heretic catholic purgatory exposed
-
-
First Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
What does the Bible say about Purgatory?"Answer: According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Purgatory is “a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the more... I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 12/02/2011 03:43:46
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
-
-
Fourth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/26/2008
Location: USA
Protestants do not understand the Catholic faith.
Protestantism is like adding & subtracting while the Catholic faith is like trigonometry.
A Protestant trying to use a Protestant understanding in order to understand the Catholic faith is like a person trying to understand trigonometry using adding & subtracting.
You need to learn trigonometry in order to understand trigonometry.
Through bigotry prejudices false assumptions & false premises Protestants are protesting a catholic church made up by Protestantism that does not actually exist.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 10/13/2007
Location: USA
Being outside of the Catholic Church, my doctrines vary, and I honestly do not have the right to speak for her any more than you or any non-Catholic website do.
It disgusts me that this site and others like it have sections specifically for the purpose of scaring and/or stealing sheep from the Catholic Church. I can't make any sense of using the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura to attack the institution that God used to compile and preserve his Word.
All they have are the crumbs that have fallen from our Lord's table. They drag people from that table to eat those scraps with them.
A fundamental fact that every sincere seeker and respector of truth has faced or must eventually face is that without the Roman Catholic Church, you would not have a Bible with which to attempt to use against them.
Regardless of this truth, Mike, faith and the others here play on your field, using what they believe to be an incomplete Bible. They don't quote popes, saints, councils, etc. The least you can do is stay on your field with them and use the Bible alone.
"Be good, keep your feet dry, your eyes open, your heart at peace and your soul in the joy of Christ." - Thomas Merton
www.percalamus.com
Edited by acumenCry on 12/07/2011 20:35:28
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 06/26/2002
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
Now you are learning how others feel about you and your churchy Mike. it take to sides of opinions and observations!
That is why not everyone is called Mike!
Um Evan. Please. I've known what others feel about the church for a long time. Remember, I once followed the same idolatry of anti Catholicism that you and g4 are hung up on. I was hoping to make the point that arguments by comparison are not only fallacies, but they can be equally applied to you. I guess that went over your head just like it went over the Mormons.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
2Th:2:10: And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th:2:11: And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th:2:12: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
There are far too many who prefer unrighteous behaviour to living as God called us.
As I said many times before, God knows how to deliver the Godly from Temptation. Those that choose sin and refuse to repent of their sin will be allowed to fall.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by michael
Protestants do not understand the Catholic faith.
Protestantism is like adding & subtracting while the Catholic faith is like trigonometry.
A Protestant trying to use a Protestant understanding in order to understand the Catholic faith is like a person trying to understand trigonometry using adding & subtracting.
You need to learn trigonometry in order to understand trigonometry.
So are you saying a non catholic is impossible to understand catholic belief, even with help of the Holy Spirit, and a gift of discernment?
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by mikejuli
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
Now you are learning how others feel about you and your churchy Mike. it take to sides of opinions and observations!
That is why not everyone is called Mike!
Um Evan. Please. I've known what others feel about the church for a long time. Remember, I once followed the same idolatry of anti Catholicism that you and g4 are hung up on. I was hoping to make the point that arguments by comparison are not only fallacies, but they can be equally applied to you. I guess that went over your head just like it went over the Mormons.
Mormon are not bible based remember?
But it would be better to use JW!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
2Th:2:10: And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th:2:11: And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th:2:12: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
There are far too many who prefer unrighteous behaviour to living as God called us.
As I said many times before, God knows how to deliver the Godly from Temptation. Those that choose sin and refuse to repent of their sin will be allowed to fall.
what born again christian would want to sin and practice sinning with all their heart, and is trying to be the best sinner?
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Fourth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/26/2008
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by michael
Protestants do not understand the Catholic faith.
Protestantism is like adding & subtracting while the Catholic faith is like trigonometry.
A Protestant trying to use a Protestant understanding in order to understand the Catholic faith is like a person trying to understand trigonometry using adding & subtracting.
You need to learn trigonometry in order to understand trigonometry.
So are you saying a non catholic is impossible to understand catholic belief, even with help of the Holy Spirit, and a gift of discernment?
one love
Protestants have redefined what the Holy Spirit is & made their own definition of what the Holy Spirit is.
When a Protestant looks for the Holy Spirit they are looking for their own pre conceived ideas of what Protestantism has defined it to be for them.
The communists of the past looked at the world through communist glasses or philosophy. Before they let anything into their mind, by their own choice, they put it through their communist filter first. So everything they seen, heard, tasted, touched, smelled, thought was communist. When communists protested religions they were protesting something they created in their own heads that did not actually exist.
Protestants are blinded by themselves.
The only way a Protestant might be able to excape their Protestant bubble is to completely forget everything they know about the Catholic Church. Then read Catholic books & watch ewtn.com TV & videos from a point of view that they know nothing about the Catholic Church & that they are reading & watching something completely different from anything they seen or heard before.
Through bigotry prejudices false assumptions & false premises Protestants are protesting a catholic church made up by Protestantism that does not actually exist.
Edited by michael on 12/08/2011 08:41:41
-
-
Fourth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/26/2008
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
Now you are learning how others feel about you and your churchy Mike. it take to sides of opinions and observations!
Protestants never look at both sides. They always look at the Catholic Church from a Protestant side.
Go read a book called The Tao of Poo by Benjamin Hoff . It is a book on the philosophy of “who”
Through bigotry prejudices false assumptions & false premises Protestants are protesting a catholic church made up by Protestantism that does not actually exist.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 10/13/2007
Location: USA
That is, unless, like me, you weren't taught anything about the Church in the first place. I was raised without the desire to study anything other than my Baptist faith. When that faith couldn't answer all my questions, I was able to look at Catholicism through a Christian lense that had never been tarnished by anti-Catholicism. My struggle has been "unlearning" things such as Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.
Rather than being taught about the RCC and where she was wrong, preachers and teachers subtly pounded Protestant doctrines such as "Call no man Father" and "Statues are false idols" into my head.
That's primarily what I have to get past, and I'll admit, if I had studied only Catholic sources such as EWTN, then I would have been Catholic a long time ago.
Evan,
You asked if a non-Catholic could understand the Catholic Church. Like Michael said, they can't truly do it in a Protestant mindset, and definitely not by reading those sites you like.
Picture an American who has never been to England but has been taught all his life that England was evil - that his forefathers rebelled against the tyranny of the English monarchy and started their own country. This man wants to learn about England. Does he read a book about it that was written by a fellow "anti-English" or does he read a book about it that was written by an Englishman?
"Be good, keep your feet dry, your eyes open, your heart at peace and your soul in the joy of Christ." - Thomas Merton
www.percalamus.com
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
2Th:2:10: And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th:2:11: And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th:2:12: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
There are far too many who prefer unrighteous behaviour to living as God called us.
As I said many times before, God knows how to deliver the Godly from Temptation. Those that choose sin and refuse to repent of their sin will be allowed to fall.
what born again christian would want to sin and practice sinning with all their heart, and is trying to be the best sinner?
one love
I would hope that none would. BUT, all the heathens I know do not practice sin at all. They are open to Christ and God, but have not reached the point of conversion yet. So the only sin they have is not believing, and yet they have not rejected either.
They go all sorts of good works and obey God's commandments.
It has been my experience that except for Hugh Hephner, the only people that I know that are practicing being the best sinners they can be are those who have claimed to be born again Christians and believe the teaching that obedience is not only not required, but a denial of Christ's free gift.
These are the ones who are making kiddy porn with their own children, and committing adultery, and doing all sorts of wicked things.
Keep in mind that I am speaking of those that I know about who are practicing sinning. Not all Christians are doing this.
And even among Catholics who are doing these things too, they are the ones who reject Church teachings and insist that "their Jesus" just wants them to be happy and paid for our sins so that sin would no longer be an issue.
Since they all believe that sin is not an issue with God, and works are all bad, they feel that they must sin to prove their faith.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 06/26/2002
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
Mormon are not bible based remember?
But it would be better to use JW!
one love
Oh Evan. Mormons are just as bible based as you are. After all you both have the abridged Protestant bible. 
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 10/13/2007
Location: USA
Ha nice.
I don't know if there is another thread on this, but I'm having some trouble with the Protestant vs. Catholic Bible issue.
One side says Luther took the books out. The other side says Luther only took the books out that the Catholic Church added. I may be wrong, but my little bit of research says that the Jews did not include the books because they were too "Hellenistic", not because they were uninspired. Can you recommend a good source that explains this? Thanks.
"Be good, keep your feet dry, your eyes open, your heart at peace and your soul in the joy of Christ." - Thomas Merton
www.percalamus.com
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
How about the Bible itself.
If you look at Jesus reponses to the Sadducees, He only quotes from the Torah, but when He respondes to the Pharisees, He quotes from the broader canon. This is because the Sadducees only accepted the Torah alone, but the Pharisees accepted a larger canon.
How large? Hard to tell, but there are clues:
Acts 23:6-7 6But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
7And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.
The reason the two groups disagreed with one another is that the Torah does not discuss or even suggest thy Resurrection of the Dead.
Even the larger Palestinian canon only speaks of it in vague terms. But Paul's belief in the resurrection of the dead - ie corpses, dead bodies. Goes beyond what is supportable by the Palestinian canon alone. But one can imagine that the word for dead might not mean corpses but simply dead. Until one gets to Hebrews.
In Hebrews 11, we have the Hall of Faith discourse. Every single example provided in Hebrews 11 is found in the Catholic OT, but not all are found in the Palestinian Canon.
So what canon was the author using?
Jesus said that the Law and the Prophets lasted until John the Baptist, Matthew 11:13 and Luke 16:16. This has a double meaning - it can refer literally to the Mosaic Law and to the actual Prophets - John the Baptist is the last of the OT style prophets. But it can also refer to the Bible itself. The Jews recognized three parts to the Bible - The Law (Torah), the Prophets and the Writings.
Either way, prophecy did not cease with Artaxerses as some Protestants suppose, some 400 years before Christ, but continued through to John the Baptist, so there is no reason to exclude any of the Deuterocanonicals based on the the absense of any form of prophecy.
I raise this because I read a book called "General Introduction to the Bible" by Norman Geisler and William Nix. They indicated that the reason the OT Deuterocanonicals were not accepted was because prophecy ceased about 400 years before Christ and therefor none of the later books could be inspired.
They used Zechariah 13:2-5 as their evidence. They deliberately ignored verse 1 which shows a clear Messianic reference. Prophecy will not cease until the time of Christ, when He becomes a fountain of mercy for us, cleansing us of sin and unrighteousness.
Prophecy did not cease, and I have heard that Hellenism was an issue, but I think that this is a red herring. The Diaspora is a part of Jewish history, even if they didn't always like it, or the influences on their broader culture.
And languages was raised, but that too is a small deal, until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, they could say that these books were only in Greek and only Hebrew was inspired for the OT. Ironically, I have heard Christians saying that the OT could only be in Hebrew and that the NT was only in Greek - wrong on both counts, even if one were to stick with the Palestinian canon.
The Dead Sea Scrolls yielded all of the Deuterocanonical books with the Protocanonical books, six of the seven were found in Hebrew.
Trying to find a reason for why the Jews rejected these books is difficult. When Christianity rose and Judaism fell from grace, so to speak, the Christians preserved the Jewish texts (and many others), but the Jews only preserved the texts they wanted to keep and this was a great loss to the Hebrew people. They consider these books to be invaluable to understanding a very important part of their history that is absent from their own works. You can see this a bit in the Jewish Virtual Library.
But, getting rid of the "unwanted" books was not easy. Sirach remained popular and in liturgical use among the Jews for nearly a thousand years after supposedly being omitted from their canon.
The Canon was not set at the time of Christ, so it is hard to say that they actually removed books from the Canon, but they did reject books that had previously been in use.
Not only the Dead Sea Scrolls bear witness to this, but also the Septuagint which would not have been accepted unless it was also accepted in Jerusalem. But, that alone would not cut it as many suggest that Christians added to the Septuagint to create our own OT canon. And this is not a foolish suggestion, but there is more to this. In addition to the above, there is another ancient canon that survived history cut off from mainstream Judaism - the Ethiopian Jews were separated from Jerusalem and mainstream Judaism by the Fall of Jerusalem and they only had what existed at the time.
Their canon was unofficial as only the Torah and the Prophets had been settled by the time Christ. The writings were still ongoing. Because of this, their unofficial canon of scripture included all of the books in the Catholic OT, plus a few extras. I think that they were short a book from the Septuagint. When Israel was re-established, the Ethopian Jewry reconnected with mainstream Judaism and they have since adopted the Palestinian Canon. And over the past while, have been been immigrating back to Israel.
Why did the Jews reject these books? There are all kinds of excuses, but the closer we get to Christ in time, the more revealing the prophecies get. There is no way that the Jews that rejected Christ could possibly have kept the Book of Wisdom in their canon - it called them out and said exactly what was going to happen to their Messiah. If they accepted it, they would have had to accept Christ.
And as for Paul and the Resurrection of the Dead, while the Palestinian canon is a little vague on the resurrection, the 2 Book of Maccabees chapter 7 gives us a clearer vision:
9And when he was at the last gasp, he said thus: Thou indeed, O most wicked man, destroyest us out of this present life: but the King of the world will raise us up, who die for his laws, in the resurrection of eternal life.
...
11 And said with confidence: These I have from heaven, but for the laws of God I now despise them, because I hope to receive them again from him.
...
14And when he was now ready to die, he spoke thus: It is better, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God, to be raised up again by him: for, as to thee thou shalt have no resurrection unto life.
There are a few places, where it even comes across as being very Catholic.
37 But I, like my brethren, offer up my life and my body for the laws of our fathers: calling upon God to be speedily merciful to our nation, and that thou by torments and stripes mayst confess that he alone is God.
Martin Luther really did not like this book. And while it is easy for non-Catholics to deny its inspiration, no one can deny its historicity. Even if it had not been inspired by God, it is a reflection of the beliefs and practices of the time it was written.
This shows a very developed theology that is very Christian and these martyrs even hope for the Resurrection of the Dead from the King of the World.
The closer we get the Christ, the clearer everything got in the writings. By the time of the Fall of Jerusalem, the Jews who had not yet converted were in an absolute frenzy with anticipation for the Messiah, this is in part what contributed to the Fall of Jerusalem. Something had to give, and it would have been much easier to dismiss books that condemned them, than to admit they were wrong.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
Edited by Faith_at_Large on 12/08/2011 22:57:08
|
|
Topic Locked
Subscribe by Email
RSS