Posted on 03/04/2007 8:21:23 AM PST by Iscool
You are right? You did ask me that question before. The answer is : NO.
As far as I'm concerned, for what it's worth, it would have been better for you to start with this. We know where you're coming from and what you think now, and it gives a context to the other arguments.
You knew where we stood from the beginning of the conversation. Now we know where you stand. Thanks for your candor.
By what authority do you make these claims? Are you saying Jesus was lying when He said He would never leave the Church and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18)? Let me remind you of what Jesus said:
"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;" John 14:16
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:26
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:26-27
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." John 16:13
You are saying the Holy Spirit left the Church and it was led astray. You need to rethink your position since you are directly contradicting Holy Scripture!
Who are you kidding??? Six months of candor and you are just now catching on. Get real. I've been candorous from day one.
The problem is that you don't know where the RCC really stands on anything because it keeps shifting when the ground beneath its position begins to crumble. But we do know one thing that it stands on --- and that is a pagan boneyard full of soothsayers beneath the Vatican where the bones of Simon Bar Jonah are nowhere to be found.
Speaking of candor, how come your own magisterium has withheld the truth about the discovery of the ossuary of Simon Bar Jonah on the Mount of Olives in the monastery of Dominus Flevit? When do you start requiring candor and truth from your own magisterium? When it's too late to do anything about it? Why is it that others have to provide it for you?
And why do you call facts: arguments? Do you know the difference? Is the ossuary of Simon Bar Jonah kept there at Dominus Flevit an argument or a fact???
You have admitted that each point of the Catechism is backed up by Scripture. As I said, you have knowingly and willfully left the Church and are promoting schism (Ref. John 17:11, 21, 22, 23 where Jesus prays that we all may be one). That is a mortal sin, except I guess you don't believe in mortal sin anymore, either, do you? Or as you said yourself, "so what!"
You aren't seeking the Truth, you are seeking justification for yourself by believing falsehoods. Your beliefs might also be described as "spiritually pretentious."
Evidently you don't understand how we got our Bible that we use today. Let me explain these historical facts to you:
There were many, many books and letters being circulated in the first 400 years of the Early Church. If you had been a Christian during that time, you would not have had a clue about which books (other than the Old Testament) to regard as the Word of God. The teachings of the Church would be what would have directed your beliefs. It was only in the late 300's, at the Council of Hippo in 393 AD, the First Council of Carthage in 397 AD, and the Second Council of Carthage in 419 AD, that the Church definitively chose which books would be included in the Canon and which would not. How was it decided? The Councils of the Church relied on the Holy Spirit to direct them in choosing which should be in and which should be out. There were many writings by good and holy men, such as the Epistles of Clement (4th pope and a good friend of St. Paul: “And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.” Philippians 4:3). According to Eusebius in 325 AD, Clement‘s First Epistle was considered to be divinely inspired while St. John’s Revelation was not! It was not until the Councils of the Church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, that each of the books to be included in the Canon were chosen. So yes, until the fourth century, the books which are now part of Holy Scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers which have just been quoted WERE ON THE SAME FOOTING!
***Speaking of candor, how come your own magisterium has withheld the truth about the discovery of the ossuary of Simon Bar Jonah on the Mount of Olives in the monastery of Dominus Flevit?***
Maybe because the monastery of Dominus Flevit doesn't hold the bones of Simon Bar-Jonah? We can question your assertion of his burial on the Mount of Olives just as much as you question his burial at the Vatican. Just because someone says the bones are Peter's doesn't make it so, but there HAS been a tradition for 2,000 years that he was buried in Rome, and there hasn't been a tradition for his burial on the Mount of Olives. Maybe the monastery was trying to drum up some pilgrimage trade and suddenly "discovered" some bones? Maybe the monastery was trying to undermine the authority of the Holy Father with this "discovery." It makes as much sense as your theory of Simon Magus being buried under the Vatican!
The Holy Spirit never joined your church...Or any church...The Holy Spirit indwells saved Christians, not churches...
A Christian that will study the bible easily and clearly sees this...
And beyond that, all saved Christians have confirmation from the Spirit itself that these things are true...
***The Holy Spirit indwells saved Christians, not churches... ***
Saved Christians ARE the Church. Read the Acts of the Apostles for a description of how all those who were saved were called "the Church." Here are a few verses:
"And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." Acts 2:47b
"And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily." Acts 16:5
"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." Acts 20:28
You read other people's posts with the same selective twist that you read your bible and your catechism.
As I said, you have knowingly and willfully left the Church and are promoting schism (Ref. John 17:11, 21, 22, 23 where Jesus prays that we all may be one).
Well then, there must be a whole lot of "schismatics" entering heaven who were "schismed" from the Roman Catholic nonsense. And let's get real --- your own theology says that you are all headed for purgatory not heaven. The schismatics don't want to go to your Catholic purgatory.
That is a mortal sin, except I guess you don't believe in mortal sin anymore ---
Does your catechism have a bible verse for that one too??? You know --- one of those bible verses that takes a real stretch of that Catholic imagination required of every catechist.
Easy there big fella? I know you disagree and now I'm getting a taste of the anger with which you disagree.
In answer to your question, I see an article put up by people who put up a lot of extremely dubious articles and who tried to parlay probabilities into certainties. The article is about an ossuary with "Simon Bar Jona" written on it in Aramaic. I am prepared to say that there is an ossuary with Simon Bar Jona written on it. I am NOT prepared to say it is the ossuary of the one we call Peter. To show that that is a fact would take an argument. I have not seen the argument nor been persuaded by it. I did see one eminent scholar refuse to declare one way or another on it. That may be what leads to you're saying I call facts arguments. From my point of view you appear to call hunches known facts.
As to the "candorous" thing, I do not think you have been very candid. This thread was started with one guy's humorously inept denunciation of the Catholic Church. You contributed some objections about Sabbath worship and then some of the Simon Magus line of thought, things of that kind. What got by me until now was what looks like very great contempt and anger at us. So my not getting that was what lead to my remark.
So as far as I know, I'm not kidding anyone.
While misuse of reason upsets me, and the specious presentation of guesses as certainties makes me angry, I am not upset by the existence of cults or denominations or what have you. A real live Baptist pastor and I met for a while on a regular basis to pray together, despite our profound differences in ecclesiology and other theological matters. Yeah, I think people ought to agree with me. No I don't think I have to conduct campaigns to persuade them to do so. If you want to worship on Saturday and think I'm a magician, have at it! We both think the other is wrong. Tra la!
But that's just not how people think about the Church. One of the things that led to my conversion was the amount of rage there seemed to be against the Church. Communism can kill 100 million people in a century while proclaiming that it has the means of salvation. And that's terrible, and so we all agree, as we pause and tut, and then go onto discuss March Madness
But if you want to see real salivating, wide-eyed, teeth-clenched anger, you have only to look at how people feel about the Catholic Church with, yes, it's massive imperfections, but also its universities and hospitals, schools and colleges. Catholic Countries get excoriated for enslaving indigenous South American peoples, while Protestantism get a pass when Protestant settlers nearly exterminate the north American aborigines. Isn't that interesting?
That seems to me to suggest that even those who hate us acknowledge, despite themselves, that we have a special vocation.
Maybe because the monastery of Dominus Flevit doesn't hold the bones of Simon Bar-Jonah?
Oh no --- did they lose them too?
We can question your assertion of his burial on the Mount of Olives just as much as you question his burial at the Vatican. Just because someone says the bones are Peter's doesn't make it so
Oh I forgot --- you only believe what the magisterium tell you to believe.
but there HAS been a tradition for 2,000 years that he was buried in Rome,
Tradition but no bones, right??? So when Tradition comes up against hard cold physical facts of life, the Church tell you to stick with Tradition, right?
and there hasn't been a tradition for his burial on the Mount of Olives.
There has been for atleast 50 years, but you're not supposed to know about it --- Ssshhhh
Maybe the monastery was trying to drum up some pilgrimage trade and suddenly "discovered" some bones?
You mean like doing what Catholic religious sites have traditionally done?
Maybe the monastery was trying to undermine the authority of the Holy Father with this "discovery."
Oh really??? Like they were actually on a sacred quest to discover the bones of St Peter on the grounds of their monastery. They were discovered by accident.
It makes as much sense as your theory of Simon Magus being buried under the Vatican!
The bones make more sense than your magisterial wizards.
I will!
I never understood the question anyway. You're not dead! Why would they want to put you in a Catholic Semitary? DUH!
I'm well aware of the verses...
You admit then that there are no 'unsaved' in the church...At the same time there can not be any that do not know if they are saved, since only the saved already are members of the church...
If you must endure to the end, you are not saved til the end and you won't know til the end if you are really saved...In which case, that person can't be a member of the body, the church...
I don't get what you mean, oh candorous one. Anyone who goes to purgatory is going to heaven, by definition. If you're headed to purgatory you're headed to heaven. And a few of us, like martyrs, are not headed for Purgatory but bypass it for a straight shot to heaven. If you're going to reject us so whole-heartedly, maybe you should make sure it's us you're rejecting and not somebody who teaches what we don't teach.
Eschatologically, yeah, but not right now. Right now we have this wheat tares thing going on, and as far as we know the Church is not identical with the community of the saved -- not yet.
That's what I thought anyway. Am I wrong?
This is funny?
No, you are not wrong.
What makes Diego right, as of now, and all previous beliefs such as those of Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Jerry Falwell, John Smith, John Smythe, Mary Baker Eddy, Martin Luther, James I, Ron Hubbard, John Calvin, or for matter, all of us Christians, wrong.
If you tell me that the Holy Spirit tells you that, then please tell me how I, Mark, can tell the difference between Diego the Inspired by God, and somebody who is either mad or lying.
If you say that there is evidence, then it really isn't evident enough. If you say that you can produce no evidence, then doesn't that contradict the directive to show our light to the world?
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.