I want to understand the Catholic faith so....

[ukok102nak]

i've been a catholic for almost 30 years my brother . . ..
and from that long period of time
i never learned anything spiritual things but only the sermons of those priest

:smoke: and that is why
without a doubt he is already dead :rofl: (we are talking of him )

:happy: but thanks to
our lord god the father almighty who is good and doesn't lie
and to
our lord god the only begotten son who is our saviour
when the time comes . ...

:scarf: he was given a chance to do
the will of god of the truth and love
AND NOT THE WILL OF ANY MEN . . ..

8) as the written scriptures say
:read:
Luke: 22. 37. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.

God bless us all always


:ty:

 

[LonelyPilgrim]

Tell me LonleyPilgrim, where in the Traditions of First Century Church and in the Old Testament Traditions did anyone teach that Mary was born without sin?

You mention Old Testament traditions. From the very earliest Christian interpreters of Scripture, Song of Solomon 4:12, etc., have been understood as references to Mary's all-holiness and perpetual virginity:

A garden locked is my sister, my bride,
a garden locked, a fountain sealed.
(Song of Solomon 4:12)
​

Nobody taught that Mary was without sin. In fact LonleyPilgrim the teaching that Mary was born without sin was created in 1854 by the Catholic Church. ... It interesting that for centuries the Catholic Church never taught that Mary was born without sin. In fact none of the Doctrines about Mary ever appeared before the 1800's!

Mr. epostle has already named quite a few early references. Some other early witnesses and documents that refer to the beliefs in Mary's all-holiness and perpetual virginity are the Protoevangelium of James (c. A.D. 140), Irenaeus of Lyons (c. A.D. 180), and Origen (c. A.D. 225).

Show us LonleyPilgrim any papers, letters, books, anything with the name Pope Peter on them! There is nothing at all from Peter indicating his role as the Pope of the Catholic Church! Nothing!

Peter was never called "pope" in his lifetime. But the "pope" is the bishop of Rome, which Peter was. Read my article.

 

[ukok102nak]

:smoke: and there were times peter was persecuted
and even nailed unto the cross upside down . . . ...
:sisid: AND THIS DID NOT COME FROM US BUT UNTO THOSE PEOPLE
BEHIND THE BACK OF THE EMPIRE . . ..
that's why most of those true christians were scattered
from every places :takbo:

:happy: and as the apostle peter says
:read:
1 Peter: 1. 7. That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:
8. Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:
9. Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

:scarf: let us continue unto the truth
10. Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
11. Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
12. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.
13. Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
~:»REMEMBER BY THE PROPHETS AND NOT BY THOSE PEOPLE OUTSIDE
THE PROPHESY . ...

:now: about the revelation of our lord jesus christ
:read:
Revelation: 6. 9. And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10. And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11. And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

:think: do we have a chance to those in power to escape unto those
people who will do all this horrible things
as it is written in this verse? :hmm:

:glasses: even in the early times of the true christians
who were been done an act which was foretold from the holy bible
and everything is so clear to many in our present time who were
the doers of the said situation. . . ...
which remind us of the things to come 8)

God bless us all always


:ty:

 

[fordman]

Peter was never called "pope" in his lifetime. But the "pope" is the bishop of Rome, which Peter was. Read my article.

Great article Pilgrim! I learned a lot from it.... even as a practicing cradel Catholic. Thanks for sharing it, and your posts.


p.s.
Welcome to this forum. Been away for a couple of weeks and its good to see another fellow Catholic on board to help correct the fallicies of our faith. As you can tell, there can be much hostility towards Catholics within this forum. Keep up the good work!


Pax tecum

 

[fordman]

A "true" Christian is someone who has been 'born-again' ( -- which is the 'base-level' definition. Do not forget it, no matter what anyone tells you. The Bible teaches the Truth - and is above all - and goes before all - where Truth is concerned. Always remember that.

Yes.... So we Catholics are as you say "True Christians" for we are born again, the "bible way", at our Baptisim. In case you didn't know.... The greek word in the orginal text for "again" is "anothen", which can more properly be translated as "from above". So if we look at this terminology using "You must be born from ABOVE" instead of "You must be born AGAIN", it takes on a slightly differnt meaning. Verse five gives us a clue when it says..."Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, hee cannot enter the kingdom of God."
　

Born of water 'and' the Spirit is a clarification from Jesus on what it means to be born from above. Water and the spirit, when combined in the bible, means a new beginning. In Gen. 1;1, we see the spirit moving over the water, creating a new earth. Later on, when Noah was trying to see if there was land appering, he sent out a dove over the water, to see if the new earth was ready. And while the dove wasn't the Holy Spirit, it cerntaily was a precursor to the Baptisim of Jesus, where we see the Holy Spirit descend as a dove over the waters of Jesus' baptisim.

Jesus had no sins, and therefore didn't need to be baptized, of course, but His baptisim sanctified the waters of baptisim for us all, and shows us what really happens during our baptisim......... The Holy Spirit descends from heaven to our bodies, His temple. Clearly, being born again, or being born from above, is a reference to our baptisim, which washes away our sins (Acts 22:16) and saves us (1Pet.3:21.)



"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed." ----- Luke 1:48.
　

Pax Christi

 

[ukok102nak]

:smoke: by the way we are not agains't to the catholic church
but only unto those doctrines my brother :happy:

as they say
``DONT JUST TELL EVERYTHING
BUT TELL THE TRUTH THAT ARE HIDDEN FROM EVERYONE``
that is above all else from
which (what) is written


God bless us all always

:ty:

 

[PennEd]

I pray that others reading this will benefit as well. I want to fix my mind only on the truth.



In five years of being a Catholic, in all the funerals I've been to, I've never even seen or been offered a "Mass card", or been asked to pay money or make a donation for any such thing. I get the feeling your conception of Catholicism is rooted in a long-ago childhood. I'm sorry if it was an unpleasant one, but you do not speak with any authority about the Catholic Church that I know.

I will say it again: the concept of purgatory has nothing at all to do with atonement of sins or even with salvation. The idea of indulgences does have to do with alleviating the burdens of those in purgatory -- but every one of those people is already saved; has already had their every sin washed away.



The saints in heaven are our brothers and sisters in the Lord, those who have already received their reward in Him. We know for a fact that they are with Christ in glory and that they stand as a great cloud of witnesses around us (cf. Hebrews 12:22-23, 1), and that they are united to the same Christ as we. We are told in Scripture that they do intercede for us (cf. Revelation 5:8-9), and that the prayer of a righteous person avails much (James 5:16). So why would we not ask them to pray for us?



What you call "heretical doctrines," I call the glorious gifts of God's grace. I trust in Christ alone: He has given me an abundance of grace, more than enough for my every need. I see my former faith as a Protestant to be mostly barren, dour, and fruitless, and I can't imagine why I would ever want to go back to that.

I feel truly sad at how decieved you are, and by extension at how you are decieving others, probably unimtentionally. You can google mass cards yourself to see how much they cost, what their purpose is, and how people STILL BUY them today. I will tell my mother and other family members YOU said they can go to the church and ask for all the MONEY back that they spent on this heresy because YOU said it doesn't really exist. If Jesus has paid for all our sins WHY ARE WE SUPPOSEDLY STILL PAYING FOR THEM IN PURGATORY!!?

I asked you to cite a SINGLE example of someone praying to ANYONE other than God without a terrible result. You could not. Instead you tried to stretch the cloud of witnesses mentioned in Hebrews to somehow mean we should, or can, pray to other people.

Show me where in Scripture someone prays to ANYONE that has died other than Jesus. We both know you cannot.

Sir, I don't know you or your heart. I only know what you have written. It is crystal clear you have not put your trust totally in Christ ALONE to save you. You have added to His Grace alone. Only divine intervention can get you to see the truth. Maybe the Lord called you to this site to soften your heart.

WHERE IN SCRIPTURE IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE SAINTS PRAYING TO ANYONE BUT GOD?

 

[valiant]

You mention Old Testament traditions. From the very earliest Christian interpreters of Scripture, Song of Solomon 4:12, etc., have been understood as references to Mary's all-holiness and perpetual virginity:

A garden locked is my sister, my bride,
a garden locked, a fountain sealed.
(Song of Solomon 4:12)​

Nonsense. Name your interpreters. The writer is simply indicating the woman's virginity prior to being married. It has nothing to do with Mary whatsoever. That is a pipe dream.
​

Mr. epostle has already named quite a few early references. Some other early witnesses and documents that refer to the beliefs in Mary's all-holiness and perpetual virginity are the Protoevangelium of James (c. A.D. 140), Irenaeus of Lyons (c. A.D. 180), and Origen (c. A.D. 225).

Citations? They do not mention her perpetual virginity. (Origen might because he was an ascetic and it would appeal to him). Besides they are irrelevant. These writers had all kinds of strange beliefs. They have no authority.

Peter was never called "pope" in his lifetime. But the "pope" is the bishop of Rome, which Peter was. Read my article.

Peter never was sole bishop of Rome. That is a fable. Like Paul he MAY have been accepted as one of a number of bishops when he was taken there for martyrdom. There was no sole bishop of Rome prior to Justin Martyr's time. Both Clement and Ignatius bear witness to the lack of a sole bishop at Rome.

 

[valiant]

p.s.
Welcome to this forum. Been away for a couple of weeks and its good to see another fellow Catholic on board to help correct the fallicies of our faith.

LOL I am pleased to see that at last you recognise the fallacies of your faith.

 

[valiant]

Yes.... So we Catholics are as you say "True Christians" for we are born again, the "bible way", at our Baptisim.

You have already condemned yourself and your church. No one is born again through baptism, and especially not infant baptism. That is to put the Holy Spirit under the control of the church, and is one of your major heresies. What you describes is simply NOT the Bible way. If you see your baptism as the source of your life in Christ, then you have no life. You have given yourself away already.

In case you didn't know.... The greek word in the orginal text for "again" is "anothen", which can more properly be translated as "from above". So if we look at this terminology using "You must be born from ABOVE" instead of "You must be born AGAIN", it takes on a slightly differnt meaning. Verse five gives us a clue when it says..."Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, hee cannot enter the kingdom of God."
　

Yes the water from above. And what is the water? It is not the water of baptism (any more than the water in John 4.10-14 is the water of baptism). It is using the prophetic picture of rain falling from Heaven giving life. (Isaiah 32.15; 44.1-5; 55.1-13). The only baptism Nicodemus knew about was the baptism of John. And that was non-effective as regards the Holy Spirit. It pointed ahead to what the Messiah would do.

Born of water 'and' the Spirit is a clarification from Jesus on what it means to be born from above. Water and the spirit, when combined in the bible, means a new beginning.

As you know kai is a weak conjunction connecting two words. It regularly means 'even'. (It has regularly been said by grammarians that it must always be given its weakest interpretation), Here Jesus spoke of being 'born of water, even of the Spirit'. In other words rain symbolised the Spirit.

In Gen. 1;1, we see the spirit moving over the water, creating a new earth. Later on, when Noah was trying to see if there was land appering, he sent out a dove over the water, to see if the new earth was ready. And while the dove wasn't the Holy Spirit, it cerntaily was a precursor to the Baptisim of Jesus, where we see the Holy Spirit descend as a dove over the waters of Jesus' baptisim.

LOL you use the word 'certainly' so glibly. It is not certain at all. There is absolutely no reason for seeing the dove returning to the Ark as the Holy Spirit. That is Roman Catholic manipulation. It says absolutely nothing about the baptism of Jesus.

Jesus had no sins, and therefore didn't need to be baptized, of course, but His baptisim sanctified the waters of baptisim for us all, and shows us what really happens during our baptisim

Firstly we note that Jesus was baptised as an adult. It does NOT show us what happens at our baptism. That is a fallacy. None of the others who were baptised received the Holy Spirit. You Roman Catholics will clutch at any straw to support your false teachings.

......... The Holy Spirit descends from heaven to our bodies, His temple. Clearly, being born again, or being born from above, is a reference to our baptisim, which washes away our sins (Acts 22:16) and saves us (1Pet.3:21.)

As I have demonstrated it does not refer to baptism. 1 Peter says that the water which bore up the Ark, lifting it up to God, symbolises the answer of good conscience towards God. He stresses that it does NOT cleans us from the filthiness of the flesh.

Nor does Ananias (who was NOT an inspired writer) directly link baptism with washing. He says, 'Arising be baptised, calling on the name of the Lord wash away your sins'. Thus it is calling on the name of the Lord that washes away an adult's sins. Baptism is NEVER elsewhere described as washing and cleansing.

 

[santuzza]

So you would really say that an infant-in-arms is capable of sin, and worthy of damnation? Nearly all Protestants I've ever heard of -- and especially those who reject infant baptism -- would say that no, infants lack the understanding either to sin or to have a saving faith. Therefore if they die before coming to an age of reason, they are accepted lovingly by God. How does this work in your mind?

No, I didn't say that. You said that infants were incapable of sin -- I disagree with that -- I think they ARE capable of sin. But I never said they were damned. I believe, like most born-again Christians, that until they come to an age when they can recognize and understand their sin, they are not culpable.

But I don't think that just because they haven't reached that age yet that we shouldn't call sin for what it is. A child going through the "terrible twos" is often openly defiant of his/her parents, and that is sin.

I do agree with you that there is a point in a person's life when sin IS recognizable, regardless of whether that person has been told it's sin. They know. And that is when they are responsible for their actions.

The point is, we have a sin nature. And it rears its ugly head very early on. Let's not whitewash it and say it's not sin just because of a child's age or lack of ability to understand it.

 

[valiant]

Mr. epostle has already named quite a few early references. Some other early witnesses and documents that refer to the beliefs in Mary's all-holiness and perpetual virginity are the Protoevangelium of James (c. A.D. 140), Irenaeus of Lyons (c. A.D. 180), and Origen (c. A.D. 225).

The Protevangelium of James was rejected by the church councils as not being Scripture. So you look to heretical works for your confirmation of a false teaching? It figures.

'The consensus is that it was actually composed some time in the 2nd century AD. The first mention of it is by Origen of Alexandria in the early 3rd century, who says the text, like that of a Gospel of Peter, was of dubious, recent appearance and shared with that book the claim that the "brethren of the Lord" were sons of Joseph by a former wife

 

[blue_ladybug]

All infants know how to do is sleep, eat, poop, pee and cry..lol.. They have NO CONCEPT of sin, thus they don't know they're sinning.. jmo

 

[KJV1611]

All infants know how to do is sleep, eat, poop, pee and cry..lol.. They have NO CONCEPT of sin, thus they don't know they're sinning.. jmo

Paul says it best... I was alive without the law once but when the commandment came sin revived and I died. Wow there is a lot of theology in that one verse.

 

[MikeHenderson]

Again LonelyPilgrim you clearly demonstrate you lack of knowledge of the Scriptures and your hatred towards God.

Romans 3:23
[SUP]23 [/SUP] for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

God cannot contradict Himself!

God clearly said ALL have sinned, that none are righteous, not one. Therefore the Doctrine of being without sin because one is full of Grace is contradicting what God has said in Romans 3:23. Clearly LonelyPilgrim you have demonstrated you lack of intelligence and your hatred towards God and His Truths.

This is because the god of this World has blinded you to the Truth from God.

I feel very sad for you lonelyPilgrim because of what you are doing will keep you from entering into Heaven. Why you ask? Because you are an Idolater following Mary as your God. How are you doing this you ask? By praying the Hail Mary, by praying the Rosary, by having a statue of Mary. This is why you will not be allowed to enter into Heaven LonelyPilgrim.

Matthew 7:15-20
[SUP]15 [/SUP] "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
[SUP]16 [/SUP] You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?
[SUP]17 [/SUP] Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
[SUP]18 [/SUP] A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
[SUP]19 [/SUP] Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Therefore by their fruits you will know them.

You LonelyPilgrim are a false prophet teaching the false doctrine that Mary was without sin.

Matthew 7:21-23
[SUP]21 [/SUP] "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
[SUP]22 [/SUP] Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
[SUP]23 [/SUP] And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

False prophets cannot enter into Heaven. You cannot enter into Heaven LonelyPilgrim as long as you keep on teaching the doctrines of demons.

 

[MikeHenderson]

Again epostle the doctrine of Mary being born without sin was not created until 1854. Before this date for 1800 years no doctrine of Mary being without sin ever appeared!

Also God cannot contradict Himself epostle. God has said ALL have sinned.

Clearly epostle you and LonelyPilgrim have shown your hatred of the Truth in the Scriptures AND your hatred towards God Himself by you insistence on proclaiming Mary was without sin.

I believe the reasons you and LonelyPilgrim have done this is because neither one have accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.

Repent eppostle and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior!

Repent LonelyPilgrim and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior!

 

[LonelyPilgrim]

No, I didn't say that. You said that infants were incapable of sin -- I disagree with that -- I think they ARE capable of sin. But I never said they were damned. I believe, like most born-again Christians, that until they come to an age when they can recognize and understand their sin, they are not culpable.

Is that not exactly what I've been saying all along? We essentially agree: you are quibbling with me over words. Yes, we have a sinful nature, even infants. Yes, many actions of infants and small children are bad behavior, disrespectful to their parents, wrong. But sin, by the very word, implies blame. The opposite of being sinful is not being perfect; it is being blameless. In the Hebrew, Greek, and especially Latin, the words for sin imply fault, blame, guilt. And if a person's actions are blameless, they are not sin. Jesus said, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin" (John 15:22).

The point is, we have a sin nature. And it rears its ugly head very early on. Let's not whitewash it and say it's not sin just because of a child's age or lack of ability to understand it.

I am not a moral relativist or attempting to "whitewash" anything. But the fact is -- and you agree -- that a child is not culpable for his or her actions. If a person is sinful, they are worthy of judgment. If there's anything I learned as a Protestant, it's that.

 

[LonelyPilgrim]

You can google mass cards yourself to see how much they cost, what their purpose is, and how people STILL BUY them today. I will tell my mother and other family members YOU said they can go to the church and ask for all the MONEY back that they spent on this heresy because YOU said it doesn't really exist.

I didn't say that they didn't exist; I said that I had never seen them. They are not a major part of the Catholic faith or experience for me or anyone I know.

If Jesus has paid for all our sins WHY ARE WE SUPPOSEDLY STILL PAYING FOR THEM IN PURGATORY!!?

We are not. You've misunderstood this doctrine. I don't know how many different ways I can say it.

Show me where in Scripture someone prays to ANYONE that has died other than Jesus. We both know you cannot.

I've already shown in Revelation the elders who lift up the bowls of incense to the Throne of God, which are the prayers of the saints (meaning, in this context, those of us on earth). The same elders and martyrs are demonstrated as witnesses to our sufferings on earth.

Sir, I don't know you or your heart. I only know what you have written. It is crystal clear you have not put your trust totally in Christ ALONE to save you. You have added to His Grace alone. Only divine intervention can get you to see the truth. Maybe the Lord called you to this site to soften your heart.

Sir, I am not your enemy. I don't know why you are judging me with such hostility. I do trust in Christ and Christ alone -- but just as you have no standing to judge the state of my soul, I have no obligation to defend it to you. I pray God's peace and mercy for you.

 

[valiant]

Is that not exactly what I've been saying all along? We essentially agree: you are quibbling with me over words. Yes, we have a sinful nature, even infants. Yes, many actions of infants and small children are bad behavior, disrespectful to their parents, wrong. But sin, by the very word, implies blame. The opposite of being sinful is not being perfect; it is being blameless. In the Hebrew, Greek, and especially Latin, the words for sin imply fault, blame, guilt. And if a person's actions are blameless, they are not sin. Jesus said, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin" (John 15:22).



I am not a moral relativist or attempting to "whitewash" anything. But the fact is -- and you agree -- that a child is not culpable for his or her actions. If a person is sinful, they are worthy of judgment. If there's anything I learned as a Protestant, it's that.

One has to admire the nerve of those who tell God what to do. Who says that a child is not culpable?. Scripture says that they are. What God does about it is in His own hands.

 

[valiant]

I've already shown in Revelation the elders who lift up the bowls of incense to the Throne of God, which are the prayers of the saints (meaning, in this context, those of us on earth). The same elders and martyrs are demonstrated as witnesses to our sufferings on earth.

There are no good grounds for seeing the 24 elders as any other than heavenly beings with a task to do. They offer bowls of incense. They do not pray. Thus your whole argument is groundless.