Posted on 05/03/2008 4:38:34 PM PDT by NYer
You might want to consider the possibility that I’m not the one in error.
I am glad you stated this. Whenever a Catholic says Mary or a saint is "united" with Christ we are accused of deifying her or him.
Of course the head is united with the body!
oh. Ok.
I understand why you were confused.
I believe in an exegetical reading of the Bible.
The interpretations of scripture that you have posted leads me to believe that you do not.
Hey Quix. What’s wrong with Foxe?
I never intended to say you were wrong about philosophy.
Why don’t you now look up empirical science?
Never said force. Never said use them as an indicator.
what good is your Holy Eucharist? I mean, what does it accomplish for you?
I have been wondering what various posters would say if asked what was received/happened to them, not the elements, while taking and after taking the sacrament. In what way is it efficacious?
Calvin's doctrine on predestination has more to do with God's omniscience than it does the matter of free will. It is somewhat defensible in the fact that the names in the Lamb's Book of Life have been written since the foundations of the world.
But in the matter of salvation, it suggests that God knows the eventual outcome of our struggles, not that there is any manipulation thereof. Hence, the road to salvation is still the same as those who believe in free will.
[...] some believe you must be baptised to be saved while others believe baptism is only symbolic;
I know of no denomination that would suggest that baptism is not a necessary part of the process, though I also know of none (including the RCC) that do not suppose that exceptions do exist- It is the faith and the confession that are mandatory.
There are heated differences around infant baptism, that much is true.
[...] some believe you must only believe while others believe you must also live your faith; some say you can sin boldly, etc.
I know of none that advise one to sin boldly, nor do I know of any that would not recommend living one's faith. Virtually every one suggests that faith is the important component, and that the Blood covers all.
Not the intent? So, Martin Luther accidentally started his own church. Jean Cauvin accidentally started his?
Luther was predated by Wycliffe, and came before Calvin and the other 'geneva reformers'. Anyone suggesting they were somehow in collusion is incorrect, as the head of the reformation was at least 50 years (c. 1500-1550) in the making, and could be argued to have taken 150 years (c. 1500-1650), going all the way to the treaty at Westphalia.
Out of that, and much contention, came the three major denominations of the Protestants: the Lutherans, the Reformed/Calvinist/Presbyterian, and the Anabaptist/Baptists.
How can you suggest that the 'reason was to form other churches'?
False Doctrine
For Starters:
* Mary was sinless.
* Mary is a mediator between God and man.
* Praying to saints and Mary.
* Catholicism is the one true church.
* Salvation cannot be found outside Catholic church.
* Designated priesthood.
* Pope as head of the church (the vicar of Christ).
* Cup & bread literal blood & body of Christ, where
salvation facilitated.
* Infant baptism.
Exactly, we are told to believe that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Pope to infallibly interpret Scripture, but EVERY Protestant has this ability.
Let's see:
The Catholic Church DOES NOT state that Salvation in unavailable to non-Catholics.
ALL Protestant denominations believe themselves to be part of the One True Church AND the Catholic Church considers ALL of these denominations to be in Communion with the Church to varying degrees.
With the exception of the Papacy, NONE of your other "false doctrines" is even peculiar to Catholicism and Huber who IS NOT Catholic (unless he recently converted) will probably attest to this.
One thing that has long been clear to me is how many self-identified "Bible Christians" (and this is almost an exclusively American group that is not found elsewhere) are so blinded by anti-Catholic bigotry that they are unaware that their beliefs are totally at odds with Protestantism and the Reformation.
Amazing that you say you find nothing in the WCF you disagree with, yet you object when I suggest you believe this: “Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.[14]” which is from the WCF.
If I believed that, I’d be ashamed of it too.
Good for you! Light pierces the darkness! But then you must also admit that every Christian is within the Body, and has the full faith and power of the Head, and then figure out why it is that you are talking to the right pinky-finger or the left knee instead of talking to the head... And why you need an earthly priesthood to get you where you already are...
uh-oh... *POOF* you're a Protestant!
Being Christ's the King's royal steward on earth isn't enough?? Because that is precisely what the granting of the keys to Peter symbolizes.
The body does have different parts that play different roles. The finger does not talk directly to the knee, they have to avail themselves of the services of the nervous system.
To beat an analogy to death. ;-)
LOL! Nice save!
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.