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.
I am sure that there are many many more errors and inventions to be added. So many that I believe the post length limit would easily be exceeded if all of them were listed.
Hmmm, this reminds of the Orthodox platitude that we know where the church is, but don't know where it is not.
Tadoflamb has simply invented something he calls the "Protestant Church" in order to vilify Protestants.
Yeah, I agree. There is no one all-encompassing set of doctrines. Which, in and of itself, contradicts the prayer of unity Christ prayed to His Father in John 17. Whereas, if you want to know 'what Catholics believe', you go to the Catechism. There's a lot of practices that are useable by Catholics but aren't necessary. Regading bread actually bleeding, this is a fact, and is documented to have happened. Our belief in it as a miracle is not required.
It doesn't happen again and again. It's the same sacrifice. I understand that you don't understand it, the how and why of it. I didn't say I understand it. But the fact is the fact.In humans there is space and time. Therefore we do not teleport back to the time when Christ layed His life down for His sheep. It was a one time for all time meaning it does not need to happen again and again. He shed His blood as it dropped on the ground for my sins. Good enough for me. His broken body was also for me.. Good enough for me. For what He did was Holy. What we are are sinners saved by the blood He shed.
It doesn't happen again and again. It's the same sacrifice. I understand that you don't understand it, the how and why of it. I didn't say I understand it. But the fact is the fact.
He did set it up upon himself. But the visible Church on Earth is what he put Peter as head of.Why would Christ setup His church on a fallen man when He could set it up on Himself? Why would it be necessary to procfess Peter as the head when Christ never made that decleraion?
There's a lot of ways to guide someone without force. The Holy Spirit does it all the time. As an analogy, how could we stop someone from falling into a hole in the ground? We could put a sign in front of it, we could put a rope around it, we could fill the hole so it doesn't exist anymore. We can build a path that goes so far around the hole that we don't notice there's a hole at all. Lots of ways to guide...when the spirit is willing.Our point of contention is not Christ being with His church, or the leading of the Holy Spirit. It's the protection from error theory that you present which is non-existent. To keep someone from teaching error the Spirit would have to force that individual to speak truth. That would be against God's nature as God does not interfere with man's freedom of choice.
He still succeeded Judas. Prayer and casting lots is an equivalent of asking the Holy Spirit to guide our decision.Jesus appointed disciples. They later on became apostles. And they did not appoint a successor, but a replacement, and that came through prayer and the casting of lots? Is this how your church operates?
Was Timothy the head of a local Church? Yes, and Paul considered him his son. Paul taught Timothy.Where does scripture show Paul appointing Timothy as Bishop? Where does scripture show Christ establishing Peter as His representative on earth? Christ's representative on earth is the church. No one man occupies that role. This is an fabrication of your church that they use to excuse the role of Pope and the primacy of that office.
That would all be fine if Christ was speaking Greek. But he was speaking Aramaic. Kephas was Peter's Aramaic name. Translated into Greek, it's Petra. Male is Petros.Peter - Petros
Rock upon which the church will be build - Petra
You have a small rock vs a big rock. A moveable rock vs an immovable one. An insecure rock vs a secure one. Peter was small, moveable, and insecure. The truth that Christ was the Son of God was big, immovable, and secure.
It could refer to Christ, but that's not the only meaning. Scripture has many senses. Or didn't you know that?And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
This is most certainly referring to Christ as He was the one who established David's throne forever and ever. And if we need to see more, compare this to:
Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
One thing that God said He would never do is share His glory with another. He is the One who establishes and upholds His church. Peter was a servant the same as the rest of us. His was not a special place of honor as your church would have us believe.
He did set it up upon himself. But the visible Church on Earth is what he put Peter as head of.
There's a lot of ways to guide someone without force. The Holy Spirit does it all the time. As an analogy, how could we stop someone from falling into a hole in the ground? We could put a sign in front of it, we could put a rope around it, we could fill the hole so it doesn't exist anymore. We can build a path that goes so far around the hole that we don't notice there's a hole at all. Lots of ways to guide...when the spirit is willing.
He still succeeded Judas. Prayer and casting lots is an equivalent of asking the Holy Spirit to guide our decision.
Was Timothy the head of a local Church? Yes, and Paul considered him his son. Paul taught Timothy.
Matt 16:18-20.
Where does Scripture say that the Church is Christ's representative on earth?
That would all be fine if Christ was speaking Greek. But he was speaking Aramaic. Kephas was Peter's Aramaic name. Translated into Greek, it's Petra. Male is Petros.
It could refer to Christ, but that's not the only meaning. Scripture has many senses. Or didn't you know that?
I think a brief perusal of Science and Health, With Key to the Scriptures should provide another large set for you. When you are finished with that, I can recommend a few other choice texts for your consideration.
That was my first thought too. However, your "list" includes items that are taken from similar groups and I don't see any interest in keeping them from being peddaled as Protestant "errors and inventions."Very kind of you to offer the above suggestion. Alas, Christian Science is not normally considered a Christian denomination.
And this rules out a head of the visible church...how?Except He didn't. Paul puts it plainly. We are the body and Christ is the head.
If said individual ignores the sign and goes around, he's on his own.Indeed. However, if said individual ignores the sign and goes around the rope you'd have to put your hands on them to keep them from going in. That's force. If you fill it with sand, you invalidate your point. The Spirit has His way, it's a collection of 66 books. How did Christ put it "If they won't listen to Moses..."
Trying to limit how the Holy Spirit works is not a point worth arguing? A Biblical manifestation of the Holy Spirit at work? Too funny. Your determination is not such a manifestation, though.Not a point worth arguing. Your selection process is part of your tradition which is fine. The office that you're filling however is not.
Read the first part of the first letter. To Timothy, my child in faith...then he instructs him to remain in Ephesus. Chapter 4 gives Timothy instructions about how to be a good bishop. Earlier, he was taught how to choose a good bishop. Paul named Timothy head of the Church where he left him.Paul thinking of Timothy as a son doesn't make Timothy Paul's successor. How did John address the congregation in his letter? Didn't he say "My little children?"
Well, we don't confine ourselves to only Scripture.And again, scripture says nothing about Timothy being head of any local church. You're appealing to your churches teaching for that.
It doesn't matter? There's no distinction in Aramaic between pebble and boulder. For one.2 Cor 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
It doesn't matter if it's Greek or Aramaic. You're clinging to a language barrier in hopes to establish a weak point. Peter is not the rock upon which Christ would be His church. Even if we just took it for what it was and didn't bother trying to use the Petra Petros argument, Christ is still the Rock spoken of in scripture. He is the Cornerstone, and the Stone of offense that causes men to stumble. If you think about the church being built upon a rock you can't help but admit that you visualize a stedy, firm, unmovable foundation. Peter was not firm, or unmovable. He had a lot of growing that he had to do. Christ on the other hand was immovable, and is a firm foundation. It doesn't take much to realize He is the Rock upon which He built His church.
Who says it can't refer to Christ and Peter? You? By what authority?Not that it could. It does. It just makes it hard for you because the prophecy can't refer to Christ and Peter. If Matt alludes to Isa 22 and Christ confirms in Revelation that He is the One that the same prophecy speaks of, than Peter isn't an option. That goes back to the whole "not sharing His glory" thing I was telling you about.
That was my first thought too. However, your "list" includes items that are taken from similar groups and I don't see any interest in keeping them from being peddaled as Protestant "errors and inventions."
No man should utter that sound when speaking about another man. THe One Holy Father sits upon a throne between the seraphim. Makes you wonder why the pope has a throne with two angels at the side of it. Oh that's right.
...
You have that backwards. It is the priest/sacrifice model carried over from the Levitical priesthood into certain Christian groups whereby they think they may sin apace daily and be absolved by eating some bread over and over and over again.
Some don't know what Paul said in regards to this. We've been saved by grace, should we then have a license to sin? Heavens no.
Actually, in order to be absolved of any sin, we really must be contrite, and resolute not to do them again. If we're not, then it really does not good to eat anything.You have that backwards. It is the priest/sacrifice model carried over from the Levitical priesthood into certain Christian groups whereby they think they may sin apace daily and be absolved by eating some bread over and over and over again.
Some don't know what Paul said in regards to this. We've been saved by grace, should we then have a license to sin? Heavens no.
Care to name the items and the groups that are "similar to [Christian Science]"?
If item #57 is on your mind then by all means mention it and explain why it ought to be excluded.
That's one of them. But I've called this to your attention already.
You pretended to do some housekeeping, yet a number of invalid items remain and you seem to be able to identify #57 without even being prompted. But it's still there on the list.
What would really be interesting is the compilation of a SERIOUS list, omitting items that are uncharacteristic of Protestants and held by only a small minority of Christians and identified with a particular denomination. This list is no more than a game and no more valid than if I were to compile a list of Catholic errors, listing acceptance of homosexual clergy, women priests, reincarnation, and universal salvation. All of those are held by some members of some Catholic churches.
One doesn't need to be RC to adhere to the creed.Prove that this is held by official teaching of the Catholic Church. Show, in the Catechism, where that is. Otherwise, stop it. You see, with the Catholic Church, it doesn't matter what some of the members think. It matters what the Church teaches, which is what Christ taught.
With Protestants, if you disagree with a particular denomination, you take their creed, change what you want, and start your own.
Doesn't work that way in Catholicism.
One doesn't need to be RC to adhere to the creed.
Btw, which "creed" are you talking about?
.
Magic?Is that like the magical prayer that once said saves no matter what?Yes, bleeding bread happens at every Catholic mass when the priest intones the magic incantation and presto bingo the bread begins to gush rivers of blood all over the altar. Because it is Catholic doctrine that the bread becomes bleeding flesh at the Mass all one has to do is attend any mass at any Catholic church to see this happen. Not!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?