I'm not a Catholic because

[PJM]

ZDHayden

Where did God ever say to take the claims of any group at face value? Looking between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, Christ’s warning in Matthew vii, 15, applies even to Rome. I never stated that my sole reason for looking Eastward was personal to suit me, but rather that such personal motivations form a part of the decision: Can God not speak through one’s spiritual experiences? Rather, the primary reasons are the intellectual reasons.

So my friend, you are familiar with the Bible and therefore may be aware that it is a “Catholic book.” The OT was collected by men known today to have been early Catholics and the entire NT is authored by God inspired Catholic men.

Certainly God can speak to one in many way’s. However the normal way God Himself chose to speak to us in present times it through the Bible and the CC that He enables to do so with complete fullness, truth and accuracy.

As to then evidence of the CC being God’s desire and plan, may I ask you to visit my BLOG and read the Document on the “Key’s to Christ Kingdom.” In addition to this information is the fact that the NT alone has over 100 references to “Only One Church” [implying as is consistent with all, of the OT teachings] of Only One set of Faith beliefs, being acceptable to God.

**Eph.3: 9 to 12 ** “And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church [SINGULAR: meaning THE CATHOLIC Church] the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and confidence of access through our faith in him”

**Matt.13:9-12 “**He who has ears, let him hear." Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” And he answered them, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” For to him who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. “

John.10: 16 “And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. **So there shall be one flock, one shepherd” **

Eph. 2:19-20 “So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,[SINGULAR] built **upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, **Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”

Eph. 3: 9-10 “And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church [singular] the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord,

It seems to me an inconceivable idea that God would become Incarnate, with a goal of redemption and possible salvation; but also so that we MIGHT actually get to know God and be able to develop a personal relationship with Him, and not leave a specific manner for those who follow to FIND Him.

John 17: 17-22 “Sanctify them in the truth; [DONE DEAL… John 14:16-17 and John 17:15-19] thy word is truth. As thou didst send me into the world,** so I have sent them into the world. [With My Power as God]** And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth. [Assurance of IMPOSSIBILITY of Error in teaching on Faith-Beliefs and Morals] "I do not pray for these only, but for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one”

John 20:19-22 “On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

This is the significance of this passage is:

1. The First Pentecost
   **2. The transfer of God’s Actual and REAL power and authority to the Apostles [and the handing on of “the Keys to heavens access” to Peter and the CC as promised in Mt. 16].
2. The formal founding of today’s CC**
3. The Institution of the Sacraments of Confirmation AND Confession / Penance

Mt. 28:16-20 “Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him; but some doubted.
And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 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 lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Space limit’s a further response but please READ Heb. 6: 4-10 knowing that is authored by Catholics inspired by God [1st. Tim. 3:16-17] for Catholics as no other churches or denominations even existed at the time of authorship.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[PJM]

=Going2Heaven;8688851]I am not a Catholic because the Catholic faith is not the true religion of the lord

OK?

God himself say’s it is and the Bible say’st is, so your foundation for your beliefs are?

Friend, I’m not arguing with you, just trying to understand the authority for your position so we can discuss it further.

God Bless you,
Pat
PJM on the Forum

 

[ZDHayden]

PJM: I have heard all of your response to my post before. I do not intend to be rude, but it does not impress me. Here is my reason: the argument assumes that the Catholic Church is the original Church and so the interpretations of those verses would have Catholicism read into them by a devout Catholic. It does not, therefore, prove anything. It is effective at reinforcing one’s already-existing faith, however. That argument did not impress me even when I was in the midst of my own “convert’s fervor.” If it did not impress me then, it will not impress me now. Thank you for trying, however.

I apologize if my tone is anything related to rude.

 

[PJM]

=ZDHayden;8689361]PJM: I have heard all of your response to my post before. I do not intend to be rude, but it does not impress me. Here is my reason: the argument assumes that the Catholic Church is the original Church and so the interpretations of those verses would have Catholicism read into them by a devout Catholic. It does not, therefore, prove anything. It is effective at reinforcing one’s already-existing faith, however. That argument did not impress me even when I was in the midst of my own “convert’s fervor.” If it did not impress me then, it will not impress me now. Thank you for trying, however.

I apologize if my tone is anything related to rude.

My dear friend in Christ, Truth is a SINGLE answer for every precise issue. God will Judge because as a Just and Fair god, he must; based on what HE makes possible for us to know; not what we ourselves choose to accept.

I’ll keep you in my daily prayers,

THANK YOU for the charity of your responses.

God Bless you,
Pat

 

[barbhorses]

Actually the english translation of Yaweh is “I Am”. The word Jehovan came into being when the writers of the King James version put together the vowells of one word with the consonants of a completely different word.

I am aware that one ecclesial community have chosen the word “jehovah” as their sort of trademark. But facts are facts.

Perhaps I wasn’t explaining myself very well. I meant that the word in English is Jehovah, not that YHWH means Jehovah. Basically, like translating the word “love” from English to another language is a different word than that in English is what I was going for. Much like the name Elizabeth is Isabella in Spanish. So is the translation of YHWH in ancient Hebrew to Jehovah in modern day English (as the letter “j” is rather new to the alphabet). Nonetheless, both YWH and Jehovah mean the same thing.

 

[barbhorses]

My friend your loig LACKS understanding.
As I have explained Jesus has TWI total and COMPLETE natures. Divien and Human.

In this instance Christ speaks of His HUMAN NATURE, not His Divine, so that is how it is correctly undersood.

God Bless,
Pat

Not really sure all of what you are saying here, but please read Isaiah 43:10-12. As stated before, anywhere you see all caps LORD is where Jehovah’s name was, but was removed. Add God’s name and those scriptures become very powerful and very clear.

 

[meltzerboy]

Since you’re fundamentalist, you might appreciate these verses:

Matthew 10:
35 For I have come to turn
“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’****a] 37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

I’ve heard these verses before but have not investigated their context. Just off-hand to you or anyone else, how does this statement by Jesus square with “Honor thy father and thy mother”?

 

[Marybeloved]

I’ve heard these verses before but have not investigated their context. Just off-hand to you or anyone else, how does this statement by Jesus square with “Honor thy father and thy mother”?

Aren’t Jews also required to love God more than self and family too? That’s all the verse means. Belief in Christ would bring division between those who accepted him and those who rejected him (this in fact is what happened) and his believers would be forced to chose between their closest family and friends on one hand and Christ on the other, if family and friends required them to reject Christ.

 

[atheistgirl]

I will bet she is. And the reason I say this is because on here, and other forums I visit, contributers personalities shine through their posts. You can tell the funny ones, the serious ones, the grumpy ones, the sarcastic ones etc from their words and their contributions. You can tell those who love their faith, and those who are exploring, and those that are just out to wind people up and annoy them.

BUT - I know three Jehovah’s Witnesses I have exchanges with, and every single one of them sound, write, and act the same. And I can see the very same thing in Barbs four posts. They are almost word for word what other Jehovah’s Witnesses I know have said or would say.

I find that incredibly bizarre - that whole groups of people can act and sound almost identical. It’s quite scarey. I reminds me of the Stepford Wives

 

[Roy5]

Hm! As I have said before, I come from a mixed Catholic/Protestant heritage. I tend to reject the more severe, narrower versions of either. In other words, I have trouble with traditional Catholicism and sola scriptura (evangelical) Protestantism.

** And both for the same reason. They each insist that we follow precisely what they teach.** In the case of Catholicism we are required to believe all the doctrines that have been promulgated through the centuries. In evangelical Protestantism we have to accept the notion that the Bible is inerrant, regardless of what it says. Traditional Catholicism tends ot say this, also, but then adds a variety of extra-Biblical doctrines like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary that stem from Catholic tradition and/or Catholic theology rather than from scripture.

  **Now, this always gets me into trouble, but I treasure my freedom to think for myself.** God has provided us each with a brain, and I feel the right to use it - with care, of course. The result is that I have come to reject any religion which insists that I ditto whatever it teaches. 

  **A millions examples, but here is just one.** I certainly don't believe in the first 11 chapters of Genesis as history. If they are presented as parables, as legends, as moral fables - okay. But the sun and moon created after the earth? Eve made from a rib of Adam? God drowns everybody, including little children, except for Noah's family? Noah built an ark that fed two of every animal for 150 days until the waters receded? God punishes humankind with different languages because they built a tower into the sky (probably much shorter than the Empire State Building!) - hey, give me a break. You can't expect any reasonable thinking person in this 21st century to accept such fables as facts. Besides, if we follow the genealogy included in early Genesis, humanity was created about 4000 BC, which we know to be false.

  Tons more to say, but I'm sure I've said enough already.

** I find that most of my friends, Catholics and Protestants both, practice their religion, but they don’t take everything in the Bible or even in the creeds literally. **They believe in God and find inspiration in much of scripture, but they - like me - think for themselves. Their emphasis is less on strict doctrine and more on faith, hope and love, especially love.
God bless people of every creed, color, culture and country. Let us make religion a bridge rather than a barrier.

 

[PJM]

=atheistgirl;8700315]I will bet she is. And the reason I say this is because on here, and other forums I visit, contributers personalities shine through their posts. You can tell the funny ones, the serious ones, the grumpy ones, the sarcastic ones etc from their words and their contributions. You can tell those who love their faith, and those who are exploring, and those that are just out to wind people up and annoy them.

BUT - I know three Jehovah’s Witnesses I have exchanges with, and every single one of them sound, write, and act the same. And I can see the very same thing in Barbs four posts. They are almost word for word what other Jehovah’s Witnesses I know have said or would say.

I find that incredibly bizarre - that whole groups of people can act and sound almost identical. It’s quite scarey. I reminds me of the Stepford Wives

GREAT POST!

The reason for this is honestly, that when one does NOT have the truth on their side; and they most certainly do not Then it become a markiting stragerty; one frankly that has worked surprisingly well [IMO]

It’s a “rote” responce to what they have learned works for them?

They are a CULT, not a religion. Having formulated their own concepts of God and everything involving Christianity.

God Bless, and thank you for your post!
Pat

 

[andrewstx]

Perhaps I wasn’t explaining myself very well. I meant that the word in English is Jehovah, not that YHWH means Jehovah. Basically, like translating the word “love” from English to another language is a different word than that in English is what I was going for. Much like the name Elizabeth is Isabella in Spanish. So is the translation of YHWH in ancient Hebrew to Jehovah in modern day English (as the letter “j” is rather new to the alphabet). Nonetheless, both YWH and Jehovah mean the same thing.

The word is not Jehovah, that is a bad transliteration formed by combining the consonants from one hebrew word with the vowells from another Hebrew word.
Jehovah is a non-existent gibberish word, and as far as I know used by the jehovah’s witnesses only.

 

[meltzerboy]

I will bet she is. And the reason I say this is because on here, and other forums I visit, contributers personalities shine through their posts. You can tell the funny ones, the serious ones, the grumpy ones, the sarcastic ones etc from their words and their contributions. You can tell those who love their faith, and those who are exploring, and those that are just out to wind people up and annoy them.

BUT - I know three Jehovah’s Witnesses I have exchanges with, and every single one of them sound, write, and act the same. And I can see the very same thing in Barbs four posts. They are almost word for word what other Jehovah’s Witnesses I know have said or would say.

I find that incredibly bizarre - that whole groups of people can act and sound almost identical. It’s quite scarey. I reminds me of the Stepford Wives

However, I don’t believe three Jehovah’s Witnesses you have exchanges with constitute “whole groups of people” who “act and sound almost identical.” And I’m not one of the grumpy ones or out to annoy you!

 

[meltzerboy]

Aren’t Jews also required to love God more than self and family too? That’s all the verse means. Belief in Christ would bring division between those who accepted him and those who rejected him (this in fact is what happened) and his believers would be forced to chose between their closest family and friends on one hand and Christ on the other, if family and friends required them to reject Christ.

Perhaps you are correct, but honoring one’s father and mother is an important commandment. There are rabbinical commentaries and stories which indicate that even when a parent is abusive, a child owes them respect. They would certainly never be considered enemies, as the passage states.

 

[seeker57]

Well, let’s see,

1. Because I am not a Christian and, therefore, don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus.
2. I am a Unitarian Universalist, who believes the divine (i.e. God, the universe, spirituality) is much too large to be contained in any single religious or spiritual dogma.
3. I believe Christianity, along with all other belief systems, provide us a glimpse into the divine, but are not a its definition.

That pretty much sums it up

Peace,

Seeker

 

[atheistgirl]

However, I don’t believe three Jehovah’s Witnesses you have exchanges with constitute “whole groups of people” who “act and sound almost identical.” And I’m not one of the grumpy ones or out to annoy you!

The three I know directly all do. However, I widened the catchment area out because in one interesting online exchange, I was intrigued by the answer. Not so much the words, but the style - the person I was talking with seemed to changed their language, style and tone mind response. So I highlighted the interesting part, cut and paste into google, and found it was a stock answer from the Watchtower magazine.

Not only that, but the results brought up hundreds of exactly the same responses, from hundreds of different people, spread over tons of forums.

So it seemed to me, these were not giving individual answers to questions, but reciting by rote a stock answer to be applied in that situation.

That is the impression I was left with. If it’s wrong, so be it.

Sarah x

 

[PJM]

=Roy5;8702110]Hm! As I have said before, I come from a mixed Catholic/Protestant heritage. I tend to reject the more severe, narrower versions of either. In other words, I have trouble with traditional Catholicism and sola scriptura (evangelical) Protestantism.

** And both for the same reason. They each insist that we follow precisely what they teach.** In the case of Catholicism we are required to believe all the doctrines that have been promulgated through the centuries. In evangelical Protestantism we have to accept the notion that the Bible is inerrant, regardless of what it says. Traditional Catholicism tends ot say this, also, but then adds a variety of extra-Biblical doctrines like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary that stem from Catholic tradition and/or Catholic theology rather than from scripture.

  **Now, this always gets me into trouble, but I treasure my freedom to think for myself.** God has provided us each with a brain, and I feel the right to use it - with care, of course. The result is that I have come to reject any religion which insists that I ditto whatever it teaches.

  **A millions examples, but here is just one.** I certainly don't believe in the first 11 chapters of Genesis as history. If they are presented as parables, as legends, as moral fables - okay. But the sun and moon created after the earth? Eve made from a rib of Adam? God drowns everybody, including little children, except for Noah's family? Noah built an ark that fed two of every animal for 150 days until the waters receded? God punishes humankind with different languages because they built a tower into the sky (probably much shorter than the Empire State Building!) - hey, give me a break. You can't expect any reasonable thinking person in this 21st century to accept such fables as facts. Besides, if we follow the genealogy included in early Genesis, humanity was created about 4000 BC, which we know to be false.

  Tons more to say, but I'm sure I've said enough already.

** I find that most of my friends, Catholics and Protestants both, practice their religion, but they don’t take everything in the Bible or even in the creeds literally. **They believe in God and find inspiration in much of scripture, but they - like me - think for themselves. Their emphasis is less on strict doctrine and more on faith, hope and love, especially love.

  God bless people of every creed, color, culture and country. Let us make religion a bridge rather than a barrier.

Hi Roy,

My friend; how many versions of a single truth can there be:shrug:

Only One God, has always insisted on ONLY one [His…guided and garded within HIS CC, set of faith beliefs].

Psalms 127:1
“Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain. Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain.”

St. Irenaeus who was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of St John. Irenaeus wrote

“we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolic tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.”

Acts.20: 28 “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 [SINGULAR] which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.” THERE was only One Church; that which is founded by Jesus himself; today’s catholic Church when the Bible was written.

Jn. 10: 16 “And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.”

The warranty promised:** Jn. 14:16-17 “**And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you”

And Delivered Jn.20:21-22 “Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit”

Personally guaranteed: Jn.17:17-19 “Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.
As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth”

My friend, denial or ignoring the truth does not change it.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[PJM]

=seeker57;8704081]Well, let’s see,

1. Because I am not a Christian and, therefore, don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus.

1. I am a Unitarian Universalist, who believes the divine (i.e. God, the universe, spirituality) is much too large to be contained in any single religious or spiritual dogma.

1. I believe Christianity, along with all other belief systems, provide us a glimpse into the divine, but are not a its definition.

That pretty much sums it up

Peace,

Seeker

So my friend,

You believ ethat God created the Universe WHY? And why are we [humanity here?]

Would God do all this and just leave it alone and all to chance?

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Roy5]

PJM

 If there is only one truth, my own view is that none of us has a monopoly on it. We probably have some part of it. Certainly the basic teaching of Christ, that love should supercede everything else - love of God and one another - strikes me as wisdom. However, as for all the details beyond that I'm inclined to think that we don't know that much. This magnificant universe is simply too mammoth, mysterious, miraculous and majestic for us to understand. Maybe a million gallaxies each with a million stars!?

 But I go part-way with the Unitarian-Universalist who recently posted, that we have the right and pivilege to use our individual brains to think and examine and decide and - yes, doubt. Certainly if God is loving, forgiving and just that should be no problem for him/her. In fact, just this morning I was reading the weekly column of Fr. Richard McBrien of Notre Dame. It was the first of his reports on a recent study of Catholics. Guess what? A large majority place following our individual conscience above following the Pope - etc. Sounds like the church has lost its authoritative clout with millions.  

 This morning's *NTTimes*has a major piece on sexual predators among priests in the Netherlands. I suggest that these revelations have helped erode the former elevation of priests among many. I recall, as a child, that there was considerable emphasis upon the priest as somehow representative of Christ among us - I forget the Latin phrase. This may sound out of place here, but I think these scandals have seriously injured the church in its efforts to hold on to the flock and helps explain why as many as 30 million Americans are ex-Catholics. Without the major influx of Latinos the church's membership would have shown major slippage. I believe at least 1/3 of US Catholic now are Latino, though the evangelicals are managing to attract many.  

 Still and all, I do admire those Catholics, of the past and today, who have devoted their lives to selfless work in such areas as medicine, education and working among the poor. This willingness is a true indication of genuine Christianity. All the lavish altars and decorous vestments are so unimportant in comparison.

 

[TarkanAttila]

But, Roy, the Catholic Church has been forming its consistent theology for 2000 years; even Lutheranism has only been around for 500 if that, and most Protestant denominations and congregations on the earth right now are not even 100 years old. Never mind you, me, or any human, who will probably never live to see 90.

In other words, The RCC has been developing its understanding of God for much longer. Does it make more sense to build on what all Christians knew to be true since the Apostolic Age? Or does it make more sense to believe whatever suits your fancy, whether consistent with history or not?

What you are saying is like saying that science is up to the interpretation of each individual person.

It’s like saying I can choose to believe in germ theory, or I can choose to believe in the four humours. I can choose to believe the Earth is the center of the universe, or the sun is the center of the solar system? Who’s gonna stop me, and who is going to say I am wrong? Scientists? On what authority? They can’t tell me what to think. My brain tells me they’re wrong, even though they’ve based what they know on the science of centuries.

Yes, you can say those things. But it doesn’t make them right. You can believe whatever you want to. But you have no right to say that your beliefs are as credible as the Catholic Church’s. Because they are not.