Questions for adherents of the Bible alone.

[Not David]

@Major1 How do you think the Church was like after the Apostles died and before the Reformation?

 

[Major1]

@Major1 How do you think the Church was like after the Apostles died and before the Reformation?

In other words you want me to explain what the Roman Catholic Church was like before the Reformation.

The argument you are theorizing is misleading because it falsely assumes that:

1. The Catholic Church was the only church before the reformation.
   
   
2. The Catholic Church could not have fallen into serious error.
   
   
3. The teaching of the modern Catholic Church is identical to that of the old Catholic church. All three propositions are false.

The teaching of the modern Catholic Church is different from that of the old Catholic church.


It is easy to be deceived by words. “The Catholic Church was the church before the Reformation..." is misleading because the doctrinal character of the modern Catholic Church is altogether different from the teaching of the old Catholic churches. We can mention the evolution of the hierarchy, papal supremacy and papal infallibility, the veneration of statues and praying to the saints, purgatory, the mass as a propitiatory sacrifice, transubstantiation, auricular confession, the rosary, the Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. These doctrines and practices originated sooner or later in the history of the Catholic Church, but they were absent in apostolic churches and the early post-apostolic era. Rome’s latest theological novelty is the assurance that members of other religions can be saved - a theory that was flatly denied by previous popes and councils.

 

[Not David]

In other words you want me to explain what the Roman Catholic Church was like before the Reformation.

The argument you are theorizing is misleading because it falsely assumes that:

1. The Catholic Church was the only church before the reformation.
   
   
2. The Catholic Church could not have fallen into serious error.
   
   
3. The teaching of the modern Catholic Church is identical to that of the old Catholic church. All three propositions are false.

The teaching of the modern Catholic Church is different from that of the old Catholic church.


It is easy to be deceived by words. “The Catholic Church was the church before the Reformation..." is misleading because the doctrinal character of the modern Catholic Church is altogether different from the teaching of the old Catholic churches. We can mention the evolution of the hierarchy, papal supremacy and papal infallibility, the veneration of statues and praying to the saints, purgatory, the mass as a propitiatory sacrifice, transubstantiation, auricular confession, the rosary, the Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. These doctrines and practices originated sooner or later in the history of the Catholic Church, but they were absent in apostolic churches and the early post-apostolic era. Rome’s latest theological novelty is the assurance that members of other religions can be saved - a theory that was flatly denied by previous popes and councils.

Well, there is also the Orthodox Church.

 

[Major1]

Well, there is also the Orthodox Church.

Yes that is true but wasn't it the outrages of the Papacy that caused the problems that led to the Reformation?

History books say that it was the selling of 'indulgences' and Purgatory and the veneration of Mary.

As Mark Greengrass states in his online essay (which is here:http://www.gla.ac.uk/centres/tltphistory/protref/intro.htm),

"In the sixteenth century, something important and unique happened to the history of western European Christianity. It did not occur in orthodox Christianity in Russia or what was left of the Byzantine empire in Greece and it is difficult to find appropriate comparisons for it in the other advanced civilizations of Eurasia. It is called the protestant reformation and it was initially an attempt to reform the traditional 'fabric' of the western church. By fabric, we mean not merely the institutions of the church but also the supporting rationale for offering a means of salvation. Protestants sought to change things by using the Bible as the primary authority for doctrine and the early Christian church as an institutional model. In the process, protestants rejected papal authority and (with it) much of the traditional beliefs and practices of the established church."
Was Eastern Orthodoxy Unaffected by the Reformation?

The fact is that Orthodoxy had already put a separation between themselves and the papal excesses of the western church and the Eastern Orthodox Church continues to this day in independent fashion, not part of Roman Catholicism but neither part of Protestantism.

They claim that they alone are the truly established Church of Jesus Christ (in institutional form, anyway), although they freely accept Christians from other traditions as true believers. Without doubt, they continue to uphold many things which are entirely biblical; their teaching on salvation is more 'open' than that found within Protestantism because Eastern Orthodoxy received comparatively little influence from Augustine and almost none, of course, from Calvin.

They reject the immaculate conception of Mary which is Biblically correct however, they do affirm the perpetual virginity of Mary as well as her bodily assumption. They also give Mary the title "Mother of God," which of course is not Biblical. Neverthless, Mary occupies a lower place than within Roman Catholicism.

Eastern Orthodoxy should also be congratulated in that that it seems to have enjoyed amazingly harmonious leadership and organization; my understanding is that their 'patriarchs' only have authority to help, guide and advise local churches, but never to meddle or demand.

What is your opinion?

 

[Not David]

Yes that is true but wasn't it the outrages of the Papacy that caused the problems that led to the Reformation?

History books say that it was the selling of 'indulgences' and Purgatory and the veneration of Mary.

As Mark Greengrass states in his online essay (which is here:http://www.gla.ac.uk/centres/tltphistory/protref/intro.htm),

"In the sixteenth century, something important and unique happened to the history of western European Christianity. It did not occur in orthodox Christianity in Russia or what was left of the Byzantine empire in Greece and it is difficult to find appropriate comparisons for it in the other advanced civilizations of Eurasia. It is called the protestant reformation and it was initially an attempt to reform the traditional 'fabric' of the western church. By fabric, we mean not merely the institutions of the church but also the supporting rationale for offering a means of salvation. Protestants sought to change things by using the Bible as the primary authority for doctrine and the early Christian church as an institutional model. In the process, protestants rejected papal authority and (with it) much of the traditional beliefs and practices of the established church."
Was Eastern Orthodoxy Unaffected by the Reformation?

The fact is that Orthodoxy had already put a separation between themselves and the papal excesses of the western church and the Eastern Orthodox Church continues to this day in independent fashion, not part of Roman Catholicism but neither part of Protestantism.

They claim that they alone are the truly established Church of Jesus Christ (in institutional form, anyway), although they freely accept Christians from other traditions as true believers. Without doubt, they continue to uphold many things which are entirely biblical; their teaching on salvation is more 'open' than that found within Protestantism because Eastern Orthodoxy received comparatively little influence from Augustine and almost none, of course, from Calvin.

They reject the immaculate conception of Mary which is Biblically correct however, they do affirm the perpetual virginity of Mary as well as her bodily assumption. They also give Mary the title "Mother of God," which of course is not Biblical. Neverthless, Mary occupies a lower place than within Roman Catholicism.

Eastern Orthodoxy should also be congratulated in that that it seems to have enjoyed amazingly harmonious leadership and organization; my understanding is that their 'patriarchs' only have authority to help, guide and advise local churches, but never to meddle or demand.

What is your opinion?

They made me appreciate Tradition and Scriptures more, and since they developed different from Rome I trust them more. Plus I'm going to that Church now.

 

[Fidelibus]

And as I have said about 100 times to you...……...I am not infallible, I am not authoritive of anything except my wife and dog and I am subject to error.

Including your personal interpretation of Scripture?

I am nothing more than an old country boy who reads the Bible and tries to explain it as best he can.

But you seem to have difficiulty admitting your personal explanation/understanding of the Bible has a strong possibility of being in error, and people that read it should not take your "explanation/understanding" as being free from error. Why is that?

If you do not agree with me...…….WONDERFUL! As I have said---- I do not care!

Good to know my friend

If you would like to discuss any Bible Scripture or you would like my understanding of one, please post it.

Sure...... I'd be happy too. However, if we were to come to a disagreement of a certain scripture passage, to what authority would we turn to determine who's in error, and who is not? I have no doubt to what authority I can turn too. And you?

If you would like to discuss any Catholic teaching that IS NOT IN THE BIBLE such as Purgatory or the Rosary, or calling men FATHET or the inability of the laity to marry, please ask me and I will be glad to give you the Bible response.

Start a thread on what you believe are Catholic teachings that are not explicitly or implicitly in Scripture, and I'd be more than happy to go over them with you one by one, or how many others you think there are.

Now speaking of Purgatory, and the Rosary Maj1, back on post #80 you accused Catholics of worshiping them:

That is not about disunity at all. It was about believing something which is not found expressly printed in the Scriptures so as to allow you as a Catholic to continue to worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and many other NON Biblical practices of the Catholic church.

And my responce to you on post #86 was:

Please show me where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church where it say's we are to worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and anything else other than God?

And your response............... Nada! These are some very serious allegations on your part, and need to be addressed or proven Maj1. For anyone to take these allegations serious, you need to back them up. I gave you the opportunity to do so by asking you to show where in the Cathechism of the Catholic Church, where it teaches what you accuse Catholics of. I am offering you a second chance to do so, right here, and right now! Failure to do so, (back up your claim) proves not only to Catholics, but everyone else on this forum your true agenda. Keep in mind my friend, your credibility is on the line here, if you want anyone in the future to take your posts with any type of seriousness.

Have a Blessed day

 

[Major1]

They made me appreciate Tradition and Scriptures more, and since they developed different from Rome I trust them more. Plus I'm going to that Church now.

As I have said before, many times, "traditions" are not always wrong.

The Catholic faction of religion likes to get Protestants arguing against all traditions rather than just the inventions of men; and more specifically, the inventions of the Catholic Church. The argument is really against traditions of men that are not supported by the written word of God.

The Catholics will not regard scripture because they are pushing so hard on the point of traditions that they attempt to prove traditions by traditions, or extrabiblical writings, rather than with scripture. The Protestants won't consider the oral transmission of God's word because they push the written text only.

The circle is a dizzying spiral that leads to nowhere fast as I am sure you have observed on this web site. The real question always comes down to.........Who do you believe?
The Roman Catholic Church or the written Word of God. It is just that simple my dear friend.

In my simple and unauthoritative opinion it is a NO brainer.We should always believe God's own testimony.

Why? because He is infallible and True.

Numbers 23:19 ………
"God is not a man, that he should lie....".

Heb 6:18 "... .....
"it was[ and is] impossible for God to lie...""

The apostle Peter had learned this and his words recorded in the bible's book of The Acts of The Apostles 5:29 ...….
"Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men."

 

[Major1]

Including your personal interpretation of Scripture?



But you seem to have difficiulty admitting your personal explanation/understanding of the Bible has a strong possibility of being in error, and people that read it should not take your "explanation/understanding" as being free from error. Why is that?



Good to know my friend




Sure...... I'd be happy too. However, if we were to come to a disagreement of a certain scripture passage, to what authority would we turn to determine who's in error, and who is not? I have no doubt to what authority I can turn too. And you?




Start a thread on what you believe are Catholic teachings that are not explicitly or implicitly in Scripture, and I'd be more than happy to go over them with you one by one, or how many others you think there are.

Now speaking of Purgatory, and the Rosary Maj1, back on post #80 you accused Catholics of worshiping them:



And my responce to you on post #86 was:



And your response............... Nada! These are some very serious allegations on your part, and need to be addressed or proven Maj1. For anyone to take these allegations serious, you need to back them up. I gave you the opportunity to do so by asking you to show where in the Cathechism of the Catholic Church, where it teaches what you accuse Catholics of. I am offering you a second chance to do so, right here, and right now! Failure to do so, (back up your claim) proves not only to Catholics, but everyone else on this forum your true agenda. Keep in mind my friend, your credibility is on the line here, if you want anyone in the future to take your posts with any type of seriousness.

Have a Blessed day

I do not respond well to threats my friend. I do not even do well when having to argue.

But since this is important to you I will respond to your threat.

Speaking of "Pergatory".

Catholicism teaches there is, after death, a place of temporary punishment which can be escaped by the merits of other people.

"What is purgatory? A place and state of temporary punishment after death.
Who goes to purgatory? Those ………
1) who die while guilty of unrepented venial sins
2) who die without having done sufficient penance to pay the debt of the temporal punishment still due their past sins.
Where do you go when you leave purgatory? To heaven to be with God.
Can you help the souls in purgatory? You can shorten their stay by having Masses said for them, praying for them and doing good works for them" .
Catechism, pp. 37-39.

But the Bible teaches something very different:
1. After death, there will be no crossing over from the place of punishment to the place of reward (Luke 16:26). Hence, our eternal destinies are fixed at the time of death and cannot be changed by anything we or anyone else does.

2. Each person will be rewarded according to what he personally did in the body (Ezek. 18:20; 2 Cor. 5:10). No one's reward or punishment after death can be determined by what other people do.

3. No human has any excess good deeds beyond what he himself needs (Rom. 3:9-18,23; I John 1:8,10; James 2:10; Luke 17:10).

4. God is no respecter of persons. Wealthy people have no advantage over poor people regarding their destiny after death (Acts 10:34,35; James 2:1-9; 2 Cor. 8:12; Mark 12:41-44). But since the priest gets paid to say masses for the dead, the doctrine of purgatory lets people who are rich (or who have rich relatives) escape punishment sooner than poor people.

Speaking of the Rosary.

The use of beads in a form something like the Rosary as we now know it originated in the Eastern Church. The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913 edition) confirms this:
“The rosary is conferred upon the Greek monk as a part of his investiture with the mandyas , or full monastic habit, as the second step in the monastic life, and is called his ‘spiritual sword

The Rosary has been included in encyclicals of many Popes. In the Catholic Encyclopedia (1917) we see the Rosary defined as:

"The Rosary", says the Roman Breviary, "is a certain form of prayer wherein we say fifteen decades or tens of Hail Marys with an Our Father between each ten, while at each of these fifteen decades we recall successively in pious meditation one of the mysteries of our Redemption."

The quotes from many different papal encyclicals below summarize well what the Church has always taught on the Holy Rosary.

• "And so Dominic looked to that simple way of praying and beseeching God, accessible to all and wholly pious, which is called the Rosary, or Psalter of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in which the same most Blessed Virgin is venerated by the angelic greeting repeated one hundred and fifty times, that is, according to the number of the Davidic Psalter, and by the Lord's Prayer with each decade. Interposed with these prayers are certain meditations showing forth the entire life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, thus completing the method of prayer devised by the by the Fathers of the Holy Roman Church." Encyclical by Pope Pius V, Consueverunt Romani, 1569
• "Now that the anniversary, therefore, of manifold and exceedingly great favors obtained by a Christian people through the devotion of the Rosary is at hand, We desire that that same devotion should be offered by the whole Catholic world with the greatest earnestness to the Blessed Virgin, that by her intercession her Divine Son may be appeased and softened in the evils which afflict us." Encyclical, "On Devotion of the Rosary" by Pope Leo XIII, 1883
• • "Our merciful God, as you know, raised up against these most direful enemies a most holy man, the illustrious parent and founder of the Dominican Order. Great in the integrity of his doctrine, in his example of virtue, and by his apostolic labors, he proceeded undauntedly to attack the enemies of the Catholic Church, not by force of arms, but trusting wholly to that devotion which he was the first to institute under the name of the Holy Rosary, which was disseminated through the length and breadth of the earth by him and his pupils. Guided, in fact, by divine inspiration and grace, he foresaw that this devotion, like a most powerful warlike weapon, would be the means of putting the enemy to flight, and of confounding their audacity and mad impiety" Encyclical, "On Devotion of the Rosary" by Pope Leo XIII, 1883
  • The formula of the Rosary, too, is excellently adapted to prayer in common, so that it has been styled, not without reason, "The Psalter of Mary." And that old custom of our forefathers ought to be preserved or else restored, according to which Christian families, whether in town or country, were religiously wont at close of day, when their labours were at an end, to assemble before a figure of Our Lady and alternately recite the Rosary. She, delighted at this faithful and unanimous homage, was ever near them like a loving mother surrounded by her children, distributing to them the blessings of domestic peace, the foretaste of the peace of heaven. Considering the efficacy of public prayer, We, among other decrees which we have from time to time issued concerning the Rosary, have spoken thus: "It is Our desire that in the principal church of each diocese it should be recited every day, and in parish churches on every feast-day (Apostolic Letter Salutaris Ille, 24th December, 1883). POPE LEO XIII ON THE ROSARY 1896
  • "Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs have let pass no occasion of commending the Rosary and have enriched it with Apostolic Indulgences." Encyclical "On Saint Dominic" by Pope Benedict XV, 1921
  • "Let us turn, too, to the most powerful intercession of the Divine Mother -- to obtain which We, addressing to you this Letter of Ours on the day appointed especially for commemorating the Holy Rosary, ordain and confirm all Our Predecessor's prescriptions with regard to the dedication of the present month to the august Virgin, by the public recitation of the Rosary in all churches" Encyclical of Pope St. Pius X, On the Restoration of All Things in Christ", 1903
  • Nevertheless, if men in our century, with its derisive pride, refuse the Holy Rosary, there is an innumerable multitude of holy men of every age and every condition who have always held it dear. They have recited it with great devotion, and in every moment they have used it as a powerful weapon to put the demons to flight, to preserve the integrity of life, to acquire virtue more easily, and in a word to attain real peace among men. Nor are there lacking men famous as to doctrine and wisdom who, although intensely occupied in scientific study and researches, never even for a day fail to pray fervently on bended knee, before the image of the Virgin, in this most pious form. Thus kings and princes, however burdened with most urgent occupations and affairs, made it their duty to recite the Rosary." Encyclical, "On the Rosary" by Pope Pius XI, 1937
  • "Devotion to the Blessed Mother: Inasmuch as priests can be called by a very special title, sons of the Virgin Mary, they will never cease to love her with an ardent piety, invoke her with perfect confidence, and frequently implore her strong protection. So that every day, as the Church herself recommends,[51] they will recite the holy rosary, which, by proposing for our meditation the mysteries of the Redeemer, leads us "to Jesus through Mary." APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION OF POPE PIUS XII TO THE CLERGY OF THE ENTIRE WORLD 1950
  • "To undertake such a difficult duty, We affirm that the custom of the family recitation of the Holy Rosary is a most efficacious means. What a sweet sight -- most pleasing tO God -- when, at eventide, the Christian home resounds with the frequent repetition of praises in honor of the august Queen of Heaven! Then the Rosary, recited in common, assembles before the image of the Virgin, in an admirable union of hearts, the parents and their children, who come back from their daily work. It unites them piously with those absent and those dead. It links all more tightly in a sweet bond of love, with the most Holy Virgin, who, like a loving mother, in the circle of her children, will be there bestowing upon them an abundance of the gifts of concord and family peace" Encyclical on "Reciting the Rosary" by Pope Pius XII, 1951
  
  The Catholic Church has repeatedly taught that the Holy Rosary is one of the best forms of prayer. Are you practicing this devotion daily? Is it promoted in your parish?

From the CATHOLIC web sit at Catholic Essentials - The Rosary

Now if the teaching of the Rosary is NOT technically in your Catechism's, then I certainly apologize for saying it was there, HOWEVER it is none the less clear and known by ALL that it is taught and promoted as stated by the Catholic apologetic web site and the list of Popes above.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Do you believe that children, say 5 or 6 years old actually understand/comprehend the things said and done in a worship service or have you not seen that most of them fall asleep????

I suppose this is a question of priorities. Assuming that everything which happens in Mass is above a child's level is simply nonsense. But even if they do fall asleep, one of their parents should wake them up. Faith requires nurture and no small amount of formation.

I didn't gain much from the silly finger-painting activities in the Protestant ecclesial communities in which I grew up. I enjoyed the stories though.

There's no good reason to divide families like that.

Why would you even question a process of an adult teaching children the Bible on a level that they can understand"

I question it because I lived it and I know it's a silly waste of time.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Catholicism teaches there is, after death, a place of temporary punishment which can be escaped by the merits of other people.

No it doesn't.

 

[Major1]

I suppose this is a question of priorities. Assuming that everything which happens in Mass is above a child's level is simply nonsense. But even if they do fall asleep, one of their parents should wake them up. Faith requires nurture and no small amount of formation.

I didn't gain much from the silly finger-painting activities in the Protestant ecclesial communities in which I grew up. I enjoyed the stories though.

There's no good reason to divide families like that.

I question it because I lived it and I know it's a silly waste of time.

Agreed. It is about priorities.

I Personally do not believe you or any other child could comprehend "Transubstaciation" any more than they could "Virgin birth".

 

[Major1]

No it doesn't.

Well...….that is exactly what the Catholic Catechism said stated. So then your argument is with it not me my friend.

That is exactly why I listed the exact words from the RCC Catechism.

Catholicism teaches there is, after death, a place of temporary punishment which can be escaped by the merits of other people.

"What is purgatory? A place and state of temporary punishment after death.
Who goes to purgatory? Those ………
1) who die while guilty of unrepented venial sins
2) who die without having done sufficient penance to pay the debt of the temporal punishment still due their past sins.
Where do you go when you leave purgatory? To heaven to be with God.
Can you help the souls in purgatory? You can shorten their stay by having Masses said for them, praying for them and doing good works for them" .
Catechism, pp. 37-39.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Agreed. It is about priorities.

I Personally do not believe you or any other child could comprehend "Transubstaciation" any more than they could "Virgin birth".

How many children have you ever attempted to teach Transubstantiation to?

Well...….that is exactly what the Catholic Catechism said stated. So then your argument is with it not me my friend.

That is exactly why I listed the exact words from the RCC Catechism.

Catholicism teaches there is, after death, a place of temporary punishment which can be escaped by the merits of other people.

"What is purgatory? A place and state of temporary punishment after death.
Who goes to purgatory? Those ………
1) who die while guilty of unrepented venial sins
2) who die without having done sufficient penance to pay the debt of the temporal punishment still due their past sins.
Where do you go when you leave purgatory? To heaven to be with God.
Can you help the souls in purgatory? You can shorten their stay by having Masses said for them, praying for them and doing good works for them" .
Catechism, pp. 37-39.

It's funny. I Googled part of that description you posted. The results?

Those are mostly non-Catholic sources. Even the one Catholic source is a message board where someone pulled a Major1 and pasted that text into a post in order to... I don't know what. Copypasta anti-Catholic nonsense.

To be clear, Purgatory is for purification. That element appears to be missing from your post. I find that Protestants, for whatever reason, cannot seem to get their heads around the idea that Purgatory is about sanctification rather than justification. But overlooking that simple reality (combined with a refusal to quote from the actual Catechism) results in incomplete copypasta posts like yours with misleading and inaccurate information.

 

[Major1]

How many children have you ever attempted to teach Transubstantiation to?

It's funny. I Googled part of that description you posted. The results?

View attachment 241473

Those are mostly non-Catholic sources. Even the one Catholic source is a message board where someone pulled a Major1 and pasted that text into a post in order to... I don't know what. Copypasta anti-Catholic nonsense.

To be clear, Purgatory is for purification. That element appears to be missing from your post. I find that Protestants, for whatever reason, cannot seem to get their heads around the idea that Purgatory is about sanctification rather than justification. But overlooking that simple reality (combined with a refusal to quote from the actual Catechism) results in incomplete copypasta posts like yours with misleading and inaccurate information.

NONE.

Never have and never will.

How many have you explained John 3:5 to?

How many adults have you tried to teach that to?

To be clear and honest...…...PURGATORY is not found in the Bible anywhere or is there even a suggestion of such a place or a practice. It is a RCC practice only.

If you will do the homework you will see that Purgatory is rooted in the "Selling of Indulgencies".

Purgatory originated with Greek and pagan philosophy, in particular Plato, and was introduced into the church through Origen in the 3rd Century, who is considered a heretic by the Roman Catholic Church. In addition, the teaching of purgatory is contradictory to Scripture for it undermines its clear teaching of the sufficiency of Jesus Christ and is not taught in the Old and New Testaments.

When was purgatory introduced to the church? Sometime before the 5th Century, the Roman Catholic Church took advantage of the idea of purgatory and used it in conjunction with selling "indulgences" to help put money into the Catholic Church.

An "indulgence" is the idea that by contributing some money to the Roman Catholic Church, you could "indulge" in a certain sin and not have to worry about the punishment for that sin.

In conjunction with purgatory, parishioners were assuming that something divine was taking place when they gave the church money to have their loved ones released from that imaginary place. By giving their money, they would also have their own time reduced. I didn't know that the pope and priests had the keys to death and hell.
is purgatory real, does purgatory exist, where does pugatory come from, catholic teachings, indulgences, The Apocrypha

What does the bible say happens when you die? "absent from the body, present with the Lord" 2 Cor. 5:8. Of course, that only applies to those who have put their trust in Jesus. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Romans 8: 1

Purgatory has NOTHING whatsoever to do with sanctification or justification my friend.
To make that claim then means you do not understand what both of those are.

Do you really think that I as a Protestant believer would copy and paste Catholic web sites ???? What kind of thinking is that?????

 

[Fidelibus]

I do not respond well to threats my friend. I do not even do well when having to argue.

Hey, like I said, it's your credibility is on the line here, not mine. Remember, it was you that said on post #80:

That is not about disunity at all. It was about believing something which is not found expressly printed in the Scriptures so as to allow you as a Catholic to continue to worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and many other NON Biblical practices of the Catholic church.[/quore]

(not to mention what your thread "Non-Biblical Practices done by Catholic believers" thread is doing to your credibility)


And I asked not once, but three times:

"Please show me where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church where it say's we are to worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and anything else other than God?"

And your only attempt to responding is?

I do not respond well to threats my friend. I do not even do well when having to argue

This non-answer speaks volumes!

But since this is important to you I will respond to your threat.

Threat is your word.... not mine. All I'm asking is for you to show me where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church where it say's we are to worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and anything else other than God?

The Catholic Church has repeatedly taught that the Holy Rosary is one of the best forms of prayer. Are you practicing this devotion daily? Is it promoted in your parish?
From the CATHOLIC web sit at Catholic Essentials - The Rosary

I asked to show me from the Catechism of the Catholic Church where it say's we are to worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and anything else other than God. Not from some copy and paste you got from who knows where. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church Maj1..... The Catechism of the Catholic Church!!!!

Now as for all the quotes from many different papal encyclicals you copied and pasted, nowhere in all the quotes did it say Catholics are to worship the Rosary.

Conclusion: your claim that Catholics worship the Rosary, Purgatory, and anything else other than God is nothing more than a myth and out right lie.

 

[thecolorsblend]

To be clear and honest...…...PURGATORY is not found in the Bible anywhere or is there even a suggestion of such a place or a practice. It is a RCC practice only.

I knew you'd get there in the end.

Some things are completely predictable.

 

[Fidelibus]

Oh I see. YOU have the ability to reject Christian sites such as "Got Questions" and Barnes' Notes on the Bible...……but those that represent the Catholic point of view are OK with you.

Let's back up and take a look at what you said on post # 92:

I could choose any of literally a 100 Christian apologists to respond to your Catholic friend but I will simply use Barnes' Notes on the Bible...…….

And you'd probably come up with 100 differnt interpretations and or understandings of any certain passage of Scripture. How many of these 100 non-Catholic Christian apologists do you think are in 100% in agreement on matters such as Abortion, Same sex marriage, Euthanasia, baptismal regeneration and salvation, Real Presence, ect.?

This dis-unity my friend is one reason I rebuff some of the sites you quote from. Another reason is sites like "gotquestions.com" is in my opinion up there in the top five bigoted anti-Catholic sites.

Now, as far as the site "Barnes Notes on the Bible" goes, let's take a look-see at some this 19th cen. Presbyterian quotes and see if you agree with him....okay?


Reguarding Matt. 16:17-19:

“The meaning of this phrase may be thus expressed: ‘Thou, in saying that I am the Son of God, hast called me by a name expressive of my true character. I, also, have given to thee a name expressive of your character. I have called you Peter, a rock. . . . I see that you are worthy of the name and will be a distinguished support of my religion” ----Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 170].---- (Albert Barnes (Nineteenth-Century Presbyterian)

On the Bible:

"The Bible, as a revelation from God, was not designed to give us all the information we might desire, nor to solve all the questions about which the human soul is perplexed, but to impart enough to be a safe guide to the haven of eternal rest."---- Albert Barnes"

Oops.... this quote must throw you for a loop!


Now my question to you Maj1, being you seem to be standing by this "Barnes Notes on the Bible web-site as a legitimate source, do you "reject" or agree with these quotes from Barnes Notes on the Bible?

I am blessed to be able to answer you questions on Scriptures and I look forward to more.

As am I to question your sources, and like you, look forward to more.





Have a Blessed Day

 

[Major1]

Let's back up and take a look at what you said on post # 92:



And you'd probably come up with 100 differnt interpretations and or understandings of any certain passage of Scripture. How many of these 100 non-Catholic Christian apologists do you think are in 100% in agreement on matters such as Abortion, Same sex marriage, Euthanasia, baptismal regeneration and salvation, Real Presence, ect.?

This dis-unity my friend is one reason I rebuff some of the sites you quote from. Another reason is sites like "gotquestions.com" is in my opinion up there in the top five bigoted anti-Catholic sites.

Now, as far as the site "Barnes Notes on the Bible" goes, let's take a look-see at some this 19th cen. Presbyterian quotes and see if you agree with him....okay?


Reguarding Matt. 16:17-19:

“The meaning of this phrase may be thus expressed: ‘Thou, in saying that I am the Son of God, hast called me by a name expressive of my true character. I, also, have given to thee a name expressive of your character. I have called you Peter, a rock. . . . I see that you are worthy of the name and will be a distinguished support of my religion” ----Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 170].---- (Albert Barnes (Nineteenth-Century Presbyterian)

On the Bible:

"The Bible, as a revelation from God, was not designed to give us all the information we might desire, nor to solve all the questions about which the human soul is perplexed, but to impart enough to be a safe guide to the haven of eternal rest."---- Albert Barnes"

Oops.... this quote must throw you for a loop!


Now my question to you Maj1, being you seem to be standing by this "Barnes Notes on the Bible web-site as a legitimate source, do you "reject" or agree with these quotes from Barnes Notes on the Bible?



As am I to question your sources, and like you, look forward to more.





Have a Blessed Day

YES!

 

[Fidelibus]

Do you really think that I as a Protestant believer would copy and paste Catholic web sites ???? What kind of thinking is that?????

Wait just a dog-gone minute now! Back on post #112 you said:

That is exactly why I listed the exact words from the RCC Catechism.

Now which is it, do you copy/paste from Catholic web-sites or do you not?

Like I said Maj1, credibility is most important.

 

[Fidelibus]

YES!

Oh.... So you agree the Bible, as a revelation from God, was not designed to give us all the information we might desire? That's what you buddy Albert Barnes believes.

p.s. Care to comment on how you misrepresented my words on your new Catholic thread?