User Profile: Caleb-Texas

Caleb-Texas

Member Since: June 15, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • June 14, 2016 at 12:21pm

    Dear 7truthiztruth77,

    I think we have reached an impasse on our discussion. Just repeating old, tired and disproven canards about the Catholic Church does not make them true. If you bring such allegations, you have the burden of proof to substantiate your allegations. As said before I invited you to do an unbiased research on any of those allegations and you will be surprise how secularist and protestant solely to advance their respective agendas have denigrated the Catholic Church.

    Your interpretation of scriptures is just that your interpretation. It so happens that such interpretation disagrees with the universal teachings of the early Christian churches, that no Christian for more than 1500 years denies the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist until after the reformation where some Protestants (not all) rejected such a fundamental tenant of Christ. Lutherans, High-Church Anglicans and Methodist continue to believe in the real presence.

    It was enjoyable exchanging ideas with you and all I asked you is to keep me in your prayers as I will keep you in mine. :-)

    Best,

    Caleb

  • June 13, 2016 at 2:10pm

    Dear 7truthiztruth77,

    As I said before, I do appreciate our friendly back and forth and your zeal for your faith.

    Historical accusations without facts are just that, accusations and many of your accusation has been debunked by secular and Christian historians some of them protestants such as Rodney Stark. I actually recommend his book Bearing False Witness if you are interested in reading a non-bias view of many of these allegations against the Catholic Church. His website is

    http://www.rodneystark.com

    I understand your argument about sincerity and I agree with it. Just because someone held a deeply sincere belief does not make it right or true. This was precisely my point. How do you know that your interpretation of the bible is not colored by protestant man-made traditions? They are man-made because they are novel interpretations of scriptures that no Christian believed before the reformation; whereas the belief in the Eucharist is universally proclaimed by the early Church fathers. I am not only convinced by the text but by the unanimous witness of the very early Church that affirm these doctrines.

    I hope that our dialogue if anything moves you to take another look at the source and the historical evidence. If you are not convinced that is fine at least you are open.

    Best,

    Caleb

  • June 12, 2016 at 4:01pm

    I implored you to checked your historical claims about the Catholic Church because you will find that they are old and tired canards that have no historical foundation. If so could you produce the evidence?
    What gross abuses of the people you are referring too? When it was the Church that promoted charity, invented hospitals and universities? Where is the evidence that the church allowed absolution for money? At best this is a profound misunderstanding of indulgences at worst this is a false calumny. And lastly where is the evidence when the Catholic Church kept the word of God from the people? When it was the Catholic Church who first translated scripture into the vernacular of the time, which it was Latin, the first English translation predates the King James translation and it was done by the Catholic Church, along other translation in other languages around the world. I have explored many of these claims but they all turn out to be either outright wrong or misunderstandings.

    Best,

    Caleb

    P.S. One more thing…earlier I used the term garden variety pastors in tongue and cheek way, I am sorry for phrasing that sentence in that way.

  • June 12, 2016 at 4:00pm

    You see Christ left us a visible Church to guard his teachings, not a collection of books, but a Church endowed by the power of the Holy Spirit to proclaim the Truth of the gospel that was pass on in an unbroken line from the apostle to today.

    I believe that the witness of history points towards the Catholic Church. That many of the traditions that you called man-made tradition are not but quite the contrary are the Traditions that the Apostle handed down to their disciples and the Church has guarded against imperial persecutions, heretics and deceivers. No other Church besides the Orthodox Church can make such claims…This is the witness of history testified by the martyrs who died for their faith.

  • June 12, 2016 at 3:59pm

    Dear 7truthiztruth77 (continuation)

    So what then? When two Christians have a genuine disagreement on their respective interpretations of the bible? What does the bible says that we ought to do? Does it say go and read the bible and find for yourself the answer? Nay, It does not but it says go to the Church:

    But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, regard him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on the earth will be loosed in heaven.…

    Mathew 18:17

  • June 12, 2016 at 3:58pm

    Dear

    I think that as Christians we both can agree that the Holy Spirit guides us in truth towards Christian unity but that Christian unity has to be based on truth, not on contradictory teachings. Otherwise, without truth there cannot be unity. The question is whose interpretation of scriptures is the correct one? I have no doubt that you hold with all sincerity of your heart that your interpretation is the right and mine is wrong but I can also tell you that the Holy Spirit has guided my life towards Christ’s church, that when I worship at the alter I know that Christ is really there in the Eucharist, His Body, His Soul, and His Divinity, the whole Christ. That he humble himself so that I as sinful as I am may receive him. I know this to be true because of the material and spiritual difference that the Eucharist has made in myself but also because the witness of the Church since the time of the apostles and because as I read scriptures it is as solid and clear teaching as any other.

  • June 10, 2016 at 11:00pm

    Just noticed my horrible grammar…didn’t checked my spelling.

  • June 10, 2016 at 10:58pm

    “For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.”

    -1 Cor. 11:23-27

    Paul and the apostle took Jesus at his word, when he said unless you eat (the word used in John 6 is to masticate) the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man you will have no life in you”… and so did those who stopped following Jesus, including Judas, when they heard him saying these words. Jesus didn’t back down or clarified that he was speaking figuratively rather he became more literal. Otherwise, he allowed many disciples to fall away based on a misunderstanding.

    Jesus didn’t establish a loose congregation of believers that mostly agree on the essential tenants of the faith, this is a far cry for unity that Christ pray to the Father and the reason why he promised to send the Holy Spirit to his Church so that there could be unity in charity but also in Faith.

  • June 10, 2016 at 10:57pm

    Hi truthiztruth77,

    First, let me start by saying that I appreciate the dialogue we are having.

    The historical reference to the beliefs of the early Church is extremely valid in our discussion because their interpretations of the gospel happen to disagree with the interpretation of mainland Protestantism on many issues that have pivotal importance on our Christian life.

    As I mentioned before one of such teaching is the real presense of Christ in the Eucharist. St. Ignatius of Antioch could not be clearer in articulating the belief of the early Christian community in regards to the Eucharist:

    “Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

    “Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

    He belief as did the apostle Paul:

    “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”

    1 Cor. 10:16-17

  • June 10, 2016 at 12:44pm

    I sincerely think you are completely wrong in equating the authority of St. Ignatius of Antioch with your garden-variety bible-believing pastor. Whereas one died for his faith and preach Christian orthodoxy the other may be denying the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist (John 6, Luke 22), the salvific effects of baptism, (John 3) or the power conferred by Christ to the apostles and their successor to forgive sins (John 20).

    To ignored history and the witness of the early martyrs of the Church is akin to taking a bright lamp and putting it under covers because it disagrees shines with your sincerely held beliefs.

    Caleb

  • June 10, 2016 at 12:43pm

    In a few sentence you can see how Christ founded one Church:

    Notice what Jesus says: “upon this rock I will build my church” and how he did not say my churches…but my church. Only one Church not many, which as Paul says is the pillar and foundation of truth…that is why we can trust in the bible because it was the Church that gave us the bible:

    15…know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

    1 Timothy 3:15

    Also, pay attention to the central role of Peter in this passage: “And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

    Moreover it gave authority that that Church and promise that it will never fell:

    “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

    He established a visible Church, which is his body. That’s why St. Ignatius says “Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”

  • June 10, 2016 at 12:42pm

    Hi 7truthiztruth77,

    I was answering your question about what the term catholic means and choose to quote St. Ignatius of Antioch to illustrate what the term meant to the early Christians. These are the Christians who knew the apostles and died for their faith, boldly proclaiming the name of Christ to all nations, while the teaching of the apostles was still ringing in their ears. These Christians strongly believe that indeed Christ founded one Church and give her authority to bound and loose on earth, as Matthew 16:13-19 says:

    13When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

  • June 9, 2016 at 2:29pm

    7truthiztruth77

    On Pentecost. And to quote To quote St. Ignatious of Antioch, an early father of the Church who personally knew St. John the Apostle:

    “Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”

    Cheers,

    Caleb

  • June 9, 2016 at 2:26pm

    Dear DGDrew,

    Who did the collecting? That is precisely my point. It was the Church! That is all the early bishops and martyrs who gave witness to the tradition either spoken or written down. Otherwise how do you know that the book of revelations belong to the bible when some in the early church didn’t want to recognize it? Or how do you know that the Letter of James does belong in the bible and not the letter of Clement (which was used by many Christians in the early church and viewed as inspired)? If it wasn’t for the authority bestowed by Christ to his Church?

  • June 7, 2016 at 5:28pm

    @7truthiztruth77 So you are a Catholic? :-)

  • [4] June 7, 2016 at 5:26pm

    Dear Ultrasecularlib,

    Love your tittle (really I am not kidding I have somewhat similar sense of humor)…Fr. LeMaitre inferred the Big Bang (he called it primordial atom) based on Einstein theory of relativity implication on gravity. At first Einstein dismissed the idea as bad physics but later as the evidence from the red shift came to light, he changed his mind.

    I recommend you to read Einstein Essay “The World as I see it” although he was not a religious person he had deep respect for religion.

    Another book I recommend you is the Genesis of Science by James Hannam. Very interesting book about the development of science in western civilization and a fair exposition of the so-called Galileo incident…most of the Jesuits actually agree with him and he was never in danger of being condemned to death or the gallows.

  • [2] June 7, 2016 at 3:45pm

    @Sarsfield1650 I absolutely agree with you it was the Holy Spirit who guided the Church!

    Nevertheless it was the Church that God used as instrument to established the books of the bible. That is no individual authority of a particular sect but the all the Bishop of the Church united in one Creed, one Faith and one Baptism in union with Christ. :-)

  • [2] June 7, 2016 at 2:40pm

    7truthiztruth77

    By Catholic Church I mean the Church founded by Christ. I based that assertion on the unbroken teaching of the Catholic Church since apostolic time through the early church fathers those who were disciples of the apostles and the witness of the Martyrs who defended Christina orthodoxy throughout the centuries. :-)

  • [13] June 7, 2016 at 2:33pm

    @WhoisJohnGit

    Really? Too bad that it was through Christianity that the Scientific Method was invented, that scientific fields such as geology and genetics were founded by priests, and the modern theories such at the Big Bang Theory was first proposed by another priest…and this is just scratching the surface.

    Responses (4) +
  • [3] June 7, 2016 at 2:33pm

    @WhoisJohnGit

    Really? Too bad that it was through Christianity that the Scientific Method was invented, that scientific fields such as geology and genetics were founded by priests, and the modern theories such at the Big Bang Theory was first proposed by another priest…and this is just scratching the surface.

    Responses (14) +
123 To page: Go