It’s not easy to reply when posts are taken apart sometimes one sentence at a time and a paragraph in response follows. It might be okay one at a time, then, wait for an answer but a list, it is daunting to come back. And another problem with a list, one sentence at a time, what the first person says gets taken out of context.
Someone at FR reminds me, we are all at different levels
of understanding. It’s true. The message from Our Lord
in 06 I shared gave me an “understanding” of the “continual sacrifice” and the “abomination of desolation.”
Here is another example to show you, a well known Catholic apologist...Scott Hahn was a Calvinist, Presbyterian, anti-Catholic minister. He passed out anti-Catholic literature! Well, Truth about the faith began to unfold, He recognized them for himself and changed in belief.
I share a link to his story, take the time and read it.
Here’s an excerpt:
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0088.html
“Then all of a sudden an episode occurred one night in a seminar I wasn’t ready for. An ex-Catholic graduate student named John raised his hand. He had just finished a presentation for the seminar on the Council of Trent. The Council of Trent, you’ll recall, was the Church’s official response to Martin Luther and the Reformation.
In about an hour and a half he had presented the Council of Trent in the most favorable light. He had shown how many of their arguments were in fact based on the Bible. Then he turned the tables on me. The students were supposed to ask him a question or two. He said, “Can I first ask you a question, Professor Hahn?
You know how Luther really had two slogans, not just sola fide, but the second slogan he used to revolt against Rome was sola Scriptura, the Bible alone. My question is, ‘Where does the Bible teach that?’”
I looked at him with a blank stare. I could feel sweat coming to my forehead. I used to take pride in asking my professors the most stumping questions, but I never heard this one before. And so I heard myself say words that I had sworn I’d never speak; I said, “John, what a dumb question.” He was not intimidated. He look at me and said, “Give me a dumb answer.” I said, “All right, I’ll try.” I just began to wing it. I said, “Well, Timothy 3:16 is the key: ‘All Scripture is inspired of God and profitable for correction, for training and righteousness, for reproof that the man of God may be completely equipped for every good work....’” He said, “Wait a second, that only says that Scripture is inspired and profitable; it doesn’t say ONLY Scripture is inspired or even better, only Scripture’s profitable for those things. We need other things like prayer,” and then he said, “What about 2 Thessalonians 2:15?” I said, “What’s that again?” He said, “Well, there Paul tells the Thessalonians that they have to hold fast, they have to cling to the traditions that Paul has taught them either in writing or by word of mouth.” Whoa! I wasn’t ready. I said, “Well, let’s move on with the questions and answers; I’ll deal with this next week. Let’s go on.”
I don’t think they realized the panic I was in. When I drove home that night, I was just staring up to the heavens asking God, why have I never heard that question? Why have I never found an answer? The next day I began calling up theologians around the country, former professors. I’d ask them, “Where does the Bible teach Sola Scriptura? Where does the Bible teach us that the Bible is our only authority?” One man actually said to me, “What a dumb question coming from you.” I said, “Give me a dumb answer then.” I was catching on.
One professor whom I greatly respect, an Oxford theologian, said to me, “Scott, you don’t expect to find the Bible proving Sola Scriptura because it isn’t something the Bible demonstrates. It is our assumption; it is our presupposition when we approach the Bible.” That struck me as odd; I said, “But professor, that seems strange because what we are saying then is that we should only believe what the Bible teaches, but the Bible doesn’t teach us to only believe what the Bible teaches. Our assumption isn’t taught by the Bible.” I said, “That feels like we’re cutting off the branch that we’re sitting on.” Then he said, “Well what other options do we have?” Good point, all right.”...
If I took something out of context please illuminate. If you would limit your counterpoints, the answers wouldn't be that long. There is too much spin in the answers to ignore. By italicizing your single points, I can respond individually.
The message from Our Lord in 06 I shared gave me an “understanding” of the “continual sacrifice” and the “abomination of desolation.”
Define them in your own words. That way understanding can be equal. Both know how we ourselves define them, now I will know what you mean by them. The 06 message was interesting as I said, and people do have different levels of understanding, some refuse to accept 'messages from our lord' as genuine just because some one says they are from God or 'Jesus' in the case provided.
Nice story in the excerpt. Another example of man asking what 'authority' Scripture has, as in 'who told you that it has authority?' If one accepts the Bible as God's Word it has God's authority intrinsically.
In #428 I asked two questions: is it the RC position that the activities of the Anti-christ are outside of the purview of the will of God? Is it the view of the RC that the Anti-christ will not unwittingly and unwillingly act in accordance with God's will?
I've bolded them so you can see. BTW, when responding to a post, you can skip the italicized parts, that is your writing, I include it for the purpose of showing to what I am responding.