Posted on 10/08/2014 11:39:09 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
Why would intelligent, successful people give up their careers, alienate their friends, and cause havoc in their families...to become Catholic? Indeed, why would anyone become Catholic?
As an evangelist and author who recently threw my own life into some turmoil by deciding to enter the Catholic Church, I've faced this question a lot lately. That is one reason I decided to make this documentary; it's part of my attempt to try to explain to those closest to me why I would do such a crazy thing.
Convinced isn't just about me, though. The film is built around interviews with some of the most articulate and compelling Catholic converts in our culture today, including Scott Hahn, Francis Beckwith, Taylor Marshall, Holly Ordway, Abby Johnson, Jeff Cavins, Devin Rose, Matthew Leonard, Mark Regnerus, Jason Stellman, John Bergsma, Christian Smith, Kevin Vost, David Currie, Richard Cole, and Kenneth Howell. It also contains special appearances by experts in the field of conversion such as Patrick Madrid and Donald Asci.
Ultimately, this is a story about finding truth, beauty, and fulfillment in an unexpected place, and then sacrificing to grab on to it. I think it will entertain and inspire you, and perhaps even give you a fresh perspective on an old faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at indiegogo.com ...
this is easily solved. do a simple word search on tradition in the NT. read those passages in context. it will answer your questions.
the catholic church has, as it always has, misinterpreted this to allow for additional non-biblical teaching. this allow an appeal to what "feels" right and an allegorical interpretation of Scripture.
it also allows an appeal to the ECFs who were by no means in agreement on the additional teachings of the catholic church.
I denied your interpretative philosophy regarding those images. Because you can't prove that the focal point of those images is a deity to be worshiped. Can you say that? I suppose you could, but it doesn't make it so.
You can post all the images you want but unless you can prove the underlying premise which is these are deities being worshiped then you're engaging in nothing but liberal propaganda.
Wow. Just. Wow.
As I said...denial is a river in Egypt.
And yes, I'm done with this conversation with you.
And I thought obama was obtuse.
that's a man to listen to. you can't go wrong with the Greek or Hebrew.
Uh huh. Well you're entitled to think what you like about me. Truth be told I reserve my scholarship and apologetics for those on RF who might be receptive to it. Pearls and swine and all that. And in my estimation, you're not worthy of it. Besides, people far more eloquent, charitable and knowledgeable have explained these things to you and you've rejected it.
P.S.: Paul's statement was in the context of all the apostles in communion with Peter as Head of Christ's Church who could not err in teaching contrary to the Faith.
No one has even attempted to prove the "traditions" are the same. They can't.
>>P.S.: Paul's statement was in the context of all the apostles in communion with Peter as Head of Christ's Church who could not err in teaching contrary to the Faith.<<
Paul specifically referenced the Gentiles making the statement "giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9and He made no distinction between us and them,". That cannot possibly be used for what you would like.
great, then you must be Catholic then..
Catholicism is pagan. Most of what they do and believe goes back to Nimrod.
It's curious. This insistence on sameness and continuity as a determiner of Truth. These are attributes of human analytical thought and according to the protestant have no bearing on the truth anywhere else in theology, except here. Of course it also depends on whether someone is referring to "traditions" in the pejorative sense or Tradition. Incidentally we Catholics refer to it as Sacred Tradition and not Traditions because Sacred Tradition has a singular quality to it signifying continuity. Which is what the protestant is apparently searching for.
....”You’d think they would go farther, exploring the deep richness of Christian theology”.......
They wouldn’t be responding so brilliantly to your posts had they not had a broad and complete understanding of ‘Christian’ Theology.....as opposed to catholic theology....there is a difference between the two.
Asking someone to understand catholic theology is like asking someone to identify ‘counterfeit’ currency......but if you study ‘real’ currency, (true Christian Theology), so that you know every dot and line then you can easily identify the counterfeit. (catholic theology) at a glance....there’s no need to study the counterfeit.
Could you be a little more obtuse?
Broad and complete you say? Wow, that's quite the statement. Is that complete in the sense that an angel has full and complete knowledge? I don't know a Catholic who would ever boast of 'knowing it all.' Once again the gnosis of Protestantism peeks its head up. .
But lets run with that for a moment. If the protestant apologist has complete knowledge of everything that it is to be a Christian then how can they possibly offend God with sin if their knowledge is so complete? Unless an act of transcendence has occurred. Their humanity has been left behind for some other order of existence.
P.S.: Catholic theology is Christian. Another artificial bifurcation from team Luther/Zwingli/Calvin.
Then you should read some of his stuff.
The Fourth cup- this site has a written transcript and an audio version.
http://thecatholicme.com/2012/12/29/the-fourth-cup-scott-hahn/
His conversion story:
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0088.html
I had no idea Gamecock had written books. Wow.
I could. But if you need me to spell it out for you then so be it. For any authentic Christian tradition to be so it must possess a certain quality of sameness with apostolic tradition. This is the argument you put forth. Continuity with that which was. On the face of it, not a problem. We Catholics do the same.
The problem comes when the protestant interjects their notion of what is the 'same' into the equation. Sameness inherently means identical. Or, it means whatever the beholder of sameness determines. Which ultimately is a function of what end of the telescope one is looking through. So, unless the protestant is prepared to accept only that which is identical, particularly in scripture, then they must be prepared to eject all the solas which are not identical to what was expressed in scripture.
As for the rest. We've all heard the following phrase, "Men and women: equal in dignity, but not the same." Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture perform the same function. Equal in dignity but not the same. Two distinct phenomena. Complementary. That is how God operates. Sameness as a function of Truth is a fiction. No wonder nobody has been able to "prove" anything to you.
And you still can’t show that what the Catholic Church teaches is what the apostles taught. Accursed is what we are told to consider those teachers.
Show me where the apostles taught the doctrine of the Trinity, or any of the Christological doctrines? It becomes problematic in a hurry when one insists on identical sameness doesn't it?
Is that a goddess? Wow! never saw one before. Are you sure? I mean doesn't someone have to be a goddess before they can be worshiped as a goddess? And don't the people doing the supposed worship have to acknowledge her status as a goddess? This deity stuff is hard.
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.