Are Catholics "born again"?

[JohnWilliams]

So you don’t think it is wise to baptize children or infants?

Not at all. I am the “godfather” of 2 Catholic kids (now adults) (done before I was saved), I was baptized as an infant in the Presbyterian Church, and my children were baptized, but as young people. Having been backslidden for years we began to attend Church and my kids were baptized at around 6 and 8 years old. I did appreciate that it was a conscious and they believed important decision on their part.

From my understanding, baptism does not have an age limit.

While we find lots of examples of folks making decisions to be baptized in scipture, I believe there are precious few (if any?) indications of infant baptism. I was born again in the Spirit in the fall of 2003 and was later baptized in the Atlantic Ocean, as a conscious decision. I believe it was an important thing for me to do.

**Has infant baptism obscured the possible importance of each of us making this decision when we are truly ready to follow the Lord? **

Do you believe baptism to be essential for infants? Do you believe your kids would have gone to perdition of they had died of SIDS at 1 year old? Or died in your car at 3?

Jesus said in Matthew 18:2-5, “Truly, Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will NEVER enter the kingdom of heaven.”

Amen

or in Mark 10:14, “Let the children come to me, do NOT hinder them for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly, I say I say to you, whoever does not received the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”

And amen again. And isn’t it fitting that McCollum vs Board of Education (end of religious instruction in schools) was decided in 1948, along with Jesus returning His people to our covenant land, to kick off this “time of the end” in which we likely find ourselves.

or in Mark 16:16: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”

Amen again. Does this say that he who is not baptized will be condemned? No. Does it say that he who believes and is baptized will be saved? Yes. Does it say that he who believes and is not baptized is condemned? No (however I believe that every believer that has any doubts about their baptism had better get it done post haste as many verses would suggest). It says he who does not believe will be condemned.
Are babies even capable of believing? No. Are those that have not been brought the gospel in the first place in a position to believe? No.
From this verse, if anthing I would be very concerned if I was a believer and had not been baptized as a conscious effort and personal decision.

But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with “He who does not believe will be condemned.” This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer.

I do not see this demonstration.
But it should be painfully obvious to everyone that every single infant that is baptized is not a believer.

This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a “believer’s baptism.”

But is there anything in Scripture about an infant being baptized?

Believing in the Lord Jesus Christ isn’t always necessary since the devil and his demons believed in God and boy do they tremble.

Amen Bro. I know this first hand.

Although Fundamentalists are the most recent critics of infant baptism, opposition to infant baptism is not a new phenomenon. In the Middle Ages, some groups developed that rejected infant baptism, e.g., the Waldenses and Catharists. Later, the Anabaptists (“re-baptizers”) echoed them, claiming that infants are incapable of being baptized validly.

I believe this is a valid point and one that you have not refuted with your verse selections so far. You cite some of those who forged Protestantism, but in a fashion which is barely recognizable in Protestant eschatology today, but very present in Protestant core doctrine.

But the historic Christian Church has always held that Christ’s law applies to infants as well as adults,

Why let scripture get in the way of the “historic church”? Perhaps you could temper your view a little with other behaviour of the “historic Christian Church”.

 

[JohnWilliams]

for Jesus said that no one can enter heaven unless he has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit (John 3:5). His words can be taken to apply to anyone capable of belonging to his kingdom. He asserted such even for children: “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 19:14).

Indeed. Operative words perhaps “let the children come, do not hinder them”. Doesn’t really read like an order for infant baptism to me. If infant baptism is essential to keep kids from going to perdition wouldn’t you think that scripture would have been more specific about it?

More detail is given in Luke’s account of this event, which reads: “Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them; and when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them to him, saying, ‘Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God’” (Luke 18:15–16).

So did Jesus baptize them? No.
Mar 10:16 And he took them up in his arms, put [his] hands upon them, and blessed them.

Now Fundamentalists say this event does not apply to young children or infants since it implies the children to which Christ was referring were able to approach him on their own. (Older translations have, “Suffer the little children to come unto me,” which seems to suggest they could do so under their own power.)

Here is the KJV which any good fundamentalist worth his salt should at least check:

(KJV) Luke 18:15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when [his] disciples saw [it], they rebuked them.

And I like to check with the Greek/English interlinear with such questions, but I do not believe that any translation or version of scripture that we use in the West is THE answer:

(Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) Luke 18:15 | proseferon <4374> (5707) de <1161> {AND THEY BROUGHT} autw <846> {TO HIM} kai <2532> {ALSO} ta <3588> {THE} brefh <1025> {BABES,} ina <2443> {THAT} autwn <846> {THEM} apthtai <680> (5735) {HE MIGHT TOUCH;} idonteV <1492> (5631) de <1161> {BUT HAVING SEEN [IT]} oi <3588> {THE} maqhtai <3101> {DISCIPLES} epetimhsan <2008> (5656) {REBUKED} autoiV <846> {THEM.}

(Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) Mark 10:16 kai <2532> {AND} enagkalisamenoV <1723> (5666) {HAVING TAKEN IN [HIS] ARMS} auta <846> {THEM,} tiqeiV <5087> (5723) taV <3588> {HAVING LAID [HIS]} ceiraV <5495> {HANDS} ep <1909> {ON} auta <846> {THEM} hulogei <2127> (5707) {HE BLESSED} auta <846> {THEM.}
olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

It is likely that if any NEWER version says “children” (if indeed any does) it is perhaps an effort to support a point of view. Like some versions that selectively capitalize the term antichrist.

Fundamentalists conclude the passage refers only to children old enough to walk, and, presumably, capable of sinning.

A fundamentalist that concludes this would seem to not have a very good handle on scripture. But then I also believe that you might be wrong if you read that Jesus baptized the babies.

But the text in Luke 18:15 says, “Now they were bringing even infants to him” (Greek, Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha). The Greek word brepha means “infants”—children who are quite unable to approach Christ on their own and who could not possibly make a conscious decision to “accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior.” And that is precisely the problem. Fundamentalists refuse to permit the baptism of infants and young children, because they are not yet capable of making such a conscious act. But notice what Jesus said: “to such as these [referring to the infants and children who had been brought to him by their mothers] belongs the kingdom of heaven.” The Lord did not require them to make a conscious decision.

EXACTLY. And doesn’t He seem to indicate that they are already saved in their present state as babies? And He doesn’t baptize them either, does He?

He says that they are precisely the kind of people who can come to him and receive the kingdom.

See how you embellished what He said to advance your point of view?

So on what basis, Fundamentalists should be asked, can infants and young children be excluded from the sacrament of baptism? If Jesus said “let them come unto me,” who are we to say “no,” and withhold baptism from them?

Since Jesus said theirs was the Kingdom of Heaven already, if I were you I would be more concerned with on what scriptural basis I thought I didn’t need to go get baptized. Do you believe you will be sent to perdition if you do?

 

[valient_Lucy]

Do Catholics consider themselves to be born again? If so when or how are they?

When they commit a “mortal sin” do they then “die” and aren’t born again until a Priest says they are?

Yes. A Catholic is born again when he is “born of water and the Spirit,” in other words, when they are baptized.

While Confession restores a person to grace, no mortal sin can undo Baptism. Even if a person is excommunicated, and later returns to the Church, he does not need to be baptized again.

 

[Mannyfit75]

John

Do you believe baptism to be essential for infants? Do you believe your kids would have gone to perdition of they had died of SIDS at 1 year old? Or died in your car at 3?
Quote:

Let us take this issue one at a time. I do believe baptism is essential and necessary. In Catholicism, it is a sacrament. It is where we are born again.

As for those who died without being baptize, I let God decide their faith. God is a merciful, and we both know infants cannot commit actual sin. Baptism takes away original sin. For those unbaptized, I don’t believe they will be punished, if they die of SID. Sin can be committed at the age of reason (age of reason begins at age 8).

Let me point a contain from the CCC:

Para. 1281: Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized (cf. LG 16).

Para. 1261: As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them” (Mk 10:14; cf. 1 Tim 2:4), allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

The traditional Christian (Catholic and Orthodox) denominations believe that infant baptism is not merely a symbol but actually conveys grace. Baptism is a sacrament because it is a “tool” or “instrument” instituted by Jesus Christ to impart grace on its recipients. Catholics believe that baptism removes original sin and causes an ontological change in the baptized person–changing him from a creature to a “child of God.” It is how a person is reborn or ‘born again.’

The earliest uncontested historical record of infant baptism is recorded in the works of Origen (185-254 A.D.):

“Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin… In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.”[2]

Thus, from the 3rd century until the 16th century, infant baptism was the nearly universal practise of Christian churches. The controversy surrounding infant baptism didn’t begin until the 16th century, when the Anabaptists challenged the biblical warrant for this practice.

 

[Mannyfit75]

And doesn’t He seem to indicate that they are already saved in their present state as babies? And He doesn’t baptize them either, does He? See how you embellished what He said to advance your point of view? Since Jesus said theirs was the Kingdom of Heaven already, if I were you I would be more concerned with on what scriptural basis I thought I didn’t need to go get baptized. Do you believe you will be sent to perdition if you do?

I don’t find the KJB as the most accurate Bible. I do read the Douey-Rheim Catholic Bible which pre-dates KJB, and the RSV Bible.

Though I have read those passages and the context is the same. I am well aware that Scripture said. God desires all to be saved, and Scripture does not forbid infant baptism. So denying infants itself is unscriptural since there is no mention of it that it should be restricted to adults only.

As I posted before, it early Christians practiced infant baptism. Even in Acts, when Cornelius had his entire household baptism. This includes infants or children.

If you can provide an historical text that forbid infant baptism by the Early Church then I may give you credit. However, from what I have read, the early Christians dating back to the Apostle practiced it, and the Catholic Church practice it and so does the Orthodox.

I don’t believe in Sola Scriptura. I believe in Scared Scripture and Tradition.

 

[JCPeacekeeper]

NO, they don’t believe that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to eternal salvation. Therefore they reject the FREE Gift from God.

 

[Stephen_C]

NO, they don’t believe that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to eternal salvation. Therefore they reject the FREE Gift from God.

Oh, you are just way too funny. And just way too wrong. Maybe you need to spend a little time reading the CCC to find out what we Catholic’s believe and what the Catholic Church teaches.

 

[JCPeacekeeper]

Oh, you are just way too funny. And just way too wrong. Maybe you need to spend a little time reading the CCC to find out what we Catholic’s believe and what the Catholic Church teaches.

No thanks, I spent 27 years trying that.

 

[LilyM]

No thanks, I spent 27 years trying that.

My sisters and I are cradle catholics in our 30s and 40s who went through Catholic school. We were taught quite well but still not nearly enough.

I didn’t start to truly learn until I reverted at the beginning of this year. And am still learning.

So don’t say 27 years of ‘trying’ (which often equates to half-hearted occasional efforts) is enough

 

[Stephen_C]

No thanks, I spent 27 years trying that.

Maybe it did not sink in…try again. Show us where the Catholic Church teaches “NO, they don’t believe that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to eternal salvation. Therefore they reject the FREE Gift from God” As well read that Bible of yours. That is what the us Catholic’s believe as well. While you are at it ponder just how that Bible came to be.

 

[Mannyfit75]

NO, they don’t believe that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to eternal salvation. Therefore they reject the FREE Gift from God.

That is so untrue. Your profile say you are ex-Catholic. You said you been Catholic for 27 yrs. I rarely give any Ex-Catholic credit of their knowledge of Catholicism. Many like you misunderstood Catholicism and find doctrines and dogmas of the Church has difficult to comprehend.

The Catholic Church is been noted in symbolic terms. The CC is refered to as the Mystical Body of Christ, and the Bride of Christ.

The Catholic Church does not reject the free gift from God. The Church grants the faithful salvation through its Sacraments, and the center of this Sacrament is the Eucharist, which we Catholics believe is Jesus.

Of course you know that, but since you are an ex-Catholic, you no longer believe in the Real Presence.

 

[JCPeacekeeper]

Biblical Salvation is…

Only through Christ…ACTS 4:12

A gift of God’s grace…Ephesians 2:8,9

By faith alone…Ephesians 2:8,9

At the moment a sinner believes the gospel…Ephesians 1:13,14

Secured by God…John 10:27-30

Catholic Salvation is…

Through RCC(846)
Merited by good works(1815,1821,2010,2027)
Attained by man (2010,2027)
A process from Baptism through
Never assured in this life(1036,2005)

You do reject the gift from god, eternal salvation is through Jesus Christ period. You’ve gone to far the moment you say “and.” You can forsake the man made sacraments.

The fact is that I am a new creature in Christ, and I am assured that now to be absent from the Body is to be present with the Lord.

I don’t have to work to be saved…I work because I am saved.

As far as the Eucharist, it is a false Christ. It is a continual sacrafice, and when Christ said, “It is finished” it was never to be done again. HEBREWS 10:10 “By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL.”

Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper as a memorial, not a sacrifice.(Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24)

There are so many things that the Catholic Church does and teaches that go directly against the word of God. As time goes by I will be more than happy to share them with all of you.

Catholic people are some of the most loving and faithful people I know. If they would just read the New Testament, the Holy Spirit would open the word of God up to them and bring them out of the spirital fog the Catholic Church has put them in.

“I am not ashamed of the Gospel because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes.” Romans 1:16

“Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

JCPeacekeeper

Get your facts straight before you get your dander up. They don’t make that much head and shoulders.

As far as the Eucharist, it is a false Christ. It is a continual sacrafice, and when Christ said, “It is finished” it was never to be done again. HEBREWS 10:10 “By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL.”

You were Catholic for 27 years? I have been Catholic for 7 months and I already know that Christ isnt resacraficed at Mass. Here is a good reading for you if you get around to it:

catholic.com/thisrock/1990/9006chap.asp

There are so many things that the Catholic Church does and teaches that go directly against the word of God.

Correction, there is so much in the Catholic Church that goes against the Gospel according to JCPeacekeeper.

If they would just read the New Testament, the Holy Spirit would open the word of God up to them and bring them out of the spirital fog the Catholic Church has put them in.

You’re barking up the wrong tree. The majority of people here do read their NT (actually I am pretty sure they read the whole Bible but you get the point).

God Bless

 

[JezuUfamTobie]

Catholic Salvation is…

Through RCC(846)
Merited by good works(1815,1821,2010,2027)
Attained by man (2010,2027)
A process from Baptism through
Never assured in this life(1036,2005)

I have consulted the Catechism and the citations you provide do not back up your assertions. For example, you hold that paragraph 1815 is evidence that Catholics believe that salvation is merited by good works. Paragraph 1815 states:
“The gift of faith remains in one who has not sinned against it. But ‘faith apart from works is dead’: when it is deprived of hope and love, faith does not fully unite the believer to Christ and does not make him a living member of his Body.”

All this paragraph does is reaffirm what the Bible says in James II. (and Matthew 25:31-46 and John 5:29 and Romans 2:6,7; 13 and 1 Peter 1:17… and so on). The Catholic Church doesn’t pull ideas out of thin air.

Furthermore, I highly suspect you are quoting someone else, because when I google the passages you refer to, I am taken immediately to several anti-Catholic web sites. If you were to do your own work, you might catch these glaring errors.

Catholic people are some of the most loving and faithful people I know. If they would just read the New Testament, the Holy Spirit would open the word of God up to them and bring them out of the spirital fog the Catholic Church has put them in.

Surely you haven’t been duped into believing that old baloney about Catholics not reading the Bible. Do you have any idea how much we cover just on an average Sunday morning? Our Church takes a most methodical approach to scripture reading.

It’s unfortunate that some Catholic parents don’t educate their children properly in the Christian Faith. It’s also unfortunate that some Evangelical men beat their wives and children. But both these lamentable facts are highly irrelevant to whether or not a religion is true or false. Let’s not waste time on fallacious reasoning, okay?

 

[runandsew]

Biblical Salvation is…

Only through Christ…ACTS 4:12
Yes I agree, and the Church is the body of Christ.

A gift of God’s grace…Ephesians 2:8,9
Yes I agree, we are saved by Grace with faith working in love.

By faith alone…Ephesians 2:8,9
Ummm… I did a word search for faith alone, and it only came up with James 2:24, must be a mistake.

At the moment a sinner believes the gospel…Ephesians 1:13,14
In whom ye also [trusted], after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
yes that is talking about baptism.

Secured by God…John 10:27-30
Yes, I hear God voice when I read the Bible and when the Church he established speaks.

Catholic Salvation is…

Through RCC(846)
You mean the Church Jesus established in the Gosple of Matthew?

Merited by good works(1815,1821,2010,2027)
You mean like in Matthew 25 with the sheep and the goats?

Attained by man (2010,2027)
You might want to start reading this one at paragraph 2006

A process from Baptism through
Never assured in this life(1036,2005)
You might want to re-read Romans chapter 11

You do reject the gift from god, eternal salvation is through Jesus Christ period. You’ve gone to far the moment you say “and.” You can forsake the man made sacraments.
Jesus instituted the sacraments.

The fact is that I am a new creature in Christ, and I am assured that now to be absent from the Body is to be present with the Lord.

I don’t have to work to be saved…I work because I am saved.
I would agree with you, if you take into account Matthew Chapter 25, the sheep and goats

As far as the Eucharist, it is a false Christ. It is a continual sacrafice, and when Christ said, “It is finished” it was never to be done again. HEBREWS 10:10 “By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL.”
“It is finished” is referring to the Passover. He started it in the upper room, and finished it on the Cross. You might google Scott Hahn’s “the fourth cup.”

Once for all can mean perpetual as in once and for all times. You might want to research about how the Jewish people celebrated the Passover, being a perpetual ordinance, They don’t just remember the passover, they take part in it.

Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper as a memorial, not a sacrifice.(Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24)
Or it could be a memorial sacrifice.

There are so many things that the Catholic Church does and teaches that go directly against the word of God. As time goes by I will be more than happy to share them with all of you.
And we would be more that happy to share the truth with you.

Catholic people are some of the most loving and faithful people I know. If they would just read the New Testament, the Holy Spirit would open the word of God up to them and bring them out of the spirital fog the Catholic Church has put them in.
And Non-Catholics are also some of the most loving and faithful people I know, and if they would just read the New and Old Testaments in context, and the early Church Fathers, they might just realize that The Catholic Church is the church that our Lord Jesus founded, and that the beliefs that the Catholics now believe are the same that they believed from the very beginning.“I am not ashamed of the Gospel because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes.” Romans 1:16

"Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."And God’s word can be found in Sacred Scripture, and in Sacred Tradition.

phew, can you keep it a little bit shorter next time? (just joking)

 

[JCPeacekeeper]

Sorry I had to make it so long but there is so much information! I’ll try to be brief.

As for doing my own research, I do. I have a nice big green catechism sitting right here. Along with my own research papers and books. Not to mention the most important thing of all, The Bible. You used Google to look something up, so I think I can also use other sources as well. You think just because you found one thing I said at an anti-catholic website that I don’t do my own research. You have NO idea how much I have studied on this religion and the hours I have put toward this mission. Do me a favor, don’t assume you know what I have and have not done.

Moving on, the Tradition that WAS delivered by the Apostles is the tradition we hold to.New dogmas are not Sacred tradition, ex:the assumption of Mary proclaimed in 1950. Council of Trent proclaimed Tradition equal with the Bible, 1545. Immaculate conception of Mary, 1854. Infallibility of the Pope, 1870. The rosary by Peter the Hermit in 1090.I could go on but I think you get the piont.

As for “faith without works is dead”, James 2:20 (CCC 1815). Instead of taking it out of context you should look at the passages prior to that one. Actually read the first two chapters in James to get the full picture. James is saying you show your faith by your works, and a man who claims to have a right relationship with God will live a life of good works. Not work to be saved. Refer to your CCC 1129! I will put the first sentence in here for you. The church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are neccessary for salvation. That came from the Council of Trent in 1547. So what about all the years prior to that Council? See the catechism changes but the bible NEVER does.

You can not merit God’s grace. Psalms 49:6-9, You can not give God ransom for your brother. Read the whole thing for yourself. You MUST read Romans 10:1-13. I just want people to know that the road to Christ is simple to follow. Religion makes that road have “rules”. If you follow the written word of God, you will never go wrong.

Next, the Mass. The source for what your faith believes is in the catechism of the catholic church. Here are some CCC you should read, 1366, 1367 (again proclaimed by the council of trent, 1562). The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice…
In your catechism at the back read in the Glossary what Mass means. It states that Mass renews the paschal sacrifice of Christ as the sacrifice offered by the church. Believe me I could be here all day on the Eucharist but I promised to keep it short. Who needs the Head and Shoulders?

The last thing I have time to comment on this morning is the Catholic parents and Evangelical men statement. What in the world does this have to do with anything! I don’t have to have my earthly parents teaches me everything about faith in God because I can go to my Heavenly Father’s own words. As for the evangelical men beating their wives, they will have to answer to God for that. Just as all the Priests who took advantage of all those little boys will. You are right these are irrelevant when it comes to a religious system being true or false, but what about the dogmas of that faith? Are they in the bible? That is how you can know if something is true or false. If it is in agreement with scripture then it is true, if not then it is a lie. All it takes is one drop of poison to make a healthy drink deadly. Remember even Satan can appear as an angel of light. A sheep in wolves clothing. How would you know if this was the case? By camapring it to the Word of God. That is why He gave it to us, so we would not be deceived. Please pray and think about who you are more faithful to. The Church or Christ? The church is not always Christ if their teachings are anti-biblical. A bible based church that is filled with the Holy Spirit is where you want to fellowship. Eternity is a long time, don’t you want to check, even double check that you are in God’s will. His will is in black and white. Pray that the Holy Spirit will lead you to an understanding in all things. 1 Corinthians 12: 7-10 list the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

 

[AlegreFe]

Sorry I had to make it so long but there is so much information! I’ll try to be brief.

As for doing my own research, I do. I have a nice big green catechism sitting right here. Along with my own research papers and books. Not to mention the most important thing of all, The Bible. You used Google to look something up, so I think I can also use other sources as well. You think just because you found one thing I said at an anti-catholic website that I don’t do my own research. You have NO idea how much I have studied on this religion and the hours I have put toward this mission. Do me a favor, don’t assume you know what I have and have not done.

Moving on, the Tradition that WAS delivered by the Apostles is the tradition we hold to.New dogmas are not Sacred tradition, ex:the assumption of Mary proclaimed in 1950. Council of Trent proclaimed Tradition equal with the Bible, 1545. Immaculate conception of Mary, 1854. Infallibility of the Pope, 1870. The rosary by Peter the Hermit in 1090.I could go on but I think you get the piont.

As for “faith without works is dead”, James 2:20 (CCC 1815). Instead of taking it out of context you should look at the passages prior to that one. Actually read the first two chapters in James to get the full picture. James is saying you show your faith by your works, and a man who claims to have a right relationship with God will live a life of good works. Not work to be saved. Refer to your CCC 1129! I will put the first sentence in here for you. The church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are neccessary for salvation. That came from the Council of Trent in 1547. So what about all the years prior to that Council? See the catechism changes but the bible NEVER does.

You can not merit God’s grace. Psalms 49:6-9, You can not give God ransom for your brother. Read the whole thing for yourself. You MUST read Romans 10:1-13. I just want people to know that the road to Christ is simple to follow. Religion makes that road have “rules”. If you follow the written word of God, you will never go wrong.

Next, the Mass. The source for what your faith believes is in the catechism of the catholic church. Here are some CCC you should read, 1366, 1367 (again proclaimed by the council of trent, 1562). The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice…
In your catechism at the back read in the Glossary what Mass means. It states that Mass renews the paschal sacrifice of Christ as the sacrifice offered by the church. Believe me I could be here all day on the Eucharist but I promised to keep it short. Looks like you should buy some Head and Shoulders as well.

The last thing I have time to comment on this morning is the Catholic parents and Evangelical men statement. What in the world does this have to do with anything! I don’t have to have my earthly parents teaches me everything about faith in God because I can go to my Heavenly Father’s own words. As for the evangelical men beating their wives, they will have to answer to God for that. Just as all the Priests who took advantage of all those little boys will. You are right these are irrelevant when it comes to a religious system being true or false, but what about the dogmas of that faith? Are they in the bible? That is how you can know if something is true or false. If it is in agreement with scripture then it is true, if not then it is a lie. All it takes is one drop of poison to make a healthy drink deadly. Remember even Satan can appear as an angel of light. A sheep in wolves clothing. How would you know if this was the case? By camapring it to the Word of God. That is why He gave it to us, so we would not be deceived. Please pray and think about who you are more faithful to. The Church or Christ? The church is not always Christ if their teachings are anti-biblical. A bible based church that is filled with the Holy Spirit is where you want to fellowship. Eternity is a long time, don’t you want to check, even double check that you are in God’s will. His will is in black and white. Pray that the Holy Spirit will lead you to an understanding in all things. 1 Corinthians 12: 7-10 list the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

:whacky: I hear all of this and more from my former Catholic, super anti-Catholic,
“Church ‘of Rome’ hater” brother of mine.

ALL the Dogmas of the Faith are in the Bible.
You just can’t see them because you don’t want to see them.

You can say all you want. Don’t waste your time.

 

[JezuUfamTobie]

Sorry I had to make it so long but there is so much information! I’ll try to be brief.

As for doing my own research, I do. I have a nice big green catechism sitting right here. Along with my own research papers and books. Not to mention the most important thing of all, The Bible. You used Google to look something up, so I think I can also use other sources as well. You think just because you found one thing I said at an anti-catholic website that I don’t do my own research. You have NO idea how much I have studied on this religion and the hours I have put toward this mission. Do me a favor, don’t assume you know what I have and have not done.

I was trying to be charitible in assuming that you were just repeating someone else’s research. I’m glad you research. You are certainly welcome to consult or refer to any source you please. But none of this changes the fact that the catechism passages you have been quoting simply do not support your assertions about the Church.

James is saying you show your faith by your works.

This is what the Catholic Church teaches. We don’t teach that we earn our own salvation. If you really want to evangelize Catholics, you need to come into the debate better informed about our beliefs, rather than attempting to read our Catechism to confirm your already-held prejudices (which were preached to you by a religious group that changes far more often than the Catechism does.) I can’t even respond to most of what you say, because what you say the Chuch believes simply isn’t what the Church believes.

The last thing I have time to comment on this morning is the Catholic parents and Evangelical men statement. What in the world does this have to do with anything!

That’s exactly my point. Some ex-Catholics in this thread have stated how they were not taught their faith, and held this as a reason not to believe that the Catholic Church is correct. Our sins and failings don’t negate the truth/untruth of our beliefs.

If it is in agreement with scripture then it is true, if not then it is a lie.

This is just not true. Plenty of things happen to you every day that weren’t written in the Bible.

But the teachings of the Church are not anti-Biblical.

 

[JCPeacekeeper]

Please show me where in the Bible they are. I would love to see them. I want to make sure I don’t miss any part of the Word of God.

 

[JCPeacekeeper]

Did you read any of the CCC I just listed? I can’t do anything but point you to these passages in your CCC.