Evangelicals and the Church

[magdelaine]

** True Church**

Membership by Spirit baptism.
There is no salvation outside this church.
Members enter by God?s will upon believing His Gospel.
Members are secure in Christ, can never be excommunicated.
One authority?the infallible Word of God.
One Head and One Mediator.
Foundation is Jesus and the Apostles.
Proclaims the true Gospel.
Justified by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
Promise of future glory with Jesus Christ

** Roman Catholic Church**

Membership by water baptism.
There is salvation outside this church.
Members enter by man?s will or by parents? desire.
Members are not secure, can be excommunicated and condemned to hell.
Three authorities?the Bible, Tradition and the infallible Magesterium.
Two Heads, many mediators.
Foundation is Peter.
Proclaims another gospel.
Justified by faith plus works.
Promise of a purging or punishing fire for sins.

Ok, I’m going to let others address the rest; I’m just going to make a few adjustments to what I know.

Catholics believe:
Justified by grace through faith and “works” in Jesus Christ
Promise of future glory with Jesus Christ after a purging or punishing fire for sins if not perfectly justified at death.

 

[Eden]

Alfie - Your list is very useful for discussing what you believe the “True Church” taught. I have started a new thread based on your list as I believe it deserves it’s own. Thanks.

 

[SDAgirl]

.

As far as the Bible and interpretations, please remember that it was the bishops of the Catholic Church who set the Canon in the late 3rd, early 4th centuries.
As they were given the authority to set the Canon, their heirs also have the authority to interpret it.

Ok, my only question is, who gave THEM the authority to do so? Or did they just take it upon themselves? I honestly have the hardest time understanding this point of the faith. A man says he can judge saints and angels because he SAYS God told him it’s ok. Does it not take more faith to be a Catholic in this instance than to be a Protestant? I wish someone could give me a vilid answer on this point. WHERE aside from Catholic writings, does it say that the Pope is MORE than anybody else? Just because the church has been around for a long time??? PLEASE DONT TAKE THIS THE WRONG WAY!!! ( but the devil has been around for a long time too. that doesnt make him right)? Please help me on this point?

 

[sadie2723]

** True Church**

Membership by Spirit baptism.
There is no salvation outside this church.
Members enter by God?s will upon believing His Gospel.
Members are secure in Christ, can never be excommunicated.
One authority?the infallible Word of God.
One Head and One Mediator.
Foundation is Jesus and the Apostles.
Proclaims the true Gospel.
Justified by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
Promise of future glory with Jesus Christ

** Roman Catholic Church**

Membership by water baptism.
There is salvation outside this church.
Members enter by man?s will or by parents? desire.
Members are not secure, can be excommunicated and condemned to hell.
Three authorities?the Bible, Tradition and the infallible Magesterium.
Two Heads, many mediators.
Foundation is Peter.
Proclaims another gospel.
Justified by faith plus works.
Promise of a purging or punishing fire for sins.

Where does she find this stuff. Still, I love it. Gives me an opportunity to poke holes in the lies again. Yahoo!

Oh, and Alfie, don’t think that I did not notice that you chose not to talk to us about defending your bogus claim that Catholics were for the Nazi party. I trust that we can count you as beaten on that one?

Let’s take them one at a time. I am only going to deal with the pot shots at Rome here.

Membership by water baptism.
Well, it is true that baptism in the Catholic Church uses water. But, you have conveniently overlooked what it means. It is not just about taking a bath. If you have doubts about this, come to the Easter Vigil Mass and see for yourself. Let’s also not forget about Confirmation where we afirm our belief in Christ and the Church that He established…for those of you playing along at home, that Church is seated in Rome.

There is salvation outside this church. Where? When does the Catholic Church claim that one can be saved outside of the Church? In fact, is it not a mortal sin to miss Mass? Sounds like Chuch is pretty important to me, Alfie. Back to the drawing board on that one…can’t wait to see the next version.

Members enter by man?s will or by parents? desire.
Members enter because of God’s will. This is why he told the deciples to go out and baptise everyone: men, women, children, infants. This is the ultimate expression of God’s will. And, due to confirmation, we all make a personal commitment in the belief of the teaching of Christ and his Holy Church.

Members are not secure, can be excommunicated and condemned to hell.

Actually, our members are secure. They are secure in the teaching of the One True Church. And, that Church teaches that we can be condemed to hell or excommunicated if our actions warrant it. The sad part is that your church does not teach this, which means that some of your members are in for one heck of a shock. Oh, and by the way, the reason we teach this…it is in the Bible.

Three authorities?the Bible, Tradition and the infallible Magesterium.

Try again. There is only one authority…the Lord Jesus Christ. The Bible is inspired by God, the tradition is passed down from God, and the Mageterium was established by God. Any questions why we follow it?

Two Heads, many mediators.
There is only one head of the Chruch and that is the Lord Jesus Christ. The Pope, which is who I assume you are talking about, is his appointed teacher here on Earth. The mediators of which you speak, and I am assuming that you are talking about priests and saints here, were all discussed in the Bible. Jesus gives men the power to forgive sins, and the Bible is clear about the prayers of the Saints in front of the throne of heaven. Next.

Foundation is Peter.

Nope. Foundation is Christ. Peter was just made the first Pope…by Jesus.

Proclaims another gospel.
What? Who do you think gave you the gospel? Had it not been for the monks writing it down for years and translating it, you would have nothing to read. And, the Catholic Church has never altered what was in the Bible…the Protestants can’t make that claim.

Justified by faith plus works.
Well sure. Just like Jesus taught us. Just like James says. You are too, and you should realize it.

Promise of a purging or punishing fire for sins.

I would assume you are referring to Purgatory here. Well, it is in the Bible, and yes it was promised…next question?

 

[magdelaine]

sadie2723:

There is salvation outside this church. Where? When does the Catholic Church claim that one can be saved outside of the Church? In fact, is it not a mortal sin to miss Mass? Sounds like Chuch is pretty important to me, Alfie. Back to the drawing board on that one…can’t wait to see the next version.

It depends on what you mean by “Church”. The Church teaches, and rightly so, that salvation can be attained by men who either have no knowledge of Christ or who, for cultural or other reasons, cannot accept the Gospels as true. Regardless, the salvation of every man is bought by the death of Christ on the Cross, whether or not he acknowledges it.

Correct me if I’m wrong…

 

[Church_Militant]

Alfie:

Contarini:

Ever heard of doctrinal development? You existed for centuries without the dogma of papal infallibility as well.

Besides, the pre-Reformation Church was far more open to evangelical emphases than the post-Tridentine Church. Protestants continue lines of development from the pre-Reformation Church that were cut off or stifled after Trent.

Can you cite any historical references to prove this to be true?

Evangelical teaching is founded on the error of Sola Scriptura which is day & night divergent than Catholic teaching.

You haven’t tried to characterize “certain” evangelicals. You’ve made a sweeping generalization. That’s my point.

If we met an Evangelical who was the exception to the rule there would be no generalizations to be made.

Fact: When it comes to a-C attacks and assertions people calling themselves “Evangelicals” seem to right up in our faces with assertions and allegations that have no basis in truth. Case in point: The person who opened this very thread.

Do you consider any of these people to be fundamentalists?

John Hagee
Dave Hunt
Adrian Rogers
Marty Minto
Mike Gendron
Norman Geisler
John Ankerberg
RC Sproul
Ravi Zacaharis
Erwin Lutzer
Michael Yossef
David Jeremiah

Looks like a roll call at an anti-Catholic convention to me!

Billy Graham is a wimp. I stopped giving money to him years ago for a number of reasons, among them are his unwillingness to speak out against abortion and his support of Rome.

So the one guy who seems to focus most on the simple Gospel is a wimp.

Everytime someone on this forum uses information to back up their arguements they use Catholic history. Are you going to tell me that Catholic history isn’t biased? You know it is. They can re-write history anyway they choose. If you want me to read anything about religious history then what would you suggest? I sure it would be something that is biased toward your view points.

Aw…what did you expect us to do? Use the trash that someone else made up? I suppose that the Rabbi who wrote the book pointing out the work the Catholic Church did (More than anyone else!) to assist the Jews during the war is biased…biased by perhaps the FACTS that he knows and stated to be true.

I was a deacon in an “Evangelical” (Assembly of God) church and I never heard any teaching at all about any of the early church fathers. If you said “Didache”, they wouldn’t have known what the heck you were talking about despite the fact that they add that doxology to the Lord’s Prayer as if it’s in the original NT text. (It’s not).

All history is biased. It is wriiten from the standpoint of what group of people are dominant in society. If you have a war, it is the victor that writes the history not the loser. The Catholic Church has been the dominant Christian religion on this earth and it has the power to re-write history or in the case of the Bible change its writings to fit their political agendas.

Again… this is an allegation that you cannot prove. I would love to see some evidence that Catholics rewrote history, but I have yet to see anything more than unsupported allegations to that effect from people who have been called on their non-Catholic sources and refuted by Catholics. Yet I don’t see any of the adversaries to our most holy faith actually reading and comparing sources to see which is the more accurate and reliable. I have compared them and that’s one of the reasons that I am a Catholic.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[sadie2723]

magdelaine:

It depends on what you mean by “Church”. The Church teaches, and rightly so, that salvation can be attained by men who either have no knowledge of Christ or who, for cultural or other reasons, cannot accept the Gospels as true. Regardless, the salvation of every man is bought by the death of Christ on the Cross, whether or not he acknowledges it.

Correct me if I’m wrong…

I agree with you there. I interpreted what Alfie was saying to mean that Catholics viewed the Church as not being necessary in their lives. Sorry, might have gotten a bit caught up in the rest of the bunk in her email.

 

[Eden]

SDAgirl:

.

Ok, my only question is, who gave THEM the authority to do so? Or did they just take it upon themselves? I honestly have the hardest time understanding this point of the faith. A man says he can judge saints and angels because he SAYS God told him it’s ok. Does it not take more faith to be a Catholic in this instance than to be a Protestant? I wish someone could give me a vilid answer on this point. WHERE aside from Catholic writings, does it say that the Pope is MORE than anybody else? Just because the church has been around for a long time??? PLEASE DONT TAKE THIS THE WRONG WAY!!! ( but the devil has been around for a long time too. that doesnt make him right)? Please help me on this point?

God gave them the authority. If God entrusted the Catholic bishops to set the Canon, does he not entrust that same Church to interpret it? Since God did not entrust the duty to set the Canon to Protestants, why should I accept Protestant theologies? Do you see why it is hard for a Catholic to accept that Protestants have authority?

 

[Eden]

Hi everybody. I started a new thread entitled “True Church” versus “Roman Catholic Church” in the Non-Catholic religions forum if anyone wants to respond there too. Or not.

Then we could get back on track:

sadie:

Oh, and Alfie, don’t think that I did not notice that you chose not to talk to us about defending your bogus claim that Catholics were for the Nazi party. I trust that we can count you as beaten on that one?

 

[sadie2723]

Church Militant:

Alfie:

Can you cite any historical references to prove this to be true?

Evangelical teaching is founded on the error of Sola Scriptura which is day & night divergent than Catholic teaching.If we met an Evangelical who was the exception to the rule there would be no generalizations to be made.

Fact:

When it comes to a-C attacks and assertions people calling themselves “Evangelicals” seem to right up in our faces with assertions and allegations that have no basis in truth. Case in point: The person who opened this very thread.

Looks like a roll call at an anti-Catholic convention to me!

So the one guy who seems to focus most on the simple Gospel is a wimp.Aw…what did you expect us to do? Use the trash that someone else made up? I suppose that the Rabbi who wrote the book pointing out the work the Catholic Church did (More than anyone else!) to assist the Jews during the war is biased…biased by perhaps the FACTS that he knows and stated to be true.

I was a deacon in an “Evangelical” (Assembly of God) church and I never heard any teaching at all about any of the early church fathers. If you said “Didache”, they wouldn’t have known what the heck you were talking about despite the fact that they add that doxology to the Lord’s Prayer as if it’s in the original NT text. (It’s not).Again… this is an allegation that you cannot prove. I would love to see some evidence that Catholics rewrote history, but I have yet to see anything more than unsupported allegations to that effect from people who have been called on their non-Catholic sources and refuted by Catholics. Yet I don’t see any of the adversaries to our most holy faith actually reading and comparing sources to see which is the more accurate and reliable. I have compared them and that’s one of the reasons that I am a Catholic.
Pax vobiscum,

Here here! The bottom line is that the Evangelicals can throw out bad propaganda all day long and it makes no difference. If you want to argue based on facts, you will be in for a rude awakening…that Rome, who they hate more than they hate anything…is right.

Trust me, I know why it is hard to accept. For once you know Rome to be right, everything else falls apart.

 

[SDAgirl]

Eden:

God gave them the authority. If God entrusted the Catholic bishops to set the Canon, does he not entrust that same Church to interpret it?

There was no such thing as CATHOLIC then. Just Christian. And how do you know that the bishops were entrusted? Maybe they just decided to put their 2 cents in on the law. Like I said, it must take an amazing amount more faith to be Catholic and trust that all these people have given you correct instructions. And if not, you always have that promise about only being judged according to your knowledge. I understand a little better now. Thank you.

 

[sadie2723]

SDAgirl:

Eden:

God gave them the authority. If God entrusted the Catholic bishops to set the Canon, does he not entrust that same Church to interpret it?

There was no such thing as CATHOLIC then. Just Christian. And how do you know that the bishops were entrusted? Maybe they just decided to put their 2 cents in on the law. Like I said, it must take an amazing amount more faith to be Catholic and trust that all these people have given you correct instructions. And if not, you always have that promise about only being judged according to your knowledge. I understand a little better now. Thank you.

Well, I admit that faith is part of it. But, there is no more faith to be Catholic and believe in the Pope than there is to believe in the Bible. Let’s face it, we all view the Bible as being inspired, and we trust that it was. That is faith.

 

[Church_Militant]

SDAgirl:

.

As far as the Bible and interpretations, please remember that it was the bishops of the Catholic Church who set the Canon in the late 3rd, early 4th centuries.
As they were given the authority to set the Canon, their heirs also have the authority to interpret it.

Ok, my only question is, who gave THEM the authority to do so? Or did they just take it upon themselves? I honestly have the hardest time understanding this point of the faith. A man says he can judge saints and angels because he SAYS God told him it’s ok. Does it not take more faith to be a Catholic in this instance than to be a Protestant? I wish someone could give me a vilid answer on this point. WHERE aside from Catholic writings, does it say that the Pope is MORE than anybody else? Just because the church has been around for a long time??? PLEASE DONT TAKE THIS THE WRONG WAY!!! ( but the devil has been around for a long time too. that doesnt make him right)? Please help me on this point?

Okay… a good question, though actually sort of off topic.

According to the Gospels what did Jesus come to establish, a church or a book?

What according to the New Testament is the pillar and ground of the truth?

Who actually was used of God to write the New Testament?

Based on the earliest writings of believers outside of the canon of the NT, do they express faith in teachings that align more with Catholic or non-Catholic belief? Read it here.

Then from what you’ve see, who had the authority to set the canon of scripture? Does a canonical list appear within the text of the Bible itself? (It does not…).

If the early church was Catholic in it’s beliefs. (And it was) And that same church is the one that collected and by Holy Spirit discernment, discussion, and debate, (A list of such discussions can be found in church history) decided what writings were the inspired canon, then the fact is that the Catholic Church was indeed the authority that collected, protected, and authoritatively declared what writings constituted the Canon of the Word of God.

As I often say: Get the facts. Decide for yourself.
Pax tecum,

 

[SDAgirl]

Does a canonical list appear within the text of the Bible itself? (It does not…).

We believe that is the 10 commandments. The Mosaic law is not necessary anymore, but the commandments were written with God’s finger. They are obviosly important, as the Mosaic law was not as long-standing. Hence the theological differences. We believe in the commandments as they were written in the Bible. Not as they were abbreviated. When you abbreviate the 4th commandment to say Remember the Sabbath Day. and thats it, you leave out the SEAL of GOD. It is this commandment in which he states his ownership of this planet as God and creator. He says its important, we believe him.

 

[Eden]

SDAgirl:

Eden:

There was no such thing as CATHOLIC then. Just Christian.

Not true. The Bishop of Antioch (where the term “Christian” was first used in Acts) states the following, around 107 A.D.:

The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, “the Catholic Church,” at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded. The title apparently was old in Ignatius’s time, which means it probably went all the way back to the time of the apostles.

And how do you know that the bishops were entrusted? Maybe they just decided to put their 2 cents in on the law. Like I said, it must take an amazing amount more faith to be Catholic and trust that all these people have given you correct instructions. And if not, you always have that promise about only being judged according to your knowledge. I understand a little better now. Thank you.

The bible tells us who are false teachers and who are not. If they do not have apostolic succession they do not have authority.

 

[Church_Militant]

There was no such thing as CATHOLIC then. Just Christian.

And how do you know that the bishops were entrusted? Maybe they just decided to put their 2 cents in on the law. Like I said, it must take an amazing amount more faith to be Catholic and trust that all these people have given you correct instructions. And if not, you always have that promise about only being judged according to your knowledge. I understand a little better now. Thank you. What if I prove you wrong on this from a letter from the bishop of the church of Antioch who was discipled by St. John the evangelist?

CHAP. VIII.–LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP.

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Link

Now Ignatius would not have used that name for the church unless it was something that was already readily recognizable by the believers. Even Acts of the Apostles points out that it was not a name that we gave ourselves, but one that was tacked on by unbelievers…even so, the name is only used twice more in the whole NT, and only once by a believer (St. Peter). (Acts Of Apostles 11:26, 26:28, and 1st Peter 4:16)

In my experience, it takes no more faith to be a Catholic than it did to be anything else I was.
Pax tecum,

 

[Eden]

SDAgirl:

Does a canonical list appear within the text of the Bible itself? (It does not…).

We believe that is the 10 commandments.

What CM is asking is, does the Bible list a table of contents within its texts? The 10 Commandments are not a list of which books belong in the New Testament.

 

[sadie2723]

Taking us back on track here for a second…Alfie, I am still waiting for you to show us how the Catholic Church, who saved more Jews than any other organization durring WW2, was a supporter of the Nazi party. Did you just give up on me? It is ok if you have, but let us all know so that we can move on.

 

[Church_Militant]

SDAgirl:

Wow. Are these chat rooms always hostile? We are supposed to be sharing what we know in our own faiths and coming to a deeper understanding of each other? Not trying to be clever and sound smart when all you’re doing is quoting somebody else.

These are not chatrooms SDAG, this is a forum…a message board. Chats are a whole 'nother animal.

NCR and Apologetics are both essentially debate forums, so the passion level is usually pretty high and “hostility” depends on who is in the discussion at any given time.

Some of us, like my friend Alfie and I, go 'round and 'round all the time, and sometimes she feels “kicked to the curb” which I never intended or that I’m a “slug”, but I really don’t mind and I pray for her and I hope that she is faithful to pray for me. I really believe that she does! I firmly believe that her heart is in the right place.
Pax tecum,

 

[Eden]

SDAgirl:

When you abbreviate the 4th commandment to say Remember the Sabbath Day. and thats it, you leave out the SEAL of GOD.

The Sabbath in the New Testament

Jesus is seen violating the law of the Sabbath on several occasions (Jn. 9:16, Jn 7:23, Mk. 3:4).

It is interesting that in various passages the Lord restates all of the decalogue except for one commandment. “And Jesus replied, You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, honor your father and mother, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mt. 19:18–19). “It is written: ‘The Lord your God shall you worship, and him alone shall you serve’” (Mt. 4:10). Finally, “But I say to you, do not swear at all; not by heaven, for it is God’s throne” (Mt. 5:34). The commandment Jesus didn’t restate? To keep holy the Sabbath.

Our Lord defends his disciples when the Jews attacked them for not observing the Sabbath, ending his comments by saying: “For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath” (Mt. 12:1–8). Or again, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mk. 2:27). The fact that Jesus rebukes too severe an interpretation of Sabbath law (Lk. 13:10–16, 14:1–5; Jn. 5:9–18, 7:22) suggests that the he was not pleased with the way that the Sabbath was being observed.

After Jesus gave us a new covenant at the Last Supper, his emphasis seems to be on Sundays. Sunday was the day he was found to have been resurrected, and his first two appearance to the twelve disciples were on the following two Sundays (Jn. 20:19, 20:26). Again, five weeks later—on Sunday—the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles.

Look at Colossians 2:17–19:** “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—things which are a mere shadow of what is to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.”** This verse has been vigorously debated. What is meant by “Sabbath day”? How are we to understand “Let no man judge you”?

When Paul writes “Let no one pass judgment on you,” the text suggests that the ones who were doing the judging were the Jewish Christians who were practicing the old covenant convocations and other dietary aberrations of Christianity. Finally, Paul writes that the Sabbath is a shadow of things to come, and that the substance is in Christ. It is clear from this text that Paul, like the Old Testament writers, considered all the Old Testament convocations as inseparable; indeed, in saying that all three are a mere shadow of things to come, he makes no distinction between the first two terms and the third. Paul concludes that the reality lies in Christ. ** The Greek literally reads: “but the body is of Christ,” meaning that all of our lives and all of our energies need to be submitted to Christ who is ever present to us and that the old covenant convocations such as the Sabbath are no longer binding.**

In Paul’s letter to the Romans, written around 57–58, he says, “For one person considers one day more important than another, while another person considers all days alike. Let everyone be fully persuaded in his own mind. Whoever observes the day observes it to the Lord” (Rom. 14:5–6). The apostle is speaking here about the day which is being observed to the Lord, i.e., the day of worship. He notes that this is up to each person to decide. It must be noted, however, that Paul does not specifically mention the Sabbath here.

From these texts it seems clear that Paul considered Sabbath observance a matter of personal conviction that was not important in itself. Moreover, since Paul was presumably responding to the churches in Colossae, Galatia, and Rome about matters which concerned them, it seems clear that some Christians were worshiping on days other that Sabbath in Rome and in Asia Minor around 54–58.

Around the years 80–90, Christians were thrown out of the synagogues. This may have provided further stimulus for Christians to change their worship from Sabbath to Sunday. The apostle John wrote his gospel in this same time frame, significant because it provided for Christians an explanation of how God could change an “everlasting” law. John wrote how the world had been symbolically created anew in Jesus. One implication of this is that with the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ one eternity had ended and another had begun. God could therefore abrogate an everlasting law and still not contradict himself.

catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9902fea1.asp