Posted on 04/26/2015 1:05:20 PM PDT by RnMomof7
Well of course they do...Your religion is built upon human philosophy (man's failed wisdom)...That is the basis for your religion...Every priest that goes to seminary has to take years of study of human philosophy, first...
they do not understand that our foundation includes the Bible—
Your religion has found a handful of scripture that it has perverted the meaning of, added to those scriptures and taken away from those scriptures to try to get it to fit with its human philosophy...There is no hint of God's wisdom that comes from your religion...
which many Protestants seem to take as their sole authority—but the Catholic Church also has other parts to the authority—parts which are **also and equally** from God.
I know you are just repeating this but there has never been a bigger lie perpetrated to deceive the people...
Excellent presentation.
.
>> “Are you saying that everything the Apostles taught is in the OT? Or that there is nothing taught by the Apostles outside the OT?” <<
Exactly! All of the apostles have written exactly that fact.
.
>> “The difference is that the Church’s understanding is that not *everything* Christ taught to the Apostles, which the Apostles then taught to their disciples, etc., is in the Bible.” <<
That is an erroneous and blasphemous misunderstanding. It is similar to the demonic rantings of the Secret Societies of the world. Claiming secret extra-scriptural revelation is Satan’s door to the destruction of God’s plan.
.
No, it does not. Hellenism was an apostasy... To include the later versions of the Septuagint (Early versions did not contain the books you refer to. They were late additions).
it seems that they were familiar with the Greek Scripture, altho using as their languages Aramaic and Hebrew.
It doesn't matter If you say 'Repent' to a Jew, he is going to be thinking 'Teshuva'. If you told him 'Do Penance' it would be framed within Teshuva... He would not have a priest to go to to order him to do this or that for penance - He would natively assume 'Do all you can to fix it and confess to those you've harmed'. The problem of attributing Greek definitions to Hebrew concepts is profound.
except that now we have also to recognize our debt to God. If I steal money from a person, not only must I make atonement to the person himself, I must also make atonement to God… which is what we call “doing penance.”
No! That is the power of the priest in every believer - That which I forgive of you (in doing harm to me) is forgiven in heaven (at your simple and heartfelt request)... YHWH will write it off. That is how forgiveness can hide a multitude of sins. Those things that can't be forgiven, or where you cannot obtain forgiveness (from those you've harmed) are where you must fall upon the mercy of YHWH - And he promises to forgive you for them as you have forgiven others...
****You can’t get penance out of that…****
In reading what you and others have written, it seems that I had the wrong idea about what many Protestants think about this process. Other posts showed that the idea of atonement is indeed a part of at least some Protestants’ idea of conversion, which I did not realize because of the different word(s) used. It seems that the Protestant idea of repentance includes what Catholics make explicit by using the word penance.
So, basically, I picked a really bad example, which may be why those who have responded to what I wrote did not understand my point :o
.
.
___________________________________
****Completely untrue...Plenty of the Old Testament writings were Christian writings…****
I should have clarified that I meant by “Christian writings” writings that were written after Christ.
.
.
___________________________________
****2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.****
Precisely. This does not mean that everything the Apostles taught was written down.
.
.
___________________________________
****Oh what nonsense...The apostles did not hand anything down to the Catholic religion other than what is recorded in scripture…****
What evidence do you have that everything taught by the Apostles was included in the Bible?
Not for salvation. Simply to make things right here on earth to live in reconciliation with each other as God intended.
One become part of the body of Christ by being born again.
No one church or denomination is the body of Christ. It’s an organism, not an organization.
God ensured that everything we need to know for salvation and growth in Christ, spiritual maturity, was written down for us.
Nothing else can be trusted, especially word of mouth, to be passed down faithfully, without corruption or danger of loss.
We have the manuscripts that date back from that time period, including ones like the Dead Sea Scrolls which verify the continued integrity and fidelity to Scripture that those who copied it down held to.
THEY knew how important it was, even when others dismiss it as being relatively unimportant.
****It doesn’t matter If you say ‘Repent’ to a Jew, he is going to be thinking ‘Teshuva’. If you told him ‘Do Penance’ it would be framed within Teshuva... He would not have a priest to go to to order him to do this or that for penance - He would natively assume ‘Do all you can to fix it and confess to those you’ve harmed’. The problem of attributing Greek definitions to Hebrew concepts is profound.****
Why then did Christ give the Apostles the power of binding and loosing, telling them: “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven, whose sins you retain are retained”? (St John 20:23)
That power is given to any who are given confession of Yeshua by YHWH. What YOU forgive (that harm done to you) is forgiven in heaven. What you retain is retained... I would submit retained in YOU, and in heaven. Have you not noticed how an unforgiving spirit is bitterness? How it turns to hate and eats people up?
****One become part of the body of Christ by being born again.****
Whaf is the process to this rebirth? How does one know which way is correct?
****Nothing else can be trusted, especially word of mouth, to be passed down faithfully, without corruption or danger of loss.****
Christ promised the protection of the Holy Spirit for precisely this reason.
I most certainly agree with your comments on a personal level, but what I was referring to is that Christ breathed on the Apostles and granted them a power reserved among the Israelites for those in authority.
In both the OT and the NT, when God breathes, something big happens. God breathed into Adam and he came to life. Why would Christ breathe on the Apostles to give them an ability that everyone already had?
If you agree with the personal level, then the other is rendered moot.
In both the OT and the NT, when God breathes, something big happens. God breathed into Adam and he came to life. Why would Christ breathe on the Apostles to give them an ability that everyone already had?
Do you so quickly disregard Shavuot? At the time, The Spirit had not yet been given.
Precisely. This does not mean that everything the Apostles taught was written down.
Not everything they said obviously but every thing they taught...
And it does not mean that everything they taught was NOT written down...If they taught something that wasn't written down, you need to show us what it was if you want to be believed...
But we know that is not the issue with Catholics...The Catholics are operating on a false premise that if the apostles had unwritten tradition that was sanctioned by God, then the Catholic religion can do the same thing...
It is ludicrous to even suggest that there are two sources of differing truth revealed by God...And since we have the one truth, preserved by God and the so-called other truth is no where to be found proves that no such thing ever existed...
****If you agree with the personal level, then the other is rendered moot.****
Not at all; there is a huge difference between apologizing to the person harmed and doing what one can to make restitution to that person, and doing the same with God. When we sin, we may harm another person, but we certainly displease God. Are we to totally ignore God?
.
.
_________________________________
****Do you so quickly disregard Shavuot? At the time, The Spirit had not yet been given.****
Does the fact that the Holy Spirit had not yet descended mean that Christ was unable to give the Apostles a spiritual gift?
****It is ludicrous to even suggest that there are two sources of differing truth revealed by God.****
And the Catholic Church does not even remotely suggest that. There is *one* source of God’s truth: God Himself. How did He transmit this to the Apostles? (Hint: not by sending them a book.)
.
.
___________________________
****And it does not mean that everything they taught was NOT written down****
I asked you for evidence for your assertion. Since we agree that this statement could go either way, it is not evidence for your assertion.
.
.
___________________________
****The Catholics are operating on a false premise that if the apostles had unwritten tradition that was sanctioned by God, then the Catholic religion can do the same thing…****
This is not at all the Catholic position. The Catholic Church teaches that the Apostles had unwritten Tradition (truths taught by Christ) before writing anything.
Those truths which were not written were not “sanctioned” by God, but transmitted by Him through the agency of Christ. The Catholic Church does not do “the same thing” as the Apostles but teaches the same truths taught by the Apostles in their entirety.
.
.
____________________________
From the OP:
****As soon as a Roman Catholic argues from Scripture he denies the need for an infallible magisterium. Once he points to Rome apart from Scripture, he shows himself to be a blind follower of Rome in the face of Scripture.****
.
.
****If they taught something that wasn’t written down, you need to show us what it was if you want to be believed…****
…some Protestants say this while at the same time claiming that all truth is contained in the Bible, and none outside it.
It is as if you are saying, “Catholics: show us your proof, but anything you show us we will refuse to accept!”
So we are back where started from: heads-we-win,-tails-you-lose.
.
.
To All of You: It’s been interesting and challenging :)
Not at all; there is a huge difference between apologizing to the person harmed and doing what one can to make restitution to that person, and doing the same with God. When we sin, we may harm another person, but we certainly displease God. Are we to totally ignore God?
Of course not - but YHWH's requirement IS only teshuva - turning from sin to face Him. And sin is transgression of Torah. There is *nothing* one can do, having broken Torah - One is only suitable for death, having broken YHWH's way. All there is for such a one is mercy, and that mercy is available in abundance.
My role as an earthly father has always followed the same thing: if one of my sons did wrong, punishment was not the point. Punishment was only inevitable when they DIDN'T recognize their sin against my house. THEN I would have to drag them around by their nose and MAKE them walk the right way. But I didn't want that. Oh, how I loved them when they, on their own, recognized their fault, exercised their consciences, and showed me on their own that they were coming back to the way that I gave them. How mercy and encouragement abounded! That is what I wanted from them! It is the same thing.
Of course you go before the Father with a humbled and contrite heart. But if you have come truly, knowing your fault, to claim His forgiveness in the Blood of Yeshua, having done everything possible to correct the problem, and having begun again to walk in Torah, then what else could possibly be needed? Do you think he needs to see you whipped for doing the right thing?
I don't think affliction is necessary unless one continues to be reprobate - Either by the father, or by oneself - If the conscience remains troubled, and one afflicts oneself, the purpose is to form the humility and contrition in every facet of the problem... Not to prove anything to YHWH... To dig deeper to the original fault... To root it up... But that affliction doesn't prove anything to YHWH - He already knows. It's YOU that needs the knowing. It is to help you search out the root of the sin... when that is found, and repented of, I think the conscience lets it go...
[roamer_1:] Do you so quickly disregard Shavuot? At the time, The Spirit had not yet been given.
Does the fact that the Holy Spirit had not yet descended mean that Christ was unable to give the Apostles a spiritual gift?
You miss the point. He would have HAD to breathe on them because the Spirit had not yet descended... I might argue that the Spirit is breathed upon each and every one of us - It was a special accommodation until they were received of the Spirit in fullness. What makes one truly free is to know forgiveness, put down guilt, and to walk out Torah in the footsteps of the Master. No other chain can bind you...
And all the forgiveness of a priest will do *nothing* for you - Mumbling 'hail marys' and 'our fathers'- all is for naught without teshuva. And having made teshuva, the priest is made moot, as one is already walking in Torah, and already turned toward the Father through the only Priest... Kinda like how baptism is just getting wet without the circumcision of the heart. The water cannot be the efficacious part... In fact, my way may be the harder road - Because I can rely upon no authority except YHWH, if He has afflicted my conscience, I will have no rest until I get to the very bottom of the problem.
I apologize for the length of time it has taken me to reply to your post—I have just been too busy to write a long response.
****Of course not - but YHWH’s requirement IS only teshuva - turning from sin to face Him. And sin is transgression of Torah. There is *nothing* one can do, having broken Torah - One is only suitable for death, having broken YHWH’s way. All there is for such a one is mercy, and that mercy is available in abundance.****
Did Christ come to us for no particular reason? Just to reiterate what had been taught before? Or did He come to teach us more deeply and more clearly? What is the point of the New Testament if all we are to do is contained in the OT?
________________________
****My role as an earthly father has always followed the same thing: if one of my sons did wrong, punishment was not the point. Punishment was only inevitable when they DIDN’T recognize their sin against my house. THEN I would have to drag them around by their nose and MAKE them walk the right way. But I didn’t want that. Oh, how I loved them when they, on their own, recognized their fault, exercised their consciences, and showed me on their own that they were coming back to the way that I gave them. How mercy and encouragement abounded! That is what I wanted from them! It is the same thing.****
You seem to see Catholic penance as a forcing into the correct direction or punishment, whereas it is an entirely different thing. Penance is more of a restitution. For example, if my son were to play baseball in the yard and break a window, no matter how much he said he was sorry, the window would still be broken. **Because he is a child,** I would show him that one aspect of amending is to make restitution. He might be unable to pay for the entire window, but I would certainly expect him to help his dad replace the window.
_________________________
****Of course you go before the Father with a humbled and contrite heart. But if you have come truly, knowing your fault, to claim His forgiveness in the Blood of Yeshua, having done everything possible to correct the problem, and having begun again to walk in Torah, then what else could possibly be needed? Do you think he needs to see you whipped for doing the right thing?****
You write: “having done everything possible to correct the problem,” and that is precisely what Catholics are talking about: doing what they can to correct the problem.
__________________________
****I don’t think affliction is necessary unless one continues to be reprobate - Either by the father, or by oneself - If the conscience remains troubled, and one afflicts oneself, the purpose is to form the humility and contrition in every facet of the problem... Not to prove anything to YHWH... To dig deeper to the original fault... To root it up... But that affliction doesn’t prove anything to YHWH - He already knows. It’s YOU that needs the knowing. It is to help you search out the root of the sin... when that is found, and repented of, I think the conscience lets it go…****
And most certainly God has certain requirements for the purpose of showing us what we need to know more than showing Him what he already knows.
___________________________
****…And all the forgiveness of a priest will do *nothing* for you****
We do not receive the forgiveness of a priest when we go to Confession, he acts “in persona Christi,” as a representative of Christ. We receive the forgiveness of God, Who, in His mercy and understanding our dual nature understands that we need physical signs of spiritual events. What assurance do Protestants have that God has forgiven them? I have so often felt sorry for those who do not have any assurance that they have been forgiven.
**** - Mumbling ‘hail marys’ and ‘our fathers’- all is for naught without teshuva. And having made teshuva, the priest is made moot, as one is already walking in Torah, and already turned toward the Father through the only Priest…****
Even the Jews went to the Temple to make a sacrifice to expiate their sins, as noted in Leviticus 4–6. And the Catholic Church recognizes and teaches that merely mumbling words will do nothing without a change of heart towards God.
Do you know that Confession is invalid without an intention of amendment, or conversion? it is not simply an outward action; without the inward change, it is not effective and if a person deliberately leaves out a mortal sin, then the Confession is not only invalid, every Confession thereafter is also invalid, until the original omitted sin is confessed and all that occurred afterwards.
*** Kinda like how baptism is just getting wet without the circumcision of the heart. ***
Baptism makes a change to the soul in the same way that circumcision makes a change physically. A baby is not even supposed to be baptized if there is no assurance that the baby will be raised Catholic—baptism is a dedication of the child to God in the same way that Samuel was dedicated to God before he was even conceived.
In adults, the same holds true—an adult is not to be baptized without a change of heart. The Church has always forbidden forced baptisms, **because** it has an effect, and that effect should be preceded by a conversion of heart.
****The water cannot be the efficacious part... ****
When Christ commissioned the Apostles to go out and teach, baptizing in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, He gave them the efficacious part. it is the combination of the pouring of the water **and** the pronouncing of the words which causes the change in the soul of the one baptized.
****In fact, my way may be the harder road - Because I can rely upon no authority except YHWH, if He has afflicted my conscience, I will have no rest until I get to the very bottom of the problem. ****
Yes, but your way is like re-inventing the wheel, isn’t it? And lacks any assurance of being correct.
One thing that really amazed me about Catholicism is that we have 2,000 years’ worth of writings. We can draw on the wisdom of 2,000 years of saintly writings which have stood the test of time rather than relying on our own selves, or perhaps our own generation. In Protestant bookshops, I saw only 1% of books not written within the previous 20 years, and the older ones had been written in the 1800s.
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.