Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
Unfortunately, that's what Paul and John profess.
One of my favorite things about Orthodox Christianity is it's refusal to believe it knows where or how the Holy Spirit works outside Orthodox Christianity. That's an honesty few religions possess
That is the God of the Church, yet its own scripture doesn't support it.
Every argument you're using against Protestants can be used against Catholicism.
If you reject truth, if there is no truth, there's just a struggle of propaganda.
Are you saying then, that all the Catholic church has is propaganda, since what it teaches and claims responsibility for is so poorly founded, as you claim?
The Protoevangelium is one of the sappiest, most poorly written pieces of drivel I've ever seen. A fifth grader could do better. It doesn't come close to the literary quality of the accepted books of the Bible. Exactly what one would expect out of something made up by man as opposed to inspired by God.
I trust God. I don’t trust a God that punishes those that don’t have faith in him. That is an evil God. I want nothing to do with that God. That God is not Christ. Followers of a religion that that has a God that punishes those that don’t believe in him are not Christians.
Thanks for the pings.
There is no magic in this world. So far, nothing supernatural has ever been discovered.
Is that a "fact"? Actually it is, by design! Not a divine design, but human design. The world fits the Christian story, like all religions do, because the story was built to fit the world.
Religion offers a hopeful model that has no backing in fact. Unlike science, which offers a working model without a promise. It's easy to see why people gravitate towards the former.
But that doesn't make any religion true, just more desirable (you know, for "what's in it for me" reasons). But if you remove all the "feel good" packaging (blissful afterlife, for example), religion loses it's appeal.
Post 3215: "People believe what they want to believe because it makes them comfortable. That's what faith is all about—a self-derived comfort from a conviction that something is true, like saying "I am saved," or "he is in a better place now," etc. You can't prove it false and you can't prove it true, even if it seems fantastic. You can either accept it or reject as a matter of faith, but never as a matter of fact. "
Not one thing you claim can be verified as true or truth. There is not one compelling argument in the whole screed. All that one is left with following your reasoning to it's logical conclusion is that you might as well believe in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. If the veracity of Scripture is that much in question, they have as much supporting them as Jesus does or Mary does.
Do you believe that George Washington or Ben Franklin existed?
That's not what the verse says...Why don't you quote it the way it's written???
It says follow the tradition, whether it is oral OR written...That either allows you to chose between the two, OR, the oral and the written are the same thing...
2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Read the scripture with love and attention and you, too, will become Catholic.
That's only if you pervert the scriptures as you read them...I read the scriptures with belief in what it says, therefore, I couldn't possibly become a Catholic...
That's not what the Bible teaches, however.
2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
Catholics claim that the Catholic church wrote the Bible and yet here we have another contradiction. Paul says in Scripture that Scripture is enough. The Catholic church is saying that he's wrong.
Why did the Catholic church then put something in the Bible that it had to contradict later?
This is playing both sides against the middle. Catholics want to have their cake and eat it too. It just doesn't work.
Oh? You're NOT Catholic after all?
Does that mean you think that Jesus wasn't a Christian?
Exactly...There's no indication that they had access to any scriptures that are not available to us...God did not speak to their fathers any more than he speaks to us...
And it's not like there were hundreds of so called church fathers...There's one in one century, another one or two in the next century and so on...
And it's been proven that at least with some of their writings of their fathers, they forged...As a result of that, I doubt that any one of them are credible...
I believe the scriptures were indeed inspired by the Holy Spirit, but the filter that is the human mind is an extremely flawed filter, and the stuff that actually finally ends up as written scriptures is a mixture of the recordings of certain highly spiritual and enlightened folks and their epiphanies of absolute inspired Truth, some grand distortions of just what 'God' expects of us, some real history, some poetic depictions of real history with extensive artistic license taken by the authors, and plenty of errors and forgeries added by men of sincere, and sometimes insincere intent.
I think the Bible is a big beautiful mosaic tapestry and hodge podge recording of some spiritually brilliant and enlightened men and their yearning to converse with God that is hopefully most often in harmony with the Holy Spirit.
I believe the Truth is there in the Bible, but in no way is it all there. The Bible is not the Church. The Bible is, to me at least, an accessory to the Church. I trust the Church to decipher what is important in that beautiful collection of flawed writings, and what should be ignored.
I believe Christ was perfect. He moved a lot of people. Some people recorded their experiences. Those people were not perfect no matter how perfect their love for Christ may have been. These flawed vessels recorded their experiences the only way the True spiritual experiences can be recorded with the written word - flawed.
I believe there can be no such thing as an experience being 'successfully' recorded with the written word. The most a writer can hope to do is try to minimize the degree of failure as best he can. I believe this is true even when the person is filled with the Holy Spirit and writing from the most sincere places of his heart.
This post is a perfect example of just how difficult it is to sincerely explain what is in one's heart. I know I have failed miserably :)
I am Catholic. I’m Eastern Orthodox. I believe Christ is God.
AMEN ..AMEN
Yes. Luckily sola scriptura has no place in the theology or praxis of The Church.
Offering philosophy is a waste of time to me and a luxury most people can't afford. Thank God we don't have to depend on philosophers for real life solutions.
You can not only predict certain behavior, but you can even predict the speed with which it will be acquired and the speed at which it will be extinguished by properly applied conditioning.
This is part of the reason why I have zero tolerance for philosophical niceties. You are the one who introduced this inductive principle, which to me means nothing of any substance. I deal in real terms. I said I could show you how I know or came to know, and if you don't believe me you are free to try it yourself.
Now as to not being able t know historical events, much of hisotry is doubtful and cluded in mystery. There is no comparable obligation or need to believe hisotry religiously, no pun intended. Everything historical must be taken with a grain of salt, especially ancient history, and yield to new evidence. That's why new discoveries change what we know about history. But the same is not the case when it comes to faith.
Not only does faith not have a working model, where you can tell me "if you don't believe me, do this..." but faith will not yield to reason even when evidence points to it being in error. Because it's hope against all odds. It's desperation, and to a large extent fear that drives it, and just like anything fear-driven it resists reason.
"Faith is the title deed to things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"
And that makes it true? What an anonymous human wrote 2000 years ago? What do you have to show for it except solitary hope?
Compare my proof with the stove top and yours. Night and day. Apples and oranges. Substance vs. hot air. But, don't take my word for it, lay BOTH of your hands on a red hot stove top! I bet you won't be writing for a while. Maybe that will give you more time to think what is real and what wishful tinkling, inductive or deductive, doesn't matter.
Oh I wouldn't say that. But let's just say it has a temperate role. :)
To fill the void they invented the idea that book was perfect because they no longer had the Church. After that, the unraveling of their faith began and with that came the endless splintering that is Protestantism.
They sure threw out a really big baby when they tossed out the bath water during that Protestant Reformation. One need look no further than FreeRepublic to find the avalanche of heresies that came along with that reformation.
The only propaganda is when people claim they know truth because God told them.
What makes you or any other so-called "elect" the possessor of truth? Remember, just because you believe something is true doesn't make it true.
Are you saying then, that all the Catholic church has is propaganda, since what it teaches and claims responsibility for is so poorly founded, as you claim?
The Church teaches that faith is hope and that God is love. I don't find that to be propaganda.
The Protoevangelium is one of the sappiest, most poorly written pieces of drivel I've ever seen. A fifth grader could do better. It doesn't come close to the literary quality of the accepted books of the Bible. Exactly what one would expect out of something made up by man as opposed to inspired by God.
It could very well be, but it reflects what at least some Christians believed in the 2nd century.
Incorrect. (1) the hot stove experiment is real and works and is true. You are invited to not believe me as long as you try it. (2) All religions "explain" how the world came about, and what happens after death, etc., although no direct observable evidence exists for any of it; in other words, the world and faith seem to be in harmony because humans made it fir the world. (3) So far nothing "supernatural" has been discovered. Invented, imagined, concocted, sure; not discovered. (4) take out the promises and rewards religions make, especially the afterlife, and see how many people stay faithful for the glory of God alone. (5) when people say someone is in a better place or that they are saved, they offer no proof; just hope.
So, everything I said is true and verifiable. Perhaps you can't see it when it stares you in the face.
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.