check out this anti catholic blog

[Reformed]

Thanks, never heard those expressions.

Continue reading *John 3
4
Nicodemus said to him, “How can a person once grown old be born again? Surely he cannot reenter his mother’s womb and be born again, can he?”
5
Jesus answered, "Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of **God without being born of water and Spirit. [snip] 22
After this, Jesus and his disciples went into the region of Judea, where he spent some time with them baptizing.

---

Okay, we are making progress. If we are united to Christ, we are united to Christ regardless of our religious affilation. Do you seem to agree?

As in Church hierarchy? Peter being the foundation of His Church?
*
1 Timothy 3:15
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.*

Not sure why you think your union with Christ is different from my union with Chist.

The Catholic church teaches and practicing Catholics believe everything you quoted. We are born in Adam - original sin, we die to sin in Christ’s salvific death on the cross. We are reborn in Christ through water Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We believe Jesus is our Lord and Savior. We believe we should spend our lives walking with Jesus and getting to know him better. We spend time talking and listening to him every day.

 

[majuscule]

This is off topic. Sorry.

Did anyone notice that the picture in the blog header is of a village on the island of Sao Jorge in the Azores, Portugal? I believe it is the village of Rosais.

Does Justin have some connection or did he just like the picture?

The Azores are very Catholic.

 

[qui_est_ce]

The apostle lays the blame of this conduct closely on them, 1. By telling them that their conduct perfectly destroyed the purpose and use of such an institution: This is not to eat the Lord’s supper, Romans 11:20. It was coming to the Lord’s table, and not coming. They might as well have staid away. Thus to eat the outward elements was not to eat Christ’s body. Note, There is a careless and irregular eating of the Lord’s supper which is as none at all; it will turn to no account, but to increase guilt. Such an eating was that of the Corinthians; their practices were a direct contradiction to the purposes of this sacred institution. 2. Their conduct carried in it a contempt of God’s house, or of the church, Romans 11:22. If they had a mind to feast, they might do it at home in their own houses; but to come to the Lord’s table, and cabal and quarrel, and keep the poor from their share of the provision there made for them as well as rich, was such an abuse of the ordinance, and such a contempt of the poorer members of the church more especially, as merited a very sharp rebuke. Such a behaviour tended much to the shame and discouragement of the poor, whose souls were as dear to Christ, and cost him as much, as those of the rich. Note, Common meals may be managed after a common manner, but religious feasts should be attended religiously. Note, also, It is a heinous evil, and severely to be censured, for Christians to treat their fellow-christians with contempt and insolence, but especially at the Lord’s table. This is doing what they can to pour contempt on divine ordinances. And we should look carefully to it that nothing in our behaviour at the Lord’s table have the appearance of contemning so sacred an institution.

lots of mental gymnastices to get around John 6 and the Last Supper to prove that Real Presence isn’t Real.

BTW, What did the Apostles eat after Jesus broke the bread and said “This is my Body?” and what did they drink after he said “This is my Blood?” Don’t give me a Bill Clint definition of “is”

I certainly see nothing supporting the idea of transubstantiation.

Transubstantiation is merely an explanation of the Real Presence

Indeed we are to receive the Eucharist in a worthy manner. It is an ordinance of grace that should be received often. There is a real bodily presence – but Jesus refers to the bread as both His body and bread. Jesus tells us to partake in this ordinance to commemorate Him, to remember His sacrifice, and in commemoration of the New Covenant (as Moses sprinkled the blood on the alter, signifying the blood of the covenant – see Exodus 24:6-8).

He also tells us to DO this in His memory.

The Gospel of John (Chap. 6) has a wonderful discourse by Jesus:

41So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, (BD) “I am the bread that came down from heaven.”

Here Jesus draws an analogy to the Jews in the desert after their Exodus from Egypt when God sent down Manna from heaven. Then God filled their bodily needs – now Jesus seeks to fill our spiritual needs.

(verses 42 through 46 omitted)

47Truly, truly, I say to you,(BP) whoever believes has eternal life. 48(BQ) I am the bread of life. 49(BR) Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and(BS) they died. 50(BT) This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it(BU) and not die. 51I am the living bread(BV) that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give(BW) for the life of the world is(BX) my flesh."

The bread Jesus is referring to here is faith.

How do you get this out of that verse?

*52The Jews then(BY) disputed among themselves, saying,(BZ) “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of(CA) the Son of Man and drink his blood, you(CB) have no life in you. 54Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood(CC) has eternal life, and(CD) I will raise him up on the last day. 55For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood(CE) abides in me, and I in him. *

If it is about faith alone, then why did those who believed in Him leave? Why didn’t Jesus run after them and say WAIT, I was talking about Faith, not flesh and blood?
***66
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him. ***

This entire discourse draws a distinction between faith and reliance on Jesus and serving our physical need for food and drink. Through faith Jesus fills our spiritual needs. By grace through faith we inherit internal life. Just as food keeps our bodies alive through Jesus we keep our souls alive.

more gynastics.

57As(CF) the living Father(CG) sent me, and(CH) I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58(CI) This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread[c] the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever." 59Jesus[d] said these things in the synagogue, as he taught(CJ) at Capernaum.

The Eucharist is spirtual food. It is food for our souls. That’s why Paul tells the early Christians to eat the bodily food at home and come the the house of God, the church, for the Spiritual food.

This affirms my view – when Jesus states “feeds on me” He refers to abiding in Him in faith.

The Words of Eternal Life

(verses 60-62 omitted)

63(CP) It is the Spirit who gives life;(CQ) the flesh is no help at all.(CR) The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

Here Jesus affirms the Spiritual nature of His revelations.

Well, then why did He die on the Cross?

*64But(CS) there are some of you who do not believe." (For Jesus(CT) knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and(CU) who it was who would betray him.) *

go on,
67
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
68
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
69
We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
70
Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you twelve? Yet is not one of you a devil?”
71
He was referring to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot; it was he who would betray him, one of the Twelve.

They didn’t understand the teaching of eat my flesh, drink my blood, but they had faith.

Again the same affirmation – this time identifying faith in Him as the vehicle of our salvation.

65And he said, “This is why I told you(CV) that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

Again we see this theme invoked:

Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for(B) the food that endures to eternal life, which(C) the Son of Man will give to you. For on(D) him God the Father has(E) set his seal." (John 6:27)

His body and blood, the spiritual food for our souls.

It amazes me to what great lengths Bible believers will go to explain anway the Real Presence, while saying everything in the Bible is self explanatory.

 

[adstrinity]

^^^ what you have just described about the Catholic church reminds me of what those two Orthodox gentlemen told me about their conversions. What they both told me was that one of the reasons why they converted was because they felt that the church described in the new testment is exactly like that of the Orthodox church.

I am so glad you mentioned this, now I don’t feel so off topic when I bring this up:

It seems to me that the poster to whom you replied saw Catholocism only because that poster knew Protestant and that poster knew NOT Protestant, i.e., Catholic. It probably never occured to that poster that it may read Orthodox as well because that poster may not have been exposed to Orthodox views and beliefs. The Poster (I am guessing, I may be WAY off) saw things like hierarchy in the Church and Real Presence in the Eucharist and praying for the dead and thought, “Catholic,” only because the poster knew that that is what Protestants either downplay or try to explain why the Catholic Church is wrong on it. He knows the western world of things so he saw it in the light of the west.

A poster on another thread here on CAF said that that poster read the Catechism of the Catholic Church on…purgatory, I think, and said that it reads very eastern, that is, it’s what we as Catholics believe, but, that poster saw that poster’s own beliefs expressed in that view so that poster associated it with being to what that poster knows.

I read a time ago a signature line on another forum stating, ‘You don’t see things how they are but how you are,’ or something along those lines.

 

[PerryJ]

I am so glad you mentioned this, now I don’t feel so off topic when I bring this up:

It seems to me that the poster to whom you replied saw Catholocism only because that poster knew Protestant and that poster knew NOT Protestant, i.e., Catholic. It probably never occured to that poster that it may read Orthodox as well because that poster may not have been exposed to Orthodox views and beliefs. The Poster (I am guessing, I may be WAY off) saw things like hierarchy in the Church and Real Presence in the Eucharist and praying for the dead and thought, “Catholic,” only because the poster knew that that is what Protestants either downplay or try to explain why the Catholic Church is wrong on it. He knows the western world of things so he saw it in the light of the west.

A poster on another thread here on CAF said that that poster read the Catechism of the Catholic Church on…purgatory, I think, and said that it reads very eastern, that is, it’s what we as Catholics believe, but, that poster saw that poster’s own beliefs expressed in that view so that poster associated it with being to what that poster knows.

I read a time ago a signature line on another forum stating, ‘You don’t see things how they are but how you are,’ or something along those lines.

In my statement I use the phrase Catholic. Not Roman Catholic. The Orthodox will find the early Church fathers in agreement. Many early Church Fathers are Orthodox.

 

[qui_est_ce]

In my statement I use the phrase Catholic. Not Roman Catholic. The Orthodox will find the early Church fathers in agreement. Many early Church Fathers are Orthodox.

Well, you’re just taking all the fun away from anti-Catholics who don’t know the difference between Roman rite and Catholic.
They might have to refer to us as Catholic Christians instead of Roman Catholics!

 

[MDK]

We celebrate the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ every single Sunday and more during the week when we can. We celebrate the Communion of Saints, being confirmed by the bishop and a Sacremental Confession when necessary. We have vestments much like yours and we even have the same readings every Sunday as you do. We share the same Gregorian Kalender seasons as you do. We recite the Nicene Creed, the Lord’s Prayer and having a sharing of peace, just like in a Catholic mass. Our chalices are beautiful just as yours are because they hold the body and blood of our Lord and Savior.

We’d like to know your church, so we know among other things if you even have a valid priesthood. Is it fair to come here and attack Catholics and the Church started by Christ, then hide your own affiliation? Some would call that cowardice. If you are confident in your church, then you should be confident it will stand up to any scrutiny. If it can’t, then you’ll just likely continue to try and attack Catholicism to try to somehow validate what you may want to believe, but know can’t stand up to scrutiny.

We’re out here, out in the open, and everyone can look to see the beauty of the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ. We Catholics are about the truth, and are completely confident in our Church because it was built by Christ and is protected by Him from teaching error in faith and morals. The Catholic Church also has a valid priesthood, with valid Sacraments.

 

[Through_Anyone]

It’s incredible that this can go on for so many pages and not make headway at all with these folks. See Luke 8: 4-15, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear,” which implies that not all have “ears to hear.” “Some [seed] fell along the path, and was trodden under foot, and the birds of the air devoured it.” Some also fell on the rock and withered away because it had no moisture, and some fell among thorns which grew up and choked it. That’s three separate analogies in one parable where the message was received but still went to waste. Plenty of people who call themselves Christian fall into those three groups. Many folks will receive the word of God, even very joyfully, thinking they understand but don’t actually get it and ultimately will not be saved. Some will hear, say they understand, preach to others, but will choose damnation though leading a life with faith. Many are invited but few are chosen. There is wheat and there are weeds. A Protestant might say the weeds are Catholics and non-believers, and that “the few” is the number of “true Christians” there’s ever been compared to the number of people that have ever lived. The Gospel, however, doesn’t support such simplistic notions and many, many people from all races, cultures, creeds, and times will not be numbered with the few. A bad tree cannot bear good fruit, but let’s hope we’re not actually dealing with bad trees here. Just because a man receives the Truth does not automatically mean he has the faculties to interpret it, which is why a guiding institution might be useful to keep folks on track and is why we must go out there and directly evangelize in ways that will work. We can blast them on the forums all we want, but it clearly will not change their ideas unless they came on hoping to have their ideas changed. From a false premise anything can follow…and all we can do is pray for the conversion of folks who attempt to “witness” to Catholics because talk won’t cut it. I give up trying to understand why they think the same old arguments will work sooner or later on people who are active enough to be posting on CAF, but twenty some odd pages can probably be summarized as “we agreed to disagree.”

 

[PerryJ]

It’s incredible that this can go on for so many pages and not make headway at all with these folks. See Luke 8: 4-15, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear,” which implies that not all have “ears to hear.” “Some [seed] fell along the path, and was trodden under foot, and the birds of the air devoured it.” Some also fell on the rock and withered away because it had no moisture, and some fell among thorns which grew up and choked it. That’s three separate analogies in one parable where the message was received but still went to waste. Plenty of people who call themselves Christian fall into those three groups. Many folks will receive the word of God, even very joyfully, thinking they understand but don’t actually get it and ultimately will not be saved. Some will hear, say they understand, preach to others, but will choose damnation though leading a life with faith. Many are invited but few are chosen. There is wheat and there are weeds. A Protestant might say the weeds are Catholics and non-believers, and that “the few” is the number of “true Christians” there’s ever been compared to the number of people that have ever lived. The Gospel, however, doesn’t support such simplistic notions and many, many people from all races, cultures, creeds, and times will not be numbered with the few. A bad tree cannot bear good fruit, but let’s hope we’re not actually dealing with bad trees here. Just because a man receives the Truth does not automatically mean he has the faculties to interpret it, which is why a guiding institution might be useful to keep folks on track and is why we must go out there and directly evangelize in ways that will work. We can blast them on the forums all we want, but it clearly will not change their ideas unless they came on hoping to have their ideas changed. From a false premise anything can follow…and all we can do is pray for the conversion of folks who attempt to “witness” to Catholics because talk won’t cut it. I give up trying to understand why they think the same old arguments will work sooner or later on people who are active enough to be posting on CAF, but twenty some odd pages can probably be summarized as “we agreed to disagree.”

Welcome to the forum.

You will find many argumentitive on this forum. You will also find many knowledgable from different faiths that are truly trying to understand each others point of view.

 

[RobHom]

Do you think the anathemas of the Council of Trent applies to Justin? Please notice that Justin used Reformed references on his blog. Therefore, do you think Sola Scriptura, Triune, and myself are false prophets too since we are all Reformed Christians? Why isn’t Justin a separated brethren instead of a false prophet. By definition, he is now a Protestant or a protestor of Rome.

1. I do not think that you know what “anathemas” are.
2. You should not put yourself in the company of people with you have little or nothing in common with.
3. Actually… he would be considered a “heretic”…not a false prophet.

To help you sort out those things you apparently have little real knowledge of…please visit these two sites and do a little reading.
It will only take a few minutes…and after you get over your embarrassment at your foolishness…smile, you wouldn’t be the first to make that mistake.

1st, Anathemas: catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0004chap.asp

2d, Heretic: findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n42_v34/ai_21255775

Both are very informative articles…and would be good reading for anyone who really doesn’t have a good grasp on the “concepts” of what those words entail in reality.

 

[TriuneUnity]

1. I do not think that you know what “anathemas” are.
2. You should not put yourself in the company of people with you have little or nothing in common with.
3. Actually… he would be considered a “heretic”…not a false prophet.

To help you sort out those things you apparently have little real knowledge of…please visit these two sites and do a little reading.
It will only take a few minutes…and after you get over your embarrassment at your foolishness…smile, you wouldn’t be the first to make that mistake.

1st, Anathemas: catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0004chap.asp

2d, Heretic: findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n42_v34/ai_21255775

Both are very informative articles…and would be good reading for anyone who really doesn’t have a good grasp on the “concepts” of what those words entail in reality.

Reformed called me Reformed…Them’s fightin’ words round here.

 

[RobHom]

Reformed called me Reformed…Them’s fightin’ words round here.

I knew you would catch that!!!

 

[adstrinity]

Could you clarify this a little more, ads? I didn’t quite get what you’re saying here. Maybe it’s me lol

Surely, I could clarify it.

Antagonist: Catholic Church IS NOT the Church of God. The Catholic Church is the antithesis of God! Catholic’s do not worship God! They worship Mary! And the Saints! And the Pope! And all statues therein! And NOT God! I know! The Bible says! “The Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon!” It says that! Right there! In the Bible!

Catholic: So, you’re saying that Catholics are not Christians?

Antagonist: There are Christians in every denomination.

By admitting this, the Antagonist will not come right out and say that Catholics aren’t Christians, but, rather, will give the political answer of not answering the question.

…Even though, in Antagonist’s original statement, we were told that Catholics do not worship God.

To BE Christian, one worships Jesus Christ. To know Jesus is to proclaim he is God.

The Antagonist claims Catholics do not worship God.
The Antagonist claims that there are Christians in every denomination.
We do not know who is truly saved BECAUSE it is an invisible Church.

Note the Antagonist did not admit that Catholics are not Christians, BUT, IF there are Christians in every denomination, then there MUST be Christians in Catholocism. IF they are Catholics, then, they MUST profess the Catholic faith and believe truly what the Catholic Church is the fullness of the faith.

Antagonist has already admitted that there are Christians in every denomination. Antagonist has admitted that it is an invisible church.

Knowing this, Antagonist comes to this forum, or street corner, or mail box/windshield/ect. and rambles at Random Catholic saying that we are not saved, even though, for all they know, we just might be. We might be a Christian because there are Christians in every denomination and they do not say how many via percentage in each denomination are true Christians.

Basically, they contradict themselves and fail at logic because they say Catholics do not worship God, even though they admit, there are Christians in every religion, and they don’t know who is who. For all they know, they could have stumbled onto the one website, or car owner, or random person, who IS both Catholic and Christian.

…Is this any clearer?

 

[TriuneUnity]

Surely, I could clarify it.

Antagonist: Catholic Church IS NOT the Church of God. The Catholic Church is the antithesis of God! Catholic’s do not worship God! They worship Mary! And the Saints! And the Pope! And all statues therein! And NOT God! I know! The Bible says! “The Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon!” It says that! Right there! In the Bible!

Catholic: So, you’re saying that Catholics are not Christians?

Antagonist: There are Christians in every denomination.

By admitting this, the Antagonist will not come right out and say that Catholics aren’t Christians, but, rather, will give the political answer of not answering the question.

…Even though, in Antagonist’s original statement, we were told that Catholics do not worship God.

To BE Christian, one worships Jesus Christ. To know Jesus is to proclaim he is God.

The Antagonist claims Catholics do not worship God.
The Antagonist claims that there are Christians in every denomination.
We do not know who is truly saved BECAUSE it is an invisible Church.

Note the Antagonist did not admit that Catholics are not Christians, BUT, IF there are Christians in every denomination, then there MUST be Christians in Catholocism. IF they are Catholics, then, they MUST profess the Catholic faith and believe truly what the Catholic Church is the fullness of the faith.

Antagonist has already admitted that there are Christians in every denomination. Antagonist has admitted that it is an invisible church.

Knowing this, Antagonist comes to this forum, or street corner, or mail box/windshield/ect. and rambles at Random Catholic saying that we are not saved, even though, for all they know, we just might be. We might be a Christian because there are Christians in every denomination and they do not say how many via percentage in each denomination are true Christians.

Basically, they contradict themselves and fail at logic because they say Catholics do not worship God, even though they admit, there are Christians in every religion, and they don’t know who is who. For all they know, they could have stumbled onto the one website, or car owner, or random person, who IS both Catholic and Christian.

…Is this any clearer?

Yep. Danke schoen!

 

[adstrinity]

Yep. Danke schoen!

“You’re welcome,” in German. WAIT! I KNOW THIS!!! I’ve seen, “Cabaret”!

Willkkommen!

 

[TriuneUnity]

“You’re welcome,” in German. WAIT! I KNOW THIS!!! I’ve seen, “Cabaret”!

Willkkommen!

hahaha!

By the way, I agree with your observations. Usually more well informed Protestants will state that Catholics within the Church will only inherit eternal life if they dispute the doctrines of soteriology as taught by Rome. That is, reject the Roman teachings on justification.

For my own two cents on that; Rome preaches the Word, and has valid sacraments (baptism and the Supper), so God will create faith there and graft members into the Church. I do agree Rome is not an orthodox visible communion…it is, however, Christian, and possesses the means with it that God uses to call His people to Himself. I would also agree that, as with any false teaching, it can be dangerous to saving faith. That is true of other Protestant bodies as well. The issue is degrees.

 

[elvisman]

You would surely love for me to give you an answer so you can begin the tearing down process of my church.

**I’ve got to be honest. **
I think it’s cowardly of somebody who espouses such anti-Catholicism - on a Catholic website, no less - yet refuses to divulge what religious tradition or system they are afilliated with.

What have you got to hide, SIA?

 

[SIA]

I’ve got to be honest.
I think it’s cowardly of somebody who espouses such anti-Catholicism - on a Catholic website, no less - yet refuses to divulge what religious tradition or system they are afilliated with.

What have you got to hide, SIA?

I chose not to offer that out at that particular time because of the obvious circumstances. I have said on other numerous occasions that I am Anglican.

 

[elvisman]

I chose not to offer that out at that particular time because of the obvious circumstances. I have said on other numerous occasions that I am Anglican.

I suspected as much - that’s why I’m so surprised.
Most anglicans I know don’t harbor such resentment towards the Catholic church.

 

[PerryJ]

hahaha!

By the way, I agree with your observations. Usually more well informed Protestants will state that Catholics within the Church will only inherit eternal life if they dispute the doctrines of soteriology as taught by Rome. That is, reject the Roman teachings on justification.

For my own two cents on that; Rome preaches the Word, and has valid sacraments (baptism and the Supper), so God will create faith there and graft members into the Church. I do agree Rome is not an orthodox visible communion…it is, however, Christian, and possesses the means with it that God uses to call His people to Himself. I would also agree that, as with any false teaching, it can be dangerous to saving faith. That is true of other Protestant bodies as well. The issue is degrees.

Okay, those are fightin words! I mean really a “Reformed” person calling my teaching false.

Just couldn’t resist!