You are all in the same boat

Participant

1. Sola Scriptura (You think authoritative truth is judged by each man's interpretation of what he thinks the Bible says)
answer 1)NO,it as to interpreted by the understandind of the scriptures and the spirit of Christ.
2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic, ordain bishops and deacons, and shepherd the faithful.

answer 2)NO,all of what you say i believe it;except that the true church is now in heaven and that church left us records today called bible,that it teaches that we are as true believer only a part or a part taker of that church,that after the apostles were killed ,the message that they have provided to us ,is that we have to worship God in spirit and truth,truth of God that is,so the physical building became ,futile and obsolete ,unless some Christians feel the need to use one ,but is not required as a worshiping tool.IT IS THE PAGANS WHO CREATED THE NEED OF BUILDING CHURCHES EVERYWERE FOR POWER AND DOMINATION,NOT FOR GODLY LOVE.HYSTORY IS TELLING IT.

EXCOMMUNICATION OF MEN IS TO CREATE FEARS ,DOMINATION,THIS IS NOT THE WAY OF CHRIST.

IF YOU WANT WE CAN DISCUSSE THE FIRST 1200 YEARS OF CATHOLIC OPPRESTION .

February 16, 2010 at 5:36 pm#178383

Participant

Hi CA,
Jesus is the head of his body and your masters are charlatans.

February 16, 2010 at 9:08 pm#178445

Worshipping Jesus

Participant

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 16 2010,12:11)

So I just wanted to talk about something. I am waiting for correction where wrong. But I think that without exception all of you have two common beliefs:

1. Sola Scriptura (You think authoritative truth is judged by each man's interpretation of what he thinks the Bible says)

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic, ordain bishops and deacons, and shepherd the faithful.

Right?

Not at all!

I have been called and ordained by God to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every creature. I have led many to Christ, and witnessed many healings, deliverances and many Baptisms of the Holy Ghost!

I know my God and my Savour, and have a Godly relationship with my Fathers in the Lord and also fellow ministers of the Gospel who share the same faith and the same intensity to reach the lost for Christ!

Should I deny all this as being of God when I see the fruit of the Holy Spirit in the lives of people being changed and delivered from all kinds of drugs and addictions and true repentance and turning of the hearts toward Jesus, including my self?

Should I say because we are not Catholic that none of what we have seen and experienced of God is true?

I would rather you crucify me on a steak and burn me alive than give up what I personally know to be of God in my life!

For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: “for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day“. 2 Tim 1:12

CA, can you swear by the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit that what I say is not true or cannot be real?

You make yourself an elitist as if the whole world cannot know Jesus unless it is through the Catholic Church, which IMO binds God to an organization, and the Holy Spirit from being capable of moving on man apart from the Catholic Church!

Is that what you believe?

We believe in a physical Body of Christ made up of every believer that has been baptized into his Body by drinking of the One Spirit!

Then there are the local churches just as you find in the scriptures, Church of Corinth, Galatia, ETC.

You are trying to convert men to a physical organization and not to the Lord Jesus Christ! IMO!

Blessings WJ

February 16, 2010 at 9:19 pm#178450

Participant

Hi WJ,
If you have been called to preach the gospel why do you instead preach a strange trinity god?

February 17, 2010 at 5:55 am#178546

david

Participant

Quote

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic

I have a question CA.

As far as I can tell, Catholics are the only other group that have a belief in excommunication. Question: Does anyone ever get excommunicated and on what grounds?

February 17, 2010 at 6:48 pm#178656

Participant

Quote (david @ Feb. 17 2010,16:55)

Quote

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic

I have a question CA.

As far as I can tell, Catholics are the only other group that have a belief in excommunication. Question: Does anyone ever get excommunicated and on what grounds?

There are numerous grounds. There are some offenses that are reserved to the pope. There are some offenses that once entered into constitute immediate effect without a formal pronouncement.

For example, a priest who breaks the confessional seal (discloses someone's confession to another) is excommunicated.

Hope this helps

February 17, 2010 at 6:53 pm#178659

Participant

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Feb. 17 2010,08:08)

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 16 2010,12:11)

So I just wanted to talk about something. I am waiting for correction where wrong. But I think that without exception all of you have two common beliefs:

1. Sola Scriptura (You think authoritative truth is judged by each man's interpretation of what he thinks the Bible says)

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic, ordain bishops and deacons, and shepherd the faithful.

Right?

Not at all!

Should I say because we are not Catholic that none of what we have seen and experienced of God is true?

I would rather you crucify me on a steak and burn me alive than give up what I personally know to be of God in my life!

CA, can you swear by the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit that what I say is not true or cannot be real?

Is that what you believe?

We believe in a physical Body of Christ made up of every believer that has been baptized into his Body by drinking of the One Spirit!

Then there are the local churches just as you find in the scriptures, Church of Corinth, Galatia, ETC.

You are trying to convert men to a physical organization and not to the Lord Jesus Christ! IMO!

Blessings WJ

WJ,

I encourage you to hear the fathers:

Ignatius of Antioch

“Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism , he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine , he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons” (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr

“We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or who live now according to reason [logos] are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid” (First Apology 46 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus

“In the Church God has placed apostles, prophets, teachers, and every other working of the Spirit, of whom none of those are sharers who do not conform to the Church, but who defraud themselves of life by an evil mind and even worse way of acting. Where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace” (Against Heresies 3:24:1 [A.D. 189]).

“[The spiritual man] shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, destroy it—men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For they can bring about no ‘reformation’ of enough importance to compensate for the evil arising from their schism. . . . True knowledge is that which consists in the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place ” (ibid., 4:33:7–8).

Clement of Alexandria

“Before the coming of the Lord, philosophy was necessary for justification to the Greeks; now it is useful for piety . . . for it brought the Greeks to Christ as the law did the Hebrews” (Miscellanies 1:5 [A.D. 208]).

Cyprian of Carthage

“Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress [a schismatic church] is separated from the promises of the Church, nor will he that forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is an alien, a worldling, and an enemy. He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his mother” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 6, 1st ed. [A.D. 251]).

“Let them not think that the way of life or salvation exists for them, if they have refused to obey the bishops and priests, since the Lord says in the book of Deuteronomy: ‘And any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest or judge, whoever he may be in those days, that man shall die’ [Deut. 17:12]. And then, indeed, they were killed with the sword . . . but now the proud and insolent are killed with the sword of the Spirit, when they are cast out from the Church. For they cannot live outside, since there is only one house of God, and there can be no salvation for anyone except in the Church” (Letters 61[4]:4 [A.D. 253]).

“When we say, ‘Do you believe in eternal life and the remission of sins through the holy Church?’ we mean that remission of sins is not granted except in the Church” (ibid., 69[70]:2 [A.D. 253]).

“Peter himself, showing and vindicating the unity, has commanded and warned us that we cannot be saved except by the one only baptism of the one Church. He says, ‘In the ark of Noah a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water. Similarly, baptism will in like manner save you” [1 Peter 3:20-21]. In how short and spiritual a summary has he set forth the sacrament of unity! In that baptism of the world in which its ancient wickedness was washed away, he who was not in the ark of Noah could not be saved by water. Likewise, neither can he be saved by baptism who has not been baptized in the Church which is established in the unity of the Lord
according to the sacrament of the one ark” (ibid., 73[71]:11).

“[O]utside the Church there is no Holy Spirit, sound faith moreover cannot exist, not alone among heretics, but even among those who are established in schism” (Treatise on Rebaptism 10 [A.D. 256]).

Lactantius

“It is, therefore, the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth; this, the domicile of faith; this, the temple of God. Whoever does not enter there or whoever does not go out from there, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. . . . Because, however, all the various groups of heretics are confident that they are the Christians and think that theirs is the Catholic Church, let it be known that this is the true Church, in which there is confession and penance and which takes a health-promoting care of the sins and wounds to which the weak flesh is subject” (Divine Institutes 4:30:11–13 [A.D. 307]).

Jerome

“Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church” (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).

Augustine

“We believe also in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church. For heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God; and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor” (Faith and the Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).

“[J]ust as baptism is of no profit to the man who renounces the world in words and not in deeds, so it is of no profit to him who is baptized in heresy or schism; but each of them, when he amends his ways, begins to receive profit from that which before was not profitable, but was yet already in him” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:4[6] [A.D. 400]).

“I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]” (ibid., 4:21[28]).

“The apostle Paul said, ‘As for a man that is a heretic, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him’ [Titus 3:10]. But those who maintain their own opinion, however false and perverted, without obstinate ill will, especially those who have not originated the error of bold presumption, but have received it from parents who had been led astray and had lapsed . . . those who seek the truth with careful industry and are ready to be corrected when they have found it, are not to be rated among heretics” (Letters 43:1 [A.D. 412]).

“Whoever is separated from this Catholic Church, by this single sin of being separated from the unity of Christ, no matter how estimable a life he may imagine he is living, shall not have life, but the wrath of God rests upon him” (ibid., 141:5).

Fulgentius of Ruspe

“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

February 17, 2010 at 6:55 pm#178660

Participant

Hi CA,
Of course being excommunicated from catholicism is a door to freedom and there is no loss involved.
The catholic church bears no relationship to the body of Christ and their leader is not a substitute for the head of the Church, Jesus.

February 17, 2010 at 7:06 pm#178669

Participant

CA
it was easy to be excommunicated in the middle age, couple of words would do it.

February 17, 2010 at 7:43 pm#178685

Participant

Hi T,
Torture or even death could have followed.
But this fruit is not acknowledged as bad by them.

February 17, 2010 at 9:30 pm#178710

Participant

nick

the believe of catholics they believe because it happen 500 years ago it is now relevant,so they ignore it.

February 18, 2010 at 4:17 am#178805

Elizabeth

Participant

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 17 2010,04:11)

So I just wanted to talk about something. I am waiting for correction where wrong. But I think that without exception all of you have two common beliefs:

1. Sola Scriptura (You think authoritative truth is judged by each man's interpretation of what he thinks the Bible says)

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic, ordain bishops and deacons, and shepherd the faithful.

Right?

Yes on # 1, why do you think we have so many denominations, if they were all let by the Holy Spirit, as they claim, then why can't they agree on anything?

1Cr 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
1Cr 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
1Cr 3:5 ¶ Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
1Cr 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
1Cr 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
1Cr 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

On that fact alone I say NO to # 2. The fact that you have so many followers shows, you all don't read the Bible; I know, I didn't till I was 45, that's when I left the Catholic church.

Georg

Ps, excommunication is just another scare tactic to keep the people in line; what's the pope going to do, sent you to hell? don't tell me you believe that?

February 18, 2010 at 5:41 am#178823

Participant

Quote (Elizabeth @ Feb. 18 2010,15:17)

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 17 2010,04:11)

So I just wanted to talk about something. I am waiting for correction where wrong. But I think that without exception all of you have two common beliefs:

1. Sola Scriptura (You think authoritative truth is judged by each man's interpretation of what he thinks the Bible says)

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic, ordain bishops and deacons, and shepherd the faithful.

Right?

Yes on # 1, why do you think we have so many denominations, if they were all let by the Holy Spirit, as they claim, then why can't they agree on anything?

On that fact alone I say NO to # 2. The fact that you have so many followers shows, you all don't read the Bible; I know, I didn't till I was 45, that's when I left the Catholic church.

Georg

Ps, excommunication is just another scare tactic to keep the people in line; what's the pope going to do, sent you to hell? don't tell me you believe that?

Thank you for being honest and agreeing with #1. Sola Scriptura is TRULY the reason for so many denominations. Each man employs “private interpretation” warned about by Peter, the first Bishop of Rome. Do you have any idea how many Sola Scriptura guys claim that the Holy Spirit led them to their interpretation? The problem is those guys disagree with each other. —- You're one of those guys.

#2. It is sad that no one told you the words of Saint Jerome “Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ”

Funny, it was the Bible that made me Catholic. The King James Bible to be precise.

Excommunication is turning a soul over to Satan for the destruction of their flesh in hopes that they will repent. It is Biblical. You should know that.

February 18, 2010 at 8:10 am#178838

Participant

CA
it is not the bible who turn you to Catholicism,it is your own mind ,your own thinking the way you wanted your god to be,
that fine we all do that out of our free will,

some of us like the truth of God and give up there freewill to do Gods will,and by doing so they become Gods servants.

you have rather picked your own way and chose to fallow men and devil way.
we all fallow the way we are more attracted too in our hearts.

February 18, 2010 at 3:20 pm#178882

Elizabeth

Participant

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 18 2010,16:41)

Quote (Elizabeth @ Feb. 18 2010,15:17)

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 17 2010,04:11)

So I just wanted to talk about something. I am waiting for correction where wrong. But I think that without exception all of you have two common beliefs:

1. Sola Scriptura (You think authoritative truth is judged by each man's interpretation of what he thinks the Bible says)

2. You DENY the existence of a real, physical, tangible, authoritative Church with power to teach the faith, excommunicate the heretic, ordain bishops and deacons, and shepherd the faithful.

Right?

Yes on # 1, why do you think we have so many denominations, if they were all let by the Holy Spirit, as they claim, then why can't they agree on anything?

On that fact alone I say NO to # 2. The fact that you have so many followers shows, you all don't read the Bible; I know, I didn't till I was 45, that's when I left the Catholic church.

Georg

Ps, excommunication is just another scare tactic to keep the people in line; what's the pope going to do, sent you to hell? don't tell me you believe that?

#2. It is sad that no one told you the words of Saint Jerome “Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ”

Funny, it was the Bible that made me Catholic. The King James Bible to be precise.

Excommunication is turning a soul over to Satan for the destruction of their flesh in hopes that they will repent. It is Biblical. You should know that.

Where does it say, in the Bible, that Peter was the first “bishop” of Rome? Peter was an Apostle, not a bishop. A bishop was nothing more then an overseer of a church, nothing at all what a bishop is today.
Paul was in Rome too, but as a prisoner; while he was there he wrote many letters to his churches; I don't know of a single letter that Peter wrote from Rome; Peter was brought to Rome for the same reason Paul was, as a prisoner to be executed.
You say;

“”” The problem is those guys disagree with each other. —- You're one of those guys.”””

Yes, I disagree with you and others, but can you show me in scripture were I am wrong; I have made that offer to many others, but no takers.

Whatever you said about Jerome is a self statement.

Yes, I know the scripture you're referring to, 1 Cor. 5:5; just how do you explain that scripture to be understood? Is Satan going to eat you alive?

Georg

February 18, 2010 at 8:56 pm#178994

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 18 2010,19:10)

CA
it is not the bible who turn you to Catholicism,it is your own mind ,your own thinking the way you wanted your god to be,
that fine we all do that out of our free will,

some of us like the truth of God and give up there freewill to do Gods will,and by doing so they become Gods servants.

you have rather picked your own way and chose to fallow men and devil way.
we all fallow the way we are more attracted too in our hearts.

Quite the contrary.

It is you Protestant heretics who have repulsed the teaching of the apostles, fathers, doctors, confessors, martyrs and saints.

You open the Bible and think God has given you the ability to interpret the Scriptures infallibly. You think the way you see things must be the way things are in truth.

Humble yourself under the mighty hand of God.

February 18, 2010 at 9:05 pm#178999

Participant

Hi CA,
Will the Lord claim your corrupt and worldly organisation as his own and praise you for your faithfulness to him and his teachings?

February 18, 2010 at 9:08 pm#179001

Participant

Terrarica and Georg,

Both of you have a fallacious idea that all truth must be completely spelled out in the Bible. I am going to logically refute this claim in 8 simple steps:

1. The Reformers asserted Proposition A: “All revealed truth is to be found in inspired Scripture.” This is quite useless unless we know which books are meant by “inspired Scripture.” After all, different sects and religions have different books which they call “inspired Scripture.”

2. The theory we are considering, when it talks of “inspired Scripture,” means in fact those 66 books which are bound in Protestant Bibles. For convenience we shall refer to them from now on simply as “the 66 books.”

3. The precise statement of the theory we are examining thus becomes Proposition B: “All revealed truth is to be found in the 66 books.”

4. It is a fact that nowhere in the 66 books themselves can we find any statements telling us which books make up the entire corpus of inspired Scripture. There is no complete list of inspired books anywhere within their own pages, nor can such a list be compiled by putting isolated verses together. (This would be the case (a) if you could find verses like “Esther is the Word of God,” “This Gospel is inspired by God,” “The Second Letter of Peter is inspired Scripture” for each of the 66 books and (b) if you could also find a biblical passage stating that no books other than these 66 were to be held as inspired. Obviously, nobody could even pretend to find all this information about the canon of Scripture in the Bible itself.)

5. It follows that Proposition B, the very foundation of Protestant Christianity, is neither found in Scripture nor can be deduced from Scripture in any way. Since the 66 books are not even identified in Scripture, much less can any further information about them (such as that all revealed truth is contained in them) be found there. In short, we must affirm Proposition C: “Proposition B is an addition to the 66 books.”

6. It follows immediately from the truth of Proposition C that Proposition B cannot itself be revealed truth. To assert that it is would involve a self-contradictory statement: “All revealed truth is to be found in the 66 books, but this revealed truth itself is not found there.”

7. Could it be the case that Proposition B is true but is not revealed truth? If that is the case, then it must be either something which can be deduced from revealed truth or something which natural human reason alone can discover, without any help from revelation. The first possibility is ruled out because, as we saw in steps 4 and 5, B cannot be deduced from Scripture, and to postulate some other, revealed, extra-scriptural premise from which B might be deduced would contradict B itself. The second possibility involves no self-contradiction, but it is factually preposterous, and I doubt whether any Protestant has seriously tried to defend it, least of all those traditional Protestants who strongly emphasize the corruption of man's natural intellectual powers as a result of the Fall. Unaided human reason might well be able to conclude prudently and responsibly that an authority which itself claimed to possess the totality of revealed truth was in fact justified in making that claim, provided that this authority backed up the claim by some striking evidence. (Catholics, in fact, believe that their Church is precisely such an authority.) But how could reason alone reach that same well-founded certitude about a collection of 66 books which do not even lay claim to what is attributed to them? The point is reinforced when we remember that those who attribute the totality of revealed truth to the 66 books are ready to acknowledge their own fallibility, whether individually or collectively, in matters of religious doctrine. All Protestant churches deny their own infallibility as much as they deny the pope's.

8. Since Proposition B is not revealed truth, or a truth which can be deduced from revelation, or a naturally-knowable truth, it is not true at all. Therefore, sola scriptura, the basic doctrine for which the Reformers fought, is simply false.

February 18, 2010 at 9:15 pm#179005