Choosing a non-Catholic denomination?

[mcq72]

but I don’t know anybody who sits down, investigates theologies first and then selects the church they think is right.

I think of the verse:

“There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.”

The spirit might be willing to investigate, but is weak through the flesh. I don’t trust those who say they are going to do a comparative study of religions or denominations and then choose the right path. It is quite an intellectual pride one displays with such verbiage. At best they may come to an intellectual understanding, but His ways are even above that or at least more than that.

For sure seek and knock at the Lord’s door and He will answer. For sure take a step towards God and He will take two towards you. For sure He must instill the desire to know Him, and seek Him.

Nothing is done in a vacuum. Faith comes by hearing, and that by the Word of God. The x Catholics I know usually will say they go to the Church where they got saving faith, where they heard the Lord’s voice calling them, not to a church, but to Himself. For sure Christ put them even baptized them into His Body, even a church.Any church social functions were quite secondary and not as pressing as growing spiritually. I might add the last place a wandering soul an unregenerated one, goes to is a church social.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Well, thanks for your perspective but for me, the Lord is right in the Catholic Church where he’s always been so I have no need to look elsewhere for him. I feel sorry for others who do, to be honest.

Muting the thread now as I posted my perspective to answer the OP’s question, not to engage in discussion about ideas such as those you have posted. For me personally, there is nothing to discuss.
Bye now.

 

[twf]

And then he goes on to say that the bread from heaven is His flesh that he lays down for the world… so by your interpretation of “my words are spirit” Jesus never really died on the cross… it’s all just a metaphor. That’s the only logical conclusion of your interpretation. You can’t have it both ways.

 

[twf]

CCC#390 states that Genesis uses “figurative language.”

 

[Horton]

You seem to have this idea that for Catholics it is either/or on the literal issue. It’s not, some is literal and some is figurative. This is a huge reason why it is not left to personal interpretation.

 

[mcq72]

Well, thanks for your perspective but for me, the Lord is right in the Catholic Church where he’s always been so I have no need to look elsewhere for him. I feel sorry for others who do, to be honest.

yes of course , but you missed my point. Most x Catholics that I know did not leave because they were looking for Christ elsewhere. That again is too calculating…again, no man (in the flesh) seeks after God, but for sure God seeks after us, finding us where He may.

i respect your need to leave this , but wanted to make sure you understood my post first. Never meant to imply they had to look for Christ elsewhere.

 

[mcq72]

You seem to have this idea that for Catholics it is either/or on the literal issue. It’s not, some is literal and some is figurative. This is a huge reason why it is not left to personal interpretation.

Personal interpretation has nothing to do with figurative or literal understanding. Agree the Spirit writes as He wills, employing all sorts of linguistics perfectly.

I am not pigeon holing CC into literal only. Only trying to show consistency in the text in determining figurative, literal, spiritual of never dying and eating His flesh.

 

[Horton]

The Bread of Life Discourse is very clear in what it states. The words of Jesus are not ambiguous in any way. The apostles understood what he said. Those in verse 60 who say “this saying is hard; who can accept it?” knew what Jesus was saying.

If Jesus meant for it to be take figuratively don’t you think you would have made that known to those around him rather than letting them walk away? I challenge you to read John 6:26-70 as a whole passage, straight through.

 

[mcq72]

If Jesus meant for it to be take figuratively don’t you think you would have made that known to those around him rather than letting them walk away?

If you think Jesus meant it in an unbloodied manner why didn’t Jesus tell them instead of letting them walk away ? Do you really think they would have stayed with any of the 3 or 4 understandings of communion (transubstantiation, consubstantiation, figurative, spiritual) ? The text is clear, they were leaving with any of these understandings. It is also clear those that left were not called of the Father and did not believe in Jesus yet had a closer understanding to yours than to other understandings.

The apostles understood what he said.

The text does not state what they understood, save that they were going to follow Jesus no matter what, that He had the words of eternal life. Even Peter misunderstood to the end, the night Jesus was arrested, and took to the sword.

I challenge you to read John 6:26-70 as a whole passage, straight through.

yes thank you but been there done that. it also ties in with Ch 3, where Jesus would not commit to men, knowing what was in their hearts, as they so called “followed” Him, that they did not believe in Him from the beginning, says John 6.

Jesus was becoming popular, and did many miracles. yet few if any understood He had to die. he finally had to put it in terms that only those called of the Father would remain.

 

[Dorothy]

I believe the mountains in our minds can be moved.

 

[Horton]

I have to assume you choose not to understand. You are so fixated on your concept of the bible and teachings, you have closed your mind to truth. It is futile to go any further. Have a good day.

 

[SonofFire]

Sadly, I joined the church of someone who convinced me that Catholic theology was wrong. I can say in retrospect that my decision was more emotional than a well done comparison. I came back 20 years later after I settled down emotionally and balanced the views from both sides.

 

[Padres1969]

Theology, Sociology, and Tradition primarily.

 

[NostalgicBaptist]

I have a question for Catholics who leave Catholicism for another Christian denomination.

How did you choose the version of Christianity you now subscribe to?

Is it down to the theology or random choice?

It came down to Theology. Early on, I wanted and asked God to lead me to the church or denomination where the knowledge of salvation was to be found, and where the truth of His word, the Bible was most accurately represented (I still do and remain open to learning). It was kind of a long and winding road for me, but I am confident that I got pretty close among Southern Baptists, although we have our own disagreements among ourselves.

 

[NostalgicBaptist]

One needs to start earlier in the text than verse 51, verses 35 through 41.

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. (John 6:35, ESV). This verse is key.

Here’s how I see it. In this verse Jesus laid it out to the unbelieving crowd what they needed to do. They needed to really come to Him in true faith (He already knew that they were not doing this). This was in response to their statements about Moses and manna. I think they were like, “That’s a pretty neat trick Jesus, but Moses fed the children of Israel with manna for 40 years. You’ve got to do better than that.” And so He told them about the true bread from heaven, Himself and that they needed to believe in Him.

Then they grumbled in unbelief and rejection, verse 41. And as so often happened in Jesus’ ministry, when He faced such a response, He switched over to speaking to such people in parable form. That “seeing they might not see and hearing, they might not hear.” (see Matthew 13:10-16)

This was an act, strange as it sounds, of both judgment and mercy. He often abandoned those to judgment who rejected Him and His message, which was also an act of mercy. Had He spelled out what He meant plainly, He knew they still would not receive Him in true faith, and, in so doing, they would incur more guilt for rejecting greater light.

 

[lilypadrees]

. It was kind of a long and winding road for me, but I am confident that I got pretty close among Southern Baptists, although we have our own disagreements among ourselves.

Funny, of all the Protestant churches I’ve been in, the Southern Baptist Church is the one He took me by the hand and led me out of. The pastor of that church actually spat on me for being Catholic!

 

[NostalgicBaptist]

Dang, I’m very sorry to hear that the pastor treated you like that. He had no excuse for such shameful behavior.

 

[lilypadrees]

Thank you, @NostalgicBaptist. I was around 10 when that happened and had just moved here. That same pastor, many years later, became the President of the Southern Baptist Convention.

 

[Bonaventurian]

I felt that I was the only one in the family who took our Catholic faith seriously and took the Bible literally.

“For many are called, but few are chosen.” Matthew 22:14

Unfortunately, that seems to be the common trend among modern Catholics.

 

[TOmNossor]

I have a question for Catholics who leave Catholicism for another Christian denomination.

How did you choose the version of Christianity you now subscribe to?

Is it down to the theology or random choice?

I began looking around outside the Catholic Church. This was because of a combination of the beam in my eye and the liberal message taught at my parish. It seemed to me that the Catholic Church was just one flavor among many.

I became a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because I was solidly convinced that this church could not be the product of Joseph Smith. Over time I have refined this belief to say that the Book of Mormon alone could not be the product of Joseph Smith. I still believe this.

So, it was not theology. It was not random (though life experiences lead in certain directions I am sure). It was a conviction that there was something divine present in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that I could not explain without acknowledging that God was involved. Much later I received what most LDS would call a testimony.

All that being said, some 15+ years ago I felt like I needed to explore the faith I left. As a non-Catholic, I concluded that Catholicism could not explain the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints adequately and I should remain a LDS. However, had I known what it was to be Catholic (what I learned as a non-Catholic), I am not sure I would have explored other faiths as I did. I have given special attention to Catholicism, but I feel no need to prove to myself that every faith is NOT where God would desire me to follow Him. I might have been a committed Catholic with a similar view concerning other faiths. Again this is not random, but I need not deny this is something that might have been (I can also say that had I been Catholic for xyz event, I am not sure I would have not begun looking then).

Charity, TOm