Do Catholics believe only they will go to heaven?

[BrotherChazz]

Tom:

Wow, what a wonderful teaching!!! It teaches that there is no sin!!! I love it!!! I can do absolutely anything I want since Jesus has forgiven my “future” sins!!! There is no sin then!!! Amen, as Martin Luther taught, we can (and should) sin and much as we like!!! Actually if we don’t sin, we’re questioning His forgiveness aren’t we??? We’d better get out there and sin then!!! What a concept!!! Do you see the folly in these teachings? They are what “we” want, not what God wants. I recommend you read Martin Luther’s writings, as much as you can, his faults are abundant and basic. And don’t ask your pastor for his thoughts on them, ask the Holy Spirit.

Your sarcasm and stretching here is appreciated and really makes me feel good, so let me first off thank you for showing your Catholic ways. Thank you.

Living out your life for God requires that you try to follow the commandments, but as we are not Christ, we will indeed sin. He is the only one who will ever lead a sinless life. DO you believe that the Pope will not sin for the rest of his life? It’s not humanly possible, because thats all we are, Humans…we are not God, and can’t be sinless.

 

[Tom]

BrotherChazz:

Your sarcasm and stretching here is appreciated and really makes me feel good, so let me first off thank you for showing your Catholic ways. Thank you.

Living out your life for God requires that you try to follow the commandments, but as we are not Christ, we will indeed sin. He is the only one who will ever lead a sinless life. DO you believe that the Pope will not sin for the rest of his life? It’s not humanly possible, because thats all we are, Humans…we are not God, and can’t be sinless.

Actually, it wasn’t as sarcastic as you might think. Please do a google search for the writings of Martin Luther, and read them. He actually does teach that if you’ve accepted Jesus you can’t sin because He’s forgiven you already, once and for all. That’s one of th the fundamental faults of this one teaching of his. It’s important to read Luther on your own, protestants and Catholics put quite a spin Luther’s teachings. Read them on your own, allow the Holy Spirit to guide you. After you do “Welcome home”.

 

[MariaG]

Hi,

You want verses on belonging to one church?

:bible1: John 10:16

:bible1:Rom 12:4-5

:bible1:Rom 15:5

:bible1:Col 3:15

How many do you want that we were told to be one Church? I can give you many, many more?

How about promises that the church will teach all truth?

:bible1:John 16:13

:bible1:1Tim 3:15

:bible1:Acts 15:28

How many more of these do you need? Is God only big enough to keep these promises for an individual or capable of keeping them for a whole church? We can look to the Bible and see this clearly.

Remember, it was Peter who was given the vision from God that no food is unclean? Then Peter taught this. But what did Peter do? He would not eat “unclean” food and had to be chastized. This shows how a person can teach the truth but not act out the truth. The Bible show us this.

Frankly, I think you have already made up your mind. You have decided that Calvary Chapel is more “Biblical”. You couldn’t be more wrong.

But please, I can provide much Scripture to show you “from the Bible”. One of my greatest joys as a convert to the Catholic faith is I can still “find it in the Bible”.

I am not sure what else you are asking here. Ask away, Scripture will be provided.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[itsjustdave1988]

BrotherChazz,

Jesus said to the apostles, “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Luke 10:16). This seems to be an appointment of authority that he had given to certain men that he appointed, which he did not give to all. He said this to those that He Himself appointed. Was the founder of the Baptist movement, John Smyth, among those appointed by Jesus or appointed by those appointed by Jesus? No. He actually baptized himself (by pouring, ironically enough), then baptized the others in his congregation. He started a new church apart from that historically established by Jesus. How was your pastor ordained? Was he appointed as pastor by those appointed in the historical laying of hands from the apostles, just as was done in NT times? I doubt it.

For the lawful pastor of the Catholic Church, the answer is yes, they were appointed by those appointed by Jesus. “He who hears you, hears me” applies to the lawful pastors who have been ordained in historical succession to those appointed by Jesus in the first century to teach with His voice.

Those appointed and sent out by Jesus are the voice of Christ, and they, in accord with Scripture, chose other men to teach in their name, and ordained them through the laying of hands to that office. Baptists broke from this first Church, committing the sin of Korah’s rebellion (cf. Num 16, Jude 11).

Furthermore, according to Scripture, the chief of these ministers appointed by Christ was Peter. And, according to the lawful pastors appointed by the first century pastors, the successor of Peter remained the chief steward, having authority over the other ministers of Christ.

See more on the Scripture roots of a single guy in charge of the Church here:

Upon this Rock - 12 Quotes from 10 Protestant Bible scholars
itsjustdave1988.blogspot.com/2005/04/upon-this-rock-is-rock-of-matt-1618.html

Unity of Command, not just a good idea, but biblical
itsjustdave1988.blogspot.com/2005/03/unity-of-command-not-just-good-idea.html

Bind and Loose and the Keys of the Kingdom
itsjustdave1988.blogspot.com/2005/04/bind-and-loose-and-keys-of-kingdom.html

 

[SL20]

One of the biggest problems with protestants…ask yourself do you really think Jesus established His Church and wanted a 100,000 different interpretations of the Bible and what it means to be Christian? Don’t you think Jesus would have wanted conformity with all people who are Christians?

For example many Christians see the evil in abortion and homosexuality, while other “Christians” use passages in the Bible, twist the context only to justify these grave sins.

:bible1: “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths” (2 Tim. 4:3–4).

scborromeo.org/truth/figure1.pdf

 

[DianJo]

Can you point out to me in the Bible where Jesus discusses a need to be a part of his church versus other churches? Or anything similar to that that I can see the Biblical evicence. I’ve already read John 6, but that doesn;t talk about the Church itself.

You are asking for us to prove that there actually was a “Catholic Church” at the time of the Aposltes. You will find no evidence of the “Catholic Church” as it is today - meaning buildings, Vatican, and all the “rules” that are established now. Correct?

The Catholic Church did not exist then as it does now - it did exist, though. There is much evidence of the heirarchy of the Catholic Church in Acts. Peter was definately the head. He imposed sentences, he speaks for the others, he ordains (laying on of hands). In Paul’s letters, he tells the Christians to be faithful to their bishops and to respect their teachings handed down by him (Tradition), etc.

During the first couple of centuries of the Church, the Church was being persecuted. Christianity was not legal unti 313 AD. The first time the Church is called the Catholic Church is by Ignatius of Antioch in 110 AD and he was talking about all the Christians at that time. We all believed the same things the Church teaches today. Please do some reading of the Early Church Fathers, I think you’ll be stunned.

When people spoke of the Church at that time, being persecuted and illegal, it was more about the body of people and the way they worshipped and what the Apostles taught since Christians could not build big churches or fellowship centers. All of the churches at the time spoken of in the NT were all Catholic because of who taught them and what they believed.

So, in short, you will not find the “Catholic Church” as such, mentioned in the bible. The bible is a Catholic tradition - that’s what it teaches - Catholic Tradition! The NT is a collection of Catholic writings. So if the teachers and writers of the bible were all Catholic, then it goes without saying that the Catholic Church has the right to interpret scripture since “she” wrote it, determined what was inspired and bound it together as a book.

To completely ignore the Tradition of the Church is to ignore any relevant information that would gives us insight into how these early Christians lived and worshipped. Not everything is contained in the bible. Those letters in the bible were written to specific churches, for specific reasons and there is much more that the writers of the letters had to say, surely. What about all the other churches that didn’t get a letter? We know Christ through His Church who passes down His teaching with the protection of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles and the early church fathers who were also teachers of the faith.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

But from what I’ve seen so far, there aren’t like a million differences.
Please be careful that you do not fall into indifferentism or relativism. In the matter of religion, there are moral absolutes. Jesus did not say, "Go forth and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. . .but, it’s optional as to how many sacraments you have, whether you teach faith alone or faith demonstrated through works as well; it doesn’t matter to me which parts of the Bible–which BTW isn’t even developed in written form yet–you choose and it doesn’t matter what you think a text means . … symbolic, literal, take your pick. . . You see, it DOES matter. Of the Christian churches, they aren’t all “right”; in fact, many outright contradict others on Scripture–so how do you know who is “right?” One must have the fullness of truth, and the others must have some degrees of truth, from greater but not total all the way down to the ittybittyest nanometer of truth but not total error.
Basically it’s differences in the sacraments.No, basically it is whether you believe in the teachings of 2000 years or the interpretations of people who dissented a couple of hundred years ago. All–repeat all–the major Protestant denominations have been in existence at most less than 500 years. Do you really think that Jesus allowed the “errors” of Catholicism to exist for 1500 years before He “revealed the REAL truth” to a Protestant. . .and how do you know which Protestant “got it right?”
Does it say in the Bible that if I don’t go to confession with a priest, thats a mortal sin? In the Bible, Jesus tells his disciples that “if you forgive a sin, it is forgiven; if you hold it bound, it is held bound.” And you do not HAVE TO GO to confession if you are not in mortal sin. Why would you NOT go to confession if you have sinned mortally? Why would you not go to the priest whom Jesus deliberately gave the ministry of forgiving sins TO?
You want me to read something a Catholic wrote. Well, yes, I do. You claim that you were baptized and raised Catholic. Why wouldn’t you read what a Catholic wrote? Who better to explain your faith? Or do you normally go to a dentist to ask about your heart disease? Both dentists and doctors are medical professionals, both are capable people. . .but you go to dentists for dental issues and doctors for medical ones. You go to CATHOLIC theologians for Catholic teachings and non-Catholic theologians for non Catholic teachings.
One side is offering me one opinion, and the other another opinion.What did I say about relativism and indifferentism? If one “opinion” is as good as another, why not stay Catholic? It looks as though you think that Catholicism "isn’t as good as the other “opinion”–why is that? And why make a judgment without knowing ALL THE FACTS?
I do pray to God. Several times a day. I fellowship with him a lot through the day. I don’t do it now, as I have in the past, through hail mary’s, but I also pray through other means. Prayer isn’t limited to the rosary.I’m glad you pray. I never said prayer was limited to the rosary–in fact, I specifically referenced the Liturgy of the Hours, psalms and scripture too. But why NOT pray a Hail Mary? It is scriptural, after all. Of course, the only reason we pray it at all is to glorify Her Son, Jesus. He came to us through her (and her cooperation with the Spirit); she points us back to Him. Beautiful. . .and foreshadowed through typology all THROUGH Scripture as well.

Look, if I wanted to choose a living room rug, (and your religion is MUCH more important), and I already HAD a living room rug, don’t you think that before I went out and got a NEW rug I should consider:
Does the original rug fit? Is it serviceable? What are its dimensions? What is it made of? How does it complement my decor?
If I just went out to the nearest rug store, saw a really cool rug that looked all new and bright and comfy, and bought it–without bothering to consider whether I actually NEEDED it in the first place, whether it would fit the measurements of my living room, whether it would stand up to use, and whether it would work with what I already had or require heavy expenses and life-altering changes on my part–wouldn’t I be a bit STUPID?

 

[BrotherChazz]

MariaG:

Hi,

You want verses on belonging to one church?

:bible1: John 10:16

:bible1:Rom 12:4-5

:bible1:Rom 15:5

:bible1:Col 3:15

How many do you want that we were told to be one Church? I can give you many, many more?

How about promises that the church will teach all truth?

:bible1:John 16:13

:bible1:1Tim 3:15

:bible1:Acts 15:28

How many more of these do you need? Is God only big enough to keep these promises for an individual or capable of keeping them for a whole church? We can look to the Bible and see this clearly.

Remember, it was Peter who was given the vision from God that no food is unclean? Then Peter taught this. But what did Peter do? He would not eat “unclean” food and had to be chastized. This shows how a person can teach the truth but not act out the truth. The Bible show us this.

Frankly, I think you have already made up your mind. You have decided that Calvary Chapel is more “Biblical”. You couldn’t be more wrong.

But please, I can provide much Scripture to show you “from the Bible”. One of my greatest joys as a convert to the Catholic faith is I can still “find it in the Bible”.

I am not sure what else you are asking here. Ask away, Scripture will be provided.

God Bless,
Maria

Maria, Thank you and God Bless! I appreciate it so much when I can see the evidence in the book instead of soley from what someone says.

Romans 12:4-5 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:
So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Can’t this be interpreted as we have many members in one body = Christians, but we have not the same office = other denominations. So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

I take this to mean that even though we have different denominations, we are all children of Christ. We are one in the same with different offices.

This would suggest contrary to belief that only the Catholic Church is the correct way.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

BrotherChazz,

This would suggest contrary to belief that only the Catholic Church is the correct way.

I think you are disregarding the difference in these “many denominations.”

Protestants, for example, assert that there are only 66 books in the Bible. Yet, Catholics canonized the Bible in the 4th century, asserted since that time that there were 73 books in the Bible. Both cannot be true, right? Can we legitamitely, without sin, reject the chapters and verses from the Bible that we don’t agree with? If so, wouldn’t that be a recipe for chaos?

One example is the Book of Daniel. All of Christianity prior to Reformation accepted the Theodotian recession of the Book of Daniel. Does your Calvary church accept it? If not, by whose authority do you reject the chapter and verses of the Holy Bible, that which ALL Christianity pior to the Reformation accepted as the Word of God? Can we simply reject James’ epistle based upon our personal views, regardless of the teachings of historical Christianity?

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD that proceeds from the mouth of God.’” (Matt 4:4)

 

[BrotherChazz]

I don’t know what to think. I’m going to just continue praying to God to let me know which direction is the right way.

 

[MariaG]

posted by BrotherChazz

Maria, Thank you and God Bless! I appreciate it so much when I can see the evidence in the book instead of soley from what someone says.

You are welcome! I know where you are coming from. I will tell you, you can fully come to the truth about the Catholic Church throught the Protestant Bible and the leading of the Holy Spirit. If I may so bold, pray that God would lead you all Truth. Use those words.

Romans 12:4-5 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:
So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Can’t this be interpreted as we have many members in one body = Christians, but we have not the same office = other denominations. So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Now, that may be the case, but look at when it was written. If you were a Christian, you belonged to the Catholic Church. There were no Christians unless they were Catholic. So through “no fault of their own” there are followers of Christ who are not Catholic, that is NOT what Scripture exhorts us to do.

I take this to mean that even though we have different denominations, we are all children of Christ. We are one in the same with different offices.

This would suggest contrary to belief that only the Catholic Church is the correct way.

This suggestion would only be even close to the truth for the last 500 years. There was only one church. Were Christians wrong for 1500 years?

There is only one way, and that way is through Christ. Different denominations did not spring up for over 1500 years. There are many places in the Bible where it warns us those who will come along. Who has been here and who has “come along”.

Here is a question for you. Go ask your pastor how he interprets John 6:35-71. Then ask us. We both will give you our interpretation of Scripture. Who is right? We both take Scripture but come up with different answers. The Bible, John 16:13, tells us that we will be guided to all truth. Is this only for individuals or for the whole church? What about Scripture that tells us the church is the pillar and foundation of truth?(1Tim 3:15) When did the Christian Church, which was only Catholic for over 1500 years loose the truth? What does that say about God and His promises?

There is not one teaching of the Catholic Church that contradicts the Bible. Bring them here (on a new thread ) We can go one by one. Ask you pastor to give you one teaching of the Catholic Church that contradicts the Bible.

You do that and I ask you to one thing. Ask your pastor where in the Bible it tells you to follow the Bible alone?

God Bless,
Maria

 

[itsjustdave1988]

BrotherChazz:

I don’t know what to think. I’m going to just continue praying to God to let me know which direction is the right way.

I recommend, in addition to fervent prayer on the matter, you do some research into the Catholic answers to Protestant objections. A great resource is catholic.com/ . I also recommend authors such as Karl Keating, Scott Hahn, and Patrick Madrid. God bless your studies.

 

[bengeorge]

BrotherChazz:

I just read John 6, and I am going to see what the Pastor at Calvary says about that, and their stance on it.

Your pastor has become your Pope.

The Pope and the Church have credentials going back to Christ. What are your pastor’s credentials?

I guess I don’t understand why you accept the word of your pastor over the word of the Church which has existed for 2000 years and can trace its roots directly to Christ.

 

[MonicaC]

BrotherChazz:

Dave I thank you so much for your responce. Can you point out to me in the Bible where Jesus discusses a need to be a part of his church versus other churches? Or anything similar to that that I can see the Biblical evicence. I’ve already read John 6, but that doesn;t talk about the Church itself.

Hello Chazz, It seems to me that you have a need to have everything in writting, didn’t christ say to Thomas that blesssed are those who believe and have not seen. Christ founded the church that is why he came back to earth after his resurrection to teach how he wants HIS church to run. Now this Church was going for 1500 years when some people Luther, Calvin, Smith thought that maybe they might know just a little bit more than God and start their own church.(now doesn’t that sound a lot like our first parents and the tree of knowledge?). I really hope you would try to learn more about God on your own. You know if you areonly planning on just going to Mass on Sundays and hope that a lighting bult will strick you and you will suddenly know the truth, than you may be in for a little surprise. I suggest that you start doing some research and pray for guidence from the Holy Spirit to find your answers. I would be very careful about asking your Baptist pastor some of these questions, because he has already been lead astray. All you need to know will come to you from God and I would start with the institution we all know that He founded. Jesus said that he will always protect his church so you know that you are safe here.

Good Luck!
Monica

 

[TNT]

BrotherChazz:

Ok, I’m having a tough time with this. Can you point out to me in the Bible where it tells me this, that even if I believe in him and his teachings and everything I need to be in his Catholic Church?
Thanks in advance to everyone who is replying and has replied!

That’s the WHOLE point!
IF you believed in everything and are obeying in Everything, then you would be in the True Church of Christ, which can only be the FIRST Church He established…that is NOT Calvary Chapel which has yet to reach its 50th birthday.

However, if you believe that they are the ones that commanded only 27 books in the NT, no more no less, and that you are in fact your own supreme judge to INTERPRET those books or the current minister in your community, then you must believe that that is all IN your bible. GOOD LUCK!

The ONLY thing that all prot’s deny the pope is what they themselves claim…INFALLIBLE interpretation of the Catholic Church’s Bible.