--- In email@example.com
, Gary Sibio
> Hi Becky,
> I'm glad you wish to live your life according to Scripture. It
> eventually lead you into the Catholic Church just like it did me,
> and many others.
> At 12:26 PM 2/28/2004, you wrote:
> >I have a difficult time in dialoguing with a RC who doesn't
> >Bible alone since I accept the Bible alone and not all the
> >tradition. Jesus mentions in parables that the wicked are cast
> >everlasting punishment, etc...not "temporary" til their bad works
> >burned off...and the Bible tells He is preparing believers a
> >now (John 14)...I prefer to take the Bible at face value. In
order to be
> >RC you have to interpret the Bible through the eyes of the
RC "system" and
> >accept that its leaders are infallible.
> If the Bible alone is to be our source of truth, then this fact
> itself be evident from Scripture. Where exactly does the Bible
> Secondly, your rejection of Sacred Tradition contradicts the clear
> of the Bible:
> 2 Thes 2:15
> St. Paul tells the Thessalonians that they are responsible for
> everything they were taught whether it was taught to them orally
> Tradition) or written (the Bible).
> >For me, this is too big of an order. There have been too many
> >throughout the years. Even this last year, they decided here in
> >that it was okay to eat meat before Christmas...even on Christmas
> >When I was having a Bible study with one girl and explaining that
> >believe that only the Bible can be the ultimate authority as it
> >change, she piped in with, "Yeah, like they just changed the
> >food. It used to be a "sin"...but now it isn't." It was simple
> >me...it's never been a sin simply because the Bible doesn't tell
us to not
> >eat meat on certain days. In fact, the Bible says that a group
> >forbids certain foods is one sign of a false religion.
> I think your problems with Catholicism stem from some fundamental
> misunderstandings. We have doctrines and we have practices.
> often called traditions - with a lower-case 't' - but I'll use
> avoid confusion.) Doctrines cannot change but practices can. A
> how we apply the doctrine to our situation. As the situation
> practice may change to adopt.
> I've never heard of a prohibition on meat on Christmas. It might
> Polish practice and I've never been to Poland. On the other hand,
I live in
> Chicago where there's a huge Polish population (second only to
> I think I would have heard of it.
> Let me use a different example. The Church teaches as doctrine
> Mass is the continuation of the Jesus' sacrifice at Calvary to our
> day. The practice was that the Mass was said in Latin. That
> from a time when Latin was an international language. That is no
> case. We no longer have a truly international language so Mass is
> allowed to be said in vernacular languages.
> Another example is abstaining from meat on Fridays. The necessity
> and fasting is a doctrine of the faith. However, abstaining from
> Friday ceased to be a matter of making a sacrifice so it was
> the understanding that individuals would find some sort of
> >You also have to do some rather large "hoop jumping" in
> >why did Christ die, if we have to finish the job....isn't
> >righteousness enough? You must believe, "No." Aren't we saved
> >His perfection, not ours? This is where I believe that God looks
at us as
> >judge through the blood of His Son...and our standing judicially,
> >at His Son's life...and it was perfect...We are accepted into
> >because of what Christ did, not what we have done. I do believe
> >of our works will be burned up and we may have works which amount
> >nothing. The rest of the rewards will be thrown at Jesus' feet as
> >of appreciation for his salvation.
> Please reread what I posted on the subject of Purgatory. Jesus'
> to pay the price for our sins. It did that. What happens to us in
> is for purification, not salvation. We would not go to Purgatory
if we were
> not saved. However, nothing impure can enter Heaven (Rev 21:27)
and most of
> us have not been completely purified from the effects of our sins
> die. That is why St Paul wrote of the need for the saved to be
> Cor 3:10-15).
> One of the major differences between the Catholic view of
> that held by most Evangelical Protestants is whether we are
> legally or actually. The Catholic Church says that justification
> process - which includes what Evangelicals refer to as
> which actually purifies us from our sins. Evangelicalism teaches
> justification is a legal act, that God declares that our sins have
> dealt with - 'covered' is the term they generally use - and that
> more is needed. Can you see the problem with the Evangelical view?
> most Evangelicals would deny this, they are, in fact, saying that
> deceiving Himself regarding our condition.
> BTW, we are saved by Jesus' death, not His perfection. His
> what made His death a true propitiation but if He had just lived a
> life without His suffering and death, we could not be saved (Is
> >I already am pretty sure you'll disagree with me. That's fine.
> >aware that when you use arguments about visions and
> >tradition...unfortunately, it doesn't mean anything to me. If
> >prove something "by the Book", then I'll listen.
> Sola scriptura (the Bible alone) is a false doctrine invented in
> century by Martin Luther. When you can prove to me that the Bible
> teaches that, I'll listen.
> Gary J Sibio
> You know you're having a bad day when Elton John rewrites the
> "Candle in the Wind" for you.
Well said Gary.
In my spiritual journey, (which I'm still on) I began as a Catholic
raised in a complacant and blissfully ignorant Catholic family in
regards to orthodoxy and orthopraxy. I lapsed in my Catholic
practice after leaving home and entering the Navy. I met a nice
Evangelical Christian who taught me a lot about practicing being a
Christian. I married her. I quit being a Catholic and became a
church hopping non-denominational Protestant. We practiced our faith
at many different Christian faith traditions from Foursquare to
Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. All of them had most things in
common. All of them also had at least several contradictory
interpretations of Christian Truth which were mutually exclusive. I
began to feel more and more like Pontius Pilate (What is Truth?...)
I began to study theology and realised that even those who profess
to believe in "The Bible Alone" (as I also believed at time)
actually believe in some school of theology's interpretation of
Sacred Scripture "Alone", usually devoid of historical and/or
Scriptural continuity. To make a very long and involved story short.
I returned to the Church which Christ founded, which is
the "...pillar and Bulwark of Truth."(1 Tim 3:15).
Telling a Catholic that they are interpreting Scripture incorrectly
is a two edged sword which proves too much. Authority is the bottom
line. Find who was given the power to bind and loose, to forgive
sins, to feed His lambs, feed His sheep, and tend His sheep. Read
who was given the keys to the Kindom of Heaven. Believe what is
revealed about the nature of Christ's Church, and on who it would be