Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

[Taken]

Nonsense.

I’ve proven repeatedly that you have claimed to be without sin, having been:

a) Forgiven of ALL past sin.
b) Unable to sin anymore

This would make you SIN-FREE – and 1 John 1:8 says that you have deceived yourself and that the truth is NOT in you.

You can dance around the issue all you want – but a + b = SIN-FREE.

Post on the appropriate Thread.
"Unproven claims be BOL"

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Giuliano]

In post #910, @epostle produced a work of Biblical art from the Early Church (2nd century).

YOUR demand for “proof” is dishonest in light of the fact that he has already provided it.
Here are some further examples from . . .

Who's lying now? Hmmm? That painting from about 150 AD to 170 AD and found in the catacombs. So at best, we can say people were painting pictures in the catacombs about 100 years after Jesus ascended. It says nothing about churches, nothing about paintings in churches and absolutely nothing about statues in churches. Stop prevaricating.

the 3rd century . . .
“The Good Shepherd”

“Adoration of the Magi”

the 4th century . . .
“Noah Praying in the Ark”

“Jesus Heals the Bleeding Woman”

ONE more time . . .
Biblical art has ALWAYS been used to educate the illiterate masses . . .

Too bad that the bishops and priests in the early Church couldn't speak to people and educate them. What's next: You are going to say Priscilla and Aquila drew pictures for Apollos? Maybe Philip drew pictures for the eunuch?

I'm beginning to wonder if you got your education from art. So do tell, did Adam have a belly button?

You know what amazes me. This started off as a small remark about the Second Council of Nicea and how statues later became a matter of controversy between Rome and Constantinople. All of a sudden people got defensive! They made absurd claims that have no historical basis; and now we're expected to believe early Christians didn't have priests or bishops to educate them, no, the illiterates needed pictures. I assure you that every church had as many books considered worth reading as they could afford. The bishops also acted as catechists, instructing converts to prepare them for baptism. Those were real and valuable ways of education. Don't give me some flimsy excuse that art was needed. Don't demean the clergy of the early Church that way. Show some respect for them.

 

[epostle]

I was an English major at university; and if something develops, it's changing. I'm getting weary of the word games.

DEVELOP | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

to grow or cause to grow or change into a more advanced form:

Peter, James, and John, with the other Apostles and elders, made up the "Magisterium" at the Council of Jerusalem. The WORD developed, the meaning was always there. The Cambridge English Dictionary did not exist then. In fact, English did not exist then. You are playing word games, not me.

The truth does not change over time if lies crop up. The truth remains the truth.

How many times have I said that?

I don't see it helped anyone improve his life. It is idle speculation to me.

So the Trinity is idle speculation? Is that why you are here? To challenge the doctrine of the Trinity?

The word "magisterium" is itself a relatively recent innovation.
magisterium | Definition of magisterium by Lexico

See above. I suggest you go back to your university and demand a refund on your tuition.

You missed the point that Israel wasn't supposed to inquire so much into the "mysteries." They were to obey the commandments given to them.
I thought many of the Gnostics made up their own books. And then too, there wasn't even an official list of what books were "in the Bible." Stop making things up, please.

We are discussing ecumenical councils, not Israel, who had no ecumenical councils, or Gnostics, who were deemed heretics by John and Paul. I'm not making anything up, but you are all over the map.

Did I mention Mary? Mary wasn't nosy, trying to look into the secret things of God the way Eve did and the way theologians have.

Some theologians have been wrong, but they are not the Magisterium.

I'd have a lot fewer problems with the Catholic Church if they stuck to the good works and did less struggling to peer into the secret things of God and then persecuting people who disagreed.

You are lashing out at me because your nonsense has been exposed.

 

[Giuliano]

Peter, James, and John, with the other Apostles and elders, made up the "Magisterium" at the Council of Jerusalem. The WORD developed, the meaning was always there. The Cambridge English Dictionary did not exist then. In fact, English did not exist then. You are playing word games, not me.

We are talking to each other now, using words the way they are used now. You may not like to hear it, but one of the big turn offs to non-Catholics is the double-speak of the Catholic Church.

How many times have I said that?
So the Trinity is idle speculation? Is that why you are here? To challenge the doctrine of the Trinity?

Fumbling in the dark? Have you seen me mention it either way? I don't see the point in it or the point of lambasting someone else over it.

See above. I suggest you go back to your university and demand a refund on your tuition.

It was okay, Ivy League and all that.
We are discussing ecumenical councils, not Israel, who had no ecumenical councils, or Gnostics, who were deemed heretics by John and Paul. I'm not making anything up, but you are all over the map.[/quote]I see no point in trying to discuss how Israel was governed by the Sanhedrin. Would that the Catholic Church had followed their precedent.

Did John and Paul hold ecumenical councils to deal with heretics? You brought up the subject of heretics and said they based their beliefs on the Bible alone, as if they were sola scriptura followers of Luther or Zwingli or something. That was a truly bizarre thing to state when the Gnostics often wrote their own books.

Some theologians have been wrong, but they are not the Magisterium. You are lashing out at me because your nonsense has been exposed.

Lashing out? Is that what you call it when someone demands logic and evidence? Go back and see how this conversation started. I ruffled feathers discussing the Second Council of Nicea. Deal with it.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Who's lying now? Hmmm? That painting from about 150 AD to 170 AD and found in the catacombs. So at best, we can say people were painting pictures in the catacombs about 100 years after Jesus ascended. It says nothing about churches, nothing about paintings in churches and absolutely nothing about statues in churches. Stop prevaricating.
Too bad that the bishops and priests in the early Church couldn't speak to people and educate them. What's next: You are going to say Priscilla and Aquila drew pictures for Apollos? Maybe Philip drew pictures for the eunuch?

I'm beginning to wonder if you got your education from art. So do tell, did Adam have a belly button?

You know what amazes me. This started off as a small remark about the Second Council of Nicea and how statues later became a matter of controversy between Rome and Constantinople. All of a sudden people got defensive! They made absurd claims that have no historical basis; and now we're expected to believe early Christians didn't have priests or bishops to educate them, no, the illiterates needed pictures. I assure you that every church had as many books considered worth reading as they could afford. The bishops also acted as catechists, instructing converts to prepare them for baptism. Those were real and valuable ways of education. Don't give me some flimsy excuse that art was needed. Don't demean the clergy of the early Church that way. Show some respect for them.

Sooooo, scholarly evidence and physical evidence aren’t as valuable as YOUR denials??
Your arrogance is almost as astounding as your ignorance.

I was taught in school in several subjects. The teachers employed textbooks, lectures and films.
WHY would you think that the Early Church wouldn’t use every tool at their disposal??

Yours is an asinine argument.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Post on the appropriate Thread.
"Unproven claims be BOL"

Glory to God,
Taken

Then dispute those verses, Einstein . . .

 

[Giuliano]

Sooooo, scholarly evidence and physical evidence aren’t as valuable as YOUR denials??
Your arrogance is almost as astounding as your ignorance.

I'll take that as a compliment meaning you ran out of sensible things to say. Still waiting for any evidence of statues in early churches. . . .

I was taught in school in several subjects. The teachers employed textbooks, lectures and films.
WHY would you think that the Early Church wouldn’t use every tool at their disposal??

Yours is an asinine argument.

No comic books without words in your school?

 

[GodsGrace]

I'll take that as a compliment meaning you ran out of sensible things to say. Still waiting for any evidence of statues in early churches. . . .

No comic books without words in your school?

I doubt you'll get evidence of statues in early churches.
Churches were not "official" buildings...
Christians were being persecuted....
And I really can't find any writings on this...not that I've read everything of course.

This practice probably started with paintings on walls and then increased after Constantine and the Milan Edict.

BoL ran out of sensible things to say a long time ago.

 

[epostle]

Who's lying now? Hmmm? That painting from about 150 AD to 170 AD and found in the catacombs. So at best, we can say people were painting pictures in the catacombs about 100 years after Jesus ascended. It says nothing about churches, nothing about paintings in churches and absolutely nothing about statues in churches. Stop prevaricating.
Too bad that the bishops and priests in the early Church couldn't speak to people and educate them. What's next: You are going to say Priscilla and Aquila drew pictures for Apollos? Maybe Philip drew pictures for the eunuch?

You are being obtuse. There were no churches for the first 3 centuries BECAUSE ASSEMBLIES WERE ILLEGAL. The catacombs were a place of refuge from pagan Roman persecution. It's basic Christian History 101. The Roman Catacombs is hard physical archeological evidence of the Catholicity of the early Church that arrogant objectors flatly deny.

I'm beginning to wonder if you got your education from art. So do tell, did Adam have a belly button?

You know what amazes me. This started off as a small remark about the Second Council of Nicea and how statues later became a matter of controversy between Rome and Constantinople. All of a sudden people got defensive! They made absurd claims that have no historical basis; and now we're expected to believe early Christians didn't have priests or bishops to educate them, no, the illiterates needed pictures. I assure you that every church had as many books considered worth reading as they could afford. The bishops also acted as catechists, instructing converts to prepare them for baptism. Those were real and valuable ways of education. Don't give me some flimsy excuse that art was needed. Don't demean the clergy of the early Church that way. Show some respect for them.

But you show no respect for the early church that used art as a tool for evangelization. That does not downplay the importance of "words". We don't create a false dichotomy.

To all who are passionately dedicated
to the search for new “epiphanies” of beauty
so that through their creative work as artists
they may offer these as gifts to the world.​

“God saw all that he had made, and it was very good” (Gn 1:31)
Letter to Artists, (April 4, 1999) | John Paul II

 

[epostle]

When did the idea of purgatory come about?

In Jewish tradition in kernel form, evidenced by the Book of Maccabees, conveniently trashed by Luther. I don't care if some people think that book is not inspired, but to reject Jewish history is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

 

[Taken]

Then dispute those verses, Einstein . . .

So now you want to play tit for tat.

Look I've answered your posts.
And I have repeatedly asked You to prove your claims you have made FOR Me.
Even posted an OP Specific for you to quote me claiming to HAVE no SIN.
NOT ONCE have you provided one shred of proof.
No...I will not yield to your DEFLECTION and answer you one more thing Until you prove

your claim...that I have said I HAVE no SIN.

.

UNTIL then, you REMAIN a Liar.
You can mend your reputation in the appropriate OP, or leave your reputation as it now stands.

Glory To God,
Taken

 

[GodsGrace]

In Jewish tradition in kernel form, evidenced by the Book of Maccabees, conveniently trashed by Luther. I don't care if some people think that book is not inspired, but to reject Jewish history is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Could you give me some verses?

I've always learned (from the CC) that purgatory came about hundreds of years after the church.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I'll take that as a compliment meaning you ran out of sensible things to say. Still waiting for any evidence of statues in early churches. . . .

No comic books without words in your school?

As GG noted in a rare moment of honesty and historical accuracy – Christianity was under persecution until the 4th century so you won’t find any Church buildings during the first 3 centuries.

From about the 6th century on, Churches began to display works of art as means to remind people of whet they learned (Early Christian Sculpture).

Anyway, as I pointed out to you earlier – Solomon had large carved Cherubim place in the Temple (1 Kings 6:27) – even though he was NOT commanded by God to do so as Moses was (Exod. 25:18).

You can go on denying this all day long – and you’ll STILL be wrong . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

So now you want to play tit for tat.
Look I've answered your posts.
And I have repeatedly asked You to prove your claims you have made FOR Me.
Even posted an OP Specific for you to quote me claiming to HAVE no SIN.
NOT ONCE have you provided one shred of proof.
No...I will not yield to your DEFLECTION and answer you one more thing Until you prove
UNTIL then, you REMAIN a Liar.
You can mend your reputation in the appropriate OP, or leave your reputation as it now stands.

Glory To God,
Taken

Then point me to the POST where you "refuted" my evidence . . .

 

[GodsGrace]

You are being obtuse. There were no churches for the first 3 centuries BECAUSE ASSEMBLIES WERE ILLEGAL. The catacombs were a place of refuge from pagan Roman persecution. It's basic Christian History 101. The Roman Catacombs is hard physical archeological evidence of the Catholicity of the early Church that arrogant objectors flatly deny.

But you show no respect for the early church that used art as a tool for evangelization. That does not downplay the importance of "words". We don't create a false dichotomy.

To all who are passionately dedicated
to the search for new “epiphanies” of beauty
so that through their creative work as artists
they may offer these as gifts to the world.​

“God saw all that he had made, and it was very good” (Gn 1:31)
Letter to Artists, (April 4, 1999) | John Paul II

He has become a Bishop....
And has also aged!
Must come with the job.

 

[Giuliano]

You are being obtuse. There were no churches for the first 3 centuries BECAUSE ASSEMBLIES WERE ILLEGAL. The catacombs were a place of refuge from pagan Roman persecution. It's basic Christian History 101. The Roman Catacombs is hard physical archeological evidence of the Catholicity of the early Church that arrogant objectors flatly deny.

Tell Bread of life that. He's the one who said, "The argument FOR paintings but AGAINST statues is a moronic one. they are BOTH imagery.
One is two dimensional and the other is three dimensional, but they're BOTH depictions. BOTH have been used throughout history to educate the masses." He jumped into the conversation and then pretended there had pictures and statues in churches from the very beginning.
He was also disrespectful to the Second Council of Nicea which approved flat pictures when an Emperor was trying to ban both pictures and statues.

Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

I asked him, "Tell me when statues starting appearing in churches. Do you know?" He didn't know. The churches with paintings (and perhaps some with statues) started after Christianity became legal. Of course, that's true. Another consideration was money. It should obvious too that statues would be pose a difficulty in the catacombs.

But you show no respect for the early church that used art as a tool for evangelization.

Evidence? Zero. We have the books of the New Testament and many writings of the early Church Fathers. I do not know what you mean by that statement. After all, "Faith comes by hearing, " not by looking at a picture or statue. People should pay more attention -- when your bishop speaks, you should believe he is speaking in God's stead. Faith comes by hearing. It truly does, not by looking.

That does not downplay the importance of "words". We don't create a false dichotomy.

To all who are passionately dedicated
to the search for new “epiphanies” of beauty
so that through their creative work as artists
they may offer these as gifts to the world.​

“God saw all that he had made, and it was very good” (Gn 1:31)
Letter to Artists, (April 4, 1999) | John Paul II

Let me try to get this straight. I have a statue of St. Francis and a very Catholic picture of Jesus with the Sacred Heart. I don't care how many pictures and statues churches have. That was not my point when I brought up the Second Council of Nicea; and I don't appreciate being portrayed as an anti-Catholic bigot.

Say what you like, paintings and statues do not talk. They cannot teach.

Habakkuk 2:18 What profiteth the graven image that the maker thereof hath graven it; the molten image, and a teacher of lies, that the maker of his work trusteth therein, to make dumb idols<good for nothing>?
19 Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it.

What my statue of St. Francis can do for me is to remind me of him, and I like that. If no one had told me why he was holding a dove, I would never have guessed. If no one had explained what the Sacred Heart was, I would never had bought the picture.

If you want to have them, fine; but don't pretend they're teaching people. That's absurd. If someone had never heard the story about Jonah, do you think a picture of him would teach him anything? Would he understand what he was seeing?

What I will say now is that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church seems to values statues more Christian unity. If someone came to my house and was offended by my statue and picture, I'd put them away. I would even give them away rather than offend him. I like them but don't need them.

 

[Giuliano]

I doubt you'll get evidence of statues in early churches.
Churches were not "official" buildings...
Christians were being persecuted....
And I really can't find any writings on this...not that I've read everything of course.

This practice probably started with paintings on walls and then increased after Constantine and the Milan Edict.

The article at Catholic Encyclopedia basically agrees with you. Can you believe it basically agrees with you? Can you believe I read the article several days ago? I'm sure Bread of Life wouldn't be interested since he knows everything already -- why should I post it for him then? Here's the link if you're interested:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Veneration of Images

BoL ran out of sensible things to say a long time ago.

I think someone should commission him to make a picture book with no words titled, "Catechism for Dummies." Maybe he would like to mail us all copies.

 

[Giuliano]

As GG noted in a rare moment of honesty and historical accuracy – Christianity was under persecution until the 4th century so you won’t find any Church buildings during the first 3 centuries.

From about the 6th century on, Churches began to display works of art as means to remind people of whet they learned (Early Christian Sculpture).

I see you've come to your senses somewhat.

Anyway, as I pointed out to you earlier – Solomon had large carved Cherubim place in the Temple (1 Kings 6:27) – even though he was NOT commanded by God to do so as Moses was (Exod. 25:18).

David gave him the pattern to be used (1 Chronicles 28). I don't think the Bible explicitly says so; but other men saw visions of what to build, so I gather God gave David the pattern.

Those cherubim were not where the public could see them as I Kings 6 states.

You can go on denying this all day long – and you’ll STILL be wrong . . .

Who's denying what? I was right that early churches did not have statues or pictures. People were using their houses as churches for a long time.

The art was to serve as reminders too, just as the Eucharist is to hold Jesus in remembrance, not to teach them.

 

[GodsGrace]

The article at Catholic Encyclopedia basically agrees with you. Can you believe it basically agrees with you? Can you believe I read the article several days ago? I'm sure Bread of Life wouldn't be interested since he knows everything already -- why should I post it for him then? Here's the link if you're interested:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Veneration of Images

I think someone should commission him to make a picture book with no words titled, "Catechism for Dummies." Maybe he would like to mail us all copies.

Sure it basically agrees with me!
I believe you also know your stuff.
And, as my mother used to tell me:
The smarter one stops first.
No use arguing with BoL...nothing seems to sink in.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I see you've come to your senses somewhat.
David gave him the pattern to be used (1 Chronicles 28). I don't think the Bible explicitly says so; but other men saw visions of what to build, so I gather God gave David the pattern.

Those cherubim were not where the public could see them as I Kings 6 states.

Who's denying what? I was right that early churches did not have statues or pictures. People were using their houses as churches for a long time.

The art was to serve as reminders too, just as the Eucharist is to hold Jesus in remembrance, not to teach them.

Apples and oranges . . .

God commanded Moses to create golden images of Cherubim.
Solomon was NOT commanded by God to do so – but God APPROVED of them.
BIG difference.

As for images used for educating the masses throughout history – I have proven my point repeatedly. I said that the EARLY CHURCH used them to educate people. I NEVER said that this was a practice from day ONE.

Nobody like to be proven wrong – and you’re no different . . .

As for the Eucharist – it is not a mere “reminder” of Christ – it is Christ Himself (Matt. 26:26, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:18-20,1 Corinthians 11:23-25).