Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Infallible interpretation of verses

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mica
    replied

    Originally posted by ramcam2 View Post
    Let us take this verse, the gift of infallibility as promised by Jesus. Are you saying when guided by the truth-giving Spirit, Jesus is lying.

    john 16: 13 It will be for him, the truth-giving Spirit, when he comes, to guide you into all truth. He will not utter a message of his own; he will utter the message that has been given to him; and he will make plain to you what is still to come.
    The Holy Spirit is infallible. Humans are not.

    Leave a comment:


  • highrigger
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark Rome View Post

    I have explained the imprimatur/nihil to him so many times but it doesn't phase him one bit. He continues to make false claims.
    I understand. You think the Catholic expert is not telling the truth and somehow fooled the official Catholic censor and arch bishop to agree

    his teachings do not affect Catholic faith. He plainly said that the apostles verses in your CCC do not necessarily mean the apostle accepts

    those dogmas in the CCC. You agree? Or even if you disagree, the experts opinion has no affect on Catholic faith?

    I never made a false claim. I simply quote the Catholic expert. Do you think HE made a false claim?

    JohnR

    Leave a comment:


  • utilyan
    replied
    Originally posted by highrigger View Post

    I never broke on my own. I follow the teachings of Jesus. My Catholic teachers teach different from you. You and your bad attitude

    about them is a fine reason not to be like you. I respect them . You do not. Your attitude repels me from the Catholic church.

    You do not even respect the experts of your Church nor the Imprimatur which should allow you to trust them but does not.

    I am sure other Catholics watch you and are likewise repelled. You make my case.

    JohnR
    Show us a teaching biblical or catechism that authority is from "EXPERTS",

    Rather then the Bishops and magisterium.

    Leave a comment:


  • Curious Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by highrigger View Post

    I never broke on my own. I follow the teachings of Jesus. My Catholic teachers teach different from you. You and your bad attitude about them is a fine reason not to be

    like you. I respect them . You do not. Your attitude repels me from the Catholic church. You do not even respect the experts of your Church nor the Imprimatur

    which should allow you to trust them but does not. I am sure other Catholics watch you and are likewise repelled. You make my case.

    JohnR
    The Church of England broke communion with the Church of Rome.

    Your denomination broke from the Church of England.

    You individually espouse beliefs that are fundamentally contrary to Methodism, while still calling yourself a Methodist.

    So yes, you broke away from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church three times over.

    Leave a comment:


  • highrigger
    replied
    Originally posted by Curious Joe View Post

    The Apostles and their successors are reliable, John. It's those like yourself who broke away on your own, founding your own theologies, that need to defend your teachers and yourselves.

    If Catholic experts were truly your teachers, you'd be Catholic.
    I never broke on my own. I follow the teachings of Jesus. My Catholic teachers teach different from you. You and your bad attitude

    about them is a fine reason not to be like you. I respect them . You do not. Your attitude repels me from the Catholic church

    because this seems to be how the common Catholic church teaches Catholics, to distrust their experts. You think I would ever want my

    family taught (or non-taught) like that?

    You do not respect the experts of your Church nor the Imprimatur which should allow you to trust them but does not.

    I am sure other Catholics watch you and are likewise repelled. You make my case.

    JohnR
    Last edited by highrigger; 07-21-18, 01:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Curious Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by highrigger View Post

    This is your argument? Do you disagree with Fr. Brown or not? Do you really think those verses in the CCC support those dogmas taught by your CCC and if they

    were in the apostles mind when he wrote those verses? He plainly says your church does not interpret scripture as to the intent of the Apostle.. Do you accept that?

    If that Arch Bishop + Official Catholic Censor gives that Imprimatur and Ok to publish does that mean your church might actually interpret scripture as to the apostles intent anyway?

    Do you have an opinion other than explaining the Imprimatur.?

    I am not trying to fool you. I am trying to educate you on what your church teaches. Do you think the Imprimatur means nothing?

    Imprimatur definition from Wikopedia
    In the Catholic Church an imprimatur is an official declaration by a Church
    authority that a book or other printed work may be published.[1][2] Since,
    according to canon law, this permission must be preceded by a declaration
    (known as a nihil obstat) by a person charged with the duties of a censor
    that the work contains nothing damaging to faith or morals,[3] the bishop's
    authorization of publication is implicitly a public declaration that nothing
    offensive to Catholic teaching on faith and morals has been found in it. The
    imprimatur is not an endorsement by the bishop of the contents of a book, not
    even of the religious opinions expressed in it, being merely a declaration
    about what is not in the book.[4] In the published work, the imprimatur is
    sometimes accompanied by a declaration of the following tenor:

    .[6] The local ordinary consults someone whom he considers competent to give a
    judgment and, if that person gives the nihil obstat ("nothing forbids") the
    local ordinary grants the imprimatur ("let it be printed").

    "Nothing offensive to Catholic teaching on faith and morals. "

    Fr. Brown is specifically speaking of what your church teaches and does not teach. The Imprimatur
    must mean something.


    JohnR
    Do you even bother to read what you quote?

    "The imprimatur is not an endorsement by the bishop of the contents of a book, not
    even of the religious opinions expressed in it, being merely a declaration
    about what is not in the book."

    This is what you have been told repeatedly. Imprimatur is negative assurance.

    Don't claim to be teaching us what the Church teaches when you can't even accurately relay a Wikipedia entry.

    Leave a comment:


  • highrigger
    replied
    Originally posted by ramcam2 View Post

    These are also in the catechism where you can see church councils, papal encyclicals, ecf writings.... in the footnotes to back it up.
    The question is if they really back anything up? If an apostle never intends to back up a dogma in the CCC what good is it. Fact is your church

    never claims that the apostle mentioned actually does back up that dogma. Does that bother you at all?

    "In terms of what we might call the literal sense of Scripture,
    ie, what a verse meant when it was first written, it is doubtful
    that the Roman Catholic Church has ever defined the meaning of
    any passage. The church has defined that some ot its doctrines
    are related to scriptural passages, but not necessarily that
    those doctrines were in the minds of the people who wrote the
    passages. Thus, a conflict between private interpretation and
    church doctrine based on scripture is really not relevant to the
    type of commentary help That I have been describing.
    I remember with sad amusement the observation made by a reviewer
    in a popular evaluation of a long commentary I had done. He stated
    he was grateful that he did not have to bother with my opinions
    or those of others since he preached only what the Catholic
    Church taught about this particular book. Since the church had never
    interpreted the literal meaning of any passage in that book,
    I wondered exactly what he found to preach. What he really meant,
    I am sure, is that he preached the opinions about the book that
    he had been taught when he was in the seminary, and he did not
    want to bother seeing whether those opinions still represented where
    most scholars stood today."
    Raymond Brown, Q15 - 101 Questions and Answers to the Bible.
    Page 25. Imprimatur

    JohnR



    Leave a comment:


  • Curious Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by highrigger View Post

    Interesting you do not even try to make a reasonable argument regarding those accusations. You do not stand up for your teachers and why

    they are reliable? I would do so if you attacked my teachers, many of which are Catholic experts. I guess you cannot. Nothing new.

    JohnR
    The Apostles and their successors are reliable, John. It's those like yourself who broke away on your own, founding your own theologies, that need to defend your teachers and yourselves.

    If Catholic experts were truly your teachers, you'd be Catholic.

    Leave a comment:


  • highrigger
    replied
    Originally posted by ramcam2 View Post

    You always stress the imprimatur/nihil obstat in your sources but you must realize that this only mean that the local bishop did not find the work objectionable. This does not mean that the work is inerrant, inspired, or divine. So, please stop fooling us to prove claims against the Catholic Church by using sources that says otherwise.
    This is your argument? Do you disagree with Fr. Brown or not? Do you really think those verses in the CCC support those dogmas taught by your CCC and if they

    were in the apostles mind when he wrote those verses? He plainly says your church does not interpret scripture as to the intent of the Apostle.. Do you accept that?

    If that Arch Bishop + Official Catholic Censor gives that Imprimatur and Ok to publish does that mean your church might actually interpret scripture as to the apostles intent anyway?

    Do you have an opinion other than explaining the Imprimatur.?

    I am not trying to fool you. I am trying to educate you on what your church teaches. Do you think the Imprimatur means nothing?

    Imprimatur definition from Wikopedia
    In the Catholic Church an imprimatur is an official declaration by a Church
    authority that a book or other printed work may be published.[1][2] Since,
    according to canon law, this permission must be preceded by a declaration
    (known as a nihil obstat) by a person charged with the duties of a censor
    that the work contains nothing damaging to faith or morals,[3] the bishop's
    authorization of publication is implicitly a public declaration that nothing
    offensive to Catholic teaching on faith and morals has been found in it. The
    imprimatur is not an endorsement by the bishop of the contents of a book, not
    even of the religious opinions expressed in it, being merely a declaration
    about what is not in the book.[4] In the published work, the imprimatur is
    sometimes accompanied by a declaration of the following tenor:

    .[6] The local ordinary consults someone whom he considers competent to give a
    judgment and, if that person gives the nihil obstat ("nothing forbids") the
    local ordinary grants the imprimatur ("let it be printed").

    "Nothing offensive to Catholic teaching on faith and morals. "

    Fr. Brown is specifically speaking of what your church teaches and does not teach. The Imprimatur
    must mean something.


    JohnR

    Leave a comment:


  • highrigger
    replied
    Originally posted by Curious Joe View Post

    quite an imagination, mica

    some of the things you suggest above are rather indicative of a theological perspective that is clearly in contrast with Scripture, coming from false teachers

    we suggest you abandon those false teachers and their false doctrines immediately
    Interesting you do not even try to make a reasonable argument regarding those accusations. You do not stand up for your teachers and why

    they are reliable? I would do so if you attacked my teachers, many of which are Catholic experts. I guess you cannot. Nothing new.

    JohnR

    Leave a comment:


  • Curious Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by mica View Post
    no, it's actually in scripture.
    you haven't demonstrated anything from Scripture

    run from the false teachings to which you have fallen prey

    Leave a comment:


  • highrigger
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark Rome View Post

    They have no need for such a list because it is left up to each individual to decide what the Bible means.
    You don't have a list either. You think those verses in your CCC are interpretations? They are not. They do not mean that your dogmas are

    derived from those verses. You do not understand your own CCC.

    What is sad is you don't even try to learn.

    "In terms of what we might call the literal sense of Scripture,
    ie, what a verse meant when it was first written, it is doubtful
    that the Roman Catholic Church has ever defined the meaning of
    any passage. The church has defined that some ot its doctrines
    are related to scriptural passages, but not necessarily that
    those doctrines were in the minds of the people who wrote the
    passages. Thus, a conflict between private interpretation and
    church doctrine based on scripture is really not relevant to the
    type of commentary help That I have been describing.
    I remember with sad amusement the observation made by a reviewer
    in a popular evaluation of a long commentary I had done. He stated
    he was grateful that he did not have to bother with my opinions
    or those of others since he preached only what the Catholic
    Church taught about this particular book. Since the church had never
    interpreted the literal meaning of any passage in that book,
    I wondered exactly what he found to preach. What he really meant,
    I am sure, is that he preached the opinions about the book that
    he had been taught when he was in the seminary, and he did not
    want to bother seeing whether those opinions still represented where
    most scholars stood today."
    Raymond Brown, Q15 - 101 Questions and Answers to the Bible.
    Page 25. Imprimatur

    You do not listen to the experts of your church. That is why you are wrong one time after another.

    You are like that unknowing reviewer. Never bothering to see where scholars stand.

    JohnR

    Leave a comment:


  • mica
    replied
    Originally posted by mica View Post
    catholics have bigger problems to worry about. they don't know the mission Jesus had in the gospels, or why. They mostly don't even know the gospel - as they've shown on this forum. They think the apostles taught the message of the cross, prior to the d/r. And they think Peter was the leader of them all. they even believe Jesus set up a false 'Church' to teach contrary to His own word.

    Major problems for catholics.

    I suggest they read Matthew and the writings of Paul until they find the reality of Christ.
    Originally posted by Curious Joe View Post
    quite an imagination, mica

    some of the things you suggest above are rather indicative of a theological perspective that is clearly in contrast with Scripture, coming from false teachers

    we suggest you abandon those false teachers and their false doctrines immediately
    no, it's actually in scripture. Which catholics barely read or understand. That catholics don't 'see' it, is not that surprising. They tend to only read some of the words - which distorts a verse. Your post tells that you haven't read and understood what He says in Matthew about why He was sent. It's been posted on this forum over and over again - with the verses cited. You still can't provide that requested vs from an apostle either, can you? If you could, you would, and you haven't.

    and catholics falter in many directions when asked 'what is the gospel?' - we've all seen that on here.


    of course a catholic would post that. They want us to join them in following their false teacher. BTDT. Finding the reality of Christ by being born again, changes one's whole life, their view of this world and eternal life. There is no turning back to life without Him.

    Think of the life of Saul - he also thought he knew the truth (as he'd been taught his whole life as a Jew), and thought that he was defending God. Then he met Christ and knew the reality of His truth. His life changed forever.


    Leave a comment:


  • mica
    replied
    Originally posted by
    HowieView Post
    Yes, the Body of Christ; the called out ones, aka, the ecclesia.
    Originally posted by Only_3
    Ok, so we're right back to the Catholic Church.
    Originally posted by illini1959 View Post
    This forum needs a merry-go-round emoji.
    yes, the catholics are deceived by the RCC, into believing they are His 'called out ones', which is contrary to His word.



    Leave a comment:


  • Curious Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by mica View Post
    catholics have bigger problems to worry about. they don't know the mission Jesus had in the gospels, or why. They mostly don't even know the gospel - as they've shown on this forum. They think the apostles taught the message of the cross, prior to the d/r. And they think Peter was the leader of them all. they even believe Jesus set up a false 'Church' to teach contrary to His own word.

    Major problems for catholics.

    I suggest they read Matthew and the writings of Paul until they find the reality of Christ.
    quite an imagination, mica

    some of the things you suggest above are rather indicative of a theological perspective that is clearly in contrast with Scripture, coming from false teachers

    we suggest you abandon those false teachers and their false doctrines immediately

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X