If you converted from Church of Christ to Catholic.....

[Catholic4aReasn]

TNT:

Re: Sprinkling
I am not aware that the mode of sprinkling is a common practice even today.
The practice today is pouring as normal, but immersion acceptable and unrestricted.
It is the ancient church as far back as 258ad that allows pouring and even sprinkling as a valid mode in cases of necessity, such as desert, bedridden sick. The sprinkle/pouring mode was even referred to as the baptism of the sick…

Actually pouring as a valid form of baptism is referred to in the Didache, a 1st century Christian document. It dates back to about 70 AD, during the time that most of the apostles were still alive and even before all the books of the NT were even written:

“In regard to Baptism- baptize thus: After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. If you have no living water, then baptize in other water; and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[RCCDefender]

Tibbar, are you refuting something I said?

Tibbar:

Jesus accepted John’s baptism…a baptism unto repentence. In doing so, he was obedient to the Lord’s command, though he knew no sin and had nothing to publicly repent of. Jesus never baptized anyone. When a person comes to Christ, he or she is baptized into Christ. A formal symbolic act of water baptism as a public witness to Christ is done in obedience to the Lord’s command, not to gain salvation through the act (as most COC’s believe).

Tibbar, by this statement you show me that either:
a) you are not really Catholic as you purport to be
or
b) you are one of the most uninformed converts I have ever heard.

Personally I think it’s more likely (a) espescially when you make statements like, " I suppose it was convenience…" for the reason for converting. You almost remind me of blackstone…

 

[Tibbar]

RCCDefender:

Tibbar, are you refuting something I said?

Tibbar, by this statement you show me that either:
a) you are not really Catholic as you purport to be
or
b) you are one of the most uninformed converts I have ever heard.

Personally I think it’s more likely (a) espescially when you make statements like, " I suppose it was convenience…" for the reason for converting. You almost remind me of blackstone…

If Teddy Kennedy, the late Frank Sinatra, and Martin Sheen are considered Catholics, than so am I. I am one of those whom John Ankerberg identifies as Evangelical “Catholic” :

Evangelical “Catholicism”—the branch of former Roman Catholics who are truly Evangelical and who have rejected the unbiblical teachings of Rome, often deciding to remain in the Church as a means to evangelize other Catholics.

The Evangelical “Catholic” is truly an Evangelical believer and not a Catholic. In other words, he is not a committed Roman Catholic who merely appropriates the title of Evangelical Christian. He understands the issues doctrinally and spiritually and attempts to walk what can be a very difficult, and to some people’s minds, inconsistent, line of fidelity to the Bible while remaining a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Tibbar:

Jesus accepted John’s baptism…a baptism unto repentence. In doing so, he was obedient to the Lord’s command, though he knew no sin and had nothing to publicly repent of. Jesus never baptized anyone. When a person comes to Christ, he or she is baptized into Christ. A formal symbolic act of water baptism as a public witness to Christ is done in obedience to the Lord’s command, not to gain salvation through the act (as most COC’s believe).

Actually, God says in his word, in no uncertain terms that “baptism now saves you” (1 Peter 3:21). Lest one believe He’s not speaking of water baptism one need only look at the context…the waters of the flood. Since we know that salvation is by grace alone (Eph 2:8) we can know with absolute certainty that baptism is a source of that saving grace.

God also says in his word that it’s in water baptism that we become a new creation (Romans 6:3-4). One goes down into the water, dies to self, and rises out of the water to new life; hence he is born again a new creation in Christ.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[misterX]

Tibbar:

If Teddy Kennedy, the late Frank Sinatra, and Martin Sheen are considered Catholics, than so am I. I am one of those whom John Ankerberg identifies as Evangelical “Catholic” :

Evangelical “Catholicism”—the branch of former Roman Catholics who are truly Evangelical and who have rejected the unbiblical teachings of Rome, often deciding to remain in the Church as a means to evangelize other Catholics.

The Evangelical “Catholic” is truly an Evangelical believer and not a Catholic. In other words, he is not a committed Roman Catholic who merely appropriates the title of Evangelical Christian. He understands the issues doctrinally and spiritually and attempts to walk what can be a very difficult, and to some people’s minds, inconsistent, line of fidelity to the Bible while remaining a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

No i don’t think you are Catholic. You seem to easly bash the Catholic church. yet you leap to the defence of the CoC, a church you gave up on ( or so you claim ) your little line about . “The Evangilical “Catholic” is truly a evangilical believer and not a Catholic” confirms my original thought that indeed you are not a Catholic. But just another evangilical who sees themselves as some sort of new prophet. because these so called “evangilical Catholics” as you like to describe yourself Are just like all the other evangilical losers out there, but the only difference is you know what the church teaches cannot be disputed. yet deep down you don’t like it because you know you will never get to be the Pope. Which i think is why many people become evangilical. They seem to want the power more than they do gods love.
Don’t bother responding because we both know i’m right

 

[cyprian]

Tibbar:

If Teddy Kennedy, the late Frank Sinatra, and Martin Sheen are considered Catholics, than so am I. I am one of those whom John Ankerberg identifies as Evangelical “Catholic” :

Evangelical “Catholicism”—the branch of former Roman Catholics who are truly Evangelical and who have rejected the unbiblical teachings of Rome, often deciding to remain in the Church as a means to evangelize other Catholics.

The Evangelical “Catholic” is truly an Evangelical believer and not a Catholic. In other words, he is not a committed Roman Catholic who merely appropriates the title of Evangelical Christian. He understands the issues doctrinally and spiritually and attempts to walk what can be a very difficult, and to some people’s minds, inconsistent, line of fidelity to the Bible while remaining a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

You dear friend, know zero about the Catholic Church.The fact that the Catholic Church is full of sin from top to bottom (it’s human members, some , not all) is something we already know about…blah blah blah. You don’t know the difference between doctrine and discipline. You’re failure to understand what The Church really is, and to associate it merely with human weakness and sin only makes you look rather…well…ignorant. Read, read and read more and understand the Church, and then you will be praying for this priest and parish…offering up penances and the like. Oh c’mon you can do it, otherwise you look rather foolish.

Peace and Love

 

[Tibbar]

cyprian:

You dear friend, know zero about the Catholic Church.The fact that the Catholic Church is full of sin from top to bottom (it’s human members, some , not all) is something we already know about…blah blah blah. You don’t know the difference between doctrine and discipline. You’re failure to understand what The Church really is, and to associate it merely with human weakness and sin only makes you look rather…well…ignorant. Read, read and read more and understand the Church, and then you will be praying for this priest and parish…offering up penances and the like. Oh c’mon you can do it, otherwise you look rather foolish.

Peace and Love

Offering up penances? Sounds an awful lot like a works based religious system to me. You are right in this: It is a fact that the RCC is definitely full of sin from top to bottom.

 

[Tibbar]

misterX:

No i don’t think you are Catholic. You seem to easly bash the Catholic church. yet you leap to the defence of the CoC, a church you gave up on ( or so you claim ) your little line about . “The Evangilical “Catholic” is truly a evangilical believer and not a Catholic” confirms my original thought that indeed you are not a Catholic. But just another evangilical who sees themselves as some sort of new prophet. because these so called “evangilical Catholics” as you like to describe yourself Are just like all the other evangilical losers out there, but the only difference is you know what the church teaches cannot be disputed. yet deep down you don’t like it because you know you will never get to be the Pope. Which i think is why many people become evangilical. They seem to want the power more than they do gods love.
Don’t bother responding because we both know i’m right

I certaninly do not aspire to be the “Pope,” for if I did, I would have to renounce Jesus Christ as Lord of my life, and that is not something that I am willing to do. You’ve got it wrong. People become evangelicals because they accept God’s love and seek His truth

 

[catsrus]

originally posted by Tibbar
It is a fact that the RCC is definitely full of sin from top to bottom.

Holy Mother Church is sinless.
Her members are sinners.
She is a hospital for sinners.
A good R.C.I.A course or, perhaps, a discussion with a priest would clear up this misconception of yours.

 

[beckyann2597]

Tibbar:

I certaninly do not aspire to be the “Pope,” for if I did, I would have to renounce Jesus Christ as Lord of my life, and that is not something that I am willing to do. You’ve got it wrong. People become evangelicals because they accept God’s love and seek His truth

Tibbar-- It says in your profile that you are Catholic. Did you study the Catholic Faith from a bunch of Chick Tracts? You are not representing the Church or making a very good argument against it with gross misconceptions and misunderstandings. Perhaps you should write out what you believe the Church is all about and we can have a discussion about that, but it is hard to talk with you when you are just rehashing the same bogus anticatholic smut.

 

[Tibbar]

catsrus:

Holy Mother Church is sinless.
Her members are sinners.
She is a hospital for sinners.
A good R.C.I.A course or, perhaps, a discussion with a priest would clear up this misconception of yours.

What is Holy Mother Church then? Certainly it cannot be comprised of sinners and be sinless. The two are mutually exclusive if one is sinless and the other are sinners. Since it cannot possibly be both sinless and sinful at the same time, Holy Mother Church, therefore, by Catholic definition must be an institution…something non-human like a series of buildings made of stone and wood, the work of human hands…an idol fashioned by us which to we must owe obesience.

 

[Tibbar]

beckyann2597:

Tibbar-- It says in your profile that you are Catholic. Did you study the Catholic Faith from a bunch of Chick Tracts? You are not representing the Church or making a very good argument against it with gross misconceptions and misunderstandings. Perhaps you should write out what you believe the Church is all about and we can have a discussion about that, but it is hard to talk with you when you are just rehashing the same bogus anticatholic smut.

What is “bogus” and “anticatholic smut?” Being honest about the fact that, as the Lord said, one cannot serve two masters. He will either love one and hate the other. As for Chick Tracts, what are they? Some sort of girlie magazines? Bet you won’t find many of those stashed away under Father’s bed if you know what I mean.

 

[kamz]

Tibbar:

I certaninly do not aspire to be the “Pope,” for if I did, I would have to renounce Jesus Christ as Lord of my life, and that is not something that I am willing to do. You’ve got it wrong. People become evangelicals because they accept God’s love and seek His truth

Tibbar, if you are so miserable with the Catholic church then just go, that is what is so great about God, FREE WILL but don’t try to bash the Catholic faith, we who are true Catholics who will NEVER leave only find such posts silly, annoying and rude and you make yourself look the fool, you don’t like the Catholic church, then go, go, go, go, good luck.

 

[beckyann2597]

Tibbar:

What is “bogus” and “anticatholic smut?” Being honest about the fact that, as the Lord said, one cannot serve two masters. He will either love one and hate the other. As for Chick Tracts, what are they? Some sort of girlie magazines? Bet you won’t find many of those stashed away under Father’s bed if you know what I mean.

Catholics do not worship the pope, so we are not serving two masters. We recognize that Jesus gave special responsibilities to his deciple Peter to be the head pastor of the Church that Jesus started on earth. We do not not worship, but we do recognize that he is a respected man of God. See here…
newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm

Chick tracts are anti Catholic propaganda pamphlets that distort Catholic teaching and tell lies. Some of the things you siad sounded that way. Read this interesing article here…
catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0403fea2.asp

Learn more about how he distorts the Catholic faith here…
catholic.com/library/sr_chick_tracts_p1.asp

and more about the man here…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Chick

 

[Tibbar]

beckyann2597:

Catholics do not worship the pope, so we are not serving two masters. We recognize that Jesus gave special responsibilities to his deciple Peter to be the head pastor of the Church that Jesus started on earth. We do not not worship, but we do recognize that he is a respected man of God. See here…
newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm

Chick tracts are anti Catholic propaganda pamphlets that distort Catholic teaching and tell lies. Some of the things you siad sounded that way. Read this interesing article here…
catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0403fea2.asp

Learn more about how he distorts the Catholic faith here…
catholic.com/library/sr_chick_tracts_p1.asp

and more about the man here…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Chick

The Catholic Church is not the Whore of Babylon nor is the Pope the Anti-Christ. This person, Mr. Chick, sounds like he is motivated more by bigotry than by a desire to spread the gospel. I don’t agree with him and I don’t hate Catholics. If I did, I wouldn’t bother to remain an evangelical Catholic.

 

[Tibbar]

kamz:

Tibbar, if you are so miserable with the Catholic church then just go, that is what is so great about God, FREE WILL but don’t try to bash the Catholic faith, we who are true Catholics who will NEVER leave only find such posts silly, annoying and rude and you make yourself look the fool, you don’t like the Catholic church, then go, go, go, go, good luck.

What’s up with the accusations of “bashing” Catholics? Love that P.C. word…bash. Time was when a bash was a celebration, not a cause for one’s defenses to fly up. Leave…I don’t believe so. I intend to stay in. The Church needs reform, and I am a reformer. I believe in working from within first. Those who don’t want real reform will have to throw me out, and if they do, they will be exposed.

 

[Mickey]

Tibbar:

The Church needs reform, and I am a reformer. I believe in working from within first.

It is often stated that satan will attempt to destroy the Catholic Church from within. :nope:

 

[Tibbar]

Mickey:

It is often stated that satan will attempt to destroy the Catholic Church from within. :nope:

Where’s that verse in the Bible? Satan will attempt to destroy the Catholic Church from within. Don’t you think the RCC is already doing a great job of this without any help from Satan.

 

[kamz]

Mickey:

It is often stated that satan will attempt to destroy the Catholic Church from within. :nope:

thanks Mickey, my thoughts Exactly

 

[RCCDefender]

Tibbar:

I am one of those whom John Ankerberg identifies as Evangelical “Catholic” :

Evangelical “Catholicism”—the branch of former Roman Catholics who are truly Evangelical and who have rejected the unbiblical teachings of Rome, often deciding to remain in the Church as a means to evangelize other Catholics.

The Evangelical “Catholic” is truly an Evangelical believer and not a Catholic. In other words, he is not a committed Roman Catholic who merely appropriates the title of Evangelical Christian. He understands the issues doctrinally and spiritually and attempts to walk what can be a very difficult, and to some people’s minds, inconsistent, line of fidelity to the Bible while remaining a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

SO you are, as you now say, an “Evangelical Catholic.” Then I would say that from your stated definition of “Evangelical Catholic” you would not be Catholic, right??

Also, do you think that fundamentalist, John Ankerberg, is a Catholic?