catholic Christian

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

SantoSubito

Guest
#21
You go to a catholic church. Of course you see all the forms of ancient heresies.
Actually I've yet to see Arianism, Modalism, Manichaenism, iconoclasm, Donatism etc, promoted in the Church. But I have seen most of those promoted here.

The biggest error I see on this board is all the people who trust in men and themselves over the Power of God. Most of the rest of the error is minor compared to that.
If Arianism or Modalism is a minor error you've got some mixed up priorities.

I know that there are saved Christians inside the catholic church. I also know that there are charismatic christians inside the catholic church (uh-oh). All this diversity inside just one church, there is even more outside of it. Its not a bad thing.
Our diversity is a tad different. We maintain it under a rigid ecclesiastical structure and require they all believe in the orthodoxy the Church teaches, while y'all splinter off into different camps with a vast medley of different beliefs.


We see through a glass darkly. That means that we don't have all the spiritual answers. We have to go to the Lord Jesus to get them, not other people who ,AT THEIR BEST, only see as much as we do...
Our belief in a infallible Church, guided by God, and protected by the Holy Spirit kind of makes that a moot point; does it not?
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#22
The Church or ekklēsia (“assembly,” “gathering”) was a word of common application in antiquity used for the “calling out” of citizens for a civic meeting or of soldiers for battle. It is used extensively throughout the Old and New Testaments to refer to the people of God (e.g., Deut 4:10; 9:10; 31:30; Mt 16:18; 18:17; Acts 5:11; Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 1:2; Eph 1:22; 3:10; Heb 12:23).

However, the New Testament uses the word to refer to all those [e.g. "body"/soma] who by faith in the person and work of Christ as the fullest revelation of God have entered into a new relationship with God and with one another (1 Cor 1:9–10) and who are the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit on earth (1 Cor 3:16).

The primary use of the word body as an image in the New Testament is the Pauline “body [Gk sōma] of Christ” as an image of the church with Christ at its head. “Body” refers to the whole human being, with corporeal substance being the very expression of the person. Hence, such an image as we find addressed to the church in Corinth, “Now you are the body of Christ and each one of you is a part of it” (1 Cor 12:27), rests on the idea of the body as the essential expression of the whole person: in this case the crucified and risen Christ. This is the key to a right understanding of the NT image of the church as “the body.”

The Church is not the kingdom of God, but is included in it and is composed of all spiritually reborn believers of Christ worldwide past, present, and future. In God's kingdom, one joins the Church (e.g. world-wide born again followers of Christ) by being joined to Christ via a spiritual rebirth (e.g. regeneration of one's spirit and soul by the Holy Spirit) (Rom 8:9-10; John 3:7; Titus 3:5-8; 1 Peter 1:3, etc...).

In scripture, this is rooted in one's personal belief and confession in the Christ symbolized by water baptism.

One cannot become a member of Christ's Church by any other means.
 

Grandpa

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2011
11,551
3,190
113
#23
Actually I've yet to see Arianism, Modalism, Manichaenism, iconoclasm, Donatism etc, promoted in the Church. But I have seen most of those promoted here.
I don't usually like to dwell on error but lets go ahead and look at this for a second.
You call Mary the mother of God. By doing that you agree with Arianism, in a way.

Mary is the mother of Jesus. God doesn't have a mother, otherwise you are placing Jesus as less God than the Father. Just saying...



If Arianism or Modalism is a minor error you've got some mixed up priorities.
This is minor compared to people who trust in people and themselves over the power of God.

How can a person come to Jesus and be taught by the Holy Spirit if they trust their church and their pope over Him???

I haven't seen it written anywhere come to the catholic church and it will give you rest. Abide in the catholic church for without her you can do nothing. Its just silly and obviously wrong.


Our diversity is a tad different. We maintain it under a rigid ecclesiastical structure and require they all believe in the orthodoxy the Church teaches, while y'all splinter off into different camps with a vast medley of different beliefs.
Its different because you do it. Your church is infallible. Yeah, I've heard that before.


Our belief in a infallible Church, guided by God, and protected by the Holy Spirit kind of makes that a moot point; does it not?
Only in your mind, not in mine.

If your church were infallible why did Martin Luther point out all of its error???

You do believe the church was in error at that time, don't you???

How could someone point out that error if they were not led by the Holy Spirit but instead believed that the church and her leaders were infallible??

I don't see how people buy into that whole infallible stuff. Only the Lord Jesus Christ is infallible.
 
J

jimmydiggs

Guest
#24
Our diversity is a tad different. We maintain it under a rigid ecclesiastical structure and require they all believe in the orthodoxy the Church teaches, while y'all splinter off into different camps with a vast medley of different beliefs.
I suppose that's the fundamental presupposition regarding that issue.
 
C

chesser

Guest
#25
I don't usually like to dwell on error but lets go ahead and look at this for a second.
You call Mary the mother of God. By doing that you agree with Arianism, in a way.

Mary is the mother of Jesus. God doesn't have a mother, otherwise you are placing Jesus as less God than the Father. Just saying...





This is minor compared to people who trust in people and themselves over the power of God.

How can a person come to Jesus and be taught by the Holy Spirit if they trust their church and their pope over Him???

I haven't seen it written anywhere come to the catholic church and it will give you rest. Abide in the catholic church for without her you can do nothing. Its just silly and obviously wrong.




Its different because you do it. Your church is infallible. Yeah, I've heard that before.




Only in your mind, not in mine.

If your church were infallible why did Martin Luther point out all of its error???

You do believe the church was in error at that time, don't you???

How could someone point out that error if they were not led by the Holy Spirit but instead believed that the church and her leaders were infallible??

I don't see how people buy into that whole infallible stuff. Only the Lord Jesus Christ is infallible.
Not catholic but here we go...
1. Jesus is god, Mary is Jesus mother, its not that hard to piece together, unless your a JW.
2. Catholics don't trust the pope over Jesus
3. I agree the RCC isn't INFALLIABLE
4. Lol, at the Luther thing, yer kinda being hypocritical there, claiming Catholics don't follow Jesus then saying Martin Luther brought truth
5. Catholics don't trust themselves over God
Once again not catholic(see how I agreed church isn't INFALLIABLE), also, living in America, and seeing so many Americans, you have GOT to be American.
 
T

TheMachine

Guest
#26
Wow! I've heard Catholicism referred to as a cult and never understood why.....until I read this thread. lighthorse has dropped a turd and left, and santo has picked it up and called it a cause!.... for the name of who is this argurement being waged? Christ is Lord and to Him be the Glory......The Pope is a dude with an awesome hat and I mean awesome!!like Elvis bedazzled jump suit awesome!....I'd sooner pursue a relationship with Christ than an obedience to a man......but that's just me.....

The Machine

"Thank ya, thank you very much"....Elvis
 

Grandpa

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2011
11,551
3,190
113
#27
Not catholic but here we go...
1. Jesus is god, Mary is Jesus mother, its not that hard to piece together, unless your a JW.
2. Catholics don't trust the pope over Jesus
3. I agree the RCC isn't INFALLIABLE
4. Lol, at the Luther thing, yer kinda being hypocritical there, claiming Catholics don't follow Jesus then saying Martin Luther brought truth
5. Catholics don't trust themselves over God
Once again not catholic(see how I agreed church isn't INFALLIABLE), also, living in America, and seeing so many Americans, you have GOT to be American.
1. I don't have any problem with Jesus being God. I have lots of problems with a church that calls Mary the mother of God, the queen of heaven, and directs their prayer to her.
2. When people say their church is infallible they are placing their church in the place of God. That means they can't know the difference between mens opinions and Gods Truth because both are placed at the same level of importance.
3. I also agree that the rcc is not infallible.
4. Hypocritical?? I was showing that an infallible church had to be corrected. How can that be if they are infallible? Maybe you misunderstand the definition of infallible...
5. I suppose they trust their church over God. It equates to the same thing as far as I'm concerned.

If someone says that their church is the one true church they should have more proof than "because we say so".

I don't know what being American has to do with this. It is the country I was born in.

 
K

kenisyes

Guest
#28
The proper esponse to this would be that other churches (actually called ecclesial communities) do not possess the complete truth, only lesser levels of it.



Actually most Christians acknowledge the Deuterocanon. If your speaking of individual denominations then your right since Protestantism is so fragmented.

I forgot about this thread since 4 days lapsed. Thanks for getting back to me.

It would be nice to hear what Lighthorse has to say. On #1, that is the response I expected.

#2, are you sure? I have known almost NO non-Catholics who believe the Deuterocanon (the Catholic name of the Apocrypha) are inspired. That is why they are not bound with most Bibles, unless you buy a Bible at a Catholic store, or make certain you have an edition with them added. And then, they are usually at the back. So, by "acknowledge", do you mean consider inspired? I can think of no way we could ever settle th claim of "most" both of us have apparently experienced.
 
K

kenisyes

Guest
#29
Wow! I've heard Catholicism referred to as a cult and never understood why.....until I read this thread. lighthorse has dropped a turd and left, and santo has picked it up and called it a cause!.... for the name of who is this argurement being waged? Christ is Lord and to Him be the Glory......The Pope is a dude with an awesome hat and I mean awesome!!like Elvis bedazzled jump suit awesome!....I'd sooner pursue a relationship with Christ than an obedience to a man......but that's just me.....

The Machine

"Thank ya, thank you very much"....Elvis
The trouble in responding to this thread, is by definition, thanks to Santo Subito, anyone who is not Catholic in some way lacks sufficient truth to understand God as well as Catholics do. That means, some things he says cannot be trusted by Catholics.

Am I right, Catholics? Isn't that what being the "one true church means" as we have defined it here? No one else has given another definition. My question to you then is, if someone who is not Catholic tells you (a Catholic) something about God or the Bible, etc., how do you determine if you should listen to them?
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,215
2,551
113
#30
I am a Catholic Christian. The catholic church is the one true church, the only one that Christ started.the church is the one who defined the cannon of scripture that all Christians hold as the inspired word of God, even anti catholic Christians. If anyone would like to lovingly discuss this with me please feel free to contract me at [email protected]
LOL wow very bold indeed, but i don't think it is up to man to decide what the one true church is.
 
Dec 19, 2009
27,513
128
0
71
#31
I am a Catholic Christian. The catholic church is the one true church, the only one that Christ started.the church is the one who defined the cannon of scripture that all Christians hold as the inspired word of God, even anti catholic Christians. If anyone would like to lovingly discuss this with me please feel free to contract me at [email protected]
Most people I know, whether Catholic or Protestant, are too humble to say something like, “My church is better than your church.”
 
S

SantoSubito

Guest
#32
I don't usually like to dwell on error but lets go ahead and look at this for a second.
You call Mary the mother of God. By doing that you agree with Arianism, in a way.

Mary is the mother of Jesus. God doesn't have a mother, otherwise you are placing Jesus as less God than the Father. Just saying...
Hardly, the title "Theotokos" (usually translated Mother of God) indicates that from the moment of his conception Christ was both fully God and fully man, and that his two natures are inseparable.

Arianism held that Christ was created by the Father and thus was a lesser God. This was rejected at the First Council of Nicaea, and is preserved today in the creed recited every Sunday in every Catholic parish.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.





This is minor compared to people who trust in people and themselves over the power of God.
Tis not, failing to discern the nature of God is probably the most damaging heresy ever to plague Christendom.



How can a person come to Jesus and be taught by the Holy Spirit if they trust their church and their pope over Him???
Because the Church preaches the Truth given her by Christ and the Holy Spirit.

I haven't seen it written anywhere come to the catholic church and it will give you rest. Abide in the catholic church for without her you can do nothing. Its just silly and obviously wrong.
Say that to all the faithful Catholics over the years (me included) who have found rest in the Faith the Church proclaims.




Its different because you do it. Your church is infallible. Yeah, I've heard that before.
It's different by the way we go about it. No pentecostal group started in a Presbyterian church and then stayed under it's authority structure. Charismatic Catholics have to obey the same Church discipline we have to, they have to worship using the same liturgical rubrics we do, and obey their bishops just like we do. The reason for all this structure and rigidity, which people like you seem to disdain, is Lex orandi, lex credendi "That which is prayed is believed".

Only in your mind, not in mine.[/SIZE


I'm aware of that.

If your church were infallible why did Martin Luther point out all of its error???
What Dogma or Doctrine did he point out that we have since changed? You know we had a whole thing called the Counter-Reformation where instead of giving in we dug in our heels, handed out anathemas like crazy, and proclaimed a lot of dogma at the Council of Trent that closed the debate on things that had been debatable before.

You do believe the church was in error at that time, don't you???
I believe there were abuses of Church practice, such as selling indulgences when they were never meant to be sold.

How could someone point out that error if they were not led by the Holy Spirit but instead believed that the church and her leaders were infallible??
Look into Martin Luther a little bit, and the reasons he did what he did become clearer. He was actually an extremely over-scrupulous man who was constantly afraid of demons and going to Hell.

Even the supposedly dramatic moment when Luther nailed his theses to the church door wasn't dramatic. The church door was like a bulletin board, and often times theologians would nail theses to the door they wanted to discuss with others.

I don't see how people buy into that whole infallible stuff. Only the Lord Jesus Christ is infallible.
Well the easy answer is because it's true. The other easy answer is that people like to have all the answers, or an authority that can supply an authoritative answer if the question becomes important enough, and the Catholic Church offers that. Just think of it like this, your church could be overrun by liberals or any other group and they could take it in a direction very much opposed to what you had envisioned.

While in the Church such things are not a problem, if we have a bishop promoting gay marriage or abortion he gets excommunicated, and ultimately any liberal Catholics are fighting a lost cause because the Church has always pronounced both to be intrinsically evil and morally disordered, and once something is decided in the Church it is set in stone.

Come to think of it most of that can be distilled down to one phrase from St. Augustine: Roma locuta, causa finita ("Rome has spoken, the matter is settled").
 
S

SantoSubito

Guest
#33
Most people I know, whether Catholic or Protestant, are too humble to say something like, “My church is better than your church.”
They still think it though, every Catholic confesses every Sunday that they believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church (meaning in our view the Catholic Church). At least I'm honest about it, because if you dress bad news up in gold it's still bad news.
 
S

smithbr8

Guest
#34
All denominations are funnels. And only the meek that that fall in can safely fit through the tiny hole in the bottom.
There is no way that ALL denominations are funnels. We have denominations that we claim are "not Christians" or "good enough for God to waste His time on". So if that is the case, then only one denomination can be the right one, for there can be NO disagreement with the religion.
 
S

SantoSubito

Guest
#35
The trouble in responding to this thread, is by definition, thanks to Santo Subito, anyone who is not Catholic in some way lacks sufficient truth to understand God as well as Catholics do. That means, some things he says cannot be trusted by Catholics.
It is not that you lack sufficient truth, but that you fail to embrace the whole truth laid before you.

Am I right, Catholics? Isn't that what being the "one true church means" as we have defined it here? No one else has given another definition. My question to you then is, if someone who is not Catholic tells you (a Catholic) something about God or the Bible, etc., how do you determine if you should listen to them?
Easy, does it line up with what the Church teaches.
 
J

jimmydiggs

Guest
#36
So if that is the case, then only one denomination can be the right one, for there can be NO disagreement with the religion.
I think Peter and Paul would disagree quite strongly with the notion that there can be no disagreement whatsoever.

Galatians 2:11-13
11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong. 12 When he first arrived, he ate with the Gentile Christians, who were not circumcised. But afterward, when some friends of James came, Peter wouldn’t eat with the Gentiles anymore. He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. 13 As a result, other Jewish Christians followed Peter’s hypocrisy, and even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.

Paul disagreed with Peter. Paul says Peter was in error. Was Peter no longer a Christian as a result?
 
S

smithbr8

Guest
#38
I think Peter and Paul would disagree quite strongly with the notion that there can be no disagreement whatsoever.

Galatians 2:11-13
11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong. 12 When he first arrived, he ate with the Gentile Christians, who were not circumcised. But afterward, when some friends of James came, Peter wouldn’t eat with the Gentiles anymore. He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. 13 As a result, other Jewish Christians followed Peter’s hypocrisy, and even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.

Paul disagreed with Peter. Paul says Peter was in error. Was Peter no longer a Christian as a result?
Technically? Yes. If he disagreed with the teachings of the Bible, then he's an abomination.
 
J

jimmydiggs

Guest
#39
Technically? Yes. If he disagreed with the teachings of the Bible, then he's an abomination.


You would be more likely to make a legitimate and well received point if you didn't try to turdmeister it up, and actually took it seriously.
 
S

smithbr8

Guest
#40


You would be more likely to make a legitimate and well received point if you didn't try to turdmeister it up, and actually took it seriously.
How is that not the case? If someone disagrees with Scripture, how are they Christian? Do we not say that the Scripture must be accepted as a whole and not just bits and pieces that we like? Therefore, if he disagreed with part of the Scripture, then he's not Christian.

Trolls have nothing to do with it. It's a pretty simple teaching.