Posted on 12/21/2008 6:19:03 AM PST by GonzoII
“It is a shame that adherents of a “group” psychology give praise and glory to an institution”
—
The Church is not an institution; it is the body of Christ.
Col:1:24:
24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church: (DRV)
So don't attack its primary builder because of some post-reformation ecclesiological nonsense.
Well, it is true that the Catholic Church is not a building. It is the Body of Christ himself, as the Holy Scripture clearly teaches.
So don't attack its primary builder because of some post-reformation ecclesiological nonsense.
Whose "attacking"? I'm just stating some common sense understanding of what is being done by adherents of many "churches" today - of whom you seem to be one.
BTW, what I said about the "ekklesia" (Greek spelling) is what is taught in the Scriptures you say you believe in. I realize you believe in a "developing" religion with "developing doctrines". However, I don't. I take what the Scriptures say about the "church" before I even consider what individuals try to push on everyone else.
Well, it is true that the Catholic Church is not a building. It is the Body of Christ himself, as the Holy Scripture clearly teaches.
*****
I’m curious annalex...what are you being taught about end-times? HOW much do you know to watch for? We were told to watch. WHAT are you watching for?
It is logically impossible to reject an author's claim without reviewing his argument. Have you read his book? If you are a champion of West civ, then at least honor the reason of the Greeks. You can easily get the book at a library. (If your local library does not have it, they will probably have an inter-library loan service.) Or buy it from Amazon or your favorite bookstore.
what do I know?
That is a very good question. That is essentially the question Socrates kept asking. So keep asking it. You may eventually get the answer.
What are you basing that opinion on? Certainly not history. During the barbarian invasions of the Roman Empire, that empire collapsed in the west. It was the Christian monasteries that remained oases of learning during those turbulent centuries. As the barbarians were destroying the marks of civilization all around, the monks behind their walls were preserved the learning of the ancients. It was from the monks that the barbarians later received the learning that the monks had preserved.
Galileo would have disagreed with you..
You are jumping all over the place. First you are talking about the early Middle Ages. That would be roughly 400 to 1000 AD. And now you are talking about Galileo who lived in the 17th century, at least 600 years later.
If you want to make a consist argument about some point, please do. But I will not play a specious game of jack rabbit--hippity hop, hippity hop.
Bravo!
No the point was that I was making the Church was anti science during that period..
During what period?
>>Well, I think I would put it like this; as the saying goes, first things first, the Catholic Church is historically the first Christian religion
Only in Catholic history books...<<
No, in all history books. The only books that claim otherwise are propaganda(such as Trail of Blood), and have been discredited by most historians(even those unsympathetic to the Roman Catholic Church).
Sounds good, doesn't it...However, your apostolic line has been broken numerous times, even from the get-go from Peter...Names were later inserted into the line to make it look like an unbroken line...
The doctrine is found as early as the Epistle to the Corinthians (c. 96), traditionally attributed to Pope Clement I...
There you go again...You don't have the letter...It's your church's 'tradition' that such a letter ever existed...
It is expressly affirmed in Roman Catholicism. It is identified with the succession of bishops in office and interpreted as the source of the bishops’ authority and leadership role. The most specific instance of these claims is that the pope is the successor of St. Peter, who was chosen by Jesus as head of his church (see Matt. 16:16–18).
I can just imagine the look on a Catholic's face when he for the first time read the scriptures in his own language...No doubt he said about his church, 'this is not the church of the scriptures'...
The Reformers are the true catholics...
Ha...All books that have been anti-Catholic have been 'dis-credited'...So what else is new???
Twisting the Knife
How Galileo Brought His Troubles with the Church on Himself
Thanks for confirming yet again that you are an idiot.
Read the following and learn something rather than regurgitate the pap you've so willingly swallowed.
Twisting the Knife
How Galileo Brought His Troubles with the Church on Himself
You feel better now???
Must be the weekend moderator is a Catholic...
>>...All books that have been anti-Catholic have been ‘dis-credited’...So what else is new??? <<
One thing that isn’t new is anti-Catholic bigotry. It’s too bad. On the cultural issues of our time, Catholics, Evangelicals and other people of faith have so much in common. As Christopher Dawson said, “The final battle of our age will not be between Catholics and Protestants, but between those who believe in God and those who do not”. We should work together, not tear each other down.
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.