The Absolute and Final Authority for Christians

[Guest]

Re: A Brief History of the Slang Expression "Hate On" with a Cat

A player hate is one who disapproves of the tactics of a player.

Oops. That should read player hater. My bad.

 

[francisdesales]

I'm certain that isnt his point, but *IF* he tries to use that 'logic' against the protestant, asking us WHY letters like Philemon belong, then we have to ask him WHY the CC felt it belonged. They CERTAINLY DID feel that it was INSPIRED in order to include it.

The difference between you and me is not our acceptance of the Word of God as found in the NT, but how we get there.

You presume that God vouched for your "decision", while lying to Mormons, Muslims, Hindus and others. I come to believe the witness of the Catholic Church that she has been founded by Jesus Christ for the purpose of spreading the Gospel to all men, universally, thus, the name... As such, being divinely instituted, I believe her claim on the contents and its cutoff of what is Scriptures and what is not. I do not believe the Book of Mormon is from God. Why? Not because of some voice, or because I a priori circularly argue that the Bible is the ONLY Word of God (not shown internally, as you have shown). But because I believe men's witness.

Just as I believe historical accounts from men who lived hundreds of years AFTER Alexander the Great died. Just as I believe that Julius Ceasar existed. I believe the witness of men. And in the case of Christianity, I believe the witness of Paul and Peter and so forth that a man rose from the dead for the purpose of saving mankind.

Not because "God told me"! Not because the integral components tell me it is part of Scriptures. I believe because I believe the men who told me. Just as the Corinthians believed Paul. Just as the Thessalonians believed. And so forth. I believe because the Church told me, and her life witnesses to her truth...

Now, you have said "God would preserve His Scriptures". That is a fine assumption based on special pleading - since the Bible itself doesn't make that claim. In actuality, the Bible claims that God would preserve His CHURCH!!!

Quite ironic that you attempt to tear down the Church - what God has promised would endure for all time, while pretending that God would "preserve Scriptures" without the use of external witnesses. This special pleading is of no avail to the thinking man.

Bottom line, this is why you refuse to accept my argument.

Not because it is illogical or lacking of explanation. You are afraid of the implications - that if God protects His Scriptures, it follows that He ALSO protects the Church that vouches for those same Scriptures. And we BOTH know who put the NT Scriptures together and we BOTH know who said that God does not speak new Scriptures anymore. Both of these things were done on the authority given from above to the CHURCH. Not from Scriptures themself.

Thus, you must "invent" some ridiculous circular argument, or "voice in the bosom" argument to circumvent the reality of the situation. And any attempt to point out the logical fallacy you foist on us, that person must be tarred and feathered, called a non-believer in the Word, and any other such ad hominem's that come to mind.

If you are a true seeker of God, you will allow that to sink in and allow God's Spirit to take you where He wills.

If you are not, then you will ignore what I say and be content with being a hypocrite who pretends to be a 'follower of Christ'.

I leave you with the last comments and will only continue if you ask for clarification. I believe I have explained myself amply for any lurkers - and for you, I leave you in the hands of the Holy Spirit to work His conversion.

 

[francisdesales]

francisdesales,

I believe you accept the Bible as God's Word. I believe you are sincere in your faith. I believe you are a Christian. We may not agree on all the points of faith, but I want to distinguish myself from my fellow Protestants. Not all of us hate on our Catholic brothers.

You are absolutely correct, there are a number of Christians here who, despite our differences on a few matters, recognize that we can be brothers in Christ. I know of a number of brothers here who I enjoy conversation with and we are able to live in harmony, realizing we have the same love of Jesus Christ. I would venture to say that more than half here are at least ambivalent towards Catholics. I think only a handful of people feel the need to return to the polemics of the 16th century...

Indeed, I often defend the REAL Church's teaching on the definition of "Church", which is often more inclusive than many think - to the chagrin of some Protestants who exclude anyone not of their denomination or mindset. I see this on this forum at times... There is only ONE Body of Christ, one Church, but that doesn't mean that a person has to sit in a Catholic pew on Sundays to be considered part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. When that teaching is given to my separated brothers, I think they appreciate that we don't exclude the obvious work of the Holy Spirit within them individually, being part of the Church in some unique and mysterious way.

Regards

 

[follower of Christ]

The difference between you and me is not our acceptance of the Word of God as found in the NT, but how we get there.

You seem to reverse the details, for sure.
*I* believe that, like in the OLD covenant, that GOD guided even those who were disobedient to preserve His word.
You seem, however, to think that man gets the glory and did God some favor in 'helping' Him get His act together.

You presume that God vouched for your "decision",

Please. Try this nonsense with someone whom may buy it.
We are TAUGHT to TRUST the Lord our God. He doesnt VOUCH for MY decision, I TRUST His ability.
You arent very good at this, are you ?

 

[follower of Christ]

I come to believe the witness of the Catholic Church that she has been founded by Jesus Christ for the purpose of spreading the Gospel to all men, universally, thus, the name... As such, being divinely instituted, I believe her claim on the contents and its cutoff of what is Scriptures and what is not. I do not believe the Book of Mormon is from God. Why? Not because of some voice, or because I a priori circularly argue that the Bible is the ONLY Word of God (not shown internally, as you have shown). But because I believe men's witness.

You can choose to believe for whatever reason you wish.
*I*, however, understand the FACT that NO one can even come to the Son without the Fathers drawing, so it is IMPOSSIBLE that man can even begin to believe without GOD causing him to.
You seem to think that MAN has some ability that he does not.

Just as I believe historical accounts from men who lived hundreds of years AFTER Alexander the Great died. Just as I believe that Julius Ceasar existed. I believe the witness of men. And in the case of Christianity, I believe the witness of Paul and Peter and so forth that a man rose from the dead for the purpose of saving mankind.

You BELIEVE all that BECAUSE GOD has given you the ABILITY to believe. Without HIS giving you a portion of faith and drawing you you wouldnt believe a thing concerning Him just as the rest of the lost do not.

 

[francisdesales]

The difference between you and me is not our acceptance of the Word of God as found in the NT, but how we get there.

You seem to reverse the details, for sure.
*I* believe that, like in the OLD covenant, that GOD guided even those who were disobedient to preserve His word.
You seem, however, to think that man gets the glory and did God some favor in 'helping' Him get His act together.

It seems appropriate that your last comment would be special pleading, since you have been doing it from the beginning.

Farewell and thanks for your comments.

 

[follower of Christ]

Not because "God told me"!

You really think you are all that, dont you ?
You truly believe YOU have given yourself faith when GODS WORD SAYS that HE has given every man a portion of FAITH. HE is the one who draws us. HE is the one who gives us the ability to believe. Without HIM drawing and giving us FAITH we would be UNBELIEVERS !

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
(Joh 6:44 KJV)

I believe because I believe the men who told me.

We'll have to see then because Gods word teaches us that HE draws and HE gives men a portion of faith.

Just as the Corinthians believed Paul. Just as the Thessalonians believed. And so forth. I believe because the Church told me, and her life witnesses to her truth...

And their belief is rooted in the drawing that GOD does and the faith that HE gives.

Now, you have said "God would preserve His Scriptures". That is a fine assumption based on special pleading - since the Bible itself doesn't make that claim. In actuality, the Bible claims that God would preserve His CHURCH!!!

Sorry friend, but it DOES make the claim when Paul says that the JEWS were ENTRUSTED with the oracles of GOD.
We see that GOD HAS preserved His old testament by the hands of sinful men and we certainly TRUST HIM to do the SAME with His instruction to His church in THIS covenant..

 

[follower of Christ]

The difference between you and me is not our acceptance of the Word of God as found in the NT, but how we get there.

You seem to reverse the details, for sure.
*I* believe that, like in the OLD covenant, that GOD guided even those who were disobedient to preserve His word.
You seem, however, to think that man gets the glory and did God some favor in 'helping' Him get His act together.

It seems appropriate that your last comment would be special pleading, since you have been doing it from the beginning.

Farewell and thanks for your comments.

Sorry but its hardly anything of the sort....
*IF* you were actually READING something youd have seen that we've already covered this detail.

What then is the superiority of the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.
(Rom 3:1-2 EMTV)

The hardhearted, disobedient Jews were entrusted with His word.
Are you actually trying to claim that God would NOT OVERSEE preservation of His word AFTER having INSPIRED it to be written ?
That is preposterous to say the least.
He guided its creation and certainly did so with it being gathered together...not a very complicated job for a God....

 

[follower of Christ]

Now, you have said "God would preserve His Scriptures". That is a fine assumption based on special pleading - since the Bible itself doesn't make that claim. In actuality, the Bible claims that God would preserve His CHURCH!!!

and PAUL shows that the Jews were ENTRUSTED with the WORDS of GOD !!!
WHO ENTRUSTED THEM with Gods word ? Martians ?!?!?!
No...GOD "entrusted" them with His oracles.

Quite ironic that you attempt to tear down the Church - what God has promised would endure for all time, while pretending that God would "preserve Scriptures" without the use of external witnesses.

No, what is ironic is that your church attempts to tear down faith in GOD.

This special pleading is of no avail to the thinking man.

The 'thinking' man who apparently cannot have FAITH in GOD except this 'church' permit him to have it.

Bottom line, this is why you refuse to accept my argument.

I refuse your argument because it is nonsense.

Not because it is illogical or lacking of explanation.

Any fool can 'explain' anything given enough determination.
Pushing words thru ones mouth doesnt make those words mean anything.
And we've already covered this 'logic' nonsense. FAith in GOD does not REQUIRE mans fallible, PITIFUL sense of logic.

You are afraid of the implications - that if God protects His Scriptures, it follows that He ALSO protects the Church that vouches for those same Scriptures.

Friend, you are making a very incorrect assumption that *I* would call YOUR church THE church...I DONT....remember *I* am not a Catholic. So the church that *I* believe has been protected ISNT the Catholic church but His 'calling out'...ALL of those who believe in Him unto salvation.

And we BOTH know who put the NT Scriptures together and we BOTH know who said that God does not speak new Scriptures anymore.
Both of these things were done on the authority given from above to the CHURCH.

Just as with the OLD covenant scriptures God entrusted sinful, disobedient men to preserve His word.
GOD is the cause and get the glory, not the sinful men He used.

Not from Scriptures themself.

Sorry but we arent playing this game now. God didnt have the Jews preserve His old covenant writings only to drop the ball with the instruction to the church.

Thus, you must "invent" some ridiculous circular argument,

blah blah blah...find a new line.
Ive already told you I couldnt care less about your absurd compulsion with 'logic'.

or "voice in the bosom" argument to circumvent the reality of the situation.

Yeah, that voice in the bosom TRUE believers get from the Spirit of God isnt for everyone, apparently.

And any attempt to point out the logical fallacy you foist on us,

"us"
I dont see any "us" here, friend, I only see YOU

If you are a true seeker of God, you will allow that to sink in and allow God's Spirit to take you where He wills.

Being a true seeker of God Ive learned very well to keep as far from Catholic error as possible.

If you are not, then you will ignore what I say and be content with being a hypocrite who pretends to be a 'follower of Christ'.

Oh please....what a lame attempt. Dont waste your time making spiritual threats or trying to convert me...

I leave you with the last comments and will only continue if you ask for clarification. I believe I have explained myself amply for any lurkers - and for you, I leave you in the hands of the Holy Spirit to work His conversion.

Dont worry about my asking for clarification..I wouldnt be able to trust anything you responded with anyway.

 

[follower of Christ]

You are absolutely correct, there are a number of Christians here who, despite our differences on a few matters, recognize that we can be brothers in Christ.

We can be brothers in Christ as long as you arent trying to force your church authority down protestant throats, which is very easy to discern that THAT has been your motivation here in this thread.
I have a lot of catholic friends and NEITHER of us tries to coerce or spiritually bully the other.
If they did then Id tell them what I think and if they didnt want to be 'brothers' any more then that would be their choice.

I know of a number of brothers here who I enjoy conversation with and we are able to live in harmony, realizing we have the same love of Jesus Christ. I would venture to say that more than half here are at least ambivalent towards Catholics. I think only a handful of people feel the need to return to the polemics of the 16th century...

Without YOU pushing your churches authority on us...without YOU telling US that WE believe because YOUR church (whom many of us have NEVER even heard tell us anything) TELLS us to believe...then there wouldnt have been any issue in this thread between us, would there ?

You try to spiritually bully the protestant who rejects you claims of church authority, then play the martyr when we reject your views.

Indeed, I often defend the REAL Church's teaching on the definition of "Church",

And THERE you go....the 'REAL church'....I wonder who that might be
And I wonder also what THEIR definition of 'church' is

The SCRIPTURAL definition doesnt seem to be in line with the CC's version.
The Greek simply shows that the word means His 'calling out'...His assembly or congregation. Its THAT simple.

which is often more inclusive than many think - to the chagrin of some Protestants who exclude anyone not of their denomination or mindset.

Come on guy, you make this sound like its some priviledge or something. You know that this ISNT how it always was. Protestant USED to be heretics to your church. But now we are what 'separated brethren" ?
Talk about trying to be politically correct.
All that happened is that the Catholic church realized she cant destroy the protestant church.

I see this on this forum at times... There is only ONE Body of Christ, one Church, but that doesn't mean that a person has to sit in a Catholic pew on Sundays to be considered part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Read my lips. *I* am NOT a catholic. I will NEVER be a catholic. I will end my life before Id bow before idols of saints and of Mary or confess my sins to a priest.
There is a REASON our reformers did what they did. The CC ISNT what they could easily see from Gods word that she SHOULD be.
Yes, they loved her because she was all they knew. But they clearly decided it was better to part ways, just as the Eastern Orthodox have, rather than take part in her error.

When that teaching is given to my separated brothers, I think they appreciate that we don't exclude the obvious work of the Holy Spirit within them individually, being part of the Church in some unique and mysterious way.

Regards

I believe many CAtholics are born again, i dont believe the system they are united under is biblical in the least, nor what Christ intended for His church.

 

[Vic C.]

I have other things to do. I will talk about it again, when we can talk about this in a good way .

C

Brother, looking through this thread gives me the impression some aren't interested in a good way to discuss or debate this issue. Instead of coming in and saying what one has to say and leave it at that, it's just one insulting post after another.

Despite appearances, Joe is not trying to push a specific agenda. He's allowed his opinion and his only recourse is to offer it from his perspective. The Title of this thread is:

The Absolute and Final Authority for Christians

Joe comes across as "pushing" a RC agenda because he is of the RCC. Would we rather he lie instead? He wasn't trying to turn this into a RC discussion; it sort of went that way by the very nature of the topic. Personally, I believe others involved were at fault for it turning into a RCC debate and were bent on keeping it that way.

So, my only choice after numerous attempts by some staff members to try and maintain some civility, is to lock this and consider the idea of cleaning it up a bit, so it may be reopened.

Peace,
Vic