Uh...
...the picture didn't come thru.
Posted on 06/16/2014 8:51:55 PM PDT by icwhatudo
UMMMmmm...
O...
K...
Just 'some' of them...
I'm glad that some Protestants ARE interested enough in the fruits of the Catholic heresy to bother!
Sorry; my bad.
By definition there CANNOT be anything that is heretical about CatholicISM; no matter WHAT it teaches or says.
It was here first, and by GOD! that fact along makes it correct.
Uh...
...the picture didn't come thru.
Let's try some easy math:
There are approximately 1.2 billion Catholics world wide;
If merely 1% of them 'ask' Mary for help just once each day;
that means that 12 million separate prayers are headed Mary's direction every day.
Given that there are 86,400 seconds per day... (24 hours times 60 minutes times 60 seconds)
...that means that Mary has to handle approximately 139 'requests' per second!
Purty good fer someone NOT 'devine'!
I think there’s a difference between “sinful” Popes and “evil.” Repentance and charity is the price of redemption. Paul himself wrote “Charity covereth a multitude of sins.” Augustine let a debauched life before he returned to God and became a profound scholar and theologian and a saint man after whom universities are named the world over.
You’ll soon be called gormless...
Interpretation of Scripture has nothing to do with innate intelligence and everything to do with the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit.
Spiritual matters CANNOT be understood in the least without His work.
1 Corinthians 18-31 For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”
Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”
1 Corinthians 2:1-16 And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. Wisdom from the Spirit
Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”— these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit.
For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
Nonsense.
Everything we need to know for salvation and maturity in Christ is found in Scripture.
Anything ANY church adds to it is unnecessary.
“I see you are determined to sneer and lob insults at a group”
No you don’t.
“rather than seriously consider what I took the time to point out.”
I considered those things seriously several decades ago—about four decades to be a bit more precise—when I was a young man. I presume all intelligent adults have dealt with these things. Your poorly composed lecture contained within it the assumption that I had not considered these things, and was therefore not an intelligent adult. Aside from that, those things are not germane here.
“I made a factual discussion of the unintended consequences of many historic events”
Neither of your examples dealt with the unintended consequences of a person’s actions.
The interstate road system did not enable teenagers to travel or go to college far from home. Parents allowed that. Nor did the Interstates result in an increasing rate of sex in the back of cars, as no Interstate is required for that. Sex in the back of cars has been occurring since cars had backs. The increase in both fornication and teen pregnancies resulted from a decline in our moral fiber, and the Protestant churches were the first to cave on that.
“Or how about Ronald Reagan...Is he solely to blame for the breakdown of the family?”
Very sneaky, the way you slipped that word “solely” in there. That is the first use of that word or concept in this discussion. With it, you slip in the notion that I said Luther was “solely” to blame for all the bloodshed caused by the Protestant heresy. Let me see now, when you try to make people think that someone said something he did not say, what category of action is that?
Of course there were “other forces in society that were operating at the same time.” Any intelligent, educated, non-leftard of my generation knows that.
The 170 words you spent on Eisenhower and Reagan were a waste of my time. If I want to be lectured to by an eighth-grader, I have a son who actually is one.
“It is useless to try to continue to blame Luther for theological differences that have stood the test of time for 400 years.”
As I recall, Luther didn’t have any theological differences with the Church when he rebelled. He was complaining about abuses, and his complaints were pretty much valid. As for standing the test to time, time is not the test of theological differences. A heresy can, theoretically, endure forever.
“There are as many people growing up in one tradition who switch to the other as there are in the other direction”
Neither are the actions of humans the test of theological differences. One might as well argue that atheism is correct because church attendance is down.
“Why carry forward old blames and hatreds?”
If it weren’t for the small cadre of vicious, lying protestants here and their endless war on the Catholic Church, I wouldn’t think about Protestantism twice in a year.
I bow out of these arguments frequently; but sooner or later some particularly noxious rant catches my attention on the wrong day, and I give in to my impulse to contradict evil.
“and avoid trying to use any church of Christ Jesus as a point of determining moral superiority over others”
Oh, don’t you even dare accuse me of that.
There is an old saying: never argue with an idiot; passers-by may find it difficult to tell which is which.
I’ve been here since 1998. I saw all this start. It started with a few narrow-minded, vicious, bigoted protestants attacking the Catholic Church. It is perpetuated by attacks on the Catholic Church by narrow-minded, vicious, bigoted protestants. Without those narrow-minded, vicious, bigoted attacks on the Catholic Church there would be no threads like this.
Now, the very people who instigated and perpetuate this nonsense blame it on Catholics, and people who have arrived in the middle can’t tell who is the idiot.
“over others whose faith is a conscientious choice”
None of those who post narrow-minded, vicious, bigoted attacks on the Catholic Church here have made any conscientious choice, nor would they capable of it.
“By definition there CANNOT be anything that is heretical about CatholicISM; no matter WHAT it teaches or says. It was here first, and by GOD! that fact along makes it correct.”
Let me try to help you, here. By definition there CANNOT be anything that is heretical about Catholicism; no matter what YOU mistakenly think it teaches or says.
And also, no matter what mistakes or heresies may be perpetrated by mortal man.
I guess it just takes a certain minimum intelligence to understand the difference between the Church and the mortal men who temporarily occupy positions.
Was Paul an apostle when he was chasing down and murdering Christians?
Did he chase them down and murder them after he met Jesus?
Are these men saved or not?
Were they Christians when put into the position of pope or not?
Top 10 Most Wicked Popes
http://listverse.com/2007/08/17/top-10-most-wicked-popes/
1. Liberius, reigned 352-66 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
2. Honorius I, reigned 625-638 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
3. Stephen VI, reigned 896-89 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
4. John XII, reigned 955-964 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
5. Benedict IX, reigned 1032-1048 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
6. Boniface VIII, reigned 1294-1303 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
7. Urban VI, reigned 1378-1389 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
8. Alexander VI, reigned 1492-1503 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
9. Leo X, reigned 1513-1521 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
10. Clement VII, reigned 1523-1524 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
Top 10 Worst Popes in History
http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-worst-popes-in-history.php
1. Pope Alexander VI (1431 – 1503)
2. Pope John XII (c. 937 – 964)
3. Pope Benedict IX (c. 1012 – 1065/85)
4. Pope Sergius III (? – 911)
5. Pope Stephen VI (? – 897)
6. Pope Julius III (1487 – 1555)
7. Pope Urban II (ca. 1035 – 1099)
8. Pope Clement VI (1291 – 1352)
9. Pope Leo X (1475 – 1521)
10. Pope Boniface VIII (c. 1235 – 1303)
“You may discuss issues, but do not make it personal. #34”
Congratulations. In one post you demonstrated that you cannot distinguish between the personal and the general, and that you are impervious to irony. And even playfulness.
But we already knew that.
“Everything we need to know for salvation and maturity in Christ is found in Scripture.”
Several people have on several occasions explained the fundamental, nearly unbearable stupidity of that notion. And yet here you are, just as if you had never been led to water.
“Anything ANY church adds to it is unnecessary.”
Here, too.
I’m going to have to walk away again.
Rejecting the truth is not a wise decision on your part.
“Interpretation of Scripture has nothing to do with innate intelligence”
Wrong. Again. God gave us reason because He wants us to use it. He does not give us all the same ability to reason. This is to teach those with less intelligence to follow, and those with more intelligence to be shepherds rather than tyrants.
“and everything to do with the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit.”
If you only knew what that meant.
Many Protestants seem to think that if they are happy with an interpretation of the Scripture, the Holy Spirit must have guided them.
When the Holy Spirit guides you, it is unmistakable. It is a small taste of Pentecost. You are transfixed, incapable of turning away. You don’t read the page and dig for the meaning; the meaning leaps off the page at you and lights you up. It is, in short, a miracle, and one that most people never experience. And when I say most people, I mean maybe one in a million ever experiences anything like it.
“Spiritual matters CANNOT be understood in the least without His work.”
Wrong again. Even unbelievers can understand a great deal—*if* they receive a correct explanation. Some of the Scriptures are rather transparent. Others mean something utterly other than what a superficial reading would imply.
The Catholic Church is the only source of a two-thousand-year-long study of what the Scriptures mean, and the only source that has been in existence long enough for a substantial portion of its interpretation to have been received directly from the Holy Spirit—a page here, a parable there, down the centuries.
Everywhere that a Protestant interpretation differs from the Catholic, the odds are unimaginably long that the Protestant interpretation is wrong, or at least incomplete.
“1 Corinthians 18-31...“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”
I just mentioned scriptures that mean something utterly other than what a superficial reading would imply.
Bingo.
Do you think you understand that scripture? One can see from the way you tried to use it here that you don’t.
You even include the passage that shows you misunderstand: “Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory.”
That is what the Catholic Church has. The passage is not discussing people like Aquinas or Augustine. It’s talking about “the rulers of this age,” and of this one.
“The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.”
I am afraid even to ask what you think that means, and what license you believe it gives you to reject and contradict the work of the brightest and holiest men of the past twenty centuries.
“Let’s try some easy math:”
Do you really imagine that God is constrained by easy math?
There is no time in Heaven. The Blessed Virgin Mary has all eternity to answer any prayer, and no difference is discernible in the Earthly realm.
“Given that there are 86,400 seconds per day...”
How many seconds are there in eternity?
This kind of “internet” stuff is not what one calls serious research. There are a plethora of anti-Catholic websites that serve as fodder for this stuff.
Apparently, the writings of St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas (whose Summa Theologica is placed NEXT to the Bible in Oxford’s renowned Bodleian Library); and Benedict XVI (where TIME called him “the theological Einstein of our era”), John Henry Cardinal Newman (convert from Anglicanism to Catholicism and now a saint) is well above the pay grade for the Joel Osteens and Billy Grahams and Schullers and just about every stripe of Protestant cult.
These idiots take a passage from here and there in the Bible and think they could provide an authoritative interpretation. Such authority was given exclusively to Peter and his sucessors. No small wonder that the pre-eminent Lutheran theologian in the United States, the late Richard Neuhaus converted to Catholicism.
There's not a shred of Scriptural support for that.
Show us where in Scripture there are instructions about Peter's successor, how he was to be picked. Where did Peter leave any instructions about the matter?
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.