RELIGION....(part 2)

[Cardinal Bunal]

---

You are the one who made the positive assertion, bro. The burden of proof is with you. Anyway, it shows that you have not tried hard enough to understand what this phrase mean. Yet, you arrived to the conclusion you have given. How would I know that you have given enough time to reconsider the position of the Christians regarding the Bible. You claim to be a Catholic; yet, you don't believe on the Bible as it is believed by Catholics (I even doubt if you really know how Catholics view the Bible). That is a sad thing. You claim to be a Catholic while not being one...

One CAN be a Christian without knowing the Gospel, the importance of a church, or about Jesus Christ........ Gandhi surely didn't know about the true Gospel.... but many of his principles were in line with Christian principles. There are those who CAN by the innate gift of discernment uphold God's law in their hearts. (Rom. 2: 10 - 12)

Although Galatians 5: 4, and Romans 11: 6 speaks against people who wish to remain with spiritual agnosia with regards to any doctrinal of faith they might believe in and simply rely on their nature of being "basically good."

[dacs]

Dacs, u made reactions on what i have posted. Sentence by sentence, but u never shared ur opinion about how to be save in your religion.

I did. Â*You just never tried to read the previous posts. Â*It would be a waste of time and space for this medium to repeat what have already been posted.

its more on how to defend Roman Catholic faith naman hinoon. U want me to quote verses to support on what i believe? and end up debating? lets nt make a replica on what had happen to the devil when he tempted Jesus christ after He fasted. The devil itself quote verses from the bible, but it surely leads to distruction. pls bro, dont do that.

That is the only example you have of the use of Scriptures? Â*Other than that event, how many times did Christ use the Scriptures to counter the claims of the Pharisees and Sadducees(?)? Â*How many times can you read from the New Testament that Jesus actually quoted the Old Testament books other than the times He was repudiating the teachers and scribes? Â*How many times did the Apostles use the Scriptures during their encounters with the teachers of the law?

Just share ur opinion nalang about Salvation. rather than ato paka ulawan ang ato Ginoo considering that we only have the same God.

If we have the same God and God want us to be one, why are you not with me?

I dont do debate bro. if anad ka na mo adto sa freedom park na makig debate well thats you.

Are you a newbie? Â*This is an online forum, bro. Â*You post something and you are bound to read something back on what you have posted.

its so sad na Christian to christian ang nag debate, mo katawa lang ang muslim ana brod.

Don't worry - yet - of what the Muslims would do. Â*Worry about the state of disunity among Christians. Â*Read again this quotation from early Christian writings:

“In the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep (Jn 21:15-19), down to the present episcopate.

“And so, lastly, does the very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.

“Such then in number and importance are the precious ties belonging to the Christian name which keep a believer in the Catholic Church, as it is right they should...With you, where there is none of these things to attract or keep me... No one shall move me from the faith which binds my mind with ties so many and so strong to the Christian religion...For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.�

- St. Augustine (AD 354-430 )
Against the Epistle of Manichaeus AD 397
[Contra Epistolam Manichaei Quam Vacant Fundamenti]


“Having founded and built the Church, the blessed apostles entrusted the episcopal office to Linus, who is mentioned by Paul in the Epistles to Timothy; Linus was succeeded by Anacletus; after him, in the third place from the apostles, the bishopric fell to Clement, who had seen the blessed apostles and conversed with them, and still had their preaching ringing in his ears and their authentic tradition before his eyes. Â*And he was not the only one; there were still many people alive who had been taught by the apostles. . . . In the same order and the same succession the authentic tradition received from the apostles and passed down by the Church, and the preaching of the truth, have been handed on to us.â€�

St. Ireneaus (c. 130-200)
Against Heresies


“But look at the men who have those perverted notions about the grace of Jesus Christ which has come down to us, and see how contrary to the mind of God they are. . . . They even abstain from the Eucharist and from the public prayers, because they will not admit that the Eucharist is the self-same body of our Savior Jesus Christ which flesh suffered for our sins, and which the Father of His goodness raised up again.“

St. Ignatius of Antioch (d. AD 106; disciple of Peter and Paul)
Epistle to the Smyrnaeans


“ It is to Peter himself that He says, ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church.’ Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church, no death is there, but life eternal.�

St. Ambrose of Milan (c. a.d 340 - 397)
Commentaries on Twelve of David's Psalms


“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. St, Peter and St. Paul, forty-six Popes, some hundreds of thousands of martyrs, have laid down their lives in its communion, having overcome Hell and the world; so that the eyes of God rest on the Roman church with special favor. Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church. On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better. We must not separate from God on account of any work of the devil, nor cease to have fellowship with the children of God who are still abiding in the pale of Rome on account of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body. For love can do all things, and nothing is difficult to those who are united.�

Martin Luther to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519
more than a year after the Ninety-Five Theses
quoted in The Facts about Luther, 356


“There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one Chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. Â*It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Â*Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering.“

St. Cyprian of Carthage
Letter to his Clergy and Â*to All His People


“The Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points of doctrine just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the churches in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, not do those in Spain, not those in Gaul, not those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions [Palestine] of the world.�

St. Ireneaus (c. 130-200)
Against Heresies


“When therefore, we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek among others the truth which is easily obtained from the Church. For the apostles, like a rich man in a bank, deposited with her [the Church] most copiously everything which pertains to the truth; and everyone whosoever wishes draws from her the drink of life. Â*Let us suppose that the apostles had left us no written records. Would we not have been able to follow the precepts of the tradition that they handed down to those to whom they entrusted the Churches? It is this precept of tradition that is followed by many barbarian nations that believe in Christ who know nothing of the use of writing, or ink.â€�

St. Ireneaus, (c. 130-200)
Against Heresies


“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ He says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatever things you bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth, they shall be loosed also in heaven.’ And again He says to him after His resurrection: ‘Feed my sheep.’ On him He builds the Church, and to him He gives the command to feed the sheep; and although He assigns a like power to all the Apostles, yet He founded a single chair, and He established by His own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Â*Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was; but a primacy is given to Peter, Â*whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. Â*So too, all are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the Apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?â€�

St. Cyprian, AD 251
The Unity of the Catholic Church


"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition".
Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*
St. Irenaeus (disciple of Polycarp, disciple of John)
(Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 189]).

I hope u get my point. and secondly, stop using 3 names in one person, i already knew you. basin ma a-an ka nga TRINITY dre sa istorya. naa na sad unya patron saint sa istorya na e canonize sa( HOLY FATHER) sto. papa.

Bro, even if I die right now, I never used nor tried to use any other username when I am posting here. Â*You owe me an apology. Â*If you really know me, then you know that I don't do that kind of thing. Â*If you will not offer an apology, may God rebuke you and your kind.

[Von!-x]

I used to listen to religious debates on radio (20 years ago). Amusing and entertaining. Insults thrown, parried and hurled back. There is no ending. The truth, nowhere.

I like to read the many posts of dacs and manny. Basing their posts, entry to heaven must be very difficult and assurance is not even guaranteed, despite Christ's promises in the scriptures.

The position of the biblical truths is weakened by dogmas and tradition. They say that when in doubt, follow what the catholic church says. But the catholic church has not been consistent throughout history.

[tolstoi]

nobody is not flawed

[mannyamador]

Von-x wrote:

The position of the biblical truths is weakened by dogmas and tradition.

First, show me what these biblical truths are and how you came to them. Why should YOUR personal interpretations of the Bible be more "truthful" than anyone else's?

They say that when in doubt, follow what the catholic church says. But the catholic church has not been consistent throughout history.

Prove it please. Show me even a SINGLE DOGMA (I mean an infallible and official Catholic doctrine, not just some papal encyclical or other such ordinary decisions that are non-dogmatic or non-infallible) that has been reversed. You can't because there aren't any.

In contrast, the constantly changing personal interpretations of "bible christians" and "born again" churches is scandalous! No wonder you have over 25,000 such "bible-believing" christian churches with different (and often contradictory) interpretations of the same bible. And NONE of them were given authority by Christ to interpret anything!

[Cardinal Bunal]

MORE CONTRAPOSITIVES

The apparition is claiming to be the woman spoken of in Revelation 12. Which cannot be true because based on the same lie that Mary is supposedly sinless, she should be immune to the pangs of childbirth (Gen 3: 15) a consequence of Eve's sin. And the Pope, when he spoke Ex Cathedra (meaning if he declares a new doctrinal, he cannot err) he mentioned that the "wailing out in pain" in Revelation 12 is the sword of sorrow but we know this happens AFTER Jesus is born (Luke 2: 34 - 35). It is well known Catholic truth that Mary, being sinless is immune to the pains of childbirth and is therefore NOT the woman in Rev. 12. With this in mind, it is clear that the Pope is NOT infallible and the Holy Spirit has NOT being preserving the foundations of the Roman clergy! And it still makes the apparition a liar anyway claiming to be immaculate when it is not. It is also an interpretation of classic Christian orthodoxy that Revelation 12 speaks figuratively of the mother church in the person of the 12 apostles (12 stars) clothed with the sun, the light of Christ by this crushing the ancient serpent (Rom 16: 20) - the moon symbolizes Satan who usurps God's glory as the moon absorbs the light of the sun at night Satan's place is at the heel of those who have been redeemed. He no longer has power over them. Wailing out in pain refers to the time of persecution of the early Christians onwards. Also, it is clear that the church, being the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3: 15), the manifold wisdom of God gave birth to the Good News, (Eph. 3: 10) which would eventually be proclaimed to the nations and to every end of the earth before the day Christ returns (Matthew 24: 14) So if much can be said about a church-approved apparition, what then can be said about the other apparitions masquerading as light? If we base the issue of Revelation 12 on an assumption that ALL Catholic dogmas are correct, then the apparition is wrong. Or giving the church an outright lie. Or if the church is wrong, then they are not infallible, the possibility ex cathedra falls apart much to their shame and destruction.Â* We derive these contrapositives by just closely scrutinizing the church's teachings and that of the apparition in Guadalupe.

[Von!-x]

Proof of the inconsistencies? Some have already been posted here.

[mannyamador]

MORE CONTRAPOSITIVES

More wacky personal interpretations with nothing to back them up.

You are deliberately confusing the apparition of Guadalupe with doctrine. No pope has ever made an ex cathedra statement about the Apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Any apparition, even if it bears the approval of the Church as authentic, is NOT DOCTRINAL. They just happen and are proven to be authentic by historical evidence, science, etc, but not doctrine. Thus, any historical proof does not make it doctrinal.

In other words, you are AGAIN MISREPRESENTING Catholic doctrine. That's called LYING.

So, you have fauiled yet again. And I cha;llenge you yet again: show me even a single instance where Catholic doctrine is reversed or contradictory. You can't because none exist.

But I can show you where YOUR doctrines are contradictory. If one claims the Bible is the sole and final authority, then that claim ought to be affirmed in the Bible, since it is the sole and final authority. But it is NOT in the Bible! Sola scriptura ("scripture alone") is UNSCRIPTURAL.

If you disagree, then show me even one verse that affirms sola scriptura. It's been a long, long time and you still haven't been able to come up with a single verse.

Same with salvation by faith alone. It is NOWHERE to be found in the Bible. And in James, the Bible explicitly states that sola fide is UNTRUE!

Poor cardinalbunal, trying to confuse us with lies that are so easily disproven just because your own beliefs have been proven to be false. Such is the shameless mark of your brand of chirsitanity".

[mannyamador]

Proof of the inconsistencies? Some have already been posted here.

Not a single one has been posted that wasn't proven to be false. Just look at the pathetic attempts of cardinalbunal. We have shown them all to be wrong. He specializes in MISREPRESENTING Catholic doctrine, and then attacking the misinterpretation. That is NOT proof. That's called a "straw man" argument. It is also very dishonest, but we've come to expect that from him.

Do you disagree? Then show me even one contradiction that will stand scrutiny. Just one.

But you don't know of any, right? I thought so.

[Cardinal Bunal]

No pope has ever made an ex cathedra statement about the Apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

Granting you might be correct there, or IF you are correct there......... what you say is irrelevant because the Pope HAS made an official declaration about Mary's sinlessness....It is NOT a doctrine about the Guadalupe apparition per se, but certainly it is NOT unfounded to say that the Pope, speaking ex cathedra declared that since it is fitting that Mary was without sin, she was immune to the pains of childbirth, a consequence of sin. (Gen. 3: 15) therefore the Sword of Sorrow which Zechariah the high priest has mentioned are what has caused the figure in Revelation 12 birthpangs. But we know this happened AFTER. AFTER Jesus birth when he was presented at the temple.

The apparition contradicts BOTH the teaching of the church and Scripture, or if the apparition is NOT, then the Pope isn't infallible!!!!!! Either way, the apparition is still a liar, claiming to be someone "immaculate" when facts prove otherwise.

If you disagree, then show me even one verse that affirms sola scriptura. It's been a long, long time and you still haven't been able to come up with a single verse.

By default, the Scriptures can stand on their own. And give the truths that are doctrinal, moral and event-chronicled that we may have Eternal Life. (John 20: 31), so that those who have eternal life may know it. (1 John 5: 13)....... We can be fully equipped (2 Tim. 3: 17 TEV) even with just the Documents.

Even Jesus kept repeating "so the Scriptures may be fulfilled." or "in accordance with the Scriptures."...... The New Testament Documents are not to be treated differently or any lesser. The apostle Peter affirms this in his second epistle and defines that which is Scripture too. (chapter 3: 15 - 16)

It is a historical fact that natives of Russia and Greece.... and Christians in Egypt.... and Semitic nomads had the DOCUMENTS before or on the 1st century... and the complete set during the early 2nd century or late 1st century Anno Domini. The Roman church is NOT the only one to have a complete compilation hundreds of years later!!!!