• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Catholic?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟218,785.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
But wasn't this explained to you earlier, that the books of the Christian Bible were selected through authority and other means?

NO!

Someone did use that as an "excuse" but it was certainly not a correct and proper explanation.

What you are repeating is Catholic apologetics. What we who disagree with the Catholic church are telling you is Bible truth and the two are not the same thing. We all know that what you are saying is what you want the truth to be but that is not the case. Just THINK for a moment...………………...

If Jesus were to write a sentence on papyus, it would automatically be inspired. Would the Catholic church then approve of it and delare it true, or would it recognize it as true? If the RCC declared it to be true by its authority, then it is setting itself above the words of Christ. On the other hand, if it recognizes Jesus' words as authoriative, then it is doing just that, recognizing what is already authoratitive. The Christian church recognizes God's word as inspired and true. It does not declare it to be inspired and true lest it claim its own authority to decide the truth of God's word.
Did the Roman Catholic church give us our Bible? | CARM.org
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟218,785.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well, perhaps it seems so, but your proposition was open-ended by its nature, wasn't it?

I mean, if "it’s not in the Bible, so it’s okay" really is your guide, then almost nothing is ruled out.

One person might think that X is unthinkable, but the next person might think the opposite, and if this is the rule....then it actually is "anything goes, just so long as the Bible does not specifically condemn it."

Agreed.

Would that kind of thinking then be the same that would say if...….
I stand in my garage, I am a car?
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟218,785.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I bet you that Major1 and albion will refuse to accept what i posted above in posts 351 and 352. They will say that the scriptures posted mean something else etc etc etc etc :doh:

We would be less of a Christian in search of the truth for you if we did not.

Immaculate conception:

Biblical Support for Mary’s Immaculate Conception
“From the first instant of her conception, Mary was totally preserved from the stain of original sin and she remained pure from all personal sin throughout her life.” (CCC 508)
Dave Armstrong
The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary is harmonious with Holy Scripture, and is supported by both analogy and plausibility.

Luke 1:28 (RSV) And he came to her and said, “Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” [in the RSV – Catholic edition, “favored one” is rendered as “full of grace”]

Many translations use “favor” here, yet even the great Baptist Greek scholar A. T. Robertson (Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. II, 13) agrees that the word involved (kecharitomene) means “full of grace which thou hast received”. It's derived from the Greek root, charis(literally, “grace”).

Kecharitomene has to do with God’s grace, as it is derived from the Greek root, charis (literally, “grace”). Thus, in the KJV, charis is translated “grace” 129 out of the 150 times that it appears. Presbyterian Greek scholar Marvin Vincent (Word Studies in the New Testament) noted that even Wycliffe and Tyndale (no enthusiastic supporters of the Catholic Church) both rendered kecharitomene in Luke 1:28 as “full of grace” and that the literal meaning was “endued with grace” (I, 259).

Likewise, well-known Protestant linguist W. E. Vine (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words), defines it as “to endue with Divine favour or grace” (II, 171). All these men (except Wycliffe, who probably would have been, had he lived in the 16th century or after it) are Protestants, and so cannot be accused of Catholic translation bias.

Now, one might wonder, “what does it mean to be full of grace?” For St. Paul, grace is the antithesis and overcomer of sin:

Romans 6:14, 22 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. . . . [22] But now that you have been set free from sin . . . the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life.

Moreover, we are saved by grace:

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God

Acts 15:11 . . . we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus . . .

Romans 3:24 they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus,

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men,

Titus 3:7 so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.

Therefore, it follows, I submit, that for a person to be full of grace is to both be saved and to be exceptionally, completely holy. Therefore, Mary is holy and sinless. The essence of the Immaculate Conception is sinlessness, and this is deduced from many biblical passages about the antithetical relation of grace to sin, and salvation and its accompanying sanctification to sin.

The only remaining question is: when did God apply this grace to Mary? We know she possessed it as a young woman, at the Annunciation. Catholics believe that God gave her the grace at her conception so as to avoid the original sin that she inevitably would have inherited, being human, but for God's preventive grace, which saved her from falling into the pit of sin. It was grace from God that couldn’t possibly have had anything to do with Mary’s personal merit.

But do we ever observe in the Bible, other persons being extraordinarily sanctified, even before their birth? Yes; for example, the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah:

Isaiah 49:1, 5 . . . The LORD called me from the womb, . . . [5] And now the LORD says, who formed me from the womb to be his servant, . . . (cf. Job 31:15, 18; Jud 16:17)

Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations. (cf. Sirach 49:7)

“Consecrated” or “sanctified” (KJV) in Jeremiah 1:5 is the Hebrew word quadash. According to Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon of the Old Testament (p. 725), in this instance it meant “to declare any one holy.”

Jeremiah was thus consecrated or sanctified from the womb; possibly from conception. This is fairly analogous to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. We know Jeremiah was a very holy man, and perhaps even sinless. We also have New Testament evidence of such sanctification before birth (John the Baptist and St. Paul):

Luke 1:15 for he will be great before the Lord, . . . and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb. (cf. 1:41, 44)

Galatians 1:15 . . . he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace,

We know that John the Baptist was also a very holy man. Was he sinless? We can't know that for sure from the biblical data. St. Catherine of Siena, for one, believed that he never sinned (A Treatise of Prayer). But we do know for sure that he was sanctified from the womb. The Bible also refers to Job as exceptionally holy (“blameless”):

Job 1:1, 8 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God, and turned away from evil. . . . [8] And the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?” (cf. 2:3)

Therefore, by analogy and plausibility, we can and may conclude that it is “biblical” to believe in faith that Mary was immaculately conceived. Nothing in the Bible contradicts this belief. It does require faith, of course. God restored to Mary the innocence of Eve before the Fall, and filled her with grace, in order to make her “fit” for the unspeakably sublime, sanctified task of being the Mother of God the Son.

Source: Biblical Support for Mary’s Immaculate Conception

That is a lot of copy and pasting to try and prove something that does not exist.

You quoted Luke 1:28 ………
" And he came to her and said, “Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” [in the RSV – Catholic edition, “favored one” is rendered as “full of grace”]

Did you actually read that verse before posting it. Please notice that there is NOT ONE SINGLE word that says "IMMACUATE CONCEPTION." There is not any suggestion that Mary was sinless when born. NO NOT ONE.

A typical Roman Catholic explanation would hold the Greek word kecharitomene means an “indication of an unparalleled grace given by God to our Lady: She was conceived without the defect of original sin” [New Catholic Answer Bible, Insert R-1]. Or take Karl Keating’s explanation from Catholicism and Fundamentalism\.

What you posted from a Catholic Apologetic web site is a frank admission that the text does not plainly support the Roman Catholic interpretation and needs to be supplemented by another ultimate authority. For all of Keating’s appeals to hidden meaning from the Greek, and for Madrid’s “The original import of this phrase is lost in English translation,” we now have Jimmy Akin finally admitting that the immaculate conception has to be read into the text.
Jimmy Akin: The Immaculate Conception has to be Read into Luke 1:28 | Alpha and Omega Ministries

Then you sated from another web blog...…………

"Therefore, it follows, I submit, that for a person to be full of grace is to both be saved and to be exceptionally, completely holy. Therefore, Mary is holy and sinless. "

Totally without any validation at all, you believe the comments of a man over the Word of God in
Deuteronomy 4:2........
"You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you."

That is exactly what the person you posted did. HE added to the Word of God what HE wanted it to say and not what it actually did say.

So when anyone reads the material you posted it can be easily seen that not ONE SINGLE BIBLE Scripture supports the false teaching of Mary's Immaculate Conception.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,600
8,669
Dallas
✟1,163,227.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Ok then if you want to be silly and not show me a scripture, which surely wouldn't be too difficult for you, I will take it that you either have nothing to offer or that you are being stubborn. And please don't tell me you already have because I haven't seen it. All I want is one scripture. Is that too hard?

Ok please tell me exactly which part do you need to see proof of from the scriptures, prayers for supplication are encouraged, Christians receive eternal life and are present with The Lord when they are absent from the body, or those in heaven are still active members in the body of Christ (His Church)? I thought these were all common knowledge especially amongst Christians.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,266
✟584,032.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Ok please tell me exactly which part do you need to see proof of from the scriptures, prayers for supplication are encouraged, Christians receive eternal life and are present with The Lord when they are absent from the body, or those in heaven are still active members in the body of Christ (His Church)? I thought these were all common knowledge especially amongst Christians.
a verse that speaks of praying to spirits.

No extrapolating from a verse about your neighbor, saying that your neighbor is no different from a ghost because A is the same as B is the same as C in some mystical "Communion of Saints" way of looking at things.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,600
8,669
Dallas
✟1,163,227.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Well, perhaps it seems so, but your proposition was open-ended by its nature, wasn't it?

I mean, if "it’s not in the Bible, so it’s okay" really is your guide, then almost nothing is ruled out.

One person might think that X is unthinkable, but the next person might think the opposite, and if this is the rule....then it actually is "anything goes, just so long as the Bible does not specifically condemn it."

Please look at the other side of the coin and reverse your logic in this matter to contemplate if anything that is not specifically stated as being allowed in the scriptures is not permissible. This extremely obscure perspective is ridiculous either way you look at it. The scriptures do have a tendency to lean more towards telling us what is forbidden than what is permissible. It’s a lot easier to list the things that are forbidden than to list everything that is permissible.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟218,785.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Purgatory:

4 Biblical Principles That Show the Reality of Purgatory
The Catholic belief in Purgatory is indeed scriptural, and here's the proof.
John Martignoni
Q. I have an Evangelical friend at work who claims that the Catholic belief in Purgatory is not scriptural. What should I say to him?

A. I want to answer that question by first using Scripture and then by using some common sense.

From the perspective of Scripture, the word “Purgatory” never appears in the Bible. Does that mean Purgatory isn’t in the Bible? Not at all. The word “Incarnation” is not in the Bible, but all Christians believe the Incarnation is a scriptural belief. The word “Trinity” is not in the Bible, but all Christians believe the Trinity is a scriptural belief. So, the mere fact that the word “Purgatory” does not appear in the Bible does not mean Catholics have to admit that Purgatory is a non-scriptural teaching, as we will see.

To demonstrate the very scriptural nature of the doctrine of Purgatory, let's first establish some Catholic scriptural principles, starting in the Old Testament. In 2 Samuel 12:13-18, it states, “David said to Nathan, ‘I have sinned against the Lord.’ And Nathan said to David, ‘The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child that is born to you shall die.’ And the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it became sick…On the seventh day the child died.”

What do we see here? David sins. David realizes he has sinned. David repents. David is forgiven — the Lord “put away” his sin. Yet, David receives punishment for his sin after he has been forgiven — his child dies.

Catholic Scriptural Principle #1 – there is the possibility of punishment for sin even after one has received forgiveness.

Let’s move now to the New Testament. Revelation 21:27 says, “But nothing unclean shall enter it…” This is referring to the New Jerusalem – Heaven.

Catholic Scriptural Principle #2 – nothing unclean - nothing, in other words, with the stain of sin — will enter Heaven.

More Scripture. Hebrews 12:22-23, “But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem...and to a judge who is God of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect…” Notice, it speaks of the “spirits” of just men (who, as Catholics would say, are those that died in a state of grace), who are in Heaven, and who have been “made perfect.”

Catholic Scriptural Principle #3 – there is a way, a process, through which the spirits of the “just” are “made perfect.”

And finally, read 1 Corinthians 3:13-15: “…each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day [judgment day] will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation [Jesus Christ] survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.”

Where is this place that a man, after he dies, has his works tested, and could suffer loss, as through fire, but still be saved? Hell? No, once you’re in Hell, you don’t get out. Heaven? No, you don’t suffer loss as through fire in Heaven. It must be somewhere else.

Catholic Scriptural Principle #4 – there is a place, or state of being, other than Heaven or Hell.

Now, let’s summarize these four scriptural principles: There is the possibility of punishment for sin even after one has received forgiveness. Nothing with the stain of sin will enter Heaven. There is some way, or process, by which the spirits of the just are made perfect. And there is a place besides Heaven or Hell where you can suffer loss, yet still be saved, but only as through fire. We’ve just, in essence, described Purgatory. Conclusion: Catholic teaching on Purgatory is indeed scriptural.

Now, what about the common sense perspective on Purgatory that I mentioned earlier?

Well, think about this: Are you perfect right now? In every single way — physically, mentally, emotionally, and/or spiritually — are you perfect? Do you have any attachment to sin? Do you never have a bad thought, say a bad word, do something you shouldn’t, or don’t do something you should? Do you ever get sick? I have asked a whole lot of people that question and I have never had anyone say to me that, yes, they are perfect.

So, you’re not perfect. But, God forbid, let’s say you were to die this very instant and you were to go to Heaven. Would you be perfect in Heaven? Yes, you would be. You would be perfectly united to the Body of Christ, no more sin, no more pain, no more anguish, no more illness. Your soul would be free from sin and your body — after the Resurrection of the Dead — would be in its glorified state. You would be perfect in Heaven.

Well, think about that. You die imperfect; but you enter Heaven perfect. How did that happen? There was some process by which the spirit of the just was made perfect. Your imperfections were “purged” from you. Call that whatever you want, but that process is what we Catholics call “Purgatory.”

Source: 4 Biblical Principles That Show the Reality of Purgatory

Again, just as it was with the Immaculate Conception of Mary...…..NOT ONE single Scripture that supports Purgatory.

Lots of Catholic Principles but you as well as myself and all others know that Catholic Principles are NOT THE WORD OF GOD.

Purgatory simply does away with the blood of Jesus to cleanses the sinner. YOU are saying and believing that what Jesus Christ did for us was not enough.

The make believe Catholic doctrine of purgatory provides false hope because it is based not in fact, but in fantasy. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines purgatory...…….
" as a purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven," and is for those who are said to be going to heaven but are nevertheless "still imperfectly purified." (CCC 1030).

Then according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, purgatory is...…..
"a place or condition of temporal punishment" for a Christian after death."

The punishment and purification process in purgatory is said to "purge" away certain sins that still require cleansing.

The problem is that this doctrine is not rooted in Scripture. The real fact is that there is NO MENTION of Purgatory found in the Bible at all. Not one single Scripture you posted can be correctly interpreted to validate Purgatory.

O, I am well aware that any Catholic apologist can say that this verse and that verse is about Purgatory and you are welcome to believe what ever someone tells you. That however does not make it truth. It only makes it Catholic dogma.

And on top of that, it invites sinners to assume the blood of Jesus and the cross of Christ are not enough to make a believer completely holy in God's sight. Man needs "more" purification, or so goes the misguided line of reasoning.

In reality, every believer is already completely holy in God's sight as a result of the Savior's sacrifice on the cross 2000 years ago. This complete cleansing flows from the miracle of the cross. (1 Peter 2:24,25) Thankfully, every Christian is already "seated with Christ in the heavenly realms." (Eph. 2:6) The complete purification of a sinner's soul occurs the moment the new birth takes place (John 3:6,7) in a person's heart through faith in Christ. (John 1:12; John 3:16)

"We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,266
✟584,032.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Please look at the other side of the coin and reverse your logic in this matter to contemplate if anything that is not specifically stated as being allowed in the scriptures is not permissible. This extremely obscure perspective is ridiculous either way you look at it. The scriptures do have a tendency to lean more towards telling us what is forbidden than what is permissible. It’s a lot easier to list the things that are forbidden than to list everything that is permissible.

Yes, but you are making dogma on your guesswork and assumptions. That's the issue here.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,600
8,669
Dallas
✟1,163,227.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
a verse that speaks of praying to spirits.

No extrapolating from a verse about your neighbor, saying that your neighbor is no different from a ghost because A is the same as B is the same as C in some mystical "Communion of Saints" way of looking at things.

Please show me a verse that says the scriptures are the pillar of truth and not the church itself. Or maybe a verse that says The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit make up the Godhead or the Trinity without extrapolating. You accept these ideas, don’t you?
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,600
8,669
Dallas
✟1,163,227.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, but you are making dogma on your guesswork and assumptions. That's the issue here.

What dogma exactly are you referring to? I have said numerous times that I do not claim that prayers to the saints are beneficial but rather they can be meaning it is possible that they might be beneficial.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟218,785.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Please look at the other side of the coin and reverse your logic in this matter to contemplate if anything that is not specifically stated as being allowed in the scriptures is not permissible. This extremely obscure perspective is ridiculous either way you look at it. The scriptures do have a tendency to lean more towards telling us what is forbidden than what is permissible. It’s a lot easier to list the things that are forbidden than to list everything that is permissible.

Do you think that may be because we as humans are totally depraved, and destined for hell and God wants to warn us????

Priverbs 3:5......….
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,266
✟584,032.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
What dogma exactly are you referring to?
I was addressing the proposition that says if X is not in Scripture or not condemned by Scripture, the church or someone is free to make it be a religious belief. That, in fact, is a concept essential to the theory of Holy Tradition.

I have said numerous times that I do not claim that prayers to the saints are beneficial but rather they can be meaning it is possible that they might be beneficial.
OK, and you have also said that praying to the spirits of departed humans is proper. Right or not? And if it is proper or permissible, what's the basis for it?
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟218,785.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Please show me a verse that says the scriptures are the pillar of truth and not the church itself. Or maybe a verse that says The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit make up the Godhead or the Trinity without extrapolating. You accept these ideas, don’t you?

Showing and you beliving them are two different things. Such a claim tghat the church is the pillar of truth is nothing more than a claim advocated by a church that has obviously failed to properly represent God and Scripture.

IMO. the idea of the church as a pillar of truth is an idea motivated by guilt.

Please consider the following teachings of the Roman Catholic Church as evidence of many of its false teachings.

  • Become gods, (CCC 460), "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."
  • Observe the commandments to attain salvation, (CCC 2068), "the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments."
  • Salvation through Catholic Church alone, (CCC 816), "The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.
  • Mary is 2nd only to Jesus: "Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son," (Vatican Council II, p. 421).
  • Mary made atonement for the sins of man: " . . . Mary, by her spiritual entering into the sacrifice of her divine son for men, made atonement for the sins of man and (de congruon) merited the application of the redemptive grace of Christ. In this manner she cooperates in the subjective redemption of mankind." (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ott, page 213).
  • Mary delivers souls from death, (CCC 966), " . . . You [Mary] conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death."
  • Is the Roman Catholic Church the pillar of truth? | CARM.org
If the Roman Catholic Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth, then why does it contradict Scripture and teach that we can become gods:
that we have to observe commandments to attain salvation,
that salvation is only for the Catholic Church,
that Mary helped make atonement for sins, and that she delivers our souls from death?

Are these really biblical teachings? Of course not. The Roman Catholic Church is obviously not the pillar and foundation of BIBLICAL truth.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,600
8,669
Dallas
✟1,163,227.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Do you think that may be because we as humans are totally depraved, and destined for hell and God wants to warn us????

Priverbs 3:5......….
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.

I don’t understand what you mean.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,600
8,669
Dallas
✟1,163,227.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Showing and you beliving them are two different things. Such a claim tghat the church is the pillar of truth is nothing more than a claim advocated by a church that has obviously failed to properly represent God and Scripture.

IMO. the idea of the church as a pillar of truth is an idea motivated by guilt.

Please consider the following teachings of the Roman Catholic Church as evidence of many of its false teachings.

  • Become gods, (CCC 460), "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."
  • Observe the commandments to attain salvation, (CCC 2068), "the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments."
  • Salvation through Catholic Church alone, (CCC 816), "The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.
  • Mary is 2nd only to Jesus: "Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son," (Vatican Council II, p. 421).
  • Mary made atonement for the sins of man: " . . . Mary, by her spiritual entering into the sacrifice of her divine son for men, made atonement for the sins of man and (de congruon) merited the application of the redemptive grace of Christ. In this manner she cooperates in the subjective redemption of mankind." (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ott, page 213).
  • Mary delivers souls from death, (CCC 966), " . . . You [Mary] conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death."
  • Is the Roman Catholic Church the pillar of truth? | CARM.org
If the Roman Catholic Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth, then why does it contradict Scripture and teach that we can become gods:
that we have to observe commandments to attain salvation,
that salvation is only for the Catholic Church,
that Mary helped make atonement for sins, and that she delivers our souls from death?

Are these really biblical teachings? Of course not. The Roman Catholic Church is obviously not the pillar and foundation of BIBLICAL truth.

The Roman church was excommunicated from the Catholic Church in 1054AD my friend.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.