Catholic Church & Jesus Christ-Why No One Should Be A Catholic

Apostolic Messianic Fellowship ^ | August 30, 2005 | Why No One Should Be A Catholic

[Dr. Eckleburg]

By the way, I prefer to use the original meaning of "church" which is eklesia, or congregation. In this sense, the argument you espouse of not being able to have an independent group can be seriously debated. From this point of view, Jesus' proclaimation "Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am in their midst" takes root and grows. A good congregation will not claim any private interpretation, but will invite scrutiny and study the Word in the open with the heart of a child, seeing what God has to say, and then applying it.

AMEN!!!

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." -- 2 Timothy 2:15

"And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." -- Romans 12:2

"I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee." -- Psalm 22:22

[Mad Dawg]

Yeah, me too, like salvation, heaven, hell and that "God" stuff. It is so confining and does nothing for my self esteem.

I have a feeling that this was intended as a devastatingly witty rejoinder, but I don't get it. Did I say something wrong?

[Mad Dawg]

Since the Catholic religion takes eating the body and blood literally, they should be swilling down gallons of the Pope's holy water.

That's just silly.

[Mad Dawg]

Hoo YAH! I think what I said was maybe misunderstood? ALL I meant was that I've seen some of those quotes that you used to distinguish between Baptism with water and Baptism with the Holy Spirit used to establish their identity, not their difference. To be precise, my having seen that, led to my remark.

I wasn't coming down on any side, and certainly not against what you were saying. I was just verbally shaking my head over the difficulty of the task.

I think, at least I hope, I have already expressed my admiration for the work done on "Rock".

Where does it fit in the conversation that "living water", denotes water in a stream or a river or a fresh pond, just as "living rock" denotes rock in its natural situation?

[MarkBsnr]

By the way, I prefer to use the original meaning of "church" which is eklesia, or congregation. In this sense, the argument you espouse of not being able to have an independent group can be seriously debated. From this point of view, Jesus' proclaimation "Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am in their midst" takes root and grows. A good congregation will not claim any private interpretation, but will invite scrutiny and study the Word in the open with the heart of a child, seeing what God has to say, and then applying it.

AMEN!!! "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." -- 2 Timothy 2:15 "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." -- Romans 12:2 "I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee." -- Psalm 22:22

There are plenty of non-good congregations out there. I see many groups or individuals even here attempting their own private interpretations. If it doesn't come from the one Holy Church of Christ, then it's somebody's private interpretation. Millions of one individuals or small groups of individuals that each have a different interpretation very often severely conflicting cannot all be right. Two of them cannot be right if they conflict. Therefore they must be wrong.

People who believe in the Trinity and people who do not believe in the Trinity are not BOTH right. People who believe that they are bound by the Commandments and people who believe that they are not bound by the Commandments are not BOTH right.

[Mad Dawg]

My point is simply, to God be the glory!

Oh.

Well.

If you're going to be THAT way ...



Who dares to disagree? I would happily put down all contention and dance that dance for a while....

[Mad Dawg]

but see no reason to re-fight the Thirty Years War or bash my Catholic friends.

Everybody should have a hobby. Some spin, some collect stamps, some engage in religious warfare. Whatever floats the old boat, y'know ....


heh heh heh

[colorado tanker]

LOL!

[kosta50]

The same is true on this thread. For instance, the translation of Luke 1:41 at NewAdvent.org does not add the word "Most" to the word "blessed" when speaking of Mary v Jesus - whereas the NAB translation linked at 2149 does:

Which is yet another example of how what some people call the "word of God" has been humanized for theological and other ends.

This practice of literally putting words in God's mouth has been going on since the Pentecost.

[nanetteclaret]

Jesus said, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" Matthew 7:15-16

[kosta50]

Since you [Diego 1618] don't believe in the Holy Trinity, you are not a Christian, by definition. In 381 A.D., the Council of Constantinople approved the Nicene Creed ... as follows...And I believe in the Holy Ghost the Lord, and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son...

I agree. Those who deny Holy Trinity are not Christians. But your version of the Creed is not from 381, as the Church formulated it. The "and from the Son" was officially inderted shortly before the Great Schism in 1054 and is known as the filioque. It is an unatuhorized addition to the Creed.

[kerryusama04]

The standard for prophets is at Deuteronoy 13 and 18 and is summed up by Isaiah at 8:20

[kerryusama04]

On the contrary, Stalinism, Nazism, Marxism, and all other forms of totalitarian hierarchal rule have failed mankind miserably each and every time they have been tried. God even warned Israel that they did not want a King, but they insisted. Kings Saul, David, and Solomon would all be prime examples of how absolute power corrupts absoluely.

I'm not going to discuss the Vat II comment because, in hindsight, it is a tangent that I really don't have the time or inclination which to devote. I shouldn't have brought it up. I do know that my parents view of Catholicism is quite different than what is taught today. Interfaith marriages weren't exactly all the rage back in the day, were they? Studying scipture is a completely foreign concept to them, as they know it is not their place.

[nanetteclaret]

I started to make a side note for all the Orthodox on this thread not to point out the filioque clause as I didn't want to start another heated discussion. But I see you have anyway.

[nanetteclaret]

I knew that the only reason you asked a rhetorical question was to argue with my answer, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. Sorry, Jesus trumps Moses and the prophets any day.

[kosta50]

It's not a 'heated discussion' but simply a historical fact. The Creed of 381 did not contain "and the Son." To insist otherwise is to mislead and disinform.

[MarkBsnr]

On the contrary, Stalinism, Nazism, Marxism, and all other forms of totalitarian hierarchal rule have failed mankind miserably each and every time they have been tried. God even warned Israel that they did not want a King, but they insisted. Kings Saul, David, and Solomon would all be prime examples of how absolute power corrupts absoluely.

I'm not going to discuss the Vat II comment because, in hindsight, it is a tangent that I really don't have the time or inclination which to devote. I shouldn't have brought it up. I do know that my parents view of Catholicism is quite different than what is taught today. Interfaith marriages weren't exactly all the rage back in the day, were they? Studying scipture is a completely foreign concept to them, as they know it is not their place.

Men created systems of totalitarian hierarchical rule which has proven to fail each time it was tried. True. The focus of power was a man or group of men. Doomed to fail when they lost focus or fought with each other or were deposed.

On the other hand, with God setting ALL the rules (a definition of totalitarianism, by the way), with the focus on Him, why would it or should it fail? Jesus set up His Church here, staffed by mortal and fallible men (such as St. Peter) to bring His Good News to the entire world. It sets the rules here, because the entity of the Church, staffed with fallible men, guided as an entity by the Holy Spirit, is His Pillar of Truth.

Not the latest fad in theology. Or private interpretation.

[MarkBsnr]

First Council of Nicea (325)
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];
who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;
he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven;
from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
And in the Holy Ghost.
[But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable' — they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.]


First Council of Constantinople (381)
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made;
who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man;
he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead;
whose kingdom shall have no end.
And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. In one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

.........

Does this help?

[nanetteclaret]

My point is that no one can be a Christian who does not believe that Jesus is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, because by definition (the Creed) Christians believe in the Holy Trinity. It has been a belief of Christians since the Apostolic Age.

[Salvation]

**To put the writing of your church fathers (perceived or real) on equal footing with the word of God is ludicrous...**

I don't think anyone would put the early church fathers -- and they are real, BTW, as equal to scripture. Sometimes they surpass Scripture, because some Scripture was wrong. (You do have a globe, don't you?) Well the Bible says the earth is flat.