Catholic vs. Presbyterian

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church ^

[HarleyD]

As I’ve stated, it doesn’t matter WHAT VERSION of the Bible you want to considered INSPIRED. We could say the Catholic version is the inspired scripture. It doesn’t matter. The question is what is the meaning of INSPIRED.

Somehow you’re not grasping this concept.

[narses]

Sure I get it, any old Bible is inspired according to Pope Harley D, right?

[narses]

Sure I get it, any old Bible is inspired according to Pope Harley D, right?

[narses]

No answer? What are you worried about?

[LexRex in TN]

From the noted sage Emo Philips--"I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off."

The venom surprises me--we have far more in common than not--why can't we rejoice where we are alike, seek common ground where possible and not worry about the minutiae?...I had a co-worker today tell me that I was heretic because I prayed in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost and HE prayed to Jesus Christ...Again, minutiae--a difference without meaning.

[Petronski]

That is why most Catholics cannot or will not admit the scriptures holds no more authority than any other Church writings, just as the Catholic definition states.

Bzzzzt.

The Catholic Church does not say that.

[Petronski]

The problem Catholics have is that Trent completely disregarded Jerome's list and created their own.

Bzzzt.

False.

[narses]

{{{{{CRICKETS}}}}}

[HarleyD]

The Catholic Church does not say that.

I have yet to hear what the Catholic Church has to say. No one seems to know.

[Petronski]

I have yet to hear what the Catholic Church has to say.

So you just made something up.

That is SO typical.

[Petronski]

Seriously, how do you account for this:

The left side of your mouth said

...just as the Catholic definition states.

The right side of your mouth said

I have yet to hear what the Catholic Church has to say.

There's a rather severe consistency problem there.

[verdadjusticia]

Mad Dawg wrote: Will you at least grant that your position tends to the more rigorist side?

verdadjusticia responds: I’m afraid that any position other than “all who are nice are saved” is rigorist today. That is why no one is too worried about their standing as far as salvation is concerned, everyone but Adolph Hitler is in Heaven, and to some, even he is in heaven.

Mad Dawg wrote:
I think a lot of ignorance is a good deal more invincible than people consider,

verdadjusticia responds:

“Invincible ignorance” has no dogmatic status. I would not bank my salvation on it. I would not even bank my salvation
on so-called “baptism of desire”. God can keep anyone alive long enough to convert them. God can get the water to anyone. No one dies by “accident”. Catholics need to teach dogma, not un-infallible theories.

Mad Dawg wrote:
re: and that some of the resistance to the Church is because of our failings.

verdadjusticia:
True. However, anyone of good will get’s past that, and becomes a better Catholic than those bad examples. Any baby can get baptized and be called a Catholic in adulthood. That means nothing. Hitler was a baptized Catholic.

Mad Dawg wrote:
re: my childhood best friend was thoroughly indoctrinated against the Catholic Church, to the point where I would think it would take therapy before he would be able to consider the issues anything like objectively.

Of myy greater family, like 300 people, all cradle Catholics, I doubt that 20 go to mass every Sunday.I too “would think it would take therapy before they would be able to consider the issues anything like objectively”.

We should forget non-Catholics till you convert Catholics. In order of priority:

1) convert ourself (pornography, fornication, no contraceptives, divorce, sins. Go to mass and confession.)

2)convert our children and wives to behave as #1

3) convert our parents nad close relatives

4) convert our greater family

Do the above and the world will convert to our good VISIBLE example.

Forget about making excuses for why others don’t convert and how they’ll be saved outside of the Church. If I not not gamble my salvation on fallible theories like invincible ignorance and baptism of desire, why would I teach that to anyone else? Till Invincible ignorance and baptism of desire become infallible defined, I’ll stick with dogma.

[HarleyD]

The left side of your mouth said ...just as the Catholic definition states. The right side of your mouth said I have yet to hear what the Catholic Church has to say. There's a rather severe consistency problem there.

Hmmmmm....I guess my statement should have read "I have yet to hear what the Catholics have to say.

I believe that somewhere way back (#385) someone pointed out the Catholic Church's definition of the inspired works of God from New Advent. That definition gave inspiration as ...Inspiration can be considered in God, who produces it; in man, who is its object; and in the text, which is its term. This encyclopedia goes on to explain:

Considered in its term, inspiration is nothing else but the biblical text itself. This text was destined by God, Who inspired it, for the universal Church, in order that it might be authentically recognized as His written word. This destination is essential. Without it a book, even if it had been inspired by God, could not become canonical; it would have no more value than a private revelation.

In other words, if we recognized right now an inspired work of God, it can't be considered inspired because the Church says its not. So yes, I have heard what the Catholic Church has to say on inspiration; without the Church whatever God has to say is rubbish. It also makes one wonder if the Church can deem something as inspired that God has not deemed.

Care to comment on the nuiances of the logic of the Catholic encyclopedia than on my terms?

[Petronski]

I do not know if this will be satisfactory, but rather than debating our way through the Catholic Encyclopedia's explanations and/or logic, I would direct your attention to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which provided by the Church to explain Catholic Teaching on all matters of faith. Specifically,

II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

One common source. . .

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."⁴⁰ Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".⁴¹

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

"Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."⁴²

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."⁴³

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."⁴⁴

I sincerely hope this advances your understanding of Catholic teaching on the topic.

The entire segment of the Catechism excerpted here can be found at this link.

[HarleyD]

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

According to your Catechism, #82 states rather clearly that not all revealed truths come from the holy Scriptures. This, of course, negates anything special about the scriptures. It also raises the question of how you can determine "tradition" to be inspired. As I stated earlier, this isn't any different than the Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses who uses extra-biblical material to boaster their claims.

[Petronski]

This, of course, negates anything special about the scriptures.

Simply false.

[SQUID]

Amen, there is only One that is infallible and it turns out that He has never been to Rome.

[RnMomof7]

From: Radio Replies Fathers Rumble and Carty 2nd Volume
361. What assurance did Christ give that His Church would be preserved from error?
When He said, “I will build my Church,” He also said that “the gates of hell would never prevail against it.” Matt. XVI., 18

A ) It does not say the Roman Catholic church , there was no such thing as the Roman Catholic church there was simply the catholic church.

B) What does that scripture REALLY mean, (as opposed to the Vatican reading of it?)

GATES are not an OFFENSIVE weapon, one puts up GATES to keep people OUT or IN
You do not bring gates to FIGHT a battle, you put up gates TO KEEP THE WAR OUTSIDE YOUR PROPERTY.

Reading this verse with the correct definition of gates,this verse means that believers will storm Hell with the real weapons of our warfare

2Cr 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds (Gates) 1) a castle, stronghold, fortress, fastness
2) anything on which one reliesand every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

The elect / the saved are to storm the gates of hell with the weapons that God has given us AND WE WILL PREVAIL

Eph 6:13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
Eph 6:14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
Eph 6:15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
Eph 6:16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
Eph 6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

One more time, there is no supportive scripture to the very foundational doctrines of the Roman church

There is no scripture support for the priesthood in the new testament church, no apostolic succession, no papacy , no transfer of the infallibility of God to the church or any man .