Universal Church

[Imagican]

fran,

Funny you would 'mention' the Pharasees. For we KNOW that Christ pointed out how FAR from the 'truth' they had veered in His time. They had opted for 'power' and pretige' over a 'continuation' of what had originally been taught.

Is there ANY doubt that this WILL happen in ANY group over time? That as time progresses that ANY 'upper group' given the opportunity would eventually begin to practice their 'profession' for the sake of SELF rather than for the benefit of their 'followers'?

We have the examples over and over of this very thing happening to EVERY instance of 'leadership' that man has exhibited over his fellow man.

And this is exactly what is indicated through the history of the CC. You would offer that thier 'altering from the truth' NEVER took place. That the examples of 'degredation' in this organization was due NOT to the organization itself, but ONLY confined to individuals contained within the organization. That even IF there were 'individuals' that veered, the basic premise was maintained throughout the centuries.

But fran, what happens when the individual happens to be at the TOP of the 'food chain'? ONe that IS capable of offering change that COMPLETELY alters the original purpose? We have examples of the papalcy not even being able to 'decide' WHO was in charge. When a NUMBER of persons CLAIMED this position and the church was in literal turmoil.

And how do we KNOW under such circumstances that the one who actually ROSE to the TOP was indeed the ONE that was MEANT to? How can YOU be assured that the church WASN'T led 'away' from that which it was MEANT to 'follow'?

The Church has NEVER been destroyed. The Body of Christ has MAINTAINED followers since His death. But there will NEVER be a compitent organization created by MAN that will be able to stand up to the guiles of this World. Not until Christ returns Himself will such an organization exist and it will NOT be LEAD by Man.

MEC

 

[A-Christian]

fran,

Funny you would 'mention' the Pharasees. For we KNOW that Christ pointed out how FAR from the 'truth' they had veered in His time. They had opted for 'power' and pretige' over a 'continuation' of what had originally been taught.

Is there ANY doubt that this WILL happen in ANY group over time? That as time progresses that ANY 'upper group' given the opportunity would eventually begin to practice their 'profession' for the sake of SELF rather than for the benefit of their 'followers'?

We have the examples over and over of this very thing happening to EVERY instance of 'leadership' that man has exhibited over his fellow man.

And this is exactly what is indicated through the history of the CC. You would offer that thier 'altering from the truth' NEVER took place. That the examples of 'degredation' in this organization was due NOT to the organization itself, but ONLY confined to individuals contained within the organization. That even IF there were 'individuals' that veered, the basic premise was maintained throughout the centuries.

But fran, what happens when the individual happens to be at the TOP of the 'food chain'? ONe that IS capable of offering change that COMPLETELY alters the original purpose? We have examples of the papalcy not even being able to 'decide' WHO was in charge. When a NUMBER of persons CLAIMED this position and the church was in literal turmoil.

And how do we KNOW under such circumstances that the one who actually ROSE to the TOP was indeed the ONE that was MEANT to? How can YOU be assured that the church WASN'T led 'away' from that which it was MEANT to 'follow'?

The Church has NEVER been destroyed. The Body of Christ has MAINTAINED followers since His death. But there will NEVER be a compitent organization created by MAN that will be able to stand up to the guiles of this World. Not until Christ returns Himself will such an organization exist and it will NOT be LEAD by Man.

MEC

Mec, even though you addressed this to Francis, I felt compelled to respond, not that Francis needs any help from me seeing as how he eats your lunch every time he responds to your “hatred of the Catholic Church†post.

Your right MEC, the Church has never been destroyed. She still stands and is very much the same now as she was then. The Church was created by Christ himself, not man. In matters that are important to God for reasons known to God, the Church is lead by the Holy Spirit, not men. Who ever said that the leaders of the Church were perfect? Are you perfect? Are the members of what ever Christian group you belong to, perfect? What is your hang-up with expecting perfection from mere men?

You have a chip on your shoulder my friend because you were proven utterly wrong in the subject of who the early church was. Please get over it. Accept the fact that the men who succeeded the apostles, men that had hands laid upon them by some of the apostles, called themselves Catholic and their way of doing things still stands after nearly two millenniums just as Christ promised.

The Church is made competent by the Holy Spirit. You may be denying the Church at your own peril. You already admitted that you have nothing to “offer†as evidence to refute the claims of history, and consequently every subsequent post you make in this thread amounts to nothing other than spiteful bashing.

Anyone that has followed this thread can see that you won’t stop until we all say that you’re right. On top of that, the way you dismiss history is saddening. Stop it friend, please, and move on. You should also apologize to every Catholic in this thread for your overconfident no-it-all attitude.

To the moderators, I apologize if this post made anyone uncomfortable and hope that it is not deleted.

 

[Imagican]

A,

I as well hope that your post is not deleted.

That I know what I know is not 'meant' to indicate that I KNOW 'everything', for I certainly DO NOT.

You folks here don't know anything about me other than what I offer in my words. But if you did KNOW me, personally, you would KNOW that I offer NOTHING lightly.

My entire life has been spent seeking the TRUTH. Whether that be the manufacturing process and chemical components of drugs, (that's what I once dwelt upon), to the structure and implimentation of our government, I seek out and attempt to understand the TRUTH 'before' I will make an statements of my 'belief'.

What I have is NO hatred towards 'anything'. That I offer the 'TRUTH' here concerning the history of the CC is NOT hate by any means. The ONLY way that this could even be percieved is by those that choose to 'believe' one thing over another, (what people teach them over the TRUTH).

If my words hold NO truth, then they will pass as all other things that can not hold up to scrutinization. But guys, know this, I am not the ONLY one that is well aware of the TRUTH so far as what I have offered here concerning the CC.

As far as 'knowing everything' concerning the CC, I do not. But know enough to be able to confidently offer to any that wish to KNOW that this 'organization' is NOT what some would be 'led' to believe it is.

There is ONLY one TRUE Church. I have offered that I do NOT know how many or if any of those that have been led by this organization are actualy 'parts' of The Body. That is NOT for me to judge. But what I can CERTAINLY do is discern, from the actions of this organization whether they are following The Spirit or 'something else'. And, the words of the prophets DEMAND that I do so in order to BE a 'part of The Body'.

The organization that you choose to follow would deny my ability to do so effectively. For the ONLY way that they would accept ANYTHING that I have to offer would be THAT which they teach. Labeling those such as myself as heretics UNABLE to have a relationship with The Father through His Son BECAUSE I do not FOLLOW 'your' teachings.

This in ANY sense is ludicrous at least, (if not downright evil). And this is NOT what was taught by Christ or His apostles. It is COMPLTETELY contrary to that offered through God's Word.

Are Catholics saved? I don't know the answer to this and don't even wish to dwell upon that which is outside of the understanding that has been offered. Are they being taught the TRUTH and teaching the same? Doubtful from my understanding.

I agree with MORE of the teachings of the CC that you may believe. Some of what is taught IS TRUTH. But much falls so short that it would be unwise of me to encourage ANY to follow such an organization. Instead, as a 'part OF The Body' it is my duty to warn any and all of the TRUTH regardless of who's feelings it may offend.

And IF the TRUTH is ABLE to offend, then I suggest that one NOT attempt to stiffle the TRUTH, but to follow IT instead.

The Universal Church? Other than in the minds of men, there is ONLY ONE. The TRUE Church IS The Body of Christ. And this is NOT a 'man-made' nor 'man-controlled' organization, but simply those that choose to follow Christ and the example that He offered. For CHRIST is the HEAD of The Church and NOT some or ANY group of human beings. For to place such a responsibility in the hands of men is to offer NOTHING but disaster. Doomed to failure from the inception of such a rediculous concept.

We are to TRUST in Christ and NOT in the meager teachings of men bent on the control of others. We are to follow those that would LEAD through SERVICE and not those that would demand our allegance through insisting on OUR FAITH in THEM by HONORING them above that which matters most. Those that would make merchandise of us for the sake of what benefits THEM the most.

If you would like an apology I will certainly offer it. If I have offered ANYTHING 'false' that has offended ANYONE, then I certainly do wish for their forgiveness. But if it's simply a matter of those taking offense to the TRUTH. I cannot nor will I apologize for 'standing up for it'. I am NOT ashamed of my Savior and most certainly not ashamed of Our Father. And so far as offense, perhaps I am NOT as patient as Paul told us to be. Perhaps I am NOT as 'nurturing' as he. But he too was able to be stern to those that made a mockery of his Savior and God. Forgive me for not having his abilities.

MEC

 

[A-Christian]

If I have offered ANYTHING 'false' that has offended ANYONE, then I certainly do wish for their forgiveness.

I forgive you and hold no grudge.

Perhaps I am NOT as 'nurturing' as he. But he too was able to be stern to those that made a mockery of his Savior and God. Forgive me for not having his abilities.

No one is trying to hold you to Paul's standard. We are all mere mortals. We are all sinners in need of forgiveness. We are all very fragile in certain ways. All anyone was trying to say to you is why do you think the Body of Christ (the Church) is suppose to be flawless in every way?

 

[RadicalReformer]

If I have offered ANYTHING 'false' that has offended ANYONE, then I certainly do wish for their forgiveness.

I forgive you and hold no grudge.

[quote:d7ed7]Perhaps I am NOT as 'nurturing' as he. But he too was able to be stern to those that made a mockery of his Savior and God. Forgive me for not having his abilities.

No one is trying to hold you to Paul's standard. We are all mere mortals. We are all sinners in need of forgiveness. We are all very fragile in certain ways. All anyone was trying to say to you is why do you think the Body of Christ (the Church) is suppose to be flawless in every way?[/quote:d7ed7]

A- Christian, let me ask you this - Why shouldn't the Church (Body of Christ) seek to be flawless in every way? The Spirit, once it has been born from above, cannot sin. The Flesh does - that is why we are to walk in the Spirit, and not of the Flesh.

 

[Imagican]

Amen, Reformer!!

A,

The Spirit is an amazing 'thing' offered for our 'perfecting'. No, NOT in that we are 'able' to BE sinless. But through it we may become PERFECT in 'understanding'.

Just to show you HOW amazing:

Read Galatians. I was led there this morning and it offered an 'insight' into exactly what we have been discussing here.

It would appear that the CC could use a 'dose' of Paul's writtings to Galatia.

Gal.3
[1] O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
[2] This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
[3] Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
[4] Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
[5] He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
[6] Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
[7] Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
[8] And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
[9] So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
[10] For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
[11] But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
[12] And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
[13] Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
[14] That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
[15] Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
[16] Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
[17] And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
[18] For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
[19] Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
[20] Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
[21] Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
[22] But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
[23] But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
[24] Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
[25] But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
[26] For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
[27] For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
[28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
[29] And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

A, I don't know if you will be able to 'see' the significance offered here. But let me attempt to offer what it was able to reveal this morning:

We were ONCE under the LAW. And the LAW necessitated that there be those that 'upheld' the law. Not those that followed, but those that 'directed'. And this was for a 'time'. For the law WAS a 'schoolmaster'.

Upon the advent of Christ, there was NO longer a NEED for a schoolmaster. For those that ACCEPT Christ into their hearts, the law is THEN written WITHIN those that choose to follow Christ. The Spirit will CONVICT those that 'break the law', IN THEIR OWN HEARTS.

Now, what I perceive the CC to have done is 'go BACK' and 'believe' that they were able to, once again, become the 'schoolmaster'. Re-instilling a 'belief' that THEY, (the clergy), were 'able' to become, once again, those whose job it was to uphold 'the law', (their doctrinal issues). For we have the evidence that the CC DID attempt to 'lay down the LAW' so far as 'doctrine' is concerned. And believed that they WERE capable of deciding the fate of those that refused to follow 'their law', (doctrine). Choosing to 'ex-communicate' or WORSE, those that refused to accept their teachings.

Now, if we read Galatians, we find that there is NO LONGER need for a 'schoolmaster', (the law). That The Spirit, NOT men, is that which leads us TO THE TRUTH. Convicting us of our shortcomings and proving that which IS righteous.

Now THIS is what I refered to when I attempted to offer 'organization'. The CC became an 'organization' that 'believed' that they could do it 'their way' instead of allowing the Spirit be THE guide. Choosing to impliment THEIR way and insist that it BE this way or NO WAY.

I hope this is able to 'sink in'. That what I have offered here IS able to 'open' your eyes and be of some aide in understanding. But "I" am unable to alter the hearts of ANY that choose to harden them. All I am able to do is 'guide' one in a 'particular direction'. I have NO desire to 'guide' one in a FALSE direction. All I can HOPE is that what has been offered to me I can demonstrate to others. That MOST will ignore or even ridicule what I offer is of none effect. That I DO what I am LED to DO is what matters most.

And A, I hold NO grudge against YOU or ANY man. For I am in NO position to be 'angered' by one's misunderstanding. That what I offer 'appears' to be 'over confident' is of NO fault of my own. For I could offer NOTHING if NOT for The Spirit that has led me to understanding. If not for The Spirit and what IT has offered, I would most likely be 'out in the world' doing what IT would lead me to DO. Understand that I am UNABLE to offer ANYTHING if NOT for The Spirit. And through IT I most certainly am able to place my confidence wholeheartedly.

MEC

 

[A-Christian]

A- Christian, let me ask you this - Why shouldn't the Church (Body of Christ) seek to be flawless in every way? The Spirit, once it has been born from above, cannot sin. The Flesh does - that is why we are to walk in the Spirit, and not of the Flesh.

You answered your own question my friend. Men are sinners. It does not matter if it is the men leading the Church or the pastor of a small country church, men are not going to be flawless. For two thousand years the Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church has maintained and handed down the deposit of faith, given to her by the apostles. Through all of the ups and downs, the Church still stands. Why are you trying to tear it down?

Peace

 

[RadicalReformer]

Deposit of Faith? What on earth is that? And yes, please provide some Scriptural reference for this.

Noone is seeking to tear down the Body of Christ.... Please, stop with such rhetoric.

Geeeshh, it sounds like you are giving in to the "sinners". Ah heck, they are going to sin, so no sense in trying to discipline or disciple them.

Read 1 Peter.

 

[Imagican]

A- Christian, let me ask you this - Why shouldn't the Church (Body of Christ) seek to be flawless in every way? The Spirit, once it has been born from above, cannot sin. The Flesh does - that is why we are to walk in the Spirit, and not of the Flesh.

You answered your own question my friend. Men are sinners. It does not matter if it is the men leading the Church or the pastor of a small country church, men are not going to be flawless. For two thousand years the Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church has maintained and handed down the deposit of faith, given to her by the apostles. Through all of the ups and downs, the Church still stands. Why are you trying to tear it down?

Peace

I am not trying to 'tear down' ANYTHING 'righteous'. And I am CERTAINLY not able nor do I have a desire to 'tear down' the CC. It is an 'entity' that is beyond my power to alter in the least. What I have attempted to do is warn those that may not be able to discern YET the TRUTH of such an organization.

The Church WILL stand until the end. But you would offer that the CC IS The Church. That would mean that IT is the ONLY 'truth'. And that my friend is simply NOT SO.

Are there members of The Church contained within the confines of The CC? I cannot and will not attempt to offer an answer to this. But, does the CC offer THE TRUTH concerning that offered by Christ and His apostles? Not from my understanding.

Look A, I can assure you that those that followed James Jones to their collective deaths most definitely, (at least at one time), BELIEVED that this man had the answers. They believed in Him wholeheartedly and would have defended him NO MATTER what. For they had placed their faith in 'a man' and for this purpose were led AWAY from the TRUTH and into the bizaar 'ideas' of this ONE MAN.

The SAME can be stated for the denominations as well. For we ALL KNOW that the denominations WERE created by MEN. For there is ONLY ONE CHURCH that is able to offer TRUTH. And that Chruch BEING nothing other than the Body of Christ. Now how do you reacon there can be anything other than ONE Body? Parts MANY, but each only a PART. And there is NEVER mentioned 'different beliefs' being part of the Body. But simply those that FOLLOW Christ. NOT in 'man-made' buildings that teach 'man-made' doctrine, but IN SPIRIT. For The Church is NOT a 'man-made' structure, but a SPIRITUAL BODY with Christ as the Head. The temple is NOW within the hearts of those that follow Christ. Not in some man-made structure that people have chosen to call a 'church'.

And A, if you will follow my posts, I am no more, no less impressed with 'protestant' denominations than I am with Catholic denominations. For these are BOTH 'man-made' institutions that have little to do with what has been offered through Christ and His apostles.

Why do you ThINK there is SO MUCH corruption in 'religion'? It is NOT due to sin, it is DUE to following that which is 'false'. For IF these that 'claim' to be following TRUTH were indeed following that which IS TRUTH, then they would be 'led' to that which IS righteous instead of allowing Satan in the doors.

Do you think that God is so powerless that His Church, (The Body of Christ), could be torn down in such a manner as pastors 'sleeping with the congregations women'? Pastor STEALING money from the congregation? Pastors leading people astray? Of course not. There MUST be a 'lack' of Spirit involved for these things to take place. And NOT just a 'lack of Spirit' in the ONE person, but lack of Spirit to guide PERIOD. For it takes MORE than ONE to perpetrate such actions. Those that actually take part in, and those that take pleasure FROM.

Many false prophets had ALREADY gone out to subvert the people AT THE TIME OF CHRIST. Do you believe that it got BETTER and not WORSE? Do you believe that The Spirit is ANY stonger NOW than it was THEN?

There is NO Universal Church created by 'men'. There is ONLY one TRUE Church and that was created by Christ and brought to us through the teaching of the apostles. NO, not a succession of apostles, but those ORIGINAL people chosen by God to 'start' The Chruch. NOT to 'maintain' The Church except through their words.

I already offered the comparison of the Jewish 'religion' to that of the CC. They STARTED with the 'Truth' and then decided that they were able to 'add to it' regardless of being told that this was IMPOSSIBLE. For the TRUTH has already been offered through Christ. And there is NOTHING left to 'add'.

ANYONE that is truly filled with The Spirit is WELL aware that The Spirit transends the feeble attempts of man to alter or add to that which has already been offered.

Look A, how do you suppose that so much paganism has been introduced and ACCEPTED by the 'churches'? Do you suppose that The Spirit OFFERED these changes? Or that the ones that INTRODUCED these pagan beliefs were being LED by The Spirit? Is it so difficult to understand that the 'churches' MUST be following something FALSE to allow this to happen? For IF they were following TRUTH then it would be OBVIOUS to them that their job is to MAINTAIN, not to ALTER.

MEC

 

[A-Christian]

ANYONE that is truly filled with The Spirit is WELL aware that The Spirit transends the feeble attempts of man to alter or add to that which has already been offered.

You see, this is why Protestants can't understand Catholics. It sounds like you regard the bible as the complete and sole authority for christians. And you have deciphered the bible in the manner that you MEC would decipher it. Unfortunatley, how MEC interprets the bible is different than how others interpret it and you are left with "your" version of the truth.

Are you "bible only"? If so, I think that unless you can prove, using the bible of course, that the bible is the complete, sole authority of Christianity, then you are living a lie. You lost on the issue of proving that the early church wasn't Catholic; why don't you take a stab at proving the bible is all there is suppose to be for the christian. It sounds as if your entire belief system is based on that so it should be easy to prove your claim that the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is so sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it. In the Protestant view, the whole of Christian truth is found within the Bible’s pages. Anything extraneous to the Bible is simply non-authoritative, unnecessary, or wrongâ€â€and may well hinder one in coming to God.

Prove it please or you lose face and all credability.

And for you Rad, the deposit of faith is the oral teachings of the apostles...you should know that.

Peace

 

[Vic C.]

Deposit of Faith? What on earth is that? And yes, please provide some Scriptural reference for this....

... And for you Rad, the deposit of faith is the oral teachings of the apostles...you should know that.

Peace

8-) Uh, I actually had to look it up myself. I didn't know what it was either. It sounded like we had to deposit our faith, like for some later time, when our faith was a little weak.

:smt102

 

[Imagican]

ANYONE that is truly filled with The Spirit is WELL aware that The Spirit transends the feeble attempts of man to alter or add to that which has already been offered.

You see, this is why Protestants can't understand Catholics. It sounds like you regard the bible as the complete and sole authority for christians. And you have deciphered the bible in the manner that you MEC would decipher it. Unfortunatley, how MEC interprets the bible is different than how others interpret it and you are left with "your" version of the truth.

Are you "bible only"? If so, I think that unless you can prove, using the bible of course, that the bible is the complete, sole authority of Christianity, then you are living a lie. You lost on the issue of proving that the early church wasn't Catholic; why don't you take a stab at proving the bible is all there is suppose to be for the christian. It sounds as if your entire belief system is based on that so it should be easy to prove your claim that the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is so sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it. In the Protestant view, the whole of Christian truth is found within the Bible’s pages. Anything extraneous to the Bible is simply non-authoritative, unnecessary, or wrongâ€â€and may well hinder one in coming to God.

Prove it please or you lose face and all credability.

And for you Rad, the deposit of faith is the oral teachings of the apostles...you should know that.

Peace

Firstly,

The ONLY reason that you can call me a 'protestant' is that I do NOT follow 'your' religion. I do NOT consider myself a 'protestant' any more than I consider myself a Catholic. I believe in God and His Son. I don't 'need' a 'label' to worship my Creator and His Son.

Now you should KNOW that I am NOT Bible ONLY. For the 'book' itself has little to offer other than 'stories' to those that choose to simply read it as such.

But, the Bible IS enough for one 'led by The Spirit' to find the TRUTH of Salvation and the example offered.

A, I'm going to take you up on your challenge. But when I DO offer scripture that STATES that ALL I NEED is The Word and FAITH I want YOU to admit that YOU are WRONG.

So far I have been as civil as can be expected considering the accusations that both YOU and fran have thrown at me. But enough is enough. i have offered NOTHING but truth. It may not agree with the CC's teachings, but that comes as no surprise considering the history of abuse that we have at our disposal concerning how they have treated those under their control. Fortunately they have LOST most of this control and now individuals are able to 'choose for themselves' HOW they worship God and WHO they give their money to, without fear of being tortured or murdered, (or oft times torture and THEN murder after their forced confession).

I need NO oral tradition. That is nothing other than 'smoke' and 'mirrors' in the 'guise' of truth. Designed JUST as the RAbis did in the Jewish faith. Christ showed that their 'Mosaic oral tradition' was BUNK. It was 'offered' by the religious leaders in order to obtain their 'own glory'.

I will offer AN example. Ever read about Jubilee? This was designed BY GOD in order to eliminate debt after a 'certain amount of time'. Every seven years I believe. This WAS part of Mosaic LAW. As time passed, the religious order became very wealthy. They started to realize that if they continued to honor Jubilee, they would LOOSE money that they were loaning the people. So, they simply altered the law and eliminated it for the sake of what they had to gain. Ask a Jew about Jubilee and few, if any laymen could even tell you what it is.

Now, if you study their Talmud you quickly find that this is 'alteration' offered in the 'guise' of ORAL tradition. And folks, ANYONE can 'say' that something was offered by 'oral tradition' but the truth is that we are to discern that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostles. If it contradicts what has been offered by These, then it is to be REJECTED.

MEC

 

[A-Christian]

Uh, I actually had to look it up myself.

:D :-D

I guess it can be a source of conflict when some christians don't know the "jargon" used by the early church fathers. I have to look stuff up also. The term "deposit of faith" is still used by catholics to this day. Scripture is also part of the deposit of faith.

Peace

 

[A-Christian]

A, I'm going to take you up on your challenge. But when I DO offer scripture that STATES that ALL I NEED is The Word and FAITH I want YOU to admit that YOU are WRONG.

Dust out your bible MEC and remember, you have to prove through scripture that scripture is the sole authority of christianity and that the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is so sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it.

Too bad I'm not a betting man.


Peace

 

[tblaine74]

I’m not sure where this thread is going, but, as far as I know, I’m the only one who has issued a serious challenge to my own original post. So after 12 pages I am giving up, I think I’ll just go with the flow here. I don’t know if I can keep up with all the posts, but I’ll start with the last “arguments†and see if I can put things into a logical context.

MEC’s “argumentâ€Â:

Premise 1: Dismissal of the Jubilee was “'alteration' offered in the 'guise' of ORAL traditionâ€Â

Conclusion: ?

There’s a premise. The point, or conclusion, is missing. This is yet to be an argument.

MEC’s “argumentâ€Â:

Premise 1: “we are to discern that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostlesâ€Â

Premise 2: “If it [“that offered THROUGH…â€Â] contradicts what has been offered by These thenâ€Â

Conclusion: “it is to be REJECTED.â€Â

Rephrased: If “that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostles†contradicts “that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostles†then “it is to be REJECTED.â€Â

Rephrased again: If something contradicts itself, then “it is to be REJECTED.â€Â

I think the argument is a little lacking, but I promise, if I ever find something that contradicts itself, I will most certainly reject it.

I am not trying to pick on you MEC. I respect your persistence. I plan to look at everything posted from now on in such a logic context. My thread has been hijacked by bad logic, the penalty is exposure.

 

[RadicalReformer]

Deposit of Faith? What on earth is that? And yes, please provide some Scriptural reference for this....

[quote="A-Christian":fb4ef]... And for you Rad, the deposit of faith is the oral teachings of the apostles...you should know that.

Peace

8-) Uh, I actually had to look it up myself. I didn't know what it was either. It sounded like we had to deposit our faith, like for some later time, when our faith was a little weak.

:smt102[/quote:fb4ef]

I thought I had a bank account I wasn't aware of... A-Christian, will you do me a favor... I am willing to discuss this Deposit of Faith with you - would you mind starting a new thread about it. Thanks...

 

[A-Christian]

I thought I had a bank account I wasn't aware of... A-Christian, will you do me a favor... I am willing to discuss this Deposit of Faith with you - would you mind starting a new thread about it. Thanks...

Sure thing Rad, but can we hold off for a while? If I get into to many disscusions at once, my head hurts :-D

 

[RadicalReformer]

I thought I had a bank account I wasn't aware of... A-Christian, will you do me a favor... I am willing to discuss this Deposit of Faith with you - would you mind starting a new thread about it. Thanks...

Sure thing Rad, but can we hold off for a while? If I get into to many disscusions at once, my head hurts :-D

Take your time. I would appreciate it if you would be willing to limit yourself to start with Scriptural support.

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

Funny you would 'mention' the Pharasees. For we KNOW that Christ pointed out how FAR from the 'truth' they had veered in His time. They had opted for 'power' and pretige' over a 'continuation' of what had originally been taught.

Is there ANY doubt that this WILL happen in ANY group over time? That as time progresses that ANY 'upper group' given the opportunity would eventually begin to practice their 'profession' for the sake of SELF rather than for the benefit of their 'followers'?

Of course it has happened, even in the hallowed halls of the Catholic Church. Jesus did not attack ALL the Pharisees, as we see that there were a number whom Jesus complimented. Yes, there were and are bad leaders. That doesn't nullify Judaism nor Catholicism. Jesus even told us that there WOULD be weeds amongst the wheat. I find it odd that you focus on this aspect, while ignoring other teachings that Jesus would CONTINUE remaining with this Church, members of whom betrayed Him, didn't understand Him, and ran away from Him in His hour of need.

It seems to me that you expect to see a Church in perfection here on this earth. It isn't going to happen here, MEC. One must remember that the Church, the Body, has TWO natures, Human and Divine. Until the second coming, the "human nature" of the Church will continue to be part of God's community. None of this has any bearing on whether the Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ - we see that Christ chose imperfect men who argued over leadership roles. We see these same men continued to disagree on the nature of the Church. Certainly you are aware of Judaizers? And the need for a council as noted in Acts 15?

We have the examples over and over of this very thing happening to EVERY instance of 'leadership' that man has exhibited over his fellow man.

And still, the Bible shows that authority is given to men, and leaders are to be followed. I do not see the precedent for "Here is the Bible... Figure it out what it means."

And this is exactly what is indicated through the history of the CC.

I do not know why you are being so obstinate about this. I have mentioned over and over that the individual leaders of the Catholic Church, through their history, have not been shining examples of God-like men. Nor were the Apostles chosen by Christ HIMSELF. But yet, I am to believe that YOU and those like you are perfect Christians? Never dissenting, always showing love for each other? Again, none of your points has any bearing on what happened in the first two centuries. Your attempt to rationalize your stance is pitiful, truly. EVERY SINGLE HUMAN ORGANIZATION has these same problems. The Scriptures amply note that Christians were not any different. Or have you not read the New Testament and all the mentioning about false teachers, Judaizers, and people who left the faith or were returning to their former lives??? What sort of utopia are you expecting?

You would offer that thier 'altering from the truth' NEVER took place. That the examples of 'degredation' in this organization was due NOT to the organization itself, but ONLY confined to individuals contained within the organization. That even IF there were 'individuals' that veered, the basic premise was maintained throughout the centuries.

But fran, what happens when the individual happens to be at the TOP of the 'food chain'? ONe that IS capable of offering change that COMPLETELY alters the original purpose? We have examples of the papalcy not even being able to 'decide' WHO was in charge. When a NUMBER of persons CLAIMED this position and the church was in literal turmoil.

The job of the "guy at the top of the food chain" is to preserve the passing of the deposit of faith intact to his generation and the next. This does not mean that the Renaissance Popes who were more intent on riches, were interjecting into the deposit the idea that Mary was God or some other thing. The Holy Spirit protects the Church from such things. While the politics and temporal relations may strain, while some offices may be in need of reform, the Spirit continues to protect that deposit of faith once given to the successors of the Apostles.

Or do you think that Christ was lying and the Spirit is NOT guiding the Church?

And how do we KNOW under such circumstances that the one who actually ROSE to the TOP was indeed the ONE that was MEANT to? How can YOU be assured that the church WASN'T led 'away' from that which it was MEANT to 'follow'?

Evidence would come in handy. Your speculations and questions are merely pointless musings in an attempt to hide the fact that you have no evidence that God suddenly took a break for 1500 years from the community He established until Martin Luther came on the scene. Ridiculous. God is always leading His Church. Caiphas was able to prophesy, from God, naturally, despite his stance on the Christ. I trust in God. You may choose to doubt what has taken place based on your "knowledge" of what must be, your utopia.

The Church has NEVER been destroyed. The Body of Christ has MAINTAINED followers since His death. But there will NEVER be a compitent organization created by MAN that will be able to stand up to the guiles of this World. Not until Christ returns Himself will such an organization exist and it will NOT be LEAD by Man.

So why are you so upset with the Catholic Church if you admit that no organization can be perfect? God didn't create perfection - everything is JOURNEYING TOWARDS PERFECTION. Not until the second coming of God will that perfection be culminated. In the meantime, we contine, just as the men of the first century and 20th century - to follow God's appointed leaders in our bids to become sanctified and transformed so that we may be prepared FOR that second coming - either at the end of time or the end of our time.

Regards

 

[RadicalReformer]

fran - there is a difference with the apostles though...

Christ chose unsavory men prior to their "conversion" in Christ. Yes, Paul still 'sinned' - however, I do not think he resorted back to being Saul.