Discussion:
Established On Christ
(too old to reply)
Frank
2008-02-05 01:44:13 UTC
Permalink
Christ established the Protestant Reformation
on knowing the imputation of his righteousness.
He did that so that people would know to place
all their trust in him for salvation and so be saved
and continue doing so to be ready for his coming.
Let no one neglect to understand what he showed.

http://roines.home.mindspring.com
Trevor
2008-02-07 01:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank
Christ established the Protestant Reformation
on knowing the imputation of his righteousness.
He did that so that people would know to place
all their trust in him for salvation and so be saved
and continue doing so to be ready for his coming.
Let no one neglect to understand what he showed.
http://roines.home.mindspring.com
Yay protestantism! I was raised my whole life Catholic and nearly
graduating high school I'd like to figure I can make decisions for
myself. I think that it has become to hierarchal. I mean, I pray to the
lord Christ Jesus, not to some random guy in a robe that I really wish I
owned heheh. The concept of the Pope bothers me a little too because
it's almost like people are following his word over Jesus' word.

No offense to devout Catholics, that's just what I think.

---

[Of course Catholics don't actually pray to the Pope. --clh]
Bob Crowley
2008-02-11 01:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Trevor
Post by Frank
Christ established the Protestant Reformation
on knowing the imputation of his righteousness.
He did that so that people would know to place
all their trust in him for salvation and so be saved
and continue doing so to be ready for his coming.
Let no one neglect to understand what he showed.
http://roines.home.mindspring.com
Yay protestantism! I was raised my whole life Catholic and nearly
graduating high school I'd like to figure I can make decisions for
myself. I think that it has become to hierarchal. I mean, I pray to the
lord Christ Jesus, not to some random guy in a robe that I really wish I
owned heheh. The concept of the Pope bothers me a little too because
it's almost like people are following his word over Jesus' word.
No offense to devout Catholics, that's just what I think.
=A0 ---
[Of course Catholics don't actually pray to the Pope. --clh]
I'm a Catholic who used to be Protestant. As far as I'm concerned the
Catholic Church is closest to the truth. I have a coupleo f
disagreements with the Catholic Church, mainly on the definition of
"infallibility" and the contraceptive pill. "Infallibility" would be
better translated as "binding". I'm not sure whether Peter's summary
judgement of Ananias and Sapphira was "infallible" but Heaven endorsed
his authority with frightening speed.

If we're going to depend on nothing more than personal opinion to
interpret Scripture, we'll end up with massive division.

And that's precisely what has happened to Protestantism. They can't
even agree amongst themselves what they believe.
How many divided sects are there now? Thirty thousand or so? Where's
their obedience to Christ's demand for unity?
Bob Crowley
2008-02-12 03:28:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Crowley
Post by Trevor
Post by Frank
Christ established the Protestant Reformation
on knowing the imputation of his righteousness.
He did that so that people would know to place
all their trust in him for salvation and so be saved
and continue doing so to be ready for his coming.
Let no one neglect to understand what he showed.
http://roines.home.mindspring.com
Yay protestantism! I was raised my whole life Catholic and nearly
graduating high school I'd like to figure I can make decisions for
myself. I think that it has become to hierarchal. I mean, I pray to the
lord Christ Jesus, not to some random guy in a robe that I really wish I
owned heheh. The concept of the Pope bothers me a little too because
it's almost like people are following his word over Jesus' word.
No offense to devout Catholics, that's just what I think.
=A0 ---
[Of course Catholics don't actually pray to the Pope. --clh]
I'm a Catholic who used to be Protestant. As far as I'm concerned the
Catholic Church is closest to the truth. I have a coupleo f
disagreements with the Catholic Church, mainly on the definition of
"infallibility" and the contraceptive pill. "Infallibility" would be
better translated as "binding". I'm not sure whether Peter's summary
judgement of Ananias and Sapphira was "infallible" but Heaven endorsed
his authority with frightening speed.
If we're going to depend on nothing more than personal opinion to
interpret Scripture, we'll end up with massive division.
And that's precisely what has happened to Protestantism. They can't
even agree amongst themselves what they believe.
How many divided sects are there now? Thirty thousand or so? Where's
their obedience to Christ's demand for unity?
I might add now that I'm getting close to abandoning Catholicism,
mainly on account of Ratzinger's endorsement of evolution.

No doubt this contradicts what I said in my last post, but I've been
arguing with atheists on another group, with mixed results. But if
the church endorses evolution, I may as well not bother.

So I've already stopped arguing with them. It's not worth it.

So I'll probably end up going back to Protestantism. The doctrine of
Papal Infallibility did not, in my opinion, come from the Holy Spirit,
but was simply the opinion of a bunch of hardline Ultramontantists in
a blue funk with a revolution going on outside and reacting to the
mistreatement of Pius whatever he was.

It seems Almighty God can't even tell His own Pope what His own method
of origins is, nor can He even tell His own Pope what His own policy
is on His own Gift, the contraceptive pill.

How's that for an endorsement of a CEO?
s***@yahoo.com
2008-02-13 02:50:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Crowley
disagreements with the Catholic Church, mainly on the definition of
"infallibility" and the contraceptive pill.
I had a big laugh when I picked up a book about the history of the
contraceptive pill, which it turns out was developed by a guy who
was a good Catholic who wanted to fulfill the churches admonition
to use natural family planning.

Please don't let these little "political footballs" define your faith
tradition.
Everybody is different. This is a big part of how God made us. Every
congregation is different too, and the different church heirarchies
have
thier value. It doesn't have to be a big deal. We can still get
together and
do good work.

Nils K. Hammer
Matthew Johnson
2008-02-13 02:50:25 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Post by Bob Crowley
I might add now that I'm getting close to abandoning Catholicism,
mainly on account of Ratzinger's endorsement of evolution.
That is the most surprising reason for "abandoning Catholicism" I have heard in
a long time.
--
-----------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
Quidquid boni habet tribuat illi a quo factus est
(Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus, Ser. 96)
Bob Crowley
2008-02-14 04:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Johnson
[snip]
Post by Bob Crowley
I might add now that I'm getting close to abandoning Catholicism,
mainly on account of Ratzinger's endorsement of evolution.
That is the most surprising reason for "abandoning Catholicism" I have heard in
a long time.
--
-----------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
Quidquid boni habet tribuat illi a quo factus est
(Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus, Ser. 96)
I have 3 major beefs with Catholicism, not just one.

First, I don't accept the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, which as
far as I'm concerned was nothing more than a jaundiced opinion of
hardline Ultramontanists, reacting against an age of Revolution and
the treatment meted out to Pius IX by revoultionaries. The only way
his role could be restored was by French military power, such that
"the world was treated to the spectacle of the Father of all the
Faithful seated on bayonets, and ruling, rather ineptly, 3,000,000
subjects, most of whom wanted to be rid of him."("Saints and Sinners"
- Eamon Duffy)

Great grounds for establishing a doctrine of Infalliblity. I accept
the business of a ruling being "binding", as exemplified by Peter's
summary execution of Ananias and Sapphira, carried out by the agency
of the Holy Spirit. But Peter himself, the first "Pope" allowed his
fallibility to shine through in all four Gospels. He had to be
rebuked by Paul for trying to reintroduce Judaism into Christianity.
If Paul hadn't pulled him into line, we'd all have been circumcised
and eating kosher food as part of Catholic 'infallible" doctrine.
Another great start for the "Infallibility doctrine"!

Secondly, I believe the contraceptive was God's gift, given at the
very time that population pressures were becoming a real problem.
It's noteworthy that in Mexico and the Phillipines, rather than
contributing fruitful ideas as to how to reduce poverty, the church's
own ruling encourages the sort of attitude that sees people living on
rubbish tips. Personally I think God has already killed JP1 over the
matter. He lasted 30 days in office before kicking the bucket,
despite being elected by an "infallible" magisterium. I think Christ
told him to rescind the ruling on the pill, and he did not. As it is,
about half of all fertilised ova are flushed down the toilet, even if
no contraceptives are not used. Around the world, that must amount to
millions every year, probably hundreds of millions due to natural
effects, maybe a billion or more. It's pretty clear God's not overly
worried about the loss of quite a few fertilised ova up to whatever
state of division they happen to have reached. The ban on fhe
contraceptive pill also provides an excuse for abortionists. And the
fact so many CAtholic families are no longer the large families they
used to be means that a lot of ordinary Catholics treat the ruling
with contempt. They're the ones who have to feed, educate, house,
clothe and care for the kids - not the Cardinals living in high pomp
in the Vatican and expensive houses.

Third, the current Pope intends to hold a "conference" on evolution,
no doubt with the intention of promoting it as official Catholic
teaching. Yet the theory is so full of holes it isn't funny.

If he had an ounce of honesty, he'd hold a DEBATE, with both sides
allowed to put their viewpoints across.

Between these three things, I think I've had enough of Catholic
"infallibility".

I'm pretty close to leaving.
Matthew Johnson
2008-02-15 03:08:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Crowley
Post by Matthew Johnson
[snip]
Post by Bob Crowley
I might add now that I'm getting close to abandoning Catholicism,
mainly on account of Ratzinger's endorsement of evolution.
That is the most surprising reason for "abandoning Catholicism" I
have heard in a long time.
I have 3 major beefs with Catholicism, not just one.
Any of those other two among the three would be less surprising than
endorsement of evolution.
Post by Bob Crowley
First, I don't accept the doctrine of Papal Infallibility,
Lot of 'Catholics' have trouble with this one -- which leaves many
wondering why _they_ stay there.

I hope it comes as no surprise to you that the Orthodox have a dim
view of "papal infallibility" also.
Post by Bob Crowley
which as far as I'm concerned was nothing more than a jaundiced
opinion of hardline Ultramontanists,
Unfortunately, it dates back much longer than that, even if it really
did harden and crystalize then.
Post by Bob Crowley
Secondly, I believe the contraceptive was God's gift, given at the
very time that population pressures were becoming a real problem.
Now I think you are over-simplifying.
Post by Bob Crowley
It's noteworthy that in Mexico and the Phillipines, rather than
contributing fruitful ideas as to how to reduce poverty, the church's
own ruling encourages the sort of attitude that sees people living on
rubbish tips.
I don't believe this is true. Even if Mexicans and Phillipinos had
taken the same attitude to contraception we Americans have had for so
long, they would _still_ be reduced to living on rubbish tips. The
socio-economic systems are that messed up there.
Post by Bob Crowley
Personally I think God has already killed JP1 over the
matter.
Now that is simply unchristian to think or say.

[snip]
Post by Bob Crowley
Third, the current Pope intends to hold a "conference" on evolution,
no doubt with the intention of promoting it as official Catholic
teaching. Yet the theory is so full of holes it isn't funny.
No, it is not "full of holes". Rather, _every_ argument against it is
"full of holes".
Post by Bob Crowley
If he had an ounce of honesty, he'd hold a DEBATE, with both sides
allowed to put their viewpoints across.
The debate has been going on for over a century now. The answer is
pretty clear: evolution is basically correct, its critics are mainly
charlatans and quacks.

If it wasn't for its atheistic tone, I would recommend the Wright
Evolution Center at
http://www.tufts.edu/as/wright_center/cosmic_evolution/docs/splash.html
as the best site on the Net summarizing the true parts of this
debate. But their tone _is_ atheistic, and it is this tone that is the
real problem, not evolution itself. It takes effort, and spirtually
guided effort to _avoid_ this tone while understanding evolution, and
this effort is what scares off both atheists and anti-evolutionists.

So I am not sure what the Roman Pope is planning to achieve at this
conference, but if he manages to highlight the problem of this tone,
then it will be a good thing.

Just for fun, see if you can find the names of the Catholic priests
who are mentioned as making _major_ contributions to the theories of
"cosmic evolution" and biological evolution at that website. I can
think of two off the top of my head.
--
-----------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
Quidquid boni habet tribuat illi a quo factus est
(Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus, Ser. 96)
George
2008-02-08 02:42:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank
Christ established the Protestant Reformation
on knowing the imputation of his righteousness.
He did that so that people would know to place
all their trust in him for salvation and so be saved
and continue doing so to be ready for his coming.
Let no one neglect to understand what he showed.
http://roines.home.mindspring.com
Odd, I thought Martin Luther established the Protestant reformation. Are
you suggesting that Martin Luther was actually Christ?

George
Loading...