Jesus isn't Catholic

[BreadOfLife]

You made the stupid claim, then disagreed with yourself...that's idoitic. <--- LOL.

Whatever makes you feel better . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Except, on a few occasions, you have accused people of lying who were not lying.

Not to my knowledge.
Perhaps YOU can show me.

Or, perhaps is is more accurate that the Catholic Church agrees with me...

But taking one of my statements out of the context of the rest of them and saying that the context of my statement is untrue while my statement is...means that you are not honestly assessing my statements.

No - the Catholic Church has been around about 2000 years longer than YOU - so it's YOU who agrees with the Church.

 

[justbyfaith]

Not to my knowledge.
Perhaps YOU can show me.

I know it, even if you don't.

The post in question that proves my point was deleted by the original poster.

That does not mean that it was never posted; only that I cannot now bring it forth as proof.

But you have to call my integrity into question if you are going to say that I am lying in testifying to what I have testified to.

Since that is what you have done from the beginning, I expect it from you. But it reeks of bearing thorns and thistles on your part (see Matthew 7:15-20).

No - the Catholic Church has been around about 2000 years longer than YOU - so it's YOU who agrees with the Church.

Except, I did not get my understanding from anything that I read ("red") coming from the Catholic Church.

And therefore, in believing my position, I am not agreeing with the Catholic Church but with what the Bible teaches on the subject.

If the Catholilc Church also believes what the Bible teaches on ths subject, then that is one point for them.

But you, as a representative of the Cathollic Church, have taught that we are saved by faith and works (unless I misunderstood you)....

Whereas you later said that Jon Courson's contention that this is not the case, but that we are saved by a faith that works, is actually the accurate assessment of James 2:14.

So, which one is it?

What do you, and the Catholic Church, actually teach on the subject?

Because it seems to me that you were disagreeing with my assessment only a few weeks ago (or less). But now you agree; and say that the Catholic Church also agrees.

Note also that what I am saying is the whole of what I quoted out of the commentary and that if you agree with that, and say that this is what the Catholic Church has always taught, then you also agree, and say that the Catholic Church has always taught, that salvation is not of works; because that is what is clearly laid out by what is written in the commentary.

 

[justbyfaith]

Here is something from an "academic commentary"....Jon Courson's Application Commentary of the New Testament:

On James 2:14-26 Jon Courson writes:

"Arguing that faith without works is dead, the book of James so incensed Martin Luther that the reformer called it the "veritable straw Epistle that should be thrown into the Rhine River." yet James proves that faith without works is dead by pointing to the example of Abraham. It's not that Abraham was saved by taking Isaac up the mountain to sacrifice him in obedience to God. No, James says the work that saved Abraham took place years before when he simply believed in God (verse 23).

When was Abraham declared righteous? As James quotes Genesis 15:6, we understand that Abraham was declared righteous when he simply believed God would do what He said He would do when He told Abraham He would make his descendants more numerable than the sand on the seashore. Interestingly, Paul would also point to Abraham as proof that man is justified by faith apart from works (Romans 4:3).

James and Paul are in full agreement because they both maintain that the moment Abraham simply believed God was the moment God imputed righteousness to him.

It is not faith and works that save a man. It is not faith or works. It is faith that works. All Abraham was doing on Mount Moriah was showing the reality of what had taken place in his life years earlier when he simply believed God.

If your faith is real, it will show itself. How? By obeying the word of God and following the leading of the Lord, even though you may not understand where it will lead. At the time, Abraham could not have understood the significance of what he had done on Mount Moriah. But this side of Calvary, we see it as a perfect picture of what God the Father would do in sending His Son to that same mountain to die for the sins of the world.

You know you're truly born again when you find yourself obeying God. We're not saved by obedience. But obedience proves we're saved, for true faith works."

 

[BloodBought 1953]

Polycarp? You are kidding, right ? Who gives a Tinker’s damn what he thinks about anything......Does the Bible say” Follow Polycarp as he follows Christ?” Nope. The Bible DOES say to “ Follow Paul as he follows Christ”...... I’ll continue to go with Paul and leave Polycrap with the rest of the Modern Day Judaizers....

 

[Philip James]

Polycarp? You are kidding, right ? Who gives a Tinker’s damn what he thinks about anything...

Wow, just wow..

Sts Paul and Polycarp,
Pray for us!

 

[justbyfaith]

This is PRECISELY what Jesus referred to as "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" that will NOT be forgiven (Matt. 12:31).
The Pharisees ALSO attributed His works to the Devil . . .

And you complained to me about judging your soul...

What was it that you said was the consequences for doing such a thing?

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you...

I have not blasphemed the Holy Spirit here...

Rather, I have discernment to know that the source of these miracles is not from the Holy Spirit but originates in the realm of the dead...

Anyone with eyes can see that...and apparently only the elect have eyes to see (see Matthew 24:24)

But your blindness prevents you from seeing it because you are so afraid of committing the unpardonable sin that you cannot see what is plainly in front of your face.

 

[justbyfaith]

There's hope for you yet.

This is PRECISELY what Jesus referred to as "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" that will NOT be forgiven (Matt. 12:31).
The Pharisees ALSO attributed His works to the Devil . . .

I'm sorry, but this seems a little bit schizophrenic to me...

 

[justbyfaith]

Gen 6:3, And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

 

[justbyfaith]

I would say that if the nature of the miracles is that they are lasting miracles of healing, that there is a possibility that they are from the Holy Ghost...except for one thing: they point to a system of doctrine that is contrary to the teaching of holy scripture: and therefore, even if the devil were to somehow perform lasting miracles of healing, they would be done only in order to counterfeit true signs and wonders that point to the living gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[BloodBought 1953]

Wow, just wow..

Sts Paul and Polycarp,
Pray for us!

The Bible says that the Holy Spirit prays for Believers with a fervency that we can’t even fathom... I’ll take those prayers and leave you with Mr. Polycarp who I never even heard of until tonight....

 

[Taken]

Ignatius of Antioch

" You should all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ did the Father.
Follow, too, the presbytery as you would the apostles;
and respect the deacons as you would God’s law.
Nobody must do anything that has to do with the Church without the bishop’s approval.
Without the bishop’s supervision, no baptisms or love feasts are permitted."

There is no self-appointed authority in the Church.

Semantics -

An Appointment of an overseer, titled, Bishop, was for the "care of a church" and, is not self-Appointed Authority.

When "should" turns into "must"... the overseer, has become a self-Appointed Dictator.

Ignatius- was instrumental in influencing a present day catholic monarchical government under the guise of religion.

Today- the absolute monarchy-
* Holy See- Area within Rome
"Ruler", Bishop of Rome
* Vatican City- Area within Rome
"Ruler", Bishop of Rome
* Catholic Church headquarters
Holy See, Vatican City- area within Rome
"Ruler", Bishop of Rome
* Rome- city of Seven Mountains

"Ruler" of Catholic Church...
Bishop of Rome-
One RULER-
Executive
Legislative
Judicial

 

[Taken]

Except, on a few occasions, you have accused people of lying who were not lying.

But taking one of my statements out of the context of the rest of them and saying that the context of my statement is untrue while my statement is...means that you are not honestly assessing my statements.

On the occasion BOL actually quotes another person, that BOL disagrees with...BOL's comment is that person is wrong .

If the other person, stands his ground, in what he believes...
BOL, THEN...does one or a combination of several things...
* calls the other A Liar (while claiming he didn't claim the other was lying).
* Blatenly "Translates" the other person's words, to "his" false meaning.
* Deflects to "a different" topic.
* Completely, "Rewrites the Others words,"
Then Disagress with "his OWN rewritten words"...<---LOL ) and makes "snarky derragatory" remarks TO the Other"...for "his OWN rewriting of the Others words."

He's a frabicator, and makes every attempt to make "You" or any of his victims, responsible "for his Fabricated lies."

His mode of operation is well known on this forum. He repeats his same worn out, well known MO with everyone who engages with him and will not Yield to agreeing with him.

Your own words stand for yourself. Everyone knows BOL's tricks.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Taken]

justbyfaith-

Faith is a Gift from God-
Because God IS Graceful.

Works- are what a Servant of God can "accomplish".
The POINT of "Works"...
Is for a Converted man, to DO Works, (before the EYES of other men),
To the Credit of God-
That Other men, may Benefit from the "Works", and Comprehend, "the Works benefiting them", was Made Possible...
Because OF God.

In turn- God "rewards", a faithful servant", FOR "Doing Works", that "Glorify Gods Great Name"...in the sight of Other men.

IOW- Works, (to Glorify Gods Great Name), can ONLY be Accomplished...
BY- one Who IS Already MADE Whole...
Converted in Christ the Lord God;

It isn't the Works that Convert a man.
It is Works that are possible...AFTER the man is Converted.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Philip James]

. Polycarp who I never even heard of until tonight

The Martyrdom of Polycarp (Lightfoot translation)

All you holy martyrs,
Pray for us!

 

[ChristisGod]

Wow, just wow..

Sts Paul and Polycarp,
Pray for us!

and polycarp was a direct disciple of the Apostle John.

Irenaeus (Epistola ad Florinum, apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 5, 20), who, in his boyhood, had known, perhaps lived with Polycarp, and of other writers. According to Irenaeus (Epist. ad Victorem. Papam, apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 5, 24), Polycarp had intercourse with "John and others of the apostles;" or still more expressly (Adv. Haeres. 3, 3, et apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 4:14), he was instructed (perhaps converted, ‎maqhteuqei/$‎) by the apostles, and conversed familiarly with many who had seen Christ; was by the apostles appointed (‎katastaqei/$‎) bishop of the Church at Smyrna; and always taught what he had learned from the apostles. Tertullian (De Praescriptionibus Haeretic, c. 32) and Jerome (De Viris Illustribus, c. 17) distinctly mention John as the apostle by whom Polycarp was ordained. But we question if the expressions of Irenaeus, when critically examined and stripped of the rhetorical exaggeration with which his natural reverence for Polycarp has invested them, will prove more than that Polycarp had enjoyed opportunities of hearing some of the apostles; and was, with their sanction, appointed bishop of the Church at Smyrna. That John was one of the apostles referred to by Irenaeus there is not the slightest reason to doubt; and we are disposed, with Tillemont, to regard Philip, whom Polycrates of Ephesus (apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 5, 24) states to have ended his days in the Phrygian Hierapolis, as another of those with whom Polycarp had intercourse. We believe that intercourse with these apostles, and perhaps with some other old disciples who had seen Jesus Christ, is sufficient to bear out the statements of Irenaeus, and is not inconsistent with the general truth of the ancient narrative given by Bollandus. His statement of the ordination of Polycarp by the apostles may perhaps be reduced to the fact that John, of whom alone Tertullian (i.c.) makes mention, was among "the bishops of the neighboring churches," who came, according to the narrative, to the consecration of Polycarp. This circumstance enables us to fix that consecration in or before 104, the latest date assigned to the death of the venerable apostle, and which is not inconsistent with the narrative. It must be borne in mind, too, that the whole subject of the ordination of these early bishops is perplexed by ecclesiastical writers utterly neglecting the circumstance that in some of the larger churches there was in the apostolic age a plurality of bishops (comp. Phil 1,), not to speak of the grave and much disputed question of the identity of bishops and presbyters. The apostolic ordination mentioned by Irenaeus and Tertullian may, therefore, have taken place during the lifetime of Bucolus, and have been antecedent to the precedency which, on his death, Polycarp obtained. We are the more disposed to admit the early origin and the truth of the leading statements embodied in the narration, as the natural tendency of a forger of a later age would have been to exaggerate the opportunities of apostolic intercourse, and the sanctions of apostolic authority, which Polycarp certainly possessed.

Polycarp was bishop of Smyrna at the time when Ignatius of Antioch passed through that city on his way to suffer death at Rome, some time between 107 and 116. Ignatius seems to have enjoyed much this intercourse with Polycarp, whom he had known, apparently, in former days, when they were both hearers of the apostle John (Martyr. Ignatii, c. 3). The sentiment of esteem was reciprocated by Polycarp (Epistol. ad Philipp. c.13), who collected several of the epistles of Ignatius, and sent them to the Church at Philippi, accompanied by an epistle of his own. Polycarp himself visited Rome while Anicetus was bishop of that city, whose episcopate extended, according to Tillemont's calculation, from 157 to 168. Ireneus has recorded (Epistol. ad Victor. apud Euseb. H. E. 5, 14) the difference of opinion of these two holy men on the time of observing Easter, and the steadfastness of Polycarp in adhering to the custom of the Asiatic churches, derived, as they affirmed, from the apostles; as well as their mutual kindness and forbearance, notwithstanding this difference. Indeed, the character of Polycarp appears to have attracted general regard: Irenaeus retained for him a feeling of deepest reverence (Epistol. ad Florin. apud Euseb. II. E. 5, 21); Jerome speaks of him (De Viris Illustr. c. 17) as "totius Asise princeps," the most eminent man in all proconsular Asia. An anecdote given elsewhere shows that even reputed heretics, notwithstanding his decided opposition to them, desired to possess his esteem; and it is not improbable that the reverence excited by his character conduced to his success in restoring them to the communion of the Church. It has been conjectured that he was the angel of the Church of Smyrna to whom Jesus Christ directed the letter in the Apocalypse (2:8-11); and also that he was the bishop to whom the apostle John, according to a beautiful anecdote recorded by Clement of Alexandria (Liber "Quis Dives salvetur?" c. 42), committed the care of a young man, who, forsaking his patron, became a chief of a band of robbers, and was reconverted by the apostle; but these are mere conjectures, and of little probability.


from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia

 

[ChristisGod]

The Martyrdom of Polycarp (Lightfoot translation)

All you holy martyrs,
Pray for us!

Its to bad people do not take the time to learn church history especially in the 1st four centuries.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I know it, even if you don't.
The post in question that proves my point was deleted by the original poster.
That does not mean that it was never posted; only that I cannot now bring it forth as proof.
But you have to call my integrity into question if you are going to say that I am lying in testifying to what I have testified to.
Since that is what you have done from the beginning, I expect it from you. But it reeks of bearing thorns and thistles on your part (see Matthew 7:15-20).
You have the ENTIRE internet at your disposal that contains EVERY Catholic document.
If you can't find what you're looking for - then it DOESN'T exist, and we're back at square ONE: You're dishonest.

Except, I did not get my understanding from anything that I read ("red") coming from the Catholic Church.

And therefore, in believing my position, I am not agreeing with the Catholic Church but with what the Bible teaches on the subject.
If the Catholilc Church also believes what the Bible teaches on ths subject, then that is one point for them.
But you, as a representative of the Cathollic Church, have taught that we are saved by faith and works (unless I misunderstood you)....

Whereas you later said that Jon Courson's contention that this is not the case, but that we are saved by a faith that works, is actually the accurate assessment of James 2:14.

So, which one is it?

What do you, and the Catholic Church, actually teach on the subject?

Because it seems to me that you were disagreeing with my assessment only a few weeks ago (or less). But now you agree; and say that the Catholic Church also agrees.

Note also that what I am saying is the whole of what I quoted out of the commentary and that if you agree with that, and say that this is what the Catholic Church has always taught, then you also agree, and say that the Catholic Church has always taught, that salvation is not of works; because that is what is clearly laid out by what is written in the commentary.

I've had DOZENS of conversations with you - and quite frankly - I'm sick to death of explaining the Catholic position on faith and works to you.

I've explained it to you so many times - YOU should be able to tell ME what I said.
But because you are so dishonest and persist in your lies - you act as if I "never" explained it to you.

I urge you to pray hard for the Holy Spirit to help you with your dishonesty issues . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

And you complained to me about judging your soul...
What was it that you said was the consequences for doing such a thing?
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you...
I have not blasphemed the Holy Spirit here...
Rather, I have discernment to know that the source of these miracles is not from the Holy Spirit but originates in the realm of the dead...
Anyone with eyes can see that...and apparently only the elect have eyes to see (see Matthew 24:24)
But your blindness prevents you from seeing it because you are so afraid of committing the unpardonable sin that you cannot see what is plainly in front of your face.

I'm sorry, but this seems a little bit schizophrenic to me...

Nobody is "judging" your soul - as YOU did mine when you said you couldn't wait for God to throw me out of Heaven.

I'm telling you to be careful because what you are doing by attributing works of the Holy Spirit to Satan is EXACTLY what Jesus told the Pharisees was the sin against the Holy Spirit that would NOT be forgiven (Matt. 12:31).
You're treading on DANGEROUS ground here . . .

 

[Berserk]

Polycarp? You are kidding, right ? Who gives a Tinker’s damn what he thinks about anything......Does the Bible say” Follow Polycarp as he follows Christ?” Nope. The Bible DOES say to “ Follow Paul as he follows Christ”...... I’ll continue to go with Paul and leave Polycrap with the rest of the Modern Day Judaizers....

Watch this free online movie on Polycarp's life and weep over your ignorant disrespect!

Polycarp (2015)