The Immaculate Conception Error

[onlinebuddy]

Also, the conscience depends on the values imbibed in a individual. The conscience can become weak when one does not understand spiritual truths.[1 Cor 8:10] The conscience can become calloused (as seared with hot iron) due to continuous disobedience.[1 Tim 4:2] Those who violate their conscience end up shipwrecking their faith[1 Tim 1:19]

so the consciences of babies can be seared as with a hot iron? interesting lol

Nit picking again. You very know that that verse is talking about adults. Therefore i had mentioned this in another paragraph.

My point was that the conscience can be dulled as a result of continuous disobedience. So one is responsible if his conscience is weak or strong. Gotta own up! It is wrong to blame Adam, or some sin in the flesh or some sinful nature. One is responsible for his own nature. Can't blame some sinful uncontrollable fleshly urges that are due to the Original Sin of Adam.

 

[onlinebuddy]

Those who violate their conscience end up shipwrecking their faith[1 Tim 1:19]

I'm not sure what this has to do with infancy conscience. but no doubt you have?

you are talking through your hat.

Again, you very know that that verse is talking about adults. Therefore i had mentioned this in another paragraph.

The false doctrine of OS is not just limited to the condition of children. In fact it corrupts adults in their assessment of their own selves in a very big way. Therefore I have thrown in a few verses about the consciences of adults to show you that you are responsible for your own condition.

Your doctrine of OS portrays the condition of an unborn child as "wicked." The same doctrine portrays the condition of an adult believer as someone who is "sold under sin" and who "walks after the flesh." This same believer simultaneously (or sometimes sporadically) shifts to the other side like a pendulum and attempts to "walk after the Spirit." This condition acceptable to OS proponents, as the great apostle Paul too struggled with it.

you are talking through your hat.

I have shown you that I have a valid and relevant point. You have nothing more to say in defense of your doctrine of OS. All beliefs that you have been conditioned to (and brainwashed) for a very long time, have been busted. So I urge you to look at scripture like a child and without an OS bias.

Bye for now and be blessed!

 

[epostle]

There is the distinction between original sin and actual sin. You are confusing the two. The former is much more in a corporate sense, whereas the latter is an individualistic thing. We are fallen creatures – even a baby (because it is human; therefore fallen) – , with original sin.

You need to synthesize Rom 5:12 with its context and 1 Cor 15:22: “. . . in Adam all die” (NIV). Note: “IN Adam,” not “because” of Adam’s original sin, which gave us a propensity, and then we died because of our actual sin,” as you are trying to assert. The Fall is that of the entire human race; we are all in the same boat. Calvin and Luther actually taught a more profound Fall than Catholicism holds, where all free will was destroyed, and man’s very nature became a “sin nature.” Catholics don’t believe that. We think the main effect is concupiscence. But it is there from the beginning, before actual sin occurs. Death itself is a consequence of this; since no human is physically immortal apart from a supernatural resurrection, we are all therefore fallen (Gen 2:17, 3:1 ff.).
There are a host of biblical proofs for this. King David writes:

Surely I have been a sinner from birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me (Psalm 51:5)
The context of Romans 5:12 abundantly proves this:

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, EVEN OVER THOSE WHO DID NOT SIN BY BREAKING A COMMAND . . . if the many died by the trespass of the one man [Paul then repeatedly contrasts this universal fall with positive parallelism of the grace available in Christ] . . . the gift of God is not like the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation . . . by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man . . . the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men . . . through the disobedience of one man the many were made sinners . . .
(Romans 5:14-19 [NIV]; see also 5:20-21)

This is clearly teaching that all human beings were affected by original sin, whether we sin actually or not, contrary to your point of view (which I continue to say is a mild form of semi-Pelagianism). It is not their own (actual) sin which brings this about, but the sin inherited from Adam and Eve, which constitutes the Fall. We have to be saved from this abnormal state. And this is why most Christians have believed in infant and regenerative baptism, precisely because of the effects of original sin, and the need to counter them.

Again, your view (quite typical of Baptist-type and generic evangelical theology) is excessively individualistic. This is not the biblical outlook, which is far more communitarian (and which is behind Paul’s thinking in his repeated analogies between Adam and Christ, in the above passage). Original sin is communal, and in some sense so is salvation, which is why the Bible speaks of whole households being saved, and why we believe that parents can “stand in” for infants. Indeed, in the context of Romans 5, Paul makes the same point, for in Romans 6:2-6 and hinted at after that, he follows through with his analogies by bringing in baptism: we were “buried with him” and then raised with Him in baptism (6:4).

The dominion of the devil is a result of original sin; it caused a catastrophic cosmic disorder (Gen 3:15, Jn 12:31, 14:30, 2 Cor 4:4, Heb 2:14, 2 Pet 2:19). That’s why the theological liberals who deny original sin (if not sin itself) invariably deny the existence of the devil and evil.

The Gnostics and Manichaeans denied original sin by claiming that the moral corruption of mankind came from an external principle of evil. The Pelagians (like you) taught that the sin of Adam was transmitted not by inheritance but merely by the imitation of a bad example. They thought that death, suffering and concupiscence were not punishments for sin, but natural conditions for mankind, which was created in a pure state of nature. And they denied baptismal regeneration and regarded baptism as a sign only. St. Augustine fought against this, and his views were adopted by the medieval Church. Liberal Protestantism denied it.
The Biblical Evidence for Original Sin

 

[KenAllan]

Everyone is a sinner and everyone sins, even Mary!

Mary was born a sinner and Mary sinned!

The whole point is everybody is a sinner. The only person who was sinless and never sinned was Jesus who is God.

Therefore to teach Mary was without sin makes you nothing more than a false prophet teaching the lies of the god of this world as truths from God.

 

[epostle]

Everyone is a sinner and everyone sins, even Mary!

Mary was born a sinner and Mary sinned!

The whole point is everybody is a sinner. The only person who was sinless and never sinned was Jesus who is God.

Therefore to teach Mary was without sin makes you nothing more than a false prophet teaching the lies of the god of this world as truths from God.

"Mary is a sinner" is a recent tradition of men, unheard of even during the reformation. You make the angel Gabriel a liar when he said, "Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord IS with you." "Full of Grace" leaves no room for sin, not even the propensity to sin. Who else was given this title/description? Your psychotic ramblings diminish the uniqueness of the Incarnation and that is why it is a doctrine of demons.

 

[epostle]

10 THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT OUR LADY OF LOURDES AND ST. BERNADETTE


1. THE STORY OF ST. BERNADETTE IS NOT JUST FOR GIRLS

Our Lady did not appear at Lourdes just to touch the hearts of tween girls throughout the ages. There is, indeed, much that speaks to the heart of the young girl. But anyone, of any age or gender can find in the story of St. Bernadette a story that will resonate truth within their hearts.
The appearance of Our Lady at Lourdes was not just for Bernadette – it could be heard by all; a sign for all pointing to Our Lady’s son, Jesus Christ.

2. THIS GREAT SAINT WAS A PRODUCT OF ‘POOR CATECHESIS’

She had the minimal schooling of a poor girl of her time, compounded by missing lessons due to ill health and the fact that she was needed at home to help care for siblings. To the chagrin of the teaching Sister preparing her for her First Holy Communion, Bernadette was a technically abysmal Catechism student. But she received the most important preparation – that which can hardy be replicated in a classroom – being raised in a family whose greatest riches were their faith. There is profound understanding in this heart which would one day write, "I was nothing, and of this nothing God made something great. In Holy Communion I am heart to heart with Jesus. How sublime is my destiny."
It was the young Bernadette’s lack of schooling which made her testimony regarding the apparitions all the more believable. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception had been defined by Pope Pius IX just four years before Bernadette’s visions. The quote “I am the Immaculate Conception” coming from the lips of a young, rural girl possessing minimal scholarship had an indisputable veracity.

3. BELIEF IN THE APPARITIONS AT LOURDES ARE NOT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH FOR CATHOLICS

The appearance of Our Lady to Bernadette is considered to be private revelation and adds nothing to the public deposit of faith – and so no Catholic is obligated to believe. The millions of believers, Catholic and non-Catholic, who visit Lourdes each year are, though, a testimony to the fact that those who do not believe in Our Lady’s appearance at Lourdes must be something of a minority.

4. “THE SONG OF BERNADETTE”

A variety of authors wrote about St. Bernadette and the apparitions at Lourdes. But 20th century cultural popularity of St. Bernadette owes much to “The Song of Bernadette” and the efforts of its author. Franz Werfel, a Jewish German writer found himself in Lourdes while trying to escape to Portugal after France fell to the Nazis. Families who took in Werfel and his wife told them the story of Bernadette and her visions of Our Lady. Werfel vowed that if they should be able to escape, he would write the story of St. Bernadette. True to his promise, his first task when arriving in the United States was to write the beautiful work of historical fiction (which is more historical than fictional), The Song of Bernadette. An interesting bit of trivia: the structure of this bestseller is itself a reference to the holy rosary – five sections of ten chapters each.

5. POPE BENEDICT XVI

Lourdes has had a special place in the hearts of many popes in the past 156 years. Blessed Pope John Paul II made three pilgrimages to Lourdes. He also proclaimed February 11, the feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, as World Day of the Sick.
Lourdes and St. Bernadette also figure prominently in the life of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. He was born on St. Bernadette’s feast day of April 16 in 1927. In his Angelus address on the first Sunday of Lent in 2008 – the 150th anniversary of Our Lady’s first appearance at Lourdes – the Holy Father reminded us of its enduring significance , “The message that Our Lady continues to spread in Lourdes recalls the words that Jesus spoke at the very beginning of his public mission, which we hear several times during these days of Lent: 'Repent, and believe in the Gospel,' pray and do penance. Let us accept Mary's invitation which echoes Christ's and ask her to obtain for us that we may 'enter' Lent with faith, to live this season of grace with inner joy and generous commitment.”
Culminating his years as Pope, serving with “inner joy and generous commitment”, it was on February 11 of last year (2013) that he took the unprecedented (in modern times) step of announcing his stepping down from the papacy.

6. LESSONS OF HUMILITY

Those who are looking for lessons in humility - and shouldn’t we all? - can find multiple examples in the story of St. Bernadette. From Bernadette and her humble, devout family, to the Church and civic officials, all the way to her teacher – who learned her lesson rather late – there is great food for contemplation in the stories of those characters who surrounded the young saint. Be they actual persons or fictionalized composites, they are all studies in growth in humility.

7. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE WATER

The spring at Lourdes was uncovered by St. Bernadette at the command of Our Lady, who asked her to drink of the as-yet-unseen spring and wash in it. Since then, millions have imbibed and bathed in the water of Lourdes. Early on, some entrepreneurial sorts had hoped to find particular properties in the water which could turn Lourdes into a popular spa destination. But the water was found to be only pure and potable. Faith is the ‘secret’ ingredient. As Bernadette said, “One must have faith and pray; the water will have no virtue without faith.”

8. ST. BERNADETTE DID NOT AVAIL HERSELF OF THE WATERS AT LOURDES

Never in good health, St. Bernadette suffered greatly, and with silent good nature, in the final years of her life. She held fast to Our Lady’s promise that she wasn’t promised “happiness in this world, but in the next.”
When she was 22, she joined the Sisters of Charity of Nevers. She was content to be apart from public life, regarding herself as a tool, such as a broom, which had served its purpose and then “the broom placed behind the door once it has been used.” The teacher who had been harsh to her in her student years was to be her novice mistress and as harsh to the young sister as she had been to the student. It was not until this nun realized the sanctity with which Bernadette was bearing her final affliction of tuberculosis of the bone that she realized what a truly holy young woman she had been privileged to teach and guide. Despite her agony, Bernadette declined the opportunity to revisit Lourdes in search for a miraculous cure.

9. THERE IS INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EVALUATION

Pope Saint Pius X established the Lourdes Medical Bureau to investigate cases of medical miracles. This Medical Bureau is a medical institution and not under Church supervision. Over 7,000 people have asked to have their cases declared as miraculous cures, yet fewer than 70 been signed off on by both the Church and the Lourdes Medical Bureau as being cures with no scientific explanation. Because this system for rigorous investigation was established early and openly, verified miracles from Lourdes are considered to be the most reliable and least controversial.

10. YOU, TOO, CAN GO TO LOURDES

If you are suffering or merely curious, a pilgrimage to Lourdes may be just what you are looking for. Volunteers of all sorts, not only medical professionals, are needed to help in a variety of ways, including helping the sick prepare for their opportunity to bathe in the water of Lourdes. A week of time given in love brings its own miraculous gift to the hearts of those who spend time with the ‘malades’ on their pilgrimages.

 

[willfollowsGod]

"Mary is a sinner" is a recent tradition of men, unheard of even during the reformation. You make the angel Gabriel a liar when he said, "Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord IS with you." "Full of Grace" leaves no room for sin, not even the propensity to sin. Who else was given this title/description? Your psychotic ramblings diminish the uniqueness of the Incarnation and that is why it is a doctrine of demons.

Saying that Mary was full of grace does not make her sinless as Jesus was. It is not a doctrine of demons nowhere in the Bible does it say Mary was sinless. If she was that would be in the Bible but it is not. Jesus did not say it, the prophecy about Mary in the Old Testament does not say that, Paul's letters do not say it, etc. Instead she was full of grace because God chose one who had never slept with a man to conceive through the Holy Spirit, Jesus who would save man from their sins. Plus if Mary is sinless, then we would most likely be told to worship her, but it says that nowhere. This is why I have a problem with Catholicism but no problem with people who are Catholic but believe everything that is orthodox Christianity. God bless.

 

[epostle]

Saying that Mary was full of grace does not make her sinless as Jesus was.

Mary was sinless because of the merits of the cross, she did nothing on her own. It's not just saying it, God said it through His messenger Gabriel. I have quotes from Protestant Greek scholars on the meaning of "Full of Grace", would you like to see them?

It is not a doctrine of demons nowhere in the Bible does it say Mary was sinless.

Does "Full of Grace" mean a little bit of sin can still hide in the corner???
Where in the bible does it say that all doctrines to be trustworthy must be explicitly found in the Bible ? Nowhere. It is a man made tradition.

If she was that would be in the Bible but it is not.

Those terms are not in the Bible, but the teaching is inferred, and well supported by the original Greek meaning of "Full of Grace" and a basic understanding of foreshadowing (typology) in the Old Testament.

Jesus did not say it,

Do you know more about Mary than her Son? Do you know more about her Son than she does? Scripture doesn't say Jesus loved his mother either.

the prophecy about Mary in the Old Testament does not say that,

Then explain why there are so many parallels.
The Old Testament Ark was said to contain three things:
the stone tablets of the Ten Commandments carved by the finger of God,
the priestly rod of Moses’ brother Aaron, and
the heavenly manna that sustained Israel in post-Egyptian wandering.

While the old Ark is acacia wood wrapped in gold, the New Ark of the Covenant is the Immaculate Woman Mary. Since being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, her womb became the dwelling place of God on Earth until the birth of Christ. As the New Testament is a perfection and fulfillment of the Old, so too is Christ’s Incarnation in the Virgin Mary a perfection of the Old Ark of the Covenant. The contents of the New Ark perfect the contents of the Old Ark insofar as Christ the Lord takes upon himself the roles of the former objects:
Word of God, (the stone tablets of the Ten Commandments carved by the finger of God,)
Eternal Priest. (the priestly rod of Moses’ brother Aaron, and)
Bread of Life, (the heavenly manna that sustained Israel in post-Egyptian wandering.)



There is much more

Paul's letters do not say it, etc.

Paul's letters were addressed to specific churches for specific problems, they were never intended to be comprehensive treaties on the development of doctrine.

Instead she was full of grace because God chose one who had never slept with a man to conceive through the Holy Spirit, Jesus who would save man from their sins. Plus if Mary is sinless, then we would most likely be told to worship her, but it says that nowhere.

Such excessive piety to Mary was condemned as a heresy in the 4th century by the Catholic Church. Mary was dedicated from youth to serve in the Temple which meant taking a vow of perpetual virginity. Such a custom is found in the OT. and was a custom in 1st century Judaism.

An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many. According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: "The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ" (Patrology, 1:120–1).

To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.

However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated "virgin of the Lord," to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).

According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit.
read more here: Mary: Ever Virgin | Catholic Answers

This is why I have a problem with Catholicism but no problem with people who are Catholic but believe everything that is orthodox Christianity. God bless.

You have a problem with Catholicism because you let anti-Catholics misinform you.

 

[epostle]

STRICT RULES FOR MODERN MIRACLES
Scroll down some

 

[Roberth]

You make the angel Gabriel a liar when he said, "Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord IS with you." "Full of Grace" leaves no room for sin, not even the propensity to sin. Who else was given this title/description? Your psychotic ramblings diminish the uniqueness of the Incarnation and that is why it is a doctrine of demons.

Then "there is none righteous, no, not even one" does not included Mary. But Paul didn't Mary exempt, did he?

And Christ said, "There is none good but one, that is, God." Again, Christ didn't exempt His biological mother. Hence Christ as the Son of Man was "born of woman" "according to the seed of David."

The Immaculate Conception is a infallible doctrine according to the RCC, but it is clearly not supported in Scripture and therefore it is a heresy of the highest order.

 

[Roberth]

Does "Full of Grace" mean a little bit of sin can still hide in the corner???

"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:14

"And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace" John 1:16

So, if you interpret "full of grace" to mean sinless then according to John 1:16 all believers are sinless, not just Mary.

Does that agree with the rest of the Bible?

No! Try 1 John 1:8 for starters.

 

[valiant]

"Mary is a sinner" is a recent tradition of men, unheard of even during the reformation. You make the angel Gabriel a liar when he said, "Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord IS with you." "Full of Grace" leaves no room for sin, not even the propensity to sin. Who else was given this title/description? Your psychotic ramblings diminish the uniqueness of the Incarnation and that is why it is a doctrine of demons.

LOL the New Testament reveals that she is a sinner, the woman who allowed her young son to go astray when she should have been looking after Him and who tried to interfere with His ministry and was roundly rebuked.

The same word for 'full of grace' is used in Eph 1.6, 'He has made us full of grace in the Beloved'. So does that mean we are all born without sin? The word actually means highly favoured, someone to whom God had shown great favour'.

You Roman Catholics twist Greek words to suit your foul doctrines.

 

[valiant]

Does "Full of Grace" mean a little bit of sin can still hide in the corner???

The Greek word means 'highly favoured' and is used of all Christians in Ephesians 1.6. God showed favour to her in that as a sinner she was allowed to birth the Messiah. God showed favour to us by accepting us in Christ.

 

[valiant]

There is much more Paul's letters were addressed to specific churches for specific problems, they were never intended to be comprehensive treaties on the development of doctrine.

So the whole of the New Testament is lacking a comprehensive treatment of doctrine? Guess where you have to go for that, the bloodstained political body called the Roman Catholic church.

An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many. According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: "The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ" (Patrology, 1:120–1).

To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.

However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated "virgin of the Lord," to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).

According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit.


You have a problem with Catholicism because you let anti-Catholics misinform you.

I love the way that the Protevangelium gets younger and younger. You'll soon be making it pre-Christian lol Far from being an important document no one in the first two centuries accepted the Protevangelium LOL It was written by a fanatic for a specific purpose. It has no standing. But it is all good Islamic doctrine from the Quran

I wonder why they forgot to put all this nonsense in the Gospels? LOL

And it is quite clear from an unbiased reading of the New Testament that Mary did have other children.

 

[KenAllan]

You must understand epostle that by teaching "Full of Grace" means no room for sin you are saying that Grace is a physical object. If a glass is full of water then no more water can be poured in because water is a physical object.

Grace is a standing with God and Grace is a blessing from God. But you Catholics have called God a liar and teach Grace is a physical object.

Its no wonder why you are a Catholic when you would rather listen to the false teachings of the Catholic Church instead of the Truths from God. Does it really make you feel better then everybody when you teach the commandments of the Catholic Church as Truths from God?

You seem to delight in the false teachings of the Catholic Church. Could it be you have never accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior and this is why you are walking in darkness?

The Pharisees knew everything about God and the Scriptures. They knew the Scriptures inside and out. But, the problem with the Pharisees was their Heart was darkened and far from God, just like you epostle. Your Heart is darkened to God and His Truths, teaching as Doctrines the commandments of the Catholic Church. In Vain you Worship God epostle because you have hardened your Heart towards God.

 

[fordman]

Am I to gather that you have gone quite mad? It seems so to me.

What you wish to gather of me, or seems to you of my sanity is of no consequent to me Pop's, so grow up.

The Roman Catholic churches so called revelations from the Holy Spirit are so ridiculous that they are excluded even from even being seen as possibly tenable. They are the proof of a still decadent church. I would rather trust anyone but them.

Yes, your hatred of the Catholic Church is quite evident, you have made that clear. So how bout in the future you give us something thats a wee bit more perspicacious.

But you see you misunderstand how the Holy Spirit works. He applies to individuals individual Scriptures. Thus His applications are many and variable.

Hmmm... so what it sounds to me your saying is that there can be more than one interpretation of the Bible. if that is your belief, I whole heartedly disagree, for the word "truth" is used several times in the New Testament. However, the plural version of the word "truth" never appears in Scripture. Therefore, there can only be one Truth.

So let me ask you valleyant, how can there be tens of thousands (if you don't beleive it, just look at the yellow pages under "Christian Churches" to see all the differnt denominations/sects in your town alone, then multiply it by all the cities/towns throughtout the Globe) of non-Catholic Christian denominations all claiming to have the "Truth" (i.e., the correct interpretation of the Bible)?

For that matter, aren't all non-Catholic Christians individuals you are talking about claiming "infallibility" when it comes to interpreting the Bible? So when it comes to your thinking of interpreting Scripture, individual non-Catholic Christians claim the same infallibility as the Papacy. If one were to put two persons of the "same" non-Catholic Christian denomination (i.e., two Presybterians, two Lutherans, two Baptists, etc.) in separate rooms with a Bible and a notepad and ask them to write down their "interpretation" of the Bible, passage for passage, shouldn't they then produce the exact same interpretation? If guided by the Holy Spirit as Scripture states, the answer should be "Yes." But would/does that really happen? History has shown that the answer is "No." Hell, Christian Chat is a perfect example of this. Just look at all the differnt threads of people disagreeing on what this passage of Scripture really means, or what that passage of Scripture means, all claiming their interpretation is guided by the Holy Spirit. The God I know is not a God of disunity or confusion as I witness here within this forum amoung the non-Catholic sects.

There are at least 5 Protestant denominations created every year based on a different interpretation of the Bible. Theoretically, anyone who owns a Bible can create their own denomination based on their own interpretation of Scripture. Taken to its logical conclusion, chaos is what happens when the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura"is applied. And Christ stated "A tree is recognized by its fruit" (Matt.12:33) and the doctrine of Sola Scriptura produces "bad fruit" (disunity, confusion and separation) in which this forum amply proves.
　

This idea that God needs to be bound by a rigid list of doctrines is Satanic. God is above and beyond that. Your problem is that your God is too small. You forget that we are not dealing with some tiny god under the control of the Roman Catholic church. We are dealing with the living God Who reveals Himself to individuals through revelation. There are in fact very few doctrines which are central to being a Christian, and we are all agreed on those..

Says the infallible, absolute, and without error...... pope Valleyant. (sarcasm here)
　


Pax Christi

 

[valiant]

Says the infallible, absolute, and without error...... pope Valleyant.

Phew! you are there at last lol
　

 

[fordman]

Yes, you pax Christi at the end of your posts is nonsense given your attitude. Are you still perpetrating and perpetuating a pretense of not being derogatory?

Really? Now thats funny, (not in the ha-ha way, but in the, thats odd way) I could ask the same thing of you. Since you have self-appointed yourself the Christian Chat morality police, are you going to continue to perpetrate and perpetuate your scolding of Catholics, while giving non-Catholics a pass, or even your blessing?
　

Pax Christi

　

 

[fordman]

Phew! you are there at last lol

Yep... just another typical impotent Valleyant non-answer.
　
　

Pax Christi

 

[Magenta]

Really? Now thats funny, (not in the ha-ha way, but in the, thats odd way) I could ask the same thing of you. Since you have self-appointed yourself the Christian Chat morality police, are you going to continue to perpetrate and perpetuate your scolding of Catholics, while giving non-Catholics a pass, or even your blessing?

Pax Christi

I would ask that you show where I have given blessing to error, but you do not recognize error, and yourself promote it as truth, so your words are, as I said, nonsense and worthless, including in your post above.