Posted on 04/18/2007 11:20:10 AM PDT by Salvation
You keep going on and on about whether the Church has the authority to celebrate its Liturgy on the first day of the week vice the last. I'll posit another question at you from Scripture... where did Peter and the Apostles get the authority to do away with circumcision at the Council of Jerusalem?
Now I'll answer it for you. Circumcision was the sign of the old covenant. Baptism is the sign of the new. In the New Covenant, whatever the Apostles held bound was held bound and whatever they loosed was loosed (Matt 16:17-19). All authority in Heaven and Earth was given to Christ and He empowered the Apostles. Who are you to say the Church doesn't have the authority God promised?
It was my pleasure, friend. :)
- Scripture (The Bible)
- Tradition (Primarily the Liturgy--Mass--and the Sacraments)
- The Magisterium (The Church's teachings)
Why do we recognize these three? Because Christianity is a religion of the Word, not of a book. The Word is a person--Jesus Christ. Each of the revelations above is mutually illuminating. Nothing in the three contradict each other, they reveal more about the others. Scripture is the God-breathed written revelation. Tradition is the living worship of God. The Magisterium is the means given by Christ to understand it all.
What's to answer? You posted a lot of words that tell me nothing except that you haven't read my quotations in blue. The Catholic Church clearly teaches contrary to scripture, and brags about it. This is why I wanted to know what the standard is for a Catholic? What is the basis for the religion? If you acknowledge that the church at Rome is beholden to nothing but itself, then I'm out. If you say that the church at Rome is beholden to scriptures, then please show me the scriptures that repeal the 4th Commandment and sanctify Sunday in its place.
"Nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Catholic] Church outside the Bible." "To Tell You the Truth," The Catholic Virginian, 22 (October 3, 1947), 9.
Boy, you are just hung up here.
Did you read my post #122? And a couple of others here on this thread? And a bunch of others on other threads?
We are responsible to Jesus Christ for the Bible. And we alone have the authority to interpret it. We should take the Bible as the Holy Spirit acting through the Church of Christ tells us.
And your re-challenges show that you don't bother to read my responses... so what's the point?
If you acknowledge that the church at Rome is beholden to nothing but itself, then I'm out. If you say that the church at Rome is beholden to scriptures, then please show me the scriptures...
Once again, the Church is beholden to Christ, Who is the Word made flesh. It is not beholden to a book and a static faith unattended by the Holy Spirit in nearly 2000 years. Christ promised He would be with His Church until the end of the age. Is He a mute? Are we to read without the aid of the Church He founded what was written 2000 years ago and create church after church based on our own interpretations? The Church is the Bride of Christ. Having one mind and one purpose makes far more sense than that She be a schitzophrenic unable to agree with her own self as is the Protestant model.
Regarding the Sabbath: Catholic Answers
Essentially, Abraham was justified in faith before his circumcision and before the Ten Commandments... as was Noah... as was Enoch. As Jesus said, the whole law is summarized in loving God with our whole mind, soul and strength and loving our neighbor as ourselves. He did far more to break the hold of the rigid Sabbath observance than anyone. God doesn't demand legalism. He demands our love. If we love God and love our neighbor, we are keeping His commands. The day of the week on which we worship is not the most critical issue in the cosmos (Col 2:16).
By the way, I've read the source material that you are using to get your quotes. I'm with wideawake... they aren't worthy of comment.
Any unsaved people in your church of Jesus Christ???
It isn’t my Church. It’s His. God created His Church - it’s not a man-made unbiblical construction, like we are surrounded with. He is not my God, in the sense that I did not create Him. I am His creature - He created me. It really pains me to see so many well meaning people creating their own Gods and parading them around for everyone to see.
I have the power to reject God before I die, just like all human beings. The only people that are saved are those who have been taken to Heaven. The judgement of God upon us is after we die; your question therefore has no meaning.
Yet, strangely eonough, I am able to contain my "chip" and refrain from personal attacks. Curious.
You keep going on and on about whether the Church has the authority to celebrate its Liturgy on the first day of the week vice the last. I'll posit another question at you from Scripture... where did Peter and the Apostles get the authority to do away with circumcision at the Council of Jerusalem?
Act 15:5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses." Act 15:6 The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter.
Act 15:7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.
Act 15:8 "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; Act 15:9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.
Act 15:10 "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?
Act 15:11 "But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."
Act 15:12 All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.
For starters, God chose the uncircumsized, not the apostles. Secondly, the apostles and elders got together to discuss what God had done. Since God chose the physically uncircumsized, they decided to go with circumcision of the heart.
Deu 10:16 "So circumcise your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer.
Deu 30:6 "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.
Rom 2:26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.
You've managed to hack my hard drive? You don't aagree with Cardinal Gibbons? How is this possible for a Catholic not to agree with a Cardinal?
Essentially, Abraham was justified in faith before his circumcision and before the Ten Commandments... as was Noah... as was Enoch. As Jesus said, the whole law is summarized in loving God with our whole mind, soul and strength and loving our neighbor as ourselves. He did far more to break the hold of the rigid Sabbath observance than anyone. God doesn't demand legalism. He demands our love. If we love God and love our neighbor, we are keeping His commands. The day of the week on which we worship is not the most critical issue in the cosmos (Col 2:16).
1Jo 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.
Not so. I point it out to the posts that drip with it. I don't recall you personally attacking a FReeper but your disdain for the Catholic Church (on a Catholic Caucus thread) is more than evident. You'll have to excuse those of us who answer attacks on Christ's Bride...
For starters, God chose the uncircumsized, not the apostles. Secondly, the apostles and elders got together to discuss what God had done. Since God chose the physically uncircumsized, they decided to go with circumcision of the heart.
I know what they decided... where (in your mind) did they get the authority to do so? This process you hail and underline is no different than what the Church has done through the ages. They convocate to discern the Will of God through the Holy Spirit. They come together and they debate. They search the Scripture, look to what has been revealed through the Deposit of Faith and Tradition and pray. You will notice that these convocations have typically taken years. It isn't a simple or light thing.
I fail to see how you can post what you just posted that came from a convocation of the Apostles seeking the Will of God and deny that right and authority so vehemently to His Church!
As was shown early on in this thread, your quotes and sourcing are suspect. If you would like to point me to a Catholic source for these quotes, I will consider them. Otherwise, I will consider them as passing on distortions to discredit the Church. This has been done throughout the history of the Church and the most recent example is the Communist-admitted plot to sully the name of Pope Pius XII.
As to the rest of your post... what exactly are we arguing about? You are either in agreement with me or have lost the will to debate...
I regret that this actually isn’t a “Catholic Causcus” thread. If it were, such contentious posts would be removed.
The “disdain for the Catholic Church” has always been evident in kerryusama04’s posts. It’s a sort of Johnny-one- note thing.
I have also been aware of the questionable sources of some of the quotes offered.
Thank you for clarifying.
Kerry’s sources are not usually questionable.
They invariably have a very visible bias. And thank God for that. I’ve had to intently scrutinize some cleverly disguised attacks on the Church in the past in order to put them into the proper light.
Most of the ones used by the anti Catholics in these threads are relatively easy to argue against. Like shooting fish in a barrel, most of them. Many of ‘em have at the root of their bias arrogance and hubris on the part of the proponents, hucksterism and largesse for the putative leaders, or just plain laziness for the practitioners. Or combinations of all three.
Both.
The issue is to distinguish between the allegory and the fact.
Did the Good Samaritan REALLY exist, or was he a personality created to illustrate a point? In the long run, does it matter?
If you are a Christian, you believe Christ rose from the dead, ascended into heaven, Satan as a real entity, the fact that Christ was the Son of God, that he redeemed us by His death and suffering, plus the personalities and facts of the Old Testament.
But there is a lot of allegory in the Bible and a lot of material which needs to be taken in a figurative sense rather than a literal one.
Post the article on the Internet, and there isn't much of a "we" left. However one answers the question, somebody else will answer differently, and it's more common that people irritate others in to taking the opposite position than that someone brings others around to a point of view through reason and argument.
John O'Brien, Ph.D., LL.D.: "But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible, and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about 15 centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed. They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair." Faith of Millions, pp. 543 and 544.
As for the rest of this thread, it is readily apparent to anyone who can doff the rosary colored glasses that I had no intention or inclination of going down this road on this thread. In fact, I didn't even want it to go any further than my original post, where I hoped Salvation would oblige me and post a thread indicating the importance of the Holy Scriptures to the Catholic Church.
When chapters and verses were added to the scriptures (1225 A.D.) it was done without divine inspiration. What you are about to learn may take some thought, but you will see the flow of scripture if you are honest.
There were two Sabbaths that week and John alludes to the first one here[John 19:31] The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Well....this is the same Sabbath spoken of in [Mark 16:1]. That particular year it fell on a Wednesday night/Thursday and was an Annual (special) Sabbath.
I'm going to show you everything from [Mark 15:42-47] and then include [Mark 16:1] to show the proper ending of Mark's train of thought. And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre. And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where he was laid. And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
What I highlighted in red was [Mark 16:1] to show you the actual ending of Mark's chapter 15.....and you can obviously see Mark's thought process when you read it that way.
The reason the chapters were divided that way is to show an agenda for Sunday as the day of resurrection. [Mark 16:2] is the only place in scripture that (in the Greek) shows a sunrise visit to the tomb.....but the previous verse happened three days earlier....prior to the Special Sabbath of Unleavened Bread.
Another reason we know that this Sabbath was not Saturday is because the women in [Mark 16:1] buy spices after that Sabbath. When Our Saviour was placed in the tomb right before sunset of that Special Sabbath the women had to wait all of Wednesday night/Thursday before they could buy any spices and [Luke 23:56] shows they went home after purchasing those spices, prepared them......Thursday night/Friday..... and rested again for the weekly Sabbath.
So to get back to your original challenge....[Mark 16:1] is not occurring on a Sunday.
Now....[Mark 16:2-8] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
First, two important things. The Tomb is empty.....and these women are not the same women who had visited earlier on the weekly Sabbath afternoon....finding also an empty tomb. If you notice the last line shows that "These" women are afraid and tell no one; whereas in [Matthew 28:8][Luke 24:9] and [John 20:2] the other women all run and tell the disciples....and these passages are to be shown occurring on Sabbath afternoon....late.
When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.
Two things here: There is no punctuation in the Greek so I can just as easily interpret this as: When Jesus rose, early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. And there is some doubt as to the authenticity of [Mark 16:9-20] The two most reliable manuscripts do not show these verses. This is common knowledge.
Luke 24:1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. ...6 "He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.'"
This, again simply shows an empty tomb.....and the Greek does not say "On the first day of the week". It says: And on the first of the sabbaths, at early dawn, they came to the tomb, bearing the spices they made ready, and certain [others] with them. The Greek actually says the same thing here as I pointed out to everyone in my post #89. "Mia twn Sabbatwn"....meaning "One of the Sabbaths"....not Sunday.
Matthew 28:1 After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
The translators again are attempting to show their bias. If you honestly look at the Greek you will see that it says something like this: [Matthew 28:1]And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.
[John 20:1] And on the first of the sabbaths, Mary the Magdalene doth come early (there being yet darkness) to the tomb, and she seeth the stone having been taken away out of the tomb.
The point being, of course.....Mary Magdalene and friends all visit the tomb late on the Sabbath and find it empty. They then run excitedly to tell the disciples (unlike the women of Mark 16:2). I again make my statement which you were unable to refute. There is no scripture that will show a Sunday resurrection. It is a myth propagated by the Roman Catholic Church......never happened....and many are being deceived!
Sorry I took so long in getting back. It's been an extremely busy day for me....and I wanted to treat this subject with the detail it needed.
See post #178.....
Alleluia!
Alleluia!
Alleluia!
On the first day of the week, Mary of Magdala came to the tomb early in the morning while it was still dark and saw the stone removed from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and to the other disciples whom Jesus loved, an d told them, “They have taken Jesus from the tomb, and we don’t know where they put him.” So Peter and the other disciples went out and came to the tomb. Jn 20:1-3
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.