Brother Adam Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote]secondly, truth brother adam, there are things that may not be written in the bible, but one can deduce from enough reading of it.[/quote] Any Catholic or non-Catholic would likely agree. You can deduce many things from the Bible, right or wrong as they may be. It's called exegesis. [quote]we don't need some conglomoration of MAN telling us what is and isn't biblical.[/quote] Excellent. We can then rule out Fundamentalism, Non-Denominationalism, Lutheranism, Calvinism, Reformedism, Methodism, JWism, Mormonism, Baptistism, Pentacostalism, and every other denomination which began with the biblical exegesis of MAN. [quote]the early church needed it because they had no bible, no real structure, no help. [/quote] I'm assuming your speaking of Apostolic leadership. [quote]and thats why the apostles and disciples went out and preached to everyone...that is why the EARLY church needed clarification. and besides the letters (scriptures) and teachings the apostles had, which were DIRECTLY from Jesus, what did the early church have?[/quote] The Apostles were given authority from Jesus, and within this authority given the directive to hand that authority down to others. You are right, without the Apostles we'd likely have seen the Church fall apart very quickly. Yet, we see the current state of the Church and see thousands of personal interpretations leading to gross misrepresentations of biblical truths. Such as the approval of homosexuality, contraception, and even abortion. We see the approval of woman-pastors, the denial of Christ's divinity and humanity, even in some sects the denial of Christ's divinity. Leaving me wondering if a central teaching leadership isn't a good thing. There is no one to tell a pastor that original sin does not exist if he so chooses to interpret scripture that way. Scripture alone leaves us in endless circles of debate, and often times truth getting shot down in the crossfire. The teaching that the Apostles had was directly from Christ. Why should one accept that this teaching is impossible to be preserved? Did it disappear in the 4th century after the canonization of scripture? [quote]WE have the bible and good solid brothers in Christ, ALONG with BIBLICAL interpretations and commentaries that HELP, but are not doctrine in any way.[/quote] Yes, systematic theology is doctrine. The Bible is not a book of doctrine. It is the record of the revelation of God to his people and his dealings with his creation throughout history. While we do have the Bible, the canon of scripture is handed to us through the authority of the Church of the time, which is called tradition. While there are "solid brothers in Christ" we can clearly see that being a Christian does not gaurentee accurate doctrine. [quote]I've never discounted or disputed the fact of there being things not SPECIFICALLY written into the bible, like the trinity, or sola scriptura, or the age of reason...but they're not hard to find in the bible...even without concordances or lexicons or mexicans.[/quote] On the other hand I have seen Christians time and again "prove" that sola scriptura, the trinity, and the age of reason all are wrong, using the Bible alone, and what they say makes a certian amount of sense. That is, it Could be that way, but who is to say that it actually is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 You heretical religion makes those claims... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Apr 1 2004, 04:50 PM'] You heretical religion makes those claims... [/quote] ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote name='the lumberjack' date='Apr 1 2004, 03:37 PM'] i submit myself to the elders of the church, and learn everything I can from them. But even my pastor tells me to look it up for myself. who EVER made claims to be anything other than a sinful man, justified by my faith (and relationship) in Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Almighty Living God who reigns? thank you. [/quote] [quote]i submit myself to the elders of the church, and learn everything I can from them. But even my pastor tells me to look it up for myself.[/quote] But that's exactly what the pastor down the street does, and he believes something totally differen than your pastor. There's got to be something wrong with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Apr 1 2004, 03:50 PM'] You heretical religion makes those claims... [/quote] CC, Dude, I admire your furver for the True Church. But there are charitable ways of evangelizing. Bruce, though very anti-Catholic on the outside, has been with us for quite a few months now. He won't be "shut up" by cracking a whip. Let's keep it civil (and REAL). You don't have to beat around the bush, but you likewise don't need to beat the bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote]QUOTE (CatholicCrusader @ Apr 1 2004, 04:50 PM) You heretical religion makes those claims... ??? [/quote] Sorry. I didn't make it clear to whom I was responding. That was to lumberjack, not you. Also, [quote]CC, Dude, I admire your furver for the True Church. But there are charitable ways of evangelizing.[/quote] Calling a spade a spade is not uncharitable, contrary to popular opinion. Just because I call his religion what it is (heretical) does not make me uncharitable. Every Catholic for 1900 years would have said the same thing up until this new post-Vat. II idea of tolerance and "light talk" that is not harsh to any liberal whose feelings might get hurt. In any case, not calling his religion heretical is like calling a black person "African American", or even worse, a "person of color", or like calling a fat person a "person of size"...political correctness is ridiculous... God bless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 (edited) what about calling a black person a nigge*? Is that okay too? Edited April 1, 2004 by Brother Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulls Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 i'm a heretic, fine, i embrace it. but you BETTER explain that "african american" reference immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulls Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 i'm labeling that post one of the dumbest thing i've ever heard until you explain it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote]Calling a spade a spade is not uncharitable, contrary to popular opinion. [/quote] Actually, it depends. If it would hurt someones feelings and repell them from the Truth, then calling a spade a spade might not be the right tactick. You can call a spade a spade more than one way, without saying it's a heart. [quote]Just because I call his religion what it is (heretical) does not make me uncharitable. [/quote] My comment was in regards to the overall tone of your posts, not just that one. Although to flat out call someones religion heretical without explaining why is a bit uncharitable. You would percieve it as uncharitable for a Protestant to call you a heritic. Although you know you are not, according to him you are. Well, we know that Protestantism at it's root is heretical. But to leave it out there without an explenation - and directed at one person (as if that person themsef was heretical)... A person might embrace a heretical idea withough being a heretic. They are merely misinformed. We are here to learn and to teach, not to slash and burn. [quote]Every Catholic for 1900 years would have said the same thing up until this new post-Vat. II idea of tolerance and "light talk" that is not harsh to any liberal whose feelings might get hurt. [/quote] This right here says a lot about your agenda. Vat.II was inspired and valid. The Pope is a man of God, and is wise beyond most other Popes / leaders. Ask yourself, do you call their religion heretical for your glory or for God's? [quote]In any case, not calling his religion heretical is like calling a black person "African American", or even worse, a "person of color", or like calling a fat person a "person of size"...political correctness is ridiculous...[/quote] No, not calling his religion heretical is like not calling a black person a black person. Um.. since you wouldn't be calling it anything, you aren't necessarily giving up your stance or your understanding of the hereticalness of their religion. Again, you don't have to call a spade a spade in order for it not to be a heart. You don't have to get defensive. I just noted that your tone was a bit uncharitable. If I observed it, odds are someone else might have too. If you see that I am uncharitable, please let me know. I want to grow in humility and love. In Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livin_the_MASS Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 [quote name='Bruce S' date='Apr 1 2004, 05:15 AM']In order to understand I must: -learn Greek and Hebrew and Latin -obtain the correct manuscript/text -know where 2,000 years of commentaries are -learn the correct exegetical requirements -be trained in apologetics -excel in hermeneutics -have the appropriate measure of The Spirit -comprehend the mysterious and esoteric -learn to dissect intricate interpretations -have the annointing of prophetic revelations -obtain special spiritual insight glasses -stop thinking for myself... (so I can make a spectacle of myself) [topic stolen from another site, but OH SO TRUE ... ][/quote] Matthew 18: 1-4 [b][u]The Greatest in the Kingdom[/u][/b] At that time the disciples approched Jesus and said, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" He called a child over, placed it in their midst, and said, [b]"Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kindom of heaven.[/b] Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom heaven. And whoever receives one child such as this in my name receives me." (Bold added by me.) God Bless Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livin_the_MASS Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 (edited) [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Apr 1 2004, 04:50 PM'] You heretical religion makes those claims... [/quote] You will not bring souls to the Catholic Church this way. God is love, so we must show love! I know you are defending the Church, but a little less name calling will bring all of us closer to God. God Bless Jason PS. I noticed this is the second or third time you have posted such a statement. Edited April 2, 2004 by Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Apr 1 2004, 04:50 PM'] You heretical religion makes those claims... [/quote] That wasn't needed.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 (edited) 1If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. Edited April 2, 2004 by cmotherofpirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 [quote]but you BETTER explain that "african american" reference immediately. [/quote] OK..do you know what African American actually means, not just what it stands for but what the words actually mean. African American: a person who originally is from Africa but is now an American (also seen as in Japanese American). 1) Most black people aren't from Africa...they are from the US 2) I guess that makes WHITE people from South Africa "African American" too, so why don't we start calling them what they are--African American, not white... See, it doesn't really make sense. The most "correct" terms I think would have to be "Negro" and "Caucasian", but I don't think anyone minds if you use white/black. No black person I have ever talked to about this WANTS to be called African American...in fact they all hate it, as far as all those I know. The white leftists do so much crying about it that anyone who is black is just as sick of hearing it as I am. Also, about being "uncharitable"...Our Lord flipped tables in the Temple. Was that uncharitable? He called people devils many times...was that uncharitable? Our had long discourses "degrading" the pharisees by calling them hypocrites, was that uncharitable? Our Lord is Charity...of course none of that was uncharitable, so CERTAINLY me calling a protestant religion a heretical religion (just as any true Catholic would from AD 33-1960), is CERTAINLY not uncharitable.... God bless you, and be happy you belong to the one true Church of Our Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now