POPE SAME AS JESUS

Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
glassjester said:
I assume by "tie together," you mean Catholic doctrine is consistent, and not self-contradictory. Yet, you say it like it's a bad thing. Isn't logical consistency and coherence good?

Is this property of Catholic doctrine somehow contrasted by protestant doctrine? Does protestant doctrine not all "tie together?" That seems like it would be a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I don't know if 'consistent' is the right word for it. It ties itself together with all manners of oddities and legalities. So while it is consistent in not necessarily being contradictory, it's also held together with weak glue.

Protestant doctrine, at it's core, is consistent. Calvinism is extremely consistent, and it's ironically the reason many people do not like it- it's rigid and can't be bent to one's convenience.

The problem with the Protestant world is that so many people have ran off with their own adulteration of properly Reformed doctrine, which has caused denominations to spiral out of control.
 
brewmama

brewmama

New member
HisServant said:
Next!

Almost every Romanist I know is prideful and puffed up because they believe they are a member of the church christ started (which is demonstrably false).
Click to expand...


1 Corinthians 4:6

"Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other."

Hmmm. Funny how St. Paul contradicts himself, according to you, as he says

2 Thessalonians 2:15
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."

1 Corinthians 11:2

" I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you."
[Which he does not list, so obviously they got them some other way]

Precisely what Paul does not do is give the Corinthians the slightest indication that his writings alone are the word of God or that they will someday contain everything he has delivered extra-biblically. Nowhere does he say, “One of these days we’ll crystallize what we’re saying into a complete New Testament, but until then just stick with the clunky and unreliable tradition we gave you.” On the contrary, he praises them for remembering his "paradosis" (traditions) , which has already been handed on to them before his letters were written, and urges them to stick to both his letters and this extra-biblical tradition.

Now that particular verse you use (and took beyond what is written!) seems to have a specific meaning, as it is in quotes. So what is the specific meaning? After Paul's first visit to Corinth, to establish the Church, he discovered that the church was in the process of splitting with some factions claiming they belonged to "Paul" others to "Peter" and still others claiming to have a relationship with "JESUS" that no other group had.
Paul's declaration not to go beyond what is written ( or set down) was intended to bring the Church back to the faith and away from all the factions that were splitting the Church through the different interpretations and claims of authority.

So once again, you are cherry-picking, misinterpreting, and going beyond what is written, and claiming that somehow St. Paul is schizophrenic by making opposing claims. He is not.
 
Cruciform

Cruciform

New member
HisServant said:
Its been done by many on this board, you just refuse to accept the objective truth.
Click to expand...
So, then, you can provide no actual proof whatsoever. That's what I thought. :yawn:

Also, still waiting for the proof requested in Post #41 as well. Let's have it.
 
H

HisServant

New member
glassjester said:
And you are puffed up by this belief?
Click to expand...

Nope, not at all.. we are who we are and belonging to any particular sect or church should not puff people up like it does to you. As a matter of fact, the new testament is full of warnings about taking pride in who baptized you or what church you belong to... so much so that Paul stopped baptizing.
 
H

HisServant

New member
brewmama said:
1 Corinthians 4:6

"Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other."

Hmmm. Funny how St. Paul contradicts himself, according to you, as he says

2 Thessalonians 2:15
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."

1 Corinthians 11:2

" I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you."
[Which he does not list, so obviously they got them some other way]

Precisely what Paul does not do is give the Corinthians the slightest indication that his writings alone are the word of God or that they will someday contain everything he has delivered extra-biblically. Nowhere does he say, “One of these days we’ll crystallize what we’re saying into a complete New Testament, but until then just stick with the clunky and unreliable tradition we gave you.” On the contrary, he praises them for remembering his "paradosis" (traditions) , which has already been handed on to them before his letters were written, and urges them to stick to both his letters and this extra-biblical tradition.

Now that particular verse you use (and took beyond what is written!) seems to have a specific meaning, as it is in quotes. So what is the specific meaning? After Paul's first visit to Corinth, to establish the Church, he discovered that the church was in the process of splitting with some factions claiming they belonged to "Paul" others to "Peter" and still others claiming to have a relationship with "JESUS" that no other group had.
Paul's declaration not to go beyond what is written ( or set down) was intended to bring the Church back to the faith and away from all the factions that were splitting the Church through the different interpretations and claims of authority.

So once again, you are cherry-picking, misinterpreting, and going beyond what is written, and claiming that somehow St. Paul is schizophrenic by making opposing claims. He is not.
Click to expand...

And once again, you cannot point to and prove what traditions he is specifically talking about... and you cannot deny that the RCC is full of traditions that the Apostles knew nothing about.
 
brewmama

brewmama

New member
HisServant said:
And once again, you cannot point to and prove what traditions he is specifically talking about... and you cannot deny that the RCC is full of traditions that the Apostles knew nothing about.
Click to expand...

Of course I can. Worship, liturgy, sacraments, hierarchy, all the stuff they didn't have to spell out specifically in the NT because everyone knew it. (Although they are all supported Biblically).

And the RCC may have some traditions that the Apostles didn't know, but so do the Protestants.

I don't really care about either.
 
brewmama

brewmama

New member
HisServant said:
Nope, not at all.. we are who we are and belonging to any particular sect or church should not puff people up like it does to you. As a matter of fact, the new testament is full of warnings about taking pride in who baptized you or what church you belong to... so much so that Paul stopped baptizing.
Click to expand...

Hebrews 13:17
Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.
 
glassjester

glassjester

Well-known member
HisServant said:
Nope, not at all.. we are who we are and belonging to any particular sect or church should not puff people up like it does to you. As a matter of fact, the new testament is full of warnings about taking pride in who baptized you or what church you belong to... so much so that Paul stopped baptizing.
Click to expand...

Why do you accuse me of this? At what point did I claim any special merit or special accomplishment of myself?

If it is possible for you to truly believe that you are a member of the Church founded by Christ, without becoming a complete prig, why can't you stomach the idea that the same is possible for me?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top