Results 1 - 20 of 101
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Dalcent Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Have you ever read a book by a Catholic? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131499 | ||
Luther and Zwingli had diametrically opposed understandings of the Eucharist sacraments. Any understanding of the sacraments is obviously subjacent to the essential saving truths of Christianity: belief in Christ's incarnation, His divinity and His atoning death. | ||||||
2 | Have you ever read a book by a Catholic? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131501 | ||
I agree with your last sentence entirely. However, what about my question: Have you read any books by Catholics? I've read all the anti-Catholic stuff, Babylon Mystery Religion, Woman rides the Beast, etc. Even if you don't come to agree with the Catholic positions, it would be scholarly if you knew the true Catholic postions not just some fundamentalist polemic. What about Karl Keating's Catholicism and Fundamentalism Ignatius Press. P.S. I'm an intercessor between God and man too, because I'm praying for you. |
||||||
3 | How am I saved? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131565 | ||
Hi there BradK, My posting 'How am I saved?' was in response to CDBJ's query that I understood how I was saved; no doubt he regarded me a little suspiciously as I stated I was a Catholic. I think the debate has shifted a little from the are Catholics Christian to more of a Calvinism/Arminianism debate. I would query some of your quotes. Why does 'It is finished!' (Jn. 19:30) necessarily mean all our sins past, present and future are forgiven. Jesus was perhaps referring to His suffering. (Note that it says He was raised for our justification in Rom. 4:25. So there is one aspect that was not finished.) You have extrapolated your past, present and future doctrine from a verse which does not explicitly say anything of the kind. What do you think "Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you. Eph. 4:32" proves? Where is any hint here of anything more than God has forgiven you your sins so far. There is nothing explicit here to affirm your doctrine. Likewise, most of your quotes just say God forgave you, you never produce a quote that explicitly mentions forgiveness of sins you will commit in the future. I take specific issue with, "All the Pauline verses denote a past action, which is complete, carrying forward to the present time." What nonsense! (Furthermore, what about future sins.) Paul writes: "...but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" 1 Cor 1:18, ie we are not saved yet. How can you logically retort 'It is finished!' to me; it is simply a non sequitur (an inference not warrantable from the premises). You write 'Surely you're not advocating any self-effort on my part?' Well Paul wrote in 1 Cor 9:27 '...I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.' That sounds like self-effort to me. Read the Bible with an open mind, not a closed system. |
||||||
4 | Have you ever read a book by a Catholic? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131566 | ||
Dear GB, It is biblical to confess your sins to one another. James 5:16 The objection that only God can forgive sins was made by a Pharisee. You cannot make a doctrine out of such verses. John 20:23 was spoken specifically to the apostles. If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained. You think this has no connection to confession practised in the Catholic and Orthodox Church for 2,000 years? What is your interpretation of John 20:23? Are you claiming that all scripture invariably applies specifically to you. Woman why are you weeping? (Jn. 20:15). If you can't "see" the plain sense of John 20:23 perhaps you are wearing denominational spectacles when you read the Bible. |
||||||
5 | Have you ever read a book by a Catholic? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131575 | ||
So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. | ||||||
6 | Have you ever read a book by a Catholic? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131579 | ||
I have read your interesting profile. How you have been given a spirit of understanding! You write: 'I would challenge all to test me. I do not claim to know it all where the Word is concerned, but what I do know, I know to be FACT.' This is a ridiculous and pompous claim. When people make claims that only the KJV and the NIV are inspired versions and others are tools of the enemy you declare yourself to be nuts! What about the NASB and the ESV? What is your interpretation of James 2:24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. The NIV is definitely not an inspired translation "For example, the NIV, translates the Greek word ergon and its derivatives as "work" when it reinforces Protestant doctrine but as something else (such as "deeds" or "doing") when it would serve Catholic doctrine. The NIV renders Romans 4:2 "If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works (ergon), he had something to boast about—but not before God." This passage is used to support the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone. But the NIV translates the erg- derivatives in Romans 2:6-7 differently: "God ‘will give to each person according to what he has done (erga).’ To those who by persistence in doing (ergou) good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life." If the erg- derivatives were translated consistently as "work" then it would be clear that the passage says God will judge "every person according to his works" and will give eternal life to those who seek immortality "by persistence in working good"—statements that support the Catholic view of salvation." Even when there is no doctrinal agenda involved, it is difficult to do word studies in dynamic translations because of inconsistency in how words are rendered." |
||||||
7 | How am I saved? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131622 | ||
With due respect I think Calvinist evangelical theology is scripturally selective and mistaken in its conclusions, so of course lots of verses including 1 Cor 1:18 don't fit. |
||||||
8 | They were not born again at time of marr | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131697 | ||
"Well documented" by the Church's fundamentalist enemies, viz. one-sided slander. Hence the title of my post 'Have you read any book by Catholics!'. |
||||||
9 | They were not born again at time of marr | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131715 | ||
This is does not resemble a prayer; where is the example of the prayer born-again Christians say you must pray? Perhaps presented in a similar manner to the Lord's prayer, i.e. pray this and you'll be born again? | ||||||
10 | should a catholic marraige be sanctified | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131717 | ||
You wrote: rome has no time for your faith and you are outside of the one true church as they state and are doomed to hell by them Yet the Catholic Catechism, the Church's authoritative statement of faith, states: 818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church." You have been lied to by your silly anti-Catholic comics. |
||||||
11 | should a catholic marraige be sanctified | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131719 | ||
Dear gods son, I live in London near the Tyburn Convent. It is built near the Tyburn fields where hundreds of Catholic missionaries to England from the time of Henry VIII were murdered for preaching the apostolic faith. I am not offended by your ignorance. |
||||||
12 | should a catholic marraige be sanctified | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131721 | ||
Gods son, Jesus spoke in Aramaic and Peter and Rock are the same word in Aramaic: Kepha. |
||||||
13 | Have you ever read a book by a Catholic? | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131722 | ||
Chick Publications! That says it all. Don't you know his website claims all non-KJV Bibles are demonic. | ||||||
14 | should a catholic marraige be sanctified | Bible general Archive 2 | Dalcent | 131773 | ||
Isn't it interesting that the ignorant Catholic basher is grammatically ignorant too. God's son you are practically illiterate! Are you aware that there are about 100 spelling mistakes in your posting. You seem to have more against capital letters than you have against the pope. |
||||||
15 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | Dalcent | 156096 | ||
Are infants condemned to hell as this teaching seems to suggest this. If original sin, and not actual sins committed from the age of reason, is the real problem, the answer would seem to be yes. This is why I believe in infant baptist: just as our first-father Adam condemned us all by his sin, our fathers, in their headship over us, incorporate us into the Christian covenant by their family decision. To suggest that original sin becomes culpable at the point when we reach the age of reason and commit an actual sin would be nonsense. (Scripture does not mention whether the many households who were "all" baptized included any infants.) |
||||||
16 | I need to know the direct translation | Jer 2:22 | Dalcent | 154696 | ||
The meaning of baptize according to Strongs and NASEC is as follows STRONG G907 baptizo bap-tid-zo From a derivative of G911; to make whelmed (that is, fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism: - baptist, baptize, wash. NASEC G907 baptizo; from G911; to dip, sink: - Baptist (3), baptize (9), baptized (51), baptizes (1), baptizing (10), ceremonially washed (1), undergo (1). |
||||||
17 | Until | Matt 1:25 | Dalcent | 135277 | ||
Some scriptural support would be nice rather than 'one might suppose...' Its abnormal to: 1) not to consummate a marriage on your wedding night 2) your wife to have had another's child, viz. God's 3) to have the Son of God in your family In the light of Jerome's comments do you still hold 'until' proves Mary lost her virginity later? Dalcent |
||||||
18 | Until | Matt 1:25 | Dalcent | 135355 | ||
If you didn't dismiss the Church fathers as "Old, dead guys" you wouldn't be so full of error. Jerome is the "greatest Doctor"; Doc, the only doctoring you do is to twist scripture to conform to your latterday sect. |
||||||
19 | Is the Word of Faith movement Biblical? | Matt 24:11 | Dalcent | 156050 | ||
Often Word of Faith teachers correctly utilize certain Scripture which evangelicals tend to ignore. Where in the Bible do we find Jesus or the Apostles praying for the sick. They address sickness and demons directly by commanding them with authority. Some of the WofF peculiars are certainly found in Scripture: Believing before receiving: Mar 11:24 "Therefore I say to you, all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they will be granted you. And the we are gods claim... Joh 10:34-35 Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS'? "If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), If Benny Hinn had said this he would have been shot! I'm not 'Word of Faith' but I believe in some respects they have had some genuine biblical insights. |
||||||
20 | Is the UPC a Christian Church? | Matt 24:11 | Dalcent | 156068 | ||
By my definition, the Jesus-only camp are outside the pale of Christianity because they deny the Trinity. A Christian is someone who holds to both the doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation. The errors of these modern-day Sabellians can easily be refuted by the same arguments the Church Fathers used against them in the past. The "Jesus Only" heresy is the result of placing your own interpretation of the Bible, re-inventing the wheel, over the conciliar definitions of the historic Catholic Church. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Next > Last [6] >> |