Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
Midterms are finally over! It's been a long and difficult semester, but G-d has seen me through it.
Now, let's finish this:
CE 1439 Dogma of seven sacraments (against Matt. 28:19,20, & 26:26-28).
I'm really not sure who comes up with this stuff. The verses quoted actually help prove the seven sacraments, or at least 2 of the 7. Now what this anti-Catholic might be doing is trying to show that there are only 2. However, if we skip on over to Mark 6:13, we see the Anointing of the Sick commanded by Jesus. Or we can look at what Christ said abot Marriage in Mark 10:9, "what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Confession is also pretty prominantly displayed when Christ says to His Apostles "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained" in John 20:23. Confirmation can be seen here: Acts 8:14–17, 9:17, 19:6, and Hebrews 6:2 (especially in Hebrews 6:2).
CE 1439 Purgatory declared valid dogma (against Matt. 25:46, Luke 23:43).
Matthew 25:46= Purgatory does not change that people go to Heaven and people go to Hell. People that go to Purgatory still go to Heaven.
Luke 23:43= There are people who do not have to go to Purgatory. The fact that the Bible lists such a person, the man being crucified with Christ, does not mean that EVERYONE goes straight to Heaven. But let's also remember that the man might have still gone to Purgatory. No one knows how 'long' Purgatory is (I put long in quotes because like Heaven and Hell, Purgatory is outside of time). So the man might indeed have gone through Purgatory in a 'day'.
CE 1508 Miryam Mother of GOD' (against Matt. 12:46-50, Mark. 8:19-21, Acts 1:14).
I should be used to the incorrect dates, but for some reason I'm still surprised. The date for the Theotokos (literally, bearer of G-d) is 431.
Matt. 12:46-50 doesn't mean that Christ did not believe that Mary was His mother. He was just making a point about how those that follow Him become part of the family of G-d. At His crucifixtion, Christ called her mother, and entrusted her care to the disciple whom He loved.
Mark. 8:19-21 does not make sense to me. It has nothing to do with motherhood.
Acts 1:14 does not contradict Mary as the Mother of G-d. For example, my mother is the mother of Brett, the mother of a Berry student, the mother of a lawyer, etc. Because Jesus is G-d, Mary can be both mother of G-d and mother of Jesus.
For a more indepth look, read here.
CE 1545 Church tradition equal to Scripture (against Matt. 15:6, Mark 7:7-13, Col. 2:8 ~ also adds all of above and many other dogma to Council of Nice!).
Church tradition can change. Church tradition includes things like celibacy, fasting on particular days, the clothes of the priest at Mass, etc. However, Tradition (that is, the Word of G-d passed along by mouth) is infallible and divine.
Not all tradition is evil. Christ followed the tradition of the Passover. He instituted traditions such as the L-ord's Prayer. Here is an excellent article on Tradition.
CE 1560 Creed of pope Pius IV decreed (against Gal. 1:13).
What's the big deal? Every denomination has creeds. These are simply a statement of faith.
By-the-way, do Protestants even read the Bible? Because here's what Galatians 1:13 says "For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it". What does this have to do with the Creed of Pope Pius IV? Here's the text of the creed in both English and Latin (P.S., it's sometimes referred to as the Tridentine Creed).
CE 1580 Pope declared to be "LORD GOD.
Nope, never. Never ever ever. Never ever ever ever. It's always best when dealing with anti-Catholics to ask them where this information comes from. In this case, the anti-Catholic will just stare and drool because there is no place where the Pope declared himself to be 'LORD GOD'.
CE 1593 "Ave Maria" adopted.
Well, actually, it's found in the Bible. Ave Maria is Latin for Hail Mary. One reads this in Luke 1:28 "Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord is with thee". Now I can agree that there is a difference between it existing and it being adopted. However, it was adopted in 1050.
Hail Mary, however, is not dogma.
CE 1710 Stuffed donkey in Verona, Italy, at Church of the Madonna of the Organs, decreed to be the actual animal Rabbi Yahushual Yahusha ha Mashiach entered Yerushallyim on.
Um... huh? Even if there was a Catholic devotion that held this to be true, this is NOT dogma.
CE 1854 Immaculate Conception of Virgin Miryam (against Romans 3:23, & 5:12, Ps. 51:5, Yerme Yahu 17:9).
Well, it was celebrated as a feast from 1476 (at the LATEST). However, none of the verses contradict the Immaculate Conception. For example, if we are to take Romans 3:23 literally, then Christ must have sinned because it says that "all have sinned". Obviously Christ is not included in that verse, so the possibility of there being others is likely. Consider, for example, a baby just born that dies. That child has not had any time to sin, and so is not included in that verse.
For a more detailed argument about the Immaculate Conception, read here.
CE 1864 Miryam 'sinless (against Luke 1:46,47, Romans 3:10-19, & 23).
Actually, this goes back to the previous answer.
CE 1870 Papal infallibility decreed (against 2 Thess. 2:2-12, Rev. 17:1-9, 13:5-8,18)
Well, this was when it was formally defined as dogma, but by no means does this mean it was new. It had already been used by Pope Pius in defining the Immaculate Conception.
I don't know what the Thess. verse has to do with anything. Papal infallibility does not put the Pope above G-d, for it is only through G-d's grace that the Pope cannot error in matters of declaring faith and morals. Therefore it is G-d who is above the Pope, not the Pope above G-d.
CE 1907 All sciences condemned.
Um, no. Why? Because the Church doesn't deal with science, she deals with theology. Sciences have never been condemned. The Church has, on occasion, come into conflict with scientific bodies. The most famous (and misunderstood) would be Galileo. But in Galileo's case, it wasn't heliocentrism that was being fought about, it was the fact that Gelileo was going beyound his research and beyound the scientific realm of what he was saying. In essance, Galileo was making religious proclamations that his science didn't back up. Anyway, if this were all true then how does one explain the many scientific conventions that the Catholic Church has sponsored?
CE 1922 Pope declared to be "Jesus"
As the last, and final, assault on the Catholic Faith by anti-Catholics during this little 'battle', the anti-Catholics have assembled a measly armada. The armada consists of a toy boat. Why? Because NO WHERE has the Pope declared himself to be Jesus.
Two last things:
1. These anti-Catholics have not done their homework. They get simple dates incorrect, they believe things are Catholic dogma that aren't, and use Bible verses that don't even relate to what is being discussed. In school, we would call these people either idiots (because they're just stupid and don't know any better) or liars. Either way, I wouldn't want to be called an anti-Catholic.
2. This is a prime example of the lack of scholarship, original thinking, and education of anti-Catholics. The arguments that I've been going through were obtained on an anti-Catholic blog. She got them from another anti-Catholic. If one Googles some of these, one will find that they are all over the place. They have simply been copied and pasted (without citing where they were obtained... it's called plagerism). Those that posted them failed to research if they were correct or not. Most of the time, I doubt they even looked at them. Why? Because they use words that are foreign to the poster (Miryam, Yesha Ya, etc.)
No comments:
Post a Comment