Credibility without Accountability?

[Lorelei]

I very seldom interact here because I find most of the discussions futile. How can you have a fruitful discussion with people who follow a leader that is accountable to no one. They will argue day after day how their leader is accountable to God, but that is not the reality.

The fact is that the catholic religion is accountable to no one.

They say they are in unison with the Holy Scriptures, but only they can interpret those scriptures correctly.

They claim the Pope is infallible in doctrine, but have no other proof than the word of the Popes who make this claim.

If you deny any of these claims you are pronounced anathema and lose what they claim is the only way to salvation. In other words, if you don't believe what they say you rot in hell.

Catholics get so upset when we remember the crusades and the many times innocent people were burned at the stake for daring to speak out against the church. They refuse to put their church in a position of accountability and refuse to see how incidences like these damage their credibility.

In all other areas of our lives, we deal with people based upon their credibility. Would you honestly invest money in a business that you knew robbed from people in the past? Would you vote for a president that openly killed any opponent that didn't agree with him? Would you knowingly invite a mass murderer in your home simply because he said he wasn't going to do that anymore? I don't think we would do any of these things, and why is that?

We base our judgment upon people based upon their credibility. If a person is credible we will interact with them, but if they are not, we use caution and care when dealing with them and avoid interacting in a way that will let us become a victim to their crimes.

What of a person whose credibility we have not been able to test yet? We may give them the benefit of the doubt and trust them implicitly, but the moment they do something contrary to that trust, they are no longer considered credible.

It is no different with God. God made us the way we are, and it is by God's standards that we hold men accountable. God has proven Himself by fulfilling prophecy and he has made Himself evident through the creation of His universe. Although we must place our faith in Him, he doesn't expect us to follow Him blindly, nor would he expect us to do so of any man or church.

In discussing anything with catholics it always falls back to what their church teaches and we can never prove them wrong because they hold themselves accountable to no one, not even God.

Oh, they will insist they are indeed accountable to God, but they have no proof other than the fact that their church says so. Do you see the circular reasoning in this?

~Lorelei

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I do.

 

[LisaMC]

Here! Here! Amen to that!

Lorilei, you said it so much better that I have ever been able to. Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lisa

 

[thessalonian]

Lorelie,

Well if it is about credibility, none of you Protestants when speaking about Cathoilcism have any as you blatantly distort it to fit you agendas and don't care if someone calls you on it. Lieing about someone elses sincerely held religious beliefs is just fine on this board.

As for the Crusades, God is the judge of whether people were sincerely defending their homelands and families or just out for plunder. There was some of both. And there are many planks in the Protestant eye's with regard to things such as this. Ever heard of 5 points calvinism. Most Baptists have. I do not know if you are baptist. But there was a man named Servetus who was teaching things the Calvinists (baptists) didn't agree with. Mr. John Calvin gave his blessing for this man to be burned at the stake. Oh wait, his preference was to have him hanged but he didn't raise much of a fuss when the woodpile was staked and the marshmallows were brought out. There were numerous other stories of Prots persecuting Prots and Prots persecuting Catholics so don't get your head too far in the sand.

Blessings

 

[Lorelei]

thessalonian,

1. Calvinist does not equal Baptist.
2. Baptist does not equal Protestant
3. Baptists hold each man accountable for their actions. They don't merely brush it off because the person commiting the crime is their leader. People who have done so in the past were simply wrong.
4. Baptists aren't claiming to be infallible nor are they claiming to be the sole source for scriptural interpretation.

It's always the same old story with Catholics, they never explain their reasonings for accepting sin, they merely justify it with "well you did something wrong too." Is there some place in the Catechism that says two wrongs make a right?

~Lorelei

 

[Acts 1:8]

Do you see the circular reasoning in this?

~Lorelei


Well said Lorelei, Thats why I and many others look to God's Word, (The Bible) and the Holy Spirit as our sole source of guidance. No circle there - Just a straight path from God to the beleiver.

 

[thessalonian]

Lorelei

"Calvinist does not equal Baptist"

Where did I say it did. But many Baptist websites speak of Calvinism and their adherence to 5 points Calvinism.. You know TULIP. Perhaps you don't


"they never explain their reasonings for accepting sin, "

Lorelie dear. Whatever are you talking about. The Catholic Church has a far more developed understanding of moral theology than the Bapitst Church can ever even claim to. And what makes you think we are not held accountable for our sins. That is exactly what Catholicism is about. God in the end is the ultimate judge of whether one truly repented of their sins or not. If they didn't, hell is not such a great place. Once again we have another "expert" on Catholicism on the board who speaks out of nothing more than sterotypes and biggotry. Sorry to say that but has become quite quickly appaent that that is the case with you. Sometimes we must be a bit harsh. After all even Jesus called the Pharasees a brood of vipers.

Oh, by the way, I have been meaning to go to the library at the U of M and do a little research on the KKK. I am wondering if there is a particular religion that they derived from. I saw a claim on the interent (not a Catholic site by the way) that they in general were Baptists and that even a pastor or two dawned those white robes. Wonder how they justified that. One of these days I will get around to it.

Blessings.

 

[trying2understand]

I must admit that the opening post to this thread is too disjointed for me to make any sense of it.

Perhaps those of you in agreement with it can explain the point of it to me.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

We are saying the RCC covers up it's past sins.

 

[BrianT]

Lorelei,

What from your post doesn't apply to other denominations? "Independent Baptists" are "accountable to no one" and criticise and condemn anyone who attends a different type of church, sometimes even if that church is "Baptist".

The "circular reasoning" you explain, I've experienced in almost every church I've ever attended, and 99.99% of the time that has been a Protestant church, usually Baptist.

So what do you suggest?

 

[GraceSaves]

I can't even see a way to answer this. There is a question at the bottom. If I answer no, and even provide explanation, I'll just get accused of more "circular reasoning." It's clear from the entire first post that you're mind is already made up; I see no room to allow me convince you otherwise.

Was this for discussion, or to rant?

God bless,

Grant

 

[thessalonian]

Lorelei,

Here is an interesting article. I will quote some salient parts:

http://www.detnet.com/wilke/klan1.html

"The father of Texas Fundamentalism, J. Frank Norris once brought the Klu Klux Klan into his First Baptist Church in Fort Worth. This event, which took place in 1924, according to author Gwin Morris, symbolized a chummy relationship Norris and Fundamentalism had with the Klan."

"Danny Welch of Klanwatch in Montgomery, Alabama, lists Baptist ministers allegedly working in the Klan in the 1990s. "

Wow, that's not too long ago is it. Wonder how they splain that.

"Author Barry Hankins writes that J. Frank Norris often spoke favorably of the Klan. Recall the Klan claimed to support Portestant principles often attacking Catholics and Jews. This made them acceptable to the outer fringe of those within Fundamentalist circles. "

Blessings

 

[JFS]

[“I very seldom interact here because I find most of the discussions futile. How can you have a fruitful discussion with people who follow a leader that is accountable to no one. They will argue day after day how their leader is accountable to God, but that is not the reality.”]

Lorelei, who are you accountable to? I bet you would say God. If this is the case why don’t you afford the same curtsey to the Pope? If you can be accountable to God so can the Pope?

[“The fact is that the catholic religion is accountable to no one.”]

Prove it.

[“They say they are in unison with the Holy Scriptures, but only they can interpret those scriptures correctly.’”]

Show please, where this is the case

[“They claim the Pope is infallible in doctrine, but have no other proof than the word of the Popes who make this claim.”]

I think you would ignore any proof we would present. It has been my observation that people who write this kind of a post are generally blind to what people have to write.

[“Catholics get so upset when we remember the crusades and the many times innocent people were burned at the stake for daring to speak out against the church. They refuse to put their church in a position of accountability and refuse to see how incidences like these damage their credibility.”]

Show me were, in writing, that the RCC sanctioned the brutality that occurred during the Crusades. Evil people do evil things.

[“In all other areas of our lives, we deal with people based upon their credibility. Would you honestly invest money in a business that you knew robbed from people in the past? Would you vote for a president that openly killed any opponent that didn't agree with him? Would you knowingly invite a mass murderer in your home simply because he said he wasn't going to do that anymore? I don't think we would do any of these things, and why is that?”]

What does this have to do with anything?


[“Oh, they will insist they are indeed accountable to God, but they have no proof other than the fact that their church says so. Do you see the circular reasoning in this?”]

So prove to me that you are accountable to God. I bet you will get dizzy trying. (It’s that circular thing)
If you are going to complain about RCC doctrine pick a subject and lets deal with it. Don’t write things in general. Lets deal with facts.


God Bless you.

Yours truly in Christ,

John

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
We are saying the RCC covers up it's past sins.

How does that fit with the "circular reasoning thing?

I don't think that that is her point.

But given how poorly the point was presented, who knows.

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Where did I say it did. But many Baptist websites speak of Calvinism and their adherence to 5 points Calvinism.. You know TULIP. Perhaps you don't

I know it and disgaree with it, yet I am still baptist. What Calvin did in his life has no effect on me or my beliefs.

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Whatever are you talking about. The Catholic Church has a far more developed understanding of moral theology than the Bapitst Church can ever even claim to.

They don't understand it better, they invented it to suit their needs.

As for the KKK, again you are excusing the sins of the man who supposedly is THE ruler of the church here on earth by comparing it to the sins of men whom you would call heretics. How is this justification for what your church leaders have done and are now doing that is contrary to God's will?

As a catholic, wouldn't you expect a person who is not part of your church to commit such atrocities? How does that excuse the pope and bishops for covering up and commiting sexual acts with children? How does that excuse the deaths that they have caused in the past?

It doesn't excuse it but rather shows how even the pope has no greater power than any of us. It surely doesn't prove that his words of doctrine are inspired.

~Lorelei

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by BrianT:
So what do you suggest?

Get a bible and read it. It has been tested and tried and never failed to be inaccurate. If the pope or I or anyone else teachings anything contrary to it, then dismiss it as a false doctrine.

~Lorelei

 

[GraceSaves]

Well, since there are no contradictions in the Catholic faith in regards to Holy Scripture, I guess I'm doing allright, then.

God bless,

Grant

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BrianT:
So what do you suggest?

Get a bible and read it. It has been tested and tried and never failed to be inaccurate. If the pope or I or anyone else teachings anything contrary to it, then dismiss it as a false doctrine.
~Lorelei </font>[/QUOTE]Why do 50 Protestants, all reading the Bible, argue about what it says? Why does a Baptist church say the Anglicans are out to lunch, the Anglicans say the Lutherans are out to lunch, and the Lutherans say the Baptists are out to lunch? Yes, we can all "get a Bible and read it", but when we say only we are interpreting it correctly, are we not committing the exact same circular reasoning you are talking about?

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by JFS:
Lorelei, who are you accountable to? I bet you would say God. If this is the case why don’t you afford the same curtsey to the Pope? If you can be accountable to God so can the Pope?

He can be, but he chooses not to be. Instead he plays God by saying his office and church are the final authority on all interpretations of God's Word. Words that were spoken before the office of pope ever existed.

Originally posted by JFS:


Prove it.

Prove that he is held accountable to God. If you disgree with His doctrine, can you prove Him wrong? How do you disprove someone who makes up all the rules?

Originally posted by JFS:
[“They say they are in unison with the Holy Scriptures, but only they can interpret those scriptures correctly.’”]

Show please, where this is the case

I don't have to, it's been done several times in this forum, but you can't see it because you argue using your own evidence which comes from the pope's(past and present) own interpretation of them. Whether or not it fits in unison with His Word, you accept what they say.

Originally posted by JFS:
I think you would ignore any proof we would present. It has been my observation that people who write this kind of a post are generally blind to what people have to write.

What would your proof be, a quote from yet another pope?

Originally posted by JFS:
Show me were, in writing, that the RCC sanctioned the brutality that occurred during the Crusades. Evil people do evil things.

When does the death of a man in the name of Christ turn form simply killing in the name of Christ to brutality?

Originally posted by JFS:
What does this have to do with anything?

It shows that in all other areas of life you wouldn't be blindly following the catholic church.

Originally posted by JFS:
So prove to me that you are accountable to God. I bet you will get dizzy trying. (It’s that circular thing)
If you are going to complain about RCC doctrine pick a subject and lets deal with it. Don’t write things in general. Lets deal with facts.

That is the point of this thread, we can't deal in facts, because you will only accept the facts as the church defines them.

~Lorelei

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
I must admit that the opening post to this thread is too disjointed for me to make any sense of it.

But given how poorly the point was presented, who knows.

I am sorry you do not like the way I presented this material. If this is your opinion of my writing ability, that is fine with me. However, I believe the rules of this board say we should show grace to others (See posting rule number 2). If you have a problem with what I said, then address it. If you just can't get past my inability to articulate my points, then maybe you should avoid the thread all together.

~Lorelei