GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: I can imagine  (Read 25429 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #35 on: Wed Nov 16, 2011 - 16:16:39 »
Quote

Ummm . . . can YOU tell ME which "truths" Jesus taught you that weren't being taught in his Catholic Church?

Elvisman,

The truth is that Peter was never a bishop of Rome or anywhere. The Roman church had no single leadership (bishop) until the mid second century.

The truth is that your bishops have no more valid connection to the apostles than any other church.
Peace, JohnR

Historical-critical method practitioners can't even agree with each other but some think they are infallible.  Go figure.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: I can imagine
« Reply #35 on: Wed Nov 16, 2011 - 16:16:39 »

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #36 on: Wed Nov 16, 2011 - 21:14:44 »
Quote
Historical-critical method practitioners can't even agree with each other but some think they are infallible.  Go figure.

Catholica,

When it comes to history they agree to a remarkable extent whether Catholic or Protestant. The difference between us is not history nor is it interpreting the meaning intended by the bible authors. The difference is how it is used.

Those hisorians/scholars do not at all think they are infallible and read the opinions of the others. They do not always agree on every minor point but on the overall they agree on the basics. Now when it comes to faith and doctrines of course protestant and Catholic historians will disagree. But I read them for their history and bible knowledge and not doctrine and practice.

But I find that many Catholics such as yourself do not keep up with the latest in what the scholars and historians of your churh are teaching. In spite of the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat on their books you still cannot accept what they say as factual. You continue
 to make excuses why they do not mean what they plainly say or why they should be ignored or why modern historians in general should be ignored (as your above post implies).

When you take that attitude, you are the loser because you have no access to the real truth of history and bible interpretation. and you have to argue with folks like me who know more about your own church than you do. You ought to learn from me and make a point of learning more about your own church and its history by reading those experts. In the end I think you would appreciate the learning experience, though you may have to go through some shocks along the way casting off old timey Catholicism and taking in the New.

We should all realize that to fear the truth is to show a lack of faith in Christ who IS the truth.  I read the Catholic scholars because I want the truth. I am not afraid of it. Neither should you be. Peace, JohnR

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: I can imagine
« Reply #36 on: Wed Nov 16, 2011 - 21:14:44 »

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #37 on: Wed Nov 16, 2011 - 22:12:16 »
Quote
Historical-critical method practitioners can't even agree with each other but some think they are infallible.  Go figure.

Catholica,

When it comes to history they agree to a remarkable extent whether Catholic or Protestant.

If they are not infallible, then their opinions are equally worthless.  It is up to you now to choose which worthless opinion you agree with the most.  I pity you for the position you are in.

You turn to these men to try to find truth, but these men are not even really teaching the Catholic faith, but rather just stating scholarly opinions which you confuse with the Catholic faith.
 
Those hisorians/scholars do not at all think they are infallible and read the opinions of the others. They do not always agree on every minor point but on the overall they agree on the basics. Now when it comes to faith and doctrines of course protestant and Catholic historians will disagree. But I read them for their history and bible knowledge and not doctrine and practice.

I love that line, "they agree on the basics".  Who determines what the basics are?  Is that person infallible?

The basics are that we need to believe everything that has been revealed by God.  None of these men who put their faith aside while working are relying not at all on what has been revealed by God.  So I don't care what they say.  They are not teaching the truth if what they say is not compatible with the divinely revealed Catholic faith.

But I find that many Catholics such as yourself do not keep up with the latest in what the scholars and historians of your churh are teaching.

Tradition tops novelty every time.

In spite of the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat on their books you still cannot accept what they say as factual.

That's because what they say is opinion.  And in someone's opinion, a someone who himself is fallible and possibly even liberal, what they write doesn't conflict with the Catholic faith.  Sorry, but post Vatican II, the Church had an influx of liberals and modernists, even in the episcopacy.  Post Vatican II Imprimaturs are pretty much meaningless.  I know that is a subtle thing that you don't understand.  Woe to you.


You continue to make excuses why they do not mean what they plainly say or why they should be ignored or why modern historians in general should be ignored (as your above post implies).

They are not excuses, but good reasons.  



When you take that attitude, you are the loser because you have no access to the real truth of history and bible interpretation. and you have to argue with folks like me who know more about your own church than you do. You ought to learn from me and make a point of learning more about your own church and its history by reading those experts. In the end I think you would appreciate the learning experience, though you may have to go through some shocks along the way casting off old timey Catholicism and taking in the New.

If the old timey Catholicism is not infallible, then all bets are off.  I wouldn't trust the Church except that I believe it is guided by the Holy Spirit.  There is no "New Catholicism".  That is a heresy promulgated by certain unscrupulous individuals post Vatican II.  Being a Methodist, you don't know what is going on.  I can hardly blame you.  


We should all realize that to fear the truth is to show a lack of faith in Christ who IS the truth.  I read the Catholic scholars because I want the truth. I am not afraid of it. Neither should you be. Peace, JohnR

I don't fear the truth.  I just recognize that the truth that matters is divinely revealed, not reverse-engineered.  These Catholic scholars don't have the truth insofar as what they say is not in line with the Catholic faith.

If John Meier says that Jesus had brothers and sisters, he is wrong if he thinks they came from Mary.  Mary was ever-virgin.  It has been revealed so by God.
« Last Edit: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 13:31:18 by Catholica »

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #38 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 11:34:59 »
Quote
If they are not infallible, then their opinions are equally worthless.  It is up to you now to choose which worthless opinion you agree with the most.  I pity you for the position you are in.

You turn to these men to try to find truth, but these men are not even really teaching the Catholic faith, but rather just stating scholarly opinions which you confuse with the Catholic faith.

Catholica,

They have committed their life to learn and teach real history. If you dont want real history then that is up to you. I am not confusing their scholarly opinions with Catholic dogma. It is you that confuse some history you have heard with Catholic teachings, not me. The Imprimatur proves their history does not conflict with Catholic teaching. I thought we established that basic fact.

I turn to them for their educated opinion on historical truth. I still make up my own mind, but what they say makes sense. I woud not go against Brown or Meire. Neither of course would I go against John Crossan, yet Meire and Crossan have minor differences.
However on the main, they agree.

The entire reason I bring them up is that you appeal to false history and I want you to understand that there is much better history from these experts whose books are approved with the Imprimatur. I am not saying the Imprimatur is necessary for a historian to be  good one. I think Gary Wills is also excellent although his books do not carry the Imprimatur.

I just think you should be aware of real history when historical subjects are discussed. You seem to get a lot of your information from those Catholic websites (not approved at all by the RCC) and prefer it while I have seen them give bad history and modify ancient documents in order to fool Catholics. Peace, JohnR

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: I can imagine
« Reply #38 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 11:34:59 »

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #39 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 12:28:35 »
Quote
If they are not infallible, then their opinions are equally worthless.  It is up to you now to choose which worthless opinion you agree with the most.  I pity you for the position you are in.

You turn to these men to try to find truth, but these men are not even really teaching the Catholic faith, but rather just stating scholarly opinions which you confuse with the Catholic faith.

They have committed their life to learn and teach real history. If you dont want real history then that is up to you. I am not confusing their scholarly opinions with Catholic dogma. It is you that confuse some history you have heard with Catholic teachings, not me. The Imprimatur proves their history does not conflict with Catholic teaching. I thought we established that basic fact.

They should have committed their life to worshiping Christ and proclaiming the truth of the gospel, not giving deductive opinions about history that contradict divinely revealed truth.  Unfortunately the result of their work is leading poor Protestants like yourself into heresy, because they are confusing you, causing you to think that what they write is actually Catholic teaching, when it is not.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: I can imagine
« Reply #39 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 12:28:35 »



Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #40 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 13:23:53 »
Quote

Ummm . . . can YOU tell ME which "truths" Jesus taught you that weren't being taught in his Catholic Church?

Elvisman,

The truth is that Peter was never a bishop of Rome or anywhere. The Roman church had no single leadership (bishop) until the mid second century.

The truth is that your bishops have no more valid connection to the apostles than any other church.
Peace, JohnR
I can provide lists from the Early Church that prove you wrong.
Can you provide ANYTHING to substantiate your claims that there was no single Episcopal leacer in Rome until the 2nd Century? 
That Peter was NEVER a Bishop?  Acts 1:15-26 PROVES you wrong on this one.

I GUARANTEE that you can't.

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #41 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 13:33:56 »
I have been looking for that church for over thirty years. 

When I asked Jesus how could it be for me to stay submitted to the Catholic Church, after he had been teaching me truths that the Church did not teach, and did not live?  Jesus told me to cooperate with don’t fight.  He then told me I was no longer to be under the headship of the Catholic Church.

Later Jesus told me, this was thirty some years ago, that a time was coming soon when man would suffer more than he has ever suffered.  I was to give a word and leave.  Out of that word a community would grow.  He wanted a place of safety for his people.

Ummm . . . can YOU tell ME which "truths" Jesus taught you that weren't being taught in his Catholic Church?

I see that you apparently believe that Jesus is revealing things to you that are unbiblicalNOWHERE do I read in Scripture that Giver is to build a community that is a safe haven for his people . . .
(Matthew 6:19) “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.

(Matthew 23:8-9) “You, however must not allow yourselves to be called Rabbi, since you have only one Master, and you are all brothers.  You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven.

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #42 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 20:21:40 »
Elvisman,


(Matthew 6:19) "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.


In my first forty years being a Catholic, and a teaching adult information classes for a number of years, never once did I ever have anyone say it was wrong to have a savings account, or a retirement plan.  No one mentioned that interest/usury was an evil.

The Catholic Church owns a bank where it stores up treasures.

(Matthew 23:8-9) "You, however must not allow yourselves to be called Rabbi, since you have only one Master, and you are all brothers.  You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven."


Jesus personally told me that it is dangerous to call another man hear on earth father, and it is dangerous to call another man father.

(Matthew 5:39) "You have learnt how it was said: 'Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.' But I say this to you: offer the wicked man no resistance."

Again Jesus personally told me that we were not to hurt/harm anyone for any reason.  The Church allows men to fight in a just war.  You should know that the Church before Constantine the Great corrupted the Church that a Christian was a pacifist.

(Luke 6: 34-35) "And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back."

(Luke 12:33) "Sell your possessions and give alms.  Get yourselves purses that do not wear out, treasure that will not fail you, in Heaven where no thief can reach it and no moth destroy it.  For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."


This is again tied up with storing up for one’s future, and emphasizes the fact that who one lend something to someone there is no interest charged.  The church does not teach this.  The church teaching has changed to say excessive interest, and that is nothing but water down excuse to allow for people to charge interest.  This again was not allowed in the early Church.

Jesus told us not to have possessions. 

(Luke 14:33) "So in the same way, none of you can be my disciple unless he gives up all his possessions."

(1 John 3: 5 - 6) " Now you know that He appeared in order to abolish sin, and that in Him there is no sin; anyone who lives in God does not sin, and anyone who sins has never seen Him or known Him." 

(1 John 3:9) "No one, who has been begotten by God sins; because God's seed remains inside him, he cannot sin when he has been begotten by God."

(1 John 3:8) "He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work"

(1 John 5:18) " We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him"


A Christian is dead to sin.  The Catholic Churches teachings have watered down the study of sin, hamartiology; to a point that all one needs to do is say they are sorry.  A serious sin may need to be confessed to a priest.  The Early Christian would never have dreamed of ever needing to confess a sin after the first time.

(Hebrews 10:26-31) "If, after we have been given knowledge of the truth, we should deliberately commit any sins, then there is no longer any sacrifice for them.  There is left only the dreadful prospect of judgment and of the fiery wrath that is to devour your enemies.


Nowhere in Hebrews does it say apostasy, it says “deliberately commit any sins

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #43 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 20:43:41 »
Quote
They should have committed their life to worshiping Christ and proclaiming the truth of the gospel, not giving deductive opinions about history that contradict divinely revealed truth.  Unfortunately the result of their work is leading poor Protestants like yourself into heresy, because they are confusing you, causing you to think that what they write is actually Catholic teaching, when it is not.

Catholica,

Their views do  not contradict Catholic teachings. They would not get the Imprimatur if they did. I never said their views were Catholic teachings. They are providing simple history which bears no relation to Catholic teaching. Your church does not teach history, Only dogma. You just dont get it.  The reason I use the scholars who are approved with the imprimatur is so you will realize their books are real history approved for publication by the Catholic church. I care not what dogma you believe, but you should be aware of real hstory.

They are history experts and I value their opinions. Too bad that you do not. But when you cite improper history claims I will continue to use them in the hope to educate you on the facts of history. Someday you will catch on. Peace, JohnR

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #44 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 20:51:26 »
Quote
In my first forty years being a Catholic

giver,

I have found that the most rabid anti-Catholics are ex-Catholics.

You should realize however that some protestants become Catholic. It is a two-way street. Yet they are almost never bitter toward their former protestant church as ex-Catholics seem to be toward the Catholic church.

I think everyone should select the church they are happy in for themselves and their family. Peace, JohnR

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #45 on: Thu Nov 17, 2011 - 21:03:53 »
Quote
In my first forty years being a Catholic

giver,

I have found that the most rabid anti-Catholics are ex-Catholics.

You should realize however that some protestants become Catholic. It is a two-way street. Yet they are almost never bitter toward their former protestant church as ex-Catholics seem to be toward the Catholic church.

I think everyone should select the church they are happy in for themselves and their family. Peace, JohnR
You have not read much of what I have posted.  I am not anti Catholic.

My son is dating a Catholic girl and I told him that the Catholic/Orthodox church has the teaching closest to the truth then any of the organized churches that I know of.

Jesus told me not to fight the Church when he relieved me of it headship.  My job is to bring it a word.

I would have you know that I shared with four Catholic bishops and was told that I was to continue doing what Jesus told me to do.  One bishop who later became an Archbishop told me that I could speak in the Catholic churches if the pastors of the churches would let me.

No there is nothing I would like better then to have the Church become once again what it was before Constantine the Great corrupted it.     

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #46 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 09:47:52 »
Elvisman,
In my first forty years being a Catholic, and a teaching adult information classes for a number of years, never once did I ever have anyone say it was wrong to have a savings account, or a retirement plan.  No one mentioned that interest/usury was an evil.

The Catholic Church owns a bank where it stores up treasures.
Jesus personally told me that it is dangerous to call another man hear on earth father, and it is dangerous to call another man father.

Again Jesus personally told me that we were not to hurt/harm anyone for any reason.  The Church allows men to fight in a just war.  You should know that the Church before Constantine the Great corrupted the Church that a Christian was a pacifist.

This is again tied up with storing up for one’s future, and emphasizes the fact that who one lend something to someone there is no interest charged.  The church does not teach this.  The church teaching has changed to say excessive interest, and that is nothing but water down excuse to allow for people to charge interest.  This again was not allowed in the early Church.

Jesus told us not to have possessions. 

A Christian is dead to sin.  The Catholic Churches teachings have watered down the study of sin, hamartiology; to a point that all one needs to do is say they are sorry.  A serious sin may need to be confessed to a priest.  The Early Christian would never have dreamed of ever needing to confess a sin after the first time.

Nowhere in Hebrews does it say apostasy, it says “deliberately commit any sins

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #47 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 10:49:42 »
Elvisman,You say: “Having a savings or retirement account is NOT what Jesus was talking about.  He was talking about GREED - not taking care of oneself or one's family.

cs80918

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #48 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:18:37 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #49 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:20:32 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 28:19ff shows Jesus sending the apostles forth teaching about God.  God gave us both the Holy Spirit AND the Catholic Church to teach us about God.  The Holy Spirit guides and protects the teachings of the Catholic Church from all error with regards to faith and morals.
« Last Edit: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:28:16 by Catholica »

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #50 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:28:19 »
Elvisman,You say: “Having a savings or retirement account is NOT what Jesus was talking about.  He was talking about GREED - not taking care of oneself or one's family.

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #51 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:35:32 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.

The gospel of Matthew shows Jesus sending the apostles forth teaching about God.  God gave us both the Holy Spirit AND the Catholic Church to teach us about God.  The Holy Spirit guides and protects the teachings of the Catholic Church from all error with regards to faith and morals.
The Church needs to teach one who has yet to accept Jesus as his or her savior, to give their lives to God.

No one can teach another to know God except God.

(1 Corinthians 2:10-16)  “These are the very things that God has revealed to us through the Spirit, for the Spirit reaches the depts. Of everything, even the depths of God.  After all, the depths of a man can only be known by his own spirit, not by any other man, and in the same way the depths of God can only be known by the Spirit of God. Now instead of the spirit of the world, we have received the Spirit that comes from God, to teach us to understand the gifts that he has given us.  Therefore we teach, not in the way in which philosophy is taught, but in the way that the Spirit teaches us: we teach spiritual things spiritually.  A spiritual man, on the other hand, is able to judge the value of everything and his own value in not to be judged by other men.  As scripture says;’ who can know the mind of the Lord, so who can teach him?’  But we are those who have the mind of Christ.

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #52 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:35:54 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.
Okay, CS - tell me something:
If ALL Christians are led by the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for themselves - WHY are there over 35,000 "denominations" ALL with different interpretations and doctrines?  Is it the intent of the Holy Spirit to confuse Christians?

Why is it that . . .
Some Protestant denominations believe in baptismal regeneration, while others do not.
Some believe in soul-sleep, while others do not.
Some believe in the total depravity of man, while others do not.
Some believe in the Holy Trinity, while others do not.
Some believe in doctrine of “once saved, always saved

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #53 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 11:42:06 »
Elvisman,You say: “Having a savings or retirement account is NOT what Jesus was talking about.  He was talking about GREED - not taking care of oneself or one's family.

cs80918

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #54 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 12:03:39 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.
Okay, CS - tell me something:
If ALL Christians are led by the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for themselves - WHY are there over 35,000 "denominations" ALL with different interpretations and doctrines?  Is it the intent of the Holy Spirit to confuse Christians?

Why is it that . . .
Some Protestant denominations believe in baptismal regeneration, while others do not.
Some believe in soul-sleep, while others do not.
Some believe in the total depravity of man, while others do not.
Some believe in the Holy Trinity, while others do not.
Some believe in doctrine of “once saved, always saved

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #55 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 12:16:25 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.
Okay, CS - tell me something:
If ALL Christians are led by the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for themselves - WHY are there over 35,000 "denominations" ALL with different interpretations and doctrines?  Is it the intent of the Holy Spirit to confuse Christians?

Why is it that . . .
Some Protestant denominations believe in baptismal regeneration, while others do not.
Some believe in soul-sleep, while others do not.
Some believe in the total depravity of man, while others do not.
Some believe in the Holy Trinity, while others do not.
Some believe in doctrine of “once saved, always saved

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #56 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 12:19:05 »
First tell me this- Why has the Catholic church changed it viewpoints/dogmas/doctrines through out the past 2,000 years or so?

The Church has NEVER changes a doctrine or Dogmatic position.  That is an anti-Catholic myth.
I challenge you to provide ONE example.

Now, please ANSWER my question:
If ALL Christians are led by the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for themselves - WHY are there over 35,000 "denominations" ALL with different interpretations and doctrines?  Is it the intent of the Holy Spirit to confuse Christians?

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #57 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 15:18:05 »
God gave us the Holy Spirit not the Catholic church to guide and teach us about God.

Just as  Paul learned from the Holy Spirit.
Okay, CS - tell me something:
If ALL Christians are led by the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for themselves - WHY are there over 35,000 "denominations" ALL with different interpretations and doctrines?  Is it the intent of the Holy Spirit to confuse Christians?

Why is it that . . .
Some Protestant denominations believe in baptismal regeneration, while others do not.
Some believe in soul-sleep, while others do not.
Some believe in the total depravity of man, while others do not.
Some believe in the Holy Trinity, while others do not.
Some believe in doctrine of “once saved, always saved

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #58 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 16:21:14 »
The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.

Again when it comes to usury.

Again when is comes to sin.

Again when it comes to calling another man father.

Again when it comes to possessions. 

Again when it comes to walking in the Spirit, personal relationship with Jesus.

HOW so? 
Be SPECIFIC.

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #59 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 16:50:57 »
The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.

Again when it comes to usury.

Again when is comes to sin.

Again when it comes to calling another man father.

Again when it comes to possessions. 

Again when it comes to walking in the Spirit, personal relationship with Jesus.

HOW so? 
Be SPECIFIC.
I will tell you why.  When the Church stopped being led by the Holy Spirit and started to listen to man’s teachings about God it’s understanding of the written Word of God took on what ever meaning people wanted.

The Church/Christian people, no longer let God teach him or her about God.  The reason they don’t is because people are no longer spiritual.  People are no longer spiritual because they no longer live the Word of God.

A person who sin is not a Christian.  Only Christians are spiritual.

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #60 on: Fri Nov 18, 2011 - 17:00:30 »
The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.

Again when it comes to usury.

Again when is comes to sin.

Again when it comes to calling another man father.

Again when it comes to possessions.  

Again when it comes to walking in the Spirit, personal relationship with Jesus.
I will tell you why.  When the Church stopped being led by the Holy Spirit and started to listen to man’s teachings about God it’s understanding of the written Word of God took on what ever meaning people wanted.

The Church/Christian people, no longer let God teach him or her about God.  The reason they don’t is because people are no longer spiritual.  People are no longer spiritual because they no longer live the Word of God.

A person who sin is not a Christian.  Only Christians are spiritual.

I asked you to be specific about HOW the church has changed God's Word, according to your little list.

As for your last statement - are you saying that you are WITHOUT sin?  You are IMMACULATE?

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #61 on: Tue Nov 22, 2011 - 14:07:35 »
Quote
I asked you to be specific about HOW the church has changed God's Word, according to your little list

Elvisman,

No one is saying that the Catholic church has changed Gods Word (the bible). But they have used it improperly by develping doctrines that have nothing to do with the original intent of the author of scripture.

Here is Raymond Brown to explain.

 "The Roman Catholic church has rarely, if ever, defined what a text meant to the person who wrote it.
The church encourages interpreters of Scripture to discover with all the sholarly means available to them
what individual passages meant when they were written and encourages all its members to read the Bible
for spiritual nourishment. Church interpretation for Catholics deals primarily, not with what the biblical
text meant when it was written, but with what it means for the life of the Christian community in
subsequant eras."

Raymond Brown, 101 Questions and Answers To The Bible. page 120 Imprimatur


The original intent actually means something to protestants. That is how we determine what doctrines and practices we should use. We want to use what the apostles INTENDED. Clearly the Catholic church does not have that as a concern.

Peace, JohnR

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #62 on: Tue Nov 22, 2011 - 14:14:55 »
Elvisman,

No one is saying that the Catholic church has changed Gods Word (the bible). But they have used it improperly by develping doctrines that have nothing to do with the original intent of the author of scripture.

Here is Raymond Brown to explain.

 "The Roman Catholic church has rarely, if ever, defined what a text meant to the person who wrote it.
The church encourages interpreters of Scripture to discover with all the sholarly means available to them
what individual passages meant when they were written and encourages all its members to read the Bible
for spiritual nourishment. Church interpretation for Catholics deals primarily, not with what the biblical
text meant when it was written, but with what it means for the life of the Christian community in
subsequant eras."

Raymond Brown, 101 Questions and Answers To The Bible. page 120 Imprimatur


The original intent actually means something to protestants. That is how we determine what doctrines and practices we should use. We want to use what the apostles INTENDED. Clearly the Catholic church does not have that as a concern.

Peace, JohnR

WRONG again, John.  Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Here is Giver's post, to which I was replying:

The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.
Again when it comes to usury.
Again when is comes to sin.
Again when it comes to calling another man father.
Again when it comes to possessions.
 


He CLEARLY stated that the Church changed God's Word.

Here's a little advice, John:
READ the posts before responding or making comments . . .

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #63 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 15:10:46 »
Quote
WRONG again, John.  Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Here is Giver's post, to which I was replying:

The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.
Again when it comes to usury.
Again when is comes to sin.
Again when it comes to calling another man father.
Again when it comes to possessions.   

He CLEARLY stated that the Church changed God's Word.

Here's a little advice, John:
READ the posts before responding or making comments . . .

elvisman,

When he says the Catholic church has changed Gods Word he must mean that it does not act in the manner that scripture recommends. Of course the scripture is the same for protestants and Catholics. BUT scipture is also changed when one uses it in a manner that is not true to the original intent of the author. The words are not changed but it is used to support something that has nothing to do with the apostles intent of his writing. I think that is what he meant. And that is correct.
Peace, JohnR

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #64 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 15:34:35 »
Quote
WRONG again, John.  Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Here is Giver's post, to which I was replying:

The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.
Again when it comes to usury.
Again when is comes to sin.
Again when it comes to calling another man father.
Again when it comes to possessions.   

He CLEARLY stated that the Church changed God's Word.

Here's a little advice, John:
READ the posts before responding or making comments . . .

elvisman,

When he says the Catholic church has changed Gods Word he must mean that it does not act in the manner that scripture recommends. Of course the scripture is the same for protestants and Catholics. BUT scipture is also changed when one uses it in a manner that is not true to the original intent of the author. The words are not changed but it is used to support something that has nothing to do with the apostles intent of his writing. I think that is what he meant. And that is correct.
Peace, JohnR

Then let GIVER respond for himself.
That is NOT what he said.  He said that the Church CHANGED GOD'S WORD.

A little advice:
If you're going to make false accusations - have the courage to back them up with some facts.  At least give some examples.
Giver has not done this despite your excuses . . .

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #65 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 16:15:56 »
I did not mean that the Church changed the Written Word of God to say something other then what was originally recorded.  Even though in the New American version I do believe they left off words that changed the meaning of some verses.  Don’t ask me to explain.  I am not concerned because Jesus lets me know what is correct.  Everyone needs to let God edit his or her reading of the Word.   I am saying all this because when the New American Bible came out I notice it differed from those I read before.  It seems that version of the bible change depending on what denomination is responsible.   

I meant the Church has ignored what the Word says, or has found a different understanding of the written Word.

Different understanding from what the Early Church knew to be the truth.  Also a different understanding from what Jesus has personally taught me.

The most important part of the Word of God that is ignored is: Christianity is hearing the Word of the Lord and living that Word.  Anything short of that is not being a Christian.

The only way one can live the Word of the Lord is to be possessed by the Holy Spirit. 

When one lives the whole Word of God, Jesus will show himself the person, and he and the Father will make there home in that person. Satan/sin will never enter into that home.

Elvisman

  • Guest
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #66 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 16:30:46 »
I did not mean that the Church changed the Written Word of God to say something other then what was originally recorded.  Even though in the New American version I do believe they left off words that changed the meaning of some verses.  Don’t ask me to explain.  I am not concerned because Jesus lets me know what is correct.  Everyone needs to let God edit his or her reading of the Word.   I am saying all this because when the New American Bible came out I notice it differed from those I read before.  It seems that version of the bible change depending on what denomination is responsible.   

I meant the Church has ignored what the Word says, or has found a different understanding of the written Word.

Different understanding from what the Early Church knew to be the truth.  Also a different understanding from what Jesus has personally taught me.

The most important part of the Word of God that is ignored is: Christianity is hearing the Word of the Lord and living that Word.  Anything short of that is not being a Christian.

The only way one can live the Word of the Lord is to be possessed by the Holy Spirit. 

When one lives the whole Word of God, Jesus will show himself the person, and he and the Father will make there home in that person. Satan/sin will never enter into that home.

WRONG.  I am demanding that you explain.
Don't level these kinds of charges - then tell me not to ask you to explain.

I'm not letting you off the hook here.  People like you have been hurling false accusations at the Church for centuries without any support whatsoever.

If you are saying that the Church CHANGED God's Word - then you need to support that statement with some EVIDENCE.
Otherwise - you're just another lying anti-Catholic whose hobby, it seems is bearing false witness . . .

Offline Giver

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Manna: 43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #67 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 17:07:36 »
I did not mean that the Church changed the Written Word of God to say something other then what was originally recorded.  Even though in the New American version I do believe they left off words that changed the meaning of some verses.  Don’t ask me to explain.  I am not concerned because Jesus lets me know what is correct.  Everyone needs to let God edit his or her reading of the Word.   I am saying all this because when the New American Bible came out I notice it differed from those I read before.  It seems that version of the bible change depending on what denomination is responsible.   

I meant the Church has ignored what the Word says, or has found a different understanding of the written Word.

Different understanding from what the Early Church knew to be the truth.  Also a different understanding from what Jesus has personally taught me.

The most important part of the Word of God that is ignored is: Christianity is hearing the Word of the Lord and living that Word.  Anything short of that is not being a Christian.

The only way one can live the Word of the Lord is to be possessed by the Holy Spirit. 

When one lives the whole Word of God, Jesus will show himself the person, and he and the Father will make there home in that person. Satan/sin will never enter into that home.

WRONG.  I am demanding that you explain.
Don't level these kinds of charges - then tell me not to ask you to explain.

I'm not letting you off the hook here.  People like you have been hurling false accusations at the Church for centuries without any support whatsoever.

If you are saying that the Church CHANGED God's Word - then you need to support that statement with some EVIDENCE.
Otherwise - you're just another lying anti-Catholic whose hobby, it seems is bearing false witness . . .
Look I am not a one who studies the bibles.  I only shared that when after I started listening to the New American Bible I noticed that they did not complete some of the verses as the other versions did.  Now I am not saying who is right or wrong.  I can’t say that because it made no difference to me.

I used the Jerusalem bible for years with the understanding that many thought it to be a poor translation.  Yet that is the bible I was using when Jesus told me to get more into the written Word.  It is also the bible that Jesus had me open to teach me that Christians are dead to sin.

I don’t believe any translation is all correct.  Let Jesus guide you into what he want you to know.

Offline Ladonia

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
  • Manna: 119
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #68 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 17:13:34 »
Quote
WRONG again, John.  Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Here is Giver's post, to which I was replying:

The Church changed God’s Word when it comes to killing.
Again when it comes to usury.
Again when is comes to sin.
Again when it comes to calling another man father.
Again when it comes to possessions.   

He CLEARLY stated that the Church changed God's Word.

Here's a little advice, John:
READ the posts before responding or making comments . . .

elvisman,

When he says the Catholic church has changed Gods Word he must mean that it does not act in the manner that scripture recommends. Of course the scripture is the same for protestants and Catholics. BUT scipture is also changed when one uses it in a manner that is not true to the original intent of the author. The words are not changed but it is used to support something that has nothing to do with the apostles intent of his writing. I think that is what he meant. And that is correct.
Peace, JohnR

And you and others know the original intent of the author?

Offline highrigger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Manna: 26
    • View Profile
Re: I can imagine
« Reply #69 on: Sun Nov 27, 2011 - 18:44:27 »
Quote
And you and others know the original intent of the author?

Ladonia,

Modern scholarship have studied the original intent of the NT authors quite a lot. And they are in general agreement whether protestant or Catholic. Peace, JohnR