Non-Catholics on these boards...

  • Thread starter Thread starter mango_2003
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Ric:
When Jesus was talking about being born of water, He was refering to natural birth from the mother’s womb. This is where we understand the fact of the first birth and the second birth (second birth being one who is “born again” from John 3:3). 🙂
Click to expand...
Since nothing outside the Bible can be used, show me the verse in the Bible that supports this as the mothers ambiotic (sp?) fluid. Fundamentalists don’t let me use anything outside the Bible so where is this verse? If its not in the Scriptures it is not valid. That means this refers to Gods pure H2O.

I will use fundamentalist logic on you.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon8.gif If you want a tougher challenge, then only use the Geneva Bible of 1560 since it is the Bible the Baptists used till forced to switch to the AKJV by publishers and kings. You can find it online too.

PS, good comeback with ambiotic fluid. I spent 27 years in Baptist churches and I heard alot of strange and bizzar things that made me laugh http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif but I never heard that one. Where did you get it from? (Don’t say Scripture either for a joke. I’d really like to read from that protestant author or sect and see when in the last 500 years it was invented.)http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon14.gif
 
40.png
Pax:
I would suggest reading Hilaire Belloc’s classic book, The Great Heresies. The interesting thing about Belloc’s work is that he outlines many cultural, philosophical, social, and political forces that contributed heavily to the Reformation. He doesn’t dwell heavily on the different teaching issues in the book, so you don’t have to feel like you’re reading the teachings of the church. It is really worth the read.
Click to expand...
Oh good I have that book also, haven’t had a chance to read it yet, but I will put it next on my list. I also had the charactors of the reformation, and why the reformation happened, both by belloc. Have you read either of these? If you have maybe you could let me know what I am in for. Thanks.
 
40.png
Ric:
Yes, it is true (sad to say) that there are many different interpretations from Scripture of many given passages. But one thing for sure is that if we come to the Scriptures in prayer and open to the Holy Spirit and most of all leaving our own intentions out we will come to the truth in the Scriptures. My post was really about that. When I said for (whoever it was) to search the scriptures, if you did so you would find out that there is not one example of water baptism before one’s salvation. (after Jesus’ resurrection).

But many denominations (including the RCC) does place man’s “tradition” equal to or above the Scriptures and that is where we get all of the other interpretations that conflict the the other denominations.

Is the truth able to be known? Yes! But we must come to the Scriptures open to the Holy Spirit and without our own prejudgements or traditions.

God Bless!
Click to expand...
Gods peace to you Theophilus,

The Mormons say if you pray about Scripture and ‘feel good’ about your interpretation then it must be true! Thats why Mormons are growing so fast. Of course the Bible tells us not to trust feelings since as emotional creatures we are prone to error. We also do not know weather it is the Holy Spirit or Satan influencing us if we rely on feelings alone. If your statement about the Holy Spirit directing you is true, then why does He tell so many prayerfull people contridictory versions? Oh like Calvin teaching predestination and Jesus teaching free will?

Jesus gave us His Church to lead us through false prophets and wolves and to guide His body to salvation and His return.

It was also the authority of the RCC that gave us the Bible and told us it was inspired. Without the RCC the Bible would be no different then the Book of Mormon or the Koran. They each say they are inspired too but the authority of the RCC is the only authorty that can say one of them is inspired and the other two are not. (Of course God can to, and has, by giving the Bishop of Rome His ‘Keys’ on earth!)

It is also the very Tradition of the RCC that gave you the Bible. The Bible itself is a RCC product with RCC teachings all through it. Without Tradition who would have written the Bible or told people it was inspired. We do not need a Bible for salvation but we do need a Church, Christs Church, the RCC to teach us Gods Word. I can live without a Bible and be saved (proven by the first 400 years of Christianity and prisoners in Gulags and Concentration Camps) but I cannot live and be saved without Christs Body, His Church, His authority to teach me on earth.

A prisoner of Christ.
 
40.png
Malachi4U:
PS, good comeback with ambiotic fluid. I spent 27 years in Baptist churches and I heard alot of strange and bizzar things that made me laugh http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif but I never heard that one. Where did you get it from? (Don’t say Scripture either for a joke. I’d really like to read from that protestant author or sect and see when in the last 500 years it was invented.)http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon14.gif
Click to expand...
I have a Baptist friend and she told me the same thing about amniotic fluid. I had to control my chuckles. I went to a baptist church and was baptized there when I was 14(I was also baptized as a baby, I didn’t know any better.) and they did a full immersion baptism. I would like to know why it wasn’t amniotic fluid. 😛
 
40.png
Malachi4U:
Second, you may fail to know who the Scripture passages you quoted were written to and the false beliefs they were correcting. This is part of what Catholics call context which many protestant sects ignore.
Click to expand...
Then explain it to me. Not being condescending here at all. I want to know. If I’m not getting something, then tell me what it is.
Fifth, Catholics agree with what is said in all these verses toohttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon9.gif! It is clear you do not understand what the Church teaches or you would not make such comments. Your preacher lied to you when he said Catholics can “Work” their way to heaven with “Works of the Law” . These are comments invented by the “re”/de-formers up to 500 years ago like Luther, Calvin, Smyth, Eddy, White. Nobody can ‘work’ their way to heaven, not even a Catholic. We must have Faith, and the Fruit of that Faith. Remember the parable of the Fig tree? Jesus said all that call upon His name will not be saved, remember this verse too? He also gave us commandments to follow, remember them all? There’s a whole bunch of them in the Bible.
Click to expand...
This is not true…not for me. I’m not a member of a church. I don’t have a pastor. I’ve yet to find where I want to be.

At any rate, thanks for the reply. If you could expand on the previous statements that I pointed out, that would be great.

~mango~
 
40.png
Shari:
CM I am not trying to say that Luther was mentally disturbed or anything. He was plagued most of his life by what he called demons and was disturbed in many ways, partly from a troubled childhood. I am sure he was a very God fearing man, I have no doubts about that. And I know he didn’t mean to have a new religion started However I have read other sources quoteing him as saying things such as the devil needs to be shoved in his but(not the language used.) My point on O’hares book is that pretty much everything in it is gotten from protestant writers. That is my only point. I haven’t finished it yet, and I definelty think a person should read more than just one book to get different views before deciding on what they think. Also a good source I think is an older world history book.
Click to expand...
Hello again Shari,

Plagued by what he called “demons” and seeing them are two different things. If seeing demons were an indicator of mental illness than we would have to diagnose certain Catholic saints as mentally ill as well.

You’re correct, Luther didn’t want to separate from the church and the issues he raised were strictly meant for dialogue, but he was met with opposition.

I still contend that O’hare’s book was written with the intention of maligning Luther. He can claim all the Protestant sources he wants to, but using them doesn’t take away from his intent. I would strongly suggest that you read Jim Swan’s analysis of O’hare’s book. He carefully documents the use of O’hare’s words in leading the reader to a “depraved”, “unholy”, “gross”, etc. caricature of Luther rather then letting the man speak for himself.

Peace,
CM
 
40.png
mango_2003:
Don’t blanket, it’s dangerous.

~mango~
Click to expand...
Mango You have a thing with blankets, must be awfully hot by not, make sure you don’t suffocate. LOL just kidding, trying to keep it a little lighter. God Bless
 
40.png
Charles:
Good luck Lurker! Maybe as you learn more about us that hill will start to appear a little easier to navigate! 😉 Please take advantage of these boards to ask any questions you may have about our Faith. I’m sure a lot of people will be praying for you as you continue your journey.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the prayers and encouragement. Catholic Answer’s has been an invaluable reference as I start to learn more about my new home to be. 🙂
 
I’m curious to those who adhere to Scripture Alone as their sole authority. If Scripture is all that is needed, how and where does scripture support this?
 
40.png
Britta:
I’m curious to those who adhere to Scripture Alone as their sole authority. If Scripture is all that is needed, how and where does scripture support this?
Click to expand...
You should start a new thread instead of adding to this rather mixed one…

ken
 
II Paradox II:
You should start a new thread instead of adding to this rather mixed one…

ken
Click to expand...
You’re right. I thought if that after I sent it. Thanks, I’ll do that.
 
What authority told you ‘your’ truth was from God? Joseph Smith, Martin Luther, Calvin, Foxe, Zwingli, Eddy, White, Jim Jones, David Koresh, etc. etc. etc. were all inspired too! But by whom? That’s the question since no two of those I listed agreed totally on the ‘truth’ with the others.
Click to expand...
Let’s not forget Henry the XVIII. His methods seemed quite, let’s just say, persuasive.

The bottom line is, all of these movements were started by people, not by Our Lord Jesus Christ, the founder of the “one, holy apostolic catholic church.”

Re: O’Hare’s book: I read it, as well, and found it too over-the-top to use in convincing any of my Protestant friends the errors of their ways. The trick in reading that book is to tear away the wrapping and look at what’s inside. He does use Luther’s own words throughout to make his case. And, it’s a strong case against Luther’s movement.
 
40.png
Shari:
Mango You have a thing with blankets, must be awfully hot by not, make sure you don’t suffocate. LOL just kidding, trying to keep it a little lighter. God Bless
Click to expand...
HAHAHAHAHA!!! 😃

Yeah…I guess I do have a thing with blankets! Actually…I just don’t like statements like “All X believe Y”, especially if one does not know for sure whether all X really believes Y or not!

In Christ and folding sheets,

~mango~
 
Little Mary:
Could someone please explain to me why this is such a big issue with non-Catholics? The Catholic Church teaches salvation by Grace and that you cannot be saved by Faith alone or Works alone. If you truly love Jesus and live with him in your heart, you can’t help but live a good, christian life, which is impossible to do without works. Impossible. Can God grant entry into heaven solely by his Grace and with nothing else? Yes! Because only He knows what is in their heart - like the Baptism of desire that Shari mentioned. He is our Creator and He can do anything. BUT, we can’t all just walk around ignoring our hungry families and robbing banks. That would be turning away from God, wouldn’t it? So works keep us close to Him and His Grace. It’s very simple.

The bible compares the importance of works in James 2:26 “…for just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also, faith without works is dead”. While you’re there, just read versus 14 through 26. It’s all right there.

Again, WHY is this such a big issue?
Click to expand...
Gods peace be with you Theophilus,

When you have nothing in your own sects theology and it is false and has no foundation and splits whenever two people gather together and see 5 verses with a full moon out, you just pick on the one True Church with anything you can sling - true or not. Desperation does strange things to those who will believe anything some protestant sect preacher will tell them and not bother to research facts. Simply make yourself feel better by cutting down someone else? Your quote of mango may be solid proof of what I just said?

Sadly though, this is very effective. Go to www.chick.com or www.mtc.com to see the really slick lies and how this is actually a big dollar business! These sites follow the religion of the dollar. You see, many Catholics believe these lies and go to the sect that makes them feel like a family member that is wanted. Some of our parishes are so large that no priest even knows everyone’s name let alone has time to meet with them to inform them the truth. Our parishes never even notice anyone is gone till a census tells them they lost 200 families last year? Most protestant sects don’t even have room for 200 people in their meeting hall!

Very sad but Catholics must stop warming the pews and get active in their Church. We must make people feel welcome in our Church and take note on every single member. It is easy for protestant sects to steal members of Christ’s body since sects may only have between 5-150 members total counting the preacher and his family too. Everyone is on a first name basis. Cults operate much the same way by making someone the center of attention until they are trapped. Things will only get worse as we gain fewer and fewer priests?

Our Church is having a dire crises today. The Faith and Morals are in perfect shape and just as Christ left them but our clergy is dwindling on the vine. We close parishes left and right. 60 or so in Boston alone this year? Without clergy how can we teach the truth to our members? Self-interpretation of the Bible will lead to a devastated and fractional Church just like all the protestant sects are in total disarray. Jesus instituted clergy and authority to keep His Church out of the abysmal state on confusion and false teachings. We need more clergy and until we get them our Church will suffer from lies like those you quoted. Are married priests the answer? Giving Deacons a parish? I would gladly quit my job and become a priest today but one little problem, I am married and have 3 kids. But, I will be obedient to what ever the Church decides to do and I am just happy I live in an area that still has a ‘Roman’ Catholic Church still in operation. I live in Utah and Christian churches are hard to find let alone the Catholic denomination of Christians.

Get out and start a youth group, a Bible study, adult clubs, and Sunday schools at your parish. Have monthly picnics, lake parties, retreats, breakfasts etc… Until you do, your Church will loose members to false and contradictory theology since some in your Church may not even remember what Catholicism even teaches or believes.

A prisoner of Christ
 
Ric said:
Look closely at 1 Peter 3:21, it states that the water symbolizes baptism:

1 Peter 3:21

**(ASV) which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; **

**(BBE) And baptism, of which this is an image, now gives you salvation, not by washing clean the flesh, but by making you free from the sense of sin before God, through the coming again of Jesus Christ from the dead; **

**(CEV) Those flood waters were like baptism that now saves you. But baptism is more than just washing your body. It means turning to God with a clear conscience, because Jesus Christ was raised from death. **

**(Darby) which figure also now saves you, even baptism, not a putting away of the filth of flesh, but the demand as before God of a good conscience, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, **

**(DRB) Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but, the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. **

**(ESV) Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, **

**(GNB) which was a symbol pointing to baptism, which now saves you. It is not the washing off of bodily dirt, but the promise made to God from a good conscience. It saves you through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, **

**(GW) Baptism, which is like that water, now saves you. Baptism doesn’t save by removing dirt from the body. Rather, baptism is a request to God for a clear conscience. It saves you through Jesus Christ, who came back from death to life. **

**(HNV) This is a symbol of immersion, which now saves you–not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Yeshua the Messiah, **

**(ISV) Baptism, which is symbolized by that water, now saves you also, not by removing dirt from the body, but by asking God for a clear conscience based on the resurrection of Jesus Christ, **

(KJV) The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

**(LITV) Which antitype now also saves us, baptism (not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; **

**(MKJV) which figure now also saves us, baptism; not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ; **

**(MRC) And corresponding to that, immersion now saves you–not the putting away of filth from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience–through the resurrection of Yeshua the Messiah, **

(NIV) and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also–not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

**(WEB) This is a symbol of baptism, which now saves you–not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, **

**(Webster) The like figure to which, even baptism, doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: **
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Hesed:
I’m not Roman Catholic.

I was raised Roman Catholic, 12 years of parochial education. I also had two wonderful Roman Catholic parents.

I never came to understand or receive God’s grace in the Roman Catholic Church. I’m sure that I never truly understood Roman Catholic theology totally, just what I was taught in school and at home, which from my standpoint was a system of human merit, regardless of the lip service to Jesus’ death on the cross.

I’m here because I love to discuss theology, and I want to understand how some seemingly cognizant people can become Roman Catholic – especially after (some of them) coming from a Reformed Protestant background of “sola scriptura.”

I’m sure I can learn a lot from Catholics, and maybe I can also share my own insights and help someone see the truth.

To me, I see it as a big shame to have so many good intentioned, even truly God-fearing people, straying from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ, and adding so many traditions that take away from the message of God’s grace in Christ. I’m sure many on this board can do a whole buch of theological gymnastics to try to prove their presuppositions and force Scripture to say what it doesn’t. What it comes down to for me is: having a lasting peace with God that is not based on my performance or works, but on what is truly a sure thing – the atoning substitutionary death of my Savior. Why would anyone want to add to that or to Christ’s High Priestly office with indulgences, Mariology, purgatory, and the like. It truly bewilders me.

I’m not a professional apologist or theologian. I’m just a lay person who tries to learn as much as I can. All I can say is that I never heard the resurrecting voice of the Good Shepherd in the Roman Catholic Church. The simple gospel, without all the smell and bells, and without all the distracting superstitions, is what did it for me.

It also troubles me how a person, who knows what the Lord Jesus taught about Kingdom leadership through his words and example, could ever submit to a Pope with all his pomp. Can you imagine Paul or Peter ever allowing people to treat them the way Roman Catholics treat the Pope. Does anyone think that Pete the Fisherman would wear such a ridiculous hat? :confused: :confused: Well anyway, I hope to make some friends here and have some meaningful discussions.
Click to expand...
Gods peace be with you Theophilus,

Hesed,

I am sorry to hear you left the Church but I am very happy to see you still appear to love God.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

What in particular is wrong with the ‘Roman’ Catholic Church? (Just some of the larger issues)http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon9.gif

I too crossed the Tiber and left the Church for protestant theology. But after 27 years I discovered that you can cross the Tiber both ways. There are some problems in the Church since it has humans in it. The Faith and Morals however are what is important and they have never changed in the Catholic Church like protestants have changed and are changing them yesterday today and tomorrow. There are now even practicing homosexual Baptist preachers!http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon13.gif

A prisoner of Christ

1 Pe 3:15 “15 …Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope,”
 
40.png
Ric:
Sorry, but I can honestly say that I will never become a member of the Roman Catholic church.

I was married in a Roman Catholic church and was going to become a member, but after what I learned about the RCC’s teachings right after my marriage to my wife - is a whole story to it’s self. I might start a thread on the subject soon.
Click to expand...
Gods peace be with you Theophilus,

Ric,

Just curios, what changed your mind on the RCC?
A prisoner of Christ

1 Pe 3:15 “15 …Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope,”
 
Ric, without a doubt the New Testament Church had very strong authority. They HAD to submit to the authority of the apostles, or they seperated themselves from the true Church (you can still be part of the mystical body, when out of communion with Christ’s apostles, but you’re not in the visible body). Paul spoke with authority, as an apostle of Christ, and expected to be obey. He imposed discipline and gave commands. The Church, like it has down through the centuries, got together in a council, and it’s decisions could not be challenged (see Acts 15). Jesus gave authority to the leadership of His Church so that it would remain one, and so that we would all know what He taught. Looking at the Church Fathers, we can see (starting in the late first century with writers such as Clement of Rome, and the Sheperd of Hermas) that the authority of the apostles was passed on to the bishops. Remember that, according to the Bible, the Church is the “Pillar and Foundation of Truth” (1 Tim 3:15). How can this be so if the Church does not agree on what is truth? I highly recommend Dave Armstrong’s book (available in e-book format, for a very reasonable price) A Biblical Defence of Catholicism , he defends many important Catholic beliefs using Sacred Scripture, and is a former Evangelical himself.ic.net/~erasmus/RAZINDEX.HTM
God bless,
and if you wish to have someone to discuss these things one on one (I’m a convert from Evangelicalism myself…not yet confirmed), feel free to email me at tyler_fehr@hotmail.com
 
40.png
Malachi4U:
Gods peace be with you Theophilus,

Ric,

Just curios, what changed your mind on the RCC?
A prisoner of Christ

1 Pe 3:15 “15 …Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope,”
Click to expand...
What changed my mind on the RCC?

None of the above!

What actually did change my mind is that the Roman Catholic church views salvation as something that must be worked for (or worked for to keep).
 
40.png
Ric:
I think not, for we all know that the Bereans even examining the Scriptures daily to see what Paul said was true (Acts 17:10-12). And even Paul asked whom ever he preached to needed to examen the Scriptures to see what ever he said was true (Galatians 1:6-9). 👍
Click to expand...
Gods peace be with you Theophilus,

Ric,

To quote President Reagan, “There you go again!”

Sorry but you have again misquoted or taken Scripture totally out of CONTEXT.

Lets start with Acts:

Acts 17:10-11 (NAB) “10 The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas to Beroea during the night. Upon arrival they went to the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These Jews were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all willingness and examined the scriptures daily to determine whether these things were so.”

This verse refers to the Jews checking the ‘Greek Septuagint’ (which sects denounce and Jesus used!) and NOT the Bible at all! The New Testament hadn’t even been written yet by the Catholics and declared inspired by the Catholic Church!

Now lets look at Gal:

Gal 1:6-9 (NAB) “6 I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by (the) grace (of Christ) for a different gospel 7 (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! 9 As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!”

In this passage the “Gospel” refers to the “Oral Tradition” and verbally spoken gospel of the Catholic Church. The ‘Gospel’ was the spoken Word and Tradition of the Church!

Thank you Ric for proofing our Catholic Tradition and teachings as true and Scripturally based and that the Catholic Church is the original Church and body of Christ.

A prisoner of Christhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

1 Pe 3:15 “15 …Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope,”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top