by Amazing 63 Replies latest jw friends
Finally this shows something ... as soon as we focus on something/someone else than Christ (and all what he means) regarding to the bible ... we got lots on the matter.
ok I'm going to put it in another way and it won't change it meaning (what is really important)
Finally this shows something ... as soon as we focus on something/someone else than Christ (and all what he means) regarding to the bible ... we got lots on the matter
I see no evidence that whoever Jesus was or wasn't was no different from other religious founders who claimed some special relationship with a God. Some are just more popular than others and some have a more loving message, but where is the holy spirit today to raise the dead and heal all kinds of sicknesses?
Ken P.
Jim, I'll tell you where I think you have gone wrong. To begin with, just because the "Orthodox" church and the "Roman Catholic" church can trace their histories back to the time of the apostles does not prove that either of these religious organizations is the same religious organization that was established by the apostles. Neither does it prove that either of these religious organizations would be approved of by the apostles, if the apostles were alive today. For instance, the Watchtower Society, as it exists today, can certainly trace its history back to the Watchtower Society that was established many years ago by Charles Russell. But is there any doubt that if Charles Russell was alive today that he would not even recognize today's Watchtower Society as being the same religious organization that he founded? And is there any doubt that if Charles Russell was alive today that he would view today's Watchtower Society as being an unholy perversion of the religious organization that he established? As you know, Christ prophesied that after He left this earth Satan would sew seeds of corruption throughout His church. (Matt. 13) And as you also know, the apostle Paul prophesied that after the apostles died, "Savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock." In fact, Paul said that the truly Christian religious order that he and his fellow apostles had worked so hard to establish would very soon become corrupted. For he told his contemporaries, "Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. " (Acts 20:29,30)
There is little doubt that Paul was referring to a coming corruption of organized Christianity in 2 Thess. chapter 2. There he said that a "lawless" "apostacy" was "already at work" within the true Christian religious order which the apostles had established. That being the case, the fact that a modern day church organization can trace its origins back to the days of the apostles does nothing to prove that it is now an uncorrupted continuation of the truly Christian religious order established by the apostles, for true Christian doctrines, traditions, and practices were already beginning to be corrupted during the lives of the apostles. Many of the teachings, practices, and traditions of the religious organizations which you seem to now be recommending to us here differ so greatly from the teachings of Christ and His apostles that I find it hard to believe that any well informed person of sound mind can believe that such an organization might now constitute "Christ's true church." ( I hope it's not necessary to actually innumerate all of these here for you. Many of the Roman Catholic Church's false teachings were discussed at length not too long ago on Channel C.) How anyone can say that the Roman Catholic church is now or was ever Christ's true church after reading Paul's prophecy in 1 Timothy 4 is beyond me. There Paul wrote, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.They will forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods." In my opinion, only the spiritually blind can fail to see this prophecy for what it was. Christians who for some reason find it necessary to identify some obviously highly corrupted church organization as "Christ's true church" and bow to their "Holy Fathers" remind me of the Israelites who insisted that they be given a visible human king. (1 Sam. 8) For some reason they found themselves unable to serve only the invisible King of Heaven, aided by His words found in the scriptures He had given them. Unlike those Israelites, the invisible King of Heaven, Jesus Christ, is the only king I need. Since leaving the JWs and becoming a Christian I have attended several churches. None of them has been anywhere near perfect. But by doing so I have been able to help my fellow Christians and they have been able to help me. In other words, I have been able to act as part of Christ's body, which has always been His only "true church." Jim, over the years I have followed your spiritual odyssey. I am now left wondering how it is that you now find yourself where you are. Maybe it is a result of your willingness to depart from the simple teachings of Christ. This is evidenced by your now praying to the Holy Spirit, while Christ instructed His followers to "Pray this way... our Father." For Christians to pray to Christ is understandable, since the Bible tells us that Christians would recognize Christ as their Father and call Him by that name. (Isa. 9:6) But prayer to the Holy Spirit was not taught by Christ or His apostles. Of course, neither was praying to long dead Catholic "Saints." I don't know if you are doing that yet. But if you are now looking to the Roman Catholic church for spiritual guidance you will probably be doing so soon. I can only suggest that you begin sticking closely to the teaching of Christ and His apostles as recorded in the scriptures, and stop paying so much attention to the teachings and traditions of corrupted, man made, religious organizations. Christ's true church does not exist today in the form of any religious organization. Rather you will find Christ's true church wherever two or three of His followers are gathered together in His name, in church buildings owned by all Christian denominations and in places which have no connection to any of them. I wish you the best in your continuing spiritual journey. Mike |
Amazing
How the Church failed me:
One of the priests in the Church was trying to have an affair with my sister in law while my brother was away on assignment. The Pastor ( a Monsignor) was not sure he believed in God, telling our family how he felt while he visited us, and the Priest I visited to discuss JW literature told me to through my Bible in the trash because only the book of St. John was worth reading. He then proceeded to tell me about his girlfriend and his plans to leave the Priesthood.
Seems rather obvious the RC was not just failing you; it was failing its priests as well. Celebacy is unnatural. And scriptually condemned, if that matters.
You also mention traditons, and somehow think quoting scriptures refering to the practice of 1st C Christoism as 'tradition' means that twenty centuries of people making stuff up and calling it tradition is somehow supported by this.
It is about the sacred which her ritual is designed to highlight.
Ah, well, you can say that about any religion or belief system emplying ritual. It must be true if you can say it for all of them.
It is about maintaining the word of mouth tradition that the Bible speaks of to compliment what is written.
This would conceivably be something of an argument if 'word of mouth tradition' was not in practice more like 'chinese whispers' with added deliberate disconuities. And 'compliment' would seem to be best understood as 'try to make something of a logical belief system out of a hash of sometimes contradictory scriptures selected to be termed par of the 'Bible'.
It is about not judging an entire people based on the actions of some who abused their authority and position.
Obviously a 'people' should not be judged by the action of corrupt leaders. The 'health' of an organisation CAN very much be determined by how it ensures it is run internally. The RC still has a way to go in this respect.
but you will not hear of a Catholic being booted or being refused communion for disagreeing with the Church.
Oh deary me...
Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo? Pope Benedict excommunicated Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo "latae sententiae" (i.e. he is classed as DA'ing himself by his actions as distinct from "ferendae sententiae", which is the DF'ing form of excommunication, a punishment. Procuring an abortion is also classed as "latae sententiae".) He did so because Milingo ordained married men...
And...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12627627/
... where four Chinese bishops get the can for breaking the RC's franchise on approving Bishops.
Just like a BoE would get canned if they appointed an Elder without Bethal approval (with the Elder so apointed also getting canned)!
It is about returning home to where I first learned of a loving Christ who cares more about healing and helping than about pushing a phamplet through a screen door.
A JC who hated those who made laws up. Can you think of a religious group that has made loads of 'laws' up over the years. Loving him is just fine, he seems like a nice guy, but an organised religious group that is still guilty of a vast elaboration of the requirements a believer should follow?
... because it is about me and Christ alone.
And this needs a vast support organsiation?
The prime teaching tool was the Apostle Creed. It was not written by the Apostles, but was taught by them and was used in baptismal questions from the late first century onward.
A belief, which is fine; some might see this belief as heresay. Others as heresy.
Amazing, I can understand how being treated nicely after a heart attack and having your medical bills pad for by the RC might predispose you favourably towards them, especially given your boyhood. We all know religious beliefs form very easily after such experiences. But you really seem to be actively kidding ourself about some aspects of RC.
The link with Jesus is mostly claim; the 'signal to noise' ratio of RC belief vs what Jesus probably said is very bad. They actively ignore very clear statements regarding forbiding of marriage being wrong. They claim inspiration to support beliefs not contained in he Bible (just like the Fetid and Disgusting Salve do). They actively support tenuously derived laws regarding contraception and abortion that result in great suffering. They ascribe to Pauline misogyny as distinct from 'more' egalitarian statements contained in the NT or beliefs one can reasonably support from how Jesus apparently treated women.
If this was an attempt to logically explain you actions and experiences (as I have read in the past), unlike those I am comparing this to, this is all about something which cannot be explained logically, no matter the reality of the experience for you.
I think you're aware of the difference though, but I am 'amazed' at the similarities between the frying pan and the fire you seem to miss, although I am sure you are now in a better place for you than before.
Amazing,
I too am a big fan of your story, as it was one of the first detailed accounts I ever read as I was on my way out of the JWs initially.
I can see the emotional healing that you are probably going through as you reconcile with the Catholic Church. It's almost embarrassing how badly JWs and others have misconstrued and twisted Catholic theology for their ends. I know you researched much more than I did, but I too was fascinated with the early Church Fathers and have always held the opinion that if we are to be a part of ANY "Organization" we should really all be Catholics. They were the "Original" Organization - and as such we should just "wait on Jehovah" (or the Lord)to correct things in the Organization (if we are to go by the Society's retarded logic).
I have also found many other religions have a similar stance as Catholics. Most of "evil Christendom" (which JW's like to label) do not require you be a member of their Church in order to get saved. It is only through acceptance of Jesus as your Lord and Savior that you can get salvation.
I also applaud the way you don't feel a need to have anyone else be Catholic and that your "days of preaching to convert" are over. I do think religion and worship should be a personal thing.
My question is, what do you do when you have kids? For instance, what would you do if this situation was exactly the same, but your kids were still small - let's say under 10 years of age? Would you raise them as Catholics? Would you tell them that if they did not believe Jesus was their savior that they would probably go to hell? Would you teach them they cannot be successful or truly happy in life (or get to heaven) unless they accepted Jesus as their savior and accept Jesus' divinity? Is that any better than the carrots and damages intimated by the WT Society?
This is where I have the problem with just saying, "it's ok to believe what you want as long as you are not attempting to convert ME". I think the mental damage of inflicting a hellfire fear in our kids is just as abusive (but more eloquently presented) as Jehovah's Witnesses. Sure there are freedoms Catholics have the JWs do not (questioning, not having to personally accept all the details of the faith, etc), but the fact remains there are carrots dangled in front of Christians for their loyalty. You said yourself that the Early Church fathers spoke of Catholic as something more than just meaning "Universal". You say these guys are just following scripture, but you fail to mention that these are the guys that put the bible together!
I would love to hear your take on the origins of the New Testament. Do you still take the same logical stance based on evidence that you do with the Early Church Fathers?
I have no desire to have this thread turn into a debate on religion vs. atheism or a debate about the dubious origins of the Bible in general. I will never debate all the truly good the Catholic Church (and other Christian groups) do in this world, because it is to be applauded. But I don't believe all the good gives them the right to ingrain teachings in my mind or the minds of my kids that are truly frightening.
That being said, I can totally understand your perspective and I "get" why you feel attracted to the Catholic Church. Perhaps this too is not the end of your journey but just another step in unraveling all the shit. Or maybe it's a comfort zone that makes you content - and if so I am happy that you finally feel at peace after all the years of abuse and mind control. There's certainly nothing wrong with that.
-ithinkisee
Jim,
I guess I skipped over the part of "praying TO the Holy Spirit" - If I were you I would not heed this advice of the church, for this teaching is clearly not biblical and is a heresy.
Christian and Abaddon, you both brought out nicely the many issues I had with the Catholic church from childhood. That is why I lef that church in my pre-teens. I tried to give Jim the benefit of the doubt that the RC may be a little different than when I was girl but the more I look at the RC the more I see the same church.
It is sad that many Christians today have been duped into believing that a man made church system is God's way of dealing with Believers. It is not. Jesus himself said a time was coming when we would worship in "spirit and truth". We do not need to belong to a system or certain denomination. The true "church" are all the believers in Christ and they are baptized by the Holy Spirit. There is certainly nothing wrong with associating with an organized group of believers, but we need to have the proper view of the organization. Or, we will replace the Lord Jesus with "it". Our loyalty to Jesus is more important than loyalty to our man made "golden calf" - good analogy by the way. Man always wants a sign, a physical thing they can see, that is why they cannot accept the true church, the one you need to see with spiritual eyes. These church systems have done nothing more than peddle thier own brand of Christianity and try to set up their own standards of righteousness. And they all claim to be the original church. Those of us who understand this simple truth need to help our fellow brothers learn what the true church is, maybe helping to release them from bondage to men. Peace, Lilly
Hi Jim, this is already a long thread and I haven't read all the posts above but in my view the bottom line is that all Christian religious organisations have simply failed to live up to the task of sainthood and no doubt will continue to do so until the end of the times of the nations when Jerusalem ie the Church will be delivered from the downtrodding spirit of this world, of these nations. We can't change the times, that can only be done by Divine intervention. Even in the early Church there were congregations that were spiritual and strong and others that were worldly and weak.
It is therefore pointless trying to dig out in great detail the history and doctrine of one or other church, that is equivalent to being enslaved to and following the old JW approach and pattern of thinking for evaluating religions. You should belong to a mainstream Christian religion and try to do the best you can with its positive elements. As long as the basics are right then try and see how to associate with individual members rather than the organisation as a whole. Otherwise all these religions have serious faults in their ideology but above all in their practice. The cults of course are even worse though they relish putting down mainstream religions to gain members. We know how much harm for example the JWs have caused to the emotional health of hundreds of thousands if not millions of people in the short time they have existed and especially after Rutherford took over.
So if you feel you have roots in the Catholic Church and want to reconnect just do it and don't get obsessed and haunted by its negative past or present. Ultimately it's the individual rather than the church that will be judged for his/her actions. For the faithful this earth is a passing phase and the real home or church is in heavens.
lil
Well, my fiance is a RC in a Dutch liberal family going to probably the most liberal RC church in Holland, which is pretty damn liberal as far as RC goes.
She, her family, most of the parishoners and the Priest (who has stayed-on past retirement to prevent some snotty-nosed young neo-traditonalist straight of seminary drivin the congregation away, although most of everything is done by a married Deacon now) are (as far as this particular Nergle goes) more Humanistists than Roman Catholic.
They stop from having babies by contraception, many would use abortion if they accidentally fell pregnant, I doubt they would stop going if the Priest was female, they no more believe in the Pope being infallable than they do in him being inflatable, and a married man as Priest (instead of a Deacon doing almost everything a Priest does and probably somethings Deacons aren't officially meant to do) would be no problemo for them, as a whole.
But the RC chuch still has loads (in practise and officially) nasty non-sensical baggage, even if the effect of them is almost zero in a country like Holland.
It is sad that many Christians today have been duped into believing that a man made
Stop there. I can understand your objection to 'man-made' religion. I do feel you are creating an artifical disinction though.
Excluding personal divine revelation (which you can't prove even if you've had it, which I can't disprove, and which loads of other people with contradictory beliefs claim), the enire corpus of every form of Christian belief is man made.
Write down what Jesus is quoted as saying, and you still only have what some man said Jesus said.
Someone could equally show that whatever you define as 'standards of rightousness' are no more-or-less 'man made' than a RC's.
That is the nature of belief, which is fine, as long as you realise it is the nature of belief.
To think one's belief system superior to another's on account of your opinion that yours is less based on man is not provable.
Ok ...
Maybe I can put it like this (because religious talk do no not talk to many)
It's already hard enough to believe in God (for many) even hard enough to believe in Jesus (for many) how could it be really interesting to believe in human being supposed to be leaded by God.
If you take things spiritually (but you can put it as a phylosophy if you want it won't change where it leads) there are only a few things really important (Charity - it's a need including forgiveness because everybody can fail and trying - because really be able to is a real challenge -to forget about our Ego) That's what the Christ is all about. Do we need to be in a religion to get that? NO lost of people never got into it and are able to try to follow those simple advices to be able to live together (and not giving too much occasion to feel like jerks at some points).
Every rules are related to a culture ... with rules we need order (and it leads to some missunderstanding and injustice)... with love you just need understandingtowards love)...
And this love is more about charity : because we can't just love everybody the same way, because we are all different but we can understand that anyone deserves as much as we deserves.
Mike S, (A Christian),
Everytime I try to post my reply, I get an error message. I think it has to do with the large type you used, combined with the quote features that I used. I will have to type out everything word for word and I do not have time right now.
It was not my intent to start a debate the Catholic Church thread ... so with my eventual response to you, I will stop posting on this thread. I want to answer some of the others ... but it is getting to be way more work than I care to engage.
Jim Whitney
