Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 13:01:16 GMT
So Jesus was Lying when He Said He was Going to Build His Church upon the Rock of St. Peter (St. Matthew chapter 16)? Jesus going to himself as the rock that the church will be built on. You look the contacts from the previous verses that is what is being said there. Even Peter calls Christ the Cornerstone. I mean that is the only verse that you have out of the entire New Testament. And they read a whole lot into it. And you didn't answer my question. Have you ever disagreed with the Catholic Church on anything or do you accept it like the sheep that you are? It's also important to look at his use of Petra and Petros (in the original Greek). He's basically calling Peter a "little rock," while claiming himself to be a boulder.
|
|
dawglf
Freshman
@dawglf
Posts: 63
Likes: 4
|
Post by dawglf on May 3, 2017 13:15:48 GMT
Jesus going to himself as the rock that the church will be built on. You look the contacts from the previous verses that is what is being said there. Even Peter calls Christ the Cornerstone. I mean that is the only verse that you have out of the entire New Testament. And they read a whole lot into it. And you didn't answer my question. Have you ever disagreed with the Catholic Church on anything or do you accept it like the sheep that you are? It's also important to look at his use of Petra and Petros (in the original Greek). He's basically calling Peter a "little rock" while claiming himself to be a boulder. Exactly. Anybody who has read and studied the Bible, or even has a basic knowledge of the Bible, understands that Jesus is the Cornerstone the church is built on
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 13:16:51 GMT
I guess I'll toss in my two cents regarding apostolic succession. I think it was important for the early church, but it's not really important for today. Doctrines aren't ultimately what save people. Apostolic succession was only important inasmuch as it was able to maintain and canonize what Jesus and his earliest followers taught. Now that we have that (the message), we no longer need fancy rituals of "transferring" authority. If apostolic succession were truly important (and was something to be continued ad infinitum), it would be more clearly outlined in the NT. But it's not.
In the end, the "tradition" is cool, but it's not really necessary. In terms of what the early church would look like if it were around today, it'd probably be a mix of the Orthodox and the Anabaptist expressions.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on May 3, 2017 16:38:23 GMT
Yes, Purgatory is in the Holy Bible. In fact, it was the Protestants who edited the Old Testament, hence taking out of the Bible, where it is shown. In the New Testament, it is in St. Matthew chapter 12, verse 31, where Christ Says the ONLY SIN not to be Forgiven in this life or the next is Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. We do not worship icons. We use them to remember God & His Saints. The ancient Israelites made images of cherubim & placed them on the Ark of the Covenant. I am sorry, clusium. When I started the thread I did not foresee it turning into a fur-ball. I did it primarily to annoy the ungodly, as they hate the Russians lately. Now I am reminded of the old board when you and that obstinate Coach Dobbs went round and round on Maya's thread about the alleged deification of Mary. FWIW although I am not a Catholic I agree that Mary was special. I once thought that she was worshipped by Catholics as a goddess, but that was years ago and I have learned much more in the interim. Those who think that Catholics worship the icons are severely off-base. Thank you Erjen. As someone who has posted on message forums for nearly 17 years now, I know first hand how a thread that is made for a specific topic can steer way off base.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on May 3, 2017 16:47:13 GMT
Yes, Purgatory is in the Holy Bible. In fact, it was the Protestants who edited the Old Testament, hence taking out of the Bible, where it is shown. Luther removed only those books which had disputed relevance in the first place, ie. those books which was added to the Old Testament in the Septaguint - but they were never Old Testament canon. Luther removed them for this reason, but maintained that they were nevertheless "good to read". Still, you won't find purgatory in those books. Case in point: the idea of purgatory was not there from the beginning, but evolved as those scriptures were interpreted and re-interpreted. It wasn't until the 13th century that purgatory was officially defined. What does that have to do with purgatory? This is merely one of numerous contradictions (this being a contradiction to the notion that a soul in hell cannot be saved). Other contradictions, such as when Jesus was born, what were his last words, how he answered Pilate etc. have not resulted in monumental concepts to explain them, so why should this? If purgatory was a thing, why is it not mentioned directly? Why can it only be inferred by taking a crowbar to the Bible? You bow down to them and pray to them. When you use those man-made images to remember what they represent, you invariably picture Jesus to look like he does in that particular effigy - and ditto for Mary. And the saints. Hence, there is no more holiness in those than in the kitchen sink - and they should remind you of Jesus, Mary, the saints or what have you to any greater extent than the kitchen sink. And surely you are not saying that you need those effigies to remember? The Jews never did, so why do you? They did not represent named characters, and nobody bowed down to them or prayed to them - or used them to "remember" God in any way. They would never have dared to try to make a likeness of God. None of those Books had any disputed relevance, except in the eyes of Martin Luther & his fellow reformers. He was also going to edit out Books from the NT too. St. Matthew chapter 12 verse 31 proves Purgatory in that it says that the person may still have their sins Forgiven after death. In Heaven, there is no more sin. If a soul goes to Hell, it means they will never receive Forgiveness. Therefore, there is a third state, where the soul awaits Forgiveness. The Church calls that state Purgatory. We do not bow down to them or pray to them. We may kneel before them while praying, but, we usually kneel while praying anyway. The Only One we bow before in Church Is the Blessed Sacrament, because it is the Living Presence Of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We do not pray to the images, but, to the Ones Whom the Images represent. They made images right on the Ark. Likewise, Moses made a bronze serpent (at God's Command) for the people to look up to & be healed after being bitten by serpents in the wilderness.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on May 3, 2017 17:07:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on May 3, 2017 19:10:51 GMT
tpfkar The Church created it whole cloth. Heil Mary, full of grace. If other monotheistic religions do it, it obviously means that it is not breaking the First Commandment to do so. We have far more reason to honour the Blessed Virgin Mary, than Muslims do Muhammad, & yet, most Protestant divisions barely pay any lip service to her, whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 3, 2017 20:13:04 GMT
I've already read that. And no, it does not shoot down my arguments, but rather I have already shot down those arguments. Like I said, the Bible is full of contradictions - the concept of purgatory was invented to deal with the contradictions surrounding whether or not it is possible to get out of hell. And why not, if nothing is impossible for God? But no, that means that "since Jesus suggests some sins may be forgiven after death, that means there must be purgatory!" But of course that is jumping to conclusions. One might just as easily interpret it in favour of soul sleep. The fact remains that purgatory is nowhere mentioned in the Bible - you have to make some pretty hefty interpretations to arrive at it. And indeed, for more than a thousand years there was no consensus on what this intermediate stage was. It was finalised only in the 13th century. That should tell you that it isn't in the Bible, but in theology only.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on May 3, 2017 20:14:16 GMT
tpfkar The Church created it whole cloth. Heil Mary, full of grace. If other monotheistic religions do it, it obviously means that it is not breaking the First Commandment to do so. We have far more reason to honour the Blessed Virgin Mary, than Muslims do Muhammad, & yet, most Protestant divisions barely pay any lip service to her, whatsoever.Let the record show that the proceeding post came from a non-christian, & thereby has no idea the heck he is talking about. The Church got Purgatory from Sacred Scripture. They got it from the Maccabees & the very Words Of Christ Himself in the afore-mentioned St. Matthew chapter 12, verse 31. The Hail Mary is from St. Luke chapter 1, both from St. Gabriel the archangel & St. Elisabeth, the mother of St. John the Baptist.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on May 3, 2017 20:27:57 GMT
tpfkar Your logic is impeccable as always. Most non-Christians have been steeped in the hoo-doo, and a non-Christian isn't compelled to attempt the most inane contortions to try to create things out of nothing. None of your references have ever come anywhere close to saying what you claim they do. The bottom line is that you worship the Word of a multi-billion dollar corporation ahead of the Bible. Oh, he cares alright!!! HE **HATES** HER!!!! Her intercession with Son Is POWERFUL!!!!
|
|
dawglf
Freshman
@dawglf
Posts: 63
Likes: 4
|
Post by dawglf on May 3, 2017 22:07:37 GMT
From the article
This seems so simple. Its common sense. Scripture is very clear when it says, "But nothing unclean shall enter [heaven]" (Rev. 21:27). Hab. 1:13 says, "You [God]... are of purer eyes than to behold evil and cannot look on wrong..." How many of us will be perfectly sanctified at the time of our deaths? I dare say most of us will be in need of further purification in order to enter the gates of heaven after we die, if, please God, we die in a state of grace.
Since if we are believers in Jesus Christ then our sins are already covered by the blood of Christ. Therefore we enter Heaven in a state of grace when we die. So there is no more need for cleansing after we die
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 3, 2017 22:37:13 GMT
None of those Books had any disputed relevance, except in the eyes of Martin Luther & his fellow reformers. He was also going to edit out Books from the NT too. Perhaps "relevance" is the wrong word. But their place in the canon was certainly disputed. First of all, the Catholic Church has some very specific ideas on what Purgatory is. These specific ideas are not found in the Bible. Second, no third state is needed. Between death and the resurrection of the body there is a whole lot of nothing. Sins could easily be forgiven here if God were willing to do so, or God could bring a soul out of hell if he were willing to do so. After all, all is possible for God, is it not? Or is this somehow impossible? Has God finally made a prison so secure that even he could not spring anyone out? By kneeling before them in prayer, you are bowing down to them. From a theological point of view, contrary to being an inspiration, they are a distraction. If you pray to Jesus before an effigy of Jesus, then you are picturing Jesus looking like that effigy. You are thus giving focus to the effigy, and thus you are bowing down to that effigy - and that is idolatry. Do you give the same attention to the kitchen sink? After all, the kitchen sink is every bit as holy and representative of God as those images. Because an image of Jesus does not represent Jesus - it represents a human being's idea of Jesus, which is precisely why the commandment against graven images was included in the first place. Yes indeed, the Bible is nothing if not inconsistent. However, there are three key differences: 1) the bronze snake (and the angels on the ark, for that matter) were not meant to be representations of an individual snake (or specific angels); 2) they did not bow down or kneel before them, nor did they pray to them or worship them (they were told that if bitten by snakes, they would live if they but looked upon the bronze snake), and 3) the ark and the bronze snake were both made at God's command, to God's specifications. This is not a carte blanche to start making visual representations of named holy individuals, on the contrary, because later on God specifically forbids graven images. It isn't just the bowing down to or worshipping graven images which is forbidden - it is forbidden to make them in the first place. This is the very reason why it is forbidden to Islam to make a visual representation of either God or the face of Muhammed - the idea being that man's efforts will invariably fall short of the ideal, and can never do the object justice. It would be as if, instead of a picture of your mother on the wall, you hang up a used oil rag instead and say "that'll do". That's why depictions of God, his prophets or his messengers are considered blasphemous in both Islam and Judaism. Not so in Christianity, though, because they furthered a Roman tradition in this respect. Also, it pays to advertise, and when seeking to gain a foothold in pagan regions where one was accustomed to idols, they were naturally curious as to what the Christian God was supposed to look like. If you want people to convert, it helps if you let them keep the traditions dearest to them - and this included, among other things, the use of graven images.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on May 3, 2017 22:51:01 GMT
None of those Books had any disputed relevance, except in the eyes of Martin Luther & his fellow reformers. He was also going to edit out Books from the NT too. Perhaps "relevance" is the wrong word. But their place in the canon was certainly disputed. First of all, the Catholic Church has some very specific ideas on what Purgatory is. These specific ideas are not found in the Bible. Second, no third state is needed. Between death and the resurrection of the body there is a whole lot of nothing. Sins could easily be forgiven here if God were willing to do so, or God could bring a soul out of hell if he were willing to do so. After all, all is possible for God, is it not? Or is this somehow impossible? Has God finally made a prison so secure that even he could not spring anyone out? By kneeling before them in prayer, you are bowing down to them. From a theological point of view, contrary to being an inspiration, they are a distraction. If you pray to Jesus before an effigy of Jesus, then you are picturing Jesus looking like that effigy. You are thus giving focus to the effigy, and thus you are bowing down to that effigy - and that is idolatry. Do you give the same attention to the kitchen sink? After all, the kitchen sink is every bit as holy and representative of God as those images. Because an image of Jesus does not represent Jesus - it represents a human being's idea of Jesus, which is precisely why the commandment against graven images was included in the first place. Yes indeed, the Bible is nothing if not inconsistent. However, there are three key differences: 1) the bronze snake (and the angels on the ark, for that matter) were not meant to be representations of an individual snake (or specific angels); 2) they did not bow down or kneel before them, nor did they pray to them or worship them (they were told that if bitten by snakes, they would live if they but looked upon the bronze snake), and 3) the ark and the bronze snake were both made at God's command, to God's specifications. This is not a carte blanche to start making visual representations of named holy individuals, on the contrary, because later on God specifically forbids graven images. It isn't just the bowing down to or worshipping graven images which is forbidden - it is forbidden to make them in the first place. This is the very reason why it is forbidden to Islam to make a visual representation of either God or the face of Muhammed - the idea being that man's efforts will invariably fall short of the ideal, and can never do the object justice. It would be as if, instead of a picture of your mother on the wall, you hang up a used oil rag instead and say "that'll do". That's why depictions of God, his prophets or his messengers are considered blasphemous in both Islam and Judaism. Not so in Christianity, though, because they furthered a Roman tradition in this respect. Also, it pays to advertise, and when seeking to gain a foothold in pagan regions where one was accustomed to idols, they were naturally curious as to what the Christian God was supposed to look like. If you want people to convert, it helps if you let them keep the traditions dearest to them - and this included, among other things, the use of graven images. Hell is the Eternal Separation from God. If a soul is in Hell, it means his/her sins will never be Forgiven. Yet, in St. Matthew's Gospel, Christ Said that it is possible for some sins to be Forgiven after death. Therefore, there is a third state. Both Catholics & Protestants believe that once a soul is in Hell, it is too late for him/her. Only the Orthodox believe it is possible for a soul to be Saved in Hell. So unless you are willing to say that the Orthodox Church is right, there is no Saving from Hell, & there is a third state after Death. Kneeling & bowing are 2 different things. Kneeling is just that: Sitting on your knees. Bowing is bending forward. Do you keep photos of loved ones, by any chance Karl? Are they a distraction from your loved ones? Or do they make you think of your loved ones? How in your mind does the kitchen sink represent God? Christ Referenced the ancient Israelites looking up at the bronze snake, when He was Prophesying His Own Passion to Nicodemus. All who looked up to Him Reverence would have their sins Forgiven. This was for all time. Yet, The Passion was at a certain time in history. Images of Christ on the Cross, brings to us His Passion in our own time. One final question for you, Karl? Do you by any chance know what worship actually is?
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 3, 2017 23:08:04 GMT
Hell is the Eternal Separation from God. If a soul is in Hell, it means his/her sins will never be Forgiven. Yet, in St. Matthew's Gospel, Christ Said that it is possible for some sins to be Forgiven after death. Therefore, there is a third state. No, that does not follow. The logical conclusion is that you can be forgiven even if in hell. Otherwise, you'd be placing limitations on God. Interpretation. Why is it not mentioned anywhere in the Bible? Besides, I'm not saying any of the denominations are right. Not being a Christian, I do not cling to the need for the Bible to be internally consistent, and thus am free to see contradictions as they appear. Same difference. A photo of a person is an accurate depiction of that person. I do not carry a rough wood carving of my fiancé in my wallet. Do you have a photograph of Jesus? It doesn't. Neither does an effigy of God represent God - from a theological point of view. When you see a figurine of Jesus, you are not looking at Jesus - you are looking at the artist's idea of Jesus. To think that that piece of human craftsmanship can help you get better in touch with God is silly. All who looked upon him - not effigies of him. Absolutely I do - I wasn't always an atheist. I am beginning to wonder if you know what worship is, as you do not even seem aware of the pagan roots of your worship. Your kind of worship is not special or true just because it gives you a special feeling. That holds true for every worshipper of every religion - even cargo cultists.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on May 3, 2017 23:40:25 GMT
Hell is the Eternal Separation from God. If a soul is in Hell, it means his/her sins will never be Forgiven. Yet, in St. Matthew's Gospel, Christ Said that it is possible for some sins to be Forgiven after death. Therefore, there is a third state. No, that does not follow. The logical conclusion is that you can be forgiven even if in hell. Otherwise, you'd be placing limitations on God. Interpretation. Why is it not mentioned anywhere in the Bible? Besides, I'm not saying any of the denominations are right. Not being a Christian, I do not cling to the need for the Bible to be internally consistent, and thus am free to see contradictions as they appear. Same difference. A photo of a person is an accurate depiction of that person. I do not carry a rough wood carving of my fiancé in my wallet. Do you have a photograph of Jesus? It doesn't. Neither does an effigy of God represent God - from a theological point of view. When you see a figurine of Jesus, you are not looking at Jesus - you are looking at the artist's idea of Jesus. To think that that piece of human craftsmanship can help you get better in touch with God is silly. All who looked upon him - not effigies of him. Absolutely I do - I wasn't always an atheist. I am beginning to wonder if you know what worship is, as you do not even seem aware of the pagan roots of your worship. Your kind of worship is not special or true just because it gives you a special feeling. That holds true for every worshipper of every religion - even cargo cultists. So you go by the Orthodox position on Hell then...? Because they pray for the souls in Hell, & even for the Devil himself & his minions. The Catholic position on praying for the Devil is the same as the Protestant position: It is an exercise in futility. St. Matthew chapter 25, verse 46 says Hell is eternal punishment. You claim your not saying that any Christian denomination is right, yet you are siding against the dawglf (a Protestant who is both anti-catholic & anti-orthodox) against me (a Catholic). No, kneeling & bowing are not the same difference. They are a DIFFERENT difference. The Shroud of Turin shows an accurate Portrait of Our Lord Jesus. Anyhow, there has always been art, but, actual photography is historically new. Even before photography was made, people had made paintings an art of people & things. We know when we look at an icon of the Lord Jesus, even if it is in error, it was the artist's loving & honest attempt to portray Him. It helps the Christian to think about Him more deeply. So, by your own POV, only followers in Christ's Own Day have been Saved? Because, only they got to see the actual event. Okay. You say that you know what worship actually is, yet. you did not mention what it is. Tell us what it is, & I will tell you if you are right or not.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 4, 2017 0:02:15 GMT
So you go by the Orthodox position on Hell then...? Because they pray for the souls in Hell, & even for the Devil himself & his minions. The Catholic position on praying for the Devil is the same as the Protestant position: It is an exercise in futility. The notion that the devil can (and even will) be saved eventually, is also present in Islam. I was raised Protestant, by the way, though always had an inquisitive mind. Even when I admitted to myself that I no longer believed, however, I remained fascinated by Scripture and theology. I could also talk about the devil and how that is a complete deviation from the monotheistic practice of Judaism (where the satan works for God, not against him), and causing Christianity to be a duotheistic religion, but that's a topic all its own. I am not under any obligation to side for or against anyone. Like yourself, I calls 'em like I sees 'em. No, they are both done in subservience. To bow down before someone symbolises the exact same thing as kneeling before them. A celebrated fake. It has no providence. It first appeared in a period where hundreds, thousands of relics appeared all over Europe. Pieces of the True Cross, the Spear of Destiny, various body parts of the apostles etc. But no portraits of Jesus or Mary until long after they had ceased to be. How? Either it makes you falsely assume pictoral accuracy, or it makes you think about the artist more deeply. How did you arrive at that conclusion? Oh, you are the judge of what worship is or isn't, are you?
|
|
|
Post by general313 on May 4, 2017 0:14:51 GMT
Wrong!!! Everything the Catholic Church teaches can be backed up by Sacred Scripture. Protestants do not understand Scripture to realize that the Catholic doctrine is backed up by it. It's part of the Ten Commandments, but not if you're a Catholic. In Jewish tradition, depictions of God or anything holy have been considered grave blasphemy. Yet Catholics are happy to make all sorts of graven images of Jesus (and of Mary), and bow down to them as if these man-made creations possess any more of God's holiness than the kitchen sink. They are doing precisely what the Bible explicitly and unequivocally forbids in this regard. I don't recall the New Testament making any proscriptions on images, so it could be argued that the O.T. ones no longer apply under the New Dispensation, just like shellfish or mixed fabrics. I guess in this case it would mean that one of the Ten Commandments had expired, or that its wording was misinterpreted. Anyway, it's a good thing that the Catholic Church went complacent on this; I always thought the Muslim Mosques lost something by being deprived of images and especially statuary. Imagine what would happen to Florence or Rome if the Taliban had their way there.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on May 4, 2017 0:48:09 GMT
As soon as someone claims the Shroud of Turin shows an accurate depiction of Jesus you know you're arguing with an imbecile.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on May 4, 2017 3:35:42 GMT
So you go by the Orthodox position on Hell then...? Because they pray for the souls in Hell, & even for the Devil himself & his minions. The Catholic position on praying for the Devil is the same as the Protestant position: It is an exercise in futility. The notion that the devil can (and even will) be saved eventually, is also present in Islam. I was raised Protestant, by the way, though always had an inquisitive mind. Even when I admitted to myself that I no longer believed, however, I remained fascinated by Scripture and theology. I could also talk about the devil and how that is a complete deviation from the monotheistic practice of Judaism (where the satan works for God, not against him), and causing Christianity to be a duotheistic religion, but that's a topic all its own. I am not under any obligation to side for or against anyone. Like yourself, I calls 'em like I sees 'em. No, they are both done in subservience. To bow down before someone symbolises the exact same thing as kneeling before them. A celebrated fake. It has no providence. It first appeared in a period where hundreds, thousands of relics appeared all over Europe. Pieces of the True Cross, the Spear of Destiny, various body parts of the apostles etc. But no portraits of Jesus or Mary until long after they had ceased to be. How? Either it makes you falsely assume pictoral accuracy, or it makes you think about the artist more deeply. How did you arrive at that conclusion? Oh, you are the judge of what worship is or isn't, are you? We are not Muslim. We are Christian. What Muslims believe isn't being discussed here. In Christianity, Satan is still a created being by God, as opposed to Zoroastrianism, where the Devil (known in that religion as Angra Mainvu) is the god of evil, and has been around as long as God (known as Ahura Mazda, the God of Goodness) has been. Kneeling is done in reverence, because these represent God's Saints. We stand out of respect for our national anthems. Those of us who are under the authority of the Queen (or any other royal personage) will likewise stand, kneel, etc., out of respect. St. Luke drew an icon of Mary & the Christ Child. You posted that "All who looked upon him - not effigies of him." So I ask again: Does that mean only the disciples of Christ that were present at His Actual Passion, are Saved, by your own POV? I know what worship actual is. I want to know if you do too.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on May 4, 2017 9:51:59 GMT
tpfkar You make comparisons to Muslims yourself. Satan was created to carry out the evil of God. You pray to Mary in heaven. Kneeling for the Queen is definitely a form of self-humbling and worship. St. Judas did god's bidding. For you, worship is whatever the Catholic hierarchy has determined for you. If other monotheistic religions do it, it obviously means that it is not breaking the First Commandment to do so. We have far more reason to honour the Blessed Virgin Mary, than Muslims do Muhammad, & yet, most Protestant divisions barely pay any lip service to her, whatsoever.
|
|