What a striking coincidence.
I have no problem sleeping at night regardless of what you believe. After 50 plus years of studying the scriptures I have a pretty strong grip on the truth.
Your guys are mostly going on church tradition and church talking points.
Both of which are have scriptural backing.
You keep throwing out that 50 year number like you are proud of it and I should be impressed by it. You’ve got 2.5% of the study time in that the Catholic church has. go study for another 1950 years and then we’ll talk about your knowledge.
First, scripture does not oppose Catholic teaching, it supports it. I’ve posted example after example. Telling us we can’t use that scripture as an example even though that example follows a custom set by Christ and Apostles is not a good debate response. Second, while fifty years of studying scripture is admirable, it works better when history and culture are also studied. Studying Greek, Latin, and Hebrew languages is a bonus.
Thinking, "I’ll say _Inquisition!_and that will answer everything only tells me that you know only a small fraction about the Inquisitions and what it was like to live in an era where government and church were not separate.
Koushi nailed it. All Christian churches (including LDS) have a Biblical foundation, and each can point to scriptures which justify their teachings and practices.
Consider this, if the Catholic church isn’t using the bible as a basis for everything they do, then why did they bother compiling the damn thing? I’m supposed to believe they came up with their practices independently, then compiled a document that would oppose their practices and create division and schism in the church? What sort of fantasy is that?
The Churches in Greece and Turkey, later Rome were founded by St. Paul, who never met the Christ.
The Copic Christiab Church, founded in Alexandria and all of Africa was founded by St. Mark, who DID meet the Christ.
The UMC in my rural village, which I attended periodically around community functions, pot lucks, Scout Sunday etc… Had no statues and looked rather simple elegant. Which was fitting for a farming-based community.
If had asked the members there, (my neighbors and schoolmates, kids from the bus, farmers whom I had helped during hay season etc.), they probably would have just shrugged and said “I dunno. It’s our tradition.”
The judgmental admonishing subset of church members, (karate chop Christians who remind me of Fred Phelps), had splintered off a few years earlier.
There you go making assumptions. Much of our studying within our churches involves the greek, hebrew, and aremaic languages the original words come from.
We study gook by book, chapter by chapter, verse by verse and even word by word straight though the Bible and when finished we start over again.
I made sure my children attended a christian university as well.
Heart and soul.
The UMC is not a good example to justify catholic tradition on. I have a sister in law who is a member and they pay little attention to the scriptures but are heavily into social/political things.
Their big thing this year is recycling. Not sure what that has to do with the Gospel. Had a good friend who was also in the UMC who said they studied world events in sunday school. They spent a whole year studying the OJ case.
Good question but they definately didn’t. Maybe to convince their followers.
I made no assumption. You said “scripture” and I mentioned three other aspects. You responded and agreed language is important. Do you have an opinion on the history and cultures as well?
When people note they have studied religiously, then I do have an expectation that these people should be familiar with passages Catholics, LDS, Calvinists, Lutherans, etc. use to back their interpretations. People may not agree with the interpretation, but certainly those who claim to study over decades should be familiar with the passage itself.
gook by book?
What a ■■■■■■■ coincidence.
Yes they did
Two catholics agree. Well that settles everything.