Posted by: Joe of St. Thérèse | September 25, 2007

A Q and A session

This was so good, I thought I’d share it with you all.
Posted by: Catholic: Body, Blood, Word!
Posted by: My Life Is Not My OwnYou make the cl.. “This verse is a prophecy of the Church, now notice what the WORD is telling you! That the way will be straight in otherwords, the Church is not going to error because of the Holy Spirit.”However, the Bible is clearly explaining the concept of JESUS CHRIST (not the church) being the narrow way. As the Bible states in John 14:4 “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” I could be off by a verse or two. Anyways, Jesus Christ is the narrow way. Also, the RCC has changed its mind on MANY issues in the past. Therefore, it has erred. Man is not perfect, not even the Pope. Since the Pope is imperfect, the church he rules is imperfect. This means, the church is erred.You have a completely incorrect interpretation of Is 54. That verse is in no way stating the church to be infallible. And please point out where in the Word of God we are commanded to form our own nation.You than make this statement, “If God is speaking through the disciples, how can they mess up? (God is not the author of evil thoughts or words)” yet you have also claimed that the Bible is flawed scientifically. If all scripture is inspired of God like the Bible states, than how can you trust the Bible since you believe it to be scientifically flawed. You must believe God is scientifically disabled to believe that the Bible is inspired of the Holy Spirit (who is God) and yet the Bible to be scientifically flawed.You reference Matthew 18:17. You misinterpret the verse because you fail to look at the full chapter. Let me explain. Here is verses 15-17. “15Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. According to your interpretation of “Luke 10:16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.” You are once again incorrect. Jesus is the word, and the word is Jesus. The Bible is the word. Therefore, yes, this verse state that he who hears the Bible hears Jesus.

(My response is here)
You are pretty much incorrect about all your interpretations…but I’ll stop with these. I don’t want to feed you too much meat too soon.Not to be mean, but I’m going to say it, either you failed Logic..Or you’re pointing out the obvious.No where did I claim that the Pope was perfect. The pope is a sinner just like the rest of us, he goes to confession to the LOW priest, he makes mistakes all the time in life as the rest of us do. If you claim to be perfect, then you are God, and that’s not possible :). What you’re talking about is something we call impeccablity. That means being incapable of sinning. Which NO ONE (Other than Jesus, Mary, and the innocents who have no knowledge of sin) has.Please do not use Rom 3:23 on me, because I just pointed 2 excpetions to that verse, which you’ll agree with me on (Jesus and the innocent)No, I didn’t fail to see the whole passage, you only proved my point further, extending my argument. “But if thy brother shall offend against thee go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall here thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican.”Now, let’s keep in mind what they are talking about, sinning against people. What is that to you? What are they trying to settle here? Trespasses, or sins correct? Sin is somethning that is doctrinal. The question is how many ways can you sin? If you’re saying a lie, that’s a sin, am I right? This is a two fold thing that I’m making here. I’m making a connection with the next verses which give the other apostles the athourity to bind and loosen. Binding and lossening refer to instruction, what they’re instructing the faithful right? Under this, they being the apostles have the athourity from Jesus to forgive sins, but the most important one is to instruct. The point that I was trying to make is that it didn’t tell you to go to the Bible, it told you to go the CHURCH :)! Now in order for you to do that, there has to be a Church that Jesus Established in order for you to do that? If you research history, the one Church that makes it through is the Catholic Church. The Church hasn’t been perfect, (sinners run the Church), in its actions, but NEVER EVER, has the Church been wrong on faith and morals.That’s impossible that he was saying that he who hears the Bible hears me. You know why? It makes no sense. How do you hear a textbook that’s written? You don’t, you read it, am I correct? So your isogesis is incorrect (I know I probally spelled that word wrong, but I’m a math teacher, so forgive)The Bible didn’t intend to teach Science. That knowlege hadn’t been revealed at that time. You’re telling me Moses was able to do Navier Strokes Equation in his head? You’re telling me that every single law of Physics can be found in the Bible? Not only will you not find it. You’ll find things that “contridict” the laws of physics, like moons being still, etc. I’m saying that the Bible is wrong ONLY ON things that IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO TEACH. You’re telling me that you can get Modern Algebra From the BIBLE? You can not! I teach that class, so I should know, lol. You’re right it doesn’t DIRECTLY say it, but you should be able to deduce my conclusion from reading that passage.Commanding to form a nation? I don’t know what you’re talking about please clear that up for me.I listen to the Church because JESUS told me to do so…What I’d personally like for you to do, is read the work of the Early Christians, and look at the Catechism, and tell me what’s changed?I think you’re confusing re-wording for changing. This is not the case.An example of this: Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.Many people misunderstood this. To think that anyone outside the Catholic Church is going to hell. (Which if you talk to old school Catholics, They’ll tell you such a thing)What Vatican II did was clarify that teaching to say that it’s only intended for those who diliberately ignore the Church. This is not a changing of the teaching, it’s wording in in a different manner. This was always the intent of that statement, to mean the one’s who diliberately ignore, it just didn’t need to be pointed out until then.Honestly, you have work to do…My 1 Billion Family Members, the Angels, the Saints in Heaven, the Souls in Purgaory, and Our Lady are praying for you.Grace, Peace, Love in ChristJoe.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: