- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:36 am to Revelator
quote:
It’s God himself who instructs me
It seems to be your ego that instructs you.
quote:
Experiences can be created by emotions and atmosphere.
Do you only worship God because some random old book tells you to? There’s no emotion or experiences tied to your faith? You’re just going through the motions that words on a page dictate? And that’s supposed to be superior to experiencing miracles?
quote:
The Bible says Satan himself can appear as an Angel of light.
It also says he’s capable of performing signs and wonders and we are to test every spirit to see if they are from God.
Does the Bible say that Satan leads us to Jesus? Because all the miracles I have experienced have.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:11 am to Revelator
quote:
You never gave a good reason for why the commandment for not worshiping idols is not in the Catholic Bible,
I showed you how the different numbering systems were developed in the early church.
I showed you what idol worship actually was in ancient Jewish culture, and showed the western church's first commandment is worded specifically to address that.
quote:
You provided and excuse about it not being needed because of the first
No, I provided a historic and factual explanation about how the ancient Jews thought of idols as actual gods, therefore the first commandment specifically calls out strange gods.
quote:
But that simply a Catholic explanation, and not even one you came up with yourself.
It's a factual explanation, and facts are facts regardless of who is presenting them, and regardless of how you feel about them.
The issue here is that your definition of what you think an idol is, versus what an idol actually is in the appropriate biblical and historic context, are two different things. So, you're arguing from a presuppositional point of view, and you're trying to insert your false definition into the text. You're twisting scripture, just like Peter said would happen.
This is where you totally ignore everything I just stated, and repeat your previous points like the broken record you are.
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 7:17 am
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:15 am to Rip Torn
quote:
Roman Catholic Church is a disgrace
No, human beings at times are a disgrace. Throughout history fallible human popes have done some evil things. Their behavior is not representative of the Roman Catholic Church that Jesus started on earth.
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 7:18 am
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:16 am to Revelator
quote:
Which doesn’t dispute my assertion that this is another made up non biblical theology that Catholics will say was passed down by oral tradition. If Catholics can annul a marriage, can they also annul an abortion?
for someone who claims to know the teaching of the Church, you are in error of a lot of teachings, and concepts in the church.
an annulment (better stated a declaration of nullity of marriage), says that a sacramental marriage didn't take place, it does not dissolve the marriage. The marriage took place, but because it was not sacramental the person is free to enter a new marriage. It would be a marriage that is unlawful, as St. Matthew put it.
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 7:20 am
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:14 am to Fun Bunch
So, blessing sin is in now in the RCC?
Exactly how does a denomination (church) bless something so clearly opposing to God’s plan for mankind from creation to present in one man and one woman being married and becoming one and procreating, which is a mirror reflection of God the creator in how the “Creator” designed us to “Procreate” ?
All I can say is that you are an actual believer in God in spite of the denomination you’re a member of, then this might be the ultimate high sign to pull the plug on it and join a congregation that is focused on serving God alone and not appeasing a sinful generation.
I simply do not think there is a way back from this. I really don’t.
Exactly how does a denomination (church) bless something so clearly opposing to God’s plan for mankind from creation to present in one man and one woman being married and becoming one and procreating, which is a mirror reflection of God the creator in how the “Creator” designed us to “Procreate” ?
All I can say is that you are an actual believer in God in spite of the denomination you’re a member of, then this might be the ultimate high sign to pull the plug on it and join a congregation that is focused on serving God alone and not appeasing a sinful generation.
I simply do not think there is a way back from this. I really don’t.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:31 am to catholictigerfan
There's no point in going back and forth with Relevator. He's the wrong kind of Protestant to do that with.
There are three kinds of Protestants:
1 - Those who carry with them a memory that many if not most Protestants have forgotten, the old ancestral memory of having once been Catholic, before the events of the sixteenth century. He carries within himself this memory of Protestants’ true home and family, understanding that Protestants as such are in essence Catholics-in-exile whose Catholic ancestors in the sixteenth century made the painful decision to live in exile from the Catholic Church until she had sufficiently reformed, never intending to be or form a permanently separate body or group of bodies.
This is what Protestant fathers used to teach to their children.
2 - Eventually Protestant fathers no longer taught this to their children, and these children grew up not even knowing that they were in exile. They came to think that schism from the Church was normal, because they no longer retained even the concept of schism from the Church.
They came to believe that the Church Christ founded was not a visible institution, was not even visible at all, even though some still used the term ‘visible Church.’6 For many, if not most, the Church is an entirely spiritual entity to which one is fully united by a merely spiritual act of faith, such as a sinner’s prayer. These descendants of the earlier Protestants have completely forgotten that they were separated from anything. And without this memory, there no longer stirs within them any longing for the conclusion of the Catholic Church’s reformation so that they can be reunited to her. Instead, understandably, their discovery of the Catholic Church’s claim to be the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church Christ founded arouses in them some degree of resentment and offense.
3 - Those that don't care and don't have a clue. Most non-denom.
Relevator is firmly entrenched in the 2nd category so there's no point in having any discussion with him.
He might not even claim Rome as a large part of his spiritual ancestry.
All of this comes from an article.
There are three kinds of Protestants:
1 - Those who carry with them a memory that many if not most Protestants have forgotten, the old ancestral memory of having once been Catholic, before the events of the sixteenth century. He carries within himself this memory of Protestants’ true home and family, understanding that Protestants as such are in essence Catholics-in-exile whose Catholic ancestors in the sixteenth century made the painful decision to live in exile from the Catholic Church until she had sufficiently reformed, never intending to be or form a permanently separate body or group of bodies.
This is what Protestant fathers used to teach to their children.
2 - Eventually Protestant fathers no longer taught this to their children, and these children grew up not even knowing that they were in exile. They came to think that schism from the Church was normal, because they no longer retained even the concept of schism from the Church.
They came to believe that the Church Christ founded was not a visible institution, was not even visible at all, even though some still used the term ‘visible Church.’6 For many, if not most, the Church is an entirely spiritual entity to which one is fully united by a merely spiritual act of faith, such as a sinner’s prayer. These descendants of the earlier Protestants have completely forgotten that they were separated from anything. And without this memory, there no longer stirs within them any longing for the conclusion of the Catholic Church’s reformation so that they can be reunited to her. Instead, understandably, their discovery of the Catholic Church’s claim to be the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church Christ founded arouses in them some degree of resentment and offense.
3 - Those that don't care and don't have a clue. Most non-denom.
Relevator is firmly entrenched in the 2nd category so there's no point in having any discussion with him.
He might not even claim Rome as a large part of his spiritual ancestry.
All of this comes from an article.
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 8:41 am
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:32 am to Mike da Tigah
Mainstream media framed up a false narrative and dispersed it to billions of people. Unfortunately Protestants are using this to insult & many Christians on all sides are confused.
Two definitions to consider:
1. Blessing = approval, support, Gods protection
2. Blessing in the context of the declaration = pastoral blessing = plea for help, a petition for God’s assistance, a plea to live better
LINK
From the declaration:
“After analyzing blessings in Scripture, the Declaration offers a theological-pastoral understanding. Those who ask for a blessing show themselves “to be in need of God’s saving presence” in their lives by expressing “a petition for God’s assistance, a plea to live better” (par. 21). This request should be received and valued “outside of a liturgical framework” when found “in a realm of greater spontaneity and freedom” (par. 23).”
”There is no intention to legitimize anything, but rather to open one’s life to God, to ask for his help to live better, and also to invoke the Holy Spirit so that the values of the Gospel may be lived with greater faithfulness.”
“The Church is thus the sacrament of God’s infinite love. Therefore, even when a person’s relationship with God is clouded by sin, he can always ask for a blessing, stretching out his hand to God, as Peter did in the storm when he cried out to Jesus, “Lord, save me!” (Mt. 14:30)”
“In this way, every brother and every sister will be able to feel that, in the Church, they are always pilgrims, always beggars, always loved, and, despite everything, always blessed.”
Mainstream framing of this “Blessing”
- Approval or encouragement
- Gods favor or protection
- Favor = approval
- Special favor, mercy, or benefit
- Support (He gave it his blessing)
- To ask God to look favorably upon
Context of Pope Francis declaration:
Two types of blessings: ascending and descending blessings
- Pouring out a gesture of grace, protection
- Peacemaking, a positive message of comfort care and encouragement.
- A pious practice
- An invocation of gods help
I’m personally not a fan of the release because most people will not read the 45 paragraph document explaining the details, and will run with the narrative.
Two definitions to consider:
1. Blessing = approval, support, Gods protection
2. Blessing in the context of the declaration = pastoral blessing = plea for help, a petition for God’s assistance, a plea to live better
LINK
From the declaration:
“After analyzing blessings in Scripture, the Declaration offers a theological-pastoral understanding. Those who ask for a blessing show themselves “to be in need of God’s saving presence” in their lives by expressing “a petition for God’s assistance, a plea to live better” (par. 21). This request should be received and valued “outside of a liturgical framework” when found “in a realm of greater spontaneity and freedom” (par. 23).”
”There is no intention to legitimize anything, but rather to open one’s life to God, to ask for his help to live better, and also to invoke the Holy Spirit so that the values of the Gospel may be lived with greater faithfulness.”
“The Church is thus the sacrament of God’s infinite love. Therefore, even when a person’s relationship with God is clouded by sin, he can always ask for a blessing, stretching out his hand to God, as Peter did in the storm when he cried out to Jesus, “Lord, save me!” (Mt. 14:30)”
“In this way, every brother and every sister will be able to feel that, in the Church, they are always pilgrims, always beggars, always loved, and, despite everything, always blessed.”
Mainstream framing of this “Blessing”
- Approval or encouragement
- Gods favor or protection
- Favor = approval
- Special favor, mercy, or benefit
- Support (He gave it his blessing)
- To ask God to look favorably upon
Context of Pope Francis declaration:
Two types of blessings: ascending and descending blessings
- Pouring out a gesture of grace, protection
- Peacemaking, a positive message of comfort care and encouragement.
- A pious practice
- An invocation of gods help
I’m personally not a fan of the release because most people will not read the 45 paragraph document explaining the details, and will run with the narrative.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 9:04 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
There's no point in going back and forth with Relevator. He's the wrong kind of Protestant to do that with.
There are three kinds of Protestants:
hmm very interesting thanks for posting!
I have to admit I enjoy debating Revelator, maybe I shouldn't do it but I do enjoy it.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 9:05 am to Mike da Tigah
quote:
So, blessing sin is in now in the RCC?
we are all sinners aren't we? So blessing a person is necessarily blessing a sinner.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:02 am to catholictigerfan
quote:
we are all sinners aren't we? So blessing a person is necessarily blessing a sinner.
Born into sin, as in our sin nature, yes, but not blessing unrepentant sin practiced by same sex couples who are receiving your denomination’s blessings.
I think the fundamental difference in between most Catholics and most Protestants in things like this is that while one comes to the defense of the denominational affiliation, the other is more concerned with coming to the defense of scripture alone. If I am going to a church that begins teaching or practicing that which is clearly against scripture, I’m OUT. Bye.
I’ll pull the plug on my affiliation with that denomination or church or pastor in a hot second, and well I should in keeping with scriptural teachings on that matter. Most Catholics however find themselves spiritually, emotionally, and traditionally bound to their affiliation with the RCC, even to come to its defense at all costs. Those who don’t usually find themselves leaving the RCC, as I did. When scripture becomes everything in your life you’ll find that is the absolute most important thing that all must be weighed by, but if the denomination is most important to you then that is where your authority resides, and you will remain firmly committed to it.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:09 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
All of this comes from
..someone's imagination. It's much more convenient to characterize how others believe and think instead of asking them.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:24 am to Mike da Tigah
quote:The older I get, the less clear it becomes.
If I am going to a church that begins teaching or practicing that which is clearly against scripture, I’m OUT. Bye.
How can you be so sure?
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:46 am to bayoubengals88
quote:I disagree with this analysis. It's way too Roman-centric. As a Protestant adhering to Reformed theology, I see one Church of Jesus Christ comprised of two elements: the visible church and the invisible church. The visible church consists of everyone who professes the true faith (as summarized by the historic creeds and the Solas of the Reformation) and their children. The invisible church is comprised of all of Christ's elect.
There are three kinds of Protestants:
Looking at just the visible church, it is characterized or marked as being one (there isn't more than one true church), holy, catholic (in the sense of the Greek word that means universal or general, not Roman Catholic), and apostolic (meaning it is founded upon the written word of God which encapsulates the necessary teachings of the apostles). So as I said, any expression of the true church that adheres to the creeds and solas is part of the one, true church of Jesus Christ, even if there are other differences in those expressions. I can say a Southern Baptist congregation is just as part of the true church of Jesus Christ as an OPC congregation, and so on.
I can say the same thing Catholics say, but I don't mean the same thing Catholics mean. Catholics see everything revolving around the Roman Church, believing in apostolic succession and so on. I don't believe that at all. I see the one, true church of Jesus Christ being preserved and built over the past 2,000 years in spite of heresies and impurities coming and going. I don't see a necessity to move back to Rome because I believe the church, today, in spite of the divisions within it is still characterized as being ONE. You have to assume Catholicism is the only true church before you can say she is the focal point that unity revolves around.
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 11:20 am
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:51 am to FooManChoo
quote:It does get quite muddled, and there is some crossover.
I disagree with this analysis.
For example, I'm firmly in the 1st camp, but I do retain your belief regarding what constitues a believer and membership in the one church. But the rest of no. 2, I would not espouse.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:52 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I don't see a necessity to move back to Rome because I believe the church, today, in spite of the divisions within it is still characterized as being ONE. You have to assume Catholicism is the true church before you can say she is the focal point that unity revolves around.
And I think here we disagree slightly as I think it would be best to have one visible church, but I'm unwilling to call that the current Roman church.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 11:11 am to bayoubengals88
quote:I can sympathize with that, and I would agree that ideally, there would only be a singular expression of the true church of Jesus Christ with full unity in every respect, but I don't believe that will happen until the visible and invisible church is unified in the new heavens and new earth.
And I think here we disagree slightly as I think it would be best to have one visible church, but I'm unwilling to call that the current Roman church.
The Reformers broke away because they thought truth was more important than unity. I would love us to have both truth and unity, but due to sin, that's not going to happen. Even the unity in Roman Catholicism is a shallow expression of it, as there are still differing beliefs and teachings with Catholicism, itself. I've found that Catholics will admit that there are differences between theological opinions, non-infallible doctrines, infallible doctrines, and dogmas, so to some degree, even Catholicism isn't unified on every possible idea, belief, or practice (there are also Charismatic Catholics, which I found to be very interesting when I first heard about it). They are unified in governing structure while having many differences within.
I don't think having a singular organizing structure as Rome has is what defines a singular true church of Christ, but I would love if every Christian were Presbyterian in their polity
Posted on 12/20/23 at 11:20 am to FooManChoo
quote:This is what I facetiously pointed out to our friend gaetti15, but he didn't catch the sarcasm, and truly believes in Catholic unity, though he and many other Catholics think poorly of Jesuits.
Even the unity in Roman Catholicism is a shallow expression of it, as there are still differing beliefs and teachings with Catholicism, itself.
quote:Totally! And I do think that Presbyterian governance is what is seen in Acts. And also what the Roman church loosely practiced until they didn't.
I don't think having a singular organizing structure as Rome has is what defines a singular true church of Christ, but I would love if every Christian were Presbyterian in their polity
Posted on 12/20/23 at 11:23 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
bayoubengals88
Posted on 12/20/23 at 12:52 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
It seems to be your ego that instructs you.
So listening to the urging of the Holy Sprit while reading God’s word is ego, but thinking an experience with Mary is somehow enriching to your faith? Ok.
quote:
Does the Bible say that Satan leads us to Jesus? Because all the miracles I have experienced have.
By your own admission your experience didn’t lead you into a deeper relationship with Jesus, but a greater adoration of Mary!
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 12:55 pm
Page 17 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News