I am trying to remain as objective a I can here but your blistering indictment of Protestantism must be answered straightforwardly. The underlying theme of my response is based on the hallowed words of none other than Jesus Christ when He saved a woman from stoning. The accusers, being Jews operating under the Law of Moses, brought the woman before Jesus so as to set Him up for apostasy, thinking He would contradict the Law and damn Himself. The tricksters formulated their plan around a question specifically designed for their nefarious purpose. Here is the KJV of that exchange:
Indeed! The application for this message here is that the Catholic church is NOT without sin; so , hold your stones.
Talk about a total butchering of scripture. That passage does not mean don't judge people, or don't speak of sin when you see it. In this passage, Christ implies we be merciful towards sinners and help them repent and find the truth. By your logic, you should just let individuals live in sin, we shouldn't evangelize. help them find Christ, by first pointing out their sin and then correcting it, is not loving or merciful. It is not merciful or loving to do nothing and stand by as others risk their eternal soul.
If taken literally, the passage conveys my message precisely. I used it to make an analogy between your casting of verbal stones and the stones being readied for casting at the adulteress in the mentioned scripture.
Christ may have implied what you said but I believe His words were clear and need no further interpretation in the context of defining our forgoing exchange.
Your frustration is becoming a distraction as indicated by your willingness to posit a baseless
ad-hominem instead of a solid argument:
Where did I write or post anything close to giving you license to say my logic supports doing nothing to reach out to sinners? As a Christian, I subscribe to the doctrine that Christ has called on us to be fishermen of men. You are way of base with your faulty analysis of my logic. It is yours that falters in the face of my preceding testaments .
You arent taking the passage "literally", nor are you addressing the context. You are just perverting one passage to fit your libetal relativistic world view.The issue in John 8 was that an adulterer a woman was caught in the sinful act. According to the Law of Moses she was to be stoned. The men who were to stone her leave after jesus spoke in 8:7. Jesus tells her to go forth and sin no more. Jesus in John 8 calls her a sinner, and tells her to sin no more. He then goes onto day those who follow him will have eternal life. So when you abandon the catholic church he built and established with peter you are putting your eternal life at risk. So this idea we cant identify and try to correct sin when we see it or we are throwing stones is absurd and has no basis in scripture. Whoever told you this is selling you a bill of goods and does not have your best interests at heart.
Yo can run but you cannot hide. I see that I am going to have to actually re-copy and post the part of your vituperative narrative that the stoning analogy applies to. I'm going to have to draw it out for you so that even a person that believed earth was the center of the universe years ago would understand.
When you said:
Who cares what this heretical abomination of a "church" thinks? They are apostates and renegades from the one true holy Catholic Church. So of course they are incensed with this shallow americanism and racial materialism, both of which are sins. Those who lie in sin beget sin so this is no surprise.
That was stone throwing. You affixed yourself as the spokesman for he Catholic church here and thereby took responsibility for the the evils committed by and assigned to Catholicism; that is , for the purpose of this discussion. As the hurler of stones at Protestant churches, you should have weighed your indignation against the blood of innocents spilled by the Catholic Church..and that is putting it mildly. You did not do that; so, I took the liberty of posting John 8 and highlighting in red the part that applied to your "stone throwing" as quoted above.
You excoriate the Protestants as being apostates and renegades, incensed with shallow americanism and racial materialism. I tend to agree with that premise and have posted similar indictments....However, I see those same social vulnerabilities exposed in Catholicism. If the stone throwing analogy doesn't work for you here, then try to get out of that glass house before launching more earth apples!
I have run into quite a few protestants who claim to be "biblical literalists. By the way, citing your "biblical literalist" background as though it somehow makes you an authority on the scripture you cite shows your ahistorical background as it pertains to Christianity. Throughout the history of Christianity, whether it be St.Augustine or Thomas Aquinas or many in between, have never adhered to a literalist interpretation of scripture. They recognize that in the Bible, their at metaphors and parables along with historical accounts and that one should be able to discern the difference. This biblical literalism is not even a manifestation of the Reformation, but of 19th century Protestant so called "fundamentalism". It is a concept made out of thin air with no philosophical or dogmatic basis in Church teaching.
Anyways, back on point.
I show you the context, and what is mean by throwing stones, and you cotniue to use this definition that has basis in scripture. For a "biblical literalist", you seem to prescribe many of your preconceived notions to scripture where it doesn't exist. Instead of opening your heart to scripture, you just have your moral philosophy and try to clumsily fit Bible verses together to conform to it. The point of the passage is not to say, "don't judge", in John 7:24, we are told to judge righteously and not by appearance. In Corrinthians 6 9:10, Paul is very judgemental about who will not enter Heaven. By your definition he, in laying out one of the foundations for Christianity, he is throwing stones.
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Christ is not telling us, "don't judge". He is saying to be forgiving of sinners and to help lead them on a righteous path.
You are entirely mischaracterizing me, and perverting Christian doctrine in the process. No where did I claim to ever speak on behalf of the Church. Thus, the very foundation of your argument is null, thus the argument is nullified. But I will accept your premise and from there deconstruct it to try and disavow you of this false notion you have. You claim that one who sins cannot point out the sins of others, and call on them to walk away from sin. By your logic, now man, as we are all sinful, could name the sin and tell the sinner to change their path. Paul when he was Saul lead of life of sin, so you are saying that for his sinful past, he cannot rebuke others for their sin, or identify it? Also by your logic, since I am a Catholic and certain Church leaders in the past have sinned and deviated from the teachings of the Church, I have to pay the wages of their sin and allow it to fester in others by remaining silent? This goes entirely against the biblical notion in both the Old and New Testament of opposing the concept of the "Sins of the Father". The fact that I have to pay the wages of Catholics who deviated from doctrine and who came before me by "not judging" goes against the very spirit of the Bible.
And you still didn't respond to how by your definition of "stone throwing" how Jesus doesn't fit that very definition in John 8. Jesus calls the woman a sinner, calls for her to leave her leave her life of sin, and that she must follow him to find eternal life. I have done nothing different that what Jesus did in John 8,. Do you condemn Christ for throwing stones?
