How would you respond -If you died 2nite where would you go?

Gracie2004 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:31 pm

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

He gave the keys to Peter alone. Those early Councils that you accept, what do they say about the decisions of the Bishops of Rome to ratify their teachings? "Peter has spoken through Pope ____!"

Like I said, I can easily reason it out historically.

Why do you believe that Peter had the keys and that he was the first pope? What do you think the "keys" were, and why do you believe Peter alone had them?

Once again, because Christ told us he had the keys...do you seriously read the Book? Mt. 16. Look it up.

Gracie2004 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:32 pm

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

He gave the keys to Peter alone. Those early Councils that you accept, what do they say about the decisions of the Bishops of Rome to ratify their teachings? "Peter has spoken through Pope ____!"

Like I said, I can easily reason it out historically.

Why do you believe that Peter had the keys and that he was the first pope? What do you think the "keys" were, and why do you believe Peter alone had them?

Because Christ gave Peter the keys and did not give the keys to anyone else.

The keys were "the keys to the kingdom of heaven". Mighty important and powerful keys!

Why do you believe that? Why do you believe we should read it that way?

Why don't YOU believe it, and why don't you read it that way?

Gracie2004 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:34 pm

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

(1). How do you know what the "keys" are in this passage and (2). that said keys were then handed down to future successors to Peter?

(1). The passage clearly states that the keys are "the keys of the kingdom of heaven." What do you think they are?

Are you infallibly declaring that to be true? I didn't think we were allowed to do that.

Quote:

No, the Church says it is true. The Magisterium says it is true and Sacred Tradition says it is true, as well as Scripture. Are you infallibly declaring it isn't?

(2). Because the Church has always believed it. Who am I to doubt it?

Why would you believe the catholic church's teaching on this?

Why wouldn't YOU believe the Holy Catholic Church's teaching on this?

pax · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:48 pm

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

(1). How do you know what the "keys" are in this passage and (2). that said keys were then handed down to future successors to Peter?

(1). The passage clearly states that the keys are "the keys of the kingdom of heaven." What do you think they are?

Are you infallibly declaring that to be true? I didn't think we were allowed to do that.

Am I not reading the Text correctly?

Quote:

(2). Because the Church has always believed it. Who am I to doubt it?

Why would you believe the catholic church's teaching on this?

Because the teaching is historically certain.

Why do you believe Calvin's teaching?

Calvinist · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:50 pm

Gracie2004 wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

Who here doesn't believe the catholic church isn't God's church? I realize there are a few non-catholics on this board, but of the others...who doesn't believe it is?

I believe the holy Roman Catholic Church and the Mystical Body of Christ are one and the same thing because a Pope infallibly told me so, not because I infallibly told me so.

Why do you trust the Pope to infallibly tell you want it is?

Because Christ said he would have the truth. Why do you trust a man to tell you what the truth is (i.e. Calvin).

I don't think Calvin was infallible.

Calvinist · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:52 pm

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

(1). How do you know what the "keys" are in this passage and (2). that said keys were then handed down to future successors to Peter?

(1). The passage clearly states that the keys are "the keys of the kingdom of heaven." What do you think they are?

Are you infallibly declaring that to be true? I didn't think we were allowed to do that.

Am I not reading the Text correctly?

Quote:

(2). Because the Church has always believed it. Who am I to doubt it?

Why would you believe the catholic church's teaching on this?

Because the teaching is historically certain.

Why do you believe Calvin's teaching?

Do you get what I'm asking here? On one hand, catholics tell me that we can't read the Bible, and we need the church. Then, on the other hand, we are told that we can know the catholic church is God's church because you believe that Peter was the first pope and had the keys to the kingdom---because this passage says so.

It seems like a bit of circular reasoning.

pax · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:12 pm

Calvinist wrote:

Gracie2004 wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

Who here doesn't believe the catholic church isn't God's church? I realize there are a few non-catholics on this board, but of the others...who doesn't believe it is?

I believe the holy Roman Catholic Church and the Mystical Body of Christ are one and the same thing because a Pope infallibly told me so, not because I infallibly told me so.

Why do you trust the Pope to infallibly tell you want it is?

Because Christ said he would have the truth. Why do you trust a man to tell you what the truth is (i.e. Calvin).

I don't think Calvin was infallible.

Then why in heaven would you believe anything he said? How do you know if anything he said is true?

pax · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:17 pm

Calvinist wrote:

catholics tell me that we can't read the Bible

Who would ever tell you such a reprehensible thing? That certainly is not the teaching of the Church. The Church grants an indulgence for reading Scripture. The Holy Mass begins with a reading from the OT, an entire Psalm, a reading from an Epistle, and a reading from the Gospel for which we stand and make the sign of the cross on our foreheads, our lips, and over our hearts. We love Scripture. We eat it like candy.

Calvinist · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:28 pm

pax wrote:

Then why in heaven would you believe anything he said? How do you know if anything he said is true?

I'm a Christian. I believe Calvin was right in regards to the 5 points...but there was a lot of things he did that I wouldn't necessarily agree with him on.

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

catholics tell me that we can't read the Bible

Who would ever tell you such a reprehensible thing? That certainly is not the teaching of the Church. The Church grants an indulgence for reading Scripture. The Holy Mass begins with a reading from the OT, an entire Psalm, a reading from an Epistle, and a reading from the Gospel for which we stand and make the sign of the cross on our foreheads, our lips, and over our hearts. We love Scripture. We eat it like candy.

Did I misunderstand you? I've been told that I'm wrong because I can claim to interpret the Bible in a way that disagrees with catholic doctrine.

faithfulservant · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:30 pm

i believe he has been told previously there is actually an indulgence offered for reading Sacred Scripture ... so obviously that old chestnut of Catholics are not allowed to read the bible is just spurious

Calvinist · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:34 pm

faithfulservant wrote:

i believe he has been told previously there is actually an indulgence offered for reading Sacred Scripture ... so obviously that old chestnut of Catholics are not allowed to read the bible is just spurious

I further expanded my statement. I realize that.

Heck...for that matter, the idea of an indulgence is something that is non-Biblical. Why would you believe in it? I'm guessing because the church teaches it. Why do you believe the church? Because you believe them when they claimed to be the true church...or you believed the Bible and understood it to be teaching that.

What it comes down to is that you trust that you have made the right observation based on the facts/proofs you have seen. Am I right?

faithfulservant · **Posted:** Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:40 pm

i came into the Catholic Church not knowing anything about it...other than it was the only Church i could go to :fyi:

Gracie2004 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:16 am

Calvinist wrote:

Gracie2004 wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

Who here doesn't believe the catholic church isn't God's church? I realize there are a few non-catholics on this board, but of the others...who doesn't believe it is?

I believe the holy Roman Catholic Church and the Mystical Body of Christ are one and the same thing because a Pope infallibly told me so, not because I infallibly told me so.

Why do you trust the Pope to infallibly tell you want it is?

Because Christ said he would have the truth. Why do you trust a man to tell you what the truth is (i.e. Calvin).

I don't think Calvin was infallible.

You must, you follow him, you even fashion your name after his. You believe what he believes if you call yourself calvinist. Why not instead believe what Christ says and call yourself Christian?

Gracie2004 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:18 am

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Then why in heaven would you believe anything he said? How do you know if anything he said is true?

I'm a Christian. I believe Calvin was right in regards to the 5 points...but there was a lot of things he did that I wouldn't necessarily agree with him on.

So, he (calvin) was infallible?

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

catholics tell me that we can't read the Bible

Who would ever tell you such a reprehensible thing? That certainly is not the teaching of the Church. The Church grants an indulgence for reading Scripture. The Holy Mass begins with a reading from the OT, an entire Psalm, a reading from an Epistle, and a reading from the Gospel for which we stand and make the sign of the cross on our foreheads, our lips, and over our hearts. We love Scripture. We eat it like candy.

Did I misunderstand you? I've been told that I'm wrong because I can claim to interpret the Bible in a way that disagrees with catholic doctrine.

If you interpret the Scriptures in a way that is not in line with the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church, then you are indeed in error. In that case, it is yourself that needs to change, that has nothing to do with not reading Scripture.

Gracie2004 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:21 am

Calvinist wrote:

faithfulservant wrote:

i believe he has been told previously there is actually an indulgence offered for reading Sacred Scripture ... so obviously that old chestnut of Catholics are not allowed to read the bible is just spurious

I further expanded my statement. I realize that.

Heck...for that matter, the idea of an indulgence is something that is non-Biblical. Why would you believe in it? I'm guessing because the church teaches it. Why do you believe the church? Because you believe them when they claimed to be the true church...or you believed the Bible and understood it to be teaching that.

What it comes down to is that you trust that you have made the right observation based on the facts/proofs you have seen. Am I right?

How do you know Indulgences aren't Biblical? Can you give me proof instead of just throwing around your opinions? You aren't proving much for your side of the argument you know...what I'm seeing is opinion based, not Scripture based. Show me the Scripture. The Holy Catholic Church IS the true Church. Chfrist left it when he left the keys to the Kingdom to Peter. We believe the Holy Scriptures because they were written by the Apostles.

pax · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:52 am

Calvinist wrote:

I've been told that I'm wrong because I can claim to interpret the Bible in a way that disagrees with catholic doctrine.

Do you also not proclaim another person to be wrong who interprets the Bible in a way contrary to yourself? But, think. Are you really interpreting the Bible, or are you interpreting a translation of the Bible?

Calvinist · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:51 pm

Gracie2004 wrote:

How do you know Indulgences aren't Biblical? Can you give me proof instead of just throwing around your opinions? You aren't proving much for your side of the argument you know...what I'm seeing is opinion based, not Scripture based.

Because the concept of them flies directly against scripture? Your argument from silence is really not a reasonable argument.

Quote:

Show me the Scripture. The Holy Catholic Church IS the true Church. Chfrist left it when he left the keys to the Kingdom to Peter. We believe the Holy Scriptures because they were written by the Apostles.

By your standard, I would like for you to give me something from scripture that shows that Jesus gave the keys to Peter, then told him he was pope, and that future successors of his would be called "Pope". And that they are the only representative of Christianity on earth.

Or that, since scripture doesn't say a thing about all sorts of other stuff like the assumption of Mary....that it didn't happen.

I guess now, by your standard, my point is proven...since you have no scripture saying that.

Calvinist · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:52 pm

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

I've been told that I'm wrong because I can claim to interpret the Bible in a way that disagrees with catholic doctrine.

Do you also not proclaim another person to be wrong who interprets the Bible in a way contrary to yourself? But, think. Are you really interpreting the Bible, or are you interpreting a translation of the Bible?

I can read Greek...can you? Besides that, I'm fairly confident my ESV is 99.9% true to the original texts. How is that even an argument for your side?

pax · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:01 pm

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

I've been told that I'm wrong because I can claim to interpret the Bible in a way that disagrees with catholic doctrine.

Do you also not proclaim another person to be wrong who interprets the Bible in a way contrary to yourself? But, think. Are you really interpreting the Bible, or are you interpreting a translation of the Bible?

I can read Greek

And you received your PhD in ancient Greek from where?

Calvinist · **Posted:** Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:14 pm

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

pax wrote:

Calvinist wrote:

I've been told that I'm wrong because I can claim to interpret the Bible in a way that disagrees with catholic doctrine.

Do you also not proclaim another person to be wrong who interprets the Bible in a way contrary to yourself? But, think. Are you really interpreting the Bible, or are you interpreting a translation of the Bible?

I can read Greek

And you received your PhD in ancient Greek from where?

I don't have a PhD. I have a Master's in Theology. Included in that was a year of Greek. It is an overstatement that I can "read Greek". I'll admit that I can read it some....and with some excellent Bible software and commentaries I can get the gist of what the author was saying.

Having said that, what is the reason for your question regarding it?

How would you respond -If you died 2nite where would you go?

Who is online