Why I could personally never chose to be Catholic

[Webers_Home]

-
One thing I have to hand Teresa is credit for never making excuses for her
deplorable spiritual condition in the private letters she wrote to spiritual
counselors. She sought their help, just like any sick person would seek help
from medical professionals; but the only remedy they had to offer the poor
woman was that ridiculous exorcism performed by Father Rosario Stroscio
towards the end of her life.

/

 

[brakelite]

And apparently, you don't actually read my posts.

I have stated ad nauseam that I don't accuse ANYBODY of being dishonest who simply "disagree" with the Catholic position.
It is only when a person resorts to being dishonest and misrepresents Catholic teaching that I expose them for what they are doing.

I will now challenge YOU to show me a post where I accused somebody of ignorance or lying when they were simply "disagreeing" with me.
Happy hunting . . .

Where did I suggest you were accusing anyone of lying? You have, as is the manner of many here, (and which I have associated many times with Catholics in particular) a decided skill in diverting attention away from those things you struggle to deal with. I don't mind you exposing those who misrepresent Catholic teaching, or those who lie in regards your church. That's fine. I do the same with those who lie and misrepresent my church. But that wasn't the subject or the thrust of my post to you. My observation is of the manner in which you do those things. Quote:
Thanks for yet another verbose - and extremely pointless anti-Catholic rant.

That the Church is like "Noah's Ark" isn't even a teaching of Catholicism - so your entire point is as silly as the time it takes you to formulate these woefully-ignorant little tirades . . .

My objection to your posts is the constant demeaning manner in which you engage others. The insults and put-downs proliferate your posts, and have done so for a long time. This does not reflect a Christian character.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Where did I suggest you were accusing anyone of lying? You have, as is the manner of many here, (and which I have associated many times with Catholics in particular) a decided skill in diverting attention away from those things you struggle to deal with. I don't mind you exposing those who misrepresent Catholic teaching, or those who lie in regards your church. That's fine. I do the same with those who lie and misrepresent my church. But that wasn't the subject or the thrust of my post to you. My observation is of the manner in which you do those things. Quote:
Thanks for yet another verbose - and extremely pointless anti-Catholic rant.

My mistake.

I should have said that I don't expose people for simply "disagreeing" with me.
I expose those who attack my faith and my Church and perpetuate filthy lies about it.

That the Church is like "Noah's Ark" isn't even a teaching of Catholicism - so your entire point is as silly as the time it takes you to formulate these woefully-ignorant little tirades . . .

My objection to your posts is the constant demeaning manner in which you engage others. The insults and put-downs proliferate your posts, and have done so for a long time. This does not reflect a Christian character.

But you don't object to the lies, myths and falsehoods that those whom I am speaking to proliferate??
That's perfectly okay with you?

What a profound hypocrisy . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

One thing I have to hand Teresa is credit for never making excuses for her
deplorable spiritual condition in the private letters she wrote to spiritual counselors. She sought their help, just like any sick person would seek help from medical professionals; but the only remedy they had to offer the poor woman was that ridiculous exorcism performed by Father Rosario Stroscio towards the end of her life.

Thanks for exposing yourself as just another angry and ignorant little anti-Catholic.
You make my job that much easier . . .

 

[brakelite]

But you don't object to the lies, myths and falsehoods that those whom I am speaking to proliferate??
That's perfectly okay with you?

What a profound hypocrisy....

They are speaking of Catholicism. I will leave it up to Catholics to defend their own faith. Calling me a hypocrite after assuming that I approve of lies is an example of your unChristian attitude. I have been visiting forums to discuss faith and practice for over 20 years. In that time, I have never blocked anyone, believing that grace should always be given to those who are in disagreement or opposition. But with you, it's different. You have no intention of discussing truth, your entire motive here is to defend to the death if necessary, your denominational bias, regardless of truth.
Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Good bye.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
The details of Yom Kippur as per Lev 23:27-32, Lev 16:29-34, and Num
29:7 don't really matter all that much to Christians because the New
Testament only concerns itself with the ritual's limitations.

In the New Testament epistle to Hebrews; it's explained that Yom Kippur's
purpose is for addressing sins committed during the past year; i.e. the very
moment that the high priest completes the full and complete ritual, new sins
immediately begin accumulating on the books that require yet another Yom
Kippur; and another, and another, and yet another, ad infinitum; viz: one
Yom Kippur alone isn't sufficient to address sins once and for all time. In
other words: the annual ritual is always and only for addressing the people's
sins one past year at a time; it doesn't extend to sins that the people are on
track to commit in the years ahead.

I was taught in Catechism to speak the following words in my discussion
with a father confessor.

"For these and all the sins of my past life I am heartily sorry".

I wasn't taught to seek absolution for future sins; only for those already on
the books; thus implying that the scope of Christ's atonement is essentially
no different than Yom Kippur's.

As a Roman Catholic, I was in desperate need of a safety net because had I
departed this life in a state of mortal sin, CCC 1035 says I'd go straight to
Hell with no stopover in a purgatory.

In other words: unless Christ's crucifixion was designed to cover my mortal
sins not only after they're committed but also in the future before they're
committed-- i.e. those already on the books and those not yet on the books
-- I would have been lost for sure because according to the Bible; Christ's
is the very last of the God-given sacrifices; i.e. his is the final option.

● Heb 10:26 . . If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth,
there no longer remains sacrifice for sins.

If perchance there are Catholics secretly following this thread without
anyone knowing; I urge you to read, with meticulous care, Heb 10:1-14 and
give this God-given safety net some serious consideration.

NOTE: See post #18 for the Catechism's definition of mortal sin.

/

 

[BreadOfLife]

They are speaking of Catholicism. I will leave it up to Catholics to defend their own faith. Calling me a hypocrite after assuming that I approve of lies is an example of your unChristian attitude. I have been visiting forums to discuss faith and practice for over 20 years. In that time, I have never blocked anyone, believing that grace should always be given to those who are in disagreement or opposition. But with you, it's different. You have no intention of discussing truth, your entire motive here is to defend to the death if necessary, your denominational bias, regardless of truth.
Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Good bye.

Translation:
"How DARE you point out my hypocrisy!"

Duly noted . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

The details of Yom Kippur as per Lev 23:27-32, Lev 16:29-34, and Num
29:7 don't really matter all that much to Christians because the New Testament only concerns itself with the ritual's limitations.

In the New Testament epistle to Hebrews; it's explained that Yom Kippur's purpose is for addressing sins committed during the past year; i.e. the very moment that the high priest completes the full and complete ritual, new sins immediately begin accumulating on the books that require yet another Yom Kippur; and another, and another, and yet another, ad infinitum; viz: one Yom Kippur alone isn't sufficient to address sins once and for all time. In other words: the annual ritual is always and only for addressing the people's sins one past year at a time; it doesn't extend to sins that the people are on track to commit in the years ahead.

I was taught in Catechism to speak the following words in my discussion with a father confessor.

"For these and all the sins of my past life I am heartily sorry".

I wasn't taught to seek absolution for future sins; only for those already on the books; thus implying that the scope of Christ's atonement is essentially no different than Yom Kippur's.

As a Roman Catholic, I was in desperate need of a safety net because had I departed this life in a state of mortal sin, CCC 1035 says I'd go straight to Hell with no stopover in a purgatory.

In other words: unless Christ's crucifixion was designed to cover my mortal sins not only after they're committed but also in the future before they're committed-- i.e. those already on the books and those not yet on the books -- I would have been lost for sure because according to the Bible; Christ's is the very last of the God-given sacrifices; i.e. his is the final option.

● Heb 10:26 . . If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins.

If perchance there are Catholics secretly following this thread without anyone knowing; I urge you to read, with meticulous care, Heb 10:1-14 and
give this God-given safety net some serious consideration.

NOTE: See post #18 for the Catechism's definition of mortal sin.

First of all - you can only seek absolution for sins you have committed (past tense).
You cannot ask for forgiveness for this sins you are going to commit in the future because you haven't yet done anything wrong. In other words - your future sins are NOT forgiven until you repent of them.

Jesus's death on the cross paid for the PENALTY for sin. That is REDEMPTION - not forgiveness.
We still need to confess and ask for forgiveness when we sin.

As to your comments on Purgatory above (in RED) - this illustrates what I have been saying to you from the beginning.
You abandoned the Church because of a complete ignorance of Catholic teaching. Purgatory isn't a "stop-over" before going to Hell. It is the Scripturelly prescribed cleansing before entering Heaven (1 Cor. 3:9-15).

 

[Jun2u]

Thanks for exposing yourself as just another angry and ignorant little anti-Catholic.
You make my job that much easier . . .

What job? Like the uncharacteristic words that a Chrstian would not say, that you let go in these forums?

 

[BreadOfLife]

What job? Like the uncharacteristic words that a Chrstian would not say, that you let go in these forums?

I have stated ad nauseam that my purpose on this forum is to dispel myths and lies about the Catholic Church and to expose those who proliferate them.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
One of my "sinful pleasures" is to go about shocking die-hard Catholics by
claiming: "If I never confess another sin for the remainder of my life-- either
mortal, venial, or otherwise --I will still go to heaven; not even God can stop
me now."

The secret to my claim is the very amazing scriptural truth that Christ's
believing followers have been made joint principals in his crucifixion, his
resurrection, and his ascension.

An introduction to joint principal begins at Rom 5:12 and continues thru to
6:11.

/

 

[BreadOfLife]

One of my "sinful pleasures" is to go about shocking die-hard Catholics by claiming: "If I never confess another sin for the remainder of my life-- either mortal, venial, or otherwise --I will still go to heaven; not even God can stop me now."

The secret to my claim is the very amazing scriptural truth that Christ's believing followers have been made joint principals in his crucifixion, his
resurrection, and his ascension.

An introduction to joint principal begins at Rom 5:12 and continues thru to 6:11.

And one of MY favorite things to do is to go around befuddling all of the anti-Catholics by asking them to provide a verse that makes the claim that they can be forgiven of sin without confessing or repenting of it.

The secret to MY challenge is the absence of Scripture ever making this false claim . . .

 

[brakelite]

Translation:
"How DARE you point out my hypocrisy!"

Duly noted . . .

You assume I approve of lies, then call me a hypocrite?
And you continue to deflect from the subject. Your unChrist-like attitude to other believers, reflected in the manner of your responses to them. You are clearly having great difficulty facing up to that defect in your character. Your penchant for creating problems where there aren't any as in the quoted reference above, a case in point.

 

[Helen]

@brakelite

Well, I guess we see from two different perspectives.
While I myself don't agree with the Catholic religion ( for me) ...when the 'chips are down'...and we all (= Christians) are in the final fight...we will face the anti-Christians Beast system together.
So, they are our brothers and sisters, like it or not! For most people it's a 'not'.

Where BOL is concerned, I don't view him as a attacker, but as a defender of what he believes.
I think this is something similar to what we are discussing in the Unity thread.

Unlike some..(which I call legalists)...I myself leave people free to their own beliefs...and if I am worried about them..I believe strongly in PRAYER..it is God's work to change hearts.
Do I warn them if they are going to step off a cliff? Yes obviously. Our calling is redemption. We are our brothers keeper...pray is work , it is good work...prayer gets the job done. Not ever arguing.

When someone is convinced ,that as much as they believe and understand, they are walking in what God has called them to do, and they are where God wants them to be. I will not try and shake that, I would not dare to.
"Before our own Master we stand or fall."

Most people seem very free and ready to tell another person how much they are in error. And I am SURE I have areas of blindness too, we all do! But many would not dare to admit that, and do not believe that...too much pride in those who think that they have everything perfectly 'down pat'.. so many are that deluded and confident in "self".

Anyway...that's my two cents for today, :)

 

[mjrhealth]

So, they are our brothers and sisters, like it or not! For most people it's a 'not'.

I dont believe you will find that is true for all of them, as for any religion created by men, hating religion is not hating the people, no matter how some twist it. And what is one to do, when our Lords young lambs come prancing around, enjoying the new freedom the found in Christ, only to recognize the wolf, for who he is, than when the call out, "hey wolf, i see you", and before they can turn and run, he has them and there legs are ripped off, and that lovey life that was in them is snuffed out.

I care not for teh wolf, he has chosen to be what he is, but we should care for our Lords young lambs and His sheep, for they belong to Him alone, and no man will ever own them. But woe be to that wolf who slays our Lords sheep,

Mat_18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

The bible tells us to,"resist teh devil and he will flee", seems sometimes he just fights harder.

 

[brakelite]

@brakelite

Well, I guess we see from two different perspectives.
While I myself don't agree with the Catholic religion ( for me) ...when the 'chips are down'...and we all (= Christians) are in the final fight...we will face the anti-Christians Beast system together.
So, they are our brothers and sisters, like it or not! For most people it's a 'not'.

Where BOL is concerned, I don't view him as a attacker, but as a defender of what he believes.
I think this is something similar to what we are discussing in the Unity thread.

Unlike some..(which I call legalists)...I myself leave people free to their own beliefs...and if I am worried about them..I believe strongly in PRAYER..it is God's work to change hearts.
Do I warn them if they are going to step off a cliff? Yes obviously. Our calling is redemption. We are our brothers keeper...pray is work , it is good work...prayer gets the job done. Not ever arguing.

When someone is convinced ,that as much as they believe and understand, they are walking in what God has called them to do, and they are where God wants them to be. I will not try and shake that, I would not dare to.
"Before our own Master we stand or fall."

Most people seem very free and ready to tell another person how much they are in error. And I am SURE I have areas of blindness too, we all do! But many would not dare to admit that, and do not believe that...too much pride in those who think that they have everything perfectly 'down pat'.. so many are that deluded and confident in "self".

Anyway...that's my two cents for today, :)

Hi Grace. I think I can go along with that, although I am more disposed to exposing the errors, fallacies and superstitions of Catholicism. Having been brought up in that faith till my early 20s. I am more aware than many of the all encompassing deceitfulness of the system to which so many are bound, but do take great care in avoiding any personal criticism of actual Catholics by suggesting that they cannot be Christian because they are Catholic. I believe...yea, know, that such a great communion of believers such as is the Catholic faith is not devoid of genuine Christians..
However. I know you don't agree with the Protestant/Catholic debates that do pop up on regular occasions. And it does seem that on most occasions they do degenerate into a nasty slanging match and personal acrimony. For me though I think it essential gospel teaching that we expose such a counterfeit fraud for what it is. (Se Revelation 14:6-12) To not do so would be like disbanding the FBI fraud unit because people complain that their counterfeit notes are no longer in circulation. There are many very good sound reasons why I know the RCC to be not just 'antichrist', but THE Antichrist. In fact Grace, Rome fulfils every criteria required of scripture to meet the conditions...the reformers may have been at odds over many things, but one thing they all agreed to. Rome, the system in general, and/or its leadership, was the Antichrist. I have written about and studied this topic for 20 years and as I see the way politics and religion is moving today, am more convinced than ever that Rome is the whore riding the state beast of Revelation 17. That combination, church and state, as a unit exemplified by the Vatican as a theocracy, will in the final days before the second coming become a world-wide global union of church and state led from Rome, its power derived from 10 divisional 'kings' or rulers under the auspices of the UN and in conjunction with international finance and the military. This is something people need to know about...prophecy warns us, so God wants us to be fully aware of the issues.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
There are at least two categories related to people's sin histories. There are
sins on the books and there are sins not on the books.

Sins not on the books were either expunged or were never recorded to begin
with.

Curiously it is possible to be forgiven of one's sins only to have them stay on
the books instead of expunged-- that would be tantamount to a reprieve;
defined as to delay and/or suspend the punishment of someone; such as a
prisoner who is sentenced to death.

For example: former US President Gerald Ford pardoned former US
President Richard Nixon back in 1974 relative to the Watergate scandal.
Ford's pardon in no way exonerated Nixon, it only let him off the hook.
Though the pardon protected Nixon from prosecution; his crimes didn't go
away. In other words: Mr. Nixon will always and forever be on the books of
world history as a crook.

Exoneration-- an adjudication of innocence, which is normally granted when
there is insufficient evidence to convict --is to be much preferred over a
reprieve because exoneration leaves nothing on the books; and if there is
nothing on the books, then there will be nothing down at the end with which
to justify condemning someone to the lake of brimstone depicted at Rev
20:10-15.

Now, watch as I deliberately misquote the following passage in order to draw
attention to something related to Christianity that's very, very important.

"He was delivered over to death for our sins; and was raised to life for our
justifications." (Rom 4:25)

In that misquote, "justification" is plural. In the actual passage, justification
is singular because there is only one justification granted per person. (Heb
10:11-17)

The koiné Greek word translated "justification" is dikaioo (dik-ah-yo'-o)
which essentially means to regard as innocent; i.e. exonerated.

In other words; though Christ's crucifixion was sufficient to obtain
forgiveness for people's sins; his crucifixion alone wasn't sufficient to make it
possible for people to obtain an acquittal. Had he not come back from the
dead, everyone's sins would have remained on the books to be used against
them during the event depicted at Rev 20:11-15.

Christ's believing followers do sin (1John 1:8-10). However, none of their
sins go on record.

● 2Cor 5:19 . . God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not
counting their trespasses against them

The koiné Greek word translated "counting" is logizomai (log-id'-zom-ahee)
which means to take an inventory; i.e. an indictment.

Now supposing a lapsed believer neglects to confess their sins in a timely
manner as per 1John 1:8-10. Are they in danger of hell's fire? No, not the
slightest, because Christ's resurrection granted them an exoneration the
very day they became one of his believing followers, and from that day
forward, they will never again be in danger of eternal suffering.

● John 5:24 . . I assure you: those who listen to my message, and believe in
God who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their
sins, but they have already passed from death into life.

Christ's assurance doesn't extend to Roman Catholics because there's scarcely
a day goes by that they aren't in danger of being condemned for their sins.

/

 

[BreadOfLife]

You assume I approve of lies, then call me a hypocrite?
And you continue to deflect from the subject. Your unChrist-like attitude to other believers, reflected in the manner of your responses to them. You are clearly having great difficulty facing up to that defect in your character. Your penchant for creating problems where there aren't any as in the quoted reference above, a case in point.

Look - as long as you condemn my posts without condemning the lies, myths and falsehoods that I am responding to - then your position is nothing but a giant hypocrisy. Sorry if the truth hurts.

This has nothing do to with having a penchant for creating problems where "none" exist.
ANY time somebody falsely attacks somebody or something - they have created a problem.

Don't shoot the messenger for exposing those lie. Instead, expose the lies . . .

 

[mjrhealth]

Look - as long as you condemn my posts without condemning the lies, myths and falsehoods that I am responding to - then your position is nothing but a giant hypocrisy. Sorry if the truth hurts.

This has nothing do to with having a penchant for creating problems where "none" exist.
ANY time somebody falsely attacks somebody or something - they have created a problem.

Don't shoot the messenger for exposing those lie. Instead, expose the lies . . .

In you own words

Translation:
"How DARE you point out my hypocrisy!"

yes he has exposed your hypocrisy as have many, and teh only one who believes you is you.

Have a lovely day

 

[BreadOfLife]

In you own words
yes he has exposed your hypocrisy as have many, and teh only one who believes you is you.
Have a lovely day

Do you ever actually R*E*A*D the posts and follow the conversation?
I didn't think so . . .