A Catholics Problems with Ecumenicalism

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Thaddius @ Oct. 13 2003,10:55)]

Quote[/b] ]If you ever need a Miracle, just pray to the Grave of a Saint.  Saints typically have more power dead than alive.

Sorry, I only pray to God, through Jesus Christ.  I do not worship past believers.  But by all means, you keep on if you feel that will get you to heaven.

Cory

Dear Thaddius,

Okay... now, after you die, who are you going to associate with? Will you suddenly want to be buddy buddy with all those people whom you were too good to associate with while you were alive? How do you think the Saints will feel about your snubs.

What of your presumption. Only Christ gets to sit at God's Right hand, and then the disciples used to fight over who would sit next to Christ. But you have the audacity to brag that you have an audiance with Christ anytime you want. No, I don't think so. If you did, you would be a mystic and know better. What we have from you is simple pretense.

Maybe you should be more Realistic. Here is a prayer you can try:

"Oh lowest Angel of Heaven have mercy on me for being a thousand times lower than thee. If I am not being presumptuous please help me anyway you can in the hopes that one day I will be worthy of your kind efforts.

"Oh, whoever is in the very last rank in Heaven, look kindly upon me as a million times less than thee. Please, if any higher soul would ever condescend to listen to a word you say, please intercede for me, and ask them to pass the word up to pray for my relief, that I may one day be worthy of all your help."

That is a prayer that has a chance to be heard -- not a prayer in which you think you can jump from the bottom most level barely above hell to the Nineth Heaven to the Throne Room of God the Father Himself. The Angels would laugh at you but they are too high up to hear your arrogant mumblings.

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Thaddius @ Oct. 13 2003,11:13)]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Oct. 12 2003,8:08)]

Quote[/b] (Thaddius @ Oct. 12 2003,9:44)]Except you cannot prove what you find on every website.  There are billions and most of them are full of garbage.

Cory

And you cannot prove the accounts in the Bible, yet you live your life around it. Are you beginning to see my point? You cannot simply dismiss these claimed miracles - you cannot.

actually Timor, I can dismiss these alledged miracles.  He does not believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God.   He said so himself.

Quote[/b] ]  In regards the Bible.  It was a reference material published by the Catholic Church in the 4th Century.  It was intended as a study guide.  It was never intended to supplant Church Teachings that went directly back to Christ

Now, since he does not agree with what I base my faith on, I do not have to believe anything he says regardless.   The same with mormons, jehovias witnesses, and any other cultest out there who distorts what the Bible clearly states to justify their own means.  I would almost bet that most Catholics would look at this guy as a nutjob for wanting to discount half the New Covenant as being a fraud.  Paul never claimed to be a prophet, yet this Leo guy has.  You tell me based on Scripture which one should be considered an antichrist.

Cory

"INSPIRED WORD OF GOD"

  Think about it.  You can look at the Bible as though it is a book -- a book that contains the History of Redemption and the Life and Teachings of Jesus, and the letters of a number of men from the first generation of Christianity.  Is this terribly wrong?  You pretend it is a sin to take the Bible at its face value.

  No, when you Prots want the whole Bible to be uniformly treated in every sylable as THE WORD OF GOD, what you really aim at is putting Paul on the same level as Christ.   How do I know this?  Well, thats easy.  Because while DEIFYING PAUL you sweep Christ off to the side.  Your Doctrines are all Paul -- because, since they are bound in the same book as the Words of Christ you make the logical leap that they must be, should be, are equal.  Then you ignore Christ because you prefer Paul.  Now, in that light, tell me which one of us will go to Hell to burn in eternal torment for having been silly?

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Oct. 13 2003,12:31)]Lion, take some breathers, you've been reduced to rambling.

Cory, the miracles stand independant of Leo. Leo did not fabricate these miracles in his mind, Leo did not perform them, and Leo is not the only one who believes in them - rather, almost all Catholics worldwide (or in your terminology, "true" Catholics) stand with him and believe in them. As for the Bible, the Bible repeatedly stands behind miracles, so no help for you there. It seems to me that you as much as you'd love to ignore them, you can't yet come up with a valid reason to. Then again, that's what ignorance is.

Wow, timor.

Every once in awhile you can string a thought together.

Have you ever read Johnson? Samuel Johnson. Or read Boswell's Life of Johnson. Victorian English flows better, but these best works from Georgian English, with their long constructions are simply stupendous. You used a few long coherent sentenses, so I think you might enjoy that style.

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Thaddius @ Oct. 13 2003,4:07)]Your right Timor, I am ignorant to the stuff that is brought here about these miracles. I know zilch about these sightings of suposed Mary.  Do I believe them? Of course not.  Jesus did not send His mortal mother to be his messenger.  He brought the message and He will return to reclaim His people.  Can I verify if these were true or not?  nope.  Do I care to?  nope.  As for the comparative to the miracles in the Bible, I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God.  My faith is what lets me believe that they really happened.  Regardless, I do not need proof to believe what the Bible tells me.  I do need proof for what the Catholic church tells me. 1500+ years of corruption tends to do that.  The Catholic church has been plagued with scandels, murder, destruction, you name it in the name of God since it was romanized.

I personally believe that the spiritual antichrist will be a pope.  He will be the one to defile the temple and claim to be Christ.  Heck even Leo's wacko theory of a jewish pope falls within that.  If God wants me to believe that Mary is what these miracles claim she is, then I'll have to see it for myself.  Until then, I'll go on believing the Bible is right, he is wrong and not much he tries to back up is going to change my faith.

Cory

I wish people were a little more sophisticated in Eastern Thought. The Yin and the Yang. The Dance of Opposites. You see all the corruption of the Church because that is what Big Brother The Protestant Establishment has been propagating for the last 5 hundred years. But just a scratch of the surface would reveal a hundred Christ-Like Saints, which you prefer to ignore.

No one talks about the Fat Corrupt and Stupid Bishops more than I, but they are balanced by the Saintlike Parish Priests and the Monks and the Nuns who live charitable and spiritual lives. There are 500 Religious and Clerics for every Fat Bishop. So you are in effect judging the Catholic Church on the basis of .2% of its Clergy. Not fair. And not smart.

 

[Kidan]

Leo-- First off, we are not to pray to angels.  (read Revelations, an angel told John this)

secondly -- have you ever heard the concept of leaven?  A little leaven, leavens the whole batch.  A little sin, makes you a sinner.  A little false doctrine, makes a church wrong.  I used to attend an Assembly of God church, I stopped attending because they taught a SINGLE false doctrine.  Yes, there are thousands of actual Christians that are Catholic, but such things as purgatory, praying to the dead, belief in an perpetual virgin Mary, and an Infallible Pope. I cannot advocate those doctrines, in any way shape of form.  Mainly because I just do not see proof for them within the scriptures.


Also, what does Eastern thought have to do with a discussion on Christianity?  The Yin and the Yang, are irrelevant concepts when dealing with the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism.  Christians should not muddy their theology with Budhist and Confusist thoughts.

Quote[/b] ]Wow, timor.

Every once in awhile you can string a thought together.

I find Timor well thought out, quite concise in his arguements, and usually a prime example of cordiality

 

[timor]

Wow, thank you for the compliments, both Leo and Kidan! *blush*

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Kidan @ Oct. 15 2003,8:22)]I used to attend an Assembly of God church, I stopped attending because they taught a SINGLE false doctrine.  

Curious...what was the false doctrine?

 

[www_rlxc_com]

If I actually believed Leo was someone of any importance in the Catholic church, I would say that he is becoming, or helping to become, the Antichrist. Unit all religions, rebuild and unit Jews, Muslims, and Catholics, a willinglness to Deny Christ as the only way to heaven if it means getting a few more converts, Deny Paul as a deciple and mark him (and all his teachings) as wrong. There goes our bible.

Yea, Leo is doing pretty good with the whole "Anti Christ" thing

 

[timor]

Unfortunatly, there are very many people with views conlicting with yours, and they can't all be *THE* anti-christ. =\ Especially not when Leo calls Jesus his Lord and Savior. I really do not see why condemning Paul and critizing the Bible makes him NOT a Christian. I say once again, that never did Jesus command you to hold the Bible in such high reverence. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the one who said that all scriptures were inspired Paul? This actually supports Leo's position quite a bit, if his views are accurate.

 

[Kidan]

Quote[/b] (Big J @ Oct. 15 2003,2:58)]

Quote[/b] (Kidan @ Oct. 15 2003,8:22)]I used to attend an Assembly of God church, I stopped attending because they taught a SINGLE false doctrine.  

Curious...what was the false doctrine?

That whole Pensacola Revival thing.
The 'manifestations' of that revival were not supported by the Bible, and all the AoG were doing them. When questioned, and the reasoning against those manifestations, the church leadership basically said "We're the leaders, we know the Spirit, you should not question us or the Spirit."

The problem with this (and why I view it as false doctrine) is that the Bible plainly tells us we should question our leaders and compare what our leaders teach to the Word.

 

[mrpopdrinker]

What is the pensacola revivel?

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Kidan @ Oct. 15 2003,8:22)]Leo-- First off, we are not to pray to angels.  (read Revelations, an angel told John this)

secondly -- have you ever heard the concept of leaven?  A little leaven, leavens the whole batch.  A little sin, makes you a sinner.  A little false doctrine, makes a church wrong.  I used to attend an Assembly of God church, I stopped attending because they taught a SINGLE false doctrine.  Yes, there are thousands of actual Christians that are Catholic, but such things as purgatory, praying to the dead, belief in an perpetual virgin Mary, and an Infallible Pope. I cannot advocate those doctrines, in any way shape of form.  Mainly because I just do not see proof for them within the scriptures.


Also, what does Eastern thought have to do with a discussion on Christianity?  The Yin and the Yang, are irrelevant concepts when dealing with the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism.  Christians should not muddy their theology with Budhist and Confusist thoughts.

Quote[/b] ]Wow, timor.

Every once in awhile you can string a thought together.

I find Timor well thought out, quite concise in his arguements, and usually a prime example of cordiality

Do you ever wonder that many people use language to fool themselves, for instance, the Church says that Catholics do not 'worship' Mary the Mother of God Queen of Heaven, ... that they 'venerate' Her. Now you tell me that we are not to 'pray' to angels, but I presume we are allowed to 'talk' to them.

Really. I am perhaps the most intelligent person I know (yes, the big fish in a very small pond) and when looking at some of these distinctions that are made by people of half my intelligence I wonder whether they actually see the difference, or are simply playing with words stupidly out of habit.

Worship vs venerate. Pray vs. talk. People who fight over these distinctions ought to consider that they could easily use the word they object to in order to define the word they defend. In other words, they are being silly.

Okay, now as to your overwhelming spiritual pride which would have you cast the Entire Catholic Church into Hell while you alone are saved. Would you not think it more fitting in the Divine Economy that those who have Passed the Test of Minor Annoyances and yet still Obeyed would be allowed into Heaven, while those who brissled with arrogance over trivial points should be the ones whom are rejected as a danger to the Peace and Quiet of all the rest?

And about Philosophical Terms designed to describe Spiritual Concepts... yes I can see why a Prot would not be interested -- Protestantism and the Spiritual Sciences afterall have no overlap. But for anyone really concerned with Heavenly things -- who have an actual hunger for things Divine, then the languages rich in such description would tend to come in handy. This is another instance where Protestant Easy Salvation shows its power to enervate what it pretends to support. Those guaranteed a certain Salvation for doing nothing, end up doing nothing, thinking nothing, knowing nothing.

 

[Kidan]

pop pensacola revival

leo--and you're so humble to!

no, worship/venerate are the same thing, whereas prayer/talk are not. pray is a form of talking, communing yes, but it has a good dose of worship thrown in as well. Talk is pure discussion. I am not saying that you should not talk with an angel if it APPPEARS before you, but to just randomly pray (which is a form of worship) to angels and the dead is wrong.

Did Christ pray to those who appeared before Him? When Peter wished to build an alter on the spot, what were Christ's words? No worship is reserved for God, not angels and not the dead.

And no, the distinctions we speak and write are outpourings of what really is in our hearts. What we speak and write are examples of what we truly believe. My Bible tells me to be humble, yet here you are claiming to be the smartest person you know. My Bible tells me to treat others as I would have them treat myself, yet here you are calling my intellect into question. If you had half the intelligence you claimed, you would realize that words are important! that is why Proverbs deals so much with what the tongue does.


i'll finish this later, must get to work

 

[Kidan]

Quote[/b] (Leo Volont @ Oct. 16 2003,2:33)]  And about Philosophical Terms designed to describe Spiritual Concepts... yes I can see why a Prot would not be interested -- Protestantism and the Spiritual Sciences afterall have no overlap.  But for anyone really concerned with Heavenly things -- who have an actual hunger for things Divine, then the languages rich in such description would tend to come in handy.  This is another instance where Protestant Easy Salvation shows its power to enervate what it pretends to support.  Those guaranteed a certain Salvation for doing nothing, end up doing nothing, thinking nothing, knowing nothing.

Ahh I see, so you describe your salvation in terms of Budhist thought?  No, I have a hunger for God!  i don't need those concepts such as yin and yang, karma and such from some OTHER religion to describe God and my relationship with God.  What makes salvation as described by a protestant so much easier than the same as by a Catholic?  Is it that I don't have to go grovel to a preist once a week?  Is it that I don't have to go worship the dead?  It can't be works, the church I attend is the LARGEST charitable orginization in the world, and I am highly active within it.  My faith is displayed through my fruit.  My salvation is evidenced by the love I show those around me.  My joy is in Christ.  My language, and the language that describe CHRISTIAN concepts is rich and vibrant enough for God.  If I were to have a discussion comparing Budhism and Christianity then those terms would be fully logical to use, but those terms have no meaning from a Christian perspective.  

but just so you'll realize that there are some of us, who actually understand these terms and how they relate to Christianity let's look at a couple...

Yin/Yang --dualitie of the divine.  Light and Dark, male and female, good and evil, yet both aspects are a part of Brahmain (sp) since Brahmain is the totality of the Divine and existence

How does that relate to God?  God is Good.  God is just.  God is love.  There is no duality, God is one, He is the great I am.

Karma -- Deeds of past lifes will affect you in this one

No such concept is found anywhere near ANY Abrahamic religion.  In all Abrahamic religions you get 1 chance.  That's it.  There is no repeat until paradise is acheived, you have  1 life with which to accept Christ.

 

[www_rlxc_com]

timor

How do you even know there was a Jesus if the bible was not there? How do you know that being a homosexual is a sin? if it was not for the bible. How do you know Jesus died for your sins?

If you want to make your own bible, go ahead, but to concider yourself a chrisitan and disown the bible is like having wife while you live with another woman. You can "say" you are married, but doesent mean you act like it.

Same with christianity, the bible is how we know who we are in christ, and what christ wants us to do with our life. If you throw that out, you no longer have a moral guide.

You choose what you want, I will take Gods word, you can have whatever foundation you wish.

A easy responce would be "my foundation is Jesus", but........ YOU dont know anything about jesus unless the BIBLE tells you it. Or unless someone who read the bible tells you. So no matter how you go about it, the BIBLE is the foundation of the christian religion. THe rock we now stand on.

 

[timor]

RLXC, I'm an atheist.

lol

 

[Ultima Avatar]

And the sun rises...
So Rlxc, what source do you have to verify the existence of God if not the Bible? Has God written you a personal letter verifying his existence? Because if he did, you wouldn't be alive. God can not show himself to us without killing us. We can't stand it. MOSES. Geez, freaking Moses. Couldn't see God once without his face being radiated and that was hidden glory...he would have disintegrated if God had revealed himself.

Granted that's Biblical but still...you get all your information of God from the book he claims to have inspired.

 

[timor]

Good point, Ultima - you guys use circular logic whenever dealing with your Bible

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Ultima Avatar @ Oct. 16 2003,9:43)]And the sun rises...
So Rlxc, what source do you have to verify the existence of God if not the Bible? Has God written you a personal letter verifying his existence? Because if he did, you wouldn't be alive. God can not show himself to us without killing us. We can't stand it. MOSES. Geez, freaking Moses. Couldn't see God once without his face being radiated and that was hidden glory...he would have disintegrated if God had revealed himself.

Granted that's Biblical but still...you get all your information of God from the book he claims to have inspired.

Hi Ultima,

Mystics are by no means common, but there have been enough of them in History. The Bible, as Great as it is, is not the exclusive source for Humanity's Knowledge of God.

Of course, not every Mystic has seen the Very Face of God. Your instincts are correct when you warn that being in the Presence of God is dangerously consuming. In the East it is said that a Yogin who has the Ultimate Religious Experience will die within twentyone days -- from an overdose of Bliss. Such a person will not eat or sleep, but will burn up in the Fever of Ecstacy.

It may not be limited to The First Person of the Trinity. With Our Lady of Lourdes France, there was just one child Seer, Bernedette Soubouro, around which the crowds observed. But on one occassion a Priest was graced with the Vision of Our Lady, and then did not live through the night -- dieing of Religious Happiness.

But, for your other point, how we should know God besides from inference from The Bible. Well, the Revelation, which the Bible represents as History, never stopped. The Revelation continues.

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Kidan @ Oct. 16 2003,8:11)]pop pensacola revival

leo--and you're so humble to!

no, worship/venerate are the same thing, whereas prayer/talk are not.  pray is a form of talking, communing yes, but it has a good dose of worship thrown in as well.  Talk is pure discussion.  I am not saying that you should not talk with an angel if it APPPEARS before you, but to just randomly pray (which is a form of worship) to angels and the dead is wrong.

Did Christ pray to those who appeared before Him?  When Peter wished to build an alter on the spot, what were Christ's words?  No worship is reserved for God, not angels and not the dead.

And no, the distinctions we speak and write are outpourings of what really is in our hearts.  What we speak and write are examples of what we truly believe.  My Bible tells me to be humble, yet here you are claiming to be the smartest person you know.  My Bible tells me to treat others as I would have them treat myself, yet here you are calling my intellect into question.  If you had half the intelligence you claimed, you would realize that words are important! that is why Proverbs deals so much with what the tongue does.


i'll finish this later, must get to work

I talk about quibbling over symantics as being the most un-zen thing you can do. and then what do you do.

Words are just words.

That was Christ's problem with the Pharisees was that weren't getting into the 'feel' of anything.

so by coming back and saying "no no.. this word really does means this, and that word really means that"... you've obviously missed my point.

But, the Protestants, as the New Pharisees, will simply insist on damning the True Mystics with their legalistic interpretations of ... well... the noises that come out of their mouths -- words.