If we were to judge a religion or doctrine solely on the actions of people who claim to adhere to said religion/doctrine then all would stand condemned. The anabaptist have their share of shed blood from the anabaptist revolts in Europe. The Lutherans have RCC and anabaptist blood on their hands. The RCC has anabaptist and Lutheran blood. No one denomination stands innocent. As long as man is involved in any church attrocities will be perpetrated in the name of that church. So why don't we drop the ad hominin attacks based on violence done in the past and actually spend time on things of substance.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Refuting Catholics...Scripture or Chick tracts?
- Thread starter D28guy
- Start date
Yes, any judgment or discernment should be focussed on the individual. But in reality if any one defends a group of murderers in the past, we can only condemn such person as the same group of the sects in the past.
Anabaptists were the victims of Lutheran too. Moreover not all the Anabaptists were fine and good. Satan worked very fast in penetrating Anabaptists as we can see in the case of Munster.
Catholics tried their best to excuse about Inquisition but found no way, then Pope declared that they regret about the past. But the people on this BB are not repenting about that, which means the Repentance by Pope was just a Lip Service.
Anabaptists were the victims of Lutheran too. Moreover not all the Anabaptists were fine and good. Satan worked very fast in penetrating Anabaptists as we can see in the case of Munster.
Catholics tried their best to excuse about Inquisition but found no way, then Pope declared that they regret about the past. But the people on this BB are not repenting about that, which means the Repentance by Pope was just a Lip Service.
With the possible exception of Briony and jay29, I do not think there are any members of the RCC on this board, so why would you expect any of us to repent of the actions of a group none of us belong to?
I don't think any of us disagrees the inquisition was a horrible travesty. Most of us just doubt the integrity of your sources and your attempts to discredit all of RCC doctrine using these sources and the ad hominims about the inquisition.
Of course, everytime I see the word inquisition I just can't help but think of Mel Brooks.
I don't think any of us disagrees the inquisition was a horrible travesty. Most of us just doubt the integrity of your sources and your attempts to discredit all of RCC doctrine using these sources and the ad hominims about the inquisition.
Of course, everytime I see the word inquisition I just can't help but think of Mel Brooks.
It's not that simple Chemnitz and it goes beyond an ad hominem against individuals. This is against the wholesale slaughter of people because their faith was not according to the dictates of Rome.
IMO, what you have stated is not the best attitude. It seems to me that to be silent is not in keeping with our responsibility to preach, teach, proclaim the pure gospel of grace without ANY human sacerdotal mediation (priest, pope or any other) but by faith in the one and only high priest the Lord Jesus Christ as revealed in the Word of God.
The pure Gospel of grace OFFENDS in and of itself and those who oppose it move in quickly and attempt to snatch the seed Word out of the hearts of the listeners and silence the preachers.
Historically myriads have been slain by the Church of Rome for those disseminating the Word and those who once freed refuse to return to bondage.
For the most part the "heretics" slain by Rome simply wanted to be left alone but were agressively persecuted and slaughtered by the "religious" both of the priesthood and the laity.
Historically this separation from and rebuke of Rome's error is what the Reformation is/was all about and it is (or should be) ongoing.
This is what the Baptists Distinctives are all about.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
HankD
Monty Python as well, surely?
Eliyahu
"groups like Aramaic primacists are neutral but they say that the Priests in the East were called as Canna, and they were worshipping their son gods and Baal and offered the human body and blood too. After the sacrifice, they ate the rest of the human body and drank the blood and they were called Canna-Baal, which eventually became Cannibal.
Even in Egypt the priests lifted up the cookies to their gods, like Osiris, Horus, Isis, in the same way as Holy Roman Catholic priests lift up the cookies and offer them to their goddess, Holy Mother of gods ! Only the labels are changed but the substance of the goddess worship and solar god worship, human body celebration have not changed ! "
"
All of this was made up by one Alexander Hislop in the 19th century for his book The Two Babylons.
"groups like Aramaic primacists are neutral but they say that the Priests in the East were called as Canna, and they were worshipping their son gods and Baal and offered the human body and blood too. After the sacrifice, they ate the rest of the human body and drank the blood and they were called Canna-Baal, which eventually became Cannibal.
Even in Egypt the priests lifted up the cookies to their gods, like Osiris, Horus, Isis, in the same way as Holy Roman Catholic priests lift up the cookies and offer them to their goddess, Holy Mother of gods ! Only the labels are changed but the substance of the goddess worship and solar god worship, human body celebration have not changed ! "
"
All of this was made up by one Alexander Hislop in the 19th century for his book The Two Babylons.
Sticking with Monty Python,
(edited for personal attack)
[ January 31, 2006, 08:52 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]
I believe that it really is that simple. The teachings of any group should be judged by how accurately they teach the truth of Scripture, not by the actions of the people who supposedly adhere to the teachings.
Sometimes corrupt doctrines lead to oppression such as the Reformed and Roman insistance on church controlled governments.
Matt Black,
Here it is from my post of 7:39pm, January 29, 2006, on this page...
When Almighty God says...this.
And sinful men contradict and say...that.
Then men are wrong and God is correct.</font>[/QUOTE]I guess you need an example....
God...
"For it is by grace that you are saved, through faith. And that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast."
"But now the rightiousness of God apart from the Law is revealed, being witnesed by the Law and the Prophets. Even the rightiousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe."
Catholic Church...
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.
"CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema."
This is not a question of interpretation. This is no more complex than just reading the words and sentences and understanding what is being said. (and there are hundreds of scriptures that are just as clear to go along with these few from God, and hundreds of falsehoods just as clear to go along with these from the CC)
God says one thing, and the Catholic Church says something else.
They cant both be right...because they completly contradict each other.
We have a choice to make. One is true. And one comes from hell.
I choose GOD as being the one who is telling us the truth.
A 2nd point to make is that when we on the side of truth post scriptures, and Catholics want to contest it, we simply continune posting scriptures. We never get off of that. Its just scriptures followed by more scriptures followed by more scriptures followed by more scriptures. On and on and on.
Catholics on the other hand might post a scripture or 2, badly mangled and twisted, but when we show all the scriptures that contradict, and we point out how they clearly butchered the ones they did post, they will quickly go off on "Well, our Sacred Tradition says that...", or "Well, the Church teaches that..." Or "The Holy Father has declared that...". On and on and on.
And its not just people on boards like this.
Its priests. Over and over again, on EWTN, I have seen ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS and CC santioned APOLOGISTS sink to that level...over and over and over again, on EWTN and on other Catholic programs.
"Well, our Sacred Tradition says that...", or "Well, the Church teaches that..." Or "The Holy Father has declared that...". On and on and on.
There is such a striking difference, in how born again evangelicals argue their points and how the Catholics argue theres so differently.
And its so clear the blasphemy and idolatry on the Catholic side.
Terribly sad. Horribly sad.
God bless,
Mike
You must have missed my post where I specifically answered your question.
Here it is from my post of 7:39pm, January 29, 2006, on this page...
Gods testimony found in Gods scriptures.
When Almighty God says...this.
And sinful men contradict and say...that.
Then men are wrong and God is correct.</font>[/QUOTE]I guess you need an example....
God...
"For it is by grace that you are saved, through faith. And that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone should boast."
"But now the rightiousness of God apart from the Law is revealed, being witnesed by the Law and the Prophets. Even the rightiousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe."
Catholic Church...
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.
"CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema."
This is not a question of interpretation. This is no more complex than just reading the words and sentences and understanding what is being said. (and there are hundreds of scriptures that are just as clear to go along with these few from God, and hundreds of falsehoods just as clear to go along with these from the CC)
God says one thing, and the Catholic Church says something else.
They cant both be right...because they completly contradict each other.
We have a choice to make. One is true. And one comes from hell.
I choose GOD as being the one who is telling us the truth.
A 2nd point to make is that when we on the side of truth post scriptures, and Catholics want to contest it, we simply continune posting scriptures. We never get off of that. Its just scriptures followed by more scriptures followed by more scriptures followed by more scriptures. On and on and on.
Catholics on the other hand might post a scripture or 2, badly mangled and twisted, but when we show all the scriptures that contradict, and we point out how they clearly butchered the ones they did post, they will quickly go off on "Well, our Sacred Tradition says that...", or "Well, the Church teaches that..." Or "The Holy Father has declared that...". On and on and on.
And its not just people on boards like this.
Its priests. Over and over again, on EWTN, I have seen ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS and CC santioned APOLOGISTS sink to that level...over and over and over again, on EWTN and on other Catholic programs.
"Well, our Sacred Tradition says that...", or "Well, the Church teaches that..." Or "The Holy Father has declared that...". On and on and on.
There is such a striking difference, in how born again evangelicals argue their points and how the Catholics argue theres so differently.
And its so clear the blasphemy and idolatry on the Catholic side.
Terribly sad. Horribly sad.
God bless,
Mike
And how do I know that you are not the one 'mangling the Scriptures' and the Catholics are?
I guess you need an example too:-
God says:
James 2:24: "You see that a man is justified through what he does and not alone through faith"
You however say something else.
God says one thing and Mike says something else. (Doubtless Mike will now say that the above Scripture is not really God and its interpretation has been 'mangled' by me and the Catholics.)
They can't both be right because they completely contradict each other.
I choose God as being the one who is telling us the truth.
I guess you need an example too:-
God says:
James 2:24: "You see that a man is justified through what he does and not alone through faith"
You however say something else.
God says one thing and Mike says something else. (Doubtless Mike will now say that the above Scripture is not really God and its interpretation has been 'mangled' by me and the Catholics.)
They can't both be right because they completely contradict each other.
I choose God as being the one who is telling us the truth.
Matt Black,
You posted this...
Then...when doing that, you will be comparing scripture with scripture, so as to allow the scriptures to interpret themselves, rather than heeding Rome, and you will see that the whole of scripture makes it impossible for the Catholic Churchs view of that passage to be false.
Then you will see that even that book...the book of James...makes clear that Rome is butchering the scriptures in order to attmept to justify the false gospel they are promoting.
I think we are making some progress here!
Grace and peace,
Mike
You posted this...
And then said...
Great! I hope you do.
Then...when doing that, you will be comparing scripture with scripture, so as to allow the scriptures to interpret themselves, rather than heeding Rome, and you will see that the whole of scripture makes it impossible for the Catholic Churchs view of that passage to be false.
Then you will see that even that book...the book of James...makes clear that Rome is butchering the scriptures in order to attmept to justify the false gospel they are promoting.
I think we are making some progress here!
Grace and peace,
Mike
But where Scripture contradicts itself - on the face value reading of it - as it does between the passages you have quoted and the passage I quoted, then it can be scarcely said to 'interpret itself'.
Therefore an interpreting authority is absolutely essential.
Now we really are getting somewhere
Therefore an interpreting authority is absolutely essential.
Now we really are getting somewhere
Murderers like Inquisitors are not qualified to interpret the Bible.Originally posted by Matt Black:
Therefore an interpreting authority is absolutely essential .
Now we really are getting somewhere[/QB]
The True Believers who are born again in the Lord can interpret the Bible as we read 1 John 2:27, 2 Pet 1:20-21, 2 Tim 2:15.
Therefore anyone who want to present the interpretation of the Bible must present his or her own testimony on the salvation. John Wesley was born again after many years of his service as Anglican priest,on May 24, 1738, Pascal was converted on No 23, 1654, Harry Ironside confessed it, Martin Luther was born againin 1515, 2 years before his work in 1517. Paul had it on the road to Damascus, Chiniquy had it, I had it, hundreds of people whom I know confessed their testimonies.
If anyone continue to murder, he or she would have not had the salvation at all. Any Inquisitors would have not had the salvation at all as we read John 16: 1-3
If there are some conflicting interpretation, it is much easier to resolve the differences as long as the interpreters are born again believers. Sometimes even the different interpretations help each each other.
Er...no. Just take a look around on these boards alone and you will see the plethora of conflicting interpretations from the posters here; most of these I am confident are born-again believers like you and I.
So your theory falls to the ground.
Next!
So your theory falls to the ground.
Next!
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Matt Black: // ... the posters here; most of these I am confident
are born-again believers like you and I.//
Eliyahu: // ... many of the people including you on this BB are
not born again in the Lord.//
Matt Black takes the moral highground and wins this point
of the debate.
The point seems to be:
Saved folks can have variant opinions of Scriptural Truth.
I know for sure, Scripture and Chick Tracts have WIDE VARIANTS
from each other
are born-again believers like you and I.//
Eliyahu: // ... many of the people including you on this BB are
not born again in the Lord.//
Matt Black takes the moral highground and wins this point
of the debate.
The point seems to be:
Saved folks can have variant opinions of Scriptural Truth.
I know for sure, Scripture and Chick Tracts have WIDE VARIANTS
from each other