1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Looking for ACCURATE Dates

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Dr. Bob, Nov 12, 2003.

  1. thessalonian

    thessalonian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Purgatory seems to be another doctrine that came to be in a series of steps...."

    Development of Doctrine Curtis. Not new truth but a greater understanding of truth that is apostolic. The same kind of arguements you are trying to make are made by oneness pentecostals against the trinity and JW's against the divinity of Christ. Your in good company. This little game can easily be played with your beloved rapture. Only in that case you cannot trace it through history. It's a lie that started in the 1800's with Darby. And symbolic only Lord's Supper is a lie that started with Zwingli. Historically the evidence for it being a part of Christian doctrine is slim to none. Your quotes only prove that purgatory, indulgences, primacy, and infallibility were around at time X. There is evidence before X that these doctrines existed and were believed. That is the point of my posts. I am sorry that this truth upsets you.

    Blessings
     
  2. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Have a few dates of when these "errors" (which, of course, they are :rolleyes: ) were made official, but most still lacking ANY definitive time when they first were espoused.

    Any more LIGHT rather than HEAT on this? Thanks.
     
  3. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good luck, doc. I'm not going to even try anymore. Apparantly, they are all in scripture, and poor blind baptists like us will never see them.

    And yes, they are errors. That's probably why we are getting so much co-operation from our catholic friends.
     
  4. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Actually, I'm not stopping, and I apologize for the previous post...

    And besides, it looks like thessalonian and I are saying the same thing. That most of the doctrines cannot be dated, as they were built up over centuries. The RCC stance is that they were built as they were revealed. The stance I and others take is that they were built on error to begin with, and compounded over centuries, error after error, until you have to rely on the doctrine, rather than scripture.

    If you have some spare time, you can paruse the New Advent site, and go thru the chronological list of popes, and see numerous challenges that were made against things like Mary's perpetual virginity, and how those folks who dared question the pope were dealt with. Most of them never preached again. It's a catholic site, so the information has to be accurate, correct ?

    Actually, I have some spare time coming up, and it sounds like a good idea for a thread.
     
  5. thessalonian

    thessalonian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    "as they were built up over centuries. The RCC stance is that they were built as they were revealed. "

    No Curtis we do not agree and never will I doudt. You do not understand it and as long as you are in this vindictive contraditory mode you never will understand what I am saying. You will never grow deeper in understanding along with the Church because you have one dimensional stagnant text on a page, and only your whimsical fallen human mind to subject it to rather than the shepherds God has given you (Jer 3:15). Very sad. :(

    We do know when Sole Fide and Sola Scriptura were proclaimed as the doctrines upon which Martil Luther's ideas stood or fell. As long as you hang on to these lies we will never agree and you will keep grasping at straw men and false arguements trying to bring down the Church that has stood for 2000 years. Very sad. :( :(
     
  6. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I found this stuff on Mary...

    In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."

    The belief in the corporeal assumption of Mary is founded on the apocryphal treatise De Obitu S. Dominae, bearing the name of St. John, which belongs however to the fourth or fifth century. It is also found in the book De Transitu Virginis, falsely ascribed to St. Melito of Sardis, and in a spurious letter attributed to St. Denis the Areopagite. If we consult genuine writings in the East, it is mentioned in the sermons of St. Andrew of Crete, St. John Damascene, St. Modestus of Jerusalem and others. In the West, St. Gregory of Tours (De gloria mart., I, iv) mentions it first. The sermons of St. Jerome and St. Augustine for this feast, however, are spurious. St. John of Damascus (P. G., I, 96) thus formulates the tradition of the Church of Jerusalem:

    St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven.

    Mary's Divine motherhood is based on the teaching of the Gospels, on the writings of the Fathers, and on the express definition of the Church. St. Matthew (1:25) testifies that Mary "brought forth her first-born son" and that He was called Jesus. According to St. John (1:15) Jesus is the Word made flesh, the Word Who assumed human nature in the womb of Mary. As Mary was truly the mother of Jesus, and as Jesus was truly God from the first moment of His conception, Mary is truly the mother of God. Even the earliest Fathers did not hesitate to draw this conclusion as may be seen in the writings of St. Ignatius [72], St. Irenaeus [73], and Tertullian [74]. The contention of Nestorius denying to Mary the title "Mother of God" [75] was followed by the teaching of the Council of Ephesus proclaiming Mary to be Theotokos in the true sense of the word. [76]


    From New Advent
     
Loading...