The Passion of the Christ

[thisdude]

i havent read all of the posts on this thread thoroughly.. but i did read a few that made me want to reply.. first of all, it seems to be a common belief among alot of you here that all "bible thumpers", "fundementalists" hate catholics. i happen to be a "bible thumping, holy rolling, fundementalist",, one of the biggest christian influences in my life is my best friend John.. he is a RC.. in fact he is almost a monk... coming closer and closer everyday
but him and i are both in agreement on this.. we disagree on doctrinal differences,, and yes he believes that catholicism is the only true church,, but i can handle that.. he doesnt question my relationship with Jesus, and likewise i dont question his either... we just simply accept each other as not only friends, but as brothers in Christ.. but he does tell me from time to time when we get to heaven i will probably be doing his dishesLOL

and one more thing.. i dont know how anyone could deny that the catholic church came first... other than orthodox,, virtualy every other church is a break away from catholicism.. it started with martin luther,, and splintered from there...

i usually dont like to debate catholicism vs protestant, except for with my friends,,because alot of times, if the person you are debating with doesnt know you.. it can be misinterpreted as hate... so i guess i will leave this thread alone, and stick to my debates with John just wanted to give an example of a protestant who doesnt hate catholics, and therfore i believe you shouldnt lump us all into a big heap, and label us "hatemongers" "warmongers" and so forth

[thisdude]

Originally posted by Niquie

Precisely! And does ANY Christian deny that Christ was a Jew, and a rabbi?

Growing up, my best friend was (and still is!) a Jew. I celebrated Christmas and Hanukkah, Easter and Passover. It was wonderful. To this day, I am grateful for two sets of parents who encouraged our friendship. It taught me so much.

you know nique,, thats one thing about most hate groups i just dont understand.. like the KKK consider themselves a protestant religion.. they claim to accept Jesus,, but no other jew??? and most skin heads claim to hate anything but "white protestants"??? do they really believe Jesus is a white man with long wavy hair??

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Christians should be humble about their sin, not about their convictions.

I am here to share and defend my faith. Sometimes this requires me to be harsh.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by theja
Why this verse? It's got nothing to do with my salvation.

It establishes a principle. Those who embrace false doctrine will be severed from Christ, and fall from grace.

Originally posted by theja
Besides I'm not advocating adherence to the law as requirement for salvation.

But you are advocating the forensic imputation of Christ's alien righteousness through the instrument of faith alone. That is by far further from the biblical gospel than the gospel of the Judaizers.

Originally posted by theja
Personally, the Holy Spirit has confirmed in my heart about my status in Christ (Romans 8:15-16).

1st century Gnostics would have been just as adamant that they had found the secret knowledge that would allow them to escape the material world. We humans have an innate capacity to fool ourselves.

[theja]

FNB, I'm appaled at the way you try to rigidly impose a set-belief on others. I'm appaled at the way you dishonor the Holy Spirit by attributing His voice to some agnostic notion. Now I seriously doubt if you have salvation at all. I'm beginning to wonder if Jesus had to speak to you, as He did to a religious leader, "You must be born again".

I think you have plenty of religion, no doubt about that; but I doubt you understood what it means to have a "dynamic" relationship with God. Every year members in my Church hosts students from Italy who obviously consider themselves Christians. I am happy to know that some of them realized what they have all along was religion and they have opened up their hearts to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

John's epistles were written partly to expose/refute the 1st Century agnostics. I can see your misunderstanding here in trying to link my assurance with their confidence. They refer to an esoteric knowledge. As for me, I'm talking about salvation based on written scripture (1 John 3:1-3; 5:10-13).

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by theja
FNB, I'm appaled at the way you try to rigidly impose a set-belief on others.

And I'm sure the Galatians were appaled when St. Paul tried to rigidly impose a set-belief on them. Many atheists are appaled when they hear Christians say that they will perish in Hell if they don't repent and turn to Christ. It's fairly common to be appaled at the Christian insistance that right belief is necessary for salvation.

Originally posted by theja
I'm appaled at the way you dishonor the Holy Spirit by attributing His voice to some agnostic notion.

I didn't say that you were necessarily getting your confidence from gnostic hidden knowledge. I was just illustrating a general principle. Muslims believe they are on the path to salvation by following Muhammed. Buddhists believe they will attain enlightenment by eliminating their desires. Hindus believe they will be reincarnated into a higher caste if they live a good life. Yet, as I'm sure you will agree, all of these people are wrong. People can sincerely believe that they are on the right path but in fact be heading straight for damnation. This was what I was getting at by using the example of the Gnostics. They sincerely believed they were on the path to salvation, but they were sincerely wrong. I am asking you to consider the possibility that you fall under this category. Maybe, just maybe, when you heard the Holy Spirit you were just hearing what you wanted to hear.

You are putting your trust in a faith alone gospel, but St. Paul clearly stated that faith alone was nothing (1 Cor 13:2).

Originally posted by theja
Now I seriously doubt if you have salvation at all.

Good. You shouldn't be too confident in anyone's salvation; not mine, not the pope's, not Billy Graham's, and not your own (Cf. 1 Cor 9:27, 10:12, Phil 2:12, Heb 4:1, Rom 11:21-22).

Originally posted by theja
I'm beginning to wonder if Jesus had to speak to you, as He did to a religious leader, "You must be born again".

I have been born again; I have been baptized.

[Marmaduke]

Well put T_C, but don't expect any great personal revelations from Mr fear, just more and more of the same- ad nauseum, ad infinitum...

Is this what the teachings of Christ really meant ? I am not a Christian- but that does not mean that I think there is a great message there for all to read and try and follow as best they can. We are all imperfect and we all flounder and make mistakes- but a good person tries. It seems all fear thinks you need for salvation is an anally retentive obsession with quoting passages from the bible and a complete failure of compassion to show this in practice. If I had to use one example of the complete inability to 'practice what you peach' I would be hard pushed to find a better example- but then I am damned to eternal misery- the trouble with that argument is that it means so will fear, as my idea of hell would be to spend an eternity with someone as rigid and unforgiving as this. Doubt he will get many laughs either.

[theja]

FNB, I'm shaking my head as I read your response. The more I explain, the more you're insinuating points I haven't even considered. So for now I'm not going to respond point for point. (As I'm busy working on the apocalypse).

I do find it amusing that now you're trying to ascribe my faith for me -- that I'm putting my faith in faith. I'm aware of that jargon long ago. And more ... that I'm hearing what I want to hear...

Can you open a thread and please teach me how to listen to the Holy Spirit? Not doctrinal statements, but practical steps to make sure one is hearing not what one wants to hear. Yes, before I listen to Billy Graham or the Pope, I need to be sure of the voice of the Spirit. (Revelation 2:11)

I do admire your faith and your tenacity to stand up for what you believe.

For my salvation, there is no maybe. I guess you glossed over the passages in 1 John that I quoted for the basis of my assurance of salvation. No wonder you played the devil's advocate by suggesting I put myself in the catagory of the gnostics, Buddhists, and Muslims. I understand the principle. Now will you read the passages in 1 John again?

Salvation comes first and doctrinal understanding come later. (Acts 2:38-39; Luke 23:41-43). Please don't put the cart before the horse.

[Edited by theja on 16th March 2004 at 11:38]

[Marmaduke]

Originally posted by theja


...As I'm busy working on the apocalypse....

Ugh ? Single handed ?

I hope the CIA aren't reading this- or expect an early morning 'call'.

For someone who thinks of himself as a Church expert and theologist, you certainly have no clue to theja's anti-Catholic mind, her smooth(ie) like approach and curry-favours. You seem to fall for her "kind" comments.
I've got a few questions for you...
How old are you?
How long have you been a Catholic?
What do you know about anti-Catholicism?
How do you single out an anti-Catholic?

And oh, i like this one:

"I am here to share and defend my faith.
Sometimes this requires me to be harsh".

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by T_C
So you mean that millions of people ( created by god)are going to hell, because they have the wrong information?

More accurately, millions of people are going to hell because they have sinned against God, and as He is just, and desires to give creatures what is their due, that is their just punishemnt.

Originally posted by T_C
What kind of loving god puts his own creation in that situation? Surly Christ, or God would have forseen this this little detail( other faiths) and made some sort of compensation for 4 billion people!!!!

Everyone has the potential to be saved. If you live a truly good life and follow your conscience, even if you never hear the name of Jesus, God will lead you to reject superstition and come to at least an implicit knowledge of the truth.

Originally posted by T_C
Why would you bother creating so much life, just to destroy it! Tell me what YOU think is right, not some bible verse to justify this act. IF you have any idea yourself.......

God didn't create life for the purpose of destroying it. He created life for the purpose of sharing the beatific vision with other creatures. However, He endowed His creatures with the ability to reject Him. He is also all holy, which requires that there be no sin in His presence. Thus, it is metaphysically impossible for Him to accept into heaven anyone who is not extraordinarily holy.

He has established the means by which we attain this state (prayer, good works, carrying our cross, sacraments), and as other religions do not provide the necessary means to salvation, other religions cannot be salvific.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by Jasperthecat
It seems all fear thinks you need for salvation is an anally retentive obsession with quoting passages from the bible and a complete failure of compassion to show this in practice.

Absolutely not. In order to attain salvation one must believe in Christ, keep His commandments, sell one's worldly possessions and give to the poor, and take up one's cross and follow Him (Matt 19:16-30). Moreover, all these actions must be rooted in altruistic, self-sacrificing love; if they are rooted in baser motive they profit one nothing towards etenal salvation (1 Cor 13).

Originally posted by Jasperthecat
If I had to use one example of the complete inability to 'practice what you peach' I would be hard pushed to find a better example

How do you know that? You have no idea how I practise my beliefs. For all you know I might tutor disadvantaged children every weekday and work at a soup kitchen every weekend. You have never observed my life, and thus you are in no position to judge it.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by theja
Can you open a thread and please teach me how to listen to the Holy Spirit? Not doctrinal statements, but practical steps to make sure one is hearing not what one wants to hear. Yes, before I listen to Billy Graham or the Pope, I need to be sure of the voice of the Spirit. (Revelation 2:11)

I think we'll have to take a step back and tackle the root question here; namely how the Holy Spirit chooses to speak. While I don't deny that the Holy Spirit works in the lives of individual believers, I believe that Jesus established a visible, institutional Church with the authority to teach in His Name, and promised said Church that its teachings would be guided and protected from error by the Holy Spirit. Thus, my advice for how to discern whether the message which one is hearing is of the Spirit or not would be simple; if the message is leading you towards Catholicism, it is of the Spirit; if it is leading you away from Catholicism, it is not.

Obviously, this leads us back to the question of whether the Catholic Church is the one true Church of Jesus Christ, which will require us to *sigh* debate doctrine.

Originally posted by theja
For my salvation, there is no maybe. I guess you glossed over the passages in 1 John that I quoted for the basis of my assurance of salvation.

I read them. We can have a conditional knowledge that if we endure to the end we will be saved. However, we cannot know with absolte certainty whether we will endure to the end.

Originally posted by theja
Salvation comes first and doctrinal understanding come later. (Acts 2:38-39; Luke 23:41-43). Please don't put the cart before the horse.

By no means do I believe one must be a theologian before one can be saved. However, one must accept the basic truths of the Gospel; one who follows a false gospel with find himself in the same boat as the Galatians.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by _DigitaLVampirE_
For someone who thinks of himself as a Church expert and theologist, you certainly have no clue to theja's anti-Catholic mind, her smooth(ie) like approach and curry-favours.

I think you're being to harsh on theja. In my experience she is never subtle or decietful; she is very up front about what she believes. She may be sincerely wrong, but she is sincere.

Originally posted by _DigitaLVampirE_
How old are you?
How long have you been a Catholic?
What do you know about anti-Catholicism?
How do you single out an anti-Catholic?

19

Christmas-Easter: 16 years, faithful Neo-Catholic: 2 years, Traditionalist: 1 year

I'm familiar with many Protestant apologists who seek to convert Catholics to their gospel, if that is what you mean. I typically try to avoid the term anti-Catholic, since some people define an anti-Catholic as anyone who doesn't believe that the Catholic Church is a valid Christian Communion, and by those standards I am an anti-Protestant.

Well, I'm hesitant to use the term, so I don't apply it to all who seek to prosyletize Catholics, if they are open, honest, and upfront about their mission. I suppose I would identify an anti-Catholic as someone who either uses deciet and lies to prosyletize Catholics (e.g. the producers of Catholicism: Crisis of Faith http://www.catholic.com/library/Expo...atholicism.asp
also Rick Jones, see my review at amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...lance&s=books) or someone who is absolutely rabid and nonsensical in their attacks upon the Church (see the Ignorami in the humor section of my website).

Respectively.

I find it odd that knowing how to distinguish an anti-Catholic, you seem to consider theja harmless.
Indeed, you have never seen the other side of her in the other forum, like how Niq and myself have experienced. Indeed, Niq has never once participated in the Religion Board on ru.com, but she is well aware of theja's antics.

If someone presents you with a system of ideas or doctrines which logical analysis reveals to be coherent...that is, free from internal contradictions and meaningless absurdities, then you can conclude, "This set of ideas may be true. It has at least passed the first test of truth, the coherence test." To find out if it actually is true you will then have to leave your logician’s armchair and seek further information. But if it fails this most elementary test of truth, it can safely be eliminated without further ado from the ideological competition, no matter how many impressive looking volumes of erudition may have been written in support of it, and no matter how attractive and appealing many of its features (or many of its proponents) may appear.

And that is the reason why i am very opposed to many of theja's arguements about the Church. I doubt she is "sincerely wrong", i know for a fact she is out to "evangelise" the flock and lead them astray and into joining her sect. She has admitted before that she has discussed with a few "weak" Catholics online and "lead them to the truth".
She knows what she is doing with all her tracts.

I acknowledge the fact that wisdom does not necessarily come just through age, but also by experience. You may be 19, and i don't think you're easily fooled, however, sometimes you may become naive and oblivious to the things around you due to the lack of experience, through age and reasonable deciphering of hidden contents.
You may think i'm being harsh on theja. That may be the case, and i have to...because if i don't, she will continue proselytizing Catholics and many a times, she has done that indirectly. I'm not here for a popularity contest. Personally, i do not quite care what others think of me. I can be their hero or i can be their foe. But i will give credit and respect towards others if it's due, and that also includes honest Protestants.

I'm 30, was born into a Brahmin/Buddhist family and have been a Catholic for over 11 years now. But before and even after my baptism in the Church, i have continously studied Church history, Church theology, Bible Knowledge, Comparative religion, Church and psychology, Theotokos...you name it, i've studied it all. Still, i do not consider myself an "expert" because for me, life's a school. My quest for the Truth shall never end till the day my vessel expires.

Regards,
DV

[Edited by _DigitaLVampirE_ on 22nd March 2004 at 02:16]