Evangelicals Will Be Extinct Within Ten Years

  • Thread starter Thread starter OneTrueCathApos
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Catholicism is not a denomination.

Non-Catholic denominations couldn’t have the Magisterium, even if they chose to because the Teaching Authority is a divine gift given to the One Church.
sure it is , its a denomination of Christendom.

Okay, we would call ours the “old boys club” but again,we don’t want one. Where in the bible exactly does it say it received this divine gift to the RCC of a Magisterium?
 
sure it is , its a denomination of Christendom.

Okay, we would call ours the “old boys club” but again,we don’t want one. Where in the bible exactly does it say it received this divine gift to the RCC of a Magisterium?
These texts should give you a starting point for prayerful study.

The Catholic Church IS the Christian Church, not a subsection of the Church, ergo it is not a denomination, it is THE Church.
 
Do you not realiize the Catholic Church is the largest evangelical church in the world? We are a megachurch and will still be evangelizing in 10 years. People like Osteen are not evangelizing but spreading the ‘name it claim it’ gospel. And he has claimed a lot of it. I hope the camel he rides can fit through the eye of the needle.
along with the other televangelists who are millionaires.
 
These texts should give you a starting point for prayerful study.
  1. Matt. 28:20.
  2. John 8:32.
  3. John 14:6.
  4. John 18:37.
  5. 1 Tim. 3:15.
The Catholic Church IS the Christian Church, not a subsection of the Church, ergo it is not a denomination, it is THE Church.
Oops! I forgot to paste in the texts when I posted. My bad.
 
Let’s say I was married and my husband was having an affair. All my friends and family knew about it because they witnessed it and told me but I refused to believe it. Would “believing” be a string attached to what was the truth? No. It would simply be a choice.
Sure it would. Because once you accepted that truth you would have to do something. Thats where the strings were attached. You would either accept the affair, and acknowledge it and live that way, or you would not accept it and refuse to accept it. But those are the strings. Everything in this world has strings attached.

For RC its ten very large strings. They are called the TEN COMMANDMENTS. Are commandments not strings?
 
sure it is , its a denomination of Christendom.

Okay, we would call ours the “old boys club” but again,we don’t want one.
Episcopalians like yourself who come from a Roman Catholic background generally do not. Those like myself who come from a free-church Protestant background, drawn precisely by the Catholic tradition present so much more strongly and evidently in Anglicanism than in other forms of Protestantism, often feel quite differently on the matter. (I will not claim to speak for cradle Episcopalians, who are a different story again! Nor do I claim that all folks with my background think like me, of course.)

Edwin
 
That is rather like saying that you can’t tell if water is poisoned until after you’ve drunk it and see if it kills you. When there is a sign by the lake that says, “Caution! Poison Do Not Drink!” I would suggest that you not drink it.
I deny the validity of your analogy. Since you give no argument showing that your analogy is correct, I don’t have to say any more than that.

Edwin
 
The book that led me to the Catholic Church is the Bible.
Sola Scriptura Catholicism. Only in America could such a monstrosity evolve! (Note that I’m not calling you a monstrosity, but I am calling your version of Catholicism a monstrosity.)

Edwin
 
Sola Scriptura Catholicism. Only in America could such a monstrosity evolve! (Note that I’m not calling you a monstrosity, but I am calling your version of Catholicism a monstrosity.)

Edwin
There is nothing in the person’s statement that the Bible is the **sole **authority. I too was lead to Catholicism largely through the Bible. No monstrosity exists.
 
There is nothing in the person’s statement that the Bible is the **sole **authority. I too was lead to Catholicism largely through the Bible. No monstrosity exists.
The “monstrosity” is in the tacit claim that reading the Bible led you to Catholicism on its own, without (name removed by moderator)ut from sources not acknowledged as valid by the church to which you belonged at the time. I just don’t believe this claim, and one of the reasons I don’t believe it is my experience with people making exactly this claim for their abandonment of Catholicism or orthodoxy for sola-scriptura Protestantism. (For instance, the Romanian Orthodox priests who founded the Plymouth Brethren in Romania claimed to have come to their views based on the Bible alone–but you read their story in a bit more detail and you find that they were reading Plymouth Brethren tracts.) But at least in that case it makes sense that they would remember their own story that way, since the theology of the group to which they converted naturally led them to do so. For Catholics to mischaracterize their own experience in this way is truly a monstrosity.

No one comes to any conclusion based on the Bible alone. Anyone who is truly closed to perspectives outside their own tradition will remain in that tradition until they die. This is what Marsha is trying to deny, and she’s flying in the face of plausibility in doing so. I don’t think either of you are lying–I think you are failing to consider carefully enough how many influences are involved in leading any human being to do anything, and your failure to do this is directly related to the religious traditions that shaped you (rather than to the Catholicism you now profess).

Edwin
 
Sola Scriptura Catholicism. Only in America could such a monstrosity evolve! (Note that I’m not calling you a monstrosity, but I am calling your version of Catholicism a monstrosity.)

Edwin
No, I do not believe in any form of Sola Scriptura. Permit me to be more clear. When I was an SDA I did believe in Sola Scriptura. It was the Bible Alone that led me to the Catholic Church. Once I was there, I learned about Tradition (written and oral) and the Magisterium and I embrace both. When I speak with those who demand a Scriptural reason for a doctrine, I do try to provide them one in the hopes of leading them also to the point where they can recognize the full truth of Catholicism.
 
I don’t think either of you are lying–I think you are failing to consider carefully enough how many influences are involved in leading any human being to do anything, and your failure to do this is directly related to the religious traditions that shaped you (rather than to the Catholicism you now profess).

Edwin
Since I did not say “alone” and never have claimed that, of course I am not lying. Nor am I failing to suggest other outside influences. Even the use of logic and deduction acknowledges those who taught us logic and deduction and those who believe in its validity. Many contribute to our belief and none are in a vacuum.

There is a sense in which Bible Alone as a doctrine led me to Catholicism because the logic contradiction in such a philosophy opened the possibility to explore the Catholic faith.
 
No one comes to any conclusion based on the Bible alone. Anyone who is truly closed to perspectives outside their own tradition will remain in that tradition until they die. This is what Marsha is trying to deny, and she’s flying in the face of plausibility in doing so. I don’t think either of you are lying–I think you are failing to consider carefully enough how many influences are involved in leading any human being to do anything, and your failure to do this is directly related to the religious traditions that shaped you (rather than to the Catholicism you now profess).

Edwin
Untrue. When I was a young SDA and I read John 6 I knew that Catholics took that chapter literally. I knew that Protestants did not. And I knew that there was nothing in the chapter that gave any indication that Jesus was speaking figuratively. Ergo, it was the Bible Alone that was pushing me to the Catholic Church for years before I ever began even talking to Catholics about their beliefs.

Likewise, John 20 spoke of Jesus granting his disciples the power to forgive sin. I knew the Catholics believed that power was present in their Church. I knew that Protestants denied that power existed. And I knew that the Bible agreed with the Catholics. Again, it was the Bible Alone that was defending the Catholic belief.

Also, in college was taught about types and anti-types in the Bible. As I read the Bible I found many examples of types and anti-types of Mary. Why would God include these types of Mary if she had no role to play in our lives? The Bible continued to point me to the Church.

The Bible can only point, the Holy Spirit must convict, but how could the Holy Spirit get a Protestant’s attention apart from the Bible, which He inspired?
 
Untrue. When I was a young SDA and I read John 6 I knew that Catholics took that chapter literally. I knew that Protestants did not. And I knew that there was nothing in the chapter that gave any indication that Jesus was speaking figuratively. Ergo, it was the Bible Alone that was pushing me to the Catholic Church for years before I ever began even talking to Catholics about their beliefs.

Likewise, John 20 spoke of Jesus granting his disciples the power to forgive sin. I knew the Catholics believed that power was present in their Church. I knew that Protestants denied that power existed. And I knew that the Bible agreed with the Catholics. Again, it was the Bible Alone that was defending the Catholic belief.

Also, in college was taught about types and anti-types in the Bible. As I read the Bible I found many examples of types and anti-types of Mary. Why would God include these types of Mary if she had no role to play in our lives? The Bible continued to point me to the Church.

The Bible can only point, the Holy Spirit must convict, but how could the Holy Spirit get a Protestant’s attention apart from the Bible, which He inspired?
I have been RC my whole life. Sometimes I think we take for granted what we were taught. People like you and people like Scott Hann can bring the Catholic faith to a different level simply by seeing what we know and our taught our whole life, but show us it in a different way.
 
I have been RC my whole life. Sometimes I think we take for granted what we were taught. People like you and people like Scott Hann can bring the Catholic faith to a different level simply by seeing what we know and our taught our whole life, but show us it in a different way.
Wow! Being included in the same sentence with Scott Hahn takes my breath away! But thank you for the thought.
 
Untrue. When I was a young SDA and I read John 6 I knew that Catholics took that chapter literally. I knew that Protestants did not. And I knew that there was nothing in the chapter that gave any indication that Jesus was speaking figuratively. Ergo, it was the Bible Alone that was pushing me to the Catholic Church for years before I ever began even talking to Catholics about their beliefs.

Likewise, John 20 spoke of Jesus granting his disciples the power to forgive sin. I knew the Catholics believed that power was present in their Church. I knew that Protestants denied that power existed. And I knew that the Bible agreed with the Catholics. Again, it was the Bible Alone that was defending the Catholic belief.

Also, in college was taught about types and anti-types in the Bible. As I read the Bible I found many examples of types and anti-types of Mary. Why would God include these types of Mary if she had no role to play in our lives? The Bible continued to point me to the Church.

The Bible can only point, the Holy Spirit must convict, but how could the Holy Spirit get a Protestant’s attention apart from the Bible, which He inspired?
Well, arguing with people about their experience is counter-productive. I apologize for my overly sweeping statement. It’s just that I’ve heard this claim made so often and found it to be untrue when I learned more about the details of the person’s experience.

I had a somewhat similar experience to yours, actually, in that there were passages of Scripture that I was told didn’t mean what they appeared to say, but that some other group (often but not always the Catholics) did “misinterpret” them in this way. For me one of the most important examples was John 3:5. So I’m not disputing that this can happen–I just question whether that’s really enough to lead someone to embrace Catholicism (or anything else).

Edwin
 
😃
Wow! Being included in the same sentence with Scott Hahn takes my breath away! But thank you for the thought.
Its just that you seem to have a great understanding of our faith. I just read his book the lamb’s supper, it was probally one of the best books I ever read in my life on our faith. I have seen that people that are of other faiths, when they come into the Catholic faith they can somehow explain it better at times. Sometimes as a RC I say things and insult people of the Protestant faith, and don’t realize I am doing it. Like him you can see things in different ways and know how to explain them better without comming off as arrogant, I seen to come off to people that way, but don’t mean to. He has a way like you of saying the same thing that I do, but not seeming confrontational.😃

:
 
These texts should give you a starting point for prayerful study.

The Catholic Church IS the Christian Church, not a subsection of the Church, ergo it is not a denomination, it is THE Church.
Yes I know what you believe. However the dictionary,not the final authority, but certainly indicative of what is commonly believed, says otherwise.

What is Christendom then?
 
Episcopalians like yourself who come from a Roman Catholic background generally do not. Those like myself who come from a free-church Protestant background, drawn precisely by the Catholic tradition present so much more strongly and evidently in Anglicanism than in other forms of Protestantism, often feel quite differently on the matter. (I will not claim to speak for cradle Episcopalians, who are a different story again! Nor do I claim that all folks with my background think like me, of course.)

Edwin
Edwin, I understand that I do not speak for all Episcopalians. I try to remind others of that, but they lump and I guess I to shortcut my answers do as well. I respect your differing view of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top