Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now they reach for the ad hominem attack. When you besmirch Jesus' Church you besmirch Jesus' himself. This speaks to your blind hatred ,your indoctrination and misunderstanding of what the Catholic Church actually is. Your lack of faith in his Church leaves you with only faith in yourself and the anarchy of a million different interpretations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Too bad Peter died and has not been resurrected yet . . . according to your beliefs. Only Jesus did so. Your loyalty to the abomination known as the Catholic Church despite its evils . . . actually speaks well of your own soul . . . but such blind faith in men does nothing to recommend your independent thought processes . . . nor that heinous organization of corrupt, ingrown, self-protecting, power-hungry men.
Too bad Peter died and has not been resurrected yet . . . according to your beliefs. Only Jesus did so. Your loyalty to the abomination known as the Catholic Church despite its evils . . . actually speaks well of your own soul . . . but such blind faith in men does nothing to recommend your independent thought processes . . . nor that heinous organization of corrupt, ingrown, self-protecting, power-hungry men.
Now they reach for the ad hominem attack. When you besmirch Jesus' Church you besmirch Jesus' himself. This speaks to your blind hatred ,your indoctrination and misunderstanding of what the Catholic Church actually is. Your lack of faith in his Church leaves you with only faith in yourself and the anarchy of a million different interpretations.
Jesus' church is the body of believers in HIM . . . NOT some corrupt organization claiming to represent Him on earth. You are the one hanging out in the wind on the say so of men. Jesus lives and His Holy Spirit within is with us. We need not any men to teach us.
1 John 2:27 (King James Version)
27But the anointing which ye have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in Him.
Stop with the rabbinical debating society scripture quoting. This is why the religious are taken so lightly in secular protestant lands. One million mini-popes with one million different interpretations. The glaring weakness of sola scriptura is that you can spin this any way you like, take things out of context and manipulate scripture to support your belief rather the true faith. There is no support anywhere for Sola Scriptura so why even engage such a heretical practice.
The Catholic Church is not bureaucracy; the Church it is the people.. One billion members and by Gods grace we have continued for 2,000 years. It should be more when the separated brethren unite with the true Church. The Pope does not interpret the scriptures, they are interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Everything that the Church does in underpinned by sacred scripture. Our faith is in Jesus, the Holy Spirt and the Lord. The mass and the teachings have remained remarkably consistent for 2,000 years. Yes the Church is not perfect and some of the members are sinners but what 2,000 year old organization is perfect?
We do not need you to anoint us with your interpretation. The ironic thing is that the verse you quoted actually is a strike against Protestantism and the learned homily. The real faith is the Church and the encounter with the Christ is with the Holy Eucharist. That is what your quote means. The faith in the Holy Spirit will do fine for us we do not need to put faith in you or some upstart mini-pope's interpretation that has a shelf life -think Calvinist, Puritan- of a few generations. We will have faith in the Rock that Jesus built his Church on; that rock is the Apostle Peter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Jesus' church is the body of believers in HIM . . . NOT some corrupt organization claiming to represent Him on earth. You are the one hanging out in the wind on the say so of men. Jesus lives and His Holy Spirit within is with us. We need not any men to teach us.
1 John 2:27 (King James Version)
27But the anointing which ye have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in Him.
Stop with the rabbinical debating society scripture quoting. This is why the religious are taken so lightly in secular protestant lands. One million mini-popes with one million different interpretations. The glaring weakness of sola scriptura is that you can spin this any way you like, take things out of context and manipulate scripture to support your belief rather the true faith. There is no support anywhere for Sola Scriptura so why even engage such a heretical practice.
You clearly have not read and have no idea what my views are or the source of them. It definitely is NOT sola scriptura. Until you independently and sincerely question the motives attributed to God by your church traditions and dogma . . . and test them against your inner heart . . . you will remain in thrall to the "precepts and doctrines of men" that have falsely represented our God as a schizophrenic mystery for over 2000 years.
Quote:
The Catholic Church is not bureaucracy; the Church it is the people.. One billion members and by Gods grace we have continued for 2,000 years. It should be more when the separated brethren unite with the true Church. The Pope does not interpret the scriptures, they are interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Everything that the Church does in underpinned by sacred scripture. Our faith is in Jesus, the Holy Spirt and the Lord. The mass and the teachings have remained remarkably consistent for 2,000 years. Yes the Church is not perfect and some of the members are sinners but what 2,000 year old organization is perfect?
The proper word is STAGNANT for over 2000 years . . . while everything else in the world has evolved a greater understanding. Life is change and evolution . . . not stagnant dogma. No effort to truly understand God for over 2000 years is a travesty. Your precious church has resisted change, despite the overwhelming evidence that every other area of human concern has clearly benefited from a natural intellectual evolution of knowledge. As R.L. Wing suggested,
. . . Once we understand the folly in this, we gain power by using the evolution in nature to our advantage - accepting, incorporating, and supporting change when and where it wants to occur. . . . Our decisions become astute because they are based on a dynamic evolving reality, not on fixed or wishful thinking.
Quote:
We do not need you to anoint us with your interpretation. The ironic thing is that the verse you quoted actually is a strike against Protestantism and the learned homily. The real faith is the Church and the encounter with the Christ is with the Holy Eucharist. That is what your quote means. The faith in the Holy Spirit will do fine for us we do not need to put faith in you or some upstart mini-pope's interpretation that has a shelf life -think Calvinist, Puritan- of a few generations. We will have faith in the Rock that Jesus built his Church on; that rock is the Apostle Peter.
Unfortunately, your self-appointed Apostle Peter "clones" foolishly place the emphasis on retaining and promoting stagnant primitive beliefs. They have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to accept even moderate reforms (Vatican II) and then they have striven to eradicate them ever since. How ironic it is that your self-appointed Apostle Peter "clones" resemble the Scribes and Pharisees described by Jesus in Matthew 15:9, "in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrine the precepts of men."
It is a vain and foolish person who says "live as I say for the reasons I give you and no others." That only serves vanity and ego. Our God couldn't be less reasonable than the best human being! If certain beliefs are causing people to err because they can no longer accept them, revise them or cast them out, as Jesus suggested in Luke 14:34
. . . Salt is good; but if even the salt loses its strength, what shall it be seasoned with? It is fit neither for the land nor for the manure heap, but must be thrown out. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
Jesus set the precedent for revision of old beliefs with his own revision of the Old Testament which he justified in Luke 5:36,
. . . And no-one pours new wine into old wine skins; else the new wine will burst the skins, and will be spilt itself, and the skins ruined. But the new wine must be put into fresh skins and both are saved.
If we substitute generation for "wine" and beliefs for "skins," we can conclude that it is foolish to try to contain new generations within old beliefs because they are not as compatible with the newer perspectives and knowledge about the world of the newer generations. The old beliefs have served their purpose. They held the earlier generations' belief in God, mellowed our barbaric nature, and humankind has reaped the benefits.
But age and new knowledge has weakened their power to persuade and made them totally inadequate to hold the new generations' belief in God. Newer, stronger beliefs more consistent with our rapidly expanding knowledge of the world are needed. This means revision, NOT abandonment!! Such revision has been one of the hallmarks of the splitting of Christianity into sects (Protestantism . . . hence my optimism about Christianity) but even that spark of wisdom seems to have faded with the rise of fundamentalist fervor.
The proper word is STAGNANT for over 2000 years . . . while everything else in the world has evolved a greater understanding. Life is change and evolution . . . not stagnant dogma. No effort to truly understand God for over 2000 years is a travesty. Your precious church has resisted change, despite the overwhelming evidence that every other area of human concern has clearly benefited from a natural intellectual evolution of knowledge. As R.L. Wing suggested,
I think he lies your problem. It sounds like, either, truth changes....OR the apostles, and disciples didn't know what they were talking about, because Jesus taught them wrong.
I think he lies your problem. It sounds like, either, truth changes....OR the apostles, and disciples didn't know what they were talking about, because Jesus taught them wrong.
No . . . you simply fail to realize that the childhood of a species is as different from its adulthood . . . as our childhoods are from our adulthood. Revision is actually a good thing and the pervasiveness of inconsistencies in its scriptures is one of the sure signs that truth resides in Christian doctrine. Christian doctrine has always been riddled with inconsistencies, and rightly so. Paul clearly explained this feature of his teachings, apparently unnoticed or misunderstood by today's apostles, in I Corinthians 3:1
. . . And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but only as carnal, as to little ones in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Nor are you now ready for it, for you are still carnal.
Paul tells us, Jesus tells us, virtually every other source of doctrine similarly reveals that what has been said and recorded was geared to the capabilities, understanding, and sophistication of the original audience. Since it was necessary to "feed milk instead of solid food" to the early audience, this necessity must become clear eventually and be recognized. Otherwise, we would forever "drink milk and ignore solid food."
The original authors of the doctrine believed in its validity unto the end of time, even though it was designed for an earlier more spiritually and cognitively primitive audience. Therefore, it must contain adequate clues for revising those early simplifications. This is inescapable if the claim of validity for more enlightened future audiences is to be accepted.
As the inevitable advances in human understanding occur, they cause these clues to emerge as inconsistencies until further revision of the underlying truth provides the appropriate explanations. The system is remarkably sound because the doctrine only requires revision when the audience has evolved the necessary understanding to demand it. It is long overdue!!
That is the beauty of the Catholic Church. It is a true anchor and safe harbor from false belief. A good example is in birth control.
While human interpretations of the truth are changing to include moral wrongs like contraception and abortion the Church remains firm in the truth. It was Jesus' Church that stood up for the rights of the the unborn while other churches gave in to the times and let a "civil right" walk all over a moral wrong. Time proved the Church right. Contraception and abortion has taken the vitality out of western society. Lowered the birthrate below replacement levels and devalued sex into a means to produce pleasurable muscle spasms rather than its true meaning as a creative expression of reproduction in a committed marriage. We paid the price-especially the poor- for this moral wrong by increased divorce and illegitimacy rates rising through the roof. We are all paying for the breach of the moral law. A moral breach endorsed by sola scriptura Protestants and their "creative interpretations".
The truth never changes no matter what season and what the trends of the times say. Authority lies in Gods word. Not in the trends of today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
No . . . you simply fail to realize that the childhood of a species is as different from its adulthood . . . as our childhoods are from our adulthood. Revision is actually a good thing and the pervasiveness of inconsistencies in its scriptures is one of the sure signs that truth resides in Christian doctrine. Christian doctrine has always been riddled with inconsistencies, and rightly so. Paul clearly explained this feature of his teachings, apparently unnoticed or misunderstood by today's apostles, in I Corinthians 3:1
. . . And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but only as carnal, as to little ones in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Nor are you now ready for it, for you are still carnal.
Paul tells us, Jesus tells us, virtually every other source of doctrine similarly reveals that what has been said and recorded was geared to the capabilities, understanding, and sophistication of the original audience. Since it was necessary to "feed milk instead of solid food" to the early audience, this necessity must become clear eventually and be recognized. Otherwise, we would forever "drink milk and ignore solid food."
The original authors of the doctrine believed in its validity unto the end of time, even though it was designed for an earlier more spiritually and cognitively primitive audience. Therefore, it must contain adequate clues for revising those early simplifications. This is inescapable if the claim of validity for more enlightened future audiences is to be accepted.
As the inevitable advances in human understanding occur, they cause these clues to emerge as inconsistencies until further revision of the underlying truth provides the appropriate explanations. The system is remarkably sound because the doctrine only requires revision when the audience has evolved the necessary understanding to demand it. It is long overdue!!
Your teaching is false and unorthodox, but not unexpected as it protects your protestant faith.
Oh spare me, Juj. You're really trying to tell me that what it obviously says is NOT what it says? I'm sorry, but that's delusional, dude. It doesn't take a Catholic with a master's in theology to read what is clearly being said there. Get over yourself already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samyn on the green
Good post. It is a shame that people can not put their faith in Jesus' Church and must put their faith into their own church and their own interpetations. The Holy Spirit.
Which makes me think of something else: in certain respects it is easier to be a Protestant (or almost anything but a Catholic), because Protestants (and people in general) can sort themselves out into more or less like-minded congregations, switch churches if they don’t like the one they’re in, or even start their own if they can’t find one they like. Those that forsake Jesus' Church are stuck in a schismatic free fall; forever dividing into little like-minded groups until they are powerless, alone and isolated.
A. First of all, both of you need to knock it off with the anti-Protestant rhetoric. It's not very becoming of either of you as Catholics.
B. You can say my teaching is false and unorthodox, but that really has nothing to do with the truth.
In my response, I'm saying nothing about Peter being the rock. I'm merely responding to Samyn on the Green's false reading and false interpretation of what is clearly written in Matthew 16. If the Catholic Church somehow wants to tell me I'm blind and not reading what is clearly there in black and white, then shame on the church for thinking all non-Catholics are really THAT ignorant.
Last edited by shyspider; 09-15-2010 at 02:17 PM..
Again, at the risk of incurring a penalty by the moderating staff:
Quote:
Originally Posted by samyn on the green
Now they reach for the ad hominem attack. When you besmirch Jesus' Church you besmirch Jesus' himself. This speaks to your blind hatred ,your indoctrination and misunderstanding of what the Catholic Church actually is. Your lack of faith in his Church leaves you with only faith in yourself and the anarchy of a million different interpretations.
How are you any better when you can't even accurately read the words which are so clearly written in Matthew 16? Here, let me help you out with a paraphrase that maybe you can understand:
Jesus, speaking to his disciples: When you're in town, and you hear people talking about me, who do they say I am?
The disciples respond: Well, we've heard some people say you're John the Baptist, and others seem to think you're Elijah. There are even some who say you're Jeremiah or one of the other prophets of years past.
Jesus: Uh huh. Interesting. But now let me ask YOU. Who do YOU guys say I am?
Peter responds: Why, you're the Messiah - the son of God.
Now do you understand the flow of the conversation?
Instead, you're presenting your OWN false reading of Scripture as if it's true. So you have no right to question what Protestants believe when you yourself can't even accurately present a Bible verse. So why can't you, as someone who professes to belong to the only church that can properly interpret Scripture, not understand what is clearly written there?
Oh, that's right...Protestants are all ignorant fools who don't know anything about the faith....despite the fact that the Catechism refers to us as "brothers in the faith". Yeah, I actually do know what the RCC teaches about us. Too bad you guys, who profess to adhere to Catholic teachings, aren't as charitable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
come home to Jesus' CHurch
