Evangelicals Will Be Extinct Within Ten Years

  • Thread starter Thread starter OneTrueCathApos
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well why wouldn’t you dispute the so called 6 million Jews who were killed at the Holocaust? Are there names of exactly 6 million people?
Again, you make weird and irrelevant arguments. I never asked for the names of the 800,000. But if you want to claim this as an established, solid ballpark estimate (in the way that the 6-million figure is established, give or take a few hundred thousand:mad:), you need more than one estimate by one diplomat based on conversations he had with survivors.

Edwin
 
Okay but what did Pius do, specifically, to save 800k Jews?
He supervised, ordered, and coordinated the Catholic Church’s attempts to offfer shelter and escape for European jews during the course of the war. He evern ordered and sheltered Jews in the Vatican city and, if I am not mistaken, Castel Gandolfo and other Church properties. He was instrumental because without his support the Church would have been unable to accomplish what it did… the rescue of hundreds of thousands of Jews… without firing a shot in anger.

Peace,
-Robert
 
Just read a huge article from the Christian Science Monitor that Evangelicals will be gone within 10 years due to the fact they are too much into their Megachurches, and they don’t teach the truth from the Word of God.
Ironic, coming from the Christian Science Monitor. Christian Science has really deviated from traditional Christian doctrine, far further than Evangelicals have.
 
. I’ve spent a good part of the last 10 years studying scripture and it has only strengthened my Catholic faith. What you probably find inconsistent with Scripture is your own misunderstanding of the Catholic faith. I invite you to start learning what Catholics really believe, as opposed to what you may have been told we believe.

Peace,
-Robert
I’ve spent a good part of the last 10 years studying scripture and it has only strengthened my Catholic faith. What you probably find inconsistent with Scripture is your own misunderstanding of the Catholic faith. I invite you to start learning what Catholics really believe, as opposed to what you may have been told we believe.

Peace,
-Robert
(Skipping ahead to this post) With all due respect, Robert, do you believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God? Because I don’t know any Catholics that hold that belief. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any out there, only my experience. It’s hard to hold a meaningful conversation when one side is speaking about Truth, and the other side has never cracked a page in the Bible based on what someone else has told them about the Bible’s reliability.

Evangelical churches will continue to thrive as long as it’s members allow themselves to be told the Word of God instead of reading it themselves - same as Catholics. jmo
 
The Evangelicals must come to an understanding that the Eucharist is the actual body of Christ.
I find this statement as disturbing as the Pope’s statement that salvation is found in the Catholic church only.
 
(Skipping ahead to this post) With all due respect, Robert, do you believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God? Because I don’t know any Catholics that hold that belief. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any out there, only my experience. It’s hard to hold a meaningful conversation when one side is speaking about Truth, and the other side has never cracked a page in the Bible based on what someone else has told them about the Bible’s reliability.

Evangelical churches will continue to thrive as long as it’s members allow themselves to be told the Word of God instead of reading it themselves - same as Catholics. jmo
So, I just want to make a couple of quick comments here.

I’m Catholic and I believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. I believe the last 40 years or so there has been a breakdown in the catechesis process for Catholics and I also beleieve that issue is being addressed. I recevied my catechesis from and Evangelical Church and returned to the Catholic Church.

To your point about Evangelical Churches thriving. And when I’m speaking about Evangelical Church’s I’m talking about the “seeker sensitive” Churchs, Willow Creek, Saddleback, etc. I believe these churchs thrive for new believers, people that have not heard the word of God or have not had proper catechesis.

One problem is that because the folks attend these churches DON’T read the word of God, they never grow in their faith and after a few years their faith fizzles out or they become stagnant. The “process of sanctification” stalls. Please see the link I put in this thread last week. This is not my opinion but the opinion of the “seeker sensitive” churches themselves. This was a stated problem in the Church I attended and also a stated problem by the Mega Churchs.

Another problem, how much of the teaching of scripture is about God and much has to do with the Senior Pastor? Again, in my experience, at the Evangelical church I attended the Senior Pastor was an EXCELLENT teacher and a great guy, helped lots of people, etc. When he wasn’t giving the message on a particular Sunday for whatever reason the church attendance was literally halved. Many in the Congregation weren’t interested in listening to any other members of the staff. What happens to this congreation if this Senior Pastor retires, God calls him somehwere else?

Each and every person is responsible for his own journey with God. To delegate that responsibilty is to remain one that needs to be fed milk and not solid food. Catholics not studying scripture, along with the guidance from the Magisterium of course, IMO are a consequence of the catechesis problem stated earlier. My parents generation (in there 80s) know their stuff, my generation (in my 40s) lost it somewhere. My kids generation (teens) is starting to be different, i.e. beginning to know their stuff again.
 
Things like in this book, maybe? :hmmm:
This is one person, or I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, a few, I am talking about a pope. One man who saved tens of thousands of people. This wasn’t the pope’s issue, it was Germany’s. Hitler’s. But the pope didn’t sit back anyway. I don’'t need to bash this to death, buy some books about it and learn, especially the ones written by the Jews. Non-Catholics will bash this to death. Terrible.
 
This is one person, or I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, a few, I am talking about a pope. One man who saved tens of thousands of people. This wasn’t the pope’s issue, it was Germany’s. Hitler’s. But the pope didn’t sit back anyway. I don’'t need to bash this to death, buy some books about it and learn, especially the ones written by the Jews. Non-Catholics will bash this to death. Terrible.
Dude, I’m being taught by the rabbi who literally wrote the book about Pius XII and the Holocaust. Don’t talk down to me about getting informed.

I think this might be useful as a good start if you insist on having numbers. However, I don’t think you needed to start something about what religion did more in World War II, and I’m Catholic and technically on your side. It’s a dumb thing to argue.

(sorry for the threadjack, guys, I mostly lurk NCR but this was getting to me)
 
(Skipping ahead to this post) With all due respect, Robert, do you believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God? Because I don’t know any Catholics that hold that belief.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

107 The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”

Ergo, all genuine Catholics believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. You must not know any real Catholics.
 
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

107 The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”

Ergo, all genuine Catholics believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. You must not know any real Catholics.
Most Catholics understand this passage to say only that the truth we need for salvation is found in Scripture without error. That is what I believe myself (though I’m not Catholic). I know that some conservative Catholics argue that this is a misreading, but you guys are in the minority.

Edwin
 
So, I just want to make a couple of quick comments here.

I’m Catholic and I believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God.

To your point about Evangelical Churches thriving…

One problem is that because the folks attend these churches DON’T read the word of God, they never grow in their faith and after a few years their faith fizzles out or they become stagnant. The “process of sanctification” stalls. Please see the link I put in this thread last week. This is not my opinion but the opinion of the “seeker sensitive” churches themselves. This was a stated problem in the Church I attended and also a stated problem by the Mega Churchs.

Another problem, how much of the teaching of scripture is about God and much has to do with the Senior Pastor?..

Each and every person is responsible for his own journey with God. To delegate that responsibilty is to remain one that needs to be fed milk and not solid food. Catholics not studying scripture, along with the guidance from the Magisterium of course, IMO are a consequence of the catechesis problem stated earlier. My parents generation (in there 80s) know their stuff, my generation (in my 40s) lost it somewhere. My kids generation (teens) is starting to be different, i.e. beginning to know their stuff again.
Wizkid43, I am so happy to hear that there are Catholics such as yourself who believe the Word of God is inerrant! I’m new to this board, and after reading another thread contrasting worship in the Catholic church with other churches, I was curious enough to perhaps visit a Catholic mass and see for myself. I would very much like to get back to the heart of real worship.

But then I got the wake-up call after reading many threads as to what has always been the problem with the Catholic faith for me - and that’s playing loose with the Truth. I’ll watch for your posts because I hold them in high regard as I learn here.

I agree that Christians will not grow in their faith or be “sanctified” without a growing knowledge of the Word of God. But living in Houston (home of a word-of-faith mega church) I have witnessed one Pastor dying and being replaced by another, and the church just keeps growing. As long as there are people who want to have their ears tickled every Sunday and call it church…
 
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

107 The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”

Ergo, all genuine Catholics believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. You must not know any real Catholics.
Marsha Adams, you’re right - I don’t know any real Catholics if your quote above is what Catholics are taught. It’s been my experience that it’s more like the post below yours, where Catholics pick and choose what they believe, and then there is no Truth and you might as well throw the Bible out the window because it’s all subjective…

How many Catholics would you estimate are posting on this board that aren’t true Catholics? Right now, I’ll be looking for yours and wizkid’s posts because I know we are on the same page, so to speak.
 
Most Catholics understand this passage to say only that the truth we need for salvation is found in Scripture without error. That is what I believe myself (though I’m not Catholic). I know that some conservative Catholics argue that this is a misreading, but you guys are in the minority.

Edwin
I agree Erwin. I was taught that the bible was the inspired word of God, not inerrant. That is more in line with fundamentalism. Perhaps that is understandable, since I do find that a large number of those who have come to RCC later from other faith traditions, are often coming from those that one would consider fundamentalist in nature. It seems they bring that sense of the bible with them. This is against Catholic teaching at least as reflected in Papal theological statements I’ve read, ironically signed off as by then Cardinal Ratzinger.

I was rather astounded at this initially, but it seems to be the case here. I agree, that it is certainly a minority opinion within the Church, at least from my experience with Catholic theologicans and biblical experts.

that would put most here it would seem in the YEC and creationist position as well, if consistency of belief is valued.

It gets confusing to be sure.
 
Always:

Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Pick and choose Catholics (priest, nun or laymember) also known as cafeteria Catholics, are not genuine Catholics.

Just look at the news, Pelosi claims to be a Catholic but if she were she could not be pro-abortion and tell such lies as “there is confusion within the Church as to when life begins”. That just isn’t true. The same with Biden, never mind he carries a rosary in his pocket. They say that 60% of Catholics voted for Obama, but genuine Catholics go to Mass every week. If you only include in that 60% regular Mass attenders it drops down to around 12%. (Now don’t mistake me, even if only 1 individual Catholic voted for Obama it would still be a scandal.)

Sooner or later you will come across a survey that says 47% of Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence. Well, that’s not true either. 100% of genuine Catholics believe in the Real Presence.

If you read the Catechism, you will know what real Catholics believe and how they try to live.
 
Originally Posted by a burger
The Evangelicals must come to an understanding that the Eucharist is the actual body of Christ.

Originally Posted by always_gr8ful
I find this statement as disturbing as the Pope’s statement that salvation is found in the Catholic church only.
Rinnie, it’s the “must come to the understanding” that I find disturbing, and the Pope’s statement about salvation speaks for itself, doesn’t it? Salvation is found in Jesus Christ alone. It’s a free gift - no strings attached.
 
Always:

Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Pick and choose Catholics (priest, nun or laymember) also known as cafeteria Catholics, are not genuine Catholics.
Marsha, I’m going to go check eBay for it right now. Thank you!
I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised about the differing beliefs within the faith. Look at Christians in general - the staggering poll numbers that believe there are many roads to salvation. No, just one very narrow one, and unfortunately, “few will find it”. Breaks my heart.
 
I agree Erwin. I was taught that the bible was the inspired word of God, not inerrant.
Older Catholic documents (pre-Vatican-II) certainly teach inerrancy. Vatican II appears to most of us to have softened the position. However, as you probably have noticed, there is strong support on this forum for an interpretation of Vatican II in continuity with the tradition (except among those who reject Vatican II, who are a minority here). I generally agree that this seems like a more reasonable way to interpret Vatican II (as opposed to the view of many liberal Catholics that Vatican II is significant only for its breaks with tradition, which should be elevated into principles in their own right independently of the cautious language with which they are surrounded in the Vatican II documents). But there are places where Vatican II clearly does seem to be modifying the traditional understanding. This is one of them.
that would put most here it would seem in the YEC and creationist position as well, if consistency of belief is valued.
No, I don’t think so. Inerrancy is not the same thing as literalism, though they are often confused because of the loud voices of modern fundamentalists. There are a number of creationists here. But it is possible to be a classical inerrantist in the Protestant “Old Princeton” sense and reject young-earth creationism (and in fact the original “fundamentalists” were not necessarily young-earthers), and this appears to be true of the Catholic version as well. Certainly Pius XII explicitly allowed for a non-literal interpretation of Genesis 1-3, and even for theistic evolution within certain limits.

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top