What would make you Catholic?

[Lon]

The problem with this ideology is that two contradictory doctrines can be equally "biblical." Every heresy has its proof texts.

Maybe a specific example would be worth talking about. What's the biblical-hence-orthodox teaching on infant baptism?

By example? None persay, but you can derive it with Acts where it says he and his whole household were baptized. Which is it? For some this is a huge issue. Because Protestants see it as an outward sign/confession of an inward change and that it signifies identity in Christ, I'm not as hung up with childhood baptism with ensuing confirmation.

Was that a teaching/doctrinal disagreement?

This is something the RC is more hung up on that I am. What we do know is that Barnabas parted ways with Paul at this point, because of the disagreement. The important point is that it wasn't wrong for Barnabas to leave Paul the Apostle. AS Catholicism is under the impression that a disagreement and separation is not sanctioned by God. It is the difference between what we view 'church' is.

 

[Cruciform]

Why am I not surprised? :doh: The man with more Catholic websites than Carter's got pills

Did you not ask for "the scriptural basis for infant baptism"? My cited source provides exactly that. Why, then, are you now complaining about receiving the very information that you yourself requested?

 

[Cruciform]

I did not ask if the Lutherans were right. I asked if it was scriptural to which Crux. immediately brought in one of his websites instead of relying on his own scholarship.

I rely on "my own scholarship" at least as much as you do, friend.

 

[Cruciform]

No... we got a link with zero scholarship and just a list of unrelated verses.

...claims HS, mindlessly parroting the opinions of his chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect. :yawn:

 

[CabinetMaker]

Based on the witness provided by the resident Catholic's on this site for their church, there is nothing short of direct intervention by God that would make me return to RCC.

 

[Cruciform]

Based on the witness provided by the resident Catholic's on this site for their church, there is nothing short of direct intervention by God that would make me return to RCC.

If the indirect intervention of God in presenting you with the truth doesn't draw you to Christ's Church, then neither would God's direct intervention. Your transparent excuse for deliberately ignoring the truth, however, is noted.

 

[CabinetMaker]

If the indirect intervention of God in presenting you with the truth doesn't draw you to Christ's Church, then neither would God's direct intervention. Your transparent excuse for deliberately ignoring the truth, however, is noted.

How can you say with absolute certainty that it was not God's direct intervention that put me exactly where He wants me.

 

[Cruciform]

How can you say with absolute certainty that it was not God's direct intervention that put me exactly where He wants me.

If God wants you to go through life in separation from Christ's one historic Church, instead to be joined with one of the schismatic recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects that have cropped up over the past few centuries, then I can concede your point. I hardly think that's God's intention, however.

As for your above question, the Jehovah's Witness who knocks on my door could very well ask the same thing. My answer to him would be the same as my answer to you.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[everready]

If God wants you to go through life in separation from Christ's one historic Church, instead to be joined with one of the schismatic recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects that have cropped up over the past few centuries, then I can concede your point. I hardly think that's God's intention, however.

As for your above question, the Jehovah's Witness who knocks on my door could very well ask the same thing. My answer to him would be the same as my answer to you.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

Are you referring to this historic church with the Babylonian Sun Wheel and the Obelisk representing Baal's Shaft that leads up to the door?

everready

 

[glassjester]

I did not ask if the Lutherans were right. I asked if it was scriptural to which Crux. immediately brought in one of his websites instead of relying on his own scholarship.

You don't have to think they're right for the purposes of this particular conversation. What the Lutheran example shows is that two people (or denominations) can both claim sola scriptura, and yet support mutually exclusive doctrines.

If Scripture was formally sufficient (as sola scriptura necessitates), then this would not be possible.

By example? None persay, but you can derive it with Acts where it says he and his whole household were baptized. Which is it?

So is the Bible sufficient for answering this question?

 

[HisServant]

You don't have to think they're right for the purposes of this particular conversation. What the Lutheran example shows is that two people (or denominations) can both claim sola scriptura, and yet support mutually exclusive doctrines.

If Scripture was formally sufficient (as sola scriptura necessitates), then this would not be possible.





So is the Bible sufficient for answering this question?

Most of they differences are nothing more than straining at gnats and mans insistence to go beyond was was originally taught and dream up interpretations on their own.... nothing different from what the professionals did (roman catholics)... at the end of the day its all about power over life and death.

 

[glassjester]

Most of they differences are nothing more than straining at gnats and mans insistence to go beyond was was originally taught and dream up interpretations on their own.... nothing different from what the professionals did (roman catholics)... at the end of the day its all about power over life and death.

Is determining whether sola scriptura is true, really just straining at gnats to you?

I think it's important.

 

[everready]

Is determining whether sola scriptura is true, really just straining at gnats to you?

I think it's important.

It is important, the papacy adding to Gods word is a fulfillment of prophecy.

Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.


everready

 

[Lon]

You don't have to think they're right for the purposes of this particular conversation. What the Lutheran example shows is that two people (or denominations) can both claim sola scriptura, and yet support mutually exclusive doctrines.

If Scripture was formally sufficient (as sola scriptura necessitates), then this would not be possible.


So is the Bible sufficient for answering this question?

I believe so. This particular isn't something I'd split a church over. I realize it is a legitimate separating issue however.

 

[glassjester]

I believe so.

Then, Scripture being formally sufficient (perspicuous), without any need of interpretation or external explanation, the answer should be readily available to all who read.

Should infants be baptized?

 

[CabinetMaker]

If God wants you to go through life in separation from Christ's one historic Church, instead to be joined with one of the schismatic recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects that have cropped up over the past few centuries, then I can concede your point. I hardly think that's God's intention, however.

As for your above question, the Jehovah's Witness who knocks on my door could very well ask the same thing. My answer to him would be the same as my answer to you.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

And who are you to say otherwise? Who made you judge over others faith?

 

[Lon]

Then, Scripture being formally sufficient (perspicuous), without any need of interpretation or external explanation, the answer should be readily available to all who read.

Should infants be baptized?

I believe that infants shouldn't be, but I've heard others make a cogent argument. For me, it is an accommodation, rather than how I believe scripture observes and practices it. More important to this would be if it is indeed church splitting. You are free to disagree with Catholics on some things. Is this one of them?

I know this is a bit off the beaten path of the OP, but it might help answer it regarding what a Catholic can and cannot disagree with to remain a Catholic. It becomes one of many, so I'm not wanting to pursue it too far other than drawing distinction between Protestant and Catholic according to the OP. I'd imagine you are pursuing a thought regarding the OP as well. Thanks. -Lon

 

[jamie]

Should infants be baptized?

Infants don't sin.

 

[heir]

What would make you Catholic?

Romans through Philemon ripped out of my Bible?
A seducing spirit?

 

[glassjester]

I believe that infants shouldn't be, but I've heard others make a cogent argument.

Then Scripture is not formally sufficient.