Are you infallible?

One Fold ^ | December 10, 2013 | Brian Culliton

[Mark17]

Ping

[Mark17]

Catholicism is not a WBR....if you read most of the posts like those of Metmom, you will realize that some non-practicing Catholics considered the church TOO restrictiveand wouldn't allow them to have any fun at all.....if you enjoyed the freedom to sin in the RCC...you certainly didn't pay close attention to your upbringing (somewhat apparent now)..Enjoy your new-found freedom to make your own ecliastical decisions. It is so much easier when you get to make your own rules....I tried that as a child but soon learned that there were authorities in charge who knew much better that I did how life should be lived....Mom, Dad, elders, Church...AMAZING how much these people knew. Then you hear such fun things like OSAS...which apparently means that once you accept that Christ is your savior....you can do anything you want and you are still in like Flynn....WOW I may have to look into that.....

Yep, when I was in the RCC, I was a terrible sinner, as were the vast majority of the people in my catholic high school, but I enjoyed sinning, and some others were worse than me. I was never self satisfied, in that I knew it was a works based religion, and I committed mortal sins everyday, and I knew I could never lead a good enough life to make it. It seemed I was powerless to stop it, so I figured, eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you die. Actually, I couldn't have cared less about the church, I was only there to play hockey. I could play hockey pretty well too, even if I am tooting my own horn. 😆 Thank you for the good wishes about enjoying my new found freedom. I am not in RCC bondage anymore. It's a beautiful thing. Don't knock it till you've tried it. 😇 Yes, OSAS is also a beautiful thing. You should indeed look into it, though I am not sure it would work for you, because, even though it has been pointed out about 3,976 times, it appears to me that you still think you can have faith and then live like Hell. Let me think about that for a minute.........ah, no you can't, so we will have disagreement among the troops. 😱 Thank God those nice guys came along. I owe them a lot. Try it, you'll like it.

Metmom, do you suppose terycarl is one of those people who cringes at the thought, that somewhere, there is someone, who is enjoying life? Certainly is possible. I thought, however, it was in like Flint, not Flynn, but what do I know? I am just a poor OSAS kind of guy. 😂 It's a beautiful thing.

[Mark17]

But I'm not that good at using emoticons or posting cool pictures, so you'll just have to imagine it. :)

🇵🇭😀😇😆😁😅😄😎😂😃😱

How's that?😆

[metmom]

We are ALL ambassadors for Christ, every single believer.

[metmom]

mm:Catholicism, I found NO room for mercy and grace, just judgment and condemnation, always being beat over the head with it, needing to beg God for forgiveness, thinking He would reject me for any least little sin, looking for an excuse to send me to hell for the least little infraction, and punishing for for the same.

tc:I have no concept of where you learned such a warped idea of what Catholicism is, but untold billions of people have interpreted it slightly differently that you did....Do you really suppose that people, over the centuries (20 of them) would have clung to, loved and accepted a vision of God and salvation as you have described?????

Absolutely, without question, because they were told by the church that if they didn't play according to the Catholic rules, they would burn in hell for eternity. And without having Scripture to tell them otherwise, since the Catholic church prohibited people from privately owning it or even reading it, they wouldn't know any better.

Muslims believe in a harsh, demanding, intolerant god and yet there are untold billions of them.

Numbers don't mean something is correct. It can simply mean that lots of people have been cowed into submission to a belief system out of fear of the consequences.

We can now start hearing from other former RC's about their experiences.....

[metmom]

Seems clear to me that you missed the ENTIRE point I was trying to make......

I did not expect anything more.

[metmom]

I can only conclude that jealousy is what’s behind the accusation.

I think you’re right.

[ealgeone]

tc:I have no concept of where you learned such a warped idea of what Catholicism is, but untold billions of people have interpreted it slightly differently that you did....

Numbers are irrelevant to Christianity. Big numbers mean nothing.

1,800,000,000 muslims and 1,100,000,000 hindus would claim their belief is correct using your "accounting".

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves.”

Galatians 2:4

[CynicalBear]

The word merit by it’s very definition indicates deserving or justification for reward. Playing word games doesn’t change that fact. Buddhism is high on merits as well.

[paladinan]

The “thrust of my point” is exactly what I posted to you.

Then consider me a very dense student, who needs you to re-word and clarify... since I don't see your point as "self-evident"! (A few other forum members have gotten into the habit of posting a Bible verse and saying, "There it is!", as if that'll settle all question, and as if there's only one possible way to interpret that text; it really doesn't work that way for the majority of verses, as St. Peter makes clear [2 Peter 3:16-17].)

For example: I think it's crystal-clear that Baptism saves us (since St. Peter says, "Baptism, which corresponds to [being saved through the waters of the flood], now saves you"). Pretty clear and non-negotiable, to me... and easy to figure out, in language easy to understand. But the vast, vast majority of Protestant Evangelicals on this board disagree with that. Surely there's only one way to interpret that verse--i.e. to take it as God's Word, and plainly, self-evidently TRUE? Shouldn't we take that as the "thrust of St. Peter's point" (and the Holy Spirit's point)?

In other words: when dealing with people who believe differently from us, it's not unreasonable to re-word things (and not unreasonable for others to REQUEST that we do that); that's just part of the normal steps involved in having a discussion.

So: could you clarify your point, for me? WERE you saying that St. Paul was right, and the other writers were wrong?

If you would give me the scriptures you are using to support your views.

I have, innumerable times, on this thread alone (and on many others); if you type in "paladinan [topic in question] site:freerepublic.com", you'll probably get lots of hits. But do remember: "sola Scriptura" is a false (and unbiblical, and self-contradictory) tradition of men, and no reasonable person needs to follow it or be restricted by it.

[paladinan]

:) I really didn’t UNDERSTAND her comment, there (i.e. asking if I had “no answer”, while hitting “reply” to the very answer which allegedly wasn’t there)... so I assumed that she’d written to me in error, or was thinking of something else. Whatever.

[Elsie]

But do remember: "sola Scriptura" is a false (and unbiblical, and self-contradictory) tradition of men, and no reasonable person needs to follow it or be restricted by it.

Acts 15

The Council at Jerusalem

 ¹ Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” ² This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. ³ The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. ⁴ When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.

 ⁵ Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

 ⁶ The apostles and elders met to consider this question. ⁷ After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. ⁸ God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. ⁹ He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. ¹⁰ Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? ¹¹ No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

 ¹² The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. ¹³ When they finished, James spoke up. “Brothers,” he said, “listen to me. ¹⁴ Simon^[a] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. ¹⁵ The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:

 ¹⁶ “‘After this I will return
   and rebuild David’s fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
   and I will restore it,
¹⁷ that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
   even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things’^[b]—
 ¹⁸ things known from long ago.^[c]

 ¹⁹ “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. ²⁰ Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. ²¹ For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”

The Council’s Letter to Gentile Believers

 ²² Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. ²³ With them they sent the following letter:

   The apostles and elders, your brothers,

   To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

   Greetings.

 ²⁴ We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. ²⁵ So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— ²⁶ men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. ²⁷ Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. ²⁸ It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: ²⁹ You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

   Farewell.

 ³⁰ So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. ³¹ The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. ³² Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. ³³ After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. ^{[34] [d] 35} But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

Disagreement Between Paul and Barnabas

 ³⁶ Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us go back and visit the believers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.” ³⁷ Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, ³⁸ but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. ³⁹ They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, ⁴⁰ but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the believers to the grace of the Lord. ⁴¹ He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

[Elsie]

But do remember: "sola Scriptura" is a false (and unbiblical, and self-contradictory) tradition of men, and no reasonable person needs to follow it or be restricted by it.

 

 

 

 

---

 

Micah 6:8

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

---

John 6:28-29
Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?

 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

---

1 John 3:21-23
Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him.
And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.

---

James 1:27

Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

 

---

 

 

 

[paladinan]

We are ALL ambassadors for Christ, every single believer.

(?) Okay... so... how does that connect to what I wrote?

[Elsie]

But do remember: "sola Scriptura" is a false (and unbiblical, and self-contradictory) tradition of men, and no reasonable person needs to follow it or be restricted by it.

[Elsie]

or be restricted by it.

HMMMmmm...

[paladinan]

:) Nice to see you again, Elsie. Surreal and erratic to the n-th degree, as always.

[paladinan]

Er... Elsie: I usually don't make a habit of replying to you, since such conversations are usually akin to talking to the Postmodernism Paper Generator... but: did you notice that, of your four Scripture quotes, NONE of them even MENTIONS Scripture as a concept, much less teaches "sola Scriptura"?

Just saying...

[CynicalBear]

>>Yes, there were, and there are; look for the Greek word "presbyteros" and "presbyteroi". There were also bishops (episkopos/oi) and deacons (diakonos/oi).<<

No priest found in any of those. presbýteros – properly, a mature man having seasoned judgment (experience); an elder. [http://biblehub.com/greek/4245.htm]

The Greek word for priest is hiereus and is never used for New Testament church authority or leadership. It is used for all believers.

1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Written by Peter no less!

>>You'll have to explain your reasoning for that one; I'm not even sure what that means, as worded.<<

1 Timothy 3:2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. 4 He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity 5 (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?),