Why Does The Shroud of Turin Still Exist?

Townhall.com ^ | July 28, 2019 | Myrah Kahn Adams

[daniel1212]

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free.” 17 As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. 18 And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered — so the Lord commands — as a heathen and a publican.

That is what the encyclical says, akin to many others, and which I show to RCs, yet RCs debate whether encyclicals (as well as Bulls) are infallible, and papal teaching also teaches that "the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors" (VEHEMENTER NOS, Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906) and under the RC model she is her own interpreter, and V2 "clarifies such Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the church there is no salvation) teaching, stating:

Vatican Two: Lumen Gentium 16: "The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (Cf. Jn. 16:13) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical [Protestant] communities...

"They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood." — LUMEN GENTIUM: 16.

Dominus Iesus: " …those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.” “All who have been justified by Faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ: they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.” Dominus Iesus: "...these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation...” — http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html

CCC 838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."

Thus the question for you is, do you reject such teachings of V2 which you judge as being contrary to historical RC teaching? What about pope Francis: is he even a valid pope?

And since Scripturally, what one does and effects constitutes the evidence of what one believes, and Rome manifestly considers even proabortion, prosodomite public figures to be members in life and in death - and which you must own unless you reject the judgment of your pastors - then why should we conservative evangelicals leave our conservative fellowships and become brethren in which an unholy amalgamation?

[grey_whiskers]

As if we have not seen and refuted these parroted polemics prior to this.

I'm not a parrot. (I'm an adult convert.)

So let me ask you what your this polemical assertion is to prove, what is the basis for your assurance of truth?

The answer is the same as the basis for Sola Scriptura: faith. You might want to read up on the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13:24-30).

God often *allows* evil for much longer than people are comfortable with.

And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus any who knowingly dissent from the latter must be in rebellion to God.

That's over simplified. And it sounds like the Phariseeical tactic of forcing a false dichotomy, then demanding "answer yes or no."

Recall all the times in Scripture, that Jesus talks about the lost:

the parable of the lost talent, the Prodigal Son, the sheep fallen in the pit on the Sabbath.

And St. Paul's writing about "after I have left you, fierce wolves will come, not sparing the flock." or for that matter, the Passage in Phillippians 3, about those who live as enemies of the Cross...their God is their belly, their mind set on earthly things.

Or 1 Timothy 1. ("who have upset the faith of some, saying that the resurrection is past already.")

In other words, apostasy, heresy, and worldliness were rife in the Church even during the times of the writing of the New Testament.

Think of the Church as a *bulwark*: a pen for the Sheep. And remember Jesus statement about "the hireling cares nothing for the Sheep."

The interesting thing, is that in reading the lives of several different saints, often they received direct revelations from God, and *strong* impressions, causing great agony if not followed, to pray on certain topics.

The rules of their order, compelled them to go their superiors with these revelations.

Often the superiors spent *years* deliberately ordering them to refrain from these prayers.

And yet, the Spirit told them to obey their superiors, at the cost of great anguish to themselves.

Doing such produced great fruit in the souls of the Saints; but it also allowed (in mysterious ways, which God did not divulge) great power and latitude for God to work in the hearts of the Superiors, so that the prayers ended up being spread wider than before, and to more effect.

Think of Saul vs. David, and 1 Samuel 15 "to obey is better than sacrifice": Saul got in trouble by not waiting for the prophet, and sacrificing on his own, jumping the gun.

Sometimes I think a lot of the Protestant churches are like that; "Gee God, you're too slow on fixing all these problems, so we're gonna do it" and that has morphed (over time) into "well, I felt it was the right thing, so I went and did it. You can't judge me!"

But on the other hand, you have the Apostles telling the Jewish leaders after the healing of the lame man in Acts: "We must obey God rather than men."

It's rather analogous to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in quantum mechanics, where one can measure either momentum or position, but not to infinite precision, or to the wave-particle duality: Law vs. Grace, Submission to God vs. Submission to Men vs. Submission to authority in fear of God.

You can find plenty of verses on those in St. Paul if you look.

The New Testament was largely composed of letters written by Apostles (Paul, Peter, John) to individuals or to Churches. And the issue is not always "How DARE you contradict Scripture!" as "rightfully handling the word of truth" : it's scriptural, but just maybe the passage you're quoting, was written to recipient X, and recipient X was confronting error Y or sin Z. And the person today you're quoting it to, is actually dealing with situation Delta.

There's such a thing as a sheep being lost on the hillside; or a herd of sheep.

Not everything is a matter of rebellion, as being lost, misunderstanding, or many other ways of "missing the mark."

Also, God is concerned with the Church (corporately, His bride) as well as individuals. We are to meet together; pray for one another, instruct and admonish one another.

It's not a matter of a bunch of Caped Superheroes riding in to save the day (according to what *they* know is right, and everyone else is just wrong). It's a corporate matter; the body of Christ, as it says in Ephesians 4: 11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. 14 Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming. 15 Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work. And the same thing goes with prayers and Church services. "Do not quench the Spirit" vs. "Let all things be done decently and in order."

Does that make any sense?

(*) There is much more to say about revelations within the Church, and Marian apparitions.

I'll just give one quote out of context, to illustrate the flavor as it applies to this discussion.

Stop and seriously consider the following words Our Lady gave in Medjugorje recently:

August 2, 2011

“…As individuals, my children, you cannot stop the evil that wants to begin to rule in this world and to destroy it…”

…Our Lady warned both the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, through Her apparitions in Kibeho, telling them not to hate. It was foreshown by Her in the Medjugorje apparitions…but Our Lady could not help them. On April 24, 1994, 19 days into what would be more than 100 days of the Rwanda genocide, Our Lady gave Her monthly message to Medjugorje visionary Marija. Our Lady said:

“…if you do not pray and if you are not humble and obedient to the messages I am giving you, I cannot help you…”

Sister Mary of St. Peter, a Carmelite nun, recounted (I don't have the book in front of me, and a quick Google search didn't find it; I have to get ready for work) how the Spirit spoke to her, telling her how she could tell if the messages were from Him: if they led to humility and she was without resentment when they were brushed aside.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Your criticisms are not correct. Nothing from a purported Aparition which contradicts Scripture is doctrine, and an anti-doctrine apparition cis not to be approved.

You may have noticed controversy about the Medjugorje phenomenon. Pope Francis has given the green light for Catholics to organize pilgrimages to Medjugorje, a site of alleged Marian apparitions, though the Church has not yet given a verdict on the apparitions’ authenticity.

This is an incoherent stance in which Pope Francis (as usual) manages to be self-contradictory and ambiguous. This is in example of what has repeatedly shown him to be incompetent as a teacher: a very worrying development.

As for the intercessory role of saints in heaven, that is an aspect of the efficacy of the prayers of ALL the saints, in heaven as well as on earth, as all are members of the Body of CHrist, Who alone gives every grace and benefit.

This is solidly grounded in New Testament Apostolic doctrine about (1) the efficacy of prayer and (2) the Body of Christ.

You can say you don't believe in the efficacy of the prayers of saintly men and women, no matter whether they be in heaven or on earth --- but this conclusion is not required by Scripture. Rather, I would say, it is incompatible with it, inasmuch as it denies he ongoing spiritual significance of the Body of Christ.

[ealgeone]

Your criticisms are not correct.

Please show where I am incorrect.

All of the statements from the apparition noted are in contradiction of Scripture.

IF you don't see that then we have a lot more ground to go over.

Nothing from a purported Aparition which contradicts Scripture is doctrine, and an anti-doctrine apparition cis not to be approved.

You're attempting to hide behind definitions, defined by Roman Catholicism I might add, to avoid dealing with this issue.

Rome has given approval of these apparitions. Pope's have spoken approvingly about these.

This is an incoherent stance in which Pope Francis (as usual) manages to be self-contradictory and ambiguous.

Unknowingly, you have encapsulated the Roman Catholic position on these apparitions.

You can say you don't believe in the efficacy of the prayers of saintly men and women, no matter whether they be in heaven or on earth --- but this conclusion is not required by Scripture. Rather, I would say, it is incompatible with it, inasmuch as it denies he ongoing spiritual significance of the Body of Christ.

No believer denies the efficacy of praying for each other. However, our prayers are for people here on earth.

Our departed loved ones are already departed. We cannot pray for them at this point. Their eternal destination has already been determined. We cannot change that.

When we pray we are to pray TO God and only God. That is what is evidenced in the New Testament.

[ealgeone]

Our Lady gave Her monthly message to Medjugorje visionary Marija. Our Lady said:

“…if you do not pray and if you are not humble and obedient to the messages I am giving you, I cannot help you…”

You cite an apparition not approved by the Vatican...at least not yet.

But regardless of what the apparition said or whether it is approved by Rome, which would mean Rome continues to affirm these non-Scriptural apparitions....that apparition cannot help you. It will only lead you away from Christ.

[daniel1212]

“Anyone who requires physical evidence to underpin their faith doesn’t understand the concept of faith.”

Whether the Shroud is real or not, the premise that faith is not based upon a degree of evidential warrant is wholly unScriptural, yet this need not be by sight.

God did call Israel to covenant with Him until after He had manifestly revealed Himself, while all held John the baptizer to "be a prophet indeed" based upon his holy character and convicting Scriptural words, even though he no miracles.

And it is was the testimony of the Resurrection of Christ that Paul states gave faith (pistis) unto all. (Act 17:31)

Meanwhile, the judgment of the Gentiles in Rm. 1 is based upon them having received revelations of the reality of God (For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Romans 1:20), and acting contrary to the innate moral sense, "the work of the law written in their hearts," Romans 2:15) by which man can "by nature the things contained in the law," by God's grace, which would lead them to "the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world," (John 1:9) True Light, Christ, glory to God.

However, the premise of a degree of evidential warrant for faith does not mean God will always do what He did for Israel in the Exodus, making it unmistakably manifest that He was real and leading them (which, contrary to Muhammad and his mere "visions," was before commissioning them to exterminate the Canaanites), and which still saw people in practice responding like atheists. But God gives to everyone a degree of light and evidential warrant for faith, and the judgment of souls will be "according to Truth," based upon the light and grace one has.

Which leaves those who were enlightened and realized the power of God and turned away as being the most accountable. (Hebrews 6:1-8; 10:25-39; Gal. 5:1-4)

[grey_whiskers]

You’re trolling.

[ealgeone]

You’re trolling.

continuing to prove my observations of many Roman Catholics in these discussions.

[grey_whiskers]

You are not speaking the truth in love; and your goal is not to build up.

You're trolling.

[Elsie]

Criticizing something I said nothing about.

Then say something about it!

Do you agree or not?

[metmom]

Nope...Don't need interpretatin'... Many will have the gift of teaching...Not what some interpretation was decided upon eons ago, but teaching the words of God...

Interesting that in the lists of gifts of the Holy Spirit, teaching and preaching are mentions, but there is no such thing as a *gift of interpretation*.

What a laugh.

So much of Scripture is so easy to understand even if you read it just at face value.

Do not murder.

Do not steal.

Do not commit adultery.

Call no man father.

Love God.

Love your neighbor as yourself.

Husbands treat your wives as well as your own body and as Christ treated the church.

Do not eat blood.

It's not rocket science.

The only reason people feel the need to *interpret* Scripture is because they don't like what it says and want to change it's meaning so that it means what they say it means and not what it says.

[metmom]

Let me know if you get an answer.

[MHGinTN]

Clearly, the Word of God states that satan comes with all signs and lying wonders.

Catholicism makes the adherents to that religion ripe to swallow the signs and lying wonders soon to be spewed out upon humanity, AFTER the Body of Christ made up of all believers throughout History and alive now are removed to escape the hour of testing coming upon the whole earth.

Teachers in catholiciism, teaching acceptance of the apparitions or conveying innocence in the apparitional genre are preparing the Catholics to be ripe for the deceptions.

Lending credulity to apparitional statements and signs points to the earth dwellers who are the ones left behind after JESUS descends to the first Heaven to gather us to Himself and return to the Father's House.

It is GOD Who promised to keep us from the time of the testing inflicted by the wrath of God. Scripture refers to this deliverance from the wrath to come. Denying the references is a cottage industry among 'Catholic Scholarship'. That too prepares Catholics to swallow the great Lie which is coming immediately following The Removal, the Snatching away of the Body of Christ which has been growing since Pentecost.

The more insidious the insistence that there is no such thing as The Rapture of The Body of Christ Believers, the closer is the sudden snatching away. That's why I caution Catholic DO NOT ACCEPT THE MARK OF THE BEAST when it is commanded to you.

In the Revelation of John, that first white horse rider is no friend of humanity; with his arrival a fourth of the earth's population is killed! The entire seven years of Tribulation / Time of Jacob's Troubles is God pouring outr HIS WRATH. Astonishingly, a number so great John could not count them are saved and transported to Heaven DURING the Tribulation.

[Elsie]

You call this LOGIC?

Then I trust you’ll get back to me after criticizing St. Paul for calling Timothy his son, or for calling himself a father in faith to the Corinthians? Because clearly, that’s hard evidence of Paul denying the words of Jesus.

Jesus said, "Call no man father."

Paul called someone a SON; and called himSELF a father.

Not quite the same; is it?

I will give you credit though; for coming close to a Biblical explanation for a clear example of not doing what the Savior has told you.

[metmom]

Since you just confirmed that Jesus IS a sign--- and then you added, "We Gentiles do not require a sign," you seem to be saying that Gentiles do not need Christ Incarnate. Astonishing, if that's what you mean. But is this what you mean?

Oh, give it up, Mrs. Don-O.

He did not mean that by any means and it takes some kind of special misconstruing of words to even begin to read that out of the comment he made.

That was unworthy of you.

[Elsie]

He never claimed that ‘JESUS’ said it.

But the implication worked; didn’t it!

Welcome to RomeSpeak 101. Enjoy your stay; marvel at the artwork.

[ealgeone]

It's called tough love.

Paul called the Galatians "foolish" for their errors.

Using your reasoning Paul was "trolling" the Galatians.

If these conversations are too much for you head to the caucus threads.

You can join the two other Roman Catholics who post there; though I doubt one would agree with you. That poster doesn't even agree with his/her fellow RCs on matters.

[metmom]

Every Christian in the forum knows someone who did NOT come to know “that the claims of Christ are true” merely because of another person’s “changed life”.

Totally clueless.

If you don't think that seeing the fruit of the Spirit manifest in someone's life is not evidence enough to convince someone that the claims of Christ are true, then you apparently have never met any real Christians.

[Elsie]

To: Elsie

Sorry Mark.

You awake?

Yes, I am awake, cuz I had to get up to answer your post. 😁 It is now 7:12 AM in my neck of the woods.

407 posted on ‎7‎/‎29‎/‎2019‎ ‎7‎:‎14‎:‎47‎ ‎PM by Mark17 (With Jesus, there is more wealth in my soul, than acres of diamonds and mountains of gold)

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

Uh...

Looks like FR disagrees with the time...

(No; I never did get an answer about the time on FR)

[Elsie]

... you claim you need a ‘higher authority figure’ to interpret it for you in order to understand,...

I'd hate to admit that I was that dumb.