• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Dealing with Liberal Christians

Discussion in 'Christian Advice' started by Lybrah, Dec 11, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Monk Brendan said: Finally, in the last years of the 4th Century, it was decided that these books here, all 73 of them could be read in Church!--and that is all the Canon of Scripture is for. These books, AND THESE ALONE, were the ones that could be read while a Liturgy was going on.

    Meaning that your statement "that is all the Canon of Scripture is for" as regards that all 73 books being read in Church meant they were Scripture, and being read in church is all the canon is for, is not universally historically accurate nor correct in the judgment of such men as Jerome, who,

    "In his famous 'Prologus Galeatus', or Preface to his translation of Samuel and Kings, he (Jerome) declares that everything not Hebrew should be classed with the apocrypha, and explicitly says that Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobias,and Judith are not in the Canon. These books, he adds, are read in the churches for the edification of the people, and not for the confirmation of revealed doctrine" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Canon of the Old Testament).

    Thus a distinction is made btwn what made be read as edifying, but not as doctrine and Scripture proper, even if the CE thinks was that was too strict as regards criteria for canonicity, (which was only made binding after the death of Luther):

    ..the inferior rank to which the deuteros were relegated by authorities like Origen, Athanasius, and Jerome, was due to too rigid a conception of canonicity, one demanding that a book, to be entitled to this supreme dignity, must be received by all, must have the sanction of Jewish antiquity, and must moreover be adapted not only to edification, but also to the "confirmation of the doctrine of the Church", to borrow Jerome's phrase. (Catholic Encyclopedia, Canon of the Old Testament; CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Canon of the Old Testament)

    Similarly, Luther himself also would not include the latest Superman comic book, but included most of the Deuteros (separately) in his translation as edifying, and could even quote from such, but not as being Scripture proper in his non-binding canon, reflecting the judgment of some revered ancients.

    As the Catholic Encyclopedia also finds as regards the Middle Ages

    In the Latin Church, all through the Middle Ages [5th century to the 15th century] we find evidence of hesitation about the character of the deuterocanonicals. There is a current friendly to them, another one distinctly unfavourable to their authority and sacredness, while wavering between the two are a number of writers whose veneration for these books is tempered by some perplexity as to their exact standing, and among those we note St. Thomas Aquinas. Few are found to unequivocally acknowledge their canonicity. The prevailing attitude of Western medieval authors is substantially that of the Greek Fathers. The chief cause of this phenomenon in the West is to be sought in the influence, direct and indirect, of St. Jerome's depreciating Prologus (CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Canon of the Old Testament)

    Origen in the 2nd century (c. 240) rejected the apocrypha as he held to the Palestinian canon (plus the Letter of Jeremiah), and likewise Cyril of Jerusalem (plus Baruch), but like St. Hilary of Poitiers (300-368) and Rufinus who also rejected the apocrypha, Origen used them or parts thereof , as others also did with these second class books.

    And the non-doctrinal status of the Deuteros and disputable status of them as Scripture is why Luther could reject 2 Mac. as proffered support for indulgences, and his rejection of the Deuteros was not cited in the list of charges against him. And infallible, indisputable definition of the canon was not provided until after the death of Luther.

    “The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council. (CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Canon of the New Testament)


    "For the first fifteen centuries of Christianity, no Christian Church put forth a definitive list of biblical books. Most Christians had followed St. Augustine and included the 'Apocrypha' in the canon, but St. Jerome, who excluded them, had always had his defenders." (Joseph Lienhard, S.J., A.B., classics, Fordham University, “The Bible, The Church, And Authority;” [Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1995], p. 59)

    And at the time of Trent Theologian Cardinal Cajetan stated, in his Commentary on All the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament (dedicated to Pope Clement VII ):

    "Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St. Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecciesiasticus, as is plain from the Protogus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome.

    Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the Bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.” . ("A Disputation on Holy Scripture" by William Whitaker (Cambridge: University, 1849), p. 48. Cf. Cosin's A Scholastic History of the Canon, Volume III, Chapter XVII, pp. 257-258 and B.F. Westcott's A General Survey of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 475.)

    Following Jerome, Cajetan also relegated the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament to a secondary place where they could serve piety but not the teaching of revealed doctrine. — Jared Wicks tr., Cajetan Responds: A Reader in Reformation Controversy (Washington: The Catholic University Press of America, 1978). See also Cardinal Cajetan, "Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament," Bruce Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Oxford, 1957), p. 180.)


    Cajetan was also highly regarded by many, even if opposed by others: The Catholic Encyclopedia states, "It has been significantly said of Cajetan that his positive teaching was regarded as a guide for others and his silence as an implicit censure. His rectitude, candour, and moderation were praised even by his enemies. Always obedient, and submitting his works to ecclesiastical authority, he presented a striking contrast to the leaders of heresy and revolt, whom he strove to save from their folly." And that "It was the common opinion of his contemporaries that had he lived, he would have succeeded Clement VII on the papal throne.” — Catholic Encyclopedia>Tommaso de Vio Gaetani Cajetan

    Nor was he alone.

    “Tobias, Judith, the Book of Wisdom, the books of Esdras, Ecclesiasticus, the books of the Maccabees, and Baruch are only "canonici et ecclesiastici" and make up the canon morum in contrast to the canon fidei. These, Seripando says in the words of St. Jerome, are suited for the edification of the people, but they are not authentic, that is, not sufficient to prove a dogma. Seripando emphasized that in spite of the Florentine canon the question of a twofold canon was still open and was treated as such by learned men in the Church. Without doubt he was thinking of Cardinal Cajetan, who in his commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews accepted St. Jerome's view which had had supporters throughout the Middle Ages.” (Hubert Jedin, Papal Legate At The Council Of Trent (St Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1947), pp. 270-271)

    Also, the claim that the Council of Rome (382) approved an infallible canon is not only contrary to Roman Catholic statements which point to Trent, but it depends upon the Decretum Gelasianum, the authority of which is disputed, based upon evidence that it was pseudepigraphical, being a sixth century compilation put together in northern Italy or southern France at the beginning of the 6th cent. In addition the Council of Rome found many opponents in Africa.” More: Tertullian : F.C.Burkitt, Review of The decretum Gelasianum, Journal of Theological Studies 14 (1913) pp. 469-471

    More here by the grace of God.

    Moreover, in the Tradition-intensive Greek Orthodox Liturgy, they have never read from the Book of Revelation, while the EOs (being not as formal and technical as Rome. may include 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees and Odes.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2017
  2. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,553
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    PbJ, I think you have far too narrow a view of the scope of Christian ethics and focus too much on the usual stuff conservative evangelicals get in a hissy fit about, personal bodily and sexual purity. When it comes to real duties to your neighbor, you fail miserably.
     
  3. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Meaning faced with substantiation which refutes you, then you must resort to ad hominem, and or more baseless charges. What it is about my personal life that warrants your charge? "Real duties to my neighbor?" Tell me.

    And if referring to things which the stats details, tell me what "real duties to our neighbor you imagine conservative Christians engage less in versus liberal one percentage wise.

    But we are not done. Tell me why Scripture is wrong for focusing on personal bodily and sexual purity and evangelism, and caring for the needs of the brethren, without appealing to the lost for find its work.

    Need to go now. I need to focus on the people are waiting for the food distribution outside in the cold, which i thank God i am able to be part of.
     
  4. Monk Brendan

    Monk Brendan Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,763
    United States
    Melkite Catholic
    Private
    US-Others
    Oh! You're so pure and holy. But you do not see the bigotry in front of your own eyes! Maybe you don't recognize it. But your web page seems to show that Catholics are the lowest and worst Christians in the world, if they are even Christian at all. You made comparisons between evangelicals and Catholics, and between Assemblies of God and Catholics, and so on. But YOUR findings, YOUR boiled down statistics are flawed.

    What about the outreach to the world through hospitals, orphanages, and some of the finest schools in the world?

    I know, you're going to say that they are all works. But they are works of FAITH! Even having faith is a WORK. Believing in Jesus is a WORK. Praying is a WORK Walking down to the altar to respond to an altar call is a WORK.

    The only works most of the Evangelical and Protestants do is to set out pew cards, which are given to the Evangelism team, who go out and call upon these poor saps and try to lead them to Christ--learning, in 90% of the case, that they are already Christians, who came to see your Christmas program or the Easter Passion Play--sometimes in the form of a singing Cross.

    Good, you pray. Good, you read the Word. But how does that do anything at all for the people in India starving to death? Have your prayers saved one single soul in Myanmar?
     
  5. Monk Brendan

    Monk Brendan Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,763
    United States
    Melkite Catholic
    Private
    US-Others
    There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. The only authentic way to run a survey, and make sure it IS non-biased is to start with the writing of the survey, and carefully make sure that your "random sampling" of the population is done honestly.

    However, I am not putting down the Pew Council. I am talking about your website, which proves that YOUR statistics are flawed and biased.
     
  6. Monk Brendan

    Monk Brendan Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,763
    United States
    Melkite Catholic
    Private
    US-Others
    Why is it that when Protestants, who usually loath church history before the Reformation, instantly go to those same histories when it can firm up your side of the argument?

    But I have so many more histories that I can quote refuting your refutation.
     
  7. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,553
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    I'm not critiquing your personal moral purity. I'm saying you don't understand, and are unwilling to understand, mainline Protestant ethics, therefore you dismiss our ethical concerns and the way we understand the Scriptures. That's hardly intellectually honest or open minded.

    This is not the proper place for this discussion, frankly. But there are plenty of other places on this forum where this discussion would be better suited. When you are willing to have an open mind and to learn, then maybe this discussion could be more fruitful.
     
  8. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Actually i am not the one dressed akin to the Pharisees in my avatar, and have confessed I have a long way to God in Godliness. But after been told I focus too much on issues of personal holiness versus and fail miserably on "real" duties to your neighbor, and i challenge that, and even mention something I must run to do along that line, and contrary to the characterization imposed on me, then i get "Oh! You're so pure and holy." Yet i must be the bigot!

    They are like unto children sitting in the marketplace, and calling one to another, and saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned to you, and ye have not wept. (Luke 7:32)
    What is not being recognized is your own bigotry, as manifest by your flailing fallacious responses to actual substantive arguments since it impugns your church, while you yourself only condemn me and conservatives regardless of what is shown you.
    You have not provided one iota of substance of any flaw that would change what those comparisons overall attest to (which also include some liberal Prot. denoms), and in response once again you must resort to mere bombast in the light of substantial research from multiple secular and Catholic sources.

    Furthermore, reporting such consistent findings is not bigotry, that of being intolerant of the opinions of others regardless of evidence, but blithely dismissing such as "a lie from Hell" is what bigotry does. Unless shown otherwise, that the response of self identifying Catholics to multiple agencies testifies to them as being just as committed and morally conservative then i must go where the evidence leads. And that compilation was a response RCs (trad. types) who attack evangelical types and exalt their church, as if we should join it and become brethren with Ted Kennedy-type RCs, though not all RCs support or are like him.
    Indeed "what about" it? The bigotry of pro-Catholics leaves them ignorant of the vast amount of evangelical and Protestant agencies providing humanitarian aid - along with the gospel if they are Biblical Christians. Every week we receive news of evangelical type agencies providing humanitarian aid, along with spiritual help (and i check out some to see how they are using their funds), from such ministries as Persecution Project, Barnabas Fund | Hope and Aid for the Persecuted Church, Food for the Hungry, Samaritans Purse, Operation Blessing International, and others, which are just a few.

    And research actually shows that ,

    Faith-based NGOs constitute nearly 60 percent of all U.S.-based foreign aid organizations, and the majority of faith-based NGOs are Christian..Three of the six largest U.S.- based international aid charities are Christian, with combined revenue of $2.7 billion in 2014..

    Christian organizations have long had a large presence among faith-based NGOs in the United States. But in the post-World War II era, they grew to constitute the lion's share, led by evangelicals. Among organizations registered with USAID and its predecessors, Protestant Christian groups made up 28 percent of all faith-based NGOs in 1940. By 2004, they accounted for 69 percent of all faith-based NGOs. 13 That figure almost certainly understates the presence of evangelical groups in international assistance, because most Christian NGOs do not receive federal funding and thus do not register with USAID ..

    A major and often overlooked difference between Christian and secular NGOs is that Christian groups - particularly evangelical ones - are almost entirely dependent on private donations, while secular NGOs rely more heavily on government funding. 14 This is often a deliberate choice on the part of Christian groups to maintain their independence, and it is a choice with potentially significant effects on the types of development projects Christian NGOs pursue. If an NGO is reliant on government funding, we would expect it to be responsive to government priorities out of self-interest. An NGO that instead relies on private donations, as most Christian groups do, would reasonably be more responsive to the priorities of private donors and less concerned with government agendas. - http://www.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/research/documents/USMissionsSurvey_FINALReport.pdf

    Of course, to be consistent we can count on you to blithely dismiss all such that is contrary to the liberal and or Catholic case that they are the saviors of the world, and all we do is preach faith.

    Yet i am not saying there are not Catholic agencies doing humanitarian work, though if we are to going make this a contest then they would need to know the amount of effective effort per capita relative to the resources available. And actually preaching the convicting and comforting gospel of salvation by effectual faith should be part if it, indeed, the highest goal.

    Note that while your may invoke the largest(?) Catholic humanitarian agency, Catholic Charities, that is attacked by Catholics themselves as an egregious example of state-funded "Christian" work:

    How Catholic Charities Charities Lost Its Soul

    Catholic Charities—and the same could be said about the Association of Jewish Family and Children's Agencies or the Lutheran Services in America—has become over the last three decades an arm of the welfare state, with 65 percent of its $2.3 billion annual budget now flowing from government sources and little that is explicitly religious, or even values-laden, about most of the services its 1,400 member agencies and 46,000 paid employees provide. Library : Spiritual and Cultural Role of Cinema

    However, they must be bigots for saying such.
    No, that is not what was going to say, or have said, and have even reproved you before on this, affirming that believing means "means a life characterized by , following the Lord Jesus, (Jn. 10:27,28) doing righteousness, and repenting when convicted of failing to do so." However, bigotry means you must impose your chosen characterization on me despite me not saying it but instead affirming faith must have works.
    Well, it seems you have no problem stating something as fact despite there not even being an raw data to examine! I wonder who is working in the vast number of Evangelical and Protestant agencies doing humanitarian work, both here and abroad.

    However, it is safe to say that a historical reality is that a minority do most of the work, and it would not be unreasonable to say Catholics as a percentage attest to doing less than evangelical have. And for which we can see some more of those dreaded statistics:
    • Volunteer church work (during past 7 days): Assemblies of God were highest at 30%, with the lowest going to Catholics at 12%. - https://www.barna.com/research/prot...reflect-diverse-levels-of-religious-activity/

    • American evangelicals gave four times as much money, per person, to churches as did all other church donors in 2001. 88 percent of evangelicals and 73 percent of all Protestants donated to churches. John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006),12. http://www.generousgiving.org/stats#

    • Data from a variety of researchers indicates that Catholics give one-third to one-half the portion of income that Protestants give. - http://www.emptytomb.org/cathgiv.html

    • A Catholic survey reports that 4 percent of US Catholics described themselves as “very” involved in parish or religious activities other than attending Mass, and 11% as “somewhat involved, and 64% as “not involved at all.” Among weekly (or more) attendees (approx 22% of adult Catholics), 13% were very” involved, 29% “somewhat involved and 25% not involved at all.” http://cara.georgetown.edu/CARAServices/FRStats/devotionpractice.pdf
    How can you even ask that, since reading the word with an obedient heart leads to providing material support for the persecuted and hungry, starving, etc,. and if we believe what God says about prayer, then how can you infer a prayer cannot have saved one single soul in Myanmar? Yet this does not mean that is all Christian love motivates and does.

    In closing, your responses much evidence that it is you who hold to a unreason-able bigoted opinion, that of evangelicals, who can only be criticized despite substantiation in favor of them, while damning what impugn them as a lie from Hell despite zero evidence that would warrant that dismissal. Meanwhile, the veracity of negativity i present against Catholicism in doctrine and works (which is not that of a "monolith that only tries to draw in money from all over the world, and give the Bishops, Cardinals and Popes the ability to live out their lives in luxury" as you falsely charge) rests upon the weight of evidential warrant, from Scripture, her own documents and researchers, and history, etc.

    If you want to debate that, then ping me to your thread instead of engaging in more sophistry.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2017
  9. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Rather, proper or not, you helped make this a place for this discussion, frankly, charging that conservative evangelicals get in a hissy fit about personal bodily and sexual purity but that "when it comes to real duties to your neighbor, you fail miserably." And being reproved for marginalizing what the NT actually does focus much on (fornication alone being mentioned over 40 times) while fallaciously characterizing evangelicals as being unconcerned over "real duties to your neighbor," now you have the gall (again) to charge me with hardly being intellectually honest or open minded.

    However, was you who choose to disparage conservative evangelicals, and i challenged you to tell me what "real duties to our neighbor you imagine conservative Christians engage less in versus liberal one percentage wise.

    But we are not done. Tell me why Scripture is wrong for focusing on personal bodily and sexual purity and evangelism, and caring for the needs of the brethren, without appealing to the lost for find [to fund] its work.


    Instead of answering this response to your blatant provocation, or even showing how mainline Protestants have the moral high ground, including in practice, you resort to another ad hominem. Which is hardly being intellectually honest or open minded, but hypocritical.
     
  10. All4Christ

    All4Christ ✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙ Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +6,384
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    AMBASSADOR HAT

    Please remember that this is not a debate forum. Address your posts to the OP.

    Thank you!
     
  11. FreeinChrist

    FreeinChrist CF Advisory team Staff Member Site Advisor Supporter

    +9,798
    Belize
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Democrat
    MOD HAT

    This is closed for staff review​
     
  12. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +12,587
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    red-strawberry-hat-wool-beret-girls-winter-wear20667.jpg
    MOD HAT ON
    This thread will remain closed.
    It is full of off topic posts, posts which violate the SOP of Christian Advice,
    flames, goads and general disrespect and discourtesy.​

    I suggest it is a case study in how not to deal with those with whom you disagree.
    MOD HAT OFF
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...