Having lived in Scotland until the last 7 years of my life I have had to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortunes but never taken arms against any such troubles. Sectarianism is an evil that people in Scotland are trying to put behind them but some are reluctact to let it go.
FYI In a Cathloic mass there are three readings that we share each time. The first is from Old Testament, the second from New Testament and the third is a Gospel. One can not dispute the ideaology that Mary was indeed a Virgin, sciptures are in no way twisted.
If I may give you an example from this weeks Mass:
Second Reading, Corinthians I;10-13. 17
"Make up the differences between you instead of disagreeing among yourselves"
I do appeal to you, brothers for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, to make up the differences between you, and instead of disagreeing among yourselves, to be united in your belief and practice. From what Chloe's people have been telling me, my dear brothers, it is clear that there are serious differences among you. What I mean are all the slogans that you have, like "I am for Paul", "I am for Apollos'", "I am for Cephas", "I am for Chirst". Has Christ been parcelled out? Was it Paul that was crucified for you?
Were you baptised in the name of Paul? For Chirst did not send me to baptise, but to preach the Good News, and not to preach that in terms oh philosophy in which the crucifixion of Christ cannot be expressed.
I will not tell you or direct you how to interpret this reading simply that you digest it and if need be read it a few more times. I have no quarrel with anyone, I have no strong ideas about Non-Catholics.
We are all Christians (within this group) are we not?
As far as I am aware, Catholics do not "add stuff" to the Bible because we do not need any more "stuff" whatever that may be. God gave us everything that we need and more.
Yes, it is true that we should trust in the Lord.
My apologies to any if I have interpreted this previous mail incorrectly but it is only fair for me as a Catholic to address comments that are made. I would think that to be reasonable.
One should be able to reason with reasonable people.
From BigB
Showing posts with label Catholic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catholic. Show all posts
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Apologetics...
From JS
I'm new to Bible study, and can't offer much, but Catholic dogmas like the Papacy just don't have Scripture to back them up. The same with the perpetual virginity of Mary, mass, and so on. Indeed Catholics twist select verses to 'fit' their views, and to make their lies believable they go so far as to say the Pope is inerrant when explaining Scripture (a dogma also achieved through twisting verses). The Catholic church says if you don't believe what they say (their dogmas) then you are destined for hell. Hmm. OK, so imagine you gave a Bible to someone who has no idea what the Catholic church is. From reading the entire Bible it is utterly impossible for that person to even KNOW about these supposedly saving dogmas since Scripture backs none of them up. That suggests that the Bible is not enough to save a person, which contradicts many of the passages in it.
Why would God give us the Bible if it is useless without that additional material proposed by Popes? And if you accepted these additions which, as James points out, first came into being in the 300's, then what do you make of the final verses of Revelation which warn against anybody who adds or takes away from the Bible? If a Catholic thinks he can add stuff then that presumes that God lied in those verses, which contradicts the verse which says God is incapable of lying.
To believe the Catholic viewpoint is to believe in human knowledge being necessary to understand the Bible rather than God (as if God failed in being coherent, and without human intervention, we're all doomed). But the exact middle verse of the Bible is Psalm 118:8 "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
I'm new to Bible study, and can't offer much, but Catholic dogmas like the Papacy just don't have Scripture to back them up. The same with the perpetual virginity of Mary, mass, and so on. Indeed Catholics twist select verses to 'fit' their views, and to make their lies believable they go so far as to say the Pope is inerrant when explaining Scripture (a dogma also achieved through twisting verses). The Catholic church says if you don't believe what they say (their dogmas) then you are destined for hell. Hmm. OK, so imagine you gave a Bible to someone who has no idea what the Catholic church is. From reading the entire Bible it is utterly impossible for that person to even KNOW about these supposedly saving dogmas since Scripture backs none of them up. That suggests that the Bible is not enough to save a person, which contradicts many of the passages in it.
Why would God give us the Bible if it is useless without that additional material proposed by Popes? And if you accepted these additions which, as James points out, first came into being in the 300's, then what do you make of the final verses of Revelation which warn against anybody who adds or takes away from the Bible? If a Catholic thinks he can add stuff then that presumes that God lied in those verses, which contradicts the verse which says God is incapable of lying.
To believe the Catholic viewpoint is to believe in human knowledge being necessary to understand the Bible rather than God (as if God failed in being coherent, and without human intervention, we're all doomed). But the exact middle verse of the Bible is Psalm 118:8 "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)