Started By
Message

re: Catholic bishops approve drafting of Communion document that could lead to rebuke of Biden

Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:24 pm to
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41779 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:24 pm to
quote:

Please provide a more complete analysis supporting your conclusion. Stating your conclusion and then listing verses and declaring them to be underlying support is not analysis.
I was answering someone who asked for scriptural support, so I provided it. If you'd like it fleshed out, I'm happy to do so, but please don't act as if it were a hit-and-run.

2 Timothy 3:14-17 (16 being the central verse) teaches that scripture is sufficient without oral tradition. Here Paul says that all scripture is breathed out by God (to show its authority) and then goes on to say what it is used for: "for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness". And what is the result of the God-breathed scriptures being used for all those things? "[T]hat the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work".

The scriptures provide everything needed for the Christian to be "complete", and equipped for every good work.

Moving on... Acts 17:11 provides an example of where an Apostle wasn't simply taken at face value but had his teachings compared to the scriptures by the Bereans. They received the word he preached eagerly precisely because it was supported by the scriptures.

1 Corinthians 4:6 has Paul chiding the church of Corinth for developing sides or parties where the ministers were celebrities or representatives of the people. Some were siding with Paul while others with Apollos. Paul was telling the church not to become puffed up with pride for belonging to one faction or another but sticking to what was written, either by Paul in his letters or by the Old Testament scriptures, depending on how you look at it. Paul was telling the people to stick to what was written, not to build their faith upon a man but on the word of God.

Lastly, in Mark 7:6-9 (actually following to vs. 13), we find the Pharisees and Scribes questioning Jesus and His disciples for not adhering to the traditions of the Jewish elders by washing their hands before eating. Jesus confronts them about their hypocrisy by doing what seems good for the sake of appearances while ignoring the word of God. Jesus condemns them specifically for their adherence to the traditions of men while trampling on God's holy word. He specifically called out their practice allowance for refusing to give monetary support to poor parents--thus allowing them to starve--while claiming that their money was dedicated to God, in direct violation of the 5th commandment. Jesus thrashed the "holy" Scribes and Pharisees for rejecting the authority of scripture for the authority of their own traditions that they had passed down.

quote:

Sola Scriptura is a doctrine invented by the Reformers more than Fifteen Centuries after Jesus Christ lived. Why would Almighty God hide this critical aspect of humanity's salvation from us for over Fifteen Centuries?

He would not. The mere suggestion that he might defies all logic and reason, and God is the Author of both.
If you were more familiar with the Reformation, you'd realize that the Reformers were reforming the Church (as they saw it), not creating a new one in their own image. They believed they were going back to the scriptures and the teachings of the early church before Rome corrupted the faith through adding on tradition after tradition that didn't comport to the scriptures and added burdens on God's people that they weren't commanded by God to bear.

Sola Scriptura was taught as a return to the very word of God as the sole authority for life and faith. They believed that tradition, while having its place, was subservient to the revealed word of God from the Old Testament and the doctrines of the Apostles that were eventually codified in writing. They would point back to early church fathers like Irenaeus and Tertullian who went to the scriptures to fight against Gnostic heresy, not tradition.

Here's a quote to leave you with, and I hope this diatribe has satisfied your request for analysis.

“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith” -Irenaeus (130 AD - 202 AD)

Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:26 pm to
quote:

How were all the Catholics (same as Christians) from Pentecost to 1500 saved with no Bible ?



All Christians prior to 1500 were not Catholics.
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:27 pm to
quote:

When one religious organization says it’s the arbiter of all religious truth, and anyone outside of its umbrella is anathema, that tends to rub people the wrong way.


How about a guy mocking a church and referring to them as a cult? Does that tend to rub people the wrong way?
Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:29 pm to
Reform ? Yyou think changing things like belief in the real presence, that has been believed since the last supper , is reform ? All the Apostles taught the real presence.
Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:30 pm to
How many Christians Churches were there before the ANglicans ?
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:31 pm to
quote:

Reform ? Yyou think changing things like belief in the real presence, that has been believed since the last supper , is reform ? All the Apostles taught the real presence.



Yeah but that's just tradition which they seem to think is worthless.

I want the chapter and verse for the grape juice while we're at it.
Posted by Foch
Member since Feb 2015
753 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:34 pm to
quote:

is anathema


You were Baptized Catholic right? You will always remain a part of the Church. I pray that one day you, as well as the many others who have left return to the fullness of faith. Until that day, I am happy to call you a fellow believer in Christ.
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:35 pm to
quote:

How many Christians Churches were there before the ANglicans ?



The simple answer is two, but it's a little more complicated than that because you really need to count the Oriental churches too.
Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:36 pm to
I want the chapter and verse that says that "This in not my body". a
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41779 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:38 pm to
quote:

I don't feel on any way despised, howver I would ask if you don't notice an irrational hostility to the Catholic Church that is certainly present in American Protestantism (specifically in Non-denominational circles and definitely in the SBC). The Reformed too have their share of those who fixate on Catholicism in a 16th Century manner.

Sproul and Spurgeon immediately come to mind.
The Reformed tend to focus on Catholicism as an evil villain due to their study of the history and doctrines of the Reformation, where the reformers were rebelling against Rome as the primary antagonist and her heretical doctrines (as the reformers saw them).

I'm honestly not sure how much time is spent on Catholicism in Evangelicalism, as doctrine doesn't seem to be emphasized much at all in a lot of churches (this isn't true of all Evangelicals and I don't want it to come across as if I believe that is the case), so a comparison of doctrines of Rome vs. Protestantism seems to be a non-issue for many. I suspect it may come down to a sense of identity more than doctrine, though there is reason enough to argue about doctrine, as this thread has demonstrated.

Don't get me wrong; I firmly believe adherents to the doctrines of Catholicism are in grave error, possibly even to their own damnation if they follow some of their doctrines to their logical conclusions (especially regarding the role of our own works in salvation), but I believe it is not charitable to be so harsh with those who claim to share the same Faith and savior. I believe we should be patient with one another, being respectful to one another as fellow image-bearers of God, and seek to glorify God above all else with our apologies of our doctrines. We should emphasize the gospel message of Christ and how He alone paid the price for our sins so that, through faith, we are heirs of the kingdom of God.



Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:39 pm to
I count all the Orthodox as Catholic. Coptics in 500 believed 100.00 % of what Roman Catholics did. Still today, after 1500 yrs of separation it's over 99%.
Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:42 pm to
Foo, is Faith without works , dead ?
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:44 pm to
quote:

I count all the Orthodox as Catholic. Coptics in 500 believed 100.00 % of what Roman Catholics did. Still today, after 1500 yrs of separation it's over 99%.



No disrespect, but we are most assuredly not Roman Catholic and I'm pretty sure that not a single Orthodox Christian would disagree with me on that.

The original statement was 1500, not 500 and by 1500 the Copts, Assyrians, Ethipoians, Syriacs etc... had long since gone their own way.

And yeah it is pretty close to 99% but the differences are fairly significant.
Posted by Foch
Member since Feb 2015
753 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:51 pm to
quote:

The Reformed tend to focus on Catholicism as an evil villain due to their study of the history and doctrines of the Reformation, where the reformers were rebelling against Rome


I agree re: Reformed and appreciate their prioritization of the study of Chruch history (though our conclusions differ).

I wonder if the hostility to Rome amongst many is due to their constant desire to define by what they are not and their desire to argue aboht anything other than the major flaws (or omissions) in their moral teachings.

Specifically, the reluctance to condemn divorce, stiff arming any meaningful conversation on contraception/theology of the body, extreme deference/love of the nation of Israel, and perverse identification of faith within the founding and development of the American ideal (belief in America as divenly inspired/instituted).
Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 9:53 pm to
I didn't say Roman Catholic. I said Catholic. RC, and all the Orthodox Catholic. I consider all Orthodox as Catholic. I said the Coptics at 500 because 2 natures or 1 comingled nature is the same thing. SO at time we all believed 100% the same thing.
Posted by 62zip
One Particular Harbor
Member since Aug 2005
6353 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 10:00 pm to
quote:

I didn't say Roman Catholic. I said Catholic. RC, and all the Orthodox Catholic. I consider all Orthodox as Catholic. I said the Coptics at 500 because 2 natures or 1 comingled nature is the same thing. SO at time we all believed 100% the same thing.



Perhaps if we are talking small c catholic as opposed to capital C Catholic.

As I said, you would be hard pressed to find an Orthodox Christian who would answer affirmatively if asked if they were a capital C Catholic.

That's one of our words by the way, just saying.
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41779 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 10:04 pm to
quote:

Reform ? Yyou think changing things like belief in the real presence, that has been believed since the last supper , is reform ? All the Apostles taught the real presence.
We've already touched on that particular doctrine in this thread, but all I'd like to say is that the scriptures teach that the point of the bread and the cup is that they are a remembrance of Christ's sacrifice (which was still in the future at the time), which was the gospel message of eternal life by His death. His sacrifice was once-for-all, not repeated each time a priest blesses bread and wine.

In regards to the early church fathers, I found this blog post analyzing references to several of the fathers that the RCC quotes in defense of the belief of the real presence of Christ. Essentially the conclusion is that they are typically quoted out of context or other passages of their writings are ignored.

Posted by Champagne
Already Conquered USA.
Member since Oct 2007
48509 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 10:05 pm to
quote:

2 Timothy 3:14-17 (16 being the central verse) teaches that scripture is sufficient without oral tradition.


Foo, that's not an accurate interpretation of that verse. Paul didn't tell the folks to go read the OT and be satisfied with that. The NT didn't exist yet when Paul said this. The OT was the only written Holy Scripture when Paul wrote here.

Even if there was one of the hand-written books of the Bible handy, Timothy or Paul wouldn't tell the folks "Everybody get one of these and rely only on this." The book would be written in Greek. Those folks spoke Aramaic and didn't read Greek. Most couldn't read at all. Why would Timothy or Paul tell people to rely only on the Written Holy Scripture when none of them had a book and none of them could read Greek? Many of them probably couldn't read at all.

You aren't making any logical or reasonable sense here, Foo. You aren't even accurate here.

The only Holy Scripture in existence at the time that Paul wrote this letter was the Old Testament. Paul never said that the Old Testament is all that's needed for salvation, Foo.
This post was edited on 6/24/21 at 10:11 pm
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41779 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 10:06 pm to
quote:

Foo, is Faith without works , dead ?
Yes, a proclaimed faith in Jesus Christ that is not evidenced by the fruits of the spirit is a dead faith that saves no one.

Good works are an evidence of saving faith, not a contributor to it.
Posted by Tbone2
Member since Jun 2015
583 posts
Posted on 6/24/21 at 10:09 pm to
I think Orhodox / Roman Catholics differences are on a total different level than Protestants / Roman Catholics. Primacy of the Pope and Assumption of Mary seem to be the 2 biggest points. The filioque doesn't seems theologocal difference to me. It seems like a different expression of the same thing. I think it was added in the west to counter a hearsay. I think that the Orthodox Churches in communion with Rome omit it from the Creed.
Jump to page
Page First 35 36 37 38 39 ... 43
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 37 of 43Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram