Christ vs the anti-Christ: Who is winning?

[Marymog]

Mary,
Do you not realize that Satan had his talons within the Church from the beginning. And, since you abide by the fact that the CC is the original and oldest "Church" therefore, it should be staunchly followed, have you ever given thought that you are following all the original heresies as well? Can you not just respect that others do not believe as you do and still speak with love?

Hi Nancy,

Yes, I do realize that Satan had his talons within the Church from the beginning. Are you suggesting that the historical Christian writings we have from the 1st and 2nd Century Christians are a product of the Anti-Christ? (The Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp etc)

Yes, I have given thought that to "original heresies" and I have studied them. What, in your opinion, is the earliest heresy commited by the Christian community? I don't mean any heresies talked about in the NT like the one settled at the Council of Jerusalem. I am talking about heresies that we know of from historical writings.

No, I can not respect heretical teachings.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Mary, do you REALLY care about what I believe, or do you just want me to be Catholic?
As discussed, I find Catholicism epistemological roots to be extremely weak.

Yes, I do care.

Thank you for your opinion on epistemological roots.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

.....I find Catholicism epistemological roots to be extremely weak.

What is the WEAKEST root of the Catholic tree? I would love to discuss it with you and hear what you think.

Patient Mary

 

[Marymog]

I do not see her proselytizing at all. And, as far as Joseph Smith, is concerned I care not. No, I do not believe in many of their doctrines but then, neither do I believe every doctrine in my own faith. We are not here to judge, I have found that out big time last summer when I was homebound for 10 weeks. God will not judge us on core belief doctrines. He looks to the heart of the person, not their denomination. There is so much judging on here.
I thank you for your "warning" but, I don't buy it.
God bless and, no offence intended :)

I agree with you.....we are not here to judge. The Church is here to judge: Matthew 18:17

 

[Jane_Doe22]

What is the WEAKEST root of the Catholic tree? I would love to discuss it with you and hear what you think.

Patient Mary

1) The appeal to historical roots. History is the biased account written by the political victors of any issue, and basely interrupted by people many years later.
2) The opposition of a person directly approaching God. Not all Catholic individuals hold this opposition, but I have observed that you very much do Mary.

 

[Nancy]

Hi Nancy,

Yes, I do realize that Satan had his talons within the Church from the beginning. Are you suggesting that the historical Christian writings we have from the 1st and 2nd Century Christians are a product of the Anti-Christ? (The Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp etc)

Yes, I have given thought that to "original heresies" and I have studied them. What, in your opinion, is the earliest heresy commited by the Christian community? I don't mean any heresies talked about in the NT like the one settled at the Council of Jerusalem. I am talking about heresies that we know of from historical writings.

No, I can not respect heretical teachings.

Mary

"The Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp etc" None of these mean a thing to me, all extra-biblical. And, we already know we disagree on Sola Scriptura.

"What, in your opinion, is the earliest heresy commited by the Christian community?"
The taking away of scriptural athority, bottom line, FINAL athority.

"Are you suggesting that the historical Christian writings we have from the 1st and 2nd Century Christians are a product of the Anti-Christ?" You said it, I didn't....

Historical is NOT scripture. And, I recall reading one of your recent posts saying something like 'history is not reliable'?? I would have to do some searching for it.

 

[brakelite]

Who do YOU rely upon for your teachings regarding faith and practice?

Jesus.

Why does YOUR confession of the Protestant faith trump my confession of the Catholic faith???

Jesus.

 

[tzcho2]

I acknowledge that's your view @tzcho2. You've made them abundantly clear.
If at any point you'd like to listen to the facts of what I actually believe (not what you've been told by your teachers, but the facts), I'm game to talk.

Again you are lying.
What I said about Joseph Smith is a KNOWN historical FACT. Anyone can find it out for themselves.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

What is the WEAKEST root of the Catholic tree? I would love to discuss it with you and hear what you think.

The weakest root is that it is apostate. There are more weaknesses: Its doctrine has changed throughout the years, waxing more deceptive over time. Its murderous history upon those truly converted. Its denial of salvation to those who are in Christ yet reject the Catholic apostate gospel. Its denial of the efficacy and sufficiency of the one-time offering of Christ. Things of this nature.

 

[Marymog]

1) The appeal to historical roots. History is the biased account written by the political victors of any issue, and basely interrupted by people many years later.
2) The opposition of a person directly approaching God. Not all Catholic individuals hold this opposition, but I have observed that you very much do Mary.

thank you. Let's deal with #1 First:

Scripture tells us to hold fast to the traditions whether they were written or given orally (2 Thess. 2:15). Sooooo the people in the NT were told to hold to their traditions. Where does Scripture tell us to STOP doing this?

Using your theory that 'history is the biased account written by the political victors of any issue' means that once something is decided on (i.e. The Trinity) at any point in the future we can disregard it since it comes from our "historical roots".

The books of Mathew and John are historicaly attributed to them but do not in themselves claim to be written by them. Based on your theory we can disregard that since it comes from our historical roots.

Scripture does not contain a table of contents. Historically we have accepted 27 books by appealing to the men of the early Church. Your theory suggest we can modify or disregard that anytime we want......since it comes from our historical roots.

#2 is not even a teaching of The Church sooooo no need to discuss a false claim.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Jesus.
Jesus.

Thank you.

What did Jesus tell you about eating His body and drinking His blood?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

The weakest root is that it is apostate. There are more weaknesses: Its doctrine has changed throughout the years, waxing more deceptive over time. Its murderous history upon those truly converted. Its denial of salvation to those who are in Christ yet reject the Catholic apostate gospel. Its denial of the efficacy and sufficiency of the one-time offering of Christ. Things of this nature.

Which doctrine has changed throughout the years?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

"The Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp etc" None of these mean a thing to me, all extra-biblical. And, we already know we disagree on Sola Scriptura.

"What, in your opinion, is the earliest heresy commited by the Christian community?"
The taking away of scriptural athority, bottom line, FINAL athority.

"Are you suggesting that the historical Christian writings we have from the 1st and 2nd Century Christians are a product of the Anti-Christ?" You said it, I didn't....

Historical is NOT scripture. And, I recall reading one of your recent posts saying something like 'history is not reliable'?? I would have to do some searching for it.

Thank you Nancy.

Sola Scriptura is an extra-biblical teaching that was begot of a man in the 1500's. It had not been taught for the first 1,500 years of Christianity. Why do you accept that teaching by that man but not the teachings of the men who walked and talked with the apostles?

The Church has not taken away Scriptural authority. The Three Pillars of the Catholic Church are:

Sacred Scripture. All of the books of the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Apostolic Tradition. The living tradition of the Church, the Church Fathers, the Sacred Liturgy

The Church’s Magisterium -- the teaching authority of the Pope and all those bishops worldwide united with him.

Please answer the question since I have answered all of yours: "Are you suggesting that the historical Christian writings we have from the 1st and 2nd Century Christians are a product of the Anti-Christ?"

Patient Mary

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Again you are lying.
What I said about Joseph Smith is a KNOWN historical FACT. Anyone can find it out for themselves.

Again: keep beating up the sinner Joseph Smith all your want. I totally don't care.
If you want the facts about what I believe (which is centered on Christ), I'm happy to talk about it.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

thank you. Let's deal with #1 First:

Scripture tells us to hold fast to the traditions whether they were written or given orally (2 Thess. 2:15). Sooooo the people in the NT were told to hold to their traditions. Where does Scripture tell us to STOP doing this?

Using your theory that 'history is the biased account written by the political victors of any issue' means that once something is decided on (i.e. The Trinity) at any point in the future we can disregard it since it comes from our "historical roots".

The books of Mathew and John are historicaly attributed to them but do not in themselves claim to be written by them. Based on your theory we can disregard that since it comes from our historical roots.

Scripture does not contain a table of contents. Historically we have accepted 27 books by appealing to the men of the early Church. Your theory suggest we can modify or disregard that anytime we want......since it comes from our historical roots.

#2 is not even a teaching of The Church sooooo no need to discuss a false claim.

Mary

Mary, your answer to #1 actually perfectly embodies problem #2. You keep referencing SINNERS and following SINNERS. Nothing about getting on your knees, and approaching God yourself. I have a major problem with that. God's servants should be *encouraging* a person to approach God and build a direct relationship with HIM, not shunning the idea.

 

[Nancy]

Thank you Nancy.

Sola Scriptura is an extra-biblical teaching that was begot of a man in the 1500's. It had not been taught for the first 1,500 years of Christianity. Why do you accept that teaching by that man but not the teachings of the men who walked and talked with the apostles?

The Church has not taken away Scriptural authority. The Three Pillars of the Catholic Church are:

Sacred Scripture. All of the books of the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Apostolic Tradition. The living tradition of the Church, the Church Fathers, the Sacred Liturgy

The Church’s Magisterium -- the teaching authority of the Pope and all those bishops worldwide united with him.

Please answer the question since I have answered all of yours: "Are you suggesting that the historical Christian writings we have from the 1st and 2nd Century Christians are a product of the Anti-Christ?"

Patient Mary

Not looking to get into a huge cranial discussion with you on this Mary. IMHO-
"The Church" should be judged buy the scriptures and not the other way around.

" Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other." 1 Corinthians 4:6.
This is clear as a cows bell to me.

""I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it." Matthew 16:18 "Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Ce's people, that there are quarrels among you. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Peter," and "I of Christ." Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Corinthians 1:10-13.

You and I, Mary, will never agree on certain things so, why can't we just keep Jesus in common??

 

[brakelite]

Thank you.

What did Jesus tell you about eating His body and drinking His blood?

Mary

The apostles and disciples asked Him the same question. His reply was...
He said the words that I speak to you, they are spirit and they are life.
Jesus did not say one word about it being a literal transformation of the substance of bread into flesh and blood that they had to eat in order to be sanctified. We are sanctified by the word of truth... Not by eating bread... Or his flesh... Man cannot live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

 

[Nancy]

The apostles and disciples asked Him the same question. His reply was...
He said the words that I speak to you, they are spirit and they are life.
Jesus did not say one word about it being a literal transformation of the substance of bread into flesh and blood that they had to eat in order to be sanctified. We are sanctified by the word of truth... Not by eating bread... Or his flesh... Man cannot live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

Yes, we feed on The Word which IS Jesus.

 

[tzcho2]

Again: keep beating up the sinner Joseph Smith all your want. I totally don't care.
If you want the facts about what I believe (which is centered on Christ), I'm happy to talk about it.

Stop falsely accusing and lying.
Thanks

 

[tzcho2]

Joseph Smith | Biography & Facts
Origin of Latter Day Saint polygamy - Wikipedia
History shows Joseph Smith married other men's wives , at least one man attempted suicide because of this.
List of Joseph Smith's wives - Wikipedia