| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 02/23/2010 11:12:46 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Hate mongering article |
Posted on 02/23/2010 5:41:42 AM PST by bogusname
Can't you see what subjective reading of Scripture has brought to the world?
Think of the Church as a parent...........a mother, a father.
God gave us this parent, not to suffocate us and prevent us from having fun as some view their earthly parents, but to keep us in the truth and preserve us from error.
You think that God just tosses us a Bible and says "read it and go figure it out for yourself"??
Uh-uh!! He's a much better parent than that. He's given us a means of safeguarding the truth of this book, safe from error. It's the Church.
Naturally, that irks some who'd prefer to run with it wherever they please just as some children want to break free of their earthly parents and do as they please but it's a foolish desire.
Further the Catholic Church asserts, "We do not in anywise presuppose that the books of the New Testament are inspired, but, rather, they are only genuine, authentic documents written by honest men."
From this he draws the conclusion:
Catholics Claim That New Testament Is Uninspired
This is detestable dishonesty. I have read this argument many times in Catholic literature and this author intentionally leaves off the second part of the argument in order to lead his readers to a false conclusion.
The true context of this statement is in response to the claim that the Catholic Church "reasons in a circle" when it proves the Church by the NT and the NT by the Church. The Church's argument is that in appealing to the NT as proof of its legitimacy it is not appealing to it as inspired Scripture but as accurate historical documentation. Then, after having established its authenticity from the NT as historical documentation, it by its own authority proclaims the NT to be divinely inspired. So the Catholic Church does indeed believe in the divine inspiration of the NT.
I am forced to concur with those who hold that the author has never been Catholic, though it is possible that he has been but is simply being detestably dishonest.
It is true that the Catholic Church regards the Bible as a "dead letter in need of a living interpreter," but this is hardly scandalous. In fact, it should be obvious that this is self-evidently true.
How is it that you are so keenly misinformed about Christ's Church?
Thank you for taking the words right out of my head. Yikes, I can only imagine ...
What do you consider the wealth of the Vatican and the Catholic Church to be? How would they liquidate that wealth and to whom and how would that impact the millions they feed and clothe from the proceeds of their dividends?
I turned the other cheek for years. It’s not the heat, it’s the stupidity.
Thank you for your honesty.
“Two Catholics let me marry their daughter and gave me $25,000 for a down payment on my house in the country.”
And you feel that are better than them and more holy than them because you repay them by insulting the Catholic faith and making up lies about it. If you think being dishonest and insulting makes you more worthy in the eyes of God then I guess you’re just going to continue what your doing.
Are you still sponging off your inlaws?
Thanks, nice read!
The book further records that Lincoln’s murder was planned in the home of Mrs. Surratt, a Roman Catholic. Booth, the murderer, was a Roman Catholic.
Lie ... Booth was Episcopalian.
Mr. Lloyd, who had the carbine that Booth wanted for "protection," was a Roman Catholic.
Never heard of him.
Dr. Mudd, who set Booth’s fractured leg, was a Roman Catholic.
I don't know if Mudd was a Catholic or not, but setting a broken leg is not a crime.
Garrett, in whose barn Booth tried to hide, was a Roman Catholic.
Neither is owning a barn.
The death of Lincoln was announced by Roman Catholics several hours before it occurred at St. Joseph, Minnesota, forty miles from a railroad and eighty miles from the nearest telegraph station. This fact is established in history.
By what history, where? Evidence?
Don't even get me started on the tripe about Catholics claiming the Bible is not inspired, or a "dead letter".
Ugly lies from beginning to end.
Supposedly, hate mongering is not allowed on FR. But until this thread is deleted, hate mongering against Catholics obviously is.
Amen, brother!
(Psst...they all sure will be surprised to discover with whom they have to share heaven... I always wonder if they’ll ask for a transfer...)
Thanks for the civilized reply.
I understand where you’re coming from.
The Bible is the word of God and it should only be interpreted one way, His way. That doesn’t happen. Christians go in different directions because of their different opinions. The only opinion we should be concerned about is God’s.
The ones that left for personal reasons, or anger at the Rc church may come back, but no TRUELY saved/born again comes back.
The problem is everyone that left for a non Catholic church is lumped together as if they were from one loaf.. Some leave because they are converted to Christ, some leave because they leave, no spiritual reason or experience.
I am good..how are you al ???
And some leave, then come back, because they discovered that they lost Christ by leaving.
(See Jeff Cavins' biography, for example.)
In reality there is only one church. Every person who accepts Christ is part of that church.
CCC 105 - God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."
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.