Proof - Catholic Charismatics Derived Protestants

[Laudate_Dominum]

dang!

[ironmonk]

The above point being that the "Charismatic" movement is a Catholic movement.

It has always been Catholic, it comes and goes.

pentacostal chuches have only been around for about 100 years... they did not spark the "Charismatic" movement. The Catholic Church has always had Charismatics.

God Bless,
ironmonk

[Bruce S]

[quote]These gifts were routine in the day of St.
Paul - but they faded by the middle of the next century, when the
heretical Montanists claimed to have them in profusion. And that was the
pattern throughout the ages. [b]Thus the Albigensians claimed them again[/b][/quote]

And we all know what happened to those poor souls.....

[quote]The Catholic Church has always had Charismatics.
[/quote]

Yeah right. Where were they when I was growing up?

Edited March 29, 2004 by Bruce S

[Hananiah]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Mar 28 2004, 04:02 PM'] One needs to understand and accept that ALL of the denominations, from Messianic Jews, to Catholics, to Orthodox, to modern Pentecostals seek God, love Jesus, and have a 'little of the puzzle' that Jesus bequeathed to us. [/quote]
I disagree. The Judaizers sought God and loved Jesus, and their doctrinal differences with orthodox Christians were probably smaller than those between modern day Catholics and Protestants, yet St. Paul still had some pretty harsh words for them (Gal 1:8-9, 5:4).

[Bruce S]

[quote]One needs to understand and accept that ALL of the denominations, from Messianic Jews, to Catholics, to Orthodox, to modern Pentecostals seek God, love Jesus, and have a 'little of the puzzle' that Jesus bequeathed to us. 


I disagree. The Judaizers sought God and loved Jesus, and their doctrinal differences with orthodox Christians were probably smaller than those between modern day Catholics and Protestants, yet St. Paul still had some pretty harsh words for them (Gal 1:8-9, 5:4). [/quote]

Paul himself WAS a Messianic Jew. Period. The Judaisers were not what Paul feared so much, but rather those who wanted to impose religion, dogmatic religion, UPON believers, negating the understanding that Paul had of salvation EXCLUSIVELY as a gift of God, not tied in any way to a denomination and a denominational rule based system, the need for religion to STOP others from a oneness with the risen Jesus via dietary, sacrificial, and bodily signs.

Edited March 29, 2004 by Bruce S

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Mar 29 2004, 09:26 AM']
Paul himself WAS a Messianic Jew. Period. The Judaisers were not what Paul feared so much, but rather those who wanted to impose religion, dogmatic religion, UPON believers, negating the understanding that Paul had of salvation EXCLUSIVELY as a gift of God, not tied in any way to a denomination and a denominational rule based system, the need for religion to STOP others from a oneness with the risen Jesus via dietary, sacrificial, and bodily signs. [/quote]
That's a pretty skewed statement Bruce.

I think you are transposing modern denominationalism onto St. Paul's context. Do you really believe that Christianity is not, and was not from the beginning a religion? And a dogmatic religion at that? And Paul was not a messianic Jew in the sense of the modern group. He was a messianic Jew in the sense that the Church is messianic Judaism, or the fulfillment of Judaism.

[Bruce S]

LD,

I'm probably the only one around here who actually WENT TO a Messianic congregation for instruction, so my understanding of the parallels between the MJ of then and now, are rather developed. AND I regularly monitor and am fascinated by the Messianics VS traditional Judaism, even to this very day, I daily delve into those discussions online.

So, accept that I might have some insights about what Paul was facing, that regular Christians or Catholics might not bring to the table.

Trust me, the battle THEN and NOW is almost identical, and is ongoing to this very day.

Messianics struggle with the very problems Paul outlines in his letters.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Mar 29 2004, 09:58 AM'] LD,

I'm probably the only one around here who actually WENT TO a Messianic congregation for instruction, so my understanding of the parallels between the MJ of then and now, are rather developed. AND I regularly monitor and am fascinated by the Messianics VS traditional Judaism, even to this very day, I daily delve into those discussions online.

So, accept that I might have some insights about what Paul was facing, that regular Christians or Catholics might not bring to the table.

Trust me, the battle THEN and NOW is almost identical, and is ongoing to this very day.

Messianics struggle with the very problems Paul outlines in his letters. [/quote]
MJ then and now? It's not the same group Bruce. You have fulfilled Jews who were part of the early Church and you have heretics who were judaisers. Then you have modern groups who are not in union with Christ's Church. It doesn't matter how "close" they try to be to whatever. If you are not in union with the Church Christ established there is a problem. I know of Catholic converts who were Messianic Jews so I think they would know better what its all about.

[CatholicAndFanatical]

the jewish people today use a different OT than those of pre-100AD, because of the Catholic Church the jews revised their scriptures and took out a few books. clearly not the same group as before. Christs Church is the fullfillment of judaism, its complete. To be in something different is to be against what Christ done.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Yeah, and groups such as Jews for Jesus are strictly speaking, evangelical protestants. They are not the Church that Christ established, no matter how hard they try to pretend. They are rooted in protestant traditions. The Traditions of the Catholic Church are the fulfillment of Judaism, not the traditions of the protestant revolt. Sorry Bruce.

[popestpiusx]

Modern Judaism is based more on the Talmud than on the OT. They pretty much had to invent a new religion after the destruction of the Temple and huge losses to Christianity. This is exactly what they did. Most of that "reowrking" of Judaism took place at the council held at Jamnia. It is from this that the Jamnian text of the OT was formed.

[Bruce S]

[quote]the jewish people today use a different OT than those of pre-100AD, [/quote]

Not really. They use HEBREW Torah's, the CLOSED CANNON might be different, but the books INLCUDED in the Septuaguint are the same, the Dead Sea scrolls proved that todays texts, IN HEBREW, are virtually the same as then, over 99% the same. Now when translated into ENGLISH, they run into the same translational issues as we do when going from Greek to English.

For example, this morning at Mass [don't forget I go every weekday morning] MY NIV Bible, which I, unlike any of the congregants bring with me, has the daily reading from John 8:1-?, and the version read from the lecturn by the reader varied quite a bit in DIRECT quotation from the NIV I had in my hand, the message was the same, just the phraseology differed quite a bit.

Jews of that age, most of whom spoke Greek in Alexandria, had the same problem, so they translated the scripture into Greek, and agreed upon the first widely approved cannon.