ProtestantBusters - Offensive websites - Common in :).

[CatholicXian]

Heidi says "So there is nothing to criticize them for."

Protestants burned 130,000 "witches" at the stake in Germany and France. I'm going to go out on a limb and say they shouldn't have done that.

Then criticize protestants for that. I'm all for challenging anyone who disagrees with the bible! But protestants do not have a myriad of pages in a doctrine that have so little to do with the bible that it has to be written down! If the catholics simply agreed with the bible, then why do they have theirr own doctrine instead of the bible? Why is it necessary when we already have the bible? :o

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today). The written doctrines of the Catholic Church are simply the Traditions that the Apostles handed down throughout the early Church... to keep the gospel intact.

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

You can't build up the entire Body when you're constantly fractioning yourself into thousands of denominations and differing doctrines... totally deprived, or not? OSAS, or not? Trinity, or not? etc, etc, etc.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi says "So there is nothing to criticize them for."

Protestants burned 130,000 "witches" at the stake in Germany and France. I'm going to go out on a limb and say they shouldn't have done that.

Then criticize protestants for that. I'm all for challenging anyone who disagrees with the bible! But protestants do not have a myriad of pages in a doctrine that have so little to do with the bible that it has to be written down! If the catholics simply agreed with the bible, then why do they have theirr own doctrine instead of the bible? Why is it necessary when we already have the bible? :o

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today). The written doctrines of the Catholic Church are simply the Traditions that the Apostles handed down throughout the early Church... to keep the gospel intact.

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

You can't build up the entire Body when you're constantly fractioning yourself into thousands of denominations and differing doctrines... totally deprived, or not? OSAS, or not? Trinity, or not? etc, etc, etc.

I thought you were going to bed. :-?

Actually, it's the exact opposite in Christ's and Paul's words.

Colossians 2:8, "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic priniciples of this world rather than on Christ."

Please quote verses in Thessalonians.

 

[Free]

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today).

You must have today mixed up with some other day. ;)

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

The one thing to keep in mind is when those letters were written - pre 100. I believe that several traditions were added in beginning in the second century which have no grounding in Scripture. However, I certainly agree with the need for tradition and an interpretation of Scripture, not interpretations.

 

[Heidi]

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today).

You must have today mixed up with some other day. ;)

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

The one thing to keep in mind is when those letters were written - pre 100. I believe that several traditions were added in beginning in the second century which have no grounding in Scripture. However, I certainly agree with the need for tradition and an interpretation of Scripture, not interpretations.

And if tradition isn't scriptural, then should we keep it? :o If so, why?

 

[CatholicXian]

I thought you were going to bed. :-?

lol, I ought to be. Too much excitement on the forums, I guess. ;-)

Actually, it's the exact opposite in Christ's and Paul's words.

Colossians 2:8, "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic priniciples of this world rather than on Christ."

Please quote verses in Thessalonians.

Human tradition is "small t" tradition, and is not the same as Divine Tradition (i.e. the Tradition handed on by the Apostles... this "handing on" has great ramifications that would've better been undersood in Paul's day at the time of his writing... some of the more orthodox Jewish sects would see this importance of "handing on" as well).

2 Thessalonians 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."

2 Thessalonians 3:6 "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."

also,

1 Corinthians 11:2 "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you."
(ordinances=Traditions... "paradosis" as the root Greek word)

Thus, even Paul must then be making a distinction between mere human traditions, and Divine Traditions that are handed on from the Apostles.

 

[CatholicXian]

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today).

You must have today mixed up with some other day. ;)

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

The one thing to keep in mind is when those letters were written - pre 100. I believe that several traditions were added in beginning in the second century which have no grounding in Scripture. However, I certainly agree with the need for tradition and an interpretation of Scripture, not interpretations.

lol.

Yeah, I only said "interpretation" on purpose.

(some things people see as Tradition in the Catholic Church are not really Tradition, but more like tradition/custom/culture, etc. and are not necessarily doctrinally held by the Church).

Okay, going to bed. Goodnight all!

 

[JM]

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today). The written doctrines of the Catholic Church are simply the Traditions that the Apostles handed down throughout the early Church... to keep the gospel intact.

That's not true.

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

The Scriptures you refer to are past tense, holding fast to what was taught, not inventing new dogmas about popes and Mary, the Marion Movement of Priests and Medjugorje.

You can't build up the entire Body when you're constantly fractioning yourself into thousands of denominations and differing doctrines... totally deprived, or not? OSAS, or not? Trinity, or not? etc, etc, etc.

It's funny you mention totally deprived. This was taught by the a doctor of your Church, Augustine and at the Council of Orange (529 AD) but do Catholics believe it? No. Traditions change.

How many denominations do you say there are now? How many denominations exist within the Traditional churches? Orthodox [with Authocephalous groups that have not reunited], Coptic, Old Catholics, SSPX, Malankara, Orientals [non-Chalcedon], Roman Catholics, etc.

Which tradition is Traditional?

Now with protestants you have Reformed/Presbyertian [same theology], Baptist/Anabaptist/Mennonite/Brethren [similar theology], Lutherns/Anglicans/prots using Tradition [similar theology], Charismatic/Pentecostal [similar theology], did I leave anything out that would be should be considered? Do JW's and Mormons count? No, we universally accept them as cults.

Can we verify, I mean truely verify what you're saying on the theological level? No we can't.

 

[CatholicXian]

The Scriptures you refer to are past tense, holding fast to what was taught, not inventing new dogmas about popes and Mary, the Marion Movement of Priests and Medjugorje.

None of the things you just referred to are considered Tradition. Do dogmas about Mary have elements from Tradition in them? Yes, otherwise they would be dogma (but they also have Scriptural elements to them, even if you and I will disagree on the interpretation).

The Marian movement of priests (I'm not really sure what you are referring to here) is not Tradition, is not dogma... and is probably one of those (small 't') tradition/custom I mentioned before. Medjugorje is a private apparition that is not a part of the Deposit of Faith, nor has Medjugorje even been approved by the Church (and you will find that many Catholics disagree with Medjugorje). But, speaking of apparitions in general, they do not come from Tradition... they are separate. Nor are apparitions part of public revelation/part of the Deposit of Faith. Apparitions are considered something akin to a spiritual gift-- their purpose is to build up the Church, not tell us anything new.

 

[gingercat]

Jesus says that He did not come here to bring peace. The Bible also says to expose the evil deeds of darkness. Because there is so much evil being practiced, there should be many of them being exposed. It is much healthier than hiding them.

But one ought to do so charitably. You will win over no one to Christ by acting like Satan. Being rude, uncharitable, sarcastic, etc. in the name of love of another is not Charity, and it is not love. It is a farce. It's a delibrate cut of another person.

Christ may have been forceful with words, but He was never deceitful nor mean-spirited.


It is one thing to say another is wrong and demonstrate that this is so. And it is a completely different thing to bash another by dressing up with humor, sarcasm, or false "charity".

Charitable is the eye of beholder. You can always use this kind of excuse to attack you opposers to keep their mouth shut if you don't like what they are saying.

Your tactic is always being used and it is very old. It is used in Protestants too.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi says "So there is nothing to criticize them for."

Protestants burned 130,000 "witches" at the stake in Germany and France. I'm going to go out on a limb and say they shouldn't have done that.

Then criticize protestants for that. I'm all for challenging anyone who disagrees with the bible! But protestants do not have a myriad of pages in a doctrine that have so little to do with the bible that it has to be written down! If the catholics simply agreed with the bible, then why do they have theirr own doctrine instead of the bible? Why is it necessary when we already have the bible? :o

Because the Church (/the Body of Christ) has to have an official interpretation of the Bible... otherwise we have 6 billion people all interpreting the Sacred Scriptures to their own personal preferences (as can be clearly seen today). The written doctrines of the Catholic Church are simply the Traditions that the Apostles handed down throughout the early Church... to keep the gospel intact.

The Scriptures themselves exhort us to "hold fast to Tradition" and to "shun those not acting according to Tradition" (check out Paul's letters to the Thessalonians). This is because without Tradition, people are free to interpret the Scriptures as they see fit, and that is not the purpose of Sacred Scripture. It is for the edification and building up of the entire Body of Christ.

You can't build up the entire Body when you're constantly fractioning yourself into thousands of denominations and differing doctrines... totally deprived, or not? OSAS, or not? Trinity, or not? etc, etc, etc.

All the church has to do is believe the bible. The doctrine of our church is the bible! We don't make up one instead. There is no need to whatsoever. And that is what Paul tells us too several times.

 

[Heidi]

What do you think Jesus means by having one teacher, catholic? And if you don't understand what Jesus is saying, then how can you follow someone you don'tunderstand? :o It's impossible.

So you go to a person to tell you what Jesus means. That is what the followers of David Koresch, Jim Jones and all cult members do also. David and Jim also claimed they were the "Holy Father" and they alone understood the bible. Therefore, they could make up any bible they wanted to and told people to believe their interpretaion of the bible. And that is precisley why Jesus told us not to call anyone Father. People start worshiping the cult leader instead of the understanding te Word of God by themselves.

But it is apparent that you don't understand Jesus or you wouldn't need to have others interpret it for you.

So again, you back up the pope just like the cult leaders back up Jim Jones and David Koresch over scripture. And it is extrememly difficult to break through the brainwashing of a cult. Some catholics will butcher scripture beyond descriptuion to try to justify that Mary was a virgin all her life or sinless, or that we should erect statues of peope, or pray to people, or chant, blow holy smoke and sprinkle magic potions during services.

So getting catholics to believe the bible over their cult leader is next to impossible. But true Christians who follow Christ alone still attempt to lead catholics to the bible because we care about your souls and don't want you to be eternally condemned for following a different gospel.

 

[gingercat]

You can't build up the entire Body when you're constantly fractioning yourself into thousands of denominations and differing doctrines... totally deprived, or not? OSAS, or not? Trinity, or not? etc, etc, etc.

All the church has to do is believe the bible. The doctrine of our church is the bible! We don't make up one instead. There is no need to whatsoever. And that is what Paul tells us too several times.

She has an excellent point. The protestants are doing the same things as the Catholics. They build up their own doctrines. They even ostracise opposers if they don't agree with them. Those doctrines are mainly Calvinism and trinity. :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Heidi]

You can't build up the entire Body when you're constantly fractioning yourself into thousands of denominations and differing doctrines... totally deprived, or not? OSAS, or not? Trinity, or not? etc, etc, etc.

All the church has to do is believe the bible. The doctrine of our church is the bible! We don't make up one instead. There is no need to whatsoever. And that is what Paul tells us too several times.

She has an excellent point. The protestants are doing the same things as the Catholics. They build up their own doctrines. They even ostracise opposers if they don't agree with them. Those doctrines are mainly Calvinism and trinity. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Absolutely. Luther himself said that he did not want those who agree with him to be called "Lutherans". And I've hammered this point home so many times on this forum that Paul says what causes division between Christians is following people, not Christ. Why don't people believe him???? :o

 

[Heidi]

1)Calvinistis follow Calvin
2)Lutherans follow Luther
3Mormons follow Joseph Smith
4)SDA's follow William Miller
5)catholics followthe pope

Yet all claim to follow Christ....according to Luther, Christ, according to Calvin, Christ, according to Joseph Smith, Christ, according to William Miller, Christ according to the pope. and on and on. Yet true born again Christians follow Christ according to Christ. There are way too many mediators between us and God and that is precisely why there is no much division as Paul tells us.

If all Christians believed Jesus when he tells us there we have only one teacher and that is the Christ, then we would all be in untiy. So read the bible. And if you don't understand it, ask God to interpret it for you, not any Tom, Dick, or Harry, or who claims he is God or he alone is the truth. Only God alone is the truth!

 

[thessalonian]

Ginger and Heidi,

We are way off topic. I take it that by your non-committal stand on the issue of riduling another religion if you don't agree with it is okay by you. I guess their is no explicit command not to mock and ridicule another's religion, even though Paul plainly avoided it in the Aeropogus. But, that's not an explicit statement and we simply cannot accept implicitness apparently.

 

[thessalonian]

1)Calvinistis follow Calvin
2)Lutherans follow Luther
3Mormons follow Joseph Smith
4)SDA's follow William Miller
5)catholics followthe pope



If all Christians believed Jesus when he tells us there we have only one teacher and that is the Christ, then we would all be in untiy.

:-?

Jesus is the only teacher? So these other teachers in scripture are teachers but they are not supposed to teach anyone?

1Tim.3
[2] Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher,
2Tim.1
[11] For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher,

2Tim.2
[24] And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing,

Or is Paul just a liar. Someday perhaps you will actually read the Bible cover to cover so you have a birds eye view Heidi. Christ most certainly is the one teacher. Yet that does not mean there are not men who are teachers. Anyone who teaches what Christ taught is in fact Christ for men. Thus while there is one teacher that teacher teaches through men who are teachers. Truth taught by men is Christ. He is the way, the truth, and the light. It's a difficult concept to grasp Heidi but I know you will rise to the challenge.

 

[Heidi]

1)Calvinistis follow Calvin
2)Lutherans follow Luther
3Mormons follow Joseph Smith
4)SDA's follow William Miller
5)catholics followthe pope



If all Christians believed Jesus when he tells us there we have only one teacher and that is the Christ, then we would all be in untiy.

:-?

Jesus is the only teacher? So these other teachers in scripture are teachers but they are not supposed to teach anyone?

1Tim.3
[2] Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher,
2Tim.1
[11] For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher,

2Tim.2
[24] And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing,

Or is Paul just a liar. Someday perhaps you will actually read the Bible cover to cover so you have a birds eye view Heidi. Christ most certainly is the one teacher. Yet that does not mean there are not men who are teachers. Anyone who teaches what Christ taught is in fact Christ for men. Thus while there is one teacher that teacher teaches through men who are teachers. Truth taught by men is Christ. He is the way, the truth, and the light. It's a difficult concept to grasp Heidi but I know you will rise to the challenge.

Are you calling Jesus a liar again when you put a question mark after his words? Jesus is not a liar. So keep that in mind when you read scripture!

1 Corinthians 3:3-4:3, on Divisions in the church

"For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not still wordly? Are you not acting like mere men? For when one says; 'I follow Paul,' and another, 'I follow Apollos', aree you not mere men?
"What afater all is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe-as the Lord assigned to each task."

Paul himself doesn't claim to be infallible so he is a trustwrothy man and is coming from the Spirit. "He who exalts himself will be humbles and he who humbles himself will be exalted." Paul is very clear about earthly teachers being servants, not God, Our Holy Father or Christ. It is the Spirit in Paul that is telling the truth and you can recognize the Spirit by his humility.

So Thess, you need to read the bible through Christ's words, not just take bits and pieces from it and interpret it through human wisdom. Then you will surely distort it. Jesus says we have one teacher and Paul says not to follow people but only Christ. They both agree perfectly.

 

[Heidi]

The Holy Spirt in Paul and in all born again believers is the same Spirit with which the bible was written so born again Christians will always agree with the bible.

But the catholics are constantly at odds with Christ as is evidenced by the phrase; "Jesus is our one teacher? :o " They are so quick to disbelieve Jesus over the pope. So again, how can you follow someone you don't believe? :o

 

[thessalonian]

I didn't say that Jesus was a liar. You slander me. I do believe we said exactly the same thing but you cannot possibly agree with a Catholic and so you must make it out so that I am disagreeing with you and twist what I say. This is not the spirit of truth Heidi. To bear false witness is not Christ in you. Sorry. I don't see it.

 

[gingercat]

1)Calvinistis follow Calvin
2)Lutherans follow Luther
3Mormons follow Joseph Smith
4)SDA's follow William Miller
5)catholics followthe pope

Yet all claim to follow Christ....according to Luther, Christ, according to Calvin, Christ, according to Joseph Smith, Christ, according to William Miller, Christ according to the pope. and on and on. Yet true born again Christians follow Christ according to Christ. There are way too many mediators between us and God and that is precisely why there is no much division as Paul tells us.

If all Christians believed Jesus when he tells us there we have only one teacher and that is the Christ, then we would all be in untiy. So read the bible. And if you don't understand it, ask God to interpret it for you, not any Tom, Dick, or Harry, or who claims he is God or he alone is the truth. Only God alone is the truth!

Amen Heide :angel: :angel: :angel: