Yes it does. However, I don’t notice the words “Roman Catholic” or even simply “Catholic” anywhere before the word “church” in that verse or any other one in the entire Word of God. The CHURCH is ALL saved believers in Christ. A person certainly does NOT have to be a Catholic to be in the TRUE church of Jesus Christ.
The word Trinity is not in the bible either, but I certainly hope that you believe in the Trinity.
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matt 18:17)
I’m not Catholic but I AM a member of Christs TRUE church, being a born again believer in Him. I’ve never met an invisible Christian and nobody I have run across yet has told me that I’m invisible.
A person doesn’t necessarily have to be part of a group with a name over the door to be a Christian.
Yes, you are a Christian. I pray that you will be guided to the fullness of truth.I’m not Catholic but I AM a member of Christs TRUE church, being a born again believer in Him. I’ve never met an invisible Christian and nobody I have run across yet has told me that I’m invisible.
Uhhhhh…you also don’t see the word “Trinity” in the Bible, but you accept it. The teaching of what the Church is and does is clearly in the Bible (as clear as the Trinity, if not more). And as for your assertion that the Church is merely “ALL saved believers in Christ”, I challenge you to prove that using the Bible alone. You are merely asserting without proof. In fact, the Scripture says quite the opposite. If your claim is that the “Church” is merely a body of believers (of which I agree), and nothing more (of which I disagree), then you are ignoring passages throughout the NT. Furthermore, your understanding of the Church would render the verse “the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth” as confusing at best. So what? Does that mean that the individual believers represent the pillar and foundation of truth? If so, does that not relativize truth, since there are now thousands upon thousands of Christian denominations, all claiming the Bible as their source of truth, that disagree? Is the truth democratic? Seriously. You must really try in order to ignore the chaos that such an un-Biblical claim creates.
And yet, Christ told the Apostles to baptize people. The Church and Acts talks about getting together to preach the Word and share in the breaking of bread. You’re right to say that the Church does include it’s believers. That is why Catholics include their Evangelical and Fundamentalist brothers and sisters as true Christians. But you are wrong to think that the Church is nothing more than this. It’s not an either/or, it’s a both/and.I’m not Catholic but I AM a member of Christs TRUE church, being a born again believer in Him. I’ve never met an invisible Christian and nobody I have run across yet has told me that I’m invisible.
Is that so??!!
Im guessing, since you didn’t actually finish with a conclusion, that since the word Catholic does not appear anywhere in the bible that you believe this to be a point of significance. Of course, “Roman Catholic” isn’t in the Bible - that’s a term invented by the reformers - they were very adept at such behavior. As for the term Catholic, per se, that is a very early term to describe the entirety of Chrisian churches unified in the Apostolic Faith; it simply means “universal”. The bible does mention that there is “one faith” and that we are are all “one body” in Christ. In addition, have you ever heard of the “Apostle’s Creed” which calls the church - “one, holy, catholic and apostolic”
That is a vague statement my friend, capable of meaning several things to various Protestant gorups depending upon their interpretation of Scripture. Im not sure what you mean by it. It is certainly part of the Church - everyone in Heaven -we can all agree on that, but that isn’t the entire Church. There is also everyone who is still striving to get there - those who are still “persevering until the end” to win the “imperishable crown” - right?
What you mean to say is that a person does not need to identify themselves as “Catholic” here on earth in order to be a member of the Church. That is true, and the Catholic Church affirms this. But you should know that the Catholic Church defines itself as those people who are “in Christ” just as you say - regardless of how they identify themselves here on earth. It seems like you don’t understand how the Catholic Church views itself and you are arguing, instead, against your misunderstanding of what it claims to be. Im pretty sure that is called a “straw man” argument…
There are degrees of communion with the Church. Those who reject the Apostolic teaching, who separate themselves from communion with the Apostolic See, do so by a compromise of integrity in doctrine and faith.
having used the library and tracts on this site frequently, my opinion is that far from attacking, they lovingly correct the misaprehensions of fundamentalists and evangelicals. If you are trying to get to New York from Texas, and keep trying to drive southwest, and I persistently try to steer you northeast, is that an attack or a loving correction?hi,
in my opinion the library on this site, at times, is attacking protestant fundamentalists and evangelists. Shouldn’t we be lovingly guiding them to the right path if they are on the wrong one instead of viciously attacking their faith??
I’ve run into a few people who make the same claim you have. In my experience, all of them were anti-social and were not examples of faith.
The word catholic with a little “c” is an adjective and does indeed mean universal. However, as used by the Catholic church, the word Catholic with a capital “C” is a noun and, as such, is a proper name.
If me saying that the church is all saved believers in Christ is a “vague” statement to you, I’ll let you figure out the ramifications of what that means.
What I meant to say is exactly what I said. Please don’t put words in my mouth.
It views itself as the “one true church”. Big deal. So does the Mormon church and so do the JW’s along with a whole host of others. And everyone that is not part of the Catholic church is some sort of “seperated brethren” or some equally ridiculous thing.
When all else fails, use the “hater card” in some way, shape or form.
Actually the Catholic church uses BOTH terms, so you are not quite correct - but close. Im sure you see it as irrelevent, but there is a big difference in distinguishing between the two.
In other words you can’t explain it any better? We can’t even begin to contemplate the ramifications without understanding what you have said. Without trying to nit-pik I was simply pointing out that the term “saved” means varying things not only between C’s and P’s, but between P’s and P’s.
Im trying to communicate - and you won’t articulate further, that’s all.
Correct. But what is the Truth? Is there anything beyond the claims which we can look at objectively in the light of Scripture and history? Which Church does it point to? Remember: one, holy, catholic and apostlolic.
There is only one Faith - if we disagree on elements of the Faith, then one of us is not fully in the Truth. Without judging whom that is, we can agree that the characterization of “separated brethren” is a valid one, and certainly more Christian than the “whore of Babylon” rhetoric.
All else failed? Nothing failed - you have even attempted to correct my opinions - your only attempt - to imply that the Catholic church doesn’t use the word catholic(lower case c) is wrong - as I told you its in the Nicene and Apostles Creeds which are in every Missallette and read each Sunday by every faithful Catholic.When all else fails, use the “hater card” in some way, shape or form.
I see. Well thats OK I guess. You probably didn’t mean to call me gullible, but you did. NP. I see that you base this on your “feelings about it” rather than your thoughts on it. Well that makes sense to me - it isn’t the feelings that lead people to the Catholic Church, its usually something more substantial. I guess I would rather be in the gullible crowd with Ignatious, Polycarp, Clement, Augustine, John Chrysostom, Justin Martyr, etc etc than in the “squeekster feel good” crowd, but that’s just me.
As far as I’m concerned, a if a person is a true Christian, they are a Christian regardless of what church they go to. Jesus didn’t differentiate between Catholics and Baptists and Methodists. One wasn’t any more a favorite than any other one. So the term “seperated brethren” is an insult and a slap in the face to non Catholics. Don’t like it? Tough. That’s the way it is. I see it as the Catholic church has insulted other Christians with their “holier than thou” braggart attitudes and now are reaping what they have sown. They simply can not play the “we are better than everybody else” game without some repercussions from other true believers. It matters not a bit whether you or any other Catholic agrees or not.
There are a number of beliefs of the Catholic church that are false, not the least of which is the sinlessness of Mary. There is no Scriptural support for such a notion. If it were “passed down” from somewhere, please show which of the original Apostles taught it or believed it.
Quote me saying anything of the sort.
It is not explicitly stated in the Bible. Then again, catholics know that the Bible is not the complete word of God. The CA library does provide some writings throughout history that refer to the belief of the immaculate conception.
Can you show just one thing that God ever said that is not written in the Bible-the written Word of God? And prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it came from God? Just quoting some writings of some ECF’s hardly proves that something came from God. At best, it shows that the one writing it believed it. But where did that person get it from? You could claim that if you went back far enough, it would have come from God Himself. But then you have a small little problem. Why didn’t God tell EVERYBODY instead of a select few who all just happen to be Catholics? Not to mention that the ECF’s didn’t even all agree on everything.