AmbassadorMan Friendship Table


#1

Greetings!

I’m Roland, Austin metro area, TX USA.

Am looking forward to meeting Karl Keating and fellow posters of Catholic Answers! Am looking forward to enjoying friendship and iron-sharpening-iron here in Catholic Answers.

I’m one of three moderators and one of many fellow posters in Catholic-Outlook (Hoge’s board); one of many fellow posters in Defenders of the Catholic Faith (Ray’s board).


I am non-align.
I am not formerly or on-paper: Protestant, Orthodox or Catholic.
I am not anti-: Protestant, Orthodox or Catholic.

I have a definite Belief Set. Worldwide Church of God web site has a Summary of Statement of Beliefs. Presently attending Family Christian Fellowship - Austin.

Knowing that everything believed within Christendom is not equally true, whatever I am actively FOR, at least I have to be passively “against” the opposite and the different.


Based on my reading (outside and inside discussion boards):
Prima scriptura = scriptures first, then all other rules
SolA scriptura = Scripture is the only infallible rule, Scripture is not the only rule
SolO scriptura = definitely bad Latin and bad practice, solO is oft:
“me and the Bible.”

I’ve learned that trueblue Prima and Sola Scripture MUST include, for the average Christian (including ME), the Word of God in print (or audio) in the language best understood, a common-sense magisterium and a common-sense tradition. Bible references and resources are a must, consultations with learned Christians are a must – to build up one’s knowledge and understanding of one’s Belief Set, Doctrines and so on.

Our Catholic brethren and sistern definitely have much going for them concerning their trinity: Tradition, Magisterium and Scripture.

Protestant and non-align brethren and sistern probably would do better to admit having some sort of magisterium and tradition along with Scripture.

In summary:
Iit needs to be God the Holy Spirit, Word of God (print or audio) in my language, common sense references and resources and consultations with fellow Christians who know and understand lots more about Christendom than I.

My in-home reading’s going to include strong Catholic material to increase my knowledge and understanding of a major portion of Christendom.


I’m not here to “question” Catholicism or Its adherents,
I’m not here to “defend” Protestantism or non-align en toto,
I’m here as a fellow Christian ambassador at the Table of Friendship and Sharing -

Sharing bits and pieces about my Belief Set, and desiring to know and understand bits and pieces about the Belief Sets of others, whichever Group within Christendom.

Presently, I see four catch-all Groups:
Catholic
Orthodox
Protestant
non-align - meaning any entity onpaper not any of the Big 3


Folks!! I’ve copyNpasted from all three places into this one thread :slight_smile:

Now, I can much better concentrate on answering all the questions and comments about what I posted :slight_smile:

I will pay full attention to this thread!

Let’s have fun and learning at OUR friendship table! :slight_smile:
Let’s debate hard, fair and accurately :slight_smile:
Let’s discuss :slight_smile:
Let’s always love one another as fellow Christians!

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#2

“Welcome to the board. If you stay on here you should learn alot about the Catholic faith. The people on this board represent some very dedicated and knowledgable Catholics.” to rjs
[from another thread]

“Life must be lived, even by those who can not find the courage to face it.” jimmy’s signature

Jimmy!

Thanks for your welcome! I plan to meet, make friends with, and interact with any and all interested dedicated & knowledgeable Catholics and nonCatholics :slight_smile:

I like your signature line - where did that come from?

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#3

Quote from Dei Verbum:
“Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence…” to rjs (from another thread)

"In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil, quod factum est…"
1962Missal

1962Missal!

Can you give us the English translation to your signature?

And, for my benefit, could you give me a little history of the Dei Verbum? I’d like to know more! I have it bookmarked, however, having a bookmark doesn’t mean my mind knows and understands :slight_smile:

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#4

[quote=stollerusa] Our Catholic brethren and sistern definitely have much going for them concerning their trinity: Tradition, Magisterium and Scripture.

Protestant and non-align brethren and sistern probably would do better to admit having some sort of magisterium and tradition along with Scripture.

Roland
AmbassadorMan
[/quote]

Just to sort of start things off, as a convert our protestant brothers need to realize where the scriptures came from. For the 1st few hundred years Christianity was word of mouth, the the Catholic church wrote things down. We chose, via the insparation of God, what went into and stayed out of the Bible.
Anyway, welcome aboard. Maybe a good way to start things here would be to ask a question or 2 and get the conversation started.


#5

**Andreas Hofer

“Whatchathink about my prima, sola and solo?” from rjs (in another thread)

"It may be a real distinction made by some Protestants, but I would suggest that this is a different topic because sola scriptura in that sense presents a different argument.

If discussing it using your classification system, a Protestant who subscribes to it would be challenged to explain why his tradition (essentially, that common-sense magisterium of learned friends, etc.) should be regarded as a reliable guide when it came into being, at the earliest, 1500 years after the life of Christ and conflicts overwhelmingly with the tradition of so many other learned people, some of whom were disciples of the Apostles (St. Polycarp) or just one more step removed (the disciples of those original followers, writing in the 2nd century)."
Andreas Hofer (his reply from another thread)

Andreas:

Thanks for your gracious reply!

Protestants do not have to begin from your timetable.
Our Lord Jesus, the apostles, the disciples, the early church fathers – all belong to each and every one of us. I fully claim the above people to be near and dear to me as I learn more and more of them.

The Word, oral and written, as given by the aforementioned belong to each and every one of us. I fully claim the Word from the abovementioned as something that I must read and study to gain spiritual knowledge and understanding.

Prima and Sola are very closely related, they intersect to a great degree as per a Venn Diagram. Prima is used by many to indicate Scripture first, then all other rules. Sola is used by many to indicate Scripture is the only infallible rule, Scripture is not the only rule. Solo Scriptura, bad Latin and bad practice, is used by many to indicate “me and the Bible.”

Roland
AmbassadorMan

ps: can a moderator unbold this post? I have NO idea on how to unbold the copyNpaste and the “enforced” bolding afterwards :slight_smile:

**


#6

Roland,
The signature of 1962 Missal is the beginning of the Gospel of John; “In the beginning was the Word…”

Peace,
Linda


#7

[quote=stollerusa]Quote from Dei Verbum:
“Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence…” to rjs (from another thread)

"In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil, quod factum est…"
1962Missal

1962Missal!

Can you give us the English translation to your signature?

And, for my benefit, could you give me a little history of the Dei Verbum? I’d like to know more! I have it bookmarked, however, having a bookmark doesn’t mean my mind knows and understands :slight_smile:

Roland
AmbassadorMan
[/quote]

1 In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.

The prologue to the Gospel of John was used as the “Last Gospel” for the Mass from 1570 to 1970. With the exception of a couple days with special “last Gospels”, it was read after the dismissal at the end of every Mass, thus the name.

Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis: et vidimus gloriam ejus, gloriam quasi unigeniti a Patre plenum gratiae, et veritatis.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The traditional reason given for its reading after the dismissal was to leave the attention of the faithful on the Incarnation of our Lord.

Justin


#8

Roland, here is a brief summary of the teaching contained in the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation:

cluster14.org/dei%20verbum.html

This summary is not, itself, a magisterial document and cannot be considered to state anything officially. However, it may help you understand Dei Verbum, which is a magisterial document of the highest authority.

Dei Verbum is one of the documents of the Second Vatican council. It explains the Church’s understanding of the transmission of the Word of God.

Justin


#9

1962Missal, thanks for your thorough and interesting coverage of your signature line!

Now, concerning Dei Verbum - can you tell me some history and goodies about the document from which you quoted about Scripture and Tradition being equal?

I’d like to know a little more about Dei Verbum per se :slight_smile:

Thanks!!

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#10

RBushlow quoted part of my post which kwik-defined prima, sola & solo Scripturas (from another thread)

Those are not the definitions of the Reformers. Sola Scriptura means that the Bible Alone, without any other information, is sufficient. To affirm that Scripture Alone is sufficient, please answer the following questions:

  1. Where it says that the number of books in the New Testament is officially 27.
  2. Where does it say what books belong in the NT?
  3. Where does it say what versions of the books belong in the NT? For example:
    There was a version of Matthew’s Gospel that had 8 chapters worth of text. Another
    with 18. A third with 28. Which one is the correct one, using Scripture alone?
  4. Where does it say which TRANSLATION of the books in the NT is the correct one?
    Yours in Christ" Pax, in another thread

Pax:

I will not answer you. You are assuming something that neither most of the Reformers, nor most of the present day Protestants believe. Most do not believe in Scripture Alone.

I never said I believed in Scripture Alone.

Since you are positing things that I never said either in DCF or in CO or here – I will not answer you any further.

If you want answers from me, you must use the material I post and must not use material I did not post.

Roland
AmbassadorMan

ps: Pax, you are STILL certainly welcome to join our Friendship Table!!


#11

"For the protestants in this whole thing, I want to get something established. You believe that the Bible is the SOLE rule of faith, NOTHING added to be EQUAL TO IT, or ABOVE IT, but GOD HIMSELF, true or false?"
For those who want to answer this question, please do so in my new post titled: Baptism of blood"
Corpus Cristi in another thread

I will comment here :slight_smile:

Unless I missed the posts, I have not found any learned Protestant (or non-align) that believes as posted above.

Personally speaking, I have accepted the definitions as set forth by ChristianityToday (or was it in MinistriesToday) and by Timothy G. Enloe. My curt snippits in my thread starter gives the magazine’s Prima and Enloe’s SolA and SolO.

I realize that Corpus Cristi was not addressing me, however, I wanted to comment and help set the definition back on track.

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#12

[quote=stollerusa]“Welcome to the board. If you stay on here you should learn alot about the Catholic faith. The people on this board represent some very dedicated and knowledgable Catholics.” to rjs
[from another thread]

“Life must be lived, even by those who can not find the courage to face it.” jimmy’s signature

Jimmy!

Thanks for your welcome! I plan to meet, make friends with, and interact with any and all interested dedicated & knowledgeable Catholics and nonCatholics :slight_smile:

I like your signature line - where did that come from?

Roland
AmbassadorMan
[/quote]

My signature came from a book named “My Way of Life”. It is a simplification of the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas.


#13

[quote=Lance]Just to sort of start things off, as a convert our protestant brothers need to realize where the scriptures came from. For the 1st few hundred years Christianity was word of mouth, the the Catholic church wrote things down. We chose, via the insparation of God, what went into and stayed out of the Bible.
Anyway, welcome aboard. Maybe a good way to start things here would be to ask a question or 2 and get the conversation started.
[/quote]

Lance!

Sorry that I missed this earlier, I guess you and I were posting at the same time :slight_smile:

Anyway:
JSBtnk
The Jewish Study Bible
Jewish Publication Society
Tanakh Translation - Torah, Nevi’im & Kethuvim
Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, editors
Oxford University Press, New York USA
Copyright 2004 by Oxford University Press, Inc.
JPS Tanakh copyright information listed

HSah
The Holy Scriptures
Revised In Accordance With Jewish Tradition
And Modern Biblical Scholarship
Alexander Harkavy
Hebrew Publishing Company, New York, NY USA
Copyright 1936 (reprinted 1951) by
Hebrew Publishing Company

HShf
The Holy Scriptures
The English text revised and edited by Harold Fisch
Koren Publishers Jerusalem Ltd.
Copyright information listed in Hebrew

HSjps
The Holy Scriptures
According to the Masoretic Text
The Jewish Publication Society of America,
Philadelphia, PA USA
Copyright 1917, 1945 & 1955 by
The Jewish Publication Society of America

TTNK
Tanakh - Torah, Nevi’im & Kethuvim
A New Translation of The Holy Scriptures
According to the Traditional Hebrew text
Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia, PA USA
Copyright 1985 by Jewish Publication Society

TPWase
Tanach - The Torah/Prophets/Writings
The Twenty-Four Books of the Bible
Newly Translated and Annotated
The ArtScroll Series / Stone Edition
Rabbi Nosson Scherman, Editor
Mesorah Publications, Ltd., Brooklyn, NY USA
Copyright 1996 by Mesorah Publications, Ltd.

What we Christians call The Old Testament is, along with our bits and pieces of rewriting, The Holy Scriptures as inspired by The Eternal to a group of men within what we now know as Judaism.

Neither God or The Holy Scriptures needed any help from any Christian anytime anywhere. Perhaps, God and The Holy Scriptures tolerated our Christendom help. :slight_smile:

Concerning what we Christians call The New Testament, yes, Christendom has been helped by the organization and canonization by Scholars within Catholicism and Scholars outside of Catholicism.

God’s Word is God Word, whether oral or written. We have numerous translations in numerous languages around the world – to make reading and consulting God’s Word easier.

Lance, welcome to the table! :slight_smile:

Incidentally, ALL participants here are my new-found friends!!
A couple of dudes are from DCF, so you are my friends from way back! :slight_smile:

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#14

I see that stollerman is a member of the Armstrongists or the World Wide Church of God.

He is correct in saying that his group is neither Protestant or Catholic, what he neglects to mention is that the group he belongs to is a non-Christian cult.

“What we Christians call The Old Testament is, along with our bits and pieces of rewriting, The Holy Scriptures as inspired by The Eternal to a group of men within what we now know as Judaism.”

"Neither God or The Holy Scriptures needed any help from any Christian anytime anywhere. Perhaps, God and The Holy Scriptures tolerated our Christendom help. "

Shows the depth of the group’s Judaizing.

They worship on the Jewish sabbath not the Lord’s Day (IOW Sunday). They consider the Christian calendar and holidays (Christmas and Easter) to be “pagan”, and instead celebrate the Jewish holidays (Yom Kippur) instead. They deny the Holy Trinity, and believe that we all can become “gods”.

I am no mind reader and cannot say for sure his reason for being here, but I imagine he is proselytizing for his cult.


#15

Herbert W. Armstrong’s dismantling of the Godhead, in direct opposition to the teaching found in the Bible, indicates the magnitude of his arrogance. He believed that he was above the God taught in the Bible and could create religious doctrine by personal fiat. His definition of God as a “family” would be rejected by any reputable Bible scholar whether they be liberal or conservative. Herbert W. Armstrong claimed that he, and only he, out of everyone else, had the correct view.

In rejecting Trinitarian doctrine, Herbert W. Armstrong substituted “family” doctrine, which was nothing more than polytheism. Herbert W. Armstrong believed in many gods, even to the point that man was created to be a reproduction of God. It is apparent that Herbert W. Armstrong believed that the Godhead was open ended, therefore, he aspired to take a place in whatever vacancy might occur. He couldn’t aspire to be one of the Trinity, but he could aspire to be one of the “family”. His doctrine was strikingly similar to the Mormon belief in their eternal progression to godhood; of their quest to become actual gods themselves


#16

The gospel that Herbert W. Armstrong preached, sometimes described as “Armstrongism”, was very different than mainstream Christianity stating that the gospel was that the Kingdom of God was coming to the Earth, and that Jesus Christ was to be coming back as King of kings and Lord of lords.

Armstrong’s beliefs were a prominent example of British Israelism. He believed that the United States, British Commonwealth and much of the Northwestern European Nations were descended from the Lost Ten Tribes (see Israelites, or the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel).

As well as British Israelism, his doctrines included:

[list=1]
*]The return of Jesus Christ would occur sometime soon
*]We are living in the last days
*]The Sabbath was a commandment that was not done away with
*]That eternal life was God’s gift and works did not save anyone but the works one did show the faith they had.
*]The Holy Days were also still in effect including the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread.
*]That not all who call themselves Christians are saved.
*]That those not saved, or not called have a resurrection to judgement and will finally learn of Jesus Christ and all who ever lived will come to have the opportunity to know God.
*]The reward of the saved was not Heaven, but the Kingdom of Heaven with the Government of God being set up on the Earth, for the first time since Satan’s rebellion, during the 1000 year reign of Jesus Christ on the Earth over those who survive great tribulation.
*]That those called in this life would receive salvation at the return of Jesus Christ and reign with him 1000 years as kings and priests with Jesus Christ as our elder brother.
*]After the 1000 years, the Great White Throne Judgement period would occur in which all of mankind who ever lived would appear before the judgement seat of God and would have the opportuity to learn God’s way and do his will for the first time ever. This would happen after Satan the Devil is cast into the Lake of Fire so he would decieve the people no more.
*]The kingdom of God would be handed by Jesus Christ to God the Father
*]All who rejected God would be destroyed in the Lake of Fire and not burn and be tormented forever and ever, that was Satan’s punishment.
*]That the Godhead was a Family made up of two personages, with the Father, whom Jesus revealed and the Son.
*]That the Holy Spirit was not a third Person of the Godhead, however, it was the power that eminated from God the Father and Jesus Christ that can be in mankind making us one with them.
*]That Jesus Christ pre-existed before he was in the flesh as the Word and known to all as the God of the Old Testament.

[/list]


#17

Boppysbud:

You’re way way out of date.

You need to visit www.wcg.org and get caught up.

And, visit the Summary of Statement of Beliefs.

And, don’t assume again my motives or intentions.
If you read the thread, you would have known differently.

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#18

boppysbud has posted lots of material which is absolutely wrong about WCG since 1995. And, absolutely wrong about me.

Is there a way to insert a disclaimer in each of boppysbud posts?

If not, can they moved to his own thread starter?

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#19

…a friend of ours has his wifey w/broken leg from auto accident.
He and kids are back home. So I can relax and concentrate on this thread.

The following is a Summary of Statement of Beliers:

Worldwide Church of God
Summary of Our Christian Faith [since 1995-1997]
We believe:
–In one holy, loving, all-powerful, and gracious Creator God who exists in three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
–That the Bible is the inspired and infallible Word of God, fully authoritative for all matters of faith and practice.
–That Jesus Christ, born of the virgin Mary, fully God and fully human, is both Lord and Savior.
–That Jesus Christ suffered and died on the cross for human sin, that he was raised bodily on the third day, and that he ascended to heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father.
–That Jesus Christ will come again to judge the living and the dead and to reign over all things.
–In the Holy Spirit, who brings sinners to repentance, who gives eternal life to believers, and who lives in them to conform them to the image of Jesus Christ.
–That Christians should gather in regular fellowship and live lives of faith that make evident the good news that humans enter the kingdom of God by putting their trust in Jesus Christ.
–In the spiritual unity of all believers in our Lord Jesus Christ.
–That salvation comes not by works, but only by God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
–In the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.
[end quote from WCG web site]

from
wcg.org/lit/aboutus/beliefs/default.htm

Roland
AmbassadorMan


#20

Roland, I am aware that some parts of the Armstrong cult changed some of their doctrines following Herbert’s death in 1986, they more closely approximate main-stream Protestant teaching, they are closer, but get no cigar.

I am also aware that following his death, it was the occasion of many splinters in his followers, now there are many sub-cults in this group.
My smallish town for example has two tiny “WWCOG” congregations, one meeting in a run-down storefront in a bad part of town, the other in a tiny house likewise in a bad neighborhood. One has services on Sunday and the Jewish holidays, the other has services on the Jewish Sabbath and the rest of the Jewish Holidays. Neither one as far as I am aware of actually celebrates the holy days of Christianity. Which is the “real WWCOG” and why?

My step-grandmother was involved with Armstrongism for a long time. I spent many hours in her house pouring over issues of “The Plain Truth” magazine. This magazine (an official Armstrong publication) verified my claims about the Armstrong cult. They did claim that the Christian calendar is “pagan” in origin, they did promote the keeping of the Jewish holidays. They did oppose the Christian teaching of the Holy Trinity.

I examined the teachings espoused in the WWGOG (which WWCOG is this?) statement of faith. It still denys the teaching of the Holy Trinity, and never once refers to it anywhere, preferring instead to speak of the “godhead”.

Although one part of the WWCOG is beginning to get a little closer to Mainstream Protestant thinking they are still far removed from it.

The other branches of Armstrongism still persist in continuing the original teachings of H W Armstrong that I have already touched on, British Isrealism, the validity of only the Jewish Sabbath for Christian worship, human beings becoming “gods”.

They are actually much closer to the teachings of your human founder, H W Armstrong than the semi-revisionists who still continue in about 1/2 of cases to worship on the Jewish Sabbath and holidays.

Simply put Ambassador Man, (Ambassador is the name of an Armstrongist University) Christianity and Judaism are two seperate and contradictory faiths. Despite the best efforts of your cult to mix or blend them, that is still the fact.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.