What would make you Catholic?

[Lon]

We're talking in circles. If Scripture was perspicuous, there could be no contradictory doctrine amongst the sola-scriptura denominations.

It depends what 'you' (or another) want them perspicuous for. Clear doesn't always mean sufficient or vice versa. Peter says some of Paul's writings are 'difficult' which may lead one to assume a need but Paul says they are clear enough toward a specific end: that the man of God may be 'thoroughly' equipped.

Scripture thoroughly equips a man of God for every good work. Surely Lutherans, while holding to sola scriptura, consider infant baptism to be a good work. Therefore, Scripture must have equipped them for it.

The scripture addresses baptism. I don't see a lot of clarity, however concerning infant baptism, where I do concerning confessional baptism.

Yet, Scripture did not equip you for that particular work. So how did the Lutherans get it wrong? Or how did you? Did the Lutherans read their Bible wrong? If that's possible to do, then how did you learn to read it "right"?

You are making a logical or illogical assumption concerning the clarity, thus sufficiency of scripture. It is important here to say that even though you bow to the RC authority, you still are responsible for carrying your objection to forum, thus it is your interpretation vs another, just the same. Simply adhering to the RC doesn't automatically make it the default or genuine, else I'd not be a Protestant. There are 'superiority authority' assertions that are always foundational to a Protestant/Catholic discussion and it is the bedrock of the disagreement.

A Catholic tricycle would have AS as the big wheel with scripture and tradition supporting. The Protestant tricycle has Scripture as the big wheel while church authority and congregational observance and traditions support one's interaction with God. The Holy Spirit's work could make quad vehicles of the illustration for both, but our expectation of which is most important is the focus on this part of disagreement. For me, the scriptures themselves are self-attesting and cannot be wrong or I'd have to go it alone like some of the fruit-cakes on TOL who run after other texts instead of the Bible, or I'd have to be Catholic or Orthodox, or depend solely on the Holy Spirit. See, we all have to go to some authority, and we all choose which one that will be. This is a thread about you (not the RC persay) being right in your choice, by assertion. Conversely, I'm saying scripture is sufficient while also recognizing it is personally sufficient for me to be Godly, to be equipped thoroughly, and for reproof, correction, and training. Why? Because I'd have to doubt God's Word not to accept it on its own terms. For me, that trumps anything you can say because it says it of its self. For me, that's an end/game.

 

[Right Divider]

I guess we'd better not pursue this discussion to its logical conclusion.

The Spirit of God is what illuminates the Word of God.

Your "church" is in darkness and does not help anyone.

 

[Lon]

Well according to that quote, only the Old Testament is "sufficient", since that is what they were referring to. So you don't use the New Testament, right?

Why? In this thread, I have an instance of Paul quoting two of the gospels, thus he was aware of them. Peter also tells us that all of Paul's writings are scripture. You also understand the Protestant Bible is smaller, I'd assume. Such means we have a different book than you. The RC makes a few assumptions regarding the compilation, but both the Coptic and Orthodox churches also have scriptures preserved, so there are some Catholic assumptions that I don't think play out historically well regarding the scriptures. I'm not against all tradition of the RC on that point, just the traditions that don't sit well with scripture. That is also why we only have 66 books. We don't rely on the same things Catholics do to collate them. As such, I am not under papal authority. That alone is your embrace/burden because scripture, some tradition including the creeds, and older men in the faith makes AS redundant for us. In a way, what keeps us from being Catholic, are Catholics. They ousted the Arians, and that makes sense, but they ousted Jansenists, and they ousted Luther, and etc. We are separate 'because' we were ousted. It doesn't make sense for the RC to try to grab us all back in after being shoved from the door. The divorce was always messy and so we Protestants live apart from the RC and her expectations, which we don't share. In some ways, TOL is an expression of what would happen if we all got back together -Lon

 

[Cruciform]

Your "church" is in darkness and does not help anyone.

So you keep parroting, but have yet to actually demonstrate. Post your proof. :yawn:

 

[Right Divider]

So you keep parroting, but have yet to actually demonstrate. Post your proof. :yawn:

Your "church" rejects the gospel of the grace of God. It's just that simple. You are the proud pope follower that is doing the parroting.

The RCC pretends to be the kingdom of Israel. Keep up the "good" work. :dog:

 

[Cruciform]

Your "church" rejects the gospel of the grace of God.

In reality, Christ's one historic Catholic Church was preaching "the gospel of the grace of God" for a millennium-and-a-half before a single Protestant ever managed to stumble onto the scene. So much for your "proof."

You are the proud pope follower...

Ad Hominem Fallacy. Try again.

...that is doing the parroting.

No more than Protestants "proudly follow" and "parrot" the opinions of their preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects. That includes you.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Right Divider]

In reality, Christ's one historic Catholic Church was preaching "the gospel of the grace of God" for a millennium-and-a-half before a single Protestant ever managed to stumble onto the scene. So much for your "proof."

I believe what God gave to Paul before any of that stuff you speak of. And NO, Peter was NOT preaching the gospel of the grace of God, which is MORE proof that you have NO idea what it is.

Ad Hominem Fallacy. Try again.

No, it's a fact.

No more than Protestants "proudly follow" and "parrot" the opinions of their preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects. That includes you.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

No, I follow God in righteousness and truth. Something that you know nothing about.

 

[Nick M]

I guess we'd better not pursue this discussion to its logical conclusion.

Believe what it says. Nice try.

 

[Cruciform]

I believe what God gave to Paul before any of that stuff you speak of. And NO, Peter was NOT preaching the gospel of the grace of God, which is MORE proof that you have NO idea what it is.

Sorry, but we---that is, the vast majority of Christians on this forum, both Protestant and Catholic---simply don't buy into the opinions you've been fed by your entirely non-authoritative recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.

No, it's a fact.

Already answered in a previous post. Your comment was, by definition, a Straw Man Fallacy. Nice try, though.

No, I follow God in righteousness and truth. Something that you know nothing about.

The simple fact is that you "follow God" only according to the assumptions and opinions that you have derived from your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, a fact that you demonstrate every single time you state your opinion on this forum.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[glassjester]

Believe what it says. Nice try.

Believe what?

 

[Right Divider]

Sorry, but we---that is, the vast majority of Christians on this forum, both Protestant and Catholic---simply don't buy into the opinions you've been fed by your entirely non-authoritative recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect.

LOL....

I guess that it has escaped your sharp eye that the majority has ALWAYS been wrong; that the majority has ALWAYS rejected what God actually says.

During Jesus' time on earth, the majority of HIS people rejected Him. Today, the majority of "Christians"... including your man-made religion from hell, reject what God is doing.

You prefer the religion of appearances, just like the leadership of Israel in Jesus' day.

Already answered in a previous post. Your comment was, by definition, a Straw Man Fallacy. Nice try, though.

Stick with your religion, it's going to end very poorly for you.

The simple fact is that you "follow God" only according to the assumptions and opinions that you have derived from your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, a fact that you demonstrate every single time you state your opinion on this forum.

No, I follow Him in truth from His Word.... the Bible and led by His Spirit.... something that you would know nothing about.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I hope that you come to God on His terms and get out of that den of thieves.

 

[KingdomRose]

Non-Catholics - what evidence would convince you that the Catholic Church was and is the Church founded by Christ?

You'd have to somehow erase the centuries of violence and greed and bloodshed that are associated with the Church. You'd have to blot out the Inquisition, the Holocaust, all the wars encouraged by the Vatican, the Rat-Line that shuffled Nazi war criminals to South America, and the relentless on-going of pedophilia practiced by the Church's priests, to name but a few things that show clearly that Jesus is NOT involved with this Church at all.

 

[Cruciform]

...the majority has ALWAYS been wrong; that the majority has ALWAYS rejected what God actually says. During Jesus' time on earth, the majority of HIS people rejected Him. Today, the majority of "Christians"...reject what God is doing.

That certainly explains the 500-year-long phenomenon of Protestantism ITSELF: 50,000+ entirely non-authoritative, competing and contradictory recently-invented man-made non-Catholic sects---including yours---with more being concocted every week. Brilliant. :yawn:

You prefer the religion of appearances...

Rather, I prefer that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D., and against which he declared that the gates of Hades would never prevail (Mt. 16:18-19; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15), that is, the Catholic Church.

Stick with your religion...

I'll certainly stick with Christ's one historic Church. :up:

...it's going to end very poorly for you.

Proof, please.

No, I follow Him in truth from His Word...

"...from His Word" according to the opinions of your favored entirely non-authoritative recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, anyway.

...the Bible and led by His Spirit...something that you would know nothing about.

Ad Hominem Fallacy. Don't bother. :yawn:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+