# Catholics strike back



## Pergamum (Mar 7, 2009)

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism


----------



## Rich Koster (Mar 7, 2009)

There is Biblical evidence about RC. 2 Thes 2 and Revelation contain quite a bit of it. Acts 20 Paul warned the elders what would soon happen. 


There was an article in the Burlington County Times (NJ paper) yesterday that a faction of the Anglicans seeks to rejoin Rome. Out of the frying pan into the fire.....

The Papists like to trash the "Protestants" on any point of doctrine we do not agree upon. However, we get ours from Scripture, theirs is Papal bull.


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 7, 2009)

Rich Koster said:


> There is Biblical evidence about RC. 2 Thes 2 and Revelation contain quite a bit of it. Acts 20 Paul warned the elders what would soon happen.
> 
> 
> There was an article in the Burlington County Times (NJ paper) yesterday that a faction of the Anglicans seeks to rejoin Rome. Out of the frying pan into the fire.....
> ...



If it weren't for women's ordination I think we would have perhaps already seen significant portions of Anglicanism go "home" to Rome.


----------



## ExGentibus (Mar 7, 2009)

Using "biblical evidence for Catholicism" is a plain contradiction. Catholicism claims no evidence but the magisterium of the RCC. In their doctrine, even the Bible itself is a product of that magisterium.


----------



## Berean (Mar 7, 2009)

Rich Koster said:


> The Papists like to trash the "Protestants" on any point of doctrine we do not agree upon. However, we get ours from Scripture, theirs is Papal bull.



Excellent, Rich.


----------



## sotzo (Mar 7, 2009)

Just a note of caution that we direct our response to RC based on their official teaching. I know I have sometimes chalked everything up to the Papacy with Rome, but fact is we need to address their high, yet insufficient, view of Scripture..to wit,

"The church forcefully and specifically exhorts all the Christian faithful to learn the surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures. Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ."

The last sentence of that passage from their catechism is particularly instructive so that we are sure to be addressing the right thing. If we simply say "we hold to Scripture while RC holds to the papacy" our response will be addressing a strawman.


----------



## Zenas (Mar 7, 2009)

The fact that they seem to read the Scriptures in light of Tradition is where the problem is, and not the other way around. 

"Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat." He answered them, "And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' But you say, 'If anyone tells his father or his mother, "What you would have gained from me is given to God," he need not honor his father.' So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:

"'This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'"


----------



## Rich Koster (Mar 7, 2009)

Berean said:


> Rich Koster said:
> 
> 
> > The Papists like to trash the "Protestants" on any point of doctrine we do not agree upon. However, we get ours from Scripture, theirs is Papal bull.
> ...



Ahhhhhhh....someone appreciates satirical wordplay.


----------



## historyb (Mar 7, 2009)

Darth catholic: I am your pope

luke prurtainwalker: NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------

