In defense of Cruciform; Traditions of Men
- Thread starter Traditio
- Start date
genuineoriginal
New member
It is right there in your signature.
Calvin is the second from the left.
400 years to come up with a story to present to constantine. Lots of time to make up theology and build a new denomination. Yes! Rcc is a denomination
you would know
that
europe was protected from islam thanks to constantine
if
you really understood history
I don't. That is between them and God. I will point them towards scripture to get them to think about what they are doing and saying but it is up to each of us to work out our salvation. The churches that we attend can help us with that, but that is all. No church grants or judges salvation.
do you think it is possible to be saved and mean at the same time?
Cruciform
New member
Yes---and communicates those judgments by means of the God-ordained ministry of his one historic Church's Magisterium.
Neither of our opinions means anything unless they happen to comport with the authoritative teachings of that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D. Are the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, then, in agreement with Christ's one historic Church? Go ahead and post your proof.
Back to Post #67 above.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Lon
Well-known member
Cruciform
New member
Your profound ignorance of ecclesiastical history is noted.
Daniel1769
New member
How anyone can remain a member a group whose heirarchy has committed sex crimes against children and covered it up boggles the mind. And not only this, they claim that the people who committed these acts and those who covered them up speak for Christ. The Roman Catholic Church should have been shut down centuries ago for their crimes against humanity. The fact they they claim to be "Christian" is the only reason the RCC leadership have not been known as terrorists and criminals for centuries.
Lon
Well-known member
It was noted when your denomination split from the universal catholic church
Cruciform
New member
Thus merely proving my point made in Post #92 above. :yawn:
Lon
Well-known member
I think I understand your preoccupation with it. I don't think you understand why it is not 1) a form of effective debate or communication, 2) not relevant but as it applies to both of us.
Your opinion, my opinion...
You use it 'as if' your's isn't an opinion. It is nowhere as substantiated as a fact as all that. You 'think' it is, but that is "your opinion." So, broken down, it is not of much use in our discussions and fairly impotent other than as a meaningless platitude or a purposeful vitriolic response. Those are the only two ways a Protestant can or will take it.
Or your chosen. "Why" we chose is more important but you aren't getting there. Rather you are stuck on the shallow platitude (platitude: cliché often concerning a moral content, that has been used too often to be interesting or thoughtful).
It is an offensive accusation that hasn't foundation. You assume it because you assume the Catholic church is the only church that has existed, despite the fact that the EO and Coptic churches have existed apart from Rome from the beginning. You assume it because you think that anyone disagreeing is 'an invention.' It amounts to little more than a purposeful offense and statement of marginalization. In effect, it is little but name-calling and snobbery as if you were of noble birth for being Catholic.
It is nothing more than a haughty assumption among us peasants Luke 18:9-14
Irony may be lost on you, but the Protestant is skipping your history and trying to go back to the beginning of it all for a pure religion. Oddly, that makes both assume the other is more man-made. In fact, tradition and authority require a closer connect to 'man-made' than a Protestant. Most of us aren't just Sola Scriptura but you make a faulty assumption and connection: We band together specifically by affiliation of 'what we have studied ourselves.' Think about that a bit more: We aren't as disjointed as you assume, there are only about 7 or so main lines of denomination of significant difference. We aren't divided so much by doctrine as we are divided by 'where' we meet. You likely will not appreciate that, it is nearly backwards of the way the RC works.
Beside, "man-made" is a repeat of 'recently invented,' unless you were thinking that God 'could more recently invent.'
I think it simple goes without saying. Of course such is the case or there would be no debate or contention. To me, the difference is what is meaningful between us. If there is no meeting of ways, in debate, there is no reason or point of debate. The goal of debate is to get another to see our point of view, to get another to either change or at most, understand our difference, or perchance even, to get another to come to our way of thinking.
Here, with the underline, one tends to read you as meaning more and against what the official RC position is: That is, that you mean 1) "typically heretical" 2) "separated excommunicated nonconforming" 3) "extremely dangerous." It is almost as if you are usurping the Traditions AND Authority of the RC and setting up yourself for your own popery against them and us! :noway:
I'd not even suggest it isn't appropriate for much of the accusatory on TOL BUT you generally toss this bomb like a grenade even at those who don't deserve it. I've told you once before you are like an old man on a porch shooting at everybody, salesmen, government, mail, or neighbor. You show a decided lack of discernment when you bomb everybody that ever comes to your porch (our Protestant porch you are renting from, actually).
Ever see Second Hand Lions?
| Porch shooting | |
Cruciform
New member
Post your proof.
Granted, yet it is a fact that goes on to arrive here.
See just above.
...and yet a demonstrable fact of history.
No, not "from the beginning," but specifically from 1054 for the Orthodox churches, for example.
Let's put this in practical terms, shall we? Please name the Protestant (non-Catholic) denomination with which you affiliate---what church do you attend and identify with as a Christian?
Go ahead, then, and trace your Protestant denomination back through ecclesiastical history to the Apostolic Era. Proof, please.
Nope, wrong again. It simply indicates that your preferred "church" was invented by mere men during the past few centuries, rather than being founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D. If you dispute this, than go ahead and trace your Protestant denomination back through ecclesiastical history to the Apostolic Era. Proof, please.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+