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

[KennethC]

Hi PoetMary,

Actually, what each believer should be doing is studying the word of God, which is the source of all truth. Therefore, regardless of who is teaching what, it should be weighed against scripture. That being said, since the RCC is teaching and practicing beliefs and rituals that are not mentioned in the word of God, such as Maryism, the ritual of the Eucharist, transubstantiation, Purgatory, indulgences, sacraments, etc., etc., then they not being found in the word of God are then deemed as false teachings. Catholics should be doing the same thing, that is, reading the word of God for themselves and if what Roman Catholicism is teaching doesn't measure up, then they should not continue in it and that goes the same for anyone who is teaching the word of God, regardless of name or denomination. We should not put our salvation and eternal life in the hands of other men or institutions. This is why each individual believer should be studying the scriptures so that we can discern through the word and the Holy Spirit who is speaking the truth and who is not. [/FONT]

I like what you have to say here except you should take the Eucharist off the list as false teachings, as that is just what the Catholic's call The Lord's Supper (Communion).

The Lord's Supper (Communion) is taught in the bible !!!

 

[Least]

I like what you have to say here except you should take the Eucharist off the list as false teachings, as that is just what the Catholic's call The Lord's Supper (Communion).

The Lord's Supper (Communion) is taught in the bible !!!

So is confession of sins. Only, not exactly the way that it's taught by different religious sects. Still, both are biblical.

 

[Ahwatukee]

I like what you have to say here except you should take the Eucharist off the list as false teachings, as that is just what the Catholic's call The Lord's Supper (Communion).

The Lord's Supper (Communion) is taught in the bible !!!

I wouldn't have put in the list if it wasn't a false teaching. They took the two elements of bread and wine that are to be symbolic of the body and blood of the Lord and made them one element called the sacrament of the Eucharist. The priest calls Christ down into the Eucharist and though the Eucharist retains its appearance, the substance is changed into the literal flesh and blood of the Lord Jesus called transubstantiation. Does that sound like the institution that the Lord gave us? Do you still think that this is the communion that the Lord taught?

 

[KennethC]

I wouldn't have put in the list if it wasn't a false teaching. They took the two elements of bread and wine that are to be symbolic of the body and blood of the Lord and made them one element called the sacrament of the Eucharist. The priest calls Christ down into the Eucharist and though the Eucharist retains its appearance, the substance is changed into the literal flesh and blood of the Lord Jesus called transubstantiation. Does that sound like the institution that the Lord gave us? Do you still think that this is the communion that the Lord taught?

How they portray it and carry it out is the wrong way I agree, but the Lord's supper (Communion) is not a false teaching.

This is why I said I do not agree with calling it that because we should point how they misuse an actual biblical teaching, instead of just call the teaching wrong. Some might take it that you think the taking of the Lord's supper is wrong to do, but we know it is not as the bible clearly speaks to do it and to do it often in remembrance of Him !!!

 

[KennethC]

So is confession of sins. Only, not exactly the way that it's taught by different religious sects. Still, both are biblical.

Yes which is why in teaching we should point out the misuse of the biblical teaching instead of just come out and say it is a false teaching.

Because I know some who will not even partake of the Lord's supper and even those who teach against confession just because of how the Catholic church misuses both.

We should point out the misuse and follow it with the proper use as stated in the Word of God.

 

[KennethC]

I am still waiting for a Catholic to show me a scripture that says we have to go to a priest to confess our sins and do pennants to be forgiven of sins ???

The only scriptures that show going to another to confess sins is for personal healing, not forgiveness !!!

 

[Ahwatukee]

I don't see how anyone could misconstrue the explanation that I gave for the Eucharist as compared to the institution of the bread and the wine, when they are clearly two different practices. You can dance around the words if you want, but it is what it is, the ritual of the Eucharist is a false teaching. Semantics!

 

[PoetMary]

I wouldn't have put in the list if it wasn't a false teaching. They took the two elements of bread and wine that are to be symbolic of the body and blood of the Lord and made them one element called the sacrament of the Eucharist. The priest calls Christ down into the Eucharist and though the Eucharist retains its appearance, the substance is changed into the literal flesh and blood of the Lord Jesus called transubstantiation. Does that sound like the institution that the Lord gave us? Do you still think that this is the communion that the Lord taught?

Actually, the teaching that Communion is "just a symbol" is based on Zwingli and is from the late 16th/early 17th century. The vast majority of Christendom believes in the Real Presence.

 

[KennethC]

I don't see how anyone could misconstrue the explanation that I gave for the Eucharist as compared to the institution of the bread and the wine, when they are clearly two different practices. You can dance around the words if you want, but it is what it is, the ritual of the Eucharist is a false teaching. Semantics!

It is not dancing around it as the Eucharist (Holy Communion) is what the Catholic's call the Lord's Supper (Communion).

Just because they call it by a different name and misuse how it is done, does not make the Lord's Supper known as Communion a false teaching.


How they take and do communion is wrong, not communion itself !!!

Does your church take communion by drinking the wine and eating unleavened bread, if no why ???

 

[KennethC]

Actually, the teaching that Communion is "just a symbol" is based on Zwingli and is from the late 16th/early 17th century. The vast majority of Christendom believes in the Real Presence.

Actually Hildebert de Lavardin in the 11th Century was the first one in the Catholic church to state the wine and bread changes to the actual blood and body of Jesus Christ. This was coined and called "transubstantiation", as before the 11th century this was not taught !!!

 

[Ahwatukee]

Actually Hildebert de Lavardin in the 11th Century was the first one in the Catholic church to state the wine and bread changes to the actual blood and body of Jesus Christ. This was coined and called "transubstantiation", as before the 11th century this was not taught !!!

That it wasn't taught before the 11th century is really irrelevant and that because it is now Roman catholic dogma. According to the counsels, anyone who says says that the bread and wine is only symbolic representing the body and the blood of the Lord and that it is not literally representing his flesh and blood, then let be an anathema. Here is the actual dogma from the counsel of Trent (1545-1563)

1. If anyone denies that the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, but says that Christ is present in the Sacrament only as in a sign or figure, or by his power: let him be anathema.

2. If anyone says that the substance of bread and wine remains in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist
together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and extraordinary
change of the whole substance of the bread into Christ's body and the whole substance of the wine into his
blood while only the species of bread and wine remain, a change which the Catholic Church has most
fittingly called transubstantiation: let him be anathema.

 

[onlinebuddy]

If you bother to notice, Catholicism gives honor to all the saints, (dulia) but extra honor to Mary because she deserves it (hyperdulia) and worship is given only to God (latria).

Blanketing hyperdulia with latria is done out of biblical illiteracy, ignorance, and prejudice.

Ask the average catholic what the terms dulia, hyperdulia and latria mean. I bet you they have no idea. No wonder the majority of catholics worship saints and Mary profusely, thus sidetracking Jesus.

The blanketing of "hyperdulia" with "latria" is done by none other than catholics. So it is the catholics who need to be corrected.

Talking about biblical illiteracy, it is catholics who are "illiterate" and "ignorant" about the Bible. Furthermore, they will be "prejudiced" and blindly defend a doctrine they have come to accept without even testing it using the scriptures.

Epostle, first teach the simple and complete gospel of Christ. Teach catholics to test everything they are taught using the Bible. Then see what they make of Mariology! You are doing things the other way around. Very tricky and very sad!

This is not a sarcastic remark, nor is it said in hostility. I make these comments with great sadness and concern for the average catholic. Even the average Muslim child knows the Koran more than a catholic adult knows his or her Bible. Truly sad, and an insult to the Word of God!

 

[Ahwatukee]

Does your church take communion by drinking the wine and eating unleavened bread, if no why ?

Yes, other churches do take communion by drinking the wine and eating bread, but they do it knowing that it is only a symbolic act representing the Lord's body and blood. What the Eucharist is, which the RCC practices, is not communion. For their dogma says that the Eucharist changes into the literal flesh and blood of the Lord. They are nothing alike and the practice of the Eucharist is not just a little off kilter, but is a pagan ritual made to look Christian. Do you always argue for the sake of arguing? All of these rituals and practices are false teachings. If you want to call them something else you are free to do so, but I know that none of them are not according to scripture.

 

[KennethC]

Yes, other churches do take communion by drinking the wine and eating bread, but they do it knowing that it is only a symbolic act representing the Lord's body and blood. What the Eucharist is, which the RCC practices, is not communion. For their dogma says that the Eucharist changes into the literal flesh and blood of the Lord. They are nothing alike and the practice of the Eucharist is not just a little off kilter, but is a pagan ritual made to look Christian. Do you always argue for the sake of arguing? All of these rituals and practices are false teachings. If you want to call them something else you are free to do so, but I know that none of them are not according to scripture.

I am not arguing with you my brother just trying to get you to see from one who has had a internal approach by being in that church I know what they teach and how they teach it. Not going by what others have said they teach, as I know first hand.

The Eucharist as they call it is Communion, they just misuse how it is to be done !!!

You want to go by what you have been taught rather then listen to somebody who has had first hand knowing of what is taught. This is one thing we need to stop doing in the denominations, stop listening to just outside sources but listen to inside sources as well.

I bet you believe all Catholic's believe the same way to, don't you ???

I can tell you there are small branches that do not agree with all the dogma's nor follow and agree with everything the Pope says to !!!

 

[Mec99]

To find the Truth let us compare what Catholicism teaches and what the Holy Spirit teaches.

1. Catholicism claims Mary was born without sin.

Romans 3:10
[SUP]10 [/SUP] As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one;


None are righteous no not one! This is what the Holy Spirit says in the Scriptures. If none are righteous NO NOT ONE, then Mary was never righteous. Mary was a sinner.

Romans 3:23
[SUP]23 [/SUP] for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Romans 5:12
[SUP]12 [/SUP] Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned--

Clearly here in these two verses the Holy Spirit says ALL have sinned. The word ALL does include Mary. Clearly the Holy Spirit here has said Mary was born with sin.

2. Catholicism teaches Mary is our Mediatrix.

1 Timothy 2:5
[SUP]5 [/SUP] For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

Clearly the Holy Spirit teaches we only have one Mediator, not two, but only one and He is Jesus Christ. Catholicism teaches its through Mary, that Mary is our mediator.

Exodus 20:4-5
[SUP]4 [/SUP] "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
[SUP]5 [/SUP] you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me

There are millions of statues of Mary both in the Catholic Churches and in the homes of Catholics. We have pictures of Pope John Paul II bowing down to many statues of Mary.

Catholicism teaches the opposite of what The Holy Spirit teaches and this proves the Catholic Church today is not following God.

The Catholic Church is not a True Church and never has been the True Church.

You cannot claim Mary was born sinless, that Mary is our mediator, and bow down to her statues and then claim only the Catholic Church has the Truth.

This is why we are not to listen nor follow nor accept anything Catholicism says. Instead we are to listen to God and read His scriptures and reject everything the Catholicism and the Catholics teach.

 

[tik]

Those who believe in Jesus Christ have the testimony of God living within them, the Holy Spirit, whose testimony exceeds in force all human testimony, as in this passage.

And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. . . . If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son (1 John 5:6-10).

If you sincerely believe in the Son of God you have the testimony of God living within you.

If a Catholic sincerely believes in the Son of God he has the testimony of God living within him.

If a Baptist sincerely believes in the Son of God she has the testimony of God living within her.

If a Methodist sincerely believes in the Son of God he has the testimony of God living within him.

If an Orthodox sincerely believes in the Son of God he has the testimony of God living within him.

Those who have Holy Spirit within them will be guided into “all truth”, as in this verse below

However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.(John 16:13)

So Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Methodist (or any other denomination) will be guided in “all truth” as long as Holy Spirit lives in him.

The question then is this. What does it mean by “all truth”?

Some people take “all truth” to mean doctrinal issues. For example Catholics would argue that every part of their doctrine is true because Holy Spirit guided them in “all truth” just as John 16:13 asserts.

I don’t think that “all truth” is referred to doctrinal issues

I believe that the experience of the Holy Spirit will imply the apprehension of truths such as "God exists" or “I am a sinner” or "I am condemned by God" or “I am judged by God” or "I am reconciled to God" or “My sins are forgiven” or "Christ lives in me".

This is evident from this passage below

“…but if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged (John 16. 7-11)

Notice that in this passage above Holy Spirit will convince the world concerning sin, righteousness and judgment. So “all truth” does not seem to mean “every nuance of the doctrine” or “every subtle issue of the doctrine” rather it is referred to “sin, righteousness and judgment”

Now

One cannot underestimate the profound and overwhelmingly positive impact Catholicism had (and still has) on the entire world. Does it mean that Catholicism is only true denomination? I don’t think so

Over the last 2000 years Christianity appears to look like a tree. The “roots” is Jesus. The “trunk” is Catholicism. The “branches” are all the other denominations that appeared much later on

 

[onlinebuddy]

Jumping on the Mary-bandwagon is done

Catholics are the ones who have jumped onto the Mary bandwagon, and they refuse to jump off and give Jesus priority, regardless of what scripture says.

 

[onlinebuddy]

Jumping on the Mary-bandwagon is done because you can't adequately defend your man made traditions of sola scriptura and sole fide

Catholics are the ones who follow man-made traditions, that go against the Word of God. Although I do not use the words Sola Scriptura and Sola fide and Sola gratia, I have no problem with these beliefs, since these have biblical basis.

Catholic beliefs such as papal infallibility, trans substantiation, saint worship, mary worship, infant baptism, sacrament of confirmation, indulgences, purgatory, confession into the ears of a priest, the arc of the covenant being a shadow of mary, etc have no biblical basis.
Mark 7:8-9
You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”
9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
Where are the commands of God found? In the Bible! In the words of Jesus!
By denying the authority of the Bible, catholics deny the authority of Jesus!

Please understand that you will be judged according to the words of Jesus (which are found in the Bible), and not by the minutes written in the Council of Trent. Why can't you see that?

John 12:48

There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.
Epostle, please teach catholic brethren the words of Jesus first. Teach them the New Testament without a catholic bias. The rest will fall in place.

 

[epostle]

Catholics are the ones who have jumped onto the Mary bandwagon, and they refuse to jump off and give Jesus priority, regardless of what scripture says.

It's Mary that leads us to Jesus in the way God set up. Your "priority" is according to how you set it up. I've explained this before. I've tried to change the topic several times, it's anti-Catholics that can't talk about anything else. I've given plenty of scripture, you just ignore them. Here is a list for you to ignore as well:
Scripture Catholic - THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

 

[onlinebuddy]

So you attack Marian teaching because your man made system forbids you from understanding the most basic BIBLICAL concepts. Moses foreshadows Christ, but you refuse to believe the Ark of the Old Covenant foreshadows Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, denying copious scriptures. You have no biblical consistency.

Epostle,
I am giving a serious listening ear to all catholic teachings, articles and videos as much a my time permits. I am still in the process of studying some literature and videos you have provided. I am

As I have brought to your notice earlier, these teachings lack biblical basis. Whenever you have quoted scriptures, they are quoted out of context.

For example if you look at your previous post on Mary being the ark of the covenant, none of the verses provided connect the arc of the covenant to Mary. It is just a false allusion made by the false teachers you follow.

If I follow the same human logic, I can prove to you that the ark of the covenant was a shadow of john the baptist, peter, paul, john the apostle, or for that matter just about anyone.

Epostle, don't believe anything unless Jesus has said it, unless you yourself are a false teacher.

I would therefore urge you to stick to the Word of God and not to rely too much on the writings of catholic apologists.