Never-Ending List Of Requirements For Salvation

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1288023537' post='2182341']
I dont think I have ever seen that many argumentum ad hominems and ad nauseams from a fundamentalist before, which is naturally the downfall of fundamentalism based on its terrible literalistic interpretive principles. The real irony lies in that they cannot see that they are guilty of the very thing they accuse Catholics of over and over again. At the same time this is great practice for some of our budding apologists.
[/quote]

In other words, you have no response to the overwhelming evidence against Catholicism. Thank you for the implicit compliment that I have rattled your cage and you have no key to get out.

[dairygirl4u2c]

this whole argument seems like a joke. citing tradition, v. no tradition etc. there's compelling arguments on both sides.

i guess it's how people learn, by arguing.
perhaps me having heard it all before is a little spent on it.
everyone has to start somewhere.

this new fundamentalist fellow is like most who come and go. they get shot down, have ego problems rather htan respect for truth, ignore things when it's inconvenient for em, and are blind.

Edited October 25, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' timestamp='1288024907' post='2182349']
where's your straight answer?

i know for a fact that you can't give it, without running into either being overly dogmatic, or without being too vague.
i'd be more than happy for you to prove me wrong.

that's the nature of what God requires of people's beliefs, it's a personal relationship somewhere in between dogmatic and vague.
[/quote]

It was pointed out to me that you are not Catholic, nor do you represent the Roman Church as your title indicates. Who then, knows what you are? So in actuality, isn't it really [b][u]you[/u][/b] who are being [i]"too vague"?[/i]
[i]
[/i]
As for being dogmatic, Jesus was dogmatic from the get-go, and He says point blank, [i]"if you do not believe that I am He, you [b][u]will[/u][/b][u] [/u] die in your sins" [/i](Jn 8:24).

[Socrates]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288028016' post='2182370']
In other words, you have no response to the overwhelming evidence against Catholicism. Thank you for the implicit compliment that I have rattled your cage and you have no key to get out.
[/quote]
What overwhelming evidence? Where is it? Don't see any in this thread.

Incidentally, Brother Adam used to be a staunch Baptist who was as much against the Catholic Church as you are, but now sees the that Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ. It's not like he's never heard an anti-Catholic argument before.
My own parents were once anti-Catholic "Bible Christians" like yourself, but their study of history showed them that the Catholic Church is the same Church found in the Bible.

You're not bringing anything new to the table, but stick around and you might learn something.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288028016' post='2182370']
In other words, you have no response to the overwhelming evidence against Catholicism. Thank you for the implicit compliment that I have rattled your cage and you have no key to get out.
[/quote]
Was he supposed to find the overwhelming evidence, paste in into your arguments and then pretend you presented overwhelming arguments against Catholicism, or do you consider personal attacks, text formatting and proof-texting to be an overwhelming argument of some kind?

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='Rebecca2009' timestamp='1288015894' post='2182309']

The Bible does not support sola scriptura
[/quote]

And you prefer to throw the Bible out the window (in direct contradiction to the highest regard Jesus had for Scripture...and who said that we would be judged by His words that are only found therein) and rest your soul on all those never-ending list of requirements at the beginning of this thread??? (Jn 12:40)

I feel sorry for you.

[Vincent Vega]

Could you point to even just one verse in the Bible that says that it is to be taken as the sole authority on Christianity?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288029087' post='2182382']
And you prefer to throw the Bible out the window (in direct contradiction to the highest regard Jesus had for Scripture...and who said that we would be judged by His words that are only found therein) and rest your soul on all those never-ending list of requirements at the beginning of this thread??? (Jn 12:40)

I feel sorry for you.
[/quote]
All should note how the biblical passage was not dealt with. Never is.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288029087' post='2182382']
And you prefer to throw the Bible out the window (in direct contradiction to the highest regard Jesus had for Scripture...and who said that we would be judged by His words that are only found therein) and rest your soul on all those never-ending list of requirements at the beginning of this thread??? (Jn 12:40)

I feel sorry for you.
[/quote]

Again, brother, I think you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. Just in case you missed what I posted earlier:

[quote name=TeresaBenedicta]Catholicism is very simple. Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Everything the Church, inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit, teaches helps to clarify and assist souls to a loving union with that Way. It's not an easy goal to accomplish. It can't be accomplished by human power; it requires grace. God, knowing the importance of the senses in our lives (being that we are both body and soul), willed to give this grace through physical signs (the Sacraments, sacramentals, pious practices encouraged by the Church). Our good works attract the grace of God. But the beauty of it is that God's grace is the beginning of those good works, it is what carries out those good works, and it is the end of those good works.

A bunch of rules? You're looking at it from the wrong perspective, brother. It's not about binding you down and complicating salvation. It's about shining light on the road to salvation, freeing us from sin so that we might truly follow the Way, know the Truth, and have new Life. If you have the proper ordering, everything makes sense. But if you're focusing on the means to the end, and don't give the end highest ranking... well, it ain't gonna make any sense. You'll be running into a brick wall.

Is salvation complicated? Nope. But it's difficult.[/quote]

[Winchester]

[img]http://jeremyberg.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/falcor.jpg[/img]

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1288030230' post='2182395']
[img]http://jeremyberg.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/falcor.jpg[/img]
[/quote]
OK, that made me chuckle.

[Winchester]

Falcor is the man.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1288028642' post='2182375']
What overwhelming evidence? Where is it? Don't see any in this thread.

Incidentally, Brother Adam used to be a staunch Baptist who was as much against the Catholic Church as you are, but now sees the that Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ. It's not like he's never heard an anti-Catholic argument before.
My own parents were once anti-Catholic "Bible Christians" like yourself, but their study of history showed them that the Catholic Church is the same Church found in the Bible.

You're not bringing anything new to the table, but stick around and you might learn something.
[/quote]

You haven't refuted a thing I've said, so your claim of "not seeing any evidence" is to be dismissed at once.

Also, I find it incredibly amusing about your parents so-called "conversion". Let me get this straight: Without an infallible interpreter ([i]and before entering the church[/i]) they were able to rely on their own understanding and conclusions of Scripture and church history to decide that Catholicism was biblical.
Fine.
But isn't it shocking that once they stepped over the threshold of their parish for the first time, that they were [i]now [/i] told that their private interpretations, such as that which led them [i]into the Roman Church, [/i]were now [u]not[/u] to be trusted, but rather, Scripture and church history were henceforth to be understood only with an infallible interpreter?

The internal contradictions of such a system cut to the core at the most fundamental level, and your parent's "conversion" story is therefore inadequate in laying a sound foundation for accepting their claims. Consequently, if you applaud your parent's [i]fallible [/i]reasoning faculties to arrive at Rome, you cannot then claim that those same reasoning faculties are illegitimate for everyone else who does [i]not [/i]arrive at Rome. And keep in mind, that the decision to trust Rome as an infallible guide, is [i]itself[/i] a fallible decision. So at the end of the day, Rome claims to be an infallible interpreter, and the Roman Catholic has [i]fallibly [/i]decided to believe that claim.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1288030597' post='2182400']
You haven't refuted a thing I've said, so your claim of "not seeing any evidence" is to be dismissed at once.[/quote]
I'm in charge of that, and I'm not dismissing it.



[quote][s]Also, I find it incredibly amusing about your parents so-called "conversion". Let me get this straight: Without an infallible interpreter ([i]and before entering the church[/i]) they were able to rely on their own understanding and conclusions of Scripture and church history to decide that Catholicism was biblical.
Fine.
But isn't it shocking that once they stepped over the threshold of their parish for the first time, that they were [i]now [/i] told that their private interpretations, such as that which led them [i]into the Roman Church, [/i]were now [u]not[/u] to be trusted, but rather, Scripture and church history were henceforth to be understood only with an infallible interpreter?

The internal contradictions of such a system cut to the core at the most fundamental level, and your parent's "conversion" story is therefore inadequate in laying a sound foundation for accepting their claims. Consequently, if you applaud your parent's [i]fallible [/i]reasoning faculties to arrive at Rome, you cannot then claim that those same reasoning faculties are illegitimate for everyone else who does [i]not [/i]arrive at Rome. And keep in mind, that the decision to trust Rome as an infallible guide, is [i]itself[/i] a fallible decision. So at the end of the day, Rome claims to be an infallible interpreter, and the Roman Catholic has [i]fallibly [/i]decided to believe that claim.[/s]
[/quote]
No one said that a fallible interpreter was always fallible. You will note the strikethrough. I have dismissed your argument.

At [i]twice[/i]. That's the step beyond at once.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1288029532' post='2182389']
Again, brother, I think you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. Just in case you missed what I posted earlier:


[/quote]



It is not possible that I am your "brother" because of the simple reason that I reject papal claims and the Catholic Church has withdrawn my right by her "divine fiat" and consigned me to hell. Just in case you missed it, see my new post, "The issue of infallibility" ---for confirming this truth, which you are seemingly unaware of.