursday, when I finally found a "proof text" for the sacrament of Confirmation in Acts, when Peter and the others laid hands on some of the other followers and conferred the Spirit upon them.

Or do you wait for the Pope to tell you what it says?

Well, much of the Bible is pretty clear, meaning that I can figure out what's going on. However, some of it is not, so while I have my own ideas of what it says, I look to the Pope as the final arbiter on the meaning. I'd rather trust someone to whom Jesus gave the power to bind and loose rather than myself when I'm reading the Bible on a packed train on the way to work. You can call that being sheep-like, but I consider the alternative to be awfully arrogant.

God gave you a brain, and He expects you to use it! The only requirement for understanding scripture is having a personal relationship with the Author.

I disagree. 1 billion people will read the Bible and you can get 1 billion different interpretations. More, considering that people's thinking can change from day to day. This is the problem in the Protestant world. Everyone looks to themselves as the end-all and be-all of dogmatic interpretation. How arrogant.

You don't get that by rituals, by liturgy, by praying to saints or Mary.

Nice way to work in the Jack Chick bullcrap. We were talkign about the Bible. Now you talk about rituals. Those things are not connected. You act as if the Bible is the only thing there is to Christianity. You are comparing apples and oranges; rituals do not by default cause someone to be unable to read the Bible.

And when are you guys gonna get off this "praying to statues and Mary" stuff anyway???? I mean, at this point, anyone who keeps bringing this up is just being a troll. And I'm not going to speed up my progression to arthritis in my hands by wasting another line explaining the difference between asking for a saint or Mary to pray for you vs. actually praying to them.

You get that by praying to Jesus, and asking Him to forgive your sins and come into your heart. You ask Him to cleanse you and make you a new man (or woman, as the case may be). Jesus said "ye must be born again". That's how you do it. It's scriptural, and it works. Once you have done that, then you can read and understand the Bible,

Jesus did not cleanse us, forgive our sins, or sacrifice Himself for us just so that we could read the Bible. Apples and oranges again.

because you have its Author, the Holy spirit, living inside you to lead and guide you into all truth (Jesus' own words).

Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, Seventh Day Adventism, Moonies, Mormons, the old Worldwide Church of God, Oneness Pentecostalism, Snake-handling Pentecostalism, Jim Jones, Christadelphianism, Swedenborgianism, and Branch Davidianism are all descendants of the Protestant Reformation, and late ones at that.

Every one of those you named is not a descendant of the Reformation.

Yes they are. Nearly all of the founders of these groups were members of slightly more mainstream sects (Charles Russell of Jehovah's Witnesses was a Congregationalist who became a Millerite a/k/a Adventist, in fact many of the cultic leaders seemed to be Adventists for some reason) and all of them were Protestants of some sort. Think of it as a game of telephone. The further down the line you get, the more the message becomes garbled, twisted, distorted, and lost. From Martin Luther to Mary Baker Eddy or Joseph Smith was about 300-350 years. Over those 300-350 years, doctrine was interpreted and reinterpreted with no final arbiter. Throw in some power plays and megalomania, and a little insanity (Mary Eddy and others) and voila, you've got downright bizarre and in most cases heretical doctrine. You have NOTHING like this in the Catholic Church. This is a Protestant phenomenon All of these people were Protestants who were parts of groups that were a little bit strange, which came from sects that were a little less strange, who themselves were an offshoot of a group a little less strange, etc etc, going right back to Martin Luther. There is a connection, and it was a logical outcome of the Reformation, where there was no final arbiter.

Just because someone starts a "new" group of followers and claims to use the Bible as their inspiration, it doesn't mean that they are Christian.

Nearly every cult leader was a member of a slightly odd but at the time, accepted Protestant group. Don't you get the connection?

Every one of those you named are cults, and labeled as such by the main Protestant denominations.

Yes, and thank goodness for that. But it does not mean that Protestantism is not at fault. Maybe Jehovah's Witnesses are considered a cult, but if you go back up the spiritual family tree, you'll find that the group that gave birth to the group that gave birth to the group that gave birth to the Witnesses or other cults is accepted as Christian.

Oh Christ almighty, will you get off this "pray to statues" and "pray to Mary" crap! I mean, this is like Jack Chick 101 stuff.

That's it, use His name in vain, that really establishes your point.

My bad. I will hit Confession and ask for forgiveness. We are all imperfect.

As far as the "pray to statues, pray to Mary" stuff, do you deny that Catholics do that?

No, I do not. There are some ignorant Catholics that do pray to statues and saints and Mary. And they are sinners and they are wrong, and they are really stupid, because everyone knows a statue is just plaster or wood or marble.

But let's get real, this is not what Protestants are talking about when they blast Catholics. They either a) take these ignorant Catholics and stereotype the whole Church through them, or b) pretend that the Catholic Church teaches as doctrine that we must pray to a statue or worship Mary and the saints (which is what we are really doing by praying to them).

Look, just go read the words of the Hail Mary and explain to me how this is praying TO Mary. Check it out:

Hail Mary,
Found in Lk 1:28

full of grace,
May was filled with grace, was she not?

the Lord is with thee,
Also found in Lk 1:28

blessed are thou among women,
Found in Lk 1:48

and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
I think we can all agree on this one, and I am sure there are myriad verses in the Gospels that call Jesus blessed.

Holy Mary, mother of God,

Jesus was God no? Mary was His mother, no?

pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death, Amen.
OK, and here we ask her to pray FOR US, as I used to do in high school, when we would ask our patron saint to PRAY FOR US.

Call me nuts, but I don't see one instance in this prayer that is prayer TO MARY. I see some verses right out of the Bible, and some that are requests to pray for us. Let's get real.

If you do then in addition to being a blasphemer, you are a liar, and you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven doing that stuff.

Jeez, and you think us "Catlicks" are wrong for saying there is no salvation outside the Church, and here I've got some stranger who's spouting off the Jack Chick 101 slanders of my Church telling me I'll go to hell if I don't do things the way HE wants them done! Sorry, I think I'll listen to Jesus, St. Paul, the Popes, and 2000 years of Church teaching over you.

Go ahead, dishonor Mary by not asking her to pray for you and by not calling her blessed (uh, that one's taken right from the Bible). I'm sure Jesus likes us to not give His Mother the respect she deserves.

Please tell me where in scripture it is commanded that we give extra honor to Mary?

Who said it was "extra" honor. Mary herself says that all will call her blessed in Lk 1:48! You know, Luke, who was inspired by GOD to write his Gospel. Or is the new practice to only consider inspired the verses that help the Protestant argument????

Mary is dead, and cannot pray for us anymore, nor can she hear our prayers.

Whoa, dude, are you a Jehovah's Witness yourself?????? Do you believe in eternal soul sleep or some other garbage like that????? What didn't you get about Jesus saying we would have ETERNAL LIFE in Him and through Him????? I think *YOU* are the one who better crack open the dusty Bible you've apparently stored in your attic, bro.

God hears our prayers, in the persons of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. We are forbidden to pray to any other than the true God.

No one is praying to Mary!!!!!!!!! Damnit, why won't you let that bone go! (Why? Because this strawman is all you have.)

Your idea of respect to Jesus Mother is a cultural construct, not a scriptural one.

Better read that Bible! Since apparently you won't, I'll quote it here for you:

Luke 1:48

For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages CALL ME BLESSED.

Jesus never commanded any such thing, and never would.

How did that Commandment go?

Thou shallt honor thy mother and father.

Heck, Jesus Himself even said so in Lk 18:20

You know the Commandments (sounds like he is talking directly to you!), 'You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; HONOR your father and your MOTHER. The whole idea of Christ's redemptive work was so that God and you could have fellowship. Directly. One on one. Without a middleman. Catholicism has placed roadblocks to fellowship with God in the path of it's followers.

You call them roadblocks, we consider them enhancements! You think its all about "Jesus-n-me", where all you have to do is say "Yo Jesus, what's up, how are ya." Catholics believe in weekly fellowship with Christ through the Eucharist, seeking cleansing of our sins through Confession, doing charitable work, asking the saints to pray for us and for our loved ones, etc. These are all Biblical things.

Catholicism attempts to invalidate the Word of God with traditions of men, and inserts itself between man and God. There is one mediator between God and man, the Man, Jesus Christ.

Good thing that I don't consider Mary or the saints or the Pope or a statue my mediator then eh?

[Pelayo]

How many of us, believe God already knows whether or not we will be in his kingdom?

God knows all things.

[dignan3]

Mary is the mother of the physical form of Jesus. I have not argued that she is not the mother of Jesus. I have made the statement that she is not, as the implication of your statements would infer, the creator of God. And I stated that whether you intend to state her as the creator of God or not. . I'm not letting such a blasphemous inferrance hang out there in the wind for others to abuse.

Here is the definition of Theotokos or "Mother of God" as it was dogmatically defined by the Council of Ephesus:

"This expression, however, "the Word was made flesh," can mean nothing else but that he partook of flesh and blood like to us; he made our body his own, and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himself flesh remaining what he was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word being personally united is said to be born according to the flesh." (Second Epistle of Cyril to Nestorius - Approved by the Council of Ephesus)

"1. If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (qeotokos), inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, 'The Word was made flesh']: let him be anathema." (Twelve Anathemas Proposed by Cyril and accepted by the Council of Ephesus)

This is what Catholics mean when we say that Mary was the "Mother of God". No more, no less. What part of the above definition do you have objections with, if any?

Pray for John Paul II

[dignan3]

Incidentally, I printed a few definitions of the Primacy of Scripture from St. Augustine. I wouldn't quarrel with his, or many of the Early Church Fathers on this issue. I wonder why you find it necessary to disavow the teachings which don't support your position.

I don't disavow what he said, but you have to understand the entire faith of Augustine. That understanding doesn't come from just proof-texting various passages while ignoring others which don't bode well for your theory.

But let us take a look at what you said Sola Scriptura is. Seeing that you quoted, in post 2730, this definition I will assume that you agree with it:

"Actually, calling it "Sola Scriptura" is a bit of a misnomer, because it is not a doctrine which teaches that we believe that there are not other authorities, nor that they have no value or place. Rather, it means that other authorities must be subordinate to the Word of God. The phrase "Sola scriptura" implies several things. First, that the Scriptures are a direct revelation from God, and as such, are His Authoritative Word. It is also a term which illustrates that the scriptures are all that is necessary for Church faith and practice today. Not only that the scriptures are sufficient, but that they also are the ultimate and final court of appeal on all doctrinal matters. Because however good and faithful a Church leader may be in giving his guidance, all the fathers, teachers, popes, and councils, are still fallible. The only infallible "source" for truth is the scriptures. Besides God Himself, Only His Words (the Scriptures alone), are infallible." -- Tony Warren

I have to be blunt with you. Except for the part in red, the above paragraph is completely foreign to Augustinian, in fact the entire early Church's, thought. Even the books which Augustine considered to be inspired Scripture was different than what you consider Scripture(that is if you don't hold to the Catholic canon)!

Your transparent ploy of firing off quote after quote of other writings is wasted energy. If I declared he or they said differently it might be appropriate.

I was trying to show that Augustine used both Tradition and the authority of the Church, and not Scripture alone, as a means to come to the correct doctrine. Did Augustine extol the virtues and authority of Scripture? Absolutely! Did he do so at the expense of the authority of Tradition and the Church, as you and Mr. Warren do? Absolutely NOT!

The Paramount Authority of Scripture (Sola Scriptura, if you will) was the primary part of the Christian faith until it became necessary for some to add an expanded definition of "Tradition" and "Magisterium" to support a changing position.

The authority of the Church and Tradition, along with the authority of Scripture, has been a part of the Christian faith since day one. Think about it for a minute, how could the early Church use the above definition of Sola Scriptura when the canon of Scripture was not even completely determined until c.400 AD?

Pray for John Paul II

[Conservative til I die]

OK, you seem to get my point and not get my point at the same time. You call yourself ignorant. You also say that everyone is ignorant to some degree. Fine, I agree with that. And it is for THAT reason that I look to the 2000 years of knowledge and authority that the Catholic Church has built up rather than you or myself for the final word.