I don't get it...if you are a non-Catholic Christian, then why aren't you a Catholic Christian?

[Rightlydivide]

Oh, I forgot. When the Bible clearly doesn’t specify something to your satisfaction, that supports Catholicism, it is to be ignored, but when it can be taken to support your view of the faith, it is Gospel.

We might as well stop.

There is nothing stating that we have to wear robes. Your point seemed to be that people in heaven are described wearing robes…so…ministers have to wear them too because they are celebrating the mass in heaven and people wear robes! Correct me but that is essentially it right…

 

[Rightlydivide]

I am Catholic.

Lovely. You and one billion other people. No seriously. I was addressing his statement. So who is right, you or him?

 

[psychiatrist]

The Catholic traditions that are not in the Bible were traditions started by Jesus and the Apostles, you know, at least a generation before the Bible was ever written.

Any serious study of the Bible will reveal that Jesus personally founded the Catholic Church almost 2000 years ago.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Okay, I think I just got an answer. Christ IS the way but elaborate. If an unsaved person asked you David (not your name but you get the point) how do I get saved and you only had thirty seconds and you would say “Christ is the way” I agree but I think even you believe a tad more than that.
My “church” does not arrive at a correct interpretation as a group. We preach the Bible verse by verse and people see the clear teachings. We have agreement on these issues and historically it did just seem to happen. Seriously you have fundamentalists all over the world who agree without councils or anything of the sort. They just do! My church does not sit around and debate these things. An elder preaches, people read the Bible for themselves, some groups study scripture together, and it just is…you cant make soemthing up that does not happen!

I’d say, you must believe in this:

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Creator of Heaven and Earth
And in Jesus Christ
His only Son, Our Lord
Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit
Born of the Virgin Mary
Suffered under Pontius Pilate
Was crucified, died and was buried.
On the third day, he rose again
He ascended into Heaven
and is seated at the right hand
of God, the Father Almighty.
He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic Church,
the Communion of Saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting.
Amen.

But with your explanation of how your Church arrives at an interpretation there is nothing to show your Church has the authority to declare it’s interpretation correct over any other interpretation. It seems to be a ‘generalized’ private interpretation and when there are disagreements, you don’t debate it and let it lie. There doesn’t seem to be an answer in that style of study, at least in my opinion.

You say ‘historically, it did seem to just happen’. That is short of it being a scriptural teaching, again, at least in my opinion, and it’s short of an explanation of how generation after generation arrived at an interpretation when Bibles were not widely owned by the majority…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

There is nothing stating that we have to wear robes. Your point seemed to be that people in heaven are described wearing robes…so…ministers have to wear them too because they are celebrating the mass in heaven and people wear robes! Correct me but that is essentially it right…

You are assuming everything in John’s vision was in heaven.

 

[Rightlydivide]

The Catholic traditions that are not in the Bible were traditions started by Jesus and the Apostles, you know, at least a generation before the Bible was ever written.

Any serious study of the Bible will reveal that Jesus personally founded the Catholic Church almost 2000 years ago.

Does this mean who are not going to directly address the first question I asked you? You are off to a bad start. Forum Rules specifically state you must directly answer a question from me…or they should…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Does this mean who are not going to directly address the first question I asked you? You are off to a bad start. Forum Rules specifically state you must directly answer a question from me…or they should…

Oh for Pete’s sake Rightly, read back through our discussion and count the times you answered my question with more questions.

 

[1beleevr]

1 Catholics can eat meat on Fridays outside of Lent.

2 Catholics are only required to go to Confession once a year. I go a minimum of once a month, (or when needed) but that’s MY choice.

3 No Catholic is required to pray the Rosary. Eastern Catholic Christians don’t pray the rosary. Never have. (Though they may pray it in private as part of their personal devotion. That’s THEIR choice.)

4 I often just refer to the Pope as the Pope. But is it any less legalistic to call the Queen Your Majesty? Or a judge Your Honor?

5 No Catholic is required to ask Mary to pray for her. But we do, not out of a sense of obligation, but we believe that Mary is one of God’s greatest gifts to us. Catholics don’t see Mary or the Saints as some kind of burden, but a great gift from God.

I have encountered many catholic posters on this forum, who would beg to differ with you! And you see, there are many of us noncatholics who believe what 1John 1:9 says, so we don’t feel the NEED to go to confession! And a number of the more radical catholics will rebuke you for disagreeing with their practices, such as calling the pope Holy Father(a title reserved for God) John 17:11. When you are able to go straight to the source(Hebrews 4:16), why would there be a reason to pray through Mary, otr the saints?

 

[1beleevr]

The Catholic traditions that are not in the Bible were traditions started by Jesus and the Apostles, you know, at least a generation before the Bible was ever written.

Any serious study of the Bible will reveal that Jesus personally founded the Catholic Church almost 2000 years ago.

All of these are assumptions on the part of the catholic church; who expect us to believe it because they said so! Jesus started His church, a church for all believers!

 

[1beleevr]

Why do you have to “get it”? Isn’t enough that they are living their life and you are living yours? There has been enough written by the Catholic Church that explains that they’re Christian, you’re Christian, and that they have the same chance at Heaven as you do.

So… why worry about it?

Good post:thumbsup: A+

 

[1beleevr]

Do non-Catholic Christians ever realize that without the Catholic Church there never would’ve been a Bible?

Sadly, it is aquestion we have heard ad nauseum!

 

[1beleevr]

Seriously, this is your ‘explanation’? The truth is clearly in the Bible for anyone to find, only we have thousands of different denominations, with slight to great differences in teachings/doctrines, all claiming Holy Spirit guidance in receiving their ‘correct’ interpretation?

Then the final authority must tell us who has the authority to say what traditions are misapplied, or overreached. It does not. Christ gave us ONE authoritative Church. It was only when individuals took it upon themselves to interpret scriptures for themselves, and then lead others with that interpretation, that many ‘new’ Churches were formed.

The Bible does teach the authority of men over the Church, a single Church. There were not many individual Churches, all with different variations and applications of the one faith, who worked harmoniously with one another. That wouild be against being the same mind and judgment and of the same accord.

Christ didn’t teach US to sit around and debate for months. He didn’t instruct the multitudes in the matters of the Church. He taught that to those He chose and appointed over His Church, those He gave the keys to the kingdom of heaven to, and the authority to bind and loose on earth with promises it would be so in heaven. Of course the first council was short and sweet and easily documented on a single piece of paper, the Church was just beginning in applying the authority given it. As time passed those who produced new and different beliefs/teachings that didn’t appear to be in line with the teachings the Church held, those beliefs/teachings, were fully examined and discussed to assure God’s truth was being protected. Nothing was dismissed quickly and possibly with error. Of course then I would imagine there would be some who would now claim, the Church dismissed a belief/teaching too quickly, without appropriate discussion! That’s the problem here. People have appointed themself to ‘judge’ the actions of the Church and have the Church ‘obey’ them, instead of subjecting themselves to their prelates as scriptures tell us to do.

Your views, like your interpretations, are of a private opinion, even though you can find some to agree with those views. I don’t see it as ‘mainstream’ in any sense of the word. I mean, look at what you’ve posted to this point. You’ve included many Protestants and the Orthodox with the Catholics in being a contradiction to the ‘fundamentalist’s’ truth that we should all be getting with the program on.

The Bible teaches the authoritative Church. It does not teach that scriptures themselves, and alone, are the final authority.

Prodigal Son1 has difficulty believing that individual Christians can be indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and thus be led in their Christian walk Jesus said that He and His Father would come and live in US, not just the disciples! When He preached to the multitudes, He told them that if they would pick up their respective crosses daily, and follow Him, they too could be His disciples! I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am a disciple of and for Christ!

 

[1beleevr]

Ok, so Catholics come to a Catholic forum to challenge other faiths? Come on. Catholics are challenged here by other faiths. We respond with how we believe and some of us rely heavily on scriptures, only to have our interpretation totally dismissed with accusations of Catholic beliefs are ‘non-scriptural’. It seems too much for some to even admit that they can see how an interpretation is derived from scriptures. It would be too close to ‘agreeing with the Catholics’.

When Catholicism is challenged, we cannot help the fact that we get that Christ established an authoritative Church from scriptures, not only authoritative but scriptures support ONE Church, of the same mind and judgement, of the same accord. Can you honestly say that’s what Protestantism has brought about?

Then when our interpretation is challenged, we ask where is it written that the scriptures are the ‘final authority’, as you claim it to be. Where does your Church get it’s interpretation? Explain that process, if you would. You said private interpretation is a ‘sin’.

You know Bible history, and you know that Catholics have been in possession of the scriptures since the beginning. It wasn’t until the 1500s that Protestants took the scriptures with them and began ‘new’ traditions with it.

Oh, come on now, catholics challenge other faiths, as much if not more than we challenge yours! And why are you so vehemently defending catholicism and not the Cross of Christ; the source of our salvation and eternal life? Didn’t Jews write the Old Testament? You guys didn’t change any of those verse did you? And, BTW, why are there so many catholics in the non catholic religions forum?

 

[1beleevr]

Yes, let’s keep it brief and on topic, even though you ignore many questions and points asked of your view of the one true Church? We’ll never know how fully we agree or disagree when you refuse to share responses to specific questions…

There were not mass BIbles. People went to Church to hear God’s truth and plans for salvation. The Church itself did not provide grace and salvation alone, it TAUGHT it to the people. Of course you say, that one Church that possessed the scriptures didn’t teach truth. So all the people, generation after generation (this is an assumption since you refuse to timeline when the teachings became so corrupted that people were no longer ‘with the program’ you preach) were without the true teachings of Christ; i.e. faith, grace, salvation.

Why weren’t there mas Bibles? Shouldn’t everyon have had the opportunity to have their own Bible to read in their home? Bibles were not really banned, and people arrested for having one in the old days, right?

 

[psychiatrist]

I have encountered many catholic posters on this forum, who would beg to differ with you! And you see, there are many of us noncatholics who believe what 1John 1:9 says, so we don’t feel the NEED to go to confession! And a number of the more radical catholics will rebuke you for disagreeing with their practices, such as calling the pope Holy Father(a title reserved for God) John 17:11. When you are able to go straight to the source(Hebrews 4:16), why would there be a reason to pray through Mary, otr the saints?

Catholics don’t “pray through Mary”. We ask her to pray for us. Much like you would tell a friend to pray for you.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I have encountered many catholic posters on this forum, who would beg to differ with you! And you see, there are many of us noncatholics who believe what 1John 1:9 says, so we don’t feel the NEED to go to confession! And a number of the more radical catholics will rebuke you for disagreeing with their practices, such as calling the pope Holy Father(a title reserved for God) John 17:11. When you are able to go straight to the source(Hebrews 4:16), why would there be a reason to pray through Mary, otr the saints?

Scriptures tell us we are to confess our sins. Scriptures also tell us Christ gave those He chose and appointed, over His Church, the authority to forgive and retain sins. How can they forgive or retain sins if those sins are not ‘confessed’ to the authorities of the Church?

As for calling the pope Holy Father, would Christ or scriptures contradict John 17:11? We know that Christ referred to Abraham your father, and we know the Apostles referred to father Abraham. John 8:56 and James 2:22 for just one example of an Apostle referring to Abraham our father. This makes me wonder what you call your male parent?

We understand Christ is the only mediator, but we see nothing wrong asking someone to pray for us, whether alive on earth or eternally alive in the next life. If we were to go solely by your ‘interpretation’, we shouldn’t ask anyone to pray for us, including those people on earth.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Why weren’t there mas Bibles? Shouldn’t everyon have had the opportunity to have their own Bible to read in their home? Bibles were not really banned, and people arrested for having one in the old days, right?

You need to study the history of the Bible. The Bible was individual letters and epistles, written to various Churches across Asia. The complete New Testament, as we know it today, did not come together as one complete Testament until many years later.

Now consider what those scriptures were written on, originally; skins or papyrus. They didn’t have paper and pencils or pens as we do today. Each copy had to be done by hand. The printing press wasn’t invented until the late 1400s, or early 1500s. Prior to the printing press, the cost for copying a Bible was more expensive than the average person could afford. The Churches had Bibles. The people went to the Churches to read, those that could read, and/or have scriptures read to them in the Mass.

 

[1beleevr]

Scriptures tell us we are to confess our sins. Scriptures also tell us Christ gave those He chose and appointed, over His Church, the authority to forgive and retain sins. How can they forgive or retain sins if those sins are not ‘confessed’ to the authorities of the Church?

As for calling the pope Holy Father, would Christ or scriptures contradict John 17:11? We know that Christ referred to Abraham your father, and we know the Apostles referred to father Abraham. John 8:56 and James 2:22 for just one example of an Apostle referring to Abraham our father. This makes me wonder what you call your male parent?

We understand Christ is the only mediator, but we see nothing wrong asking someone to pray for us, whether alive on earth or eternally alive in the next life. If we were to go solely by your ‘interpretation’, we shouldn’t ask anyone to pray for us, including those people on earth.

I do confess my sins, to God, through Jesus! And while my father was alive, I called him Dad. And Christ did refer to Abraham as the father of the Israelites. And we see nothing wrong with NOT having Mary or the saints pray for us. How does the Lord’s Prayer go again: Our Father, which art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name…! And there is more than one interpretation of John 20:20-23. It does not necessarily mean tha we MUST confess our sins(only God can forgive sins) to a mortal man. I know there was not punctuation in the early days, but I believe that one reason that capitalization was used(such as Father, God, Him, etc.) was to distinguish God from earthly fathers. So, in other words, it is okay for you to call the pope, holy father, but not Holy Father, that would be blasphemous!

 

[1beleevr]

You need to study the history of the Bible. The Bible was individual letters and epistles, written to various Churches across Asia. The complete New Testament, as we know it today, did not come together as one complete Testament until many years later.

Now consider what those scriptures were written on, originally; skins or papyrus. They didn’t have paper and pencils or pens as we do today. Each copy had to be done by hand. The printing press wasn’t invented until the late 1400s, or early 1500s. Prior to the printing press, the cost for copying a Bible was more expensive than the average person could afford. The Churches had Bibles. The people went to the Churches to read, those that could read, and/or have scriptures read to them in the Mass.

Good thing Bibles are mass produced and relatiely affordable today! hat means we can read them daily at home, and have our pastor use scripture to deliver his message!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Prodigal Son1 has difficulty believing that individual Christians can be indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and thus be led in their Christian walk Jesus said that He and His Father would come and live in US, not just the disciples! When He preached to the multitudes, He told them that if they would pick up their respective crosses daily, and follow Him, they too could be His disciples! I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am a disciple of and for Christ!

There you go twisting what I believe. Does that make you feel like you’ve made a ‘valid’ point?

I have difficulty in accepting every person assuming the authority granted to men Christ chose and appointed over His Church, and those they chose and appointed through Apostolic succession, and all claiming the Holy Spirit ‘empowers’ them to be in a position of authority. There is not one example of this in scriptures. It is one of those ‘man made’ traditions.

You can always prove me wrong. Show me where Christ made such promises to the ‘multitudes’. Show me where Christ commanded the multitudes to go out and teach and preach.

Those who claim the same ‘discipleship’ as the Apostles, have assumed an authority upon themselves, because they choose to read scriptures out of context, of who what was said too.