天主教一个值得警惕的动向

本帖由 明的凡2016-03-03 发布。版面名称:基督教会

  1. 明的凡

    明的凡 知名会员 ID:106409

    注册:
    2012-02-28
    帖子:
    6,617
    支持:
    607
    声望:
    123
    金钱:
    $52,660
    How Evangelical Christians Handle Difficult Verses Part 1
    By Mike Bugal
    6/18/2016 9:00:10 AM


    While reading my Newsfeed on Facebook the other day I came across this meme titled “10 Biblical Verses That Protestants Cannot Accept (Without Becoming Catholic)” I responded that while this is mostly true it’s not 100% true. The reason it’s not is because it’s inaccurate to consider “Protestants” as a monolith with the same theology and thus the same interpretation of these verses. There is no such thing as “Protestant Theology” due primarily to their false doctrine of Sola Scriptura which has resulted in thousands and thousands of denomination with thousands more just waiting for the right reason to come into existence.

    In addition, since most Evangelical Christians believe the Bible to be the sole authority on matters of faith and doctrine, they cannot “not accept” these verses. They accept them as part of the Bible, but what they do is pick and choose which verses they will pay attention to and which verses they will ignore… or reinterpret in a way that doesn’t mean what the verses say. So, I thought it would be good for a former Evangelical Christian minister and Apologetics writer to talk about what they actually do with these verses.

    Matthew 16:18-19 and Isaiah 22:22

    These verses in Matthew (and Isaiah’s which they fulfill) are the verses which establish Saint Peter as the rock upon which Christ would establish His Church. What the Evangelical Christians do here is play semantic games with the Greek language. They say that Jesus referred to Peter as a “pebble” and the substantial “rock” that Jesus referred to was not Peter but his profession of faith. It’s only natural that they would do so since those who they follow rebelled against the true Authority of the Church founded by the Lord. These verses have to mean something other than their plain reading or they have no choice but to admit that the Lord Jesus conferred upon Peter the “keys to the Kingdom” as well as the Authority to “bind” or “loose” on Earth to which Heaven will agree. Once they deny Peter, they must also state that the Lord conferred this Authority on all believers and not just Peter.

    1 Timothy 3:15

    Since they deny the authority of the Church established in the verses in Matthew, they must interpret this verse. This is done by altering the Scriptural view of the Church as both a physical and metaphysical body to make the word mean “the invisible body of believers from all ages and in all places” … in short a strictly spiritual meaning. This, of course, requires ignoring the fact that the Lord established a Church with a hierarchy, that the Apostles maintained that hierarchy in the very first chapter of Acts by selecting Matheus to fill the vacancy created by Judas’ death, and that the New Testament writers spelled out the qualifications for various offices within the hierarchy. The “pillar and ground” to the Evangelical Christian is the shifting sand of an unbiblical doctrine: Sola Scriptura.

    2 Thessalonians 2:15

    Now this is a verse that is generally skimmed over with no emphasis on the word” tradition” whatsoever. They ignore the fact that Saint Paul clearly says that his teaching is both verbal as well as written. Again, their reliance upon the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura requires that sound doctrine only exists in the written word. Of course, that also ignores the fact that there wouldn’t be an established and recognized Canon of Scripture for nearly 300 years after Saint Paul penned these words. In short, there was no “scriptura” to be “sola”. Sacred Tradition is all there was until the Canon was established and, in reality, not until Saint Jerome’s Latin Vulgate… the first Bible.

    1 Peter 3:21

    What happens to this verse varies in Evangelical Christianity depending on the person’s denomination and theological viewpoint. The majority of what is called “mainline evangelical denominations” hold that baptism is an optional ritual which would be nice if the person would do it, but has no importance whatsoever. Certain others say that it is important as an “act of obedience” but utterly meaningless as far as salvation is concerned. There are, however, some who “accurately handle the Word of Truth” as Saint Paul says, and believe that baptism is a required part of the “plan of salvation”. I wrote a series of articles on this subject and Part 1 deals specifically with this verse.

    John 20:23

    I experienced a prime example of what happens to this verse in the mind of many Evangelical Christians shortly after I reverted to the Church in 2012. I was driving truck over the road in the United States (the last of many occupations I held during my working life) and was at a Petro Truck Stop in Kingdom City, Missouri. There was another truck driver that I was talking to about the things of the Lord. Everything was okay until I mentioned that I had recently reverted.

    You would have thought I had just told her I had become a Mormon or Jehovah’s Witness. She was dumb founded and asked the question every Apologetics teacher loves to hear: “Why!!” I began sharing with her what I not only found from my studies of extra biblical sources, but also the biblical support. I told her that the Lord had given the power to the Apostles to forgive sin. Her response was complete denial. I told her to read this verse and she literally ran away saying “I don’t want to hear anymore.” (a similar experience to what happened just the other day on Facebook).

    In short, this verse is generally ignored and unless the person is a good student of the Scriptures and reads it themselves, they may never know it’s there. No preacher or teacher that I know of within Evangelical Christianity would touch it.

    In Part 2 we’ll look at the remaining 5 verses.
     
  2. 明的凡

    明的凡 知名会员 ID:106409

    注册:
    2012-02-28
    帖子:
    6,617
    支持:
    607
    声望:
    123
    金钱:
    $52,660
    看到上面这篇文章和文章中所“处理”的这十节被认为是天主教最有力支持的经文。@beechan, 你觉得这令人信服吗?
     
  3. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673

    你一次過倒一堆問題在檯上, 回答了你, 你亦一次過消化未到哩。

    就只取第一項Matthew 16:18-19 講一講。

    你的引文只能道出新教故意對經文套上另外解作的動機,
    卻没有說出新教徒所倡的: 『伯多祿只是小石, 在這大石(基督)上, 耶穌要建立他的教會』解作是如何不成理。

    所以, 更令人信服的反辯還在後頭。
     
  4. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673
    請看另一段經文, 說的與 Matthew 16:18-19 平衡, 是一人將重任交付另一人打理:



    若望福音21章:

    吃完了早飯,耶穌對西滿伯多祿說:「若望的兒子西滿,你比他們更愛我嗎?」伯多祿回答說:「主,是的,你知道我愛你。」耶穌就對他說:「你餵養我的羔羊。」
    耶穌第二次又問他說:「若望的兒子西滿,你愛我嗎?」伯多祿回答說:「主,是的,你知道我愛你。」耶穌就對他說:「你牧放我的羊群。」
    耶穌第三次問他說:「若望的兒子西滿,你愛我嗎?」伯多祿因耶穌第三次問他說:「你愛我嗎?」便憂愁起來,遂向他說:「主啊! 一切你都知道,你曉得我愛你。」耶穌對他說:「你餵養我的羊群。」

    依上文下理, 當時全部門徒都在埸, 為何耶穌只向伯多祿說:『你餵養我的羊群』?

    意思没有『你伯多祿餵我的小部份的羊, 我才是大牧人, 大羊群留由我來餵』。


    依若望福音的意思, 耶穌在 matthew 16 都是把重任委托給伯多祿。
     
  5. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673
    還有更多的說服力。。。

    在此不急於一一列舉。

    待你慢慢消化。
    你無反辯時, 再給你另一個。
     
  6. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673
    一個離家出走了的兒子
    當然是對外人盡數家中的不是.....
    為『出走是合理』貼金, 合理化
    因為, 若家中是好的, 又因何要走呢?
     
  7. 明的凡

    明的凡 知名会员 ID:106409

    注册:
    2012-02-28
    帖子:
    6,617
    支持:
    607
    声望:
    123
    金钱:
    $52,660
    看来你也认为那十节经文并不像那位主教徒所认为的那样?换句话说,你也认为他曲解了相关的经文。所以,你想帮他补足?

    :)
     
  8. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673

    我只跟你說第一項
    其它的四項,未有理會。

    你不要亂塞話「你也认为那十节经文」入我口。
     
  9. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673
    1 Timothy 3:15


    甚麼才是『真理的柱石和基礎。』
    新教徒說『真理的柱石和基礎。』是指聖經, 不是指天主教會。

    那麼, 看在馬丁路德後, 新教的教會如何分派分支, 到今日成千上萬,
    有些在教義上也不統一, 你說你的一套, 我信我的,
    嚴重的如後期聖徒教會, 耶和華見証人, 呼喊派, 東方閃電全能神.......已經到了走樣失真的程度, 而這些教會都說是看大致同一樣的聖經。

    如『真理的柱石和基礎。』是只建立在經書上, 這根基也很飄移。

    比起天主教會的教導, 二千年來都無大變動。根基穏固。
    二千年前反對同性戀, 離婚, 婚外性行為, 墮胎。。。今日仍然是反對, 不認同, 不似有些新教會要向社會風氣低頭。
     
  10. cvictor

    cvictor 资深人士 ID:52072 VIP

    注册:
    2005-06-12
    帖子:
    16,485
    支持:
    918
    声望:
    273
    金钱:
    $144,716
    看到一个消息,教皇为穆斯林洗脚,就寻思,有时候天主教做事情,还是很仁义的。
     
  11. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673
    那還要有穆斯林肯讓教宗替她洗腳
     
  12. cvictor

    cvictor 资深人士 ID:52072 VIP

    注册:
    2005-06-12
    帖子:
    16,485
    支持:
    918
    声望:
    273
    金钱:
    $144,716
    要求穆斯林为基督徒洗脚,
     
  13. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673

    為人洗腳是服務
    要人為你洗腳是勞役

    你的原罪又發作了!
     
  14. cvictor

    cvictor 资深人士 ID:52072 VIP

    注册:
    2005-06-12
    帖子:
    16,485
    支持:
    918
    声望:
    273
    金钱:
    $144,716
    哦,看来不能要求穆斯林了,只能建议穆斯林给基督徒洗脚了。不对等啊,教皇已经给穆斯林洗脚了,阿訇也该表示表示了吧?
     
  15. beechan

    beechan 新手上路 ID:138012

    注册:
    2014-06-09
    帖子:
    800
    支持:
    20
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $7,673
    [​IMG]
    和尚刻意在頭上灼幾個戒疤

    教宗, 阿訇又要不要照做, 有樣學樣?

    無腦!
     

分享此页面

扫描下面的二维码分享到微信!
http://bbs.comefromchina.com/threads/1495790/page-30