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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FredSmith said:
Paul Washer is fantastic.
Click to expand...
So following this “man” is somehow “biblical”?
Your FredSmith wrote;
And that is the difference between us: when you talk about a search for truth, you make a list of men amd man made organizations
Click to expand...
.

How are your comments on this thread regarding Paul Washer (a “man”) any different?

Isn’t he a just a “man”? Is not what he says or writes (or any protestant minister) outside the “word of God”, by your own definition, as used by you and applied to Catholicism?

If it isn’t the same thing, please explain why it is not?

You cannot have it both ways, it is either “you and your bible” and nothing else or it involves “a list of men and man made organizations.”
“
This logic doesn’t seem somewhat hypocritical and schizophrenic to you?
 
FredSmith said:
Paul Washer is fantastic.
Click to expand...
I now understand your hatred of the Catholic Church.

They used to lynch African-Americans and Catholics down in the bible belt.

Your religious hatred of us is just a hand-me-down from generations past.

peace
 
Although I am Catholic I can understand reasons why one would not be Roman Catholic.

I believe it was Gandhi who said:

**If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today.

**I believe many fail to see the beauty of the Church because of the waywardness of it’s members. :o

So far have we fallen away from Him that I doubt many historical Catholics would recognize His Church anymore. 😊
 
mgrfin said:
Jesus did not exist from the beginning of time. What lack of clarity does exist for someone who would say such.

The Word existed from all time. The Word was not Jesus. Through the union of the human and divine nature, Jesus came into existence. The human Jesus did not exist for all time. He exists now, and for all time.
Click to expand...
**
mgrfin, you are wrong. Very wrong by saying the Word was not Jesus, or that he didn’t exist.

I’m going to have to correct you. Jesus did exist in the beginning. He is the Word. Remember the first chapter of John. In the Beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jesus did not have a body. He was pure spirit in complete union with God the Father and the Holy Spirit. In the fullness of time, through the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary and became man. He is both God and Man.

Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega. The Beginning and the End. So you are incorrect in your thinking that Jesus wasn’t in the Beginning. He did. Remember Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I AM!”**
 
Mannyfit75 said:
**
mgrfin, you are wrong. Very wrong by saying the Word was not Jesus, or that he didn’t exist.

I’m going to have to correct you. Jesus did exist in the beginning. He is the Word. Remember the first chapter of John. In the Beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jesus did not have a body. He was pure spirit in complete union with God the Father and the Holy Spirit. In the fullness of time, through the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary and became man. He is both God and Man.

Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega. The Beginning and the End. So you are incorrect in your thinking that Jesus wasn’t in the Beginning. He did. Remember Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I AM!”**
Click to expand...
Sorry, Manny, I am not wrong.

The Word (Second Person of the Blessed Trinity), was conceived and became Man. That Man was Jesus Christ, who had two Natures, the Human and the Divine. The Divine Nature was from the beginning; the Human was born in time.

Jesus, the human Jesus, did not exist with the Father and the Holy Spirit. His Divine Nature, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity did.

I appreciate your concern; but your concern is not warranted.

peace
 
Mannyfit75 said:
**
mgrfin, you are wrong. Very wrong by saying the Word was not Jesus, or that he didn’t exist.

I’m going to have to correct you. Jesus did exist in the beginning. He is the Word. Remember the first chapter of John. In the Beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jesus did not have a body. He was pure spirit in complete union with God the Father and the Holy Spirit. In the fullness of time, through the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary and became man. He is both God and Man.

Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega. The Beginning and the End. So you are incorrect in your thinking that Jesus wasn’t in the Beginning. He did. Remember Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I AM!”**
Click to expand...
Perhaps you are conflating the person Jesus was Fully God and Fully Man (two natures in Unity) with the Logos the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. There is a difference in my humble opinion.

The Incarnation created a person unique in history Jesus Christ (Fully Man, Fully God) and we can’t attribute to the Second Person of the Holy Trinity a Human Nature.
 
mgrfin said:
Okay, you were forced to go to Church. You are now an adult and you are not forced, whether to go to a bible church, or to the Catholic Church down the street.

I seem to be missing the point, or are you? When you went inside that Catholic Church, Jesus Christ was present - really, truly present in that Tabernacle. When you go into your current church, there is hardly a Cross, there is no altar, there is no tabernacle, there is no Jesus physically present.

That is the beginning of the difference. You didn’t tell us why you are a Protestant. You didn’t tell us why you left the Catholic Church, assuming it hasn’t nothing to do with divorce which your bible loving church professes, dispite the fact that divorce is forbidden in your Scriptures.

What else can you tell us about this? Now, tell us the truth - no fudging, no lying, no dissimulation. No hiding, like a lot of protestant apologists do on this site.

peace
Click to expand...
 
mgrfin said:
Sorry, Manny, I am not wrong.

The Word (Second Person of the Blessed Trinity), was conceived and became Man. That Man was Jesus Christ, who had two Natures, the Human and the Divine. The Divine Nature was from the beginning; the Human was born in time.
Click to expand...
That clarify everything than your previous post. You left a lot of gaps in the other one.

I do disagree with your first sentence. Jesus was in the beginning. Was he not the Word? He was the Word but he did not have human nature. His divine nature was in the beginning. His human didn’t came into being until the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary.
Jesus, the human Jesus, did not exist with the Father and the Holy Spirit. His Divine Nature, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity did.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your concern; but your concern is not warranted.
Click to expand...
peace
Click to expand...
No disagreement there.
 
chrisb said:
Perhaps you are conflating the person Jesus was Fully God and Fully Man (two natures in Unity) with the Logos the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. There is a difference in my humble opinion.
Click to expand...
No. I’m pretty clear I have some understanding of the theology concerning the Second Person of the Trinity.

In the beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This Word is the Second Person of the Trinity. He had not taken up a human nature. His divine nature was there in the beginning.

This makes it clear when Jesus said, “Before Abraham was. I am.” That is why we hear Jesus said, “The Father and I are One.”
The Incarnation created a person unique in history Jesus Christ (Fully Man, Fully God) and we can’t attribute to the Second Person of the Holy Trinity a Human Nature.
Click to expand...
In order to fullfill the prophecy of the prophets. The Word of God took upon the our nature. He was born under the law, took a form of a slave, born of a woman. He became flesh. He is Jesus Christ, the Word incarnate. He is both God and Man. I’m pretty clear what the Church teaches my friend.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
No. I’m pretty clear I have some understanding of the theology concerning the Second Person of the Trinity.

In the beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This Word is the Second Person of the Trinity. He had not taken up a human nature. His divine nature was there in the beginning.

This makes it clear when Jesus said, “Before Abraham was. I am.” That is why we hear Jesus said, “The Father and I are One.”
Click to expand...
Would that understanding suggest that the Second Person of the Trinity always had a Human Nature? Jesus Christ wasn’t just the Second Person of the Holy Trinity but the union of God and Man, the New Adam. The Trinity, specifically the Second Person of the Holy Trinity had to unite with Man to restore man’s participation in the Divine Nature in order to conquer Death. Jesus has both a Human Nature as well as a Divine Nature and neither is done away with nor are they co-mingled.
In order to fullfill the prophecy of the prophets. The Word of God took upon the our nature. He was born under the law, took a form of a slave, born of a woman. He became flesh. He is Jesus Christ, the Word incarnate. He is both God and Man. I’m pretty clear what the Church teaches my friend.
Click to expand...
Mary gave birth to the person Jesus Christ. She was not the creator of the Divine Nature as it has not origin but she was the creator of the ‘person’ Jesus Christ (Fully Man, Fully God) and in so doing is legitimately recognized as the Theotokos (Bearer of God). If we cannot see the person of Jesus Christ holistically then we do grave harm to our understanding of him as the God-Man.
 
Dear mgrfin,
I’m not sure what your motivation sir, but since I’ve joined this “thread” about what our real reason is for not being catholic, all I see from you is a serious case of racism. You think you have all the answers. Who made you the expert on God? or even on religion? Your smugness, your pomposity, your anger, to name a few ill tempers make you a perfect representative of all that is bad about religious stereotypes. We are trying to have a serious discussion here and if you continue to be a bully about it, well, go ahead! Obviously we are not going to stop you, but it is obvious too, you have issues you need to look at.
t
 
2ndGen; said:
:
Darn! That’s twice in one day!
Click to expand...

You could have cited the followign as a defense that books were removed from the NT:
  • 3 Corinthians;
  • EpLao;
  • Didache;
  • Epistle of Barnabus;
  • Shepherd Hermanus (?sp)
Roughly a dozen books were subject to serious debate about whether or not they were canonical.

FWIW, Luther is credited with the removal of one of those books from the German Catholic Canon.

xan

jonathon
 
Mannyfit75 said:
No. I’m pretty clear I have some understanding of the theology concerning the Second Person of the Trinity.

In the beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This Word is the Second Person of the Trinity. He had not taken up a human nature. His divine nature was there in the beginning.

This makes it clear when Jesus said, “Before Abraham was. I am.” That is why we hear Jesus said, “The Father and I are One.”

In order to fullfill the prophecy of the prophets. The Word of God took upon the our nature. He was born under the law, took a form of a slave, born of a woman. He became flesh. He is Jesus Christ, the Word incarnate. He is both God and Man. I’m pretty clear what the Church teaches my friend.
Click to expand...
Well Said! 👍
 
chrisb said:
Would that understanding suggest that the Second Person of the Trinity always had a Human Nature? Jesus Christ wasn’t just the Second Person of the Holy Trinity but the union of God and Man, the New Adam. The Trinity, specifically the Second Person of the Holy Trinity had to unite with Man to restore man’s participation in the Divine Nature in order to conquer Death. Jesus has both a Human Nature as well as a Divine Nature and neither is done away with nor are they co-mingled.
Click to expand...
No the Second Person of the Trinity didn’t have a human nature in the Beginning. He was pure Spirit like God the Father and God, the Holy Spirit… He was there in the beginning but without a body. It was not until the reign of Ceasar Augustus, when Gabriel came upon Mary and greeted her, “Hail, full of the grace, the Lord is with you.” To make this short. Mary consented by saying her FIAT. “Be it done onto me according to your word.”

The Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and she conceived the Son of God. From Mary’s flesh. The Eternal Word became flesh. He took upon a human nature of the creator. Life itself.
Mary gave birth to the person Jesus Christ. She was not the creator of the Divine Nature as it has not origin but she was the creator of the ‘person’ Jesus Christ (Fully Man, Fully God) and in so doing is legitimately recognized as the Theotokos (Bearer of God). If we cannot see the person of Jesus Christ holistically then we do grave harm to our understanding of him as the God-Man.
Click to expand...
I want to make this clear to you that I believe what the Council of Ephesus in 432 AD declared that Mary is the Mother of God, the Theotokos.

The problem I have with is saying that Jesus was NOT in the beginning. He was in the beginning but without his human nature. The Book of Revelation made this very clear.

Jesus said.

“Fear not,** I am the first and the last**, and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of the Death and Hades.” Rev 1:17-18.

When Jesus said I am the first and the last, implies, he was there in the beginning of creation, or rather. He had no beginning. He is God in full communion with Triune God. Three Divine Persons. He is the last because He is unending. He is Immortal.

He divine presence has always been there. He is eternal. Jesus is indeed God-Man. Jesus received his bodily human flesh from Mary. The blood of Mary flows through Jesus, and the blood of Jesu flows through Mary just as Fr. Corapi said.
 
tmg said:
Dear mgrfin,
I’m not sure what your motivation sir, but since I’ve joined this “thread” about what our real reason is for not being catholic, all I see from you is a serious case of racism. You think you have all the answers. Who made you the expert on God? or even on religion? Your smugness, your pomposity, your anger, to name a few ill tempers make you a perfect representative of all that is bad about religious stereotypes. We are trying to have a serious discussion here and if you continue to be a bully about it, well, go ahead! Obviously we are not going to stop you, but it is obvious too, you have issues you need to look at.
t
Click to expand...
**Ok, that’s great, let me start, **

tmg**, why are you a Christian and not Catholic? **

If you have any specific problems with Catholicism, what are they? (please list one at a time)

Note: If you want to use Bible verses alone, that’s great, I can’t wait to see them, I love the Bible!

Thank you
 
tmg said:
Hello mgrfin,
…But all the misinformation the catholic church spreads around when a person is young and impressionable is a disservice to humanity. For instance, when I was young, there was a Heaven, Hell and Limbo. Well, as we all know, …(
Click to expand...
Catechism of the Catholic Church
IV. HELL
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”
1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.614 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"615 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"616
1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
Click to expand...
1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:621
Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.622

(Limbo)

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.
Click to expand...
 
Jimmy_B said:
**Ok, that’s great, let me start, **

tmg**, why are you a Christian and not Catholic? **

If you have any specific problems with Catholicism, what are they? (please list one at a time)

Note: If you want to use Bible verses alone, that’s great, I can’t wait to see them, I love the Bible!

Thank you
Click to expand...
Well let’s see…
  1. Its inherent lack of respect, more like antipathy, towards women.(This inadvertantly gave rise to its latent acceptance of homosexuality within the clergy ranks.)
  2. Its lack of respect for other religions (like God didn’t exist before Christ? You that naive? Come on, give us a break!).
  3. Its insistence we need priests to intervene with God for us. This robs us of the opportunity to develop that relationship for ourselves.
  4. The burden of guilt it lays on us. It’s so heavyhanded! Where is God’s love? Certainly not in the catholic teachings.
  5. In a lot of places, the church just doesn’t make sense. They like to say “it’s a mystery” to keep people dumb. Of course there are answers to important questions. Do you really follow someone who tells you “it’s a mystery?” Pardon me for asking, but that’s kinda stupid, isn’t it? Why do they try to keep people in the dark? Because they like having the power to do so, that’s why.
    There are a few more things but that’s enough for now.
    Peace.
 
tmg said:
Well let’s see…
  1. Its inherent lack of respect, more like antipathy, towards women.(This inadvertantly gave rise to its latent acceptance of homosexuality within the clergy ranks.)
  2. Its lack of respect for other religions (like God didn’t exist before Christ? You that naive? Come on, give us a break!).
  3. Its insistence we need priests to intervene with God for us. This robs us of the opportunity to develop that relationship for ourselves.
  4. The burden of guilt it lays on us. It’s so heavyhanded! Where is God’s love? Certainly not in the catholic teachings.
  5. In a lot of places, the church just doesn’t make sense. They like to say “it’s a mystery” to keep people dumb. Of course there are answers to important questions. Do you really follow someone who tells you “it’s a mystery?” Pardon me for asking, but that’s kinda stupid, isn’t it? Why do they try to keep people in the dark? Because they like having the power to do so, that’s why.
    There are a few more things but that’s enough for now.
    Peace.
Click to expand...
OH PLEASE start another thread with this!!!

It is SO very honest and illustrative of an amazing view of the Church. An incorrect view, but a prevalent one that most people holding it won’t come right out and say.

Truly beautiful in it’s honesty and naivete!

…quite the thing to watch. Let me get my popcorn and settle in for the show! Thanks to everyone involved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top