Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
I think Mr. Easter might find the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector to be a relevant and timely read.
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS . . . in South America . . .
too.
In any case, am off to the college class . . . pottery . . .
maybe even some pockets of sanity here and there.
“Remember that the Indians (throughout the Americas) are notorious for mixing religions and/or changing their denomination depending on the latest missionary to show up.”
You are right about this. I read of a Lutheran missionary to Korea in the late 19th century. She wrote about the horror of learning how they had learned that Korean shamans taught of an unknown god who was higher than any other. They taught these pagans that God was this god and watched as the Koreans twisted Christianity together with Shamanism and ended up with demonic half-truths.
It’s a danger in every culture - it’s simply easier to see when it’s in methods and behaviors different from our own culture.
It doesn’t take anything more than physical eyes to see people prostrating themselves in front of pagan idols, such as Randall described, and know that this practice is demonic.
A chip on Randall’s shoulder? Did you read of his broken hearted examination of his own church once he returned home? He is broken over idolatry in every life he comes across - including his own.
Regarding Catholic iconography - is this not a violation of the command to NOT make graven images for people to worship?
"Demonic." That's a very large word, which you toss around quite a bit.
You assume much, and in your choice of words you make Christianity look ugly and hateful. I know a good many Catholic Christians -- and as a group they seem to be a lot more in touch with Christ's command to "love one another" than the folks who oppose Catholics for their "idolatry".
Let me suggest that you do much more damage than good when you deal out this medieval claptrap.
Yet you answer none of the questions or issues. Classic style of dodge-ball. The Word of God is True - nothing else, including RCC and Southern Baptist traditions alike.
AMEN!
Same old, same old. Men love the calluses on their knees more than the wounds through Christ's hands.
Soooo, just where do you think you got “the bible” dear? That would be “from the Catholic Church”. Leave Mexico and Peru alone. They have problems, but heresy is not the answer, finish corrupting Amerika first.
It’s a lie from hell that the RCC “gave” anyone the Bible. That tale is as much a fabrication of man as is the lie that the Apostle Peter was a pope or that Mary was without sin.
The RCC tried to keep the Bible away from people for centuries, contending that only “God’s anointed” could properly understand it. The RCC killed people rather than let them read the Bible for themselves.
Try another lie.
No. You lead them FROM Christ. Christ founded the Catholic Church as his visible institution on Earth. He gave the keys to Peter and his successors.
Stop fighting against true Christians and repent. The Catholic Church will welcome you home to Christ. Right now you are covered in pride for doing Satan’s work.
Really, can you put me in contact with one, just one of these people who claim to both be idolaters and Catholic? I suspect that the existence of these oft reported on but as-of-yet independently verified people are rarer than hen's teeth.
If you were shown examples of RC teaching that are clearly not Scriptural and are in violation of what Scripture teaches, would you be willing to leave the RCC, or attempt to show your fellow RC's the error and seek to change your church?
There is no apostolic succession. The RCC does not have the keys to the kingdom of God. Christ built His church on Himself - He made this clear in many Scriptures including Ephesians chapter 2:
“14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.”
Regarding the Bible:
The Catholic Church claims that it gave us the Bible. Is this supported by the historical evidence?
The Old Testament was written by God’s inspired prophets, patriarchs, psalmists, judges, and kings. It was faithfully copied and preserved by Jewish scribes. Modern Protestant Bibles have the same content as the Hebrew Bible.
The New Testament was written by Christian apostles. None of them were Catholics, because there was no Roman Catholic Church at the time. This was over two centuries before Constantine’s “conversion”.
The early Church did not have the New Testament as we know it. Rather, individuals and local congregations had portions of it. They would have one or more of the Gospels, some of the letters which Apostles had written, and perhaps the Book of Acts or the Book of Revelation.
Why weren’t all of these books collected in one place? Look at what the books themselves say. Individual apostles wrote them for specific audiences. For example, the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were written for Theophilus. (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1) Most of the Epistles were written to specific churches or to specific individuals. (Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:2; 2 Corinthians 1:1; Galatians 1:2; Ephesians 1:1; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:2; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4; Philemon 1:1; 3 John 1:1)
The early Christians expected that Jesus would return for His Church at any moment. As a result, they didn’t see the need for long-term planning for future generations. Furthermore, Christians were persecuted by the Romans. When your life is in constant danger, it is difficult to collect writings which are scattered all over the Roman Empire. So it took time to collect all of these writings, decide which ones were authoritative Scripture, and make complete sets of them.
By the time of Origen (185-254 A.D.), there was general agreement about most of the New Testament. However, there was disagreement as to whether the following six epistles should be part of the New Testament canon: Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude. This was sixty years before the conversion of Emperor Constantine.
The canon of the New Testament was not formed by the decision of any Church council. Rather, the Council of Carthage (397 A.D.) listed as canonical “only those books that were generally regarded by the consensus of use as properly a canon”. In other words, it didn’t create the canon. Rather, it confirmed the identity of the canon which already existed.
So the Catholic Church did not give us the Bible. However, Catholic monks helped preserve the Bible by copying it.
The Catholic Church changed the Bible. In 1548, at the Council of Trent, it added the Apocrypha to the Bible. The apocryphal books contain passages which are used to justify some Catholic doctrines, such as praying for the dead.
I'm curious, which teachings did you have in mind?
The goal, all along, is to proclaim the Truth of God’s Word, which all men - and much RCC doctrine - rail against in many ways.
When I travel to Asia, I don’t see RCCs, I see Buddhists. They are without hope except for believing in Christ just as much as the idolaters Randall saw in Mexico. It’s a shame that the RCC claims such as its own.
Would you do it?
We just finished a heated discussion about Mary, we could start there.
Hmmmmm . . . and the sociological participant observers would class that exhortation as . . .
A) A reasoned, calm, Unrubberized Bible based bit of advice
B) A flip retort
C) An embittered diatribe
D) A flattering gesture
####
Personally, I’m convinced we got the unrubberized Bible from . . . drum roll . . .
GOD ALMIGHTY.
He used various characters along the way in that plan . . .
finally 300-400 years later, a cluster of quasi politically powerful ecclesiastics . . . some from diverse regions . . . agreed about what God had done.
I’m sure God was quite flattered.
Ya know, Dr E . . . it still somewhat amazes me . . .
Some folks act like our pontifications are new information . . . like we are saying horribly startling things out of the blue, with no evidence, for the first time etc. etc. etc. and etc.
And that they are duty bound to erupt like Old Faithful geyser . . . full of steaming water . . . in knee-jerk fashion at every perceived hint of a slight or insult or whatever is against their construction on reality.
Given that you are such a wonderful spokesperson for the Calvinists . . .
What is WRONG WITH THEM! Why aren’t THEY acting like 2 year olds in constant outrage that all the 4 year olds don’t agree with their construction on reality?
WHY OH WHY aren’t the Calvinists CONTINUALLY OUTRAGED; foaming at the mouth; flailing about at every falling leaf; terminally incensed; rushing about like a whirling dervish in sack-cloth and ashes . . . because ANYONE in the rest of the world DARES to construe reality differently?
Are the Calvinists lacking in zeal and fervor for The truly truest true truth most truly truthedly trothed? Are THEY LACKING in backbones made of cacti?
Maybe their Sunday Schools don’t include lessons in THE IDOLATRY OF FLAILING ABOUT???
Maybe Calvinists haven’t been properly taught about the ABSOLUTE ETERNAL LIFE ESSENTIAL OF WORSHIPPING CALVINISM and all the ivy encrusted edifi, structures, organizations, and reference groups sprouting his name?
Perhaps THEIR pontifical magicstericals are . . . what . . . asleep at the switch? Trusting in GOD ALONE [the horror of it all]? Spending too much time bowing and scraping at Calvin’s bier? What?
Why no irate pontifical fiercely embittered and outraged diatribes from the Calvinists? Are they wimpy Christians?
Or are they just older than grade school?
But it must be suuuuucccchhhhh a TRIAL to endure ANYONE who doesn’t bow and scrape at Calvin’s bier. How can Calvinists stand it? What kind of meds do they take?
Maybe there’s a mantra they say for serenity’s sake . . . what must it be . . . I wonder . . .
OHHHHHH CALVIN FULL OF CHIPMUNKS [ooops, wrong Calvin. sorry.]
OHHHHH CLAVIN, FULL OF GRAPES
GRACE US WITH YOUR ETERNAL
PONTIFICAL MAGNANIMITY.
LET US ENJOY YOUR OMNICIENT
UNDERSTANDING AND PREDESTINED
INTERCESSIONS FOR OUR HUMBLE
UNCHOSEN DESTINIES.
HERE WE ARE UNGENUFLECTING
IN YOUR BEHALF BECAUSE YOU
OH GRACIOUS CALVIN DOTH
BESTOWEST UPON YOUR HUMBLE
PENITENTS SUCH WONDERUS
GRAPES—ERR GRACES.
MAY YOUR INTERCESSIONS
NEVER END OH MIGHTY CALVIN.
= = = =
Would the mantra go something like that? Maybe briefer?
I’m trying to imagine if the author of the original post of this thread had discovered Calvinists in Peru and Mexico behaving as described . . .
would the Calvinists hereon all be in need of rabies shots for all their foaming at the mouth as the fitting and holy demonstration of their holy duty?
I could sort of imagine some strong retorts of a very intellectual sort. One or two might show some slight emotion underneath all the pontifical dreary intellectualism. But, I’d think, most would kind of go—tsk tsk—what balderdash. And walk on by—unless, of course, they were clever and humble enough to consider the evidence on its merits and discuss it accordingly.
What a novel idea.
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.