H
heedthewarning7
Guest
umm… it was hah… i even stated a post after that I don’t agree with it I was just wondering what people thought of it…
Oh look, two Catholic bashers with very few posts. Did you get bored at your regular forum and decide to come here?LOL. now that will never do. The Roman church has NEVER changed, so they say. Course just about everyone else begs to differ.
Oh look, two Catholic bashers. Did you get bored at your regular forum and decide to come here?
Since when did questioning something automatically make you a basher…?May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1
That was a wise word to use in your statement what the EO Claim.The EO claim that it was the RCC that broke away, and that IT is the original church.
Btw, it was 1054, at least if you’re referring to The great Schism…
Machine???wait I’m confused… you guys can’t honestly tell me that the Catholic Church today is the same machine that is was 500 years ago, let alone 2000! It would be blissful ignorance to believe that.![]()
AMENWhat if we all took a step back and looked at it as if none of our versions of Christianity today are correct. We as humans are rotten and sinful and I believe part of the beauty in Christ dying on the cross is that nothing we do can possible compensate for our wrong doings. Why can’t we all look at it as if we are stuck in the thing called humanity together and arguing about which sect or “version” of christianity is more correct is a waste of the short time we have on earth. No one today was alive 2000 years ago so, regardless of what scripture we have, we have a distorted view of what happened. We could argue until the end of time about “who is more right”, but what really matters is truly loving God and other people no matter what they believe and not expecting any type or reward in return. You don’t “earn” salvation, none of us deserve or are entitled to salvation, if a person believes they deserve it more than someone else they are wrong. If Christ were here today he wouldn’t be so concerned with which denomination is correct, he would be out helping people, loving people, spending time drinking wine and eating dinner with his friends and people who “society” looks down upon, and loving his father, God.
What great news, the Holy spirit reveals truth to a soul, so that God may be glorified, and everyknee bow before the Lord Jesus in heaven and on earth, and heaven rejoices for that one that comes back to God.So now that i have a great understanding of christianity and everything in that nature, i would totally agree with Catholism being the only church that has authority to be established. All of these other churches are just idiotic. All your shoot offs just broke away because they wanted to focus on a specific doctrine. For example, the baptists focus everything on being baptized and that was the reason for the breakaway.
Another reason was due to the corruption or sins of catholic leaders. Thats the main reason Lutherans broke away. So it’s just a matter of the Catholic church teaching and practicing correct principles, it doesn’t give people authority to establish their own churches. Its just a matter of knocking sense into the catholic leaders. The Catholics are closer to true doctrine then any other church i have seen.
What great news, the Holy spirit reveals truth to a soul, so that God may be glorified, and everyknee bow before the Lord Jesus in heaven and on earth, and heaven rejoices for that one that comes back to God.
I pray the enemy of division does not come here to distort this good news of God’s glory, in the form of changing the subject at hand, or trying desperate to divide the One holy Catholic apostolic Church, as the father of lies tries to do to the body of Jesus Christ but to no avail, nothing can seperate us from the love of God, neither in this age, or future, not even death can seperate us from God who loves us.
AMEN! AMEN!Peace.
Excepting perhaps the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.So now that i have a great understanding of christianity and everything in that nature, i would totally agree with Catholism being the only church that has authority to be established.
Don’t forget the ordinances! Baptism by immersion for one. At what point in time was that changed anyway?So it’s just a matter of the Catholic church teaching and practicing correct principles…
Agreed. That authority only comes from God and since he only has one church……it doesn’t give people authority to establish their own churches.
Hey jash, you don’t do it the way the early Christians did…there were female deacons then, because they baptized everyone as they came into the world…no clothes.Don’t forget the ordinances! Baptism by immersion for one. At what point in time was that changed anyway?
I agree, and if there were no catholic (little c) Church, ie Christ never came into the world, I’d be looking at Judaism.Agreed. That authority only comes from God and since he only has one church…
What happened to your (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4043492&postcount=81) of doctrines that the Catholic Church has gotten wrong?So now that i have a great understanding of christianity and everything in that nature,
I’m this guy too.
Ha Ha Funny. But really. When did the ordinance change from immersion to sprinkling? And why?Hey jash, you don’t do it the way the early Christians did…there were female deacons then, because they baptized everyone as they came into the world…no clothes.
So, when are mormons going to start up that practice again?
Nothing. Every child deserves the very best chance they can get. I am not questioning raising children in the way of god. I am only questioning the mode of baptism. Had I intended to question age I would have included it.And what, exactly, is wrong with giving your children the very best start in life you could possibly give them?
That good. Because Judaism was Christs church before he came.I agree, and if there were no catholic (little c) Church, ie Christ never came into the world, I’d be looking at Judaism.
Ha Ha Funny. But really. When did the ordinance change from immersion to sprinkling? And why?Hey jash, you don’t do it the way the early Christians did…there were female deacons then, because they baptized everyone as they came into the world…no clothes.
So, when are mormons going to start up that practice again?
Nothing. Every child deserves the very best chance they can get. I am not questioning raising children in the way of god. I am only questioning the mode of baptism. Had I intended to question age I would have included it.And what, exactly, is wrong with giving your children the very best start in life you could possibly give them?
Me too! Since Judaism was Christs church before he came.I agree, and if there were no catholic (little c) Church, ie Christ never came into the world, I’d be looking at Judaism.
The earliest Christians were using immersion and pouring. I have never been to a baptism where it was done by sprinkling so I wonder if Mormons call pouring sprinkling? Anyway, there are instances where a person wants to be baptized and cannot be immersed. Health, death bed, huge groups of people to be baptized in a short time (persecutions and all, they had to keep baptisms secret, or die).Ha Ha Funny. But really. When did the ordinance change from immersion to sprinkling? And why?
Nah, just sarcasm.AMEN
Anybody but me think the original post was just a troll to start a(nother) fight between Catholics and Protestants?
No. This is not another word we have redefined.I have never been to a baptism where it was done by sprinkling so I wonder if Mormons call pouring sprinkling?
We believe the following Biblical references to point to immersion:Honestly, I don’t know why Mormons believe it has to be done by immersion.
K. (Just checked “diaconate” under wikipedia.)And it’s true, there were women in the diaconate for the purpose of baptizing other women, because they did indeed baptize in sans clothing.