• 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?

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Thomas, wow! Great post!
Thanks.
 

D28guy

New Member
Doubting Thomas,

"In historical context, these "hot button" topics were during a transition period between when the Church being exclusively made up of Jews to a body where there was neither Jew nor Greek. Paul's point is that keeping these Jewish festivals and dietary laws had no bearing on salvation."
There was much more to his point. The point is to not condemn your brother because he has a different view of some issue, or scriptural interpretation than you do. Let him have his convictions. (Surely you dont think these people were not consulting the scriptures of that time, those on both sides, to support their views, do you?)

"Jews were neither commended nor condemned for merely continuing to observe these practices (unless they were claiming these practices were necessary for salvation)."
And they were told to let the other have his convictions. Its perfectly OK for their to be different interpretations on non-foundational issues. Just as today.

"Clearly, this is a different issue entirely from false teachers that distort the true nature of God, Christ, and/or salvation.""
And we...using the scriptures alone...have no problem identifying cults for what they are...with no Truth Gestapo.

And...to just use one example...neither the Arminians nor the Calvinists are guilty of distorting the true nature of God, Christ, and/or salvation.

"God invested the Apostles and the visible church they founded with the authority to bind and loose and the promise that the Holy Spirit would guide them (collectively) into all truth."
Every promise given to the Apostles is also given to every born again person on earth today...regarding the promise of the Holy Spirit guiding them into all truth.

"2:6
However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.
2:7
But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory,
2:8
which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
2:9
But as it is written: "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him." F5
2:10
But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.
2:11
For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
2:12
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
2:13
These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
2:14
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."


"If you want to disparage the exercise of this authority as a "truth gestapo", I suppose you will have to answer to God for that some day."
The "Truth Gestapo" of the Catholic Church...and every other organisation that is usurping the Holy Spirits ministry in the life of every believer...is not deserving of respect. And the ones who will have to stand naked before God one day will be those who are actively involved in such devilish devices as the Catholic Church of Rome.

I hope with all may heart that they will be standing before God at the "Bema" seat of judgment(rewards or loss of rewards for the saved), but I am afraid the vast majority will be at the Great White Thrown judgment seat.

"The Apostles and early Christians would find your charge absurd given that the Church is the ground and pillar of truth (not "truthS"), and they were to contend earnestly for the faith (not "faithS")."
The church...all born again people on earth, NOT any particular organisation...is indeed the "ground and pillar of truth" because every single believer has the Lord Jesus Christ indwelling them,("I am the way the truth and the life"), through the ministry of the Holy Spirit,(who is called the "Spirit of Truth"), and because we have in our posession the scriptures of God.("They word is Truth")

Referring to the Calvinists and Arminians, you said...

"That's really a non-answer. Besides it doesn't address the fundamental issue of Calvism and Arminianism ascribing mutually contradictory attributes to God as we'll see below...Again a meaningless non-answer. These arguments have not led to a consensus. Each side is firmly entrenched in their respective positions with their mutually contradictory views of God."
Oh really? On foundational issues?

Why then are both sides responsible for bringing millions of lost people into the body of Christ through the years? Must be that they are proclaiming the same gospel.

Why is it that I, and millions of others, have been blessed and enriched greatly by books, radio messages, tv broadcasts, and preachers whom I have heard or known from both camps?

(Even though I lean towards one of the 2...not gonna say which one)

Why is it that both groups have bible colleges and seminaries that produce great men of God who are working together in the work of bringing in the Harvest...in spite of their different views?

"They differ on the most fundamental issue of all--the character of GOD."
Then wich one is getting people saved, and which one is sending people to hell?

BOTH sides are getting people saved because BOTH sides are proclaiming the same gospel of Jesus Christ, and are growing up believers into fruitful believers. They simply see somethings as working themselves out differently. I have been blessed greatly by teaching on both sides.

"One side's "god" is the god who monergistically determines whom he will bestow eternal life upon irrespective of any will, desires, or response of his creatures--his creatures basically have no choice in the matter. The other side's "god" is the one who truly offers salvation to everyone but allows creatures to receive or reject His offer based on the free will He created in them."
And both are free to their convictions. According to God that is.

"So the two ascribe mutually contradictory characteristics to "god" (and to man as well). If position A is true about God, then position B is necessarily false (and vice versa)."
False. Only in some respects. There is wonderful truth to be found in both groups. And there are some who have come to convictions that allow them to blend the 2 together into a composite view.

(Gee...I wonder why you left them out? Maybe because it blows apart your ridiculous charicature?)

"Therefore the alleged commonality of "faith" breaks down at the very point of the object of that faith as there are two rival concepts of "God" being expoused."
There is one God, who is so far above us in every respect that its beyond comprehension. None of us have perfect hearing or perfect sight.

Praise God \o/ that we have the priviledge of having this unfathonable God literally indwell each one of us individually and become our teacher!

"No amount of kum-bah-ya relativism can reconcile these mutually contradictory "gods"."
Then why are those in both camps being used of God to bring multitudes into the body of Christ?

"He promised He'd guide the Church founded by the apostles--which was (and still is) a visible, organized community, mind you--into all truth."
Of course we are visible. We dont become invisible when we become born again. Thats all the church is on earth...all the born again people on earth. There are some in every group lifting up Christ, along with a bunch of lost people.

"However, where the massive Hierachy is, with Cathedrals and Robes and Crowns and gold encrusted Thrones is, there I am in the midst of it!"

No.

"Whereever 2 or 3 are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them"

"Inspired Scripture commands us to keep the Tradition whether delievered orally or written (2 Thess 2:15). The visible historic Church has kept this authentic Tradition since the days of the Apostles who enjoined them to keep it.
"True, Scriptures must be approached with humility and a teachable heart. But part of that humility and teachableness is recognizing the God ordained authority of the Apostolic Church and the Apostolic tradition."
No...that is not included. That is falsehood. Its a lie.

"It's pride that deludes people in thinking that they can arrive at the correct interpretation outside the life of the Holy Spirit in the Apostolic Church which has kept the "rule of faith" delivered by the Apostles and indeed from Christ Himself."
There is nothing wrong with considering the wisdom found in good books, good preaching, joing bible studies, listening to those more learned than the new believer. (Or an old believe)

But we are to never...never...NEVER...NEVER...consider ANY group to be the God anointed truth dispenser for the lowely masses.

We enter the world of the cults when we do that.

I said...

All one has to do is look at the mess that happens when that principle is ignored...

Jehovahs Witnesses.
Jim Jones.
Mormons.
Christian Science.
Catholic Church
David Koresh
(By the way, a "quote box" is to be just that. A quote. You removed my inclusion of the Catholic church in that. I put it back. Please do not alter what I said when you QUOTE me in a quote box.)

And you said...

You keep throwing out that canard.[/quote

Because all of those groups/leaders all employ the same tactic. Subplanting themselves into Gods place as the one who interprets truth for the believer.

"These are groups which are even more extreme in rejecting the Apostolic Tradition and replacing it with their own man-madetraditions."
I dont grade on the curve. All of these groups fail.

"Herein lies the crux of the matter. You and other modern day sola Scripturists seemingly have a high view of Scripture (while manipulating it to arrive at their desired conclusions), yet you have a low view of the historic church founded by Christ and the Apostles"
We do not have a low view of Gods church. Gods church is all of the people born of the Spirit on earth. Not any particular organisation.

"(those who are in the tradition of the "magesterial Reformation" may be the exception). Those of us who recognize the historic apostolic Church have a high view of both Scripture and the Church,"
Not when you say that tradition trumps it...in spite of Christ scathing rebuke to anyone who heeds tradition of Gods scriptures.

"....which wrote the New Testament Scriptures"
Oh great. I was hoping that one wouldnt be regurgitated.

The Catholic Church wrote the bible. In spite of the fact that there was no Catholic Church when the scriptures were recorded in the 1st century.

"...(and proclaimed the Christological interpretation of the Old), defined the limits of the canon, and which has guarded the correct interpretation of it as found in the Apostolic tradition.
My my my my my.

Very sadly,

Mike
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Thomas, wow! Great post!

Eliyahu, following your numbered paragraphs:-

1. Yes

2. No they're not - or if they are they are doing so in disobedience to or in ignorance of Catholic dogma.

3. No

4. No. Mistaken in part, as all ecclesial bodies who possess only part of the Apostolic Tradition are, but heretical, no.
For No 2.
The Problem is that you deny the fact and reality that all the Roman Catholic churches are doing. I have never seen any Roman Catholic church which is condemning the prayer to Mary. There are plenty of Prayer books published by Catholics. You must notice that they are encouraging their people to pray to the Holy Mother of God.

You are denying the real facts. Check with your neighbor Catholics. You don't know about Catholic at all. This is why I think the people who support Catholic are not trustworthy at all.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I was raised a Catholic and have two uncles who are priests in that Church, so I am aware of what the Catholic Church teaches on this subject.

The Catholic Church does not teach that Catholics should offer prayers to Mary.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The Catholic Church does not teach that Catholics should offer prayers to Mary.
Pope John Paul II on March 31, 1985 as part of the Angelus prayer: "May Mary our Protectress, the Co-Redemptrix, to whom we offer our prayer with great outpouring, make our desire generously correspond to the desire of the Redeemer."
Found online in the public domain at : http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/abtmary.htm
Eliyahu, you are correct in the fact that Mary is treated as a goddess by the RCC laity under the direction of the priesthood and the various orders of nuns.

As a child and as part of my grade-school education, I was taught under the auspices of the RCC.

I was taught to pray directly to Mary as if she had the deity attributes of all-hearing, omni-presence, ever/always-present. The double-speak of the Catholic theologians concerning latria vs. hyper-dulia was never mentioned.

They present a crafted, smooth and compelling apologetic to the world but teach by practice something else to the laity.

The fifth marian dogma (Mary as coremptrix, mediatrix and advocate) has been accepted and taught to the laity as a matter of practice for decades.

http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/abtmary.htm

Here is an example of a prayer to her which clearly proves the point of her mediatorship and advocacy (per the RCC).

http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/prayer/hailholy.htm

HankD

[ February 03, 2006, 12:10 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]
 

Bro. James

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Matthew Black said,"The Catholic Church does not teach that Catholics should offer prayers to Mary".

I, too was brainwashed by the holy see. After about 45 years of being away from the catechism and prayers, I still remember the prayers.

I am having difficulty harmonizing Matthew's statement with the prayer called "Hail Mary", which is repeated ad infinitum in sets of 5, as I recall, on that set of prayer beads called the rosary.

I still remember every word: Hail, Mary,full of grace; The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb: Jesus. Holy, Mary, Mother of God, PRAY for us sinners now, and at the hour of our deaths. Amen.

Praying the rosary is praying mostly to Mary. As I recall we would repeat the Hail Mary as payment for having committed sins which we had just confessed to the priest.

That Mary gets adoration should be obvious--even to the cursory observer.

Selah,

Bro. James
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
One can only pray to God. That is what the Catholic Church teaches too. One may petition her under Catholic doctrine, but only in the same way that I might petition you to pray for me if eg: I was unwell.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
His Holiness Pope Pius XII
Encyclical on Proclaiming the Queenship of Mary
Promulgated October 11, 1954
To the Venerable Brethren, the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops and other Local Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Holy See.

Venerable Brethren, Health and Apostolic Blessing.

From the earliest ages of the Catholic Church a Christian people, whether in time of triumph or more especially in time of crisis, has addressed prayers of petition and hymns of praise and veneration to the Queen of Heaven.

The New Advent, Catholic Encyclopedia online found in the Public domain at http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pi12ac.htm
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
What really amazes me is the stronghold the RCC has on their members. This thread is the perfect example. You have direct quotes and sources from their own sites, pope and doctrine you STILL get this...
The Catholic Church does not teach that Catholics should offer prayers to Mary.
One can only pray to God. That is what the Catholic Church teaches too.
Man, wake up people! The church and it's "tradition" do not outweigh God's Word!
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
Hmm...where to begin.
Originally posted by D28guy:
There was much more to his point. The point is to not condemn your brother because he has a different view of some issue, or scriptural interpretation than you do. Let him have his convictions.
Convictions about food and Jewish feast days, again, are far cry from differing scriptural interpretations leading to false teachings about God, Christ, and salvation. Listen to the Apostle Peter:
"...Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of Scriptures." (2 Peter 3:15, 16)

Peter suggests that the Scriptures are capable of being twisted to the DESTRUCTION of individuals, but you suggest we should let folks just have there own contradictory convictions about Scriptural interpretations and it's all somehow hunky-dory. Sad. :(

Paul told Timothy: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine..." (2 Tim 4:3). Notice Paul didn't add: "But that's okay, Timothy, since everybody has their own differing convictions and they just need to be convinced in their own minds. After all, one man's sound doctrine is another one's unsound doctrine. Who am I to judge?" :D

(Also notice that Paul didn't differentiate between "foundational" and "non-foundational" doctrines...)


Its perfectly OK for their to be different interpretations on non-foundational issues. Just as today.
And which are the "non-foundational" issues? Different groups come up with different answers. Where in the Bible does it specifically make this distinction? One group's "foundational" issue is another group's "non-foundational" issue. How does one determine which is the case without begging the question?

And we...using the scriptures alone...have no problem identifying cults for what they are...with no Truth Gestapo.
Problem is, the lists of which groups are actually a "cult" vary. You obviously think the RCC is a cult. Other sola Scripturists would disagree. Many consider Oneness Pentecostals a cult; others (including the Oneness Pentecostals themselves--who are "sola Scripturists") do not. Some consider Seventh Day adventists a cult; others (including the SDAs themselves--who are "sola Scripturists") don't. Mormons are considered by many to be a cult, but they consider themselves to just be "Christian".

Every promise given to the Apostles is also given to every born again person on earth today...regarding the promise of the Holy Spirit guiding them into all truth.
Which begs the question about how exactly one is "born again"? Some "sola Scripturists" believe Baptism is necessary for regeneration ("born of water and the spirit"); others do not. They both can't be right...who decides? Is it Mike (with his private interpretation) who is the final arbiter on which position is correct?


But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.
This "us" is collective; it's the Church. The Holy Spirit does not reveal contradictory "truths" to individual believers. If you believe that you might as well join the Ba'hai faith.

But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."[/i]
Yet many of these who claim spiritual discernment disagree on what exactly are the "things of God".

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"The Apostles and early Christians would find your charge absurd given that the Church is the ground and pillar of truth (not "truthS"), and they were to contend earnestly for the faith (not "faithS")."
The church...all born again people on earth, NOT any particular organisation...</font>[/QUOTE]Yet the Church is the visible, organized bodyfounded on the Apostles with Christ being the Chief cornerstone. There's one Truth and one Faith, not conflicting "truths" and conflicting "faiths".

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"That's really a non-answer. Besides it doesn't address the fundamental issue of Calvism and Arminianism ascribing mutually contradictory attributes to God as we'll see below...Again a meaningless non-answer. These arguments have not led to a consensus. Each side is firmly entrenched in their respective positions with their mutually contradictory views of God."
Oh really? On foundational issues?</font>[/QUOTE]Yes, really--on the foundational issue of the character of GOD. One's god geniunely loves everyone and genuinely wants to save everyone and creates people with the ability to respond to his grace either in the negative or the affirmative. The other's "god" makes it impossible for fallen creatures to ever repent unless he monergistically causes them (a select few) to do so. The two cannot be both true about the same god.

Why then are both sides responsible for bringing millions of lost people into the body of Christ through the years? Must be that they are proclaiming the same gospel.
You're begging the question. True they're bring folks into schismatic fellowships with their gospels (since it's debatible whether they are preaching the same "good news"). Whether they are bringing people into the historic Church--the Body of Christ is what is being debated.

Why is it that I, and millions of others, have been blessed and enriched greatly by books, radio messages, tv broadcasts, and preachers whom I have heard or known from both camps?
Muslims and Mormons and other cultists claim to be blessed and enlightened by their respective teachers...so what's your point? Subjective "blessings" are no proof in and of themselves of objective TRUTH.

Why is it that both groups have bible colleges and seminaries that produce great men of God who are working together in the work of bringing in the Harvest...in spite of their different views?
If there is indeed a "Harvest" it's by the mercy of God and inspite of kum-bah-ya relativism and heretical views about Him preached by one camp or the other. There's still no excuse for contradictory teachings about God, Christ, and/or salvation.


BOTH sides are getting people saved because BOTH sides are proclaiming the same gospel of Jesus Christ, and are growing up believers into fruitful believers. They simply see somethings as working themselves out differently. I have been blessed greatly by teaching on both sides.
(Gnostics and other heretics both believed they were getting people "saved", as they saw it, as well.) Again, if folks are getting "saved" in schismatic fellowships (and I'll be happy to concede that there's a good chance of that being the case :cool: ), it's by the mercy of God and that there is some gospel truth remaining in those fellowhips. It's still no excuse for condoning relativism and not preaching the fullness of the the Christian faith according to the entire Scriptures (not just one sects favorite proof texts) interpreted in light of Apostolic Tradition handed down in the Church.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"One side's "god" is the god who monergistically determines whom he will bestow eternal life upon irrespective of any will, desires, or response of his creatures--his creatures basically have no choice in the matter. The other side's "god" is the one who truly offers salvation to everyone but allows creatures to receive or reject His offer based on the free will He created in them."
And both are free to their convictions. According to God that is. </font>[/QUOTE]Garbage. I guess anyone is free to have any conviction about "god" that they want, including Unitarians, Mormons, Hindus, and Buddhists, but that doesn't change the fact that mutually contradictory views about God cannot both(or all) be true. If the Arminian belief about God's omnibenevolence in genuinely offering salvation to everyone is correct, then the Calvinist belief about "god" is false.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"So the two ascribe mutually contradictory characteristics to "god" (and to man as well). If position A is true about God, then position B is necessarily false (and vice versa)."
False. Only in some respects. There is wonderful truth to be found in both groups. And there are some who have come to convictions that allow them to blend the 2 together into a composite view.

(Gee...I wonder why you left them out? Maybe because it blows apart your ridiculous charicature?) </font>[/QUOTE]Because the "composite view", while haphazardly mixing and matching the "points" of Calvinism or Arminianism, still either subsribes to one view point of God's omnibenevolence (mentioned above) or the other. Neither can be right simultaneously. My point still stands, your accusations of "ridiculous charicature" notwithstanding.
saint.gif



</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"Therefore the alleged commonality of "faith" breaks down at the very point of the object of that faith as there are two rival concepts of "God" being expoused."
There is one God, who is so far above us in every respect that its beyond comprehension. None of us have perfect hearing or perfect sight.</font>[/QUOTE]This one God, however, wants to be worshipped in Spirit and in TRUTH. Two mutually contradictory viewpoints about God cannot both be TRUE.

Praise God \o/ that we have the priviledge of having this unfathonable God literally indwell each one of us individually and become our teacher!
Praise God \o/ we have the privilege and responsibility hold the traditions whether delivered orally or written and that we have the Holy Spirit collectly guiding us in the Church to the same TRUTH.

"Whereever 2 or 3 are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them"
And Mormons have God in their midst too right? Afterall, they are the "Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints". There are many who proclaim that they are gathering in the name of Jesus Christ, yet who have false concepts about Him, God, and salvation. We shouldn't delude ourselves that such groups actually have Christ in their midst if they aren't worshipping Him in Spirit and in TRUTH.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"Inspired Scripture commands us to keep the Tradition whether delievered orally or written (2 Thess 2:15). The visible historic Church has kept this authentic Tradition since the days of the Apostles who enjoined them to keep it.
"True, Scriptures must be approached with humility and a teachable heart. But part of that humility and teachableness is recognizing the God ordained authority of the Apostolic Church and the Apostolic tradition."
No...that is not included. That is falsehood. Its a lie. </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry...but it is indeed true. Scriptures are quite clear that Christ has invested the visible body He established beginning with the Apostles authority to bind and loose. True Christians are enjoined to submit to this God ordained authority. Likewise, Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit commanded believers to keep the traditions delivered to them whether orally or written (2 Thess 2:15)


But we are to never...never...NEVER...NEVER...consider ANY group to be the God anointed truth dispenser for the lowely masses.
But according to the Scriptures, the Church (which was and still is visible and organized) founded on the Apostles is the "truth dispenser" as she is the repository of Truth, indeed, the "pillar and ground of truth" (1 Timothy 3:15).

We enter the world of the cults when we do that.
Actually, we're more susceptible to cults when we ignore the "rule of faith" bequeathed from the apostles in the Church.


</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />All one has to do is look at the mess that happens when that principle is ignored...

Jehovahs Witnesses.
Jim Jones.
Mormons.
Christian Science.
Catholic Church
David Koresh
(By the way, a "quote box" is to be just that. A quote. You removed my inclusion of the Catholic church in that. I put it back. Please do not alter what I said when you QUOTE me in a quote box.)</font>[/QUOTE]I removed the Catholic Church because it's not historically accurate to include them along with the other groups mentioned. Despite my disagreements with Rome on some things, she still has apostolic roots and has maintained most of the Apostolic Tradition without subtraction. But point taken--in the future I'll leave them in the quote box...I'll just put an (*) by them.



</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />You keep throwing out that canard.
Because all of those groups/leaders all employ the same tactic. Subplanting themselves into Gods place as the one who interprets truth for the believer. </font>[/QUOTE]The difference is with the Apostolic Church, Christ has promised that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth. All those other groups you keep lumping in with the Catholics are not apostolic churches.



</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"These are groups which are even more extreme in rejecting the Apostolic Tradition and replacing it with their own man-madetraditions."
I dont grade on the curve. All of these groups fail.</font>[/QUOTE]You may not "grade on a curve", but obviously groups vary in their degree of error depending on how far they depart from the fullness of the Apostolic faith--whether it's Baptists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Methodists, Campbellites, SDAs, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarians, Mormons, JWS, etc.....

"We do not have a low view of Gods church. Gods church is all of the people born of the Spirit on earth. Not any particular organisation."
Wrong--as pointed out repeatedly, the Church, established by the Apostles in the Power of the Spirit under the Authority of Christ, is both visible and organized. The fact that there exists some dead branches inside of her (which unfortunately will be ultimately cast out and burned) doesn't change this fact.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"(those who are in the tradition of the "magesterial Reformation" may be the exception). Those of us who recognize the historic apostolic Church have a high view of both Scripture and the Church,"
Not when you say that tradition trumps it...in spite of Christ scathing rebuke to anyone who heeds tradition of Gods scriptures. </font>[/QUOTE]First, Apostolic Tradition doesn't "trump" Scriptures as Scriptures are certainly the central and normative core of Apostolic Tradition. Scripture and Apostolic Tradition are inseparable...or are meant to be at least. When folks do attempt to wrest Scripture from its apostolic ecclessial context, they are susceptible to creating or succumbing to all sorts of false teachings. They are the ones in danger of wresting and twisting Scripture to their own destruction as Peter warned.

Second, Christ condemned the tradition of the Pharisees since it did not derive from God but from men only. Apostolic Tradition--in the oral and written teachings of the Apostles--derive ultimately from Christ Himself through the Apostles and maintained in the Church.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"....which wrote the New Testament Scriptures"
Oh great. I was hoping that one wouldnt be regurgitated.</font>[/QUOTE]"Regurgitated" or not, it's true. The Apostles were part (indeed, the foundation) of the Church, were they not?

The Catholic Church wrote the bible. In spite of the fact that there was no Catholic Church when the scriptures were recorded in the 1st century.
Sure there was. The catholic (meaning "according to the whole") Church was there from the beginning. It was established by the Apostles.
thumbs.gif


</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"...(and proclaimed the Christological interpretation of the Old), defined the limits of the canon, and which has guarded the correct interpretation of it as found in the Apostolic tradition.
My my my my my.</font>[/QUOTE]You may pooh-pooh the facts but it doesn't change the veracity of them.


[ February 03, 2006, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: Doubting Thomas ]
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
Originally posted by Matt Black:
The Catholic Church does not teach that Catholics should offer prayers to Mary . [/QB]
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

It seems that you don't know about RC, maybe even your brethren either.

Look at this Rosario Prayer:


The Closing Prayer


We’ve covered the opening prayers of the rosary. In fact, we’ve covered all the prayers of the rosary except the very last one, which is usually the Hail Queen (Salve Regina), sometimes called the Hail Holy Queen. It’s the most commonly recited prayer in praise of Mary , after the Hail Mary itself, and was composed at the end of the eleventh century. It generally reads like this (there are several variants):

" Hail holy Queen, Mother of mercy, our life, our sweetness, and our hope ! To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve. To thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this vale of tears . Turn, then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, and after this our exile show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus. O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary."

So those are the prayers of the rosary. Between the introductory prayers and the concluding prayer is the meat of the rosary: the decades. Each decade—there are fifteen in a full rosary (which takes about forty-five minutes to say)—is composed of ten Hail Marys. Each decade is bracketed between an Our Father and a Glory Be, so each decade actually has twelve prayers.


Can RC not pray directly to Jesus or to God ?
 

Johnv

New Member
Originally posted by Eliyahu:
Can RC not pray directly to Jesus or to God ?
Strictly speaking, we're told to pray to God the Father (in Jesus' name). Yet many Christians pray to Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit without giving it a second thought. We'll tell a Catholic they shouldn't ask St Elsewhere to pray for them, and then we turn around and pray in a manner not instituted in scripture.

I'm not taking sides here on the issue, just making an objective observation.
 

mozier

New Member
As a former Roman Catholic myself, who has seriously struggled in his breakaway from the Roman Catholic Institution, I shouldn't even bother with this argument, since it does rile up some old bitterness and feelings. In fact, I think that D28Guy is feeling the same things that I once felt before I let them go. Perhaps he left Roman Catholicism just recently. I hope he finds peace with this bitterness.

Listen, everyone --- the argument for or against the Roman Catholic Institution is a futile one. It will go back and forth with no one giving an inch, let alone a mile. For every scriptural argument against the Institution, there is one for it. And vice versa. So please, don't go there.

Sharing the faith isn't about slinging KJV verses or passing out Chick Tracts. All one needs to do is preach the simplicity of the gospel. Nothing more, nothing less. This alone will speak volumes to the Roman Catholic. This is what attracted me to Christianity in the first place.

As well, and this is VERY important, you have to live the example of a Christian in the presence of a Roman Catholic. You will NEVER lead one to Christ if you are full of negativity or bitterness to them or to their institution. If you want to share your faith, then live with the true joy that comes from it. Otherwise, you are going to turn everyone off, for who wants to be an angry, bitter Christian?
 

D28guy

New Member
Matt said...

"I was raised a Catholic and have two uncles who are priests in that Church, so I am aware of what the Catholic Church teaches on this subject.

The Catholic Church does not teach that Catholics should offer prayers to Mary."
That literally stuns the mind. Incredible.

Hank D said...

Eliyahu, you are correct in the fact that Mary is treated as a goddess by the RCC laity under the direction of the priesthood and the various orders of nuns.
Absolutly true.


"As a child and as part of my grade-school education, I was taught under the auspices of the RCC.

I was taught to pray directly to Mary as if she had the deity attributes of all-hearing, omni-presence, ever/always-present."
I was too.

"The double-speak of the Catholic theologians concerning latria vs. hyper-dulia was never mentioned."
Whenever I hear that "dulia vs "hyper-dulia" nonsense I find myself thinking about how incredible it is that there is even one person on this planet that is capable of buying such absurdity.

Sadly amazed,

Mike
 

D28guy

New Member
Matt said...

"One can only pray to God. That is what the Catholic Church teaches too. One may petition her under Catholic doctrine, but only in the same way that I might petition you to pray for me if eg: I was unwell."
The mind just reels.....

Mike
 

D28guy

New Member
mozier,

"As a former Roman Catholic myself, who has seriously struggled in his breakaway from the Roman Catholic Institution, I shouldn't even bother with this argument, since it does rile up some old bitterness and feelings. In fact, I think that D28Guy is feeling the same things that I once felt before I let them go. Perhaps he left Roman Catholicism just recently."
Greetings to you.

No...Jesus Christ rescued me from the Catholic Church over 20 years ago.

"I hope he finds peace with this bitterness."
I have no bitterness towards the Catholic Church now. I simply recognise it now for what it is. A supposed christian denomination that is filled with blasphemy, idolatry, pagansin, goddess worship(Mary), and the proclaimation of the very false gospel that God places his curse upon.

I said I have none now, because at 1st I was angry that they never once presented the gospel of Jesus Christ to me for all those years I was in its clutches.

But I got over that a loooong time ago.

"Sharing the faith isn't about slinging KJV verses..."
What you call "slinging KJV verses" God calls using His scriptures to expose the darkness, as He has directed us to do. Almighty God blesses His "living" and "active", and "sharper than a two edged sword" scriptures as it is shared with those who need to hear it.

Every Catholic who has read the verses posted by myself and others that condemn the teachings of the Catholic Church have more than likely discerned the truth of those scriptures posted as they read them. Gods scriptures have His anointing on them.

What they do with the truth presented, and when they might do it, is their buisiness.


"or passing out Chick Tracts."
I've never passed one out.

God bless you,

Mike
 

Johnv

New Member
We need to stop repeating one things. Catholics do not worship anyone other than God. We can debate the incorrectness of praying to others besides God, and those debates are worthy. But we cannot, with any accuracy, say that Catholics worship any other God besides the Almighty God.
 

D28guy

New Member
JohnV,

"We need to stop repeating one things. Catholics do not worship anyone other than God. We can debate the incorrectness of praying to others besides God, and those debates are worthy. But we cannot, with any accuracy, say that Catholics worship any other God besides the Almighty God."
(Wish I didnt have to go to work now.)

Its goddess worship. I'll prove it to you later.

God bless,

Mike
 

Johnv

New Member
It may be many things, but it's not goddess worship. Catholics don't believe Mary to be a deity, nor do they believe there is any deity but the Almighty God.
 

mozier

New Member
Johnv,

You are correct. Catholics do not worship Mary as a goddess, though the devotion to her can seem exaggerated to the non-Catholic to the point where it does appear to be worship.

I can only hope that D28Guy (whom I am glad to see that he left the church 20 years, yet still seems bitter, IMO) doesn't go the Hislop Babylon route to prove his point.

It is too easy to accuse Roman Catholics of things they do not do, let alone the things they do!
 
Top