Welcome to Gaia! ::

*~Let the Fire Fall ~* A Christian Guild

Back to Guilds

 

 

Reply *~Let the Fire Fall ~* A Christian Guild
Catholic Evidence Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20 21 22 23 [>] [>>] [»|]

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Ace xAngel

PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:58 pm


She's a strong person to come into debates like this I believe personally.

As for what she said, I kinda do agree when it comes to things as such (as in anything that is the most significant, it is to come from the Word itself only).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- See, way back when after Christ's death, there was a group of Christ's followers still mingling about..so, what're they to do?..spread the Word. So it was..the message was carried throughout the known world by the disciples(apostles) of Jesus.

- Since the first converts to this new belief system were Jews, Christianity was first viewed as a sect of Judaism. Gradually, the new believers (instructed and encouraged by the apostle Paul) saw their faith as distinct from Judaism. The followers of Jesus were first called Christians in Antioch, Syria (present-day Turkey).

- But then, in 70 A.D, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, effectively scattering Jews and Christians alike.

((Okay, here is where the main split occurs))

- As Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire (after it became an accepted religion by Constantine), theoligical interpretations began to differ in the East and West. The conflict created by this was mainly because of distance, different languages and culture, and conflicting theological opinions.

- It is from this point, where there is that main divide in Christianity itself. When a group of people, which became the Roman Catholic Church, chose to break away from that main group. The rest of the followers that stayed became which we know as Protestants (basically, for that formed the Protestant Reformation - when Martin Luther posted his 95 Thesison the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, there's out little history lesson to think about for a moment. I'll stop for now because, it's late and..I have yet to add more. I'm just trying to start from point one so that people can see how and why things turned as they did and the big split that has made our lives so complicated in having different churches and beliefs.
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 11:23 pm


Ace xAngel
((Okay, here is where the main split occurs))

- As Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire (after it became an accepted religion by Constantine), theoligical interpretations began to differ in the East and West. The conflict created by this was mainly because of distance, different languages and culture, and conflicting theological opinions.

- It is from this point, where there is that main divide in Christianity itself. When a group of people, which became the Roman Catholic Church, chose to break away from that main group. The rest of the followers that stayed became which we know as Protestants (basically, for that formed the Protestant Reformation - when Martin Luther posted his 95 Thesison the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany).

You forgot the Eastern Orthodox Churches which were seperate from the Roman Catholic Church and existed from their foundations (Many were founded by the Apostles themselves and carry their own perticular Traditions) and had different beliefs even within their own seperate Churches as each Eastern Orthodox Branch has it's own perticular Tradition. Some of the different Eastern Orthodox Traditions also have different accepted Scriptures in their Canons.

Then there are the Coptic Christian Churches which likewise existed from Early Christianity and they were largely cut off from the rest of the world and from outside influence for almost 2000 years until fairly recently and kept to their own Tradition and Doctrine from their foundation.

Then there are the Ethiopian Christian Churches who have a largely expanded Canon of Scripture (They have always had the Book of Enoch in their Canon since Early Christianity for example, which was cited as Prophetic in the Epistle of Jude in the New Testament) who are said to have the Arc of the Covenant. There are over 3000 Ethiopian Christian Churches.

Then there were the Gnostic Christians who comprised many different branches and traditions, who existed during the first several hundred years of Christianity.

There were also many other "Hetrodox" / "Unorthodox" Branches of Christianity in Early Christianity.

There were overall many different Traditions and Branches of Christianity even within Early Christianity and at least a dozen different Canons of Recognized Scripture. I'm a Valentinian.

Eteponge


Ace xAngel

PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 11:26 pm


Oh yea, well I mean I knew of the main 3 branches and how that extended further, I was just pointing out the first major split, sweatdrop

..otherwise, I know after that first one it did lead to that..and so today the 3 main religions are Roman Catholicism, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox..all of that broken down over the centuries..

Got'cha, wink - (T'was just workin'my way into it as I started from a simple level as to who it was that left/split in the first place).
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 4:19 am


Eteponge
windswept_fury
Sorry, I didn't read your post until just now.

Please, in your arguements, such as in the entire first section, don't post things written by saints, as I'm not familiar with thise things, since I don't think there's anything special with the saints. I'm not Catholic, so references to Catholic books do me no good. Though I'd like to become more familiar with other beliefs and will research all I can, I'm only 13 and can only research and learn so fast. So, don't assume I know everything. At the same time, don't look down on me. As for the rest, I'll answer tomorrow, I've gotta go for now. Sorry I took so long getting back to yas!!

I quoted from several Early Church Figures because they are closer to the times and teachings of Jesus Christ and the Apostles and spoke Hebrew and Greek and knew Scripture far better than many Christians today and had access to Early Oral Traditions and such and Knowledge that was passed down in the first few centuries of Christianity. However, I also quoted from *many* areas of Scripture along with Early Christian Commentary on them.

Also, be sure to read the other post I posted about the Deutrocanonicals.

You're only 13 and getting into deep theological debates? When I was 13 all I could think about was playing outside with my friends, playing video games, and worrying about school. I didn't truely become highly spiritual until I was in my late teenage years. sweatdrop


Well, I suppose I could consider that a compliment. But I' not highly spiritual, and this isn't a deep debate. I believe what I know is right, so I'm here to use Scripture to prove it. Isn't that part of our job as Christians?

windswept_fury


marysservant

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 10:11 am


Protestants may say that Catholics (and Orthodox Christians) added the Apocrypha, but, if you think about it, the Protestants removed them. And don't even the Jews find some true (inerrant) even though they don't accept them as scripture? I ask this because the Jewish holiday of Chanukah comes from the book of Maccabees (I'm pretty sure), it commemorates the continuous burning of the oil lamp for 8 days after it ran out of oil. Again I say, Catholics didn't add them, Protestants removed them.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 10:12 am


BTW windswept_fury, you tell us that we cannot use un-scriptural evidence against your case, however, you quote the book "Roman Catholicism," isn't this kind of hypocritical?

marysservant


windswept_fury

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 10:39 am


marysservant
BTW windswept_fury, you tell us that we cannot use un-scriptural evidence against your case, however, you quote the book "Roman Catholicism," isn't this kind of hypocritical?


No. Since you didn't conform to my wishes, and persisted in posting non-scriptural things, I figured I could as well. Because if you were posting them, you obviously found relevancy in them, and thus I did the same. If you'd like to go strictly by what's in the Bible, I'd be delighted to continue debating that way. It makes things easier.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 3:25 pm


windswept_fury
marysservant
BTW windswept_fury, you tell us that we cannot use un-scriptural evidence against your case, however, you quote the book "Roman Catholicism," isn't this kind of hypocritical?


No. Since you didn't conform to my wishes, and persisted in posting non-scriptural things, I figured I could as well. Because if you were posting them, you obviously found relevancy in them, and thus I did the same. If you'd like to go strictly by what's in the Bible, I'd be delighted to continue debating that way. It makes things easier.


Excuse me, I havn't posted anything as proof except stuff FROM the Scriptures, name one thing I havn't.

marysservant


Collun

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 4:38 pm


I just got here but anyways.
Purgatory, I believe is where we're at.
There is a waiting place where our souls are kept til Judgment Day.
But the Catholics Purgatory is metioned nowhere in the Bible. (the Bible being the actual Bible not the extra seven added books)
There is Heaven and Hell. We always sin, but when we're baptized God washes our sins away and protects us with his Son.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 6:39 pm


Collun
(The Bible being the actual Bible not the extra seven added books)

You mean the Seven Books *Removed* from the later Protestant Canon. The Deuterocanonical Books of the Septuagint are the same collection of Old Testament Scriptures that were used by Jesus Christ and the Apostles and the First Century Christians that is still used by Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Churches today. The New Testament itself undeniably referances the Deterocanonical Books in *many* places throughout the New Testament and refers to information found in them, and over 2/3 of the Old Testament prophecies quoted in the New Testament are directly from the Septuagint, which included those Seven Books.

Accepting the Deuterocanonicals depends on whether or not you are using the same compilation of Old Testament Scriptures that the Apostles used or not, which includes the Deutrocanonicals. If you are Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox or Ethiopian Christian you are, if you are Protestant, you are not.

"[T]he Early Christians used a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. This translation . . . contained an expanded canon which included a number of the so-called "deuterocanonical" (or "apocryphal") books. Although there was some initial debate over these books, they were eventually received by Christians into the Old Testament canon.

In reaction to the rise of Christianity, the Jews narrowed their canons and eventually excluded the deuterocanonical books - although they still regarded them as sacred. The modern Jewish canon was not rigidly fixed until the third century A.D. Interestingly, it is this later version of the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, rather than the canon of Early Christianity, that is followed by most modern Protestants today." ("Which Came First: The Church or the New Testament," The Christian Activist, Vol. 9, Fall/Winter 1996, p. 1,4-7.)

The Deuterocanonical Books in the Early Church

"In the first century the Christian Bible had simply been the Old Testament (read in the Septuagint version). Authority resided in this scripture and in the words of the Lord, which long circulated in oral tradition, as is apparent in the letter of Clement to the Corinthians." ("The Early Church" Henry Chadwick p 42)

The LXX version was also used by the authors of the New Testament.

Interestingly, when Luther and other Protestants rejected the Septuagint text and its Latin translation in the Vulgate, thus rejecting the Apocrypha, and instead used a smaller collection of Old Testament books from the Masoretic Hebrew text, they diverged from centuries of Christian tradition. As a result, the Roman Catholic Bible now has about twelve books more than the Protestant Bible, meaning that about 200 pages of text have been "subtracted" - one could say - from the Protestant Bible relative to the "traditional" Catholic Bible.

The Christian acceptance of the deuterocanonical books was logical because the deuterocanonicals were also included in the Septuagint, the Greek edition of the Old Testament which the apostles used to evangelize the world. Two thirds of the Old Testament quotations in the New are from the Septuagint. Yet the apostles nowhere told their converts to avoid seven books of it. Like the Jews all over the world who used the Septuagint, the early Christians accepted the books they found in it. They knew that the apostles would not mislead them and endanger their souls by putting false scriptures in their hands -- especially without warning them against them.

But the apostles did not merely place the deuterocanonicals in the hands of their converts as part of the Septuagint. They regularly referred to the deuterocanonicals in their writings.

And here are some of the quotations from the Deuterocanon in the New Testament:

Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God's Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord's description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus' usage of "fall by the edge of the sword" follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke's description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus', Luke's and Paul's usage of "signs and wonders" follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus' Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 15:6 - branches that don't bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke's reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter's and Paul's statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.

Rom 1:18-25 - Paul's teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.

Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God's existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.

Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.

Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.

Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.

Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.

Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul's question, "who has known the mind of the Lord?" references Wisdom 9:13.

1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.

1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many "gods" but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.

1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul's description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.

1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.

1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.

Eph. 1:17 - Paul's prayer for a "spirit of wisdom" follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.

Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1Thess. 5:8.

Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.

1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul's description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.

2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul's description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.

Heb. 4:12 - Paul's description of God's word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.

Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.

Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 6:18, 7:1-42.

Heb. 12:12 - the description "drooping hands" and "weak knees" comes from Sirach 25:23.

James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.

James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

James 3:13 - James' instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.

James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.

James 5:6 - condemning and killing the "righteous man" follows Wisdom 2:10-20.

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.

1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.

2 Peter 2:7 - God's rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.

Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.

Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God's Word in Wisdom 18:16.

Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.

Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.

Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.

Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.

Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 19:1 - the cry "Hallelujah" at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.

Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.

Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.

2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

The Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., council of Jamnia in 90 - 100 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testatment canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Orthodox and Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council who rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament!

It is also ironic that Protestants reject the inclusion of the deuterocanonicals at councils such as Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), because these are the very same early Church councils that Protestants appeal to for the canon of the New Testament. Prior to the councils of the late 300s, there was a wide range of disagreement over exactly what books belonged in the New Testament. Certain books, such as the gospels, acts, and most of the epistles of Paul had long been agreed upon. However a number of the books of the New Testament, most notably Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, and Revelation remained hotly disputed until the canon was settled. They are, in effect, "New Testament deuterocanonicals."

While Protestants are willing to accept the testimony of Hippo and Carthage (the councils they most commonly cite) for the canonicity of the New Testament deuterocanonicals, they are unwilling to accept the testimony of Hippo and Carthage for the canonicity of the Old Testament deuterocanonicals. Ironic indeed!

Eteponge


windswept_fury

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:05 pm


Crud.. I'm at my dad's house, so I don't have any concordances, reference books.. Nothing. Not even my Bible, which is a ginormous surprise, because I carry it everywhere.. All I have is the Message.. Grr.. Anywho, I'll answer as soon as I get the chance, I wasn''t planning on coming to my dad's house today.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:24 pm


Okay, a lot of the topics I was going to bring up have already been brought up, so I'll ask you this:

Since the Bible says that only God can forgive your sins, why do you go to a preist or whatever to have him do it for you? He can't do anything, only God can.

Also! Where'd the whole 'Praying to Marry' thing come in!? Nowhere in the Bible does it say that she was Holly. Seems like a false idol to me...

MokieMorty


Aetherius Lamia

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:29 pm


marysservant
me trying to show the truth to non-catholics
the truth? the truth about what, exactly?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:38 pm


MokieMorty
Since the Bible says that only God can forgive your sins,
Only God has the power to forgive sins
MokieMorty
why do you go to a preist
and He grants priests that power.
MokieMorty
Also! Where'd the whole 'Praying to Marry' thing come in!?
We pray WITH Mary and all the angels and saints... something about the more people agreeing in prayer about a certain thing ("when two or more join together..." something Jesus said.)
MokieMorty
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that she was Holly. Seems like a false idol to me...
neutral sounds like trolling to me...

The "false idol" thing: We honor Mary (as she was the mother of Christ our savior), not worship her.

Can someone tell me why some Christians (and many Southern Baptists) believe Catholics aren't Christians? Catholics STARTED Christianity (well Jews did, but you get what I mean)...

Aetherius Lamia


windswept_fury

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:28 am


Quote:
and He grants priests that power.
No He doesn't. All you need to do is pray to God for forgiveness.
Quote:
We pray WITH Mary and all the angels and saints... something about the more people agreeing in prayer about a certain thing ("when two or more join together..." something Jesus said.)
Well, if you're not even interested in the subjest enough to look scripture up, there's no point in me argueing... The scripture is:
Matthew 18:20

" This is true because where two or more gether in my name, I am there with them."
And I doubt that Mary sits up there going, ' Hail Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death, Amen. Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee.Blessed art thou among woman, and bleesed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus...' Yes, I've wathed and been to Catholic masses before, and they never ever change.

Quote:
The "false idol" thing: We honor Mary (as she was the mother of Christ our savior), not worship her.

Mary doesn't need honor on Earth, she's in Heaven. She, one of the humblest of servants, would and probably is appalled by her fame here among the Catholics.

Quote:
Can someone tell me why some Christians (and many Southern Baptists) believe Catholics aren't Christians? Catholics STARTED Christianity (well Jews did, but you get what I mean)...

First, no, Catholics did not start Christianity. I don't remember Acts telling s that the first church was Catholic, memorized prayers, prayed to Mary, etc,.
Reply
*~Let the Fire Fall ~* A Christian Guild

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20 21 22 23 [>] [>>] [»|]
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum