If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? - 2

[csmatyi]

Dear joe,

Just to make sure you understand what I want from you:

please refer me to an excel or other data file which contains the following information:

column 1: id number
column 2: denomination’s name

this file should contain 33000 rows each with every single “denomination’s” name.

Of course it would take about a week to type every single name in…

 

[mikew262]

The Holy Spirit guides the Church.

Who is to say the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide the Protestant Churchs as well? Not I.

 

[mikew262]

I think you are missing the point. What “we feel” and what “we think” isn’t always the truth. The Catholic teachings are not based on our feelings or what we “want” to believe, it is the Truths that Jesus taught, To claim the Holy Spirit is leading you is not always coming from the Holy Spirit. HE cannot, nor will not ever lead one into error. If you are a Catholic and if your not “sure” who is right and who is wrong, then you don’t know your Catholic Faith very well. While many of us catholics do not live up to our Faith as we should, the Truth is still there for us to come back to and the 7 Sacraments there to help us. The Church teaches that we must follow a well formed conscious according to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Just because I feel I can practice artificial birth control and it doesn’t bother my poorly informed, or willfully ignorant conscience doesn’t mean its ok to do so. That just means I am fooling myself. My Mom used to tell us when we were kids, "You can fool me, you might even be able to fool the priest, (in confession, if not being truthful) but you can NEVER fool GOD. Like I said before, speaking the TRUTH is never bashing anyone, and I have never heard a Catholic accuse a protestant of believing something they did not believe. But I have had many protestant friends and acquaintances accuse me of worshiping statues and saints, and a piece of bread, the Pope and whatever. They do not believe me even when I try to explain that we do NOT. I have a friend that I have known for 40 years that still thinks I don’t believe Jesus rose from the dead because I have a crucifix in my home. I have explained and explained but she insists I’d get rid of the crucifix if I really believed in the Resurrection. Some people never learn.

You as a Catholic are strictly speaking from the Catholic point of view and refuse to believe any other form of Christianity has any real legitimacy. I feel that’s wrong. I may be over-stating it, but that’s what I see. I know my Catholic faith just fine, but there are certain parts of it I have trouble with at times. This kind of attitude is one of them.

The vast majority (if not all) of all Christians believe Christ died for our sins, and was resurrected. These are the base beliefs of all Christians. Yes, the details of how we worship are different among the various “slices” of Christianity, but we have most of the “basics” in common. Until folks like you and others among all the “slices” start seeing this, there will always be a passive discrimination going on. I truly believe the most important thing to Christ is that you are Christian, not whether you follow the Catholic or Methodist methodology. I also leave the door open for people of non-Christian faiths to reach salvation depending upon certain circumstances, but that’s another thread.

I know you are going to reject what I’ve just written, and I’ll just have to accept it. It just annoys me to no end when I see the “my faith is better than yours” mentality. I commend you on your adherence to the Catholic faith, but I think you need to loosen up the blinders a little bit, and realize just because somebody else doesn’t worship like you do, doesn’t necessarily make them wrong. God will make that call, if needed.

 

[onetimeposter]

Mike, Stating the truth is NOT protestant bashing. I didn’t say they weren’t sincere in what they believe but the truth is the truth. The Catholic Church has been stating the truth for 2,000 years. If the Catholic Church doesn’t “have it right” then Jesus didn’t mean what HE said when HE promised that she would Never teach error. To let someone go on believing in something less than the truth is not helping them.

Some believe that the Church went off course.

I would like to find out about the scripture that has Jesus saying that he would never allow the Church to teach error.

Verse please.

 

[Roy5]

HISTORIC/EMOTIONAL TIES TO CHURCHES

  In an earlier posting, I made note of the refusal of many Protestants, both mainline and evangelical, to accept various Catholic doctrines and practices, from transubstantiation and papal authority to the celibacy of clergy and prohibition of artificial birth control.

  I neglected what in many instances may be more important: the historic and emotional ties which are common both to Catholics and Protestants. Just as many Irish and Polish Catholics, for example, stay close to their faith because of history, so too do many Protestants.

  An example. A Protestant friend is deeply versed in church history and still refers to the Massacre of St. Bartholomew centuries ago when thousands of Protestants were set upon at a wedding in France and slaughtered. The Pope had a special Mass sung in celebration. He points out that some of his ancestors were Huguenots who fled to England and Holland. and then the USA, to practice their faith openly and safely. His suspicion of Catholicism (he fears it still wants to run the USA and the world) is deeply rooted even though he participates in ecumenical events, always hopeful that a Vatican III will further reform Catholicism and Christian unity may some day be possible.

   In somewhat similar fashion Irish, Polish and other Catholics underwent persecution in past centuries - by the Church of England, for example, or by the Russian Orthodox or Soviet Communists - which helped solidify Irish, Polish and the bonds of other ethnic groups to Catholicism. 

   Sometimes these emotional ties are far more important than theology or anything else. Let's face it: religion for millions (billions?) is more feeling than thinking, more heart than brain. Isn't that why we call it faith?

 

[NotWorthy]

Some believe that the Church went off course.

I would like to find out about the scripture that has Jesus saying that he would never allow the Church to teach error.

Verse please.

I would look at John 14:16-17

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.

I’d also look at Matthew 28:19-20

*** Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you***. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."

Both of these quotes show that Jesus and the Holy Spirit will guide not just the Apostles in teaching the faithful, but the successors to the Apostles.

 

[guanophore]

csmatyi, if you would use the “quote” button at the bottom of the post, then it will automatically quote for you. See the “using quotes” tutorial for help on breaking up the text.
"guanophore:

*So, what you are saying is that how we understand the Truth is not based on God’s revelation but on our own fallible reasoning and arguementative abilities? Who determines which person argues better? *

Decide for yourself since you have the freedom. But: I mentioned in another post of mine, that one must not trust his own mental faculties but must be enlightened by the holy spirit, who cannot fail. This is the key.

We agree that the Spirit cannot fail, but people can, and our perception of the Spirit can be skewed and lacking. Jesus gave his Spirit to the Church, and promised them, as a Body, that He would lead them into all truth. When one separates oneself from that appointed authority, one can easily stray.
"guanophore:

On the contrary, Jesus revealed himself to His Apostles, and empowered them with His authority to teach. He did not instruct them to write it down, then fail to teach as He commanded. Making the Scripture the rule of faith is rejecting the Teaching Authority appointed by Christ.

This is cute. Then you would not read the Bible. Catholics always argue that their tradition was beleived from the very first days of Christianity, it is just that they wrote it down later. This is how they explain how their dogmas evolved. In the end of course, they still found it extremely important to write it down!!!

No one is denying that, and we have the utmost respect for the Holy Scripture. We believe that is should not be separated from the sacred Tradition from whence it came. But you did not respond to my observation that the Teaching Authority was given to the Church, not the scripture… Where did the authority of the apostles to teach get dissolved?

I don’t understand what you are saying. Here is the verse you are referring to:

“Nothing beyond what is written,” 1 Cor 4:6

You are asserting that we should use only what is written. However, Paul was actually penning the NT when he wrote this advice. Therefore, you cannot apply what he is saying to the NT, since it did not exist. I am saying that you are taking this passage out of context to support the belief that the teaching authority appointed by Christ is not valid. If that were true, what Paul was writing in that very verse would not be valid either!

Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

Paul says that on the last day Christ will come and reveal all things. All things as it says which are in darkness and in the counsels of hearts. So until then we rely on what is written.

How do you get from one to the other? How does looking forward to the revelation on the last day invalidate the portion of God’s revelation that is not contained in the New Testament? I don’t understand this leap.

Jesus said over 50 times in the New Testament when He asked the Pharisees whether they had read in the Scriptures (you see, they who substituted the word of God with their own traditions - the Catholic church does the very same).

You make this statement because you do not understand either the scripture, or the Traditions, or both. God is the Source of both, and therefore, there are no contradictions.

Also:

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)

What made them noble is that they received the word with all readiness of mind. This is the nobility that you are now lacking. You refuse to receive the Word that was committed to the church with any readiness of mind. You have been taught wrongly about Catholics, and instead of having an open mind, and entertaining the possiblity that this may, indeed, be the Church founded by Christ, you act with prejudice and lack of nobility.
"guanophore:

In fact, you are incorrect. Not all protestants believe in the 5 Sola’s. What all Protestants have in common is the rejection of the Apostolic Authority appointed by Christ.

I am a Protestant, please let me decide what we beleive. Either all 5 or no go.

Sorry, csmatyi, no go. You can decide for yourself what you think ought to define a Protestant. You can decide on your own that if a protestant does not accept the 5 solas, they are not really a Protestant. However, you are only able to exercise authority over yourself, and perhaps those you have converted and are disciplining into your church of one. All other Protestants have the same right and authority to define for themselves what they believe. This is the nature of lacking authority:

Judg 17:5-6
“In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes.”

You can’t claim a right that you are not willing to afford to the rest of Protestantdom. (is that a word?)

 

[guanophore]

"guanophore:

What do you think the “keys” were that Jesus gave to Peter?

Only to Peter?

Cross question:

Yes. I see you answered my question with a question…

Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel. (John 1:49)

If Peter became the first pope since he said Jesus was the Christ, then what about Nathanael here? This would mean that Nathanael would have had to be the first pope.

This is a good point. However, your premise is in error. Simon did not become Peter the Rock because he recognized Jesus, but because Jesus chose Him for this job. The time for his appointment became clear by his infallible statement.

Do you mean that all Catholic clergy were alive in Jesus’s day so that this means we have to listen to them? Are you serious?

I suppose to the extent that Jesus was in the loins of Abraham when he tithed to Melchizadech this might be true. But, no, the office and authority of the Apostles was passed to the bishops, and to their successors, unto the present day. Are you saying that you would have been willing to listen to the Apostles? Would you submit to their authority? How about the authority of those they appointed? Would you submit to them, as to Christ?
"guanophore:

It is this rejection of those whom Christ sent that is the foundation of the Reformation. The fruit of it is separation and division, which continues and multiplies to this day.

No, it is only human to differ in theological questions. No two Catholics think the same about all dogma. This is so obvious, I simply cannot grasp why you as well as a load of other Catholic apologeticists apply a double standard when it comes to your own church.

I agree that it is human to differ in theological questions. I beleive this is why Jesus instructed the disciples to take their disuptes “to the church” an that we should listen (abide by) the decisions made by the authority He appointed.

Your example of the thoughts of Catholics is irrelevant. It is not individual Catholics that define the dogma, but Jesus through the Apostles and their successors. Individual Catholics who do not accept the teaching and the authority given by Christ are no longer Catholic. They have become protestant,but don’t realize it.

You are wrong about “Protestants have more unity in the 5 solas”. This is simply not consistent with the facts. You are in need of study on your own family history.

Protestants are more united than Catholics because we all have the 5 Solas. This is a common unifying threme in Protestantism.

This is not a common unifying theme for Protestants. It must seem like that to you because this is your personal experience. The common unifying theme for Protestants is rejection of Catholicsm.

For example there are traditionalist Catholics who disown modern popes because according to them they have long left the true Catholic teachings. Again there are many Catholic sects all across the world which differ in their teachings. Then again you have your run of the mill cafetaria Catholics. And yet still you have the brand of syncretism that the Roman Catholic church pushes which allows for unity with all other world religions, opening salvation to Muslims, Orthodox, and what not.

Persons who are not in unity with Catholic Teaching are not Catholic. Their belief that they are does not change the facts. There is One Church, One Body, One Lord of all.

What is this, if not a theological potpourri?

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly on the theological potoourri. This exists in both Protestant and Catholic venues. But Jesus founded a Church on Truth, of which there is only One. Those who are united in this truth are Catholic. Those who reject part of it, have left the truth.

It’s all a smokescreen I tell you.

Clearly you do not percieve that there is a difference between the holy infallible Church of Christ and the falllible persons who are joined to her.

 

[joe370]

Hey csmatyi, day off so I thought I would respond.

Look, joe, I still don’t beleive you.

**I certainly respect your right to believe as you wish. **

As I said before, all people consist of a microdenomination on their own rights. This means there are more Catholic denominations then there are Protestant. Sorry.

**Could you please name a few of these C.C. denominations! Prior to the protestant reformation, the C.C. wouldn’t have known what you were talking about if you referred to it as a denomination. A denomination by definition is a group which has slightly different beliefs from other groups within the same faith. There was only one church with one set of beliefs, no other groups within the same faith for 1500 years, outside the E.O.C., and that was an issue of authority not beliefs or doctrines per se. **

It’s not that I disagree with you on this point, the facts do.

If the following 23 “particular Churches,” (the reputed fractured C.C.'s I’m assuming) or Rites ALL acknowledge a primacy of jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome and are in full communion with the Holy See and each other, then logically the C.C. maintains the unity and oneness the bible speaks of—well, to me anyway. Where/who are these microdenominations within the C.C.?

*** Of Alexandrian liturgical tradition:
o Coptic Catholic Church
o Ethiopic Catholic Church

• Of Antiochian liturgical tradition:
  o Maronite Church
  o Syrian Catholic Church
  o Syro-Malankara Catholic Church
• Of Armenian liturgical tradition:
  o Armenian Catholic Church
• Of Byzantine (Constantinopolitan) liturgical tradition:
  o Albanian Byzantine Catholic Church
  o Belarusian Greek Catholic Church
  o Bulgarian Greek Catholic Church
  o Byzantine Church of the Eparchy of Križevci
  o Greek Byzantine Catholic Church
  o Hungarian Greek Catholic Church
  o Italo-Albanian Catholic Church
  o Macedonian Greek Catholic Church
  o Melkite Greek Catholic Church
  o Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic
  o Russian Byzantine Catholic Church
  o Ruthenian Catholic Church
  o Slovak Greek Catholic Church
  o Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
• Of Chaldean or East Syrian tradition:
  o Chaldean Catholic Church
  o Syro-Malabar Church
• Of Western liturgical tradition:
  o Latin Church**

Are you saying that the apostles via Jesus, taught these doctrines (5 Solas) in the 1st century?

Is this what Jesus taught to His apostles and disciples in general? Is this what the early church promulgated?

Sola Scriptura: that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. (1Cor. 4:6)
Sola gratia: And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. (Romans 11:6)
Solus Christus: Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4:12)
Sola fide: For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect. (Rom. 4:4)
Soli Deo Gloria: That no flesh should glory in his presence…That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. (1Cor. 1:29.31)…

…if All Protestants beleive the 5 Solas (Sola Scriptura, sola fide, solus Christus, sola gratia, soli Deo Gloria). This is a basic rule of thumb for deciding who’s Christian and who ain’t.

**1 Cor. 1:6 can’t apply to the New Testament; it wasn’t even codified/canonized until the 4th century, and the 27 books certainly weren’t written until the end of the 1st century. The apostles taught orally. Apostolic Tradition was the normal mode of teaching. The traditional subscription to the epistle, translated in the Authorized Version, states that this epistle was written at Philippi, perhaps arising from a misinterpretation of 16:5, “For I do pass through Macedonia,” as meaning, “I am passing through Macedonia.” In 16:8 Paul declares his intention of staying in Ephesus until Pentecost. This statement, in turn, is clearly reminiscent of Paul’s Second Missionary Journey, when Paul travelled from Corinth to Ephesus, before going to Jerusalem for Pentecost (Acts 18:22). Thus, it is possible that I Corinthians was written during Paul’s first (brief) stay in Ephesus, at the end of his Second Journey, usually dated to early 54 AD. Clearly the other books of the N.T. weren’t written yet, meaning that “that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written” was referring to Pauls letters and the law of Moses, the prophets and the psalms. **

The Five solas are five Latin phrases (or slogans) that emerged during the Protestant Reformation, 1500 years removed from the time Jesus established His church and doctrines and they contradict those doctrines. They summarize the Reformers’ basic theological beliefs in contradistinction to the teaching of the Catholic Church, not Jesus’ or His apostles theological beliefs. The five solas articulated five fundamental beliefs of the Protestant Reformation, pillars which the Reformers believed to be essentials of the Christian life and practice. I adhered to these doctrines as well until I realized they weren’t doctrines the apostolic church taught!

**As a former Lutheran, I came to realize that there is no scriptural bases for these man-made doctrines. 2 Timothy 3:14-17 is about as good as it gets. I totally believe that all scripture collected, selected, compiled, codified and finally canonized by the C.C. through the inspiration of the H.S. is profitable… However, scripture says all scripture not only scripture, wouldn’t you agree?
**
**"But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; (they were taught by actual people, the church) And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture (which of course wasn’t codified or canonized until the 4th century, by the C.C.; many heretical writings were considered sacred and apostolic for almost 400 years, that didn’t make the cut at the end of the 4th century; and are not in my bible today; if these early Christians relied on sola scriptura, they would have been misguided; luckily the church was there to oversee) ----is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable (actually complete,Greek word is artios) for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."
**

**Also, artios does not describe the Scriptures, it describes the clergyman. So, non-Catholics cannot use this verse to argue the Scriptures are complete.

James 1:4 - patience also makes a man “perfect (teleioi) and complete (holoklepoi), lacking nothing.” This verse is important because "teleioi"and “holoklepoi” are much stronger words than “artios,” but Protestants do not argue that patience is all one needs to be a Christian. That would be silly.
**

**“My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.” James 1:4 **

**Moreover the Bible says the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth. Why do so many non-Catholics try and sidestep this verse while hinging everything on 2 Tim. 3:16? That was the question I had to ask myself; I’m not trying to convince you, you seem pretty self assured. Just dialoguing.

“so that if I am delayed, you will know how people must conduct themselves in the household of God. This is the church of the living God, which is the pillar and foundation of the truth.”** 1 Timothy 3:15

excerpt…
"There are “over 33,000 denominations in 238 countries” and every year there is a net increase of around 270 to 300 denominations.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism

Remember, the numbers below are derived using Protestant sources only.

bringyou.to/apologetics/a120.htm

I cannot objectively beleive what you say until you give me the entire list of all 33000 (last time it was 40000 btw, looks like a decrease) denominations.

**I never said 44000; that was someone else! I’ll need that itemized list of catholic denominations as well.

*  Independents (about 22000)
* Protestants (about 9000)
* "Marginals" (about 1600)
* Orthodox (781)
* Roman Catholics (24)
* Anglicans (168)**

Lets just stick with 9000 protestant denominations, all registered as a separate entity, unlike the 23 “particular Churches,” or Rites which all acknowledge a primacy of jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome and are in full communion with the Holy See and each other. However, these independent/non-denominational churches are out there, and clearly, are the product of protestantism. I always try and remain 100% unbiased; something I wasn’t as a former lutheran! If I’m wrong, convince me.

**The World Christian Database provides comprehensive statistical information on world religions, Christian denominations, and people groups. I checked it out; Seems really reliable to me.

worldchristiandatabase.org/wcd/about/denominations.asp

**

But I scanned through your link, and I found your logic quite faulty to say the least:

Remember its not my logic; they are statistical facts!

to be continued…

 

[joe370]

1. There’s this list titled Independents, covering about 22000 so called denominaions. Examples of such entries are:

-schismatic Conservative Catholics
-Hidden Buddhist believers in Christ
-Hidden Buddhist believers in Christ (for example, and how many???)
-Independent Estonian Orthodox
-Gay/Lesbian homosexual tradition
-Independent Greek Orthodox
-Hidden Hindu believers in Christ
-Independent Jehovah’s Witnesses (yikes! how did they get in here???)
-Hidden Muslim believers in Christ
-Independent Assyrian or Nestorian
-Old Catholics (i.e. split from Rome after Vatican Council I)
-Orthodox sect/sectarian

So, you think that gay people can be Christian?

I have a friend who is gay and she seems to think so! Not my call though. **You forgot to show the link; they certainly believe they are true Christians:

This is the link— Metropolitan Community Churches
**
Jehovah’s witnesses?

They too believe they are true Christians and they too can only trace their origin back to a mere man, unlike the C.C.

Which is clearly non-Protestant?

WordNet® 3.0 © 2006 Princeton University and the dictionary seems to think so: The Jehovah’s Witnesses - Protestant denomination founded in the United States by Charles Taze Russell in 1884

Adventists? Who deny sola gratia? Catholics? Orthodox? Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists? What in the world are you talking about?

You forgot to add, Orthodox, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists “believers in Christ,” which make them Christians.

**However, I do see where you’re going with this, and I agree. I should check each and every fact and stat. from the actual source: World Christian Encyclopedia by Barrett, Kurian, Johnson (Oxford Univ Press, 2nd edition, 2001) —before I make any claims. **

**The C.C. is the world’s largest single religious body, and represents over half of all Christians and one-sixth of the world’s population. With a 2,000 year history, the Catholic Church is the western world’s oldest institution. Surely this is a fulfilment of Matthew 28:18-20.

Jesus said go and make disciples of all the nations…Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age.; only the C.C. has been doing that since Jesus spoke those words!If the C.C. fell away in the 4th, 5th or 6th century (until the protestant reformation came along to save the day) that would really make me question the infallible, omnipotent Trinity. Notice He said teach, not read the bible and interpret privately. Also notice the promise of perpetuity. He said He would not leave them orphans, regardless of the wheat mixed with the chaff;He would be with them “forever.” If the C.C. apostatized (not individual apostasies but a total apostasy) the bible starts to look a bit sketchy at best, for me anyway.

**Jesus knew there would be bad people in His Church as well as incredibly good people. If He knew this and still allowed it to happen, it must be for a reason! Lets not forget about are ultimate enemy—Satan/anti-Christ. He wants to utterly destroy Jesus Christ’s Body, which is the the church and all her members, which is also the House of the Living God, the pillar and foundation of truth. There is a war being waged, we just don’t see it. **

**“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
**
**“Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.” (Acts 20:26-30 RSV)

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” Matthew7:15 **

**Just because you are larger in number and have a longer history doesn’t mean that by default you are right.

It’s not about me being right or wrong; it’s about the fact that the C.C. is the only church that has been spreading the gospel in every century, since the time Jesus walked the earth. Continuity is the ultimate benchmark by which any and all churches should be measured. Why should I trust a church if it wasn’t established by Jesus Himself? We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
**

Since there are many more non-beleivers than beleivers than does this mean that they’re right? Absolutely not.

**I agree, however this doesn’t change the fact that the C.C. is the only church that passes the continuity test. Would you buy a product if you knew it was a forgery. If it wasn’t the genuine article. Are you really sure that the C.C. Is not the genuine article?
**

God said in the Bible He would preserve a remnant throughout all time who would be His witnesses.

**Are you referring to Romans 9:25-29:

**"Concerning the Gentiles, God says in the prophecy of Hosea, “Those who were not my people I will now call my people. And I will love those whom I did not love before.”[k] And, “Then, at the place where they were told, ‘You are not my people,’ there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’”[l]And concerning Israel, Isaiah the prophet cried out, “Though the people of Israel are as numerous as the sand of the seashore, only a remnant will be saved. For the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth quickly and with finality.”[m] And Isaiah said the same thing in another place: “If the Lord of Heaven’s Armies had not spared a few of our children, we would have been wiped out like Sodom, destroyed like Gomorrah.”

---

This seems very specific to Israel, God’s chosen people.

I still believe that Jesus wanted His church for to make disciples of all nations, not just a small remnant, and that is exactly what happened. Christianity has almost pervaded the entire globe. (Certainly the 16th century doctrine, sola scriptura isn’t responsible for this phenomenon)

Alas, you are wrong:

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. (Matthew 7:13-14)

Alas is right! This is a very sad and sobering verse, however, I said that the church (not just the C.C.) has successfully made disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that Jesus commanded His apostolic church. I didn’t say anything about the eternal fate of these new Christians through the centuries!

Only a few are gonna make it!

**VERY SAD WHEN YOU PUT IT THAT WAY. **

“Throughout history, small groups of Christians kept the fire alive outside of the Catholic church, groups like the Vaudois, the Cathars, the Albigenses, Lollards, Hussites, all before the Reformation.”

If these various movements represented the true apostolic church, established by Jesus (God ordained) --why did they fade into oblivion? Even if they didn’t fade into oblivion, they might as well have. I had to do some serious research to learn anything about them.

Waldenses still exist to this day if I am correct. But hey, why do their denomination have to remain to this very day? They could have joined up with other denominations. History showed that the Waldenses had met with the Reformers and they found that they taught many similar things. When I was in Belgium I went to the Verenigde Protestantse Kerk in Belgie - the United Protestant church in Belgium - which shows that they had united instead of splitting up.

**Doesn’t sound like the church Jesus intended when he said the following:

“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church**, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

“You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.”
—Matthew 5:14-16

The following passages would require a very visible, indomitable church, that would be around for all generations (starting in the 1st century) --to benefit, not just a few; guided by the Holy Spirit with a promise of perpetuity, which of course applies to the C.C. unless of course another church preceded the C.C. --and that church is responsible for the whole world possessing a Bible.

Jesus said in John 8:12 “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

John 12:46 I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.

As I said before, The C.C. comprises 23 “particular Churches,” or Rites, all of which acknowledge a primacy of jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome and are in full communion with the Holy See and each other.

Okay, okay, but it doesn’t matter what the confession is of the church that you go to

**Confession??? **

…but what you beleive in your heart and in your mind. This is why your whole entire argument says absouletly nothing.

Like I said before, just dialoguing… Jesus said, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind— and if people do that and find themselves, free of any lingering doubts in a church other than the C.C., then your home!!!**

 

[celticcrusader]

Jehovah’s witnesses?

They too believe they are true Christians and they too can only trace their origin back to a mere man, unlike the C.C. When did JWs become Christian???

 

[joe370]

Jehovah’s witnesses?

They too believe they are true Christians and they too can only trace their origin back to a mere man, unlike the C.C. When did JWs become Christian???

Based on this information, I would say they think they are. Clearly a cult to anyone outside their organization. They quote from the same bible, excluding the Deuterocanonical books, and worship God and Jesus in albeit a very heretical way!

Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[joe370]

Based on this information, I would say they think they are. Clearly a cult to anyone outside their organization. They quote from the same bible, excluding the Deuterocanonical books, and worship God and Jesus in albeit a very heretical way!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah’s_Witnesses

EXCERPT…

Avoidance of interfaith activity

The Witness contend that the Bible has always condemned the mixing of religions because there can only be one truth from God.[29][30] **They believe only their religion represents true Christianity. **They believe that all other religions fail to meet all the requirements set by God and will be done away with. [31] Weddings, anniversaries, and funerals are typically observed; however, common celebrations or national holidays such as birthdays (based on the biblical account of Pharaoh at Genesis 40:20–22 and the biblical account of King Herod at Matthew 14:6–10), Halloween, Easter, and Christmas are regarded as pagan holidays owing to their origins and are not celebrated.[32] The Witnesses are opposed to ‘councils’ that unite or combine different religions. [33]

 

[Memaw]

Who is to say the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide the Protestant Churchs as well? Not I.

Would the Holy Spirit guide them into error and heresy? And hatred for HIS One, True Church? I hardly think so. Christ promised the Holy Spirit would be with HIS Church and keep it in the Truth. God never abandons his children and even when we are in sin and error the Holy Spirit is there to try to bring us back. But that doesn’t change the fact that Christ established ONE Church and that is the Catholic Church, to teach, govern and Sanctify, for all men, for all time, and it is HIS WILL the we all follow Him in the fullness of TRUTH. It would be interesting to know how many protestants have heard the truth of Christ’s Catholic Church but chose to refuse it or ignore it or whatever.

 

[wisdomseeker]

**Quote:
Originally Posted by mikew262
Who is to say the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide the Protestant Churchs as well? Not I. **

i would say this: Jesus said a house divided is a house destroyed.

i can not understand perhaps you can explain this. if the Lord promise the Spirit of Truth to His Church, how do you reconcile this with many other believers in Christ being against this Church. pretty much what the CC believes to be true, protestants say is false.

Can the Lord come against Himself? or do you think is just the way of disobedient men. who reject authority.

do you truly believe they can understant SS?

remember this the CC is first, men decided to leave to follow their own ways. anyone leaving this Church is in disobedience to Christ who built One Church.

i am not say they will not come back some day, but the way it is they are in disobedience.

:knight2: :knight2: :knight2:

 

[Ronald_E]

Would the Holy Spirit guide them into error and heresy? And hatred for HIS One, True Church? I hardly think so. Christ promised the Holy Spirit would be with HIS Church and keep it in the Truth. God never abandons his children and even when we are in sin and error the Holy Spirit is there to try to bring us back. But that doesn’t change the fact that Christ established ONE Church and that is the Catholic Church, to teach, govern and Sanctify, for all men, for all time, and it is HIS WILL the we all follow Him in the fullness of TRUTH. It would be interesting to know how many protestants have heard the truth of Christ’s Catholic Church but chose to refuse it or ignore it or whatever.

I believe that the Holy Spirit meets us where we are. We do have the fullness of Truth in our Catholic faith, but, we as human beings do not know the full Truth. Through the Sacraments we are constantly being given the opportunities to develop a deepening awareness of the Truth.
The Truth is God is Love. The Sacraments, especially the Eucharist, can open us to more of an understanding of God’ Love. To receive the Eucharist, we must first be baptized, which gives us the first experience of the Holy Spirit. This Baptism is just the first step towards our maturation in knowing God.
I was told as a child that the Catholic faith is the one true Church that Christ created, but I did not know it until the age of 58. To know our Catholic faith comes from Christ is a gift of God’s Grace which is an expression of His Love. I did not ask for this Truth. I was given it.
The Holy Spirit works throughout all of creation constantly calling us to first and foremost, Love one another. Any thought, feeling, or action that does not resonate love does not resonate with God’s Love, regardless of what faith we practice.

 

[PetersKeys]

I tend to agree. Many anti-catholics are people who have been married more than once and are angry at the church because of their divorcing and re-marrying constantly. Others who are angry want to use contraception and BC, or they came from Catholic familys and are rebelling. One onl has to look at King Henry VIII to look at the spirit of protestantism and why it started.

As with alot of people, with have problems with authority and think they themselves are right all the time. People who don’t llike the church do not like authority(even if it is apostolic authority like the Catholic Church) and think that they themselves are capable of everything like scripture interperatation, eccumenalism, rhetoric, etc. What is funny is that these types of people all tend to have conflicting interperatations and dogmas from each other.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**I’m rom. Catholic ever since birth. Mom married after divorce again – this time a very Christian protestant. She and my brother became Lutherans. I stayed Catholic for quite a few reasons.
First of all, my new dad, even though he was very religious and his brother was a Lutheran priest, never understood all about the holy Virgin Mary – mother of Jesus, not took he the Holy Communion as what it is. As a child of 11 (I am nearly 70 now) this disappointed me ever so much. Besides, he thought, Church must be democracy. I thought, it’s ridiculous to ask for democracy in matters between God and us.
**

 

[joe370]

IF ITS NOT IN THE BIBLE IT’S WRONG

Catholic Tradition chose Sunday to go to Mass and December 25t to celebrate Christmas (our Lords birth).

Protestants claim to follow the written word only (the Bible) as their final authority on all matters of faith and morals yet they go to mass on Sunday. Sounds like you are embracing C.C. tradition.

Sunday is a tradition of the Catholic Church. It cannot be found in the Bible, **sole authority **for protestants. After all, protestants, (as I use to believe as a former Lutheran) reject the assumption of Mary based on the same criteria! What gives…

**December 25th is a tradition of the C.C. **Why do protestants celebrate Christmas on December 25th when there is no written record in the bible of when this occurred. Aren’t these simply trappings of 4th century “Romanism”? I’m constantly being told by my sister and other protestants, if it’s not in Holy Scripture it’s not to be believed.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**Well, isn’t in fact the precise date of birth of Jesus Christ of very minor matter? We know is happened and that’s it
More to the determination of day of birth, we find here:
newadvent.org/cathen/05504c.htm
In fact, over here in Germany, 25th and 26th is just a church-holiday, whilst the actual Christmas is celebrated Dec 24th on Holy Eve, with presents (remembering the three wise men who brought presents to the child Jesus).
When precisely all that was, ought to be secondary. We celebrate knowing IT HAD HAPPENED on several days throughout the year.
All we have to know is the fact that GOD IS as we pray in the Lords Prayer THOU ART. And when we then got the path Jesus told us to take, we are on the safe side and on the right track. Tiny details don’t strengthen our faith – sticking on them rather disturbs faith and keeps us from living in God.
**