I want to understand the Catholic faith so....

  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
47,422
20,674
113
Your question is a straw man and will not be dignified with a response. You're going to be sorely shamed standing in the presence of an unprecedented amount of believers who gave of themselves with the utmost faith as seen and known by God, yet did not make it into your history books.

Once again you show that you put the Catholic church above Jesus. If it were not so, you'd answer the question placed before you and teach those who seek answers. No worries, I'll answer for you:

The bread and wine magically become the actual body and blood of Jesus because a priest, more importantly, a blasphemous sinner, prays over it. It looks like bread and wine, tastes like bread and wine, smells like bread and wine and has the texture of bread and wine, but I digress, its the actual body and blood of Jesus because the Catholic church says so.

Reality check: its bread and wine; a symbol of Jesus' body and blood, but fear not, when two or more are gathered in Jesus' Name, He is there among them. How bout them apples!
And there is also the fact that Catholics, some, want to pretend that what they believe was taught by Jesus and those who followed Him directly, which is so easily shown to be a pile of horse manure, since none of them taught what the RCC teaches as infallible truths. Our LORD did not elevate His mother above others. He specifically said any who does the will of His Father is His mother, yet Catholics elevate her to be not just equal to Him in sinlessness, but glorify her in many other ways as well, despite the very clear Word of God: He will not share His glory.

They promote the heresies of Mary's sinlessness, her immaculate conception, her perpetual virginity, her bodily assumption to heaven, her as the mother of humanity and the queen of heaven, and an intercessor between us and God. The RCC promotes these as truths, some of them as infallible truths, despite there being no evidence
to support them through Scripture, and despite the fact that some of them are plainly directly and explicitly contradicted by Scripture. The RCC glorifies not just Mary but Peter, as if the church Christ is building is founded upon a fallible man Jesus called Satan at one point, instead of on a confession of faith in Him, divinely inspired. There are plenty of Scriptures to attest to the fact that God is the sole rock of our salvation.

Within Catholicism, there is a drive to define a new Marian dogma in which Catholics, as a matter of faith, would be obliged to accept: 1) Mary participates in redemption with Jesus Christ; 2) grace is granted by Jesus only through the intercession of Mary; and 3) all prayers from the faithful must flow through Mary, who brings them to the attention of her Son. Scripture also tells us not to call anyone Father but God, while they call many men "father" and blindly follow them. They have foisted upon their unsuspecting followers that all graces flow through Mary. They believe that a fallible man is the Rock that Jesus is building His Church on, not a confession of faith divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, despite a plethora of Scriptures that attest to the fact that God is the sole Rock of our salvation. They teach purgatory, and many other things neither the apostles nor Jesus ever taught. For instance, they claim priests must be celibate, when they were not in the early church. Another example would be infant baptism, nowhere promoted in Scripture. They burned people at the stake for daring to read the Bible, which is what Scripture tells us to do. Despite all this, and more, the
Catholic Church considers herself the only valid expression of the community of God.

Pplease see this site for more info:
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-doctrine.htm
 
Dec 1, 2014
9,701
250
0
And there is also the fact that Catholics, some, want to pretend that what they believe was taught by Jesus and those who followed Him directly, which is so easily shown to be a pile of horse manure, since none of them taught what the RCC teaches as infallible truths. Our LORD did not elevate His mother above others. He specifically said any who does the will of His Father is His mother, yet Catholics elevate her to be not just equal to Him in sinlessness, but glorify her in many other ways as well, despite the very clear Word of God: He will not share His glory.

They promote the heresies of Mary's sinlessness, her immaculate conception, her perpetual virginity, her bodily assumption to heaven, her as the mother of humanity and the queen of heaven, and an intercessor between us and God. The RCC promotes these as truths, some of them as infallible truths, despite there being no evidence
to support them through Scripture, and despite the fact that some of them are plainly directly and explicitly contradicted by Scripture. The RCC glorifies not just Mary but Peter, as if the church Christ is building is founded upon a fallible man Jesus called Satan at one point, instead of on a confession of faith in Him, divinely inspired. There are plenty of Scriptures to attest to the fact that God is the sole rock of our salvation.

Within Catholicism, there is a drive to define a new Marian dogma in which Catholics, as a matter of faith, would be obliged to accept: 1) Mary participates in redemption with Jesus Christ; 2) grace is granted by Jesus only through the intercession of Mary; and 3) all prayers from the faithful must flow through Mary, who brings them to the attention of her Son. Scripture also tells us not to call anyone Father but God, while they call many men "father" and blindly follow them. They have foisted upon their unsuspecting followers that all graces flow through Mary. They believe that a fallible man is the Rock that Jesus is building His Church on, not a confession of faith divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, despite a plethora of Scriptures that attest to the fact that God is the sole Rock of our salvation. They teach purgatory, and many other things neither the apostles nor Jesus ever taught. For instance, they claim priests must be celibate, when they were not in the early church. Another example would be infant baptism, nowhere promoted in Scripture. They burned people at the stake for daring to read the Bible, which is what Scripture tells us to do. Despite all this, and more, the
Catholic Church considers herself the only valid expression of the community of God.

Pplease see this site for more info:
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-doctrine.htm
Pretty darn sickening, at that, my Lady. Catholicism teaches purgatory. To state that purgatory exists is stating that what Jesus did on the Cross was not good enough.
 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
11,162
2,378
113
Protestants are hostile to the notions of Mary's freedom from actual sin and her Immaculate Conception (in which God freed her from original sin from the moment of her conception) because they feel that this makes her a sort of goddess and improperly set apart from the rest of humanity. They do not believe that it was fitting for God to set her apart in such a manner, even for the purpose of being the Mother of Jesus Christ, and don't see that this is "fitting" or "appropriate" (as Catholics do).
xaritóō (from 5486 /xárisma, "grace," see there) – properly, highly-favored because receptive to God's grace. 5487 (xaritóō) is used twice in the NT (Lk 1:28 and Eph 1:6), both times of God extending Himself to freely bestow grace (favor).

According to the word that is used in the scripture, it is Mary who is receiving God's favor/grace and not her being endowed with her own grace in order to mete it out. Also, there is no scripture at all that would infer that Mary was set free from original sin. Furthermore, we are not hostile about these claims regarding Mary, but are contending for the truth against false teachings. This is exactly why we have the word of God, so that there is a source of truth that we can go to in order to verify whether it is of God or false and none of these claims that you have made regarding Mary are Scriptural. Below is part of Mary's song:

"And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior" (Luke 1:46)

By Mary saying "God my Savior" this would demonstrate that she was a sinner and in need of a Savior just as everyone who comes into this world. Therefore, the Catholic argument does not hinge upon the meaning of the word kecharitomene, but by Mary referring to God as her Savior, this destroys the idea of Mary herself being sinless and being full of grace opposed to having grace bestowed upon her, as well as all of the writers that you quoted in this post. It also means that all of your attempts on this post to prove Mary as being sinless are made null and void. For since Mary called God her Savior, it would mean that she was a sinner, for only sinners need a Savior.

2. Grace gives us the power to be holy and righteous and without sin.
The grace of God is unmerited favor, that is, we don't deserve it but we've got it and it requires faith on the believers part. Regarding being holy, Christ died for us while we were yet sinners. Our sins are covered while we are still sinners and throughout our walk we are being transformed into his image (2 Cor.3:18, Eph.8:28). Therefore, God sees us a being perfect through our faith in Christ even though we are not.

My advice to you is, Stop listening to the teachings of the RCC and give scripture an unbiased look. It is your eternal life, so don't put it into the hands of the pagan system of Roman Catholicism.
 

epostle

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2015
660
15
18
4. The Bible teaches that we need God's grace to live a holy life, free from sin.

5. To be "full of" God's grace is thus to be so holy that one is sinless.

Nope not even close
Does anyone agree with notuptome we do not need God's grace to live a holy life, free from sin or
To be "full of" God's grace can be co-existent with sin."

Please explain using relevant scriptures with a few verses in context.

What's really going on here, Gary, is that you have tripped over on your own fence. You are at odds with what is commonly accepted by a majority of Christians.
 

epostle

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2015
660
15
18
And there is also the fact that Catholics, some, want to pretend that what they believe was taught by Jesus and those who followed Him directly, which is so easily shown to be a pile of horse manure, since none of them taught what the RCC teaches as infallible truths. Our LORD did not elevate His mother above others. He specifically said any who does the will of His Father is His mother, yet Catholics elevate her to be not just equal to Him in sinlessness, but glorify her in many other ways as well, despite the very clear Word of God: He will not share His glory.

They promote the heresies of Mary's sinlessness, her immaculate conception, her perpetual virginity, her bodily assumption to heaven, her as the mother of humanity and the queen of heaven, and an intercessor between us and God. The RCC promotes these as truths, some of them as infallible truths, despite there being no evidence
to support them through Scripture, and despite the fact that some of them are plainly directly and explicitly contradicted by Scripture. The RCC glorifies not just Mary but Peter, as if the church Christ is building is founded upon a fallible man Jesus called Satan at one point, instead of on a confession of faith in Him, divinely inspired. There are plenty of Scriptures to attest to the fact that God is the sole rock of our salvation.

Within Catholicism, there is a drive to define a new Marian dogma in which Catholics, as a matter of faith, would be obliged to accept: 1) Mary participates in redemption with Jesus Christ; 2) grace is granted by Jesus only through the intercession of Mary; and 3) all prayers from the faithful must flow through Mary, who brings them to the attention of her Son. Scripture also tells us not to call anyone Father but God, while they call many men "father" and blindly follow them. They have foisted upon their unsuspecting followers that all graces flow through Mary. They believe that a fallible man is the Rock that Jesus is building His Church on, not a confession of faith divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, despite a plethora of Scriptures that attest to the fact that God is the sole Rock of our salvation. They teach purgatory, and many other things neither the apostles nor Jesus ever taught. For instance, they claim priests must be celibate, when they were not in the early church. Another example would be infant baptism, nowhere promoted in Scripture. They burned people at the stake for daring to read the Bible, which is what Scripture tells us to do. Despite all this, and more, the
Catholic Church considers herself the only valid expression of the community of God.

Pplease see this site for more info:
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-doctrine.htm
I know there are a lot of people who are deceived, but very few people want to be deceived. Misrepresentations and lies are popular because they feel good. Last I checked, "you shall not bear false witness" is the 8th commandment. Not sure...you know how confused us Catholics get when it comes to numbering. :)

I don't think you have a problem with the Catholic faith, but what she symbolizes. What would that be? An authority figure? You must had some kind of severe trauma a long time ago. Good little Christian girls can't get angry at parents, so the anger is displaced on a symbol of authority, the Catholic Church. It's not about religion at all and you should seek healing for the roots of the trauma. You will feel better about yourself.
 
Nov 25, 2014
942
44
0
There has been a slight (but significant) misuse of terminology in here regarding the Eucharist (aka Communion or The Lord's Supper). It has to do with the use of the term "Real Presence."

The vast majority of Christendom believes in the Real Presence. Belief in the Real Presence is the belief that Jesus Christ is really present in the elements of the Eucharist and not just symbolically or metaphorically present.

People seem most familiar with this idea in regard to the teachings of the RCC; however here is a list of the major denominations that believe in the Real Presence:

Roman Catholics
The Orthodox Church (all rites)
other rites of "Catholicism" (like Syrian-Chaldean, etc.)
Lutherans
Anglicans
Methodists
Presbyterians

Of course, these various denominations differ in their view of HOW EXACTLY Jesus Christ is present in the elements of the Eucharist. The RCC explains the Real Presence via the concept of Transubstantiation; however, the Orthodox believe in the idea of Definitive Change (and ultimately call it a mystery). Lutherans believe in the Sacramental Union, Anglicans have a varied view depending on if the congregation is "high church" or "low church" (so anything from transubstantiation to a more "reformed" take on it). Methodists call it a Divine Mystery and Presbyterians (and some other reformed churches) talk about a "spiritual presence."

The idea that the elements of the Eucharist are just symbolic didn't appear until the late 15th/early 16th century with Zwingli. (In fact, Zwingli and Luther--both Reformation leaders--could not come to agreement on this very issue). So, Baptists, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, etc., align themselves with this particular view of Communion.

While there are some who might find the entire concept of the Real Presence objectionable, there are others who might object to say, transubstantiation, but who wouldn't have a problem with the concepts of Definitive Change, or Sacramental Union.

Of course, understanding these theological concepts takes a little research into each particular denomination's view of it.

I just wanted to clarify that Real Presence isn't exclusively an RCC thing.


 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
There has been a slight (but significant) misuse of terminology in here regarding the Eucharist (aka Communion or The Lord's Supper). It has to do with the use of the term "Real Presence."

The vast majority of Christendom believes in the Real Presence. Belief in the Real Presence is the belief that Jesus Christ is really present in the elements of the Eucharist and not just symbolically or metaphorically present.

People seem most familiar with this idea in regard to the teachings of the RCC; however here is a list of the major denominations that believe in the Real Presence:

Roman Catholics
The Orthodox Church (all rites)
other rites of "Catholicism" (like Syrian-Chaldean, etc.)
Lutherans
Anglicans
Methodists
Presbyterians

Of course, these various denominations differ in their view of HOW EXACTLY Jesus Christ is present in the elements of the Eucharist. The RCC explains the Real Presence via the concept of Transubstantiation; however, the Orthodox believe in the idea of Definitive Change (and ultimately call it a mystery). Lutherans believe in the Sacramental Union, Anglicans have a varied view depending on if the congregation is "high church" or "low church" (so anything from transubstantiation to a more "reformed" take on it). Methodists call it a Divine Mystery and Presbyterians (and some other reformed churches) talk about a "spiritual presence."

The idea that the elements of the Eucharist are just symbolic didn't appear until the late 15th/early 16th century with Zwingli. (In fact, Zwingli and Luther--both Reformation leaders--could not come to agreement on this very issue). So, Baptists, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, etc., align themselves with this particular view of Communion.

While there are some who might find the entire concept of the Real Presence objectionable, there are others who might object to say, transubstantiation, but who wouldn't have a problem with the concepts of Definitive Change, or Sacramental Union.

Of course, understanding these theological concepts takes a little research into each particular denomination's view of it.

I just wanted to clarify that Real Presence isn't exclusively an RCC thing.



That's why we follow the word of God. and not men.

any presence, no matter what type. is not substantiated with the scripture using John 6. period.

Men can say what they want, does not make it from God. That's why he gave us his word to test each spirit to see if it is from God or not.

 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
11,162
2,378
113
People seem most familiar with this idea in regard to the teachings of the RCC; however here is a list of the major denominations that believe in the Real Presence:

Roman Catholics
The Orthodox Church (all rites)
other rites of "Catholicism" (like Syrian-Chaldean, etc.)
Lutherans
Anglicans
Methodists
Presbyterians


If the above is true, then that would make all of those denominations wrong as well. The institution of the bread and wine was symbolic of Christ's body that was broken for us and his blood that was shed for us. The fact that he breaks literal bread and they drink literal wine demonstrates that these elements were meant to be taken symbolically. Otherwise, in order for it to be literal, Jesus would have cut off his flesh and given it to them to eat and then gave them his blood to drink if it were meant to be literal. As it is, he broke literal bread as symbolizing his body and gave them literal wine to symbolize his blood. Therefore, as often as we break bread and drink from the cup, we do so symbolically remembering the body and the blood of the Lord until he returns.

 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
47,422
20,674
113
I can consume and digest things without putting a thing in my mouth...
Jesus knew this was a hard teaching. He is the Bread of Life. He is the
Author, the Giver, and Sustainer of all life. That does not mean we are
eating Him and drinking His blood. In Him we live and move and have our being.
 
Nov 25, 2014
942
44
0
If the above is true, then that would make all of those denominations wrong as well. The institution of the bread and wine was symbolic of Christ's body that was broken for us and his blood that was shed for us. The fact that he breaks literal bread and they drink literal wine demonstrates that these elements were meant to be taken symbolically. Otherwise, in order for it to be literal, Jesus would have cut off his flesh and given it to them to eat and then gave them his blood to drink if it were meant to be literal. As it is, he broke literal bread as symbolizing his body and gave them literal wine to symbolize his blood. Therefore, as often as we break bread and drink from the cup, we do so symbolically remembering the body and the blood of the Lord until he returns.[/FONT]
It is true that all variations of belief expressed in the concept of the "Real Presence" are at odds with the more Zwinglian interpretation of "just symbolic." However, please remember that all these denominations are using scriptures to support their beliefs. Their interpretations of various scriptures will clearly differ from the interpretations of say a Baptist or someone who is Assemblies of God. So then we're down to denominations (and individuals) interpreting scripture and considering their interpretation as more correct or authoritative than the interpretations of others. All part of the reason why we have various denominations to begin with. :)
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
47,422
20,674
113
It is true that all variations of belief expressed in the concept of the "Real Presence" are at odds with the more Zwinglian interpretation of "just symbolic." However, please remember that all these denominations are using scriptures to support their beliefs. Their interpretations of various scriptures will clearly differ from the interpretations of say a Baptist or someone who is Assemblies of God. So then we're down to denominations (and individuals) interpreting scripture and considering their interpretation as more correct or authoritative than the interpretations of others. All part of the reason why we have various denominations to begin with. :)
What an odd name, Zwingli; I had to look that one up ;) Anyways, we have freedom in Christ, as the Scriptures declare. We are not obliged to accept a person's teaching if we think they are wrong, unlike Roman Catholics who suffer under the misconception that they will go to hell if they reject what the pope has declared to be infallible.
 

slave

Senior Member
Mar 20, 2015
6,307
1,097
113
I could lay a sheet out with many reasons I specifically don't agree with the Catholic doctrines, yet I will say only this at this time, it is not an open mind God calls us to, it is a dedicated mind, even a separatist mind unto Christ Jesus. If we do that we can be open to anything He has to say, but that is the only open mind we are to have. If we do not men and evil give way to argument of Jesus' positions, and human reasonings run amok once again. I may be back to say a specific thing or two, or three smile as time permits, but this is the most important message so far...God bless you Blain.
 
Sep 16, 2014
1,278
23
0
Its so sad epostle that you are doing the Work of Satan and do not even realize it.

The problem IS the Catholic Faith, the Faith that teaches Mary was born without sin. Clearly in Romans 3:10,23 Romans 5:12 God clearly say Mary was born with sin. I believe what God says.

How can believing what the Holy Spirit says be caused by a trauma in my life? Are you epostle claiming all those who follow God and His Truths are some how traumatized by the Catholic Church?

You do know epostle that Satan is deceiving you into doing his will.

Nobody can call God accursed who has the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit.. Nobody can call Jesus accursed who has the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Nobody can call the Holy Spirit accursed who has the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:3 (NKJV)
[SUP]3 [/SUP] Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

You are calling God accursed epostle every time you teach a lie in His name.

Exodus 20:16
[SUP]16 [/SUP] “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You are bearing false witness against me epostle when you claim i have been traumatized by the Catholic Church.

Its the Holy Spirit who teaches me all the Truths.

John 16:13
[SUP]13 [/SUP] However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth;

You must realize epostle its you who have been traumatized by the Catholic Faith into accepting lies from the Catholic Church. Its you epostle who is putting your Eternal Soul in danger of Hell Fire. And its you epostle who will regret it after you die.

No one who has the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit will ever listen to what the Catholic Church says. Instead we have the Holy Spirit who teaches us all the Truths. Even at the Church i attend, everything the Pastor says i check it against what the Holy Spirit says.

The Holy Spirit IS our only source for the Truth.
 
S

sydlit

Guest
I know there are a lot of people who are deceived, but very few people want to be deceived. Misrepresentations and lies are popular because they feel good. Last I checked, "you shall not bear false witness" is the 8th commandment. Not sure...you know how confused us Catholics get when it comes to numbering. :)

I don't think you have a problem with the Catholic faith, but what she symbolizes. What would that be? An authority figure? You must had some kind of severe trauma a long time ago. Good little Christian girls can't get angry at parents, so the anger is displaced on a symbol of authority, the Catholic Church. It's not about religion at all and you should seek healing for the roots of the trauma. You will feel better about yourself.
Ok, missMarionette, you've pushed your pompous arrogance a bit too far. We don't have a problem with the 'catholic faith' because it doesn't exist. It's a fallacy. You don't know if you were to die right now today, whether or not you'd go to heaven, and if you say you do, you're going against the very religious bunkem you claim to believe in. You're hierarchy instructs you that you can NOT know, and if claim to know, you're own leaders consider you anathema...accursed of God.
This is why you HAVE to practice the things they tell you, ... there's confession to 'priests', 'acts' of contrition, prayers to 'saints', and incessant, repetative 'prayers'...over and over and over, to someone who is clearly NOT the Mary who gave birth to Jesus, but some entity you plead to, to pray for you...not only now, but all the way to the hour of your DEATH, all because you DO NOT have faith in Jesus. Ppl have tried to show you just exactly who Jesus is, what He did FOR YOU, and what He Promises to do for you, if you would simply put your trust in Him alone and receive the salvation He purchased FOR YOU with His own blood, which you still can do...Now...Today.
But you refuse to listen, and have now resorted to insulting a woman on a Christian chat site, yet you know nothing about her childhood, how she was raised or who by who, nor do you know what stuggles she's been through in life or what she may be struggling with even now, but she has put her faith and trust in the TRUE God and Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, and that shows she's got more spine, more FAITH, than the many spineless religious worms who are afraid to do the same. And yet, she'd be the first to tell you salvation is a gift, which is why she praises the Lord and thanks Him for it, and has taken time out of her own life to try to share that truth with you.
And you may not believe it, but even thru my anger, MY HEART BREAKS OVER THE HARDNESS OF YOURS. We don't hate you at all, in fact, we love you enough to share the good news with you, and to pray for you. What we 'hate' is false teaching in the name of our Saviour, and the spiritual darkness that it keeps ppl in bondage to.
Furthermore, most of these ppl here are not only friends, but believers in Jesus, brothers and sisters in Christ, which makes us children of the King, and I for one believe you owe our sister an apology. You're on shaky ground at this point, and you'd do well to consider the things most ppl have been trying to tell you here...or you're free to find another websight where ppl might be more in line with your religion. But for Jesus'sake and yours, I pray that's not your final decision.
 
Nov 25, 2014
942
44
0
What an odd name, Zwingli; I had to look that one up ;) Anyways, we have freedom in Christ, as the Scriptures declare. We are not obliged to accept a person's teaching if we think they are wrong, unlike Roman Catholics who suffer under the misconception that they will go to hell if they reject what the pope has declared to be infallible.

Actually, Catholics don't believe someone is going to hell if they fail to believe in the Real Presence. An individual Roman Catholic might believe that a Baptist, for example, is depriving himself of an opportunity to encounter God by cutting himself off from the idea of the real presence in the Eucharist, but they wouldn't presume that this Baptist believer is going to hell.

Catholics don't even believe that other Catholics are going to hell for these kinds of things. Let me give you an example of what I mean. When people leave the RCC, the RCC doesn't leave those people. So, if someone comes to believe that they need to no longer be Roman Catholic, but become a member of some other kind of church, the RCC simply considers this person a "lapsed" Catholic. They don't consider the person an "unbeliever" or presume they are "going to hell." So, if Johnny stops being Catholic and becomes Baptist, the RCC doesn't "disown" him. Years and years later, if Johnny ever decided to return to the RCC, there would be no impediment to him rejoining.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
11,830
7,821
113
I'm assuming again you didn't see my post from several days ago Mary. I'll repost for you. This is not a gotcha post. I'd really like to know:

Originally Posted by PoetMary

Okay...I started a long post, then deleted it. But I'll say this: The fact that I'm a "cradle Catholic" doesn't mean I don't have lots of experience with other kinds of churches and biblical interpretations. The reason I'm still Catholic is

1. Most of the issues that people have with the Catholic church are non-essentials. Now, don't presume I'm saying that they are not important. Just that they are not issues of orthodoxy. We've seen on these boards that non-Catholics will even argue amongst themselves about various doctrinal issues that are not issues of orthodoxy.

2. Because I believe it is God's will for me. The RCC adheres to orthodoxy. I understand how someone who objects to the beliefs of the RCC could ever believe that God would have someone be involved with the RCC, but I understand the rationale behind (most) of these beliefs (it's a work in process. As many of you know, the RCC believes in using 20 words where four would suffice, so reading the background of these beliefs takes time).

3. I experience the presence of God in the liturgy. Just as charismatics might experience God's presence through speaking in tongues, or evangelicals through the parsing of scripture, or Quakers through sitting quietly, I get it through the celebration of the Eucharist.




Thanks for replying Mary. Please don't interpret my questions as an attack, but you didn't really address my question. How can confessing your sins to a priest to have him grant forgiveness after reciting 10 hail marys and 5 Our Fathers be non-essential?

How can trying to BUY your loved ones graduation from purgatory to heaven through mass cards be non-essential? How can praying to the dead, Mary included, to intervene on our behalf be non- essential? The list goes on Mary, but you get the idea. these ARE very essential issues. Would you please pray on these questions and give me an answer? Mary, I can't tell you how many friends and relatives I have that remain catholic. And I pray they would accept Jesus ALONE as their Savior, but they believe these false, anti-Biblical doctrines, and I truly fail to see how this fundamental principle of Faith in Jesus' sacrificial death ALONE and these other doctrines can be reckoned . Thanks again Mary, and may the Lord Bless you and your family.
 

epostle

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2015
660
15
18
I could lay a sheet out with many reasons I specifically don't agree with the Catholic doctrines, yet I will say only this at this time, it is not an open mind God calls us to, it is a dedicated mind, even a separatist mind unto Christ Jesus. If we do that we can be open to anything He has to say, but that is the only open mind we are to have. If we do not men and evil give way to argument of Jesus' positions, and human reasonings run amok once again. I may be back to say a specific thing or two, or three smile as time permits, but this is the most important message so far...God bless you Blain.
[h=1]“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”[/h]Bishop Sheen
 

epostle

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2015
660
15
18
Ok, missMarionette, you've pushed your pompous arrogance a bit too far. We don't have a problem with the 'catholic faith' because it doesn't exist. It's a fallacy. You don't know if you were to die right now today, whether or not you'd go to heaven, and if you say you do, you're going against the very religious bunkem you claim to believe in. You're hierarchy instructs you that you can NOT know, and if claim to know, you're own leaders consider you anathema...accursed of God.
This is why you HAVE to practice the things they tell you, ... there's confession to 'priests', 'acts' of contrition, prayers to 'saints', and incessant, repetative 'prayers'...over and over and over, to someone who is clearly NOT the Mary who gave birth to Jesus, but some entity you plead to, to pray for you...not only now, but all the way to the hour of your DEATH, all because you DO NOT have faith in Jesus. Ppl have tried to show you just exactly who Jesus is, what He did FOR YOU, and what He Promises to do for you, if you would simply put your trust in Him alone and receive the salvation He purchased FOR YOU with His own blood, which you still can do...Now...Today.
But you refuse to listen, and have now resorted to insulting a woman on a Christian chat site, yet you know nothing about her childhood, how she was raised or who by who, nor do you know what stuggles she's been through in life or what she may be struggling with even now, but she has put her faith and trust in the TRUE God and Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, and that shows she's got more spine, more FAITH, than the many spineless religious worms who are afraid to do the same. And yet, she'd be the first to tell you salvation is a gift, which is why she praises the Lord and thanks Him for it, and has taken time out of her own life to try to share that truth with you.
And you may not believe it, but even thru my anger, MY HEART BREAKS OVER THE HARDNESS OF YOURS. We don't hate you at all, in fact, we love you enough to share the good news with you, and to pray for you. What we 'hate' is false teaching in the name of our Saviour, and the spiritual darkness that it keeps ppl in bondage to.
Furthermore, most of these ppl here are not only friends, but believers in Jesus, brothers and sisters in Christ, which makes us children of the King, and I for one believe you owe our sister an apology. You're on shaky ground at this point, and you'd do well to consider the things most ppl have been trying to tell you here...or you're free to find another websight where ppl might be more in line with your religion. But for Jesus'sake and yours, I pray that's not your final decision.
You have a very bleak and false view of Catholicism. sorry_if.jpg
 

slave

Senior Member
Mar 20, 2015
6,307
1,097
113
There are many different denominations that do carry the actual presence as their belief, but the Roman Catholics also isolate themselves as unique to the carrying out of this through the priests. I believe that the observance of the Lord's Supper is a symbolic remembrance of Christ's death. 1 Corinthians 11:24 says, "and after giving thanks to God, He broke it and said,'This is My Body, broken for you. Keep doing this so that you and all who come after will have a vivid reminder of Me." So, I don't believe the claims of the Roman Church that her priests are mysteriously able to change common bread and wine into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. That's where I sit anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.