If the Roman Catholic Church is so bad...

Why not get down to the truth?

First: The term Roman Catholic is a misnomer. Catholic means universal and the Roman Catholic communion is by no means universal.

Second: The true Church is built on Jesus Christ; the Roman Catholic communion is built on man, Tradition, and the Teaching Magisterium.

Third: The Roman Catholic communion became, until the Reformation, simply a replacement for the Roman Empire.

Fourth: Since the Roman Catholic communion is built, not on Jesus Christ, but on man, Tradition, and the Teaching Magisterium, it has become a haven for gross heresy; not the least of which is the continual re-sacrifice of Jesus Christ and Mariolatry.

Fifth: The Roman Catholic communion is built on blood, not the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, but the blood of the millions of dissenters who have been slaughtered over the years.

Sixth: The above being true the Roman Catholic communion must be considered apostate!

Having said all the above I still believe that God has many true, though woefully misguided, believers within the Roman Catholic communion.

 

John 8:56 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad."

You're not doing too good, 0 for 2. Once again your proofs disprove your pet theory. Abraham saw the day not Jesus .

</font>[/QUOTE]Yes, there was an extension of my interpretation there.

But read the next verse!

John 8:57
Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham ?
Did Jesus deny it ? Rather He answered
Before Abraham was, I am.

Is that denying the meeting each other?
I would think about Gen 18 more for this verse.

Where is Melchisedec now who has no beginning, no end, King of Righteousness, Eternal Priest? Where is he now? Where is he gone?

 

Actually He never said one way or the other, you are taking silence for agreement. It is neither. At the same time just because Jesus saw Abraham does not necessarily mean Abraham saw him in turn.

Again who knows, who cares, most likely in heaven with the rest of the saints.

Once again you cannot go against basic grammar and word meaning, resembles does not mean is.

 

Eventually what you are saying is that you don't know about Melchisedec now ?

What you say is you don't care, you don't know,right? Why didn't you say that earlier ? You don't know anything !

1) If Jesus didn't mean the affirmation, why were the Jews upset?
2) What do you think "MY Day" means ? Could Abraham see His Day without meeting Him or seeing Him in person?

Why Does Bible say Melchisedec is the continual, endless Priest? Isn't Bible wrong if Melchisedec is not working any more?

Who can have no beginning and no ending other than God ?
Does any saint or any angel have no beginning or no ending ?
Who could bless Abraham? Who could have the authority to receive the tithe from Abraham
Who is King of Peace ?


Still can you not understand ?


Once again you cannot go against basic grammar and word meaning, resembles does not mean is .

When a supect is found, don't we start to ask whether the person resembles the wanted person?

[ February 24, 2006, 01:17 AM: Message edited by: Eliyahu ]

 

Bob Ryan,

You said...

</font>[/QUOTE]God is so clear.

And yet off they go, every time they perform their little mass ritual, actually thinking they are re-sacrificing Christ over and over and over and over and over again.

Year after year, century after century.

And every single repetition of the little ritual is nothing but pure fairy tale. Superstition. Christianised magic.

Very sadly,

Mike

 

Matt Black,

Well, I'm the one who put the post up, yes.

And thats the problem...

They are follwing what the Magesterium is commanding them to believe. And the Magesterium is teaching them falsehood, superstition, fairy tales, pagansim, heresy, idolatry, and even more tragically, a false gospel.

Wrong. I am seeking to allow the scriptures to interpret themselves, with the Holy Spirit being the guide and teacher.

Funny how you guys are constantly leaving Him out. All we hear is "individual interpretation", "individual interpretation", "individual interpretation".

Yet never a mention of the Holy Spirit. I wonder why that is?

Of course they say that.

How do you know? Thats easy.

By simply taking the blinders off, laying aside the Catholic "interpretations", and having as your hearts attitude...

"Ok God. From now on its just you and me. I dont care what the Catholic Church says. Or the Baptists or the Pentecostals or the Charismatics or the Methodists or any one else.

I'm throwing all of that in the dung heap, and I am going to now go into the scriptures with just you, God...my Father and through the Holy Spirit my interpreter of the scriptures...and ask YOU to teach me truth."

When anyone has that attitude, with a humble and teachable heart, beautiful things happen.

We just got done with that, Matt. Rememmber?

The Church is the pillar and ground of truth.

Because born again people have residing within them, and we offer to the world, the Lord Jesus Christ who identified himself as the Truth.

We have Gods scriptures which are Gods unchanging truth standard.

And we are empowered by the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of Truth.

Do you see it? We offer to the world the Lord Jesus Christ, Gods truth standard (the scriptures), and the interpreter of the scriptures, the Holy Spirit.

Nope. Completly wrong.

The differences regarding non-foundational issues that bother you so much do not bother God a bit.

He said...

"Let your brother be fully convinced in his own mind. Who are you to judge your brother? To his own master he will stand or fall, and God will make him stand."

It is important for all of us to make sure that when we "draw a line in the sand" regarding something, it isnt something that God advises us to allow.

Again...

"Let your brother be fully convinced in his own mind. Who are you to judge your brother? To his own master he will stand or fall, and God will make him stand."

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

Old Regular said...

Just thought that was worth repeating.

Mike

 

They are follwing what the Magesterium is commanding them to believe. And the Magesterium is teaching them falsehood, superstition, fairy tales, pagansim, heresy, idolatry, and even more tragically, a false gospel.</font>[/QUOTE]Or they could be interpreting the Scriptures more accurately than you or I. How do you know that you're interpretation is better than theirs? To quote you later: "Let your brother be fully convinced in his own mind. Who are you to judge your brother? To his own master he will stand or fall, and God will make him stand."

Because it is crystal clear and has been demonstrated time and again that the Holy Spirit doesn't work like that; if He did, we'd all agree, wouldn't we?

Er...no. Now we're actually getting to the nub of it. What you've just said is a heretics' and nutters' charter. If I had a £ for every time someone has said to me "I was reading the Scriptures and God told me {insert bizarre teaching or practice of your choice}" then I'd have retired a long time ago. 'Beautiful things' do not happen in my experience (I'm not denying you can meet with God when reading the Scriptures; don't hear what I'm not saying but please please please hear my warnings too): what happens is that people go off into the jungles of Guyana and drink funny-tasting drinks and die. Or perhaps, more benignly but just as misguidedly, start a show on TBN...Word of Faith, anyone? Thanks, but no thanks.

Nope. Completly wrong.

The differences regarding non-foundational issues that bother you so much do not bother God a bit.</font>[/QUOTE]Er...these are not 'non-foundational' issues. Did you read my link to the Synod of Dort (just one example)?

The bottome line for me is that if you are presenting as your doctrinal paradigm the model of 'Me, Jesus and my Bible', you are on very very dangerously thin ice. That way lies the path of Jimmy Jones and David Koresh...

 

In any event, it is Christ Who is supreme in all matters of faith and conduct; we follow a Person, not a book, however inspired that book might be. (Otherwise we might as well ditch the label 'Christian' and rebrand ourselves as 'Biblians')

 

Matt,

Excellent, again.

The problem with every one being free to interpret Scripture for him/herself is that it may lead to kooky beliefs (minimally) and/or the individual separating him/herself from orthodoxy (unfortunately).

God promised that he would be with his CHURCH to the end of the ages. I believe that whole-heartedly and would add that when one decides to interpret Scripture on her/his own, apart from the guidance and teaching of the orthodox faithful through the ages, then one is implicitly doubting God's promise to be with his church throughout time.

Alexander

 

(edit)

Quote boxes messed up. I'll post it again.

Sorry

 

Matt Black,

Me...

You...

Because regarding those false teachings, superstitions, fairy tales, paganism, heresy, and idolatry the Catholic Church teaches those things, and the scriptures do not. That makes the Catholic Church wrong.

Thank you for posing that again. It is of such importance.

Me...

You...

We have already gone over both of those Matt. But we can do it again I guess.

Prove it. Give me one group who is doing better than Gods way.

Certainly not any of these...

Jehovahs Witnesses
Mormons
David Koresh
Catholicism
Mary Baker Eddys group
Jim Jones

I could go on and on. All of those groups have a "Truth Gestapo" in place to keep their people in bondage to them. All of them are(or were) overflowing with blasphemies.(And to be honest, many many cults of this sort are much less in error than Catholicism. Catholicism could very well be the furthest from truth than any of them, with the most devilish errors.)

So who is doing it better than Gods way? You say Gods is insufficient, so who is doing it better?

If the amount of error in different groups could be measured, it might be 1% in this evangelical group, 3% in that one, 2% in those over there, and 5% in those over there.

In Catholicism they are off the charts.

60%...70%...80%...who knows. The cancerous tumor in Catholicism has been spreading, multiplying exponentially, unchecked(no sola scriptura allowed) for 1700 years now. What a sad thing it is to see.

Not on everything.

"Let your brother be fully convinced in his own mind. Who are you to judge your brother?"

Me...

You...

Oh brother. Now I'm a heretic.

Matt, do you have any idea how humurous it is to be called a "heretic" by the (((Catholic Church!!!))).

Trust me, nothing goes "out the other ear" more quickly.

And whey did they do that, Matt?

Because Jim Jones set himself up as their truth gestapo to spoon feed them the truth!

All the cults use that tactic, Matt! Jim Jones, Jehovahs Witnesses, Catholicism...all of the false christian groups use it.

They are free to their convictions. And if they go too far we identify it...using Gods scriptures. We dont need a tribunal of men in gold encrusted robes to go somewhere and have a "Supreme Council of the Heretic Hunters" to come and tell us poor pitiful little helpless lay people who to be wary of.

Me...

I'm afraid they are. And no, I did not read your link to the council of Dort.

No...those men set themselves up as their peoples "Truth Gestapo"...just as the Catholic Church does with its people.

Bad bad bad things happen when we stray from Gods admonistion that we call sola scriptura.

It is incredibly important.

Grace and peace,

Mike
Matt Black,

Me...

You...

Because regarding those false teachings, superstitions, fairy tales, paganism, heresy, and idolatry the Catholic Church teaches those things, and the scriptures do not. That makes the Catholic Church wrong.

 

I think we are approaching the end of the thread. It may be useful if everyone comment the final words shortly.

 

Good grief. I fixed the messed up quote boxes, and reposted.

One is still messed up.

I'm not going to waste my time fixing it again.

This statement...

"Er...these are not 'non-foundational' issues. Did you read my link to the Synod of Dort (just one example)?"

is NOT from me its from Matt.

Mike

 

Mike, I'm certainly not calling you a heretic; I was just commenting that I've seen heresies spouted too many times by individuals all claiming to have found their doctrine solely in the Scriptures to be able to give the sola Scriptura doctrine any credence anymore. Yes, the cultish groups such as the Branch Davidians and Jones' lot developed a Truth Gestapo as you put it - usually under one charismatic leader - but they started off as ostensibly based in Scripture and would not have taken off if not grounded in the weakness of sola Scriptura.

Neither do I doubt for one moment that God can use these mutually contradictory epistemologies to - in spite of them - bring people into His kingdom; He is after all far bigger than any tradition of men. But we have to - with any shred of intellectual honesty - acknowledge that they are mutually contradictory, and indeed amathematising in some cases (please do read my link to Dort as it makes the language of the anathemas of Trent and the damnations of the Lutheran Book of Concord look like polite exchanges). It's not a matter of any group doing in better than 'God's way' as you put it but an acknowledgement that, from a theological point of view, the Holy Spirit does not speak through individuals as you would like to think but through the 'Pillar and Foundation of the Truth'.

 

This is not a fair nor even a true comparison. If anything it is slanderous.
Jim Jones and others like him do not (did not) use sola scriptura to establish their doctrine. No cult does. They are their own authority. No one was able to challenge their authority. It was the same with Charles Taze Russel, and is to this day. They followed him, not the Bible--it was his interpretation, his writings, etc. That is not sola scriptura. That is following a cult leader. Sola scriptura keeps one from going into error. That is plainly shown by Acts 17:11

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Paul was not an authority unto himself. His words were checked by the Bereans through Scripture. It is the Scripture, not the cult leader, that is our guide. Your understanding of sola scriptura is left wanting.
DHK

 

For the record, David Koresh told people that they needed to forget anything that they believed the bible taught them, and listen only to him. He was a self deluded individual. He would not even say that he wasn't the Lord Jesus Christ when asked.

Bye for now. Y. b. in C. Keith

 

The "untrustworthy Bible in the hands of a human" argument here - is debunked by the fact of Acts 17 where "the most untrustworthy Christdians of all" (in factd NON Christians) are using the minimalist Bible (just the OT) to test/judge/validate/evaluate the highest human authority in the church -- An APOSTLE!

Those who claim that the Bible is "not enough" since we are all fallible Christians have no answer at all for the strong endorsement we see of the practice in Acts 17!

 

Bob,

Whatever are you talking about?

Alexander

 

Matt Black...

DHK said...

(but the bolding in this quote is mine)

And Kamaroso said...

(bolding mine again)

And these brothers are just saying in a different way what I have been saying over and over again....

The Catholic Church employs the identical strategy as the very cult leaders and groups that YOU brought up!

How can you not see it? All of these cult groups tell their people that they have no buisiness interpreting the scriptures themselves...

(sound familiar?)

...because I WILL DO IT FOR YOU, and YOU MUST HEED MY INTERPRETATION!

(and does THAT sound familiar?)

Good grief I PRAY that God will lift the scales off of your eyes to see this. It is so important

Grace and peace,

Mike