Catholicism

[FranC]

I know. I said what I said in agreement with you, that priests are not the only ones with the authority to forgive. I was just adding that not only does God forgive, but people other than priests forgive too; in fact, we're commanded to. So the idea that only priests have the authority to forgive is hogwash, for more than one reason.

Uffa.
Priests do NOT have the authority to forgive sin.
They have the authority to DECLARE a sin forgiven.
They give a SIGN to the repentent that they are forgiven so they could go home happy.

GOD forgives sin. The priest also acts as the representative of the community of believers. Since we all belong to ONE BODY, when one of us sins, the entire body is affected.

 

[FranC]

If I take away words, speech, ideas, logical tools (therefore taking the Bible, pastors, religious divisions/belief systems out of the equation), am I still left with God? Of course, God is always there.

To me the Bible is a guide. It is a collection of inspirational writings. It has been changed many times, it has been translated and defined, it has been through many hands of men. When people refer to God writing the bible, well actually the bible has been redefined many times in history. What you would be saying is you trust a group of men you have never known, that they knew what God wanted in the bible. I'll tell you what I'm interested in, is not if, but why would they omit anything? If God wrote everything the prophets wrote, then why would they omit anything they said? To say nothing was omitted through editing is a kind of ignorance. It is what man does. Look at the massive organisation of the Catholic church. Was it started out of meekness, or power? How are most 'religious organisations' built up, out of meekness or power?

Exactly who tells you to put all your faith in the bible, is it the bible? Who tells you to read the bible inside out, is it the bible? Who tells you to take every single word literally, as matter of fact, is it the bible? Who tells you what the bible scriptures mean, is it the bible? Who tells you the bible is the whole truth and nothing but the truth (as in it has never ever been edited), is it the bible?

Everything to do with how people treat the bible, or how people are told to trust only the bible, or maybe how every other 'book' on earth is ALL LIES, does not come from the bible, and it does not come from God. These type of people are WALL-BUILDERS because, they have not overcome their own walls. They are people of many walls. As Christians we are supposed to go out there and break down walls.

To me God is everywhere, and in every person. Love. Whether they are Muslim, or Christian, Atheist, Kung-Fu Fighter, Butcher, Gay. It doesn't mean that I am saying they are connected to God. Everyone has God and they have free-will to follow God or follow themselves. I've known many good people in my life who spend their time helping others, more than some who read the bible inside out and yet spend more time bickering than being loving or helpful. Where does the connection to God come, is it through the bible, or is it through Jesus? And even the word 'through' is taken literally by the majority.

If I want to be a master of Kung-Fu then maybe Bruce Lee would be a good example. He is dead now, he in spirit. But if I thought of mastering kung-fu through the spirit of Bruce Lee, then to me, that is the same kind as the 'through' regarding knowing God through Jesus. Do I need to idolise Bruce Lee to master kung-fu? Or worship him? No, it is more about understanding, what was his attitude and his way of being that made him a master of kung-fu. I could read a book written by a 2nd or 3rd person, but it wouldn't tell me much if I wasn't able to submit to the spirit of what I am trying to do.

Being more Christlike, trying to be more selfless, trying to love enemies or those you fall out with, trying to be still rather than let your thoughts control your words and actions, hanging with those that many others will have put on the other side of a wall.

I know what you're talking about, but there are some mistakes in your post.

Not everyone has God in them. Atheists do not have God in them. You see God as a force, which is why you compare knowing Him to knowing B Lee for Kung Fu. Our God is not a force in the sense you're explaining. He is a PERSONAL GOD. That's why Jesus came to us - to make us know Him.

The only other thing I'll say is that the bible is a Holy Book. Not all books are Holy.
If you read the writings of Krishna, for instance, you read writings that DO bring you to God. They are God-inspired and reveal the character of God, which is Love and Goodness toward man.

If you read the Quran you'll find that it is NOT a holy book. It does NOT properly represent the character of God but states the ideas of a man and will bring one AWAY from the God we know and love.

I understand your general idea and I do agree with it. We are to know and follow the ESSENCE of Jesus.

However, some of your statements are just not true and should be thought over again.

My two cents.

 

[mailmandan]

Hi 17bees,

I also appreciate MMD's nice demeanor.

That doesn't make him any less wrong in presenting what the RCC teaches.
This is why so many dislike it - its teachings are not properly represented in these forums.

What was I wrong about in regards to what the RCC teaches? Keep in mind that I grew up in the RCC. I also quote Roman Catholics sources and other Roman Catholics in regards to their teachings.

And as to your works furthering your faith and grace, this is also very true.

In its official writings, the Catholic church teaches that faith is important; (their version of faith) but it also insists on the necessity of good works to merit eternal life. Please read carefully the following quotations from the Council of Trent on Justification:

Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, excluding grace and charity which is poured into their hearts by the Holy Spirit and inheres in them, or also that the grace which justifies us is only the favour of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.

Canon 24. If anyone says that the justice (righteousness) received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.

Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.

Canon 32. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ (of whom one is a living member), the justified does not truly merit an increase of grace, and eternal life, provided that one dies in the state of grace, the attainment of this eternal life, as well as an increase in glory, let him be anathema.

Official Roman Catholic teaching would not allow the sinner to rely by faith on the mercy of God or to believe that his sins are forgiven based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone. Something more is required. You must keep yourself saved by your own good works. You must merit grace and eternal life by your works. You must pay the debt of sins by your penance and your purgatorial sufferings. That is the Roman Catholic version of salvation by works. Do you agree with all of that?

Others love Justification but do not like to talk about Sanctification -- which in the RCC is known as initial justification and progressive justification.

Catholics confuse justification with sanctification. It's actually justification and progressive sanctification. There are three tenses to salvation that often get mixed up. 1. We have been saved from the PENALTY of sin (Justification) 2. We are being saved from the POWER of sin (ongoing Sanctification) 3. We will be saved from the PRESENCE of sin (Glorification)

It would do us all good to know the difference.

It absolutely would.

 

[FranC]

What was I wrong about in regards to what the RCC teaches? Keep in mind that I grew up in the RCC. I also quote Roman Catholics sources and other Roman Catholics in regards to their teachings.

In its official writings, the Catholic church teaches that faith is important; (their version of faith) but it also insists on the necessity of good works to merit eternal life. Please read carefully the following quotations from the Council of Trent on Justification:

Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, excluding grace and charity which is poured into their hearts by the Holy Spirit and inheres in them, or also that the grace which justifies us is only the favour of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.

Canon 24. If anyone says that the justice (righteousness) received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.

Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.

Canon 32. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ (of whom one is a living member), the justified does not truly merit an increase of grace, and eternal life, provided that one dies in the state of grace, the attainment of this eternal life, as well as an increase in glory, let him be anathema.

Official Roman Catholic teaching would not allow the sinner to rely by faith on the mercy of God or to believe that his sins are forgiven based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone. Something more is required. You must keep yourself saved by your own good works. You must merit grace and eternal life by your works. You must pay the debt of sins by your penance and your purgatorial sufferings. That is the Roman Catholic version of salvation by works. Do you agree with all of that?

Catholics confuse justification with sanctification. It's actually justification and progressive sanctification. There are three tenses to salvation that often get mixed up. 1. We have been saved from the PENALTY of sin (Justification) 2. We are being saved from the POWER of sin (ongoing Sanctification) 3. We will be saved from the PRESENCE of sin (Glorification)

It absolutely would.

This is what you have to do MMD:

STOP reading the Council of Trent (1,500's a LONG time ago)

And START reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

It means nothing that you grew up Catholic. That Church taught nothing until just recently. Catholics know nothing of their religion. This is why it's easy to pick on them. Try picking on a JW or a Calvanist. It's a bit harder to do.

As far as works and being anathama if we don't do them.
THE BIBLE AGREES.
If you want to, I'd be happy to go through it, but you put a lot of meat in the dish and it's difficult to digest it all with the amount of time I have.

Works:

Mathew 5:17-20
2 Peter 1:5-10
Philippians 3:12-14
Romans 11:22
1 Timoty 4:8-11
Hebrews 10:24
James 1:22

Need more?? Works are INDEED necessary for continued salvation.

I'm not sure you understand sanctification
Catholics call it initial justification = justification
and progressive justification = sanctification

This is how YOU explain it:

1. We have been saved from the PENALTY of sin (Justification)
2. We are being saved from the POWER of sin (ongoing Sanctification)
3. We will be saved from the PRESENCE of sin (Glorification)

Let's see if you like this definition:

1. Justification: We repent and turn to God and He receives us into His family and we are made just in His sight through Jesus.
This act is completed TOTALLY by God.

2. Sanctification: An ongoing process by which we are made holy, set apart and for SERVICE to God. This is a COMBINED work between us and God. The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin, helps us to do Godly works, and is our helper and paraplete.

3. Glorification: We receive our glorified body after Death. Sin is no longer a condition we must deal with.


Comments?

 

[mailmandan]

You know MMD
I've gone through this with you before.
You seem to know a lot more about Catholicism that the Catholic Church knows.

You sound partial towards the Catholic church. I grew up in the Roman Catholic church. Most of my family is still Roman Catholic and I've had several discussions with Roman Catholics about what they believe and teach. I also quote what they teach directly from their sources.

Once again:

The catholic church believes WE ARE SAVED BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH.
Ephesians 2:8

What's interesting is when I received Christ through faith several years ago and I called my mother on the phone to tell her the good news. I actually quoted Ephesians 2:8,9 to her and said that we are saved by grace through faith, not work. She replied, "I know that" but as we discussed these two verses further, I could see that she poured a different meaning into what it means to be saved by grace through faith, not works, just like the RCC does. Don't be so naive. With Catholics, it's saved through faith "infused with works" (all the right works and those works become meritorious towards receiving salvation) just not saved by specific works of the law. The problem with their argument of saved by "these" works and just not "those" works is you cannot dissect good works from the MORAL aspect of the law.

James is saying that we are saved by FAITH, but that faith LEADS TO WORKS.
Faith, without works is DEAD. It is of NO VALUE. What good is having faith if I act just like everyone else and do nothing to help my fellow humans? Are we not the hands and feet of God? Or do we expect HIM to come down here and do everything for us?

*In James 2:14, we read of one who says-claims (key word) he has faith but has no works (to back up his claim). This is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" He is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. So James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Simple!

James is NOT talking about an empty profession of faith. He's talking about faith, as YOU understand it.

No, James is talking about a dead faith. James said SAYS-CLAIMS to have faith (James 2:14) not actually has faith.

You state that in James 2:14 the person SAYS = CLAIMS that he has faith.
So when YOU "say" you have faith, you are only claiming to have it?
So what is the correct expression to "say" that I have faith?
Things are becoming sillier and sillier.

James plainly said, SAYS-CLAIMS to have faith but has no works in James 2:14. We show our faith by our works (James 2:18). A phrase that James could have coined is, "the absence of evidence (of works) can be construed as evidence of absence" (of faith)

You speak of "rewards". What is the reward? Is it not heaven?
Mathew 25:34-46

In addition to receiving eternal life, believers will receive rewards and loss of rewards based on their works (1 Corinthians 3:13-15). Eternal life/salvation is a gift (Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8) and not a reward that we worked for and earned.

Jesus will come to judge all nations. He will put the sheep on His right and the goats on His left.
Mathew 25:33

The sheep are believers and the goats are unbelievers.

To those who did well, He will say to come because they are blessed by the Father and they will inherit the reward, which is heaven
Mathew 25:34

The NASB says inherit the kingdom.

And to those on His left, who did nothing for their brother and thusly also nothing for Jesus, He will tell them to go to eternal punishment.
Mathew 25:46

Descriptive of unbelievers.

We should not downplay works, since Jesus said many times that we are to work here on earth to promote His Kingdom.
John 14:15
John 14:21
John 15:14
"If you love Me, you will keep My commandments".

I don't down play works at all. John clearly explains in 1 John 2:3 - By this we know that we have come to know Him, (demonstrative evidence) if we keep His commandments. 4 The one who says, (sound familiar? says he has faith) "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. BTY the Greek word for "keep" is "tereo" which means to guard, observe, watch over, properly maintain, keep intact. It does not mean sinless, perfect obedience to all of His commandments 100% of the time.

Matthew 5:16 - Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.

Titus 3:8 - This is a faithful saying, and these things I want you to affirm constantly, that those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men.

We are saved FOR good works, NOT BY good works (Ephesians 2:8-10).

We are exhorted throughout the entire N.T. to keep the commandments. Why give new Christians the idea that it is not necessary to do so? What advantage to the Kingdom of God?

I already explained this above.

So yes, these "fruits" are also the means to our salvation.

That's false and you are sounding more and more like a Catholic.

Romans 11:21-22
"For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you.
Behold then the kindness and severity of God, to those who fell, severity, but to you God's kindness,
IF YOU CONTINUE in His kindness, otherwise YOU ALSO will be CUT OFF."
NASB

The Jews were in the olive tree to begin with because they were the "natural branches" and not because they were all saved. Because of their unbelief and hard hearts God removed His gracious hand from them as a people overall and broke them off from His goodness (but only for a time after which they will be restored). We Gentiles have now been grafted into God's goodness and are the recipients of His blessings. Paul's warning is that we should not get arrogant because we might lose the goodness and blessings of God just like the Jews lost the goodness and blessings of God -- but this doesn't speak of losing salvation.

Catholics DO NOT believe in sinless perfection as you insinuate.

I never said that Catholics believe in sinless perfection. If they did, then confessing their sins to a priest would be a waste of time.

Also, sacraments do not save, they impart grace.

According to Catholics, the sacraments impart grace and save, which is completely false.

You may agree with this or not, but you should state what the RCC teaches, not what you believe it teaches.

I did state what the RCC teaches. I quoted their teachings directly from Roman Catholic sources and from other Roman Catholics.

 

[BethyA]

Funny how people who don't read the Bible tell us we are not to read the Bible because we won't understand it. Its like someone who doesn't drive telling NASCAR drivers how to race.

Well said...

 

[FranC]

FOR MAILMANDAN

I just came across this from a different post.

Hanegraaff’s conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy should not be viewed as a mere isolated occurrence. There has been a definite trend for the past few decades of a growing number of American evangelical Protestants converting to either Catholicism or Orthodoxy. As long ago as 1992, the trend of conversions of evangelical clergy to Orthodoxy was noted in a book.[4] I want to suggest some lessons (by no means exhaustive) that need to be learned from this recent turn of events.
First, evangelicals need to understand Catholicism and especially Orthodoxy much better than most of us currently do. It is safe to say that most evangelicals know little about the Eastern Orthodox tradition and are ill-equipped to say anything substantive about the subject. Fortunately, some good evangelical resources on Orthodoxy are available, but more is needed and more teaching generally in evangelical churches and schools is especially needed.[5]


I'd be interested in your opinion as to why some convert from P. to C. or E.O.
I have my theory - I may be wrong.
I think some people are looking for authority. They're tired of hearing differing opinions.
Maybe they're looking for religiosity? Or some type of organized religion... Something "steady" in their life...

 

[FranC]

MAILMANDAN...

Here's the article. It's interesting. No time to read the Whole thing right now or to answer you. Later...

Evangelical Apologist Hank Hanegraaff Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy

 

[Utah]

My sentiments exactly.
I feel that Calvinism is MUCH WORSE than doctrine the RCC has that I don't agree with. The ascension of Mary, for instance.

Why is it worse? It changes the character of God - nothing the Catholic Church teaches changes the character of God. Think about it.

I'm saying it would be nice for you to face these people in a calm manner and just DISCUSS without being too disdained.
Otherwise they don't even listen.

I learned long ago not to make excuses for my actions, yet its good to explain oneself when necessary. My crude comment about fecal matter earlier in this thread is not the true sentiments of my heart, however I stated it because once in a while there's a Catholic apologist who visits CC and attacks people who are not Catholic. He says extremely vulgar things, to which, I beat him to the punch this time because I have a feeling the guy I was banging heads with was this particular trouble maker. Sorry you were hit with friendly fire.

 

[FranC]

I learned long ago not to make excuses for my actions, yet its good to explain oneself when necessary. My crude comment about fecal matter earlier in this thread is not the true sentiments of my heart, however I stated it because once in a while there's a Catholic apologist who visits CC and attacks people who are not Catholic. He says extremely vulgar things, to which, I beat him to the punch this time because I have a feeling the guy I was banging heads with was this particular trouble maker. Sorry you were hit with friendly fire.

No problem Utah.
It wasn't meant for me personally -- it was just such a turn off and I couldn't believe YOU said it.

Wish I could be around the next time he shows up.
Tell him he should love his fellow Christians - it's what his Lord, Jesus, would have wanted.
(Even the Pope says we're all to love one another.)

There's a lot of Catholic doctrine I don't like, but I love all Catholics who love Jesus.

 

[mailmandan]

This is what you have to do MMD:

STOP reading the Council of Trent (1,500's a LONG time ago)

And START reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Nothing has changed since the 1500's in regards to official Roman Catholic not allowing the sinner to rely by faith on the mercy of God or to believe that his sins are forgiven based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone. Something more is required. You must keep yourself saved by your own good works. You must merit grace and eternal life by your works. You must pay the debt of sins by your penance and your purgatorial sufferings. That is the Roman Catholic version of salvation by works. Again I ask, "do you agree with all of that?" All of those Canons? As for the Catechism of the Catholic church:

Here is a summarized paragraph with references found in the Catechism of the Catholic church (CCC) of many of the false teachings of Roman Catholicism. How do we know they are false? By comparing Scripture with what is taught.

The Catholic Church is the one true church (CCC 2105), Infallibility of the Catholic Church, (CCC 2035), Only the Roman Catholic Church has authority to interpret Scripture (CCC 100), The Pope is the head of the church and has the authority of Christ (CCC 2034), The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation (CCC 846), Sacred Tradition equal to scripture (CCC 82), Forgiveness of sins, salvation, is by faith and works (CCC 2036 CCC 2080 2068), Full benefit of Salvation is only through the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican 2, Decree on Ecumenism, 3), Grace can be merited (CCC 2010 CCC 2027), The merit of Mary and the Saints can be applied to Catholics and others (1477), Penance is necessary for salvation (CCC 980), Purgatory (CCC 1031 CCC 1475), Indulgences (CCC 1471 CCC 1478 CCC 1498 CCC 1472), Mary is Mediatrix (CCC 969), Mary brings us the gifts of eternal salvation (CCC 969), Mary delivers souls from death (CCC 966), Prayer to the saints (CCC 2677), The Communion elements become the actual body and blood of Christ (CCC 1374 CCC 1376).

It means nothing that you grew up Catholic. That Church taught nothing until just recently. Catholics know nothing of their religion. This is why it's easy to pick on them. Try picking on a JW or a Calvanist. It's a bit harder to do.

It's not about picking on Catholics. It's about exposing their false teachings and contending for the faith once and for all delivered to the saints.

As far as works and being anathama if we don't do them.

If you did no works at all, then you would demonstrate that you have a dead faith and not genuine faith, yet we are still saved through faith, not works.

THE BIBLE AGREES.
If you want to, I'd be happy to go through it, but you put a lot of meat in the dish and it's difficult to digest it all with the amount of time I have.

Works:

Mathew 5:17-20
2 Peter 1:5-10
Philippians 3:12-14
Romans 11:22
1 Timothy 4:8-11
Hebrews 10:24
James 1:22

None of those verses above teach salvation by works. It doesn't sound like you are fully grasping the errors of Roman Catholicism.

Need more?? Works are INDEED necessary for continued salvation.

Works neither obtain or maintain salvation. From beginning "have been saved through faith" (Ephesians 2:8) to end "receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls" (1 Peter 1:9) salvation is through faith and is not by works.

I'm not sure you understand sanctification
Catholics call it initial justification = justification
and progressive justification = sanctification

Catholics are wrong about calling progressive sanctification - progressive justification. Catholics also reject IMPUTED righteousness (Romans 4:5-6) for imparted righteousness.

This is how YOU explain it:

1. We have been saved from the PENALTY of sin (Justification)
2. We are being saved from the POWER of sin (ongoing Sanctification)
3. We will be saved from the PRESENCE of sin (Glorification)

Do you agree?

Let's see if you like this definition:

1. Justification: We repent and turn to God and He receives us into His family and we are made just in His sight through Jesus.
This act is completed TOTALLY by God.

Justification is the work of God where the righteousness of God is reckoned to the sinner, so the sinner is accounted as righteous by God (Romans 4:5-6; Philippians 3:9). This righteousness is not earned or retained by works. Justification is an instantaneous occurrence with the result being eternal life. It is based completely and solely upon Christ's finished work of redemption and is received through faith (rightly understood) in Christ alone.

2. Sanctification: An ongoing process by which we are made holy, set apart and for SERVICE to God. This is a COMBINED work between us and God. The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin, helps us to do Godly works, and is our helper and paraplete.

Sanctification is the process of being set apart for God's work and being conformed to the image of Christ. This conforming to Christ involves the work of the person, but it is still God working in the believer to produce more of a godly character and life in the person who has already been justified (Philippians 2:13). The justified person is actively involved in submitting to God's will, resisting sin, seeking holiness, as we continue to grow in grace. Ongoing sanctification has no bearing on justification. That is, even if we don't live a sinless, perfect life (which we won't) we are still justified by faith in Christ. Where justification is a legal declaration that is instantaneous, ongoing sanctification is a process.

3. Glorification: We receive our glorified body after Death. Sin is no longer a condition we must deal with.

Glorification is the future and final work of God upon Christians, where he transforms our mortal physical bodies to the eternal physical bodies in which we will dwell forever.

 

[mailmandan]

FOR MAILMANDAN

I just came across this from a different post.

Hanegraaff’s conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy should not be viewed as a mere isolated occurrence. There has been a definite trend for the past few decades of a growing number of American evangelical Protestants converting to either Catholicism or Orthodoxy. As long ago as 1992, the trend of conversions of evangelical clergy to Orthodoxy was noted in a book.[4] I want to suggest some lessons (by no means exhaustive) that need to be learned from this recent turn of events.
First, evangelicals need to understand Catholicism and especially Orthodoxy much better than most of us currently do. It is safe to say that most evangelicals know little about the Eastern Orthodox tradition and are ill-equipped to say anything substantive about the subject. Fortunately, some good evangelical resources on Orthodoxy are available, but more is needed and more teaching generally in evangelical churches and schools is especially needed.[5]

I'd be interested in your opinion as to why some convert from P. to C. or E.O.
I have my theory - I may be wrong.
I think some people are looking for authority. They're tired of hearing differing opinions.
Maybe they're looking for religiosity? Or some type of organized religion... Something "steady" in their life...

Your theory may not be wrong here. I attend a non-denominational Christian church and I will NEVER go back to Catholicism.

 

[mailmandan]

MAILMANDAN...

Here's the article. It's interesting. No time to read the Whole thing right now or to answer you. Later...

Evangelical Apologist Hank Hanegraaff Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy

Thanks for sharing the article. I noticed the article mentioned the church fathers and their writings having an impact on evangelicals converting to Catholicism. The church fathers were not infallible and at times contradicted each other. Their writings are also copies of copies of copies that were copied and preserved by the Roman Catholic church. hmm... Ultimately, it's the Word of God that is our authority and not the fallible writings of fallible men.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Hanegraaff’s conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy should not be viewed as a mere isolated occurrence. There has been a definite trend for the past few decades of a growing number of American evangelical Protestants converting to either Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

Greetings FranC,

The reason for the growing number of conversions is taking place because of the following:

"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." - 2 Tim.2:3-4

" Now there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies that even deny the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction on themselves." 2 Peter 2:1

Unfortunately, this above is why we are and have been seeing a mass departure from the truth of God's word on every level.

 

[mailmandan]

Your theory may not be wrong here. I attend a non-denominational Christian church and I will NEVER go back to Catholicism.

I should probably clarify my response in regards to your theory. People are looking for "what they believe" to be the authority and have bought into the Roman Catholic sales pitch on who is the authority. They feel there are two many different opinions in the Protestant church and feel that the Catholic church stands united in it's beliefs. Sadly, many people like structured religion, but have no personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

 

[Matt]

Raised Catholic myself and was just made to feel about 2 cents worth in chat.

I've been here a long time and donate to this site (what I can afford, when I can afford it) because I believe in having a place to come and share with others my love of Jesus and spend time with people that share this. I don't give money to the Catholic church (they have enough).

It hurts when judged by other Christians here that I am of lesser value to God or that I am not worthy to share in the joy of being with Jesus because of being raised Catholic.

I love everyone that comes into chat and show support to all. Being a father and husband of many years has taught me patience and understanding that I believe comes through whenever I speak on microphone that most will attest to.

There are so many wonderful people here and it's the reason I have stayed around so long. The management team and those that run the chat do such a fantastic job which make it such a pity that when they are not around some individuals make a it very uncomfortable for those of us raised Catholic.

At one point in chat it was asked "who here is Catholic?", I was almost afraid to say yes that I was raised Catholic because of the possible retribution both verbal and chat.

There are plenty of issues that the Catholic church falters on. Lets make sure that Christian Chat rises above all of this and makes sure that everyone is welcome.

Love you all.

 

[PrynceNY]

Raised Catholic myself and was just made to feel about 2 cents worth in chat.

I've been here a long time and donate to this site (what I can afford, when I can afford it) because I believe in having a place to come and share with others my love of Jesus and spend time with people that share this. I don't give money to the Catholic church (they have enough).

It hurts when judged by other Christians here that I am of lesser value to God or that I am not worthy to share in the joy of being with Jesus because of being raised Catholic.

I love everyone that comes into chat and show support to all. Being a father and husband of many years has taught me patience and understanding that I believe comes through whenever I speak on microphone that most will attest to.

There are so many wonderful people here and it's the reason I have stayed around so long. The management team and those that run the chat do such a fantastic job which make it such a pity that when they are not around some individuals make a it very uncomfortable for those of us raised Catholic.

At one point in chat it was asked "who here is Catholic?", I was almost afraid to say yes that I was raised Catholic because of the possible retribution both verbal and chat.

There are plenty of issues that the Catholic church falters on. Lets make sure that Christian Chat rises above all of this and makes sure that everyone is welcome.

Love you all.

I understand your hesitation to reveal your Catholic to others. However there are Christians who love Catholics and desire for them to get away from false practices and doctrines.

 

[wwjd_kilden]

I understand your hesitation to reveal your Catholic to others. However there are Christians who love Catholics and desire for them to get away from false practices and doctrines.

I think the problem is, there are plenty of non- Catholics here with false doctrine as well,
yet no- one says "We need to save the Protestants from their false doctrine"

 

[PrynceNY]

I think the problem is, there are plenty of non- Catholics here with false doctrine as well, yet no- one says "We need to save the Protestants from their false doctrine"

Well i've seen people address non catholics who may follow false doctrines here. I'll just say for the most part it's not done in a loving manner. Whenever you see a thread about "works" you will find many arguments

 

[Magenta]

Raised Catholic myself and was just made to feel about 2 cents worth in chat.

I've been here a long time and donate to this site (what I can afford, when I can afford it) because I believe in having a place to come and share with others my love of Jesus and spend time with people that share this. I don't give money to the Catholic church (they have enough).

It hurts when judged by other Christians here that I am of lesser value to God or that I am not worthy to share in the joy of being with Jesus because of being raised Catholic.

I love everyone that comes into chat and show support to all. Being a father and husband of many years has taught me patience and understanding that I believe comes through whenever I speak on microphone that most will attest to.

There are so many wonderful people here and it's the reason I have stayed around so long. The management team and those that run the chat do such a fantastic job which make it such a pity that when they are not around some individuals make a it very uncomfortable for those of us raised Catholic.

At one point in chat it was asked "who here is Catholic?", I was almost afraid to say yes that I was raised Catholic because of the possible retribution both verbal and chat.

There are plenty of issues that the Catholic church falters on. Lets make sure that Christian Chat rises above all of this and makes sure that everyone is welcome.

Love you all.

Being raised Roman Catholic does not make you Catholic. I was also raised Roman Catholic, but I agree with the site owner that Catholicism is heretical, and I stand against their heretical teachings steadfastly. If you come to a protestant site where the official position is that Catholicism is heretical, and defend Catholicism, you will be taken to task for it. Why would you identify as being Catholic, anyways? Are you not simply a Christian? Do you accept the two ex cathedra dogmas? Do you pray to dead people when Jesus instructed us to pray to the Father? Do you believe Mary intercedes for you when Scripture attests to the fact that there is only one mediator between God and man? Do you not believe that Mary had other children after Jesus was born despite the fact that His brothers and sisters are identified in Scripture, and two of His brothers have books in the Bible? Do you believe Mary never died when there is nothing in Scripture to support such a fanciful belief and everything else that flows from such elevations of her above and beyond how Jesus Christ viewed her? Do you elevate Roman Catholic traditions above the revealed written Word of God? Do you promote the lies the RCC has fabricated? If you do then you should call yourself a Catholic, and you will be confronted about your disturbing beliefs on a protestant site where quite a few members repudiate such heresies.