My #1 reason for converting

[justinthemartyr]

As a protestant(bible church) man I attended over 18 denominations and non denominational denominations of churches. At each one I asked the pastor about baptism. I asked if it was necessary, and if it removed the stain of original sin. I asked if it gave us graces and how we were to have it performed, by immersion, pouring or sprinkling the water?

I received a different and contradicting answer from each.

This brought me to the reality of authority and scripture alone.

I then sought the doctrine of sola scriptura in the Bible and found nothing to support it and then went to find the meaning of the word cephas, which is what Jesus named Simon in John 1:42.

I looked it up in the hebrew and aramaic dictonaries at a local college.

It meant rock, large stone…

I then went on a tirade of searches for early christian writings, of which I found the Fathers of the Church in every century in the first 1000 years and was led over the next three years of study into what I believed was the whore of Babylon, the great and abominable church. I was very anti Catholic and I was very angry at God because I swore I would NEVER become Catholic.

I am now at home, no longer in search.

 

[Pax]

Yours is a great witness and testimony. It gives hope to all of us when we evangelize and interact with those that are severely anti-Catholic.

Praise God for all of His blessings and use your experience and knowledge to lead others home to the Church that Jesus gave us.

 

[Markstorm]

Praise be to God. Justinthemartyr, your testimony demonstrates that the genuine use of reason and commitment to truth leads to the Catholic faith.

The Peace of Our Lord be with you.

 

[believers]

As a protestant(bible church) man I attended over 18 denominations and non denominational denominations of churches. At each one I asked the pastor about baptism. I asked if it was necessary, and if it removed the stain of original sin. I asked if it gave us graces and how we were to have it performed, by immersion, pouring or sprinkling the water?

I received a different and contradicting answer from each.

This brought me to the reality of authority and scripture alone.

I then sought the doctrine of sola scriptura in the Bible and found nothing to support it and then went to find the meaning of the word cephas, which is what Jesus named Simon in John 1:42.

I looked it up in the hebrew and aramaic dictonaries at a local college.

It meant rock, large stone…

I then went on a tirade of searches for early christian writings, of which I found the Fathers of the Church in every century in the first 1000 years and was led over the next three years of study into what I believed was the whore of Babylon, the great and abominable church. I was very anti Catholic and I was very angry at God because I swore I would NEVER become Catholic.

I am now at home, no longer in search.

Did you ever repent? Did you ever have perfect love? Did you ever crucify yourself with Christ? Galations 2:20.

How do you suppose Peter could have been a Pope? The Gospel of salvation to the gentiles was committed to Paul not Peter. While Paul was busy spreading the gospel to gentiles… Peter stayed in Jerusalem.

By the way… were you really protestant? I’m personally not convinced. Here’s why…because there is no such thing as a “stain of original sin”. That’s a Roman Catholic term. Adam’s original sin is not a “stain”. It is a judgment of condemnation. By default, we’re all on the path to hell if you don’t turn to Jesus in faith and repent.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

How do you suppose Peter could have been a Pope? The Gospel of salvation to the gentiles was committed to Paul not Peter. While Paul was busy spreading the gospel to gentiles… Peter stayed in Jerusalem.
.

believers:

The title ‘Pope’ (you should know this, being as you claim to be “an ex-cradle Catholic”) is a later term given to the Bishop of Rome.

It is a “Protestant” view that “[t]he Gospel of salvation to the gentiles was committed to Paul not Peter.” Rather, I should say a fabrication: ALL Apostles went forth and baptized ALL NATIONS (i.e., ‘gentiles’ it means ‘peoples’) and St Paul’s soi-disant references to it are to be understood in CONTEXT to the local churches his letters were addressing.

St Thomas went to India. Can’t get any more ‘gentile’ than that.

“Peter stayed in Jerusalem.” Hmmmm. Who was St Paul going to visit in Rome before his martyrdom?

If you’re going to be a literalist about Scripture, I’d* love* to hear your views on the True Presence!

I’ll stay here (though its not Jerusalem) and wait your reply.

Robert

 

[believers]

believers:

The title ‘Pope’ (you should know this, being as you claim to be “an ex-cradle Catholic”) is a later term given to the Bishop of Rome.

It is a “Protestant” view that “[t]he Gospel of salvation to the gentiles was committed to Paul not Peter.” Rather, I should say a fabrication: ALL Apostles went forth and baptized ALL NATIONS (i.e., ‘gentiles’ it means ‘peoples’) and St Paul’s soi-disant references to it are to be understood in CONTEXT to the local churches his letters were addressing.

St Thomas went to India. Can’t get any more ‘gentile’ than that.

“Peter stayed in Jerusalem.” Hmmmm. Who was St Paul going to visit in Rome before his martyrdom?

If you’re going to be a literalist about Scripture, I’d* love* to hear your views on the True Presence!

I’ll stay here (though its not Jerusalem) and wait your reply.

Robert

Exactly where in the bible does it say that Paul was visiting Peter in Rome? Please share with me the Book, Chapter, and verse please. Then we’ll move on to the real presence. Actually, read my signature.

 

[BrianH]

spreading the gospel to gentiles… Peter stayed in Jerusalem.

By the way… were you really protestant? I’m personally not convinced. Here’s why…because there is no such thing as a “stain of original sin”. That’s a Roman Catholic term. Adam’s original sin is not a “stain”. It is a judgment of condemnation. By default, we’re all on the path to hell if you don’t turn to Jesus in faith and repent.

I concur. The OP terminology is completely Catholic. Gives us graces? I do not believe you. Hey, dont get me wrong, people convert from Protestant to Catholic but I do not buy it in this case.

 

[Mickey]

I concur. The OP terminology is completely Catholic. Gives us graces? I do not believe you. Hey, dont get me wrong, people convert from Protestant to Catholic but I do not buy it in this case.

Someone gives a testimony of their conversion from protestantism to Catholicism, and you (and beleivers) do not believe him? How odd.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Exactly where in the bible does it say that Paul was visiting Peter in Rome?

Please share with me the Book, Chapter, and verse please. Then we’ll move on to the real presence. Actually, read my signature.

Paul only encounter Peter once in Jerusalem after remaining.

Galatians Chapter 1 verse 18-19:

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remain with him for fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother.

There could be a time where Peter and Paul may have meet while in Rome but there is no historical such meeting took place. However, in Peter’s own Epistle, it does suggest that Peter himself was in Rome.

1 Peter 5:13 states:

By Silvanus, a faithful brother as I regard him, I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that is the true grace of God; stand fast in it. She who is in Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to all of you that are in Christ.

History also showed that Peter indeed was in Rome. Babylon is the code word for Rome.

“At Rome the** first apostles and bishops **were Peter and Paul, then Linus, then Cletus, then Clement, the contemporary of Peter and Paul” (Epiphanius of Salamis, Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 27:6 [A.D. 375]).

"Likewise it is decreed: . . . [W]e have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it. (Pope Damasus I, 382 AD)

"[In the second] year of the two hundredth and fifth Olympiad [A.D. 42]: The apostle Peter, after he has established the church in Antioch, is sent to Rome, where he remains as a bishop of that city, preaching the gospel for twenty-five years. (Eusebius of Caesarea 303 AD)

“Not as Peter and Paul did, do I command you [Romans]. They were apostles, and I am a convict” (Letter to the Romans 4:3 [A.D. 110] (St. Ignatius of Antioch 110 AD)

“You [Pope Soter] have also, by your very admonition, brought together the planting that was made by **Peter and Paul **at Rome and at Corinth; for both of them alike planted in our Corinth and taught us; and both alike, teaching similarly in Italy, suffered martyrdom at the same time” (Dionysius of Corinth, Letter to Pope Soter [A.D. 170], in Eusebius, History of the Church 2:25:8).

 

[Mannyfit75]

More on Peter:

That St. Peter was Bishop of Rome is testified by:

• Eusebius, Chronicon, 74
• St. Irenaeus, Book III, chapter 3.
• Dorotheus, In Synopsis.
• St. Augustine, Epistola 53 and Contra Epistolam Fundamenti, ch. 4, title 8; in chapter 5 he writes:

“I am kept in the church by the succession of Bishops from St. Peter, to whom the Lord committed the care of His sheep down to the present Bishop.”

That St. Peter died in Rome is testifed by:

• St. Augustine, de Consense Evangelistarum, Book 1.
• Eusebius, Chronicon 71, a Christo nato.
• Paul Orosius, History, Book VIII.
• St. Maximus, Sermon v on the Birthday of the Apostles.
• Origen, Book III on Genesis, as stated by eusebius, HIstory, Book III, ch. 2.
• St. Jerome, Book of Illustrious Men.

Reference and Source: angelfire.com/ms/seanie/PeterRome.html

 

[believers]

Paul only encounter Peter once in Jerusalem after remaining.

Thank you Manny for confirming that. It is **UNBIBLICAL **to say that Paul met Peter in Rome.

 

[East_and_West]

Are you kidding me? The early Christians were quite clear that Peter went to rome. There are alot of things that bible doesn’t mention that have happened. I mean, it is unbilical to say that Peter never “went to the bathroom” but we all know he had to relieve himself from time to time.

 

[justinthemartyr]

Believers,

fortunately the Bible is not the sole authority of God, and no where does it say it is.

Fortunately we see through history that the first letter of the New Testament did not even begin to be written until the mid 40’s AD

Fortunately we see through basic history that the books of the NT did not even come together to be studied as a whole along with many other books claiming to be scripture, until 179AD.

Fortunately we see through basic history that the entire Bible was not canonized as a book of inspired scriptures until 382 AD under Pope Damasus. It was ratified twice at the councils of Hippo and Carthage under St Augustine in South Africa in 393 and 397AD.

Fortunately I did repent when I came to know Jesus Christ and confessed that I was a sinner, and still am. It was following that amazing conversion, a mere beginning of my faith in Christ and my relationship with God Himself, that I began to see choas and division in the realms of Bible churches and protestantism in general.

It was ONLY Catholic teaching that I saw historically in the first 1500 years of Christendom. Nothing was protestant in thought or action.

Fortunately this makes your idea of what is Biblical irrelevent to me, because you have no authority to interpret scripture privately and deem it to be correct and true, without the lens of the Church Christ instituted, the visible Church as a light set upon a hill for the entire world to see from beginning to this very day.

And so we see that Paul made it very clear that the sacred Tradition of the Church holds true and you are to hold to it as shown by Paul in 2 thess 2:15.

The greatest form of sacred Tradition is the canon of scripture itself, for no where did God give us a list IN scripture telling which books are inspired and which are not. when you find that list IN scripture let me know, or just realize that you hold in your hand Catholic Sacred Tradition, nothing less. You also abide by it, apparently.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Thank you Manny for confirming that. It is **UNBIBLICAL **to say that Paul met Peter in Rome.

I also like to add that Paul did know Peter. That I know very much. I also believed that Paul consider him as the eldest of the Apostle since it was Peter whom he confer after being baptized by Annias, another disciple.

 

[justinthemartyr]

believers, don’t miss my last post to you as it might enlighten you on my journey a bit.

 

[Emily_CA]

So your #1 reason for converting was because you couldn’t find a good answer to baptism? Interesting. My #1 reason for converting from Catholicism to being a born-again bible-believing Christian is the one and only Name of JESUS CHRIST. I am no longer deceived into praying to a false goddess named Mary, I am no longer deceived that I have to earn my salvation through meaningless rituals. I am saved by grace through faith in JESUS.

Your post says it all. You were in search of a religion where you could perform works to redeem yourself. Since that is what you are seeking you are definitely “home”, Catholicism is the perfect religion where you are constantly performing works and reciting memorized words like a pharisee in an attempt to earn your grace, earn your love from Jesus, earn your way into heaven. The Bible has no meaning to you, so you can follow your personal whims because you have decided that men know more than the LORD.

You do not know Jesus, friend. You are living in deception, and I know this because you are not worshipping the LORD in spirit and truth, which is to follow His one and only WORD. I feel sorry for you, you have returned to wallow in the mire from which you were once washed.

**Deceptions of False Teachers

For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage. For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.”**

I’d quote where this is in the bible, but why bother, since its just a meaningless book thats NOT the one and only inerrant Word of God, right? Why bother cracking open the bible when you can just turn to a page in the misilette once a week for 20 minutes, make the sign of the cross and go through all the little rituals to redeem yourself in an empty, lifeless church that uses the name of Jesus Christ to fleece the flock.

“But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” Jesus’ GRACE is enough for me. I don’t need to “earn” my way into Heaven by saying the rosary, or committing to first Fridays, or trying to become the next Mother Theresa because my works are like filthy rags (or so says the meaningless bible you don’t believe in), and His job was finished when He breathed His last breath on the cross (at least, according to that worthless bible). I’m redeemed by Jesus’ blood, I don’t need to jump through any cheap, man-made Catholic hoops. I am saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[Mannyfit75]

So your #1 reason for converting was because you couldn’t find a good answer to baptism? Interesting. My #1 reason for converting from Catholicism to being a born-again bible-believing Christian is the one and only Name of JESUS CHRIST. I am no longer deceived into praying to a false goddess named Mary, I am no longer deceived that I have to earn my salvation through meaningless rituals. I am saved by grace through faith in JESUS.

Your testimony is no different from any Ex-Catholic who left the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. However, there are errors in your posts concerning Catholicism concerning Mary.

The Catholic Church has never taught that Mary is a goddess. This is an opinion and is totally a misception of Catholic doctrine. So in your part by calling her a false goddess named Mary is erroneous.

Mary is venerated in a special way. She is not worshipped in the same level as God.

Catholic Encyclopedia states:

(Greek doulia; Latin servitus), a theological term signifying the honour paid to the saints, while latria means worship given to God alone, and hyperdulia the veneration offered to the Blessed Virgin Mary. St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei, X, ii, 1) distinguishes two kinds of servitus: “one which is due to men . . . which in Greek is called dulia; the other, latria, which is the service pertaining to the worship of God”.

Leibniz, though a Protestant, recognizes the “discrimen infinitum atque immensum between the honour which is due to God and that which is shown to the saints, the one being called by theologians, after Augustine’s example, latria, the other dulia”; and he further declares that this difference should “not only be inculcated in the minds of hearers and learners, but should also be manifested as far as possible by outward signs” (Syst. theol., p. 184). A further distinction is made between dulia in the absolute sense, the honour paid to persons, and dulia in the relative sense, the honour paid to inanimate objects, such as images and relics. With regard to the saints, dulia includes veneration and invocation; the former being the honour paid directly to them, the latter having primarily in view the petitioner’s advantage.

Asking Mary to pray for us is no different than me asking me to ask you to pray for me. The Catholic Church has never taught that we are to worship Mary. Mary is venerate and honor. She is not a special honor due to her relationship with her son, Jesus Christ.

Your post says it all. You were in search of a religion where you could perform works to redeem yourself. Since that is what you are seeking you are definitely “home”, Catholicism is the perfect religion where you are constantly performing works and reciting memorized words like a pharisee in an attempt to earn your grace, earn your love from Jesus, earn your way into heaven. The Bible has no meaning to you, so you can follow your personal whims because you have decided that men know more than the LORD.

The Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by grace of God. The grace of the Lord enables us to live out our faith fully. It gives us the zeal to love God by obeying all his statutes and ordinates. Prayer plays an important role in a Christian life.

Repetitive prayer is fruitless if it is not prayed from the heart and prayed with a contrite heart and the desire to speak to God. Reciting prayer though repetitive may seem odd, but the angels in heaven pray this daily, “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord. God of Power and Might.” Jesus at the garden prayed the same prayer twice to the Father. Jesus condemned vain repetitious prayer, not repetitive prayer.

In Matt. 26:44, Jesus prayed the same prayer the third time, saying the same exact words.

You do not know Jesus, friend. You are living in deception, and I know this because you are not worshipping the LORD in spirit and truth, which is to follow His one and only WORD. I feel sorry for you, you have returned to wallow in the mire from which you were once washed.

I find the comment “you are living in deception” offensive. I don’t think my friend reason for conversion is not limited to just one statement. There are several factors. I believe my friend here is moved by the Holy Spirit to become Catholic.

For one the source, center, and submit of our Catholic Church is the Jesus Christ truly present in the Blessed Eucharist. Every devout Catholic seek to go to Mass because they want to received Jesus and consumed him, just as he commanded us in John 6:51.

((continue))

 

[believers]

Believers,

fortunately the Bible is not the sole authority of God, and no where does it say it is.

Hbr 4:12
For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

2Ti 3:16
All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Pro 15:32
He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding.

Pro 15:10
Correction [is] grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: [and] he that hateth reproof shall die.

Pro 30:5 Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Luk 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Psa 119:105 NUN. Thy word [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path

 

[Mannyfit75]

**

I’d quote where this is in the bible, but why bother, since its just a meaningless book thats NOT the one and only inerrant Word of God, right? Why bother cracking open the bible when you can just turn to a page in the misilette once a week for 20 minutes, make the sign of the cross and go through all the little rituals to redeem yourself in an empty, lifeless church that uses the name of Jesus Christ to fleece the flock.**

It’s called Missal or Missalette. The Missal contains the Liturgy of the Word. The First Reading from the OT, Psalm, Second Reading from the Epistles, and the Gospel Reading. The most important feature of the Liturgy is Eucharistic Liturgy.

The reasons for going to Mass is to listen to the Word of God and more importantly, we are there to received the Body and Blood of Our Lord. Seeking the Jesus through the Sacrament of the Eucharist is not empty or lifeless.

Making the Sign of the Cross is a reminder of your baptisal committment to God. What is so wrong by saying these words, “In the Name of the Father, And of the Son, and Of the Holy Spirit.”

I have adapted the Eastern Rite way of making the sign of the cross.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Sign-of-the-cross--fingers-position.jpg

Here is an explanation of the Cross.

The hand

. The open right hand is used in the Churches of the West. In the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches, the thumb, index, and middle finger are brought to a point, symbolizing the Trinity (the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit/Ghost, three persons sharing a single essence), the remaining two fingers (kept pressed together and touching the palm) representing the human and divine natures of Jesus Christ.

The motion. The sign of the Cross is then made be touching the hand to the forehead, sternum, and both shoulders. As one moves through the Sign, the Trinitarian formula is prayed: when the sign is firstly at the forehead: In the name of the Father; then at the stomach: and of the Son; across the shoulders: and of the Holy Spirit/Ghost; and in the end: Amen. There are several interpretations, according to Church Fathers[1]: the forehead symbolizes the Heaven; the stomach, the Earth; the shoulders, the place and sign of power. Also, the hand to the forehead may be seen as a prayer to the Father for wisdom; the hand to the stomach as a prayer to the Son who become incarnate; and the hand to the shoulders as a prayer to the Holy Spirit.

There are some variations: for example a person may first place the right hand in holy water. After moving the hand from one shoulder to the other, it may be returned to the stomach. It may also be accompanied by the recitation of a prayer e.g the Jesus Prayer, or simply “Lord have mercy”.

 

[Mannyfit75]

“But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” Jesus’ GRACE is enough for me. I don’t need to “earn” my way into Heaven by saying the rosary, or committing to first Fridays, or trying to become the next Mother Theresa because my works are like filthy rags (or so says the meaningless bible you don’t believe in), and His job was finished when He breathed His last breath on the cross (at least, according to that worthless bible). I’m redeemed by Jesus’ blood, I don’t need to jump through any cheap, man-made Catholic hoops. I am saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

The Catholic Church is founded by a the most perfect man of all. Jesus Christ, who is both True God and True Man. So in a way, the statement man-made Catholic hoops is truth but I find the use of your terminology is rather immature and rather insulting.

Jesus Christ established a Church. He build it upon Peter (see Matt 16:18) and gave the same authority to his other 11 Apostle in Matthew 18:18. Peter is the first Pope, and the Apostles are foundation of the Church, as Jesus as the head of the Church. Peter and the Apostles are succeeded by Pope and Bishops of today.

You are saved by faith but in judgment day. Jesus, who is the Son of God, accompanied by his angels will judge us according to our deeds. We are not judged by faith alone. Read Matthew 25:31:46.

Most Catholics are Catholic because of Jesus Christ. I received him weekly at Mass and eat him with humble and humility. For Jesus said in John 6:51 “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.” and John 6:55, “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indee.” Paul even goes as far calling the bread and wine in 1 Corinthians 11: 24-30 as the body and blood of the Lord in verse 27.

I think for the most part that you didn’t have a true devotion to Jesus Christ by adoring him in the Blessed Sacrament. If you did, you probably remain a Catholic.