Your Favorite Protestant Preacher?

[hyperdulia again]

i know the bible better than most protestants...i tend to remember wht paul wrote and what he didn't write. i know when something is from a gospel. i don't have endless numbers of verses committed to memory however.

catholics read the bible differently than protestants. in my experience catholics tend to read whole books/chapters and get thir meaning. protestants tend to grab a verse or two and run with it.

[jasJis]

Tru dat.

I've been thinking about the title of the thread. I personally know Preachers, etc.

I don't like anyone I feel are Protestant Preachers.

I do know a few Christian Preachers that don't preach Protestantism and preach about Christian TRUTHS that are shared with most denoms. I like them.

[Circle_Master]

i know the bible better than most protestants...i tend to remember wht paul wrote and what he didn't write. i know when something is from a gospel. i don't have endless numbers of verses committed to memory however.

catholics read the bible differently than protestants. in my experience catholics tend to read whole books/chapters and get thir meaning. protestants tend to grab a verse or two and run with it.

perhaps for the laypeeps. I attempt to always know the surrounding context before using any verse. I have seen a few Catholics here doing massive 'snippet' exercises however.

[cmotherofpirl]

Maybe that is because prots always demand specific verses, instead of using the whole chapters or the whole Bible. Because they rarely consider the context of whole books or the intent of the author, or the books relationship to other books or the Church at a time, protestants have to rely on specific texts. They have cut themselves off from the Sacred Tradition and Church that gave them the bible and guarentees its texts and authenticity , and can only see it in isolation.

[Circle_Master]

Maybe that is because prots always demand specific verses, instead of using the whole chapters or the whole Bible. Because they rarely consider the context of whole books or the intent of the author, or the books relationship to other books or the Church at a time, protestants have to rely on specific texts. They have cut themselves off from the Sacred Tradition and Church that gave them the bible and guarentees its texts and authenticity , and can only see it in isolation.

isolation as in using history, tradition, culture, linguistics, and surrounding theology to determine the correct meaning?

[Bruce S]

Nah....

Edited ...

Goodnight gang.

Edited January 8, 2004 by Bruce S

[hyperdulia again]

Come Holy Spirit!

[Anna]

Damned if we do, and Damned if we don't.

Give prots lengthy Bible quotes, cross references, and commentary (See Dave's post, Circle) and you refuse to read it, say it's too long, and call it a document dump.

Give you a simple verse or two (within context) to prove a point or support a Church teaching, and you mock it by calling it a snippet.

Basically, you refuse to admit to yourself, or anyone else, that

Christ founded One Single Church, which is True, and it is the Catholic Church.

You've still not proved me wrong, Circle, and I'm still waiting.

Waiting for you to tell me who founded the Catholic Church, and when, if not Jesus Christ in 33 A.D., as the Church Herself claims.

Who was our first pope, if not St. Peter?

Waiting...

Pax Christi. <><

[jasJis]

isolation as in using history, tradition, culture, linguistics, and surrounding theology to determine the correct meaning?

Add in Sacrad Tradition, and you'll have a Grace Flush.

[Circle_Master]

Give prots lengthy Bible quotes, cross references, and commentary (See Dave's post, Circle) and you refuse to read it, say it's too long, and call it a document dump.

I would put money down that you did not read it Anna. I haven't pasted it in word or anything but I would assume it is around 30 pages, at least. That is a text dump, anyone can write that much and say nothing. Maybe he said nothing, maybe not, but as it is my time, I will decide if it is worth writing a critique for your pleasure.

Give you a simple verse or two (within context) to prove a point or support a Church teaching, and you mock it by calling it a snippet.

I have met every single verse you throw at me and shown by context that you have the incorrect meaning. If you disagree with that, it is your responsibility to show me wrong, which you have not done.

Christ founded One Single Church, which is True, and it is the Catholic Church.

Agreed, Christ was the foundation for one single church, and it is the catholic church. Even you must agree to this, do you really believe that those who have died from your institution in the past will not be wed to Christ? Do you believe Christ will only wed those members of the Church who are currently alive when He returns? Your Church is invisible as well.

Waiting for you to tell me who founded the Catholic Church, and when, if not Jesus Christ in 33 A.D., as the Church Herself claims. Who was our first pope, if not St. Peter?

Gregory the Great in 590 A.D.

[Anna]

I would put money down that you did not read it Anna.

How much would you like to wager?

I have met every single verse you throw at me and shown by context that you have the incorrect meaning.  If you disagree with that, it is your responsibility to show me wrong, which you have not done.

That's not quite correct, Circle. You've not shown that my quotes are "out of context," you've simply dismissed them because you are too proud to receive correction. I don't take most Bible quotes and paste them here. I look them up on the Catholic Bishops' website and read the footnotes and commentary to make sure it is within context. I don't rely on my own understanding, which is so flawed. I rely upon the infallible teaching of the Church. So, if one of us is quoting out of context, I'd rather think it is you, than the National Catholic Conference of Bishops.

Agreed, Christ was the foundation for one single church, and it is the catholic church.

And, it is also the Catholic Church! What a co-inky-dink! :D

Even you must agree to this, do you really believe that those who have died from your institution in the past will not be wed to Christ?  Do you believe Christ will only wed those members of the Church who are currently alive when He returns?  Your Church is invisible as well.

Silly, Circle. We are not speaking of "visible persons," but a visible and recognizable "organization," the Catholic Church has a visible earthly head; visible hierarchical order; visible structure in its worship; structured spiritual calendar citing important historical dates to be remembered and honored. (And I'm not just talking Christmas and Easter!!!) Yes, the saints of the Church will be wed to Christ! I can't believe you, who are accusing everyone else of misconstruing facts, quotes, and history, cannot even percieve the difference between a "visible Church," and an "invisible one."

Is that just a deliberate dance, or do you really think that?

You should never have called Tina dense.

Gregory the Great in 590 A.D.

FASCINATING!!!!!!! Do, give us all the details!!!

Pax Christi. <><

[Circle_Master]

Silly, Circle. We are not speaking of "visible persons," but a visible and recognizable "organization," the Catholic Church has a visible earthly head; visible hierarchical order; visible structure in its worship; structured spiritual calendar citing important historical dates to be remembered and honored. (And I'm not just talking Christmas and Easter!!!) Yes, the saints of the Church will be wed to Christ! I can't believe you, who are accusing everyone else of misconstruing facts, quotes, and history, cannot even percieve the difference between a "visible Church," and an "invisible one."

So you are saying that when Christ marries the church, no one will actually be in it. The church is only the teachings, and should never ever be thought of as people.

or

You agree there is a universal invisible church - just that there is also a physical manifestation placed on top of it.

?

[Anna]

I am saying that the "visible" aspect of the Church is as I described.

Those in the Church are members of It for all eternity...whether they are in heaven or hell!

The members on earth are the Church militant, the members in purgatory are the Church suffering, and the members in heaven are the Church Triumphant.

There is the spiritual dimension of the Church, regarding our souls.

The "visible" dimension of Our Church is the outwardly recognizable features, like a city on a hill. You recognize things as 'Catholic,' for the Catholic Church is one with visible characteristics. You see the head of our Church, the pope, and you know: 'Catholic,' for instance.

Pax Christi. <><

[Anna]

Gregory the Great in 590 A.D.

But I need to know more!!!

If Gregory the Great was the first pope, and he founded the Catholic Church in 590 AD, then who was Pelagius II, who was elected in 579 AD, whose embassador was Gregory the Great?! What office was he elected to?!

Pax Christi. <><

[Circle_Master]

The members on earth are the Church militant, the members in purgatory are the Church suffering, and the members in heaven are the Church Triumphant.

so your church is invisible when you come down to it though? if you are including all 3 of those groups in your church, then it must be bigger than this visible thing.