is the Catholic Church officially now Apostate?

[Thomas Helwys]

Strange. You keep talking about your academic credentials but you neither say what they are and where you got them, nor do you write anything on here that would suggest you actually have them. Go ahead, TH, show us your stuff. If you don't want to say where you went to school, give us a reason to believe you actually went somewhere. By the way, a fable is a genre of fiction in which animals or other non human characters take on human characteristics and the story is played out through them. I don't remember doing that in any of my posts.

I answered a person who asked me respectfully about my education. I still will not reveal the name of the schools (plural), but I did say my doctorate was from a US school, with an international presence. I don't owe you anything, nor do I have to prove anything to you. My privacy is of utmost importance. However, my 40 years of formal and informal, in-depth study is more than sufficient to refute fables, falsehoods, myths, and bogus claims. I am only interested in verifiable historical and scholarly accuracy and facts.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

TH, you did it again. I begin to read your post and think, "Yes, he's going to give us some information to support what he thinks about this topic!" And then I realize I will be disappointed again by your vacuous statements.

I have posted verifiable historical, scholarly, and scriptural facts many times and in many places. I can't help it if you are too lazy to search these out. I'm not going to do the work for you, nor will I repeat myself. My time is too valuable to waste.

 

[The Biblicist]

I answered a person who asked me respectfully about my education. I still will not reveal the name of the schools (plural), but I did say my doctorate was from a US school, with an international presence. I don't owe you anything, nor do I have to prove anything to you. My privacy is of utmost importance. However, my 40 years of formal and informal, in-depth study is more than sufficient to refute fables, falsehoods, myths, and bogus claims. I am only interested in verifiable historical and scholarly accuracy and facts.

There are others on this forum with equal years of formal and informal study, experience and who have gone to multiple schools and hold multiple degrees (including myself). However, that does not make false doctrine, false interpretations true.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If you evaluate the RCC as a business they are all about their agenda...nothing else matters. Honestly, that's not unique but is generally the same operating system most churches work from.

Christ operated differently & insisted we as his followers operate differently, touch the flesh, humble ourselves & operate in love.

So are they apostate...I would say yes. I would also include many Main Line denominations & Baptist Churches. :love2:

 

[webdog]

If you evaluate the RCC as a business they are all about their agenda...nothing else matters. Honestly, that's not unique but is generally the same operating system most churches work from.

Christ operated differently & insisted we as his followers operate differently, touch the flesh, humble ourselves & operate in love.

So are they apostate...I would say yes. Iwould also include many Main Line denomonations & Baptist Churches. :love2:

:thumbsup: The modern church is more concerned with being a 501 c3

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

:thumbsup: The modern church is more concerned with being a 501 c3

Your right! "CHURCH INC" ....Just ignore them, read the Bible & extrapolate what the lord really wants....which is not of that nonsense. God is bigger than all that anyway. :thumbsup:

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I don't believe the Pope is teaching universalism. I believe that he's saying that Jesus provides redemption for everyone. However, only the people who avail themselves or accepting this redemption are saved.

However, its not a dogmatic statement nor was it said ex cathedra.

 

[Walter]

I don't believe the Pope is teaching universalism. I believe that he's saying that Jesus provides redemption for everyone. However, only the people who avail themselves or accepting this redemption are saved.

However, its not a dogmatic statement nor was it said ex cathedra.

Yeah, I agree. I have said that I believe that the Pope was at most chargeable with a loose use of theological terminology-of course we just have an English version of what he actually said in Italian. Certainly not Universalism.

Lets remember, Birkenstocks aside, he is also a Jesuit who really ticked off his brother Jesuits in Argentina by insisting that they be Catholic priests and shut down Liberation Theology tout de suite.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Yeah, I agree. I have said that I believe that the Pope was at most chargeable with a loose use of theological terminology-of course we just have an English version of what he actually said in Italian. Certainly not Universalism.

Lets remember, Birkenstocks aside, he is also a Jesuit who really ticked off his brother Jesuits in Argentina by insisting that they be Catholic priests and shut down Liberation Theology tout de suite.

Which I whole hartedly agree with. Liberation theology is an obmination imo.

 

[DHK]

Yeah, I agree. I have said that I believe that the Pope was at most chargeable with a loose use of theological terminology-of course we just have an English version of what he actually said in Italian. Certainly not Universalism.

Here is an incident that happened in the life of H.A. Ironsidie:

[FONT=&quot]"While witnessing for Christ on the streets of a city in California, evangelist H.A. Ironside and his associates were often interrupted by questions from the crowd. "There are hundreds of religions in this country, and the followers of each sect think they're right. How can poor plain people like us find out what really is the truth?" Ironside and his friends would answer something like this: "Did I hear you say there are hundreds of religions? That's strange; I've heard of only two. True, I find many shades of difference in the opinions of those comprising the two great schools. But after all, there are but two. The one covers all who expect salvation by doing; the other, all who have been saved by something done."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Source Unknown.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]The RCC puts itself in the former group; they expect "salvation by doing," which was what the Pope was emphasizing. It is also what all the religions of the world emphasize.
[/FONT]

 

[The Biblicist]

Here is an incident that happened in the life of H.A. Ironsidie:

[FONT=&quot]"While witnessing for Christ on the streets of a city in California, evangelist H.A. Ironside and his associates were often interrupted by questions from the crowd. "There are hundreds of religions in this country, and the followers of each sect think they're right. How can poor plain people like us find out what really is the truth?" Ironside and his friends would answer something like this: "Did I hear you say there are hundreds of religions? That's strange; I've heard of only two. True, I find many shades of difference in the opinions of those comprising the two great schools. But after all, there are but two. The one covers all who expect salvation by doing; the other, all who have been saved by something done."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Source Unknown.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]The RCC puts itself in the former group; they expect "salvation by doing," which was what the Pope was emphasizing. It is also what all the religions of the world emphasize.
[/FONT]

Also Jesus only has heard of two (Mt. 7:13-14). Paul has only heard of two (Gal. 1:6-9). David has only heard of two (Psa. 1:1-6) and Solomon only has heard of the "way" that seems right unto man and the "WAYS" therein are numerous but all contrary to the singular WAY of the Lord.

 

[Zenas]

I answered a person who asked me respectfully about my education. I still will not reveal the name of the schools (plural), but I did say my doctorate was from a US school, with an international presence. I don't owe you anything, nor do I have to prove anything to you. My privacy is of utmost importance. However, my 40 years of formal and informal, in-depth study is more than sufficient to refute fables, falsehoods, myths, and bogus claims. I am only interested in verifiable historical and scholarly accuracy and facts.

I read what you posted and it wasn't very convincing, especially when your posts have such a complete absence of scholarship. Of course you don't have to prove anything to me but if you want to be credible you should at least put forth something to support the opinions you express.

 

[DHK]

I read what you posted and it wasn't very convincing, especially when your posts have such a complete absence of scholarship. Of course you don't have to prove anything to me but if you want to be credible you should at least put forth something to support the opinions you express.

This matter is not up for debate, as it is an attack on the person. Post to the OP, not attacking the person. If you have a personal matter then pm him privately. Keep on the subject and leave the personal attacks out.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I read what you posted and it wasn't very convincing, especially when your posts have such a complete absence of scholarship. Of course you don't have to prove anything to me but if you want to be credible you should at least put forth something to support the opinions you express.

Zenas he has said several times to me that he has a Phd in History. I have no reason to doubt him though I am curious at his lack of referrence to academia. However, that in itself is no reason to doubt the guy. If he is not, it is rather a silly thing to say as I'm no Phd in History though I consider myself a "history hobbiest". And he doesn't have to prove anything to me in any way. So, its not something I find all that important. Though he has yet to wow me with his historical knowledge.

 

[Zenas]

Zenas he has said several times to me that he has a Phd in History. I have no reason to doubt him though I am curious at his lack of referrence to academia. However, that in itself is no reason to doubt the guy. If he is not, it is rather a silly thing to say as I'm no Phd in History though I consider myself a "history hobbiest". And he doesn't have to prove anything to me in any way. So, its not something I find all that important. Though he has yet to wow me with his historical knowledge.

You must be confusing me with someone else. For the record, I DO NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF DEGREE IN HISTORY, or religion either for that matter.

 

[The Biblicist]

You must be confusing me with someone else. For the record, I DO NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF DEGREE IN HISTORY, or religion either for that matter.

I don't believe he was referring to you. Not to speak for him, but I believe he was referring to the one you were questioning the credentials - Thomas Hewleys

 

[Thomas Helwys]

I read what you posted and it wasn't very convincing, especially when your posts have such a complete absence of scholarship. Of course you don't have to prove anything to me but if you want to be credible you should at least put forth something to support the opinions you express.

You obviously have not read my posts. I have posted scripture, history, and scholarship to support the facts, not my opinions. Facts remain facts; they are not negated by anyone's denial that they are the facts. I know the truth is difficult to admit to when it punctures the balloon of fables, but so be it.

So, you can keep chirping that my posts have an absence of scholarship. That's the only thing you have to try and discredit me, but making a charge does not make it true. Anyone who has read all my posts knows what I am saying is the truth.

One example as a case in point: Search my posts and come back and tell me where Peter was buried. T'wasn't where the pope falsely claimed. :laugh:

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Zenas he has said several times to me that he has a Phd in History. I have no reason to doubt him though I am curious at his lack of referrence to academia. However, that in itself is no reason to doubt the guy. If he is not, it is rather a silly thing to say as I'm no Phd in History though I consider myself a "history hobbiest". And he doesn't have to prove anything to me in any way. So, its not something I find all that important. Though he has yet to wow me with his historical knowledge.

Thanks, TS, but that's not quite what I said. I said I had a doctorate with concentrations in church history and theology. I really don't want to keep bringing that into the conversation, but insults and personal attacks rather force me to.

 

[saturneptune]

You obviously have not read my posts. I have posted scripture, history, and scholarship to support the facts, not my opinions. Facts remain facts; they are not negated by anyone's denial that they are the facts. I know the truth is difficult to admit to when it punctures the balloon of fables, but so be it.

So, you can keep chirping that my posts have an absence of scholarship. That's the only thing you have to try and discredit me, but making a charge does not make it true. Anyone who has read all my posts knows what I am saying is the truth.

One example as a case in point: Search my posts and come back and tell me where Peter was buried. T'wasn't where the pope falsely claimed. :laugh:

Calling the RCC a NT church is like dressing up a pig and putting lipstick on it.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

There are others on this forum with equal years of formal and informal study, experience and who have gone to multiple schools and hold multiple degrees (including myself). However, that does not make false doctrine, false interpretations true.

I never claimed it did.

I wish we could stay on the subject and not get personal. I'm trying very hard to reign myself in, in that regard. Sometimes it's hard not to respond, though.