-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I know nothing about all the different denominations...
Meaning.. I don't have any knowledge about Calvinism.. nor Calvin.
So how can I have an opinion.
Up until that part of your post... I agreed with you....
I did not say, I disagreed with you about "Calvin"...
I simply said "I don't know about denominations."
So there was no disagreement unless...
You disagree with yourself.
Blessings
O... and If you see... I liked your comment...
Meaning I agreed.
Meaning.. I don't have any knowledge about Calvinism.. nor Calvin.
So how can I have an opinion.
Up until that part of your post... I agreed with you....
I did not say, I disagreed with you about "Calvin"...
I simply said "I don't know about denominations."
So there was no disagreement unless...
You disagree with yourself.
Blessings
O... and If you see... I liked your comment...
Meaning I agreed.
yeah Cyberman,
I know all about all the problems.
I've spoken to about 3 priests I know personally and have suggested doing more teaching during the homily.
All 3 told me it's a Mass not a classroom. I understand what the Mass is, I know what they mean. But I've seen priests on EWTN do exactly what I have in mind and it doesn't interfere at all with the Mass.
Another idea would be to do the Mass a little faster, everything the same but say the prayers quicker, except at the Consecration of course, and then do just 10 MINUTES of catechism. I bet most would like to learn their faith and it might even get more people to go to Mass.
The problem is that folks won't go to bible study. I've heard that they don't understand why it's necessary.
So, they're just starting to explain why it's necessary.
Better late than never, right?
I know all about all the problems.
I've spoken to about 3 priests I know personally and have suggested doing more teaching during the homily.
All 3 told me it's a Mass not a classroom. I understand what the Mass is, I know what they mean. But I've seen priests on EWTN do exactly what I have in mind and it doesn't interfere at all with the Mass.
Another idea would be to do the Mass a little faster, everything the same but say the prayers quicker, except at the Consecration of course, and then do just 10 MINUTES of catechism. I bet most would like to learn their faith and it might even get more people to go to Mass.
The problem is that folks won't go to bible study. I've heard that they don't understand why it's necessary.
So, they're just starting to explain why it's necessary.
Better late than never, right?
than just say so, do not mention islam and jews
the plan of salvation is for all that believe in Jesus.
Catholic believe jews and muslim do not need to Convert.
catholic believe Christian and muslim share the same God
it is Lie, If so why Allah not tell Mohammad that Jesus is God
lumen gentium 2/16
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.[18] There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance (cf. Rom. 11:29-29).
But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are
the Moslems: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham,
and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day. Nor is God remote from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, since he gives to all men life and breath and all things
did moslem God and Abraham God same?, did Allah Abraham God
nlet me reapet my question, If so, why don't Allah tell mohammad that Jesus is God
let me give you a link that vatican not Cinvert jews
http://time.com/4145056/vactican-catholics-jews-convert/
it demonstrate how vatican attack Bible disguisedly, look like not attack but It is
if jews do not need to accept Jesus, why Peter, Paul, and Stephen evangelized to Jews
in other word Catholic say Peter was wrong. She did in polite way to make people unaware that she attack Bible and look like love Jesus
the plan of salvation is for all that believe in Jesus.
Catholic believe jews and muslim do not need to Convert.
catholic believe Christian and muslim share the same God
it is Lie, If so why Allah not tell Mohammad that Jesus is God
lumen gentium 2/16
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.[18] There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance (cf. Rom. 11:29-29).
But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are
the Moslems: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham,
and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day. Nor is God remote from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, since he gives to all men life and breath and all things
did moslem God and Abraham God same?, did Allah Abraham God
nlet me reapet my question, If so, why don't Allah tell mohammad that Jesus is God
let me give you a link that vatican not Cinvert jews
http://time.com/4145056/vactican-catholics-jews-convert/
it demonstrate how vatican attack Bible disguisedly, look like not attack but It is
if jews do not need to accept Jesus, why Peter, Paul, and Stephen evangelized to Jews
in other word Catholic say Peter was wrong. She did in polite way to make people unaware that she attack Bible and look like love Jesus
W
I will give one last response before I have to call it quits and finish my homework.
In regards to the Pope and the Bible I just want to make this comment.
I understand if you do not want to believe that the Holy Spirit guides the church through the Pope, but you ought not to object to the possibility of it on principle. What I mean is that we all believe that the Holy Spirit can inspire and guide through men. Clearly this is what happened with the writting of the Scriptures: the Holy Spirit inspires fallible human agents as His instruments and through them He speaks infallibly. So we all acknowledg that this is a possibiility and in the case of the Bible a reality.
Surely it would be foolish to say, "I don't listen to the Bible because it is merely the words of men!". As Dei Verbum says, "It is the Word of God in the words of men". Catholics simply believe that God has seen it good and chosen to use this same process on a continual basis to help guid His people throughout time. I think most Christians believe that the Spirit guided Peter and Paul etc, so I don't know why we should, at least in principle, be so against the idea of God continuing this process throughout history.
Certainly we all can admit to the need for some guidance given that there are now over 30,000 different Christian denominations all claiming to have the "correct" interpretation of the Bible.
And of course I must add one final line on a closing related note that will surely win me many agnry replies but I feel like more people should follow the Protestant RC Sproul and realize that if there is no such thing as Apostolic Succession and the Holy Spirit is not infallibly guiding the Church then we CAN'T HAVE AN INFALLIBLE LIST OF THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. Sproul says that at best we can say that we have "a fallible list of infallible books". We do realize that Jesus left us no such list correct? And that the canon that existed until the time of Martin Luther came from the Catholic councils of Carthage and Hippo.
I guess the only point I am making is that almost every post has responded about how "we go by the Bible and not by the teachings of men!", but if we deny God's ability or choice to work through men in His Church then we have no foundation for beliving in the Bible in the first place.
Anyways that is a lot more than I wanted to write...heh, thanks for the engagement guys
In regards to the Pope and the Bible I just want to make this comment.
I understand if you do not want to believe that the Holy Spirit guides the church through the Pope, but you ought not to object to the possibility of it on principle. What I mean is that we all believe that the Holy Spirit can inspire and guide through men. Clearly this is what happened with the writting of the Scriptures: the Holy Spirit inspires fallible human agents as His instruments and through them He speaks infallibly. So we all acknowledg that this is a possibiility and in the case of the Bible a reality.
Surely it would be foolish to say, "I don't listen to the Bible because it is merely the words of men!". As Dei Verbum says, "It is the Word of God in the words of men". Catholics simply believe that God has seen it good and chosen to use this same process on a continual basis to help guid His people throughout time. I think most Christians believe that the Spirit guided Peter and Paul etc, so I don't know why we should, at least in principle, be so against the idea of God continuing this process throughout history.
Certainly we all can admit to the need for some guidance given that there are now over 30,000 different Christian denominations all claiming to have the "correct" interpretation of the Bible.
And of course I must add one final line on a closing related note that will surely win me many agnry replies but I feel like more people should follow the Protestant RC Sproul and realize that if there is no such thing as Apostolic Succession and the Holy Spirit is not infallibly guiding the Church then we CAN'T HAVE AN INFALLIBLE LIST OF THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. Sproul says that at best we can say that we have "a fallible list of infallible books". We do realize that Jesus left us no such list correct? And that the canon that existed until the time of Martin Luther came from the Catholic councils of Carthage and Hippo.
I guess the only point I am making is that almost every post has responded about how "we go by the Bible and not by the teachings of men!", but if we deny God's ability or choice to work through men in His Church then we have no foundation for beliving in the Bible in the first place.
Anyways that is a lot more than I wanted to write...heh, thanks for the engagement guys
Sorry that I won't have time to reply to all the various objections as I said, but this one is brief enough and several of you have mention it. In the statements such as the above quote from Lumen Gentium, the Church is not saying that Jews can be saved by/through Judaism and Muslims through Islam and Atheists through (science??), but rather, that we hold out the hope that such persons, if (IF!) they are seeking to live the truth in charity to the best of their ability and conscience, could possibly still be saved through Christ.
Now this is not an easy topic so you can't just read one paragraph of a document and then start making accusations. The Church as early as the Council of Orange in the early 5th century had already made statements about salvation only being available through Christ, and these have been reaffirmed in various councils, particularly Trent in answer to the Reformers. So the idea is not that there are other saviors besides Christ, but rather that because God IS Truth and IS Charity, we Hope (note well, we hope, not that it is certain but that we have to at least hope and pray), that those who have had no chance to know Christ could still be saved by Him because they have sought Him in seeking the Truth and Charity. So think for instance of the Last Judgement in Matthew, those who are saved are those who feed the poor and visited the imprisoned etc, and those who are condemned say "but Lord didn't we...". Now don't confuse me for trying to teach salvation by works which I already can hear people jumping into, but the Church merely recognizes that while we know that Christ alone is the savior it seems like a good idea to hope and pray for the millions and millions of people who will never have the chance to know Him by name, and believe that because He is a good Savior it might be possible for Him to finds means to save such persons.
To deny this hope is to admit that there are millions of people who God created without giving any chance of salvation. Think of the people living on other continents 5 minutes after Jesus died. They would have no chance to ever hear of this beautiful story about the God who entered into His creation to rescue His lost bride. So the Church atleast says we can't condemn them and we hope that God can save them throught he little knowledge of His Son that they would have from their conscience and reason which are glimmers of the image of God in man which He implanted that we might know Him.
As CS Lewis (an Anglican ) says: "Is it not frightfully unfair that this new life should beconfined to people who have heard of Christ and been able to believe in Him? But the truth is God hasnot told us what His arrangements about the other people are. We do know that no man can be savedexcept through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him"
I don't expect that to be an exhaustive explanation of the matter to convince you, but it is just to go to show you that you have to be able to understand something of the context of these teachings to understand them correctly.
Now this is not an easy topic so you can't just read one paragraph of a document and then start making accusations. The Church as early as the Council of Orange in the early 5th century had already made statements about salvation only being available through Christ, and these have been reaffirmed in various councils, particularly Trent in answer to the Reformers. So the idea is not that there are other saviors besides Christ, but rather that because God IS Truth and IS Charity, we Hope (note well, we hope, not that it is certain but that we have to at least hope and pray), that those who have had no chance to know Christ could still be saved by Him because they have sought Him in seeking the Truth and Charity. So think for instance of the Last Judgement in Matthew, those who are saved are those who feed the poor and visited the imprisoned etc, and those who are condemned say "but Lord didn't we...". Now don't confuse me for trying to teach salvation by works which I already can hear people jumping into, but the Church merely recognizes that while we know that Christ alone is the savior it seems like a good idea to hope and pray for the millions and millions of people who will never have the chance to know Him by name, and believe that because He is a good Savior it might be possible for Him to finds means to save such persons.
To deny this hope is to admit that there are millions of people who God created without giving any chance of salvation. Think of the people living on other continents 5 minutes after Jesus died. They would have no chance to ever hear of this beautiful story about the God who entered into His creation to rescue His lost bride. So the Church atleast says we can't condemn them and we hope that God can save them throught he little knowledge of His Son that they would have from their conscience and reason which are glimmers of the image of God in man which He implanted that we might know Him.
As CS Lewis (an Anglican
) says: "Is it not frightfully unfair that this new life should beconfined to people who have heard of Christ and been able to believe in Him? But the truth is God hasnot told us what His arrangements about the other people are. We do know that no man can be savedexcept through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him"I don't expect that to be an exhaustive explanation of the matter to convince you, but it is just to go to show you that you have to be able to understand something of the context of these teachings to understand them correctly.
than you do not agree with lumen gentium
1. Lumen gentium state muslim and Abraham share the same God. Do you agree?
2. It is state in lumen gentium why jews do not need Jesus
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.[18] There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh
the reason jews do not need Jesus is the covenants and promises and because Jesus Born from jews
and you Said jews save because catholic expect they accept Jesus.
so you Said that is not in lumen gentium
W
The segmants which you have quoted simply point out that the Church is affirming that these faiths have commonalities to Christianity.
I hope you also believe that Jews and Christians believe in the same God considering that Christ comes as the fulfillment of the people of Israel and is Yahweh in the flesh (He applies God's name as revealed to Moses to Himself, "I AM"). To believe anything less is Marcionism.
Now that being said, no where does Lumen Gentium say that such people are not in need of Jesus, you have filled that line in yourself my friend.
W
Correct, I agree, Christ is the fullness of revelation, the "image of the invisible God", but we only know of this revelation through the Bible and Tradition which we have received through the Church. That is my point, it is in no way to undermind the centrality of Christ but simply to say that Christ seems to have chosen to use instruments such as His Word and as I believe His Church to communicate Himself to us.
But you have to admit that you only know of Christ because of His Word in the Scriptures and Tradition. What I mean is, if you grew up in some rural area of Africa and never heard of Christ you would most likely not have been able to come to such a clear understanding of Him and relationship with Him; you would only be able to know Him in the vague way that Paul speaks of in Acts 17 for instance...
But you have to admit that you only know of Christ because of His Word in the Scriptures and Tradition. What I mean is, if you grew up in some rural area of Africa and never heard of Christ you would most likely not have been able to come to such a clear understanding of Him and relationship with Him; you would only be able to know Him in the vague way that Paul speaks of in Acts 17 for instance...
yes friend Jews and Christian share the same God, but not muslim
do you believe Jews do not need to accept Jesus that die oN the Cross 2000 years ago for they salvation?
This is what Vatican said
The Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with Jews released a document outlining developments in the church's stance towards Judaism, including that Jews do not need to be converted to Catholicism to find salvation since God did not revoke his covenant with Israel
Again catholic believe Jews save not because accept Jesus but covenant with abraham
do you share this believe?
do you believe Jews do not need to accept Jesus that die oN the Cross 2000 years ago for they salvation?
This is what Vatican said
The Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with Jews released a document outlining developments in the church's stance towards Judaism, including that Jews do not need to be converted to Catholicism to find salvation since God did not revoke his covenant with Israel
Again catholic believe Jews save not because accept Jesus but covenant with abraham
do you share this believe?
If I may...
I was raised Catholic. I became born again in my 20's. I became Protestant. The Catholic Church had nothing for me back in those days. No bible study. No nothing.
I do agree with Protestant doctrine but you're absolutely correct that not having a central figure is ruining Christianity.
Some Protestants believe that the Bible is God.
We are not people of the book, like the Muslims.
JESUS is God. HE is our book.
Do many even know what it took to get the bible put together?
When I mention that it was done by the CC I'm told that God put it together.
Do many even know that some books in the "original" bible were then taken out?
One of these is the Didache.
Oh, but had it been left in !
I could go on and on.
I just want to say that JESUS is our Lord,
not the bible.
Although I do believe it should be the ultimate authority.
problem is:
WHO is to say what any one verse REALLY means???
Blessings.
I was raised Catholic. I became born again in my 20's. I became Protestant. The Catholic Church had nothing for me back in those days. No bible study. No nothing.
I do agree with Protestant doctrine but you're absolutely correct that not having a central figure is ruining Christianity.
Some Protestants believe that the Bible is God.
We are not people of the book, like the Muslims.
JESUS is God. HE is our book.
Do many even know what it took to get the bible put together?
When I mention that it was done by the CC I'm told that God put it together.
Do many even know that some books in the "original" bible were then taken out?
One of these is the Didache.
Oh, but had it been left in !
I could go on and on.
I just want to say that JESUS is our Lord,
not the bible.
Although I do believe it should be the ultimate authority.
problem is:
WHO is to say what any one verse REALLY means???
Blessings.
W
You are quoting a media article about the document and not the document itself. The document just doesn't say that Jews don't need Jesus, the Church is clear in repeated affirmations about that fact. The point of the document you are reading is to make an effort to make progress in religious dialog with non-Christians in an effort to draw them closer to the truth, thus the Church acknowledges our common roots with them. If you really want to prove your supposed point that Lumen Gentium says what you are trying to make it say you would need to show me the line from the actual document, not a secondary source misquoting it; but I am quite sure that such a line does not exist.
W
Hi FranC,
Thanks for your well thought out replies. This is what we believe as Catholics also, so we are in agreement here I believe. Dei Verbum speaks of Christ as God's Word and Revelation, and the Bible and Tradition as sources which mediate that Revelation. Anyways, thanks for the reply.
I am doing a bad job at not replying like I said I was, heh, sorry
Thanks for your well thought out replies. This is what we believe as Catholics also, so we are in agreement here I believe. Dei Verbum speaks of Christ as God's Word and Revelation, and the Bible and Tradition as sources which mediate that Revelation. Anyways, thanks for the reply.
I am doing a bad job at not replying like I said I was, heh, sorry
E
In order to understand any single verse within scripture you must first look at the context of the passage and the book or letter and if you study God's word contextually you will find all verse systematically fit together, you see we need to study before we start picking verses out of context because if we do that we will soon see that the bible contradicts it's self and we as christians know very well it doesn't.
this is the document it self
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.[18] There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance
what people is this talking about
read that artile above and you know what It is
the article is just a translations for this document my friend
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.[18] There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance
what people is this talking about
read that artile above and you know what It is
the article is just a translations for this document my friend
