Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[Iscool]

You see, James, Peter and John gave Paul their agreement as to his scope of work and added final instructions as to inclusion of the poor. You see, James, Peter and John gave Paul their agreement as to his scope of work and added final instructions as to inclusion of the poor.

I think you are reading some things into it that are not there...

They acknowledged a partnership...The sentence does not indicate an instruction to Paul to go to the poor any more than it indicates a request or a reminder for Paul to go to the poor...

Paul, even though he resented it tremendously, accepted that he was under the leadership of the Council; he was not leading it, nor giving it instructions.

This is pure conjecture based on nothing except the desire of your religion to make Paul subservient to Peter...

Paul's mission was straight from God...He couldn't give a hoot what the other Apostles thought about it...They got together to confirm God's plan...

[Cronos]

The last pint of blood she donated is now working out the final physics equations for sustainable fusion power, and 100 hairs from her last haircut are heading up a humanitarian mission to Poland to rescue the Poles from the ravages of the Roman Catholic Church.

HEY! I'm in Warsaw and I resemble that remark!!

I just went for mass to the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Stare Miasto (Old Town) and it was crowded -- in the Old Town there are 8 to 10 Churches all within 10 minutes walking radius (in fact, right next to the Cathedral and sharing a building wall with it is the Jesuit Church). Today was a big day -- the anniversary of the Warsaw Uprising and everyone was at mass, there were celebrations and national prayers at the Military cemetary. And they repeat what JPII said when he said mass at Plac Piłsudskiego on how Christianity defined Poland from the very start and how Warsaw, the phoenix city rose from the ashes.

[OLD REGGIE]

Actually, what I said was that it occured 60 years after the death, Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus. The posting history does bear me out.

Yes you did. My error. Sorry.

[presently no screen name]

If that were indeed the case why does Scripture even need to be written down

WHERE do you think I get Scripture from? Thank God He wrote it down. He gave us everything He wants us to have.

90+ minutes of "preachin'" at their services to expand and clarify on what you presumably already know?

Already know? We are always growing and learning and will never stop. 90+ is NOTHING!! I spend hours myself daily! I'm a daily walker by faith not a Sunday walker. The Word needs to be planted - it's not for head knowledge but planted in the heart. Faith comes from hearing and hearing THE WORD OF GOD. Notice 'hearing' - it's stated more than once because it needs to be planted. It's like the sower sowing the seed - first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear.

"To those who listen to My teaching, MORE UNDERSTANDING will be given. But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them."

Jesus also said, "The Kingdom of God is like a farmer who scatters seed on the ground. Night and day, while he's asleep or awake, the seed sprouts and grows, but he does not understand how it happens.

The earth produces the crops on its own. First a leaf blade pushes through, then the heads of wheat are formed, and finally the grain ripens.

And as soon as the grain is ready, the farmer comes and harvests it with a sickle, for the harvest time has come."

Jesus said, "How can I describe the Kingdom of God? What story should I use to illustrate it?

It is like a mustard seed planted in the ground. It is the smallest of all seeds,

Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds of the air can perch in its shade."

Faith is like a mustard seed. God's Word is seed. A hard heart cannot accept a seed - much like soil in a garden.

The parable of the sower occurs in all three of the synoptic gospels (Matt.13:1-9; Mk.4:1-9; Lk.8.4-8), and is explained by Jesus in Matt.13:18-23; Mk.4:13-20; Lk.8:11-15.

It is significant for us because it helps to explain the mechanics of spiritual growth.

In the parable, a sower goes out to sow seed in four different types of ground: hard ground (by the roadside), rocky ground, thorny ground, and good ground.

The seed that falls on the hardened ground beside the road is quickly stolen away by birds; the seed that falls on the rocky ground springs up quickly, but perishes because its roots lack depth;

the seed that falls on the thorny ground is choked by the weeds that grow up around it; but the seed that falls on good ground prospers and produces a bountiful crop.

Jesus explains the hard ground as the person whom Satan causes to reject the gospel; the rocky ground as the person who abandons the gospel in times of distress; the thorny ground as the person distracted from the gospel by the cares and worries of life; and the good ground as the person who actually produces fruit for God in this life.

The SEED is God's Word - not church doctrine. But church doctrine can cause a hard heart (ground/soil) if the church does not teach God's Word is Supreme - above everything else.

[Natural Law]

"This is pure conjecture based on nothing except the desire of your religion to make Paul subservient to Peter..."

Just the opposite. It is the Catholic position to not accept the primacy of Paul over Peter and the other Apostles.

Do you disagree that there is a hierarchy within Scripture and that the Synoptic Gospels are supreme? If so, how do you reconcile this with the Paulican heresy practiced by Calvinists?

[boatbums]

To be in full communion with the Church, which is the keeper of the deposit of faith, one must believe these things.
The Church condemns no person to hell.

Thanks for the response. Here's the rub...One must believe these things to be in full communion with the Church. The Church teaches that only those who die in a "state of grace" go to heaven. Those who die without paying the "temporal" price of venial sins go to purgatory first. So in order to be in a state of grace, one must be in communion with the Church. Do I have this correct?

[OLD REGGIE]

ZENIT

[dsc]

“I have taken the liberty of following a couple of the links here:”

How about taking the time to understand them?

The first article reports that there will be a discussion of a possible fifth dogma, under which the Blessed Virgin would be known as “Spiritual Mother of All Humanity.”

That is the information reported.

In the rest of the article, the author uses that announcement as an excuse to introduce his own opinions and delusions, which will not be under discussion by the Church.

It’s not correct to seize upon the excesses of everyone who calls himself Catholic as supposed “proof” of Catholic doctrine.

[Natural Law]

"WHERE do you think I get Scripture from?"

The chicken and egg paradox. You needed a Chruch to bring you Scripture so that you don't need a Church. The Holy Spirit has already directly told you all you need to know yet you require a Church to help you grow and you condemn those who need a Church to help them understand.

[OLD REGGIE]

Jesus never quoted the “Apocrypha” contained in any of the several Septuagints.

[Cronos]

Here's my two cents:
1. If you're Catholic or Orthodox or Oriental or Assyrian Church, you're in the One Apostolic Church and share the fullness of Christ and Christian teachings

2. If you're in the Traditional Anglican or Lutheran (LCMS types not ELCA gay liberals types), Methodists, some orthodox Assemblies of God type Pentecostal, orthodoxy proficient Baptists, Evangelicals like Pentecostals etc., your group has some of the grace of the Christian faith and I call you Christian brethern

3. If you're from the Seventh Day Adventists and the way-out hyper-Calvinist groups, I don't think you have much in common with the loving God of Christianity. This of course varies -- some groups are closer to orthodoxy, some are closer to lunacy

4. Other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, are pretty wrong to very wrong. Islam in all it's forms (Sunni, Shia, Ismaili, Ibadi, Bora, etc.) is SATANIC. The Druze and Alawis I might club with Hindus as less demonic influence but Bahais and Ahmaddiyas are in the Islamic satan worshippers club.

If groups 2 or 3 go out to focus on converting practising Catholics, I wonder why they don't focus on group 4

HOWEVER, if there are the non-practising, CINOs like in France, and group 2 go out to convert them -- I WILL CHEER THEM ON, as I think it's better for the secularists or agnostics to find even a little Christ than none at all.

If group 3 go out to convert them, I don't think it's a good idea as they will not get much or any Christ and when they leave, they will hate Christianity

For preaching to group 4, the same, I'd rather group 1 or 2 convert them as the non-Christians will get some Christ.

[Iscool]

Read Acts. Read Galatians. Paul is subordinate to the Council.

Have...Many times...Paul is subordinate to no one except Jesus Christ...

We don't have a religion. It is you guys that have invented them. We got our instruction from the Lord Jesus Christ and from the Holy Spirit beginning with Pentecost. Paul was a great man, a great Apostle, and the super salesman of the Church to the Greeks, but he was never the steward of the Church.

What message did you guys receive from Jesus at Pentecost???

[OLD REGGIE]

More deflection? Let us say that the document in question was proven to your satisfaction. What then would be your course of action?

Let's say it was proven to your satisfaction that the RCC was built on a foundation of deception, forgeries, and lies. What the would be your course of action?

[dsc]

By the way, there is nothing in those links — absolutely nothing — that in any way supports your ludicrous falsehood that “there is a very large group of Catholics including bishops and cardinals who are pushing for the Catholic church to claim Mary as part of the Godhead...”

Once again, Bruce: Howls.

Looks like you really did study with the Philosophy Department of the University of Wallamaroo.

[presently no screen name]

I see it went right over your head. It’s the mindset - the Pope is NOT a servant like Jesus. I used washing of the feet as one example. You don’t wash someone’s feet one moment and then go back to your marble palace with servants galore command ‘your subjects’ to obey your decrees. That’s why it’s a photo op - what ‘looks’ good. A religious moment caught on Kodak.

Pope is pomp and circumstance - Jesus nor any of his apostles/disciples were.

The Pope’s ‘subjects’ bow/genuflect to him and KISS his ring.

Pope lives like King Herod and head gear and dress to boot!

You can’t serve TWO masters!

[Iscool]

The Catholic Church will not self destruct or be rendered destroyed by anything. Jesus’ promise to her is sacred.

You might want to prayerfully read the book of Revelation...

[Jvette]

"If ye have heard of the Dispensation of the grace of God which is GIVEN ME to you-ward: how that by REVELATION He made known unto ME, the mystery...which in OTHER AGES was NOT MADE KNOWN unto the sons of men as it is NOW REVEALED unto His Holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body and partakers of His promise in Christ BY THE GOSPEL...and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the MYSTERY, which from the beginning of the world hath been HID IN GOD who created all things by Jesus Christ." (Eph. 3:2,3,5,6,9).

I disagree with the conclusions you draw as to the mystery Hid in God.

Paul is quite clearly explaining his ministry to the Gentiles. The Jewish people understood what it was to have a sacrifice offered for their sins. The high priest did it every year. That the great dispensation of Jesus would be offered to the Gentiles, to anyone not of the Chosen People, the Jews, was a very new revelation indeed. The OT and thus, the Messiah, was seen as only for God's Chosen People and not for the Gentiles.

Read the beginning of chapter 11 in Acts. Here Peter recounts why the Gentiles had been given and accepted the Word of God. Read the whole thing verses 1-18 and you will see how God revealed to Peter that the word of God was to save all men, not just Jews.

This happened before Paul's discourse on his commission of God's grace that was given him for the sake of the Gentiles. The great mystery was that God intended for all to participate in and receive His grace, not just His Chosen People.

[MarkBsnr]

1. It is impossible to remove books from the "canon" that never were part of that canon.

2. The Jews had no authority over the Christians and the Christians never had authority of the Jewish canon.

Pay attention now:

Romans 3:

[1] Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? [2] Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews are entrusted with the oracles of God.

You are too kind.

1. The Alexandrian Jews had the authority to write the Jewish Canon.

2. They did, several centuries before Jesus was born.

3. Most Jews did not speak Hebrew - it was a scholastic language mostly relegated to the Pharisees.

4. Most Jews in the several centuries before Christ - and after - spoke Greek.

5. The Scrolls in Qumran validate the Septuagint over the Masoretic text.

6. It is very likely that there was no Council of Jamnia - there are no current records of it or its agenda or its accomplishments.

But it all comes back to this: why was the Council at Jamnia (if there ever was one) given authority to close the canon? It was not closed before this point. What made the Alexandrian Septuagint wrong, or at least, able to be superseded by the hypothetical Jamnian text? And, with the Temple destruction in AD 70, do the Jews have authority over Christian Scripture?

Your Romans quote is quite appropriate until one stops to consider that Paul wrote this half a lifetime before hypothetical fiddling with the canon occured, and the Church had been using the Septuagint exclusively - look at Paul's quotations from the Septuagint if you think that those from Jesus are not enough.

[Cronos]

“John would not have sank” —> how exactly do you know that?

[Natural Law]

"You might want to prayerfully read the book of Revelation..."

Let me be clear that I am speaking ONLY for myself and not from any teachings of the Catholic Church. I personally reject that John Patmos was the same person as the Apostle John and not the same author as the Gospel of John. That being said I reject anything within his writings as being new revelation. Like the Letters of Paul, its purpose is to aid in the explanation, clarification and spreading of the Word, not to revise, expand, or add to it.