ECT NO, THE BIBLE IS NOT THE CHRISTIAN'S ONLY AUTHORITY

[Cruciform]

That is not a defense of your assertion, that is simply a restatement of your assertion.

Not so. That the apostles---including Paul---taught on the papacy, apostolic succession, and doctrinal development is unambiguously demonstrated in the sources I cited. Thus, Paul's own apostolic teaching supports the conclusion that any mention of "Tradition" by the apostles---including Paul---would necessarily include and allow for these realities in the Church of all time, and not only during the Apostolic Era itself. This fact is promulgated in both Scripture and Tradition (i.e., in God's Word).



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

Oral traditions are more resilient than that - but still less resilient than the written word.

Back to Post #205.

Also - the oral traditions are nothing but "some human being's interpretation of Scripture."

The question is whose particular doctrinal tradition---that of Christ's one historic Catholic Church, or of your recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect---is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D., and whose interpretations are therefore bindingly authoritative upon all believers everywhere. Go ahead, then, and post your proof in support of your chosen man-made sect.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Not so. That the apostles---including Paul---taught on the papacy, apostolic succession, and doctrinal development is unambiguously demonstrated in the sources I cited. Thus, Paul's own apostolic teaching supports the conclusion that any mention of "Tradition" by the apostles---including Paul---would necessarily include and allow for these realities in the Church of all time, and not only during the Apostolic Era itself. This fact is promulgated in both Scripture and Tradition (i.e., in God's Word).



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

All righty then. I guess that concludes your meaningful participation here. We can draw one obvious conclusion, there is a second set of Catholic doctrines you are unable to defend.

You cannot defend the Marian traditions.
You cannot defend the catholic's teachings regarding catholic tradition.

Now I can sit back and watch your protestations otherwise. Proceed.

 

[Cruciform]

All righty then. I guess that concludes your meaningful participation here. We can draw one obvious conclusion, there is a second set of Catholic doctrines you are unable to defend. You cannot defend the Marian traditions. You cannot defend the Catholic's teachings regarding Catholic tradition.

TRANSLATION: "My preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect won't allow me to agree with what Christ's one historic Church has believed and taught for two millennia now, no matter how much evidence from Divine Revelation, ecclesiastical history, and informed reason is presented. In short: I DON'T LIKE IT!" :mmph:​

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

TRANSLATION: "My preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect won't allow me to agree with what Christ's one historic Church has believed and taught for two millennia now, no matter how much evidence from Divine Revelation, ecclesiastical history, and informed reason is presented. In short: I DON'T LIKE IT!" :mmph:​

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

This sound familiar, where have I heard this before? Oh! I remember! This is what you said when you couldn't answer my questions about the Marian doctrines, a post that remains unanswered by you. Marian doctrines and Catholic traditions, two issues you cannot deal with in a honest and straight forward fashion.

You say that you are not responding to me in these threads but rather to the interested reader. Why don't you ask the interested readers what they learned about catholic traditions?

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

One thing I always notice of these rabid Catholics, who behave online like they want to burn some Protestants at the stake: have you ever noticed all they harp on and uplift is the Roman cult, Popes, Mary, cannibalism, any and all lies, but they don't seem to be interested in uplifting Jesus Christ and the gospel?

 

[Cruciform]

This is what you said when you couldn't answer my questions...

Just one more deliberate lie on CM's part (Ex. 20:16; Prov. 19:5).

...about the Marian doctrines, a post that remains unanswered by you.

Already more than sufficiently answered here and here.

Marian doctrines and Catholic traditions, two issues you cannot deal with in a honest and straight forward fashion.

See above. Here you merely prove my statements in Post #244.

You say that you are not responding to me in these threads but rather to the interested reader. Why don't you ask the interested readers what they learned about Catholic traditions?

I'd be more interested in knowing what readers have learned about you from your deliberate and ongoing recourse to fallacious reasoning (Straw Man, Non Sequitur, and False Dilemma Fallacies), willful ignorance, and outright lying (see above in this very post) in your desperate, apparently pathological need to try and avoid the doctrinal authority of Christ's one historic Catholic Church. :think:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

One thing I always notice of these rabid Catholics, who behave online like they want to burn some Protestants at the stake...

Perhaps we Catholics, then, should see you as "a rabid Protestant who behaves online like you want to burn some Catholics at the stake," correct? Then again, we could just go with the unavoidable observation that you're an ignorant bigot.

...have you ever noticed all they harp on and uplift is the Roman cult...

Here you merely place your vast ignorance on public display once again...

...cannibalism...

...and again... :darwinsm:

...but they don't seem to be interested in uplifting Jesus Christ and the gospel?

...like you're doing in this post? Come back whan you come up with something even marginally intelligent to say.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Just one more deliberate lie on CM's part (Ex. 20:16; Prov. 19:5).


Already more than sufficiently answered here and here.


See above. Here you merely prove my statements in Post #244.


I'd be more interested in knowing what readers have learned about you from your deliberate and ongoing recourse to fallacious reasoning (Straw Man, Non Sequitur, and False Dilemma Fallacies), willful ignorance, and outright lying (see above in this very post) in your desperate, apparently pathological need to try and avoid the doctrinal authority of Christ's one historic Catholic Church. :think:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

Have you read any of th either posts in thus thread? So far, of the people who have voiced an opinion, they are running 100% in my favor. I would say that they have learned about me, and you, and they don't find you credible.

 

[wonderingjew]

How deep a rabbit hole...

How deep a rabbit hole...

"THE BIBLE, NOT ORAL TRADITION, IS OUR ONLY AUTHORITY!"

False. Christ sent the Apostles to teach all things that He had taught them, but the Bible tells us that not all that He did was written in Scripture (Jn. 21:25). Therefore, if all is to be taught, and not all is in Scripture, part of Christian truth must be elsewhere. But where?

St. Paul tells us clearly to "stand fast and hold to the traditions which we have learned, either by word or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:14).

Thus, the Catholic Church, "the pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15), teaches that Divine Revelation is contained fully in the Word of God, which is comprised of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.



Deut. 29:29 may shed some light here and those who are a bit taken back by the Roman Church, remember that the Messiah came to tear down religious organization and rid us of go betweens like priests, etc. While the Roman Church has committed deeply atrocious acts against mankind and tried to build a system similar to Judaism in holly days, priestly works and offices to keep a "high Priest" (Pope) around we must remember that as these man made revelations cannot trump all the "Scripture" that we can be empowered to do all the words of the Law. Notice "WORDS" and not works here and no mediator is required. Y'Shua said "It is finished... so we must let the corrupt system of man be finished and done with.
To be fair however to those who wrestle with the Cathlic Church as being anti-Christ remember the anti-Christ denies the Son, and denies the Father but every Catholic I've met can't stop sprinkling that crazy water around saying in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost so with all the wickedness it harbors it cannot be anti-christ.​

 

[Cruciform]

Have you read any of th either posts in thus thread? So far, of the people who have voiced an opinion, they are running 100% in my favor.

Well, I for one am shocked---SHOCKED, I say! Your anti-Catholic opinions are generally accepted on an anti-Catholic forum...??? Now who could have predicted THAT?! Now take your opinions over to any number of Catholic forums and see how you do. In short, your observation is utterly irrelevant. Once again, it seems, you're fresh out of actual arguments.

:darwinsm:​

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

the Messiah came to tear down religious organization and rid us of go betweens like priests, etc.

Now go ahead and post your proof for this completely unsubstantiated assertion.

...the Roman Church has committed deeply atrocious acts against mankind...

Post your proof.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Well, I for one am shocked---SHOCKED, I say! Your anti-Catholic opinions are generally accepted on an anti-Catholic forum...??? Now who could have predicted THAT?! Now take your opinions over to any number of Catholic forums and see how you do. In short, your observation is utterly irrelevant. Once again, it seems, you're fresh out of actual arguments.

:darwinsm:​

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

If this forum is so anti catholic, what do you hope to accomplish here? To date, you have done a bang up job of posting what Catholics believe and an absolutely horrid job of defending those beliefs. So what do you hope yo accomplish?

 

[Cruciform]

If this forum is so anti catholic, what do you hope to accomplish here?

Two things:

• correcting the common Protestant distortions and misrepresentations of Catholic doctrine such as those that you routinely promote on this forum, and
• planting seeds that the Holy Spirit might subsequently use to draw those who are genuinely interested and honest to Christ's one historic Catholic Church.

To date, you have done a bang up job of posting what Catholics believe and an absolutely horrid job of defending those beliefs.

That must be why you have thus far been so utterly, embarrassingly incompetent in not only refuting Catholic teaching, but even in simply stating what Catholics actually believe adequately and accurately. In short, the problem is not with the evidence in support of Christ's one historic Church, but rather with those who choose to arrogantly place their own personal theological lay opinions above the authoritative teachings of that one historic Church, as you have.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Two things:

• correcting the common Protestant distortions and misrepresentations of Catholic doctrine such as those that you routinely promote on this forum, and

• Okay, you have failed there. I have not seen anybody change their minds about what the Catholics believe based on your presentation of catholic doctrine. I would hazard that inability to defend those beliefs when pressed plays a roll in that failure.
  

  [*]planting seeds that the Holy Spirit might subsequently use to draw those who are genuinely interested and honest to Christ's one historic Catholic Church.

What the Catholic Church teaches is not the seeds of the Holy Spirit.

That must be why you have thus far been so utterly, embarrassingly incompetent in not only refuting Catholic teaching, but even in simply stating what Catholics actually believe adequately and accurately. In short, the problem is not with the evidence in support of Christ's one historic Church, but rather with those who choose to arrogantly place their own personal theological lay opinions above the authoritative teachings of that one historic Church, as you have.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I must point out that you have been completely unable to answer my challenges to the Marian and Tradition doctrines of the RCC. Sure, have posted what the church teaches, but you have not provided any compelling reason for me, or most of the people on this forum, to believe you.

I can defend my beliefs and tell you why I believe what I do. Your arguments always reduce to, "because the RCCsays so." Unless and until you can address post 518 point by point and provide a list of traditions Paul was specifically referring to, there is no reason for anybody to listen to you. Your response to this post will reveal that you don't, in fact, care about actually trying to persuade Protestants.

 

[Cruciform]

Okay, you have failed there.

...declares the guy who can't even manage to accurately state what the Catholic Church actually believes and teaches. Clearly, you're the very last individual who would be able to discern whether I have succeeded or not. Thus, your opinion here means exactly nothing.

I have not seen anybody change their minds about what the Catholics believe based on your presentation of catholic doctrine. I would hazard that inability to defend those beliefs when pressed plays a roll in that failure.

Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. I've been contacted by at least four people who were either seriously considering becoming Catholic, or were actually in the process of entering the Catholic Church, in part on the basis of my efforts on this forum. In any case, even if I were aware of no one on TOL who was moved toward the Catholic faith because of my involvement here, it would simply be irrelevant, since it is not me but rather the Lord himself who's in charge of the practical results of the communication of divine truth.

What the Catholic Church teaches is not the seeds of the Holy Spirit.

Only according to the opinion of your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, which---because it is demonstrably not that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ in 33 A.D.---possesses no inherent doctrinal authority whatsoever. Try again.

I must point out that you have been completely unable to answer my challenges...

I've already answered this Straw Man Fallacy.

I can defend my beliefs and tell you why I believe what I do. Your arguments always reduce to, "because the RCCsays so."

...just as your "arguments" always reduce to "Because my preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect says so."



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[wonderingjew]

It was said but I didn't mean it...

It was said but I didn't mean it...

Now go ahead and post your proof for this completely unsubstantiated assertion.


Post your proof.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

The words of your, and I mean your church fathers, have propagated and in writing damned and cursed innocent Jews whom the Messiah came to save and rather than admit to the reality of this and a multitude of other sayings(as well as actions) i/e murder, forced conversion and finally motivating such animals like A. Hitlr and Mohammed into creating hateful and wicked practices.
It's ok to admit to being in error and it is just as well to admit the true history of a group of religious spirits and their hate but it is unconscionable to continue in denial and never come to a place of forgiveness. I can forgive the RCC and I can forgive as crazy as it sound Hitlr but to try to come out as a truly called out faithful assembly is unethical. I don't give the protestants a pass either since they were caught up in a hatred for the people that Y'Shua called His brothers. As catholics Im sure there are many "good works" you can point to but I'm sure no-one falls for that either.
Messiah said to make the tree good and its fruit good or vice versa. My thought would be that either do one or the other or get out of the farming business altogether.
A Man Called Saint John by the RCC said as follows. It really doesn't matter who tries to rescind the statements but these were the true feelings of the RCC at the time.

"The wicked and unclean fast of the Jews is now at our doors. Thought it is a fast, do not wonder that I have called it unclean. What is done contrary to God's purpose, be it sacrifice or fast, is the most abominable of all things. Their wicked fast will begin after five days. Ten days ago, or more than ten, I anticipated this and gave an exhortation with the hope it would make your brothers safe. Let no one find fault and say my discourse was untimely because I gave it so many days beforehand. When a fever threatens, or any other disease, physicians anticipate this and with many remedies make safe and secure the body of the man who will be seized by the fever; they hurry to snatch his body from the dangers which threaten it before the patient experiences their onset."

Calling the apple of Gods eye a disease or unclean or even contrary to Gods purpose is both unlearned and self incriminating since if those that rejected Messiah (and there were many many others that accepted Him) if that rejection brought you the opportunity:hammer: to be saved then you should be grateful and humbled by the truth in Scripture that states that God so loved "The World" not the catholic religious zealots who if they would be humble and ask for the forgiveness for their fathers sins maybe things would be a bit nicer on this site and in the world.

 

[wonderingjew]

Muslims and Catholics Have the same God?

Muslims and Catholics Have the same God?

[

St. Paul tells us clearly to "stand fast and hold to the traditions which we have learned, either by word or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:14).​

Lumen gentium 16 from catholic dogma states that muslims worship the same God as Catholics. God forbid since allah a false god created by a catholic and spread to the earlier muslims cannot be nor with a great stretch even be imaged as Y'Shua Ha'Moshiac.
I was wondering how you could explain this belief with the RCC?
​

 

[Spitfire]

I was wondering how you could explain this belief with the RCC?

People tend to misread that as an endorsement of the Islamic understanding of God. It's more that we think Muslims are correct to believe in one all-powerful God who created everything. The dispute between Muslims and Christians therefore isn't over which God so much as the nature of this God and how we are to serve and be justified before our God.

 

[Spitfire]

A Man Called Saint John by the RCC said as follows. It really doesn't matter who tries to rescind the statements but these were the true feelings of the RCC at the time.

If you care to read the whole text, you'll see that John Chrysostom's problem isn't with Jews because they are racially/ethnically Jewish but rather that they still sought and preached justification through the old law.

Here's another excerpt:

But someone might say: Is there so much harm in circumcision that it makes Christ's whole plan of redemption useless? Yes, the harm of circumcision is as great as that, not because of its own but because of your obstinacy. There was a time when the law was useful and necessary, but now it has ceased and is fruitless. If you take it on yourself to be circumcised now, when the time is no longer right, it makes the gift of God useless. It is because you are not willing to come to him that Christ will be of no advantage to you. Suppose someone should be caught in the act of adultery and the foulest crimes and then be thrown into prison. Suppose, next, that judgment was going to be passed against him and that he would be condemned. Suppose that just at that moment a letter should come from the Emperor setting free from any accounting or examination all those detained in prison. If the prisoner should refuse to take advantage of the pardon, remain obstinate and choose to be brought to trial, to give an account, and to undergo punishment, he will not be able thereafter to avail himself of the Emperor's favor. For when he made himself accountable to the court, examination, and sentence, he chose of his own accord to deprive himself of the imperial gift.

This is what happened in the case of the Jews. Look how it is. All human nature was taken in the foulest evils. "All have sinned," say Paul. They were locked, as it were, in a prison by the curse of their transgression of the Law. The sentence of the judge was going to be passed against them. A letter from the King came down from heaven. Rather, the King himself came. Without examination, without exacting an account, he set all men free from the claims of their sin.

All, then, who run to Christ are saved by his grace and profit from his gift. But those who wish to find justification from the Law will also fall from grace. They will not be able to enjoy the King's loving-kindness because they are striving to gain salvation by their own efforts; they will draw down on themselves the curse of the Law because from the works of the Law no flesh will find justification. So it is that Paul says: "If you be circumcised, Christ will be of no advantage to you." For the man who strives to gain salvation from the works of the Laws has nothing in common with grace.

The people who claimed that Jews were innately evil and greedy weren't Christians, those were Gnostics (who Catholics are routinely accused of having ruthlessly slaughtered...)