by Amazing 66 Replies latest jw friends
Whatever we criticise the WTS (and I hate it with a passion) it has never - burned people at the stake or supported wars.
That is my point exactly.
The real attitude is exposed when a person or organization has total power.
We have seen what the Church of the Inquisition did when it's power was unfettered by the State.
The only question I have about the Catholic Church is ................................
How can anyone support such an abomination?
yesidid
Amazing wrote"
5. The Invisible Church Theology: I was in this camp for a many years. These folks have largely disconnected from all denominational-ism,but may go to any Church or none, even traditional denominations, but can never again commit to anything. They view the Church as this 'invisible' thing that Jesus founded on himself as the 'Rock' and has Christians from all denominations ... hence it is invisible as a singular structure ... it can never have the elements that the Apostles spoke about and directed, and it cannot have any clear identification that it is something that Jesus built ... that is the one they hold as the 'Rock' (Jesus) is its only foundation stone ... but any other structure in addition to Jesus is rejected. It is this latter camp that you and Mouthy seem to me to be in ... correct me if I am not following your comments accurately
********
No, not really. I have not rejected the church, as you suggest. In fact, I stated that specifically. Not sure how you concluded that if you read my post. Either I need to sharpen my communication skills, or I fear we are talking past each other. I don’t have any problem making a commitment. My commitment is to Christ. I do not see the church as a building or structure. John 2:14 "In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. 15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. 16 And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.” 17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me.” 18 So the Jews said to him, “What sign do you show us for doing these things?” 19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” 20 The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” 21 But he was speaking about the temple of his body"
What was Jesus building upon if not himself?
We understand Mtt 16: differently. If you read the whole chapter in context, it does not focus on Peter, but on Christ. In asking Peter who Peter believes Jesus to be, Jesus is thrilled that Peter recognized this truth (that Jesus is the Christ) because Jesus had not told Him. This truth that Peter understood…is the foundation…the very most basic teaching…. the very truth upon which all other Christian teachings rest … is the fact that Jesus is the Christ… This is the foundation, the rock, the chief cornerstone….Jesus Christ. The gates of Hell did not and cannot prevail against Him. It did not take Peter long to show feet of clay…he denied Jesus 3 times when he thought he was in danger. .
Neither my relationship with God nor my salvation depend on a Church. That doesn’t mean that I reject the Church. The church definitely has its place which I fully respect, and enjoy…but it is not the master of my faith nor is it my Spiritual Father. The only one who can fulfill that role is Jesus.
Remember that Jesus also said “where 2 or 3 are gathered In My Name, there I am in their midst. Matt 18:20
Which brings me to the subject of the what you call the “mano to mano” approach. I don’t see it that way, but you can call it whatever you like. You asked if my (or Mouthy’s) relationship with God is one dementional, and if the communication is only 1 way. No…I do not hear voices…Jesus does not sit down in the flesh and talk to me verbally. With all due respect, I don’t think he sits down in the flesh with the Pope either. My relationship is not one way, however. I feel His presence, and He answers my prayers. He directs me through Holy Spirit. There are things that have happened in my life as a Christian that I could not explain otherwise.
How did I learn about Jesus? From my parents initially, who even though they were jws, had a somewhat different understanding of Him than the organization. My boyfriend, also an xjw, swears I grew up in a different religion than he did. It finally clicked when I went to a Witnesses now for Jesus convention. I went forward (twice, actually because I couldn’t get enough, I was overwhelmed) to accept Christ. I was a little disconcerted when later one of the speakers came up to me and asked if I had done this because of something that person had said. It felt like this person wanted to take credit for my accepting Jesus. Credit belongs only to Christ. He was there all along…it just took me nearly 4 decades to realize it.
So let me ask you this. As jws, we believed that the Faithful and Discreet Slave was 144000/GB. Now that you are a Catholic, who do you believe the FDS is? Keeping in mind that in Luke 12: He speaks of the Faithful and wise servants…plural. Do you believe, as I do, that he was speaking here about individual Christians?
As I read the New Testament, I look first at the words of Jesus. What He said is the measure by which I read the rest of Scripture. If other texts, written by the apostles conflicts with what Jesus said…well, Jesus’ words prevail. I know that what we have is limited…but it is enough as a starting point in coming to know Him, an introduction, if you will. Holy Spirit and a willing heart can do the rest.
Amazing said:[Note: The blood relatives of Jesus Christ attend an Orthodox Church in Antioch and near Jerusalem to this day.] Really? Can you expand on this? By what relation? Very interesting…would like to know more about this. Never heard that before.
Amazing said: Side note: It would be nice if people stopped judging me, and show the respect for me that they desire for themselves ... you know, do unto others ... the golden rule.
I hope you are not referring to me… If I have been disrespectful or judgmental in any way, please point it out to me. That is definitely not my intention.
Enough for tonight... going to bed...busy day tomorrow
Coffee
.
dear Amazing... hello there. there are 3 reasons for my response to this tread.
1. THIS tread is the one I wanted to answer a response to when I first came here.
2. I feel that in my response I am being true to my own belief about the roman catholic church.
3. I see it as a kind of offering...an apology for lying to a friend + 20 percent.
I believe that the roman catholic church has not been completely true to the gospel and that "it" has neither the glory nor the guts to come clean about its mistakes or heresy.
at vatican II pope paul VI stated in paragraph 14 "All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ." http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html
I find it difficult to find any biblical source for the RCC belief that the virgin mary(from heaven) is the dispenser of the mercies of God the Father through Jesus Christ as she is portrayed in the RCC traditions. Contrary to this tradition, the bible says that there is one mediator between God and man - the Man Jesus Christ, and here on earth, the christain is to be the dispenser of mercies to other "men".
I find it difficult to find any biblical source for the RCC belief that somehow hard cash/indulgences can buy ones way out of a supposed purgitory where the blood of the Savior can't. I find it difficult to find any biblical source for the RCC belief that a bloodless sacrifice in the form of the mass holds any benefit for anyone - without the shedding of blood there is no atonement for sin - the transubstantiation miracle seems strangly out of place in that all of the miracles recorded in the bible were seen by people(verified).
was it in the spirit of Christ to sit on/horde enough resources to shelter, feed and clothe entire nations? was it in the spirit of Christ to offer an apology to the world for the sins of the sons and daughters of the church while omitting the fact that the popes themselves are culpable for many of the atrocities committed throughout the long history of the church?
to give credit where credit is due...I am thankful that the RCC was responsible in part for the collection/preservation/transmission of the biblical texts, BUT the essential task was carried out by the Holy Spirit working through men of God...which are hardly identifiable with many of the "apostolic succession".
when the traditions of men take precedence over the revealed word of God men have made the word of God of no effect. unfortunately the pope is "bound" on earth by the traditions of the RCC...but the Truth will set him free.
xo
Coffee
My post sounded condescending in asking if you knew about the gmostics. What i meant was that they are not heard of that much. Careless writing, on my part. Sorry.
S
No problem Satanus.... no offense taken at all...
Just poppin' in for a minute here. I'm in Virginia visiting with my son, dil and my beautiful 1 year old granddaughter. I'm going to make the most of every minute. Have to drive back to Massachusetts later today...so I won't be back online probably until after work tomorrow.
Where is Amazing? Hope all is well ...thought he'd be on here by now. No hurry though.
Coffee
Hello All,
I just got my PC back on line in my new location. I had PC and Router problems ... but finally got them solved.
It will take a while to respond to you all ... and the various points you have presented ... perhaps I will break this up to each person who has posted on issues, concerns, or questions.
In general, there is a running theme that because of the sins of people in the Church, including its leaders, that this means Catholicism is not true, or true to the Gospel. I will deal with each one in more detail ... but for this general concern ...
One can find the worst evil among ALL Christian denominations and non-denominations, starting with the very first Christians, Apostles included. Judas betrayed Christ, after he was an Apostle. Peter denied Christ. Paul was a jerk, John and James were zealous firebrand idiots, Matthew was, and continued to be a Tax collector ... which in those days was not a nice trade. Any Jew who listened to Judas, might have gotten the impression that Jesus was a mere cult leader. Mary Magdalene was a whore. And Jesus was often accused of hanging out with the worst of humanity. And, today, one can find the same and worst in all denominations ... so, what is the point?
The point is, if you have faith in Jesus, you do so in spite of the evil and sin among Christians. The Church is made up of sinful people - the vast majority of which have not been evil. The problem confronting ex-JWs is the claim of the Watchtower that pure true religion would clean out the evil, and by allowing evil to exist, such a religion is false. Ex-JWs still what would be the truth by what they learned in the Watchtower, even though they have rejected the Watchtower Society. When I look at the Catholic Church, I do not look at the sinful people, but rather, at the fact that she has been protected from error on matters of faith and morals in spite of the evil that has surfaced. When I say protected, I am not speaking of the conduct of some, but of the teaching of the Church. And, it is the only denomination along with the Orthodox, that have any historical chance of claiming to be the Church Jesus said he would build and protect through the ages. The Watchtower Society has not been protected from error.
If those of you who feel that the Catholic Church must be abandoned because of sins that some of her people have committed throughout history, then I submit to you that you should therefore abandon Christ because of the sins of ALL Christians through all of Christian history. Is that the standard you use to judge Catholicism, and therefore, do you defend the same standard to judge being a Christian of any type?
I will finish responding in a day or two, as I am trying to catch up on work and unpacking.
As a non-christian I don't see how you have to abandon Christ because of what those who claim to represent him have done. The problem you will have is determining who this Christ bloke is in the first place as so much of what he is alleged to have said (ok ALL of it) has been filtered through religious authorities and in some instance secular authorities (eg Constantine, King James etc) for centuries, each with their own axes to grind. I would say that there is no way you could know what Jesus did or did not say based on Scripture.
GromitSK,
In principle you have a point. The basic Christian has faith in what has been taught and written about Jesus Christ by those who knew him personally, and those who knew the disciples who passed on the faith ... faith is the key ... yet, there is also authenticated history which scholars have confirmed, that Jesus existed, and that he said and did the things claimed. There is nothing in secular writing to refute or expose Christ as a fraud. I am not sure of the 'filtering' you mention, as very ancient manuscripts have surfaced which confirm that later versions have exhibited little or no change. Also, Catholic and Orthodox traditions have not changed in nearly 2,000 years. One can even confirm this through a study of art history, which provides additional supporting evidence.
All that said ... it still boils down to faith ... for even if all of what Jesus and the Apostles said and did are recorded accurately and passed on with little or no changes ... it sill requires faith to accept that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came down from heaven to die for us, be resurrected, proving he is who he said he is, and then building his Church from heaven. Jesus said to the Apostle Thomas that it would be a matter of faith once he left the earth, as no one would be able to physically test him as did Thomas.
Thanks Amazing. When you say an authenticated record - I might accept that he existed. I far as him doing what he said and did I would say there is no way to know that from a written record and we would be reduced to accepting the word of long-dead unknown writers, most of whom had an axe to grind as followers. I certainly wouldn't suggest Christ was a fraud (if one accepts he existed) however we are not talking about Christ but those who claim to have recorded his sayings and doings. In terms of filtering, as you wil be aware there was a large number of "Gospels" many of which it was decided would be excluded from the canon of the Bible as they either did not fit the agreed pattern (whose pattern?) or were plainly fairy stories. Some of which were contemporaneous with Jesus.
I am not sure how Art History would give anyone a sound conviction that Jesus existed, performed miracles and that the Bible is the word of God but that could just be my ignorance.
Faith is an important ingredient of everyday life I agree. Faith in a story that was written down milennia ago? By person we have no way of knowing or validating other than what they or their followers wrote about themselves? Whilst I respect everyone's right to believe what they want, I would not expect anyone to place much faith in something so distant and lacking in objective evidence (not that these people existed but that they were and did what they claimed). It is a personal choice and the standard of evidence which is acceptable to you might not be to someone else as I am sure you will agree.
check out http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ - you might get a laugh and there is quite a lot of interesting material there too :)
