Origin of the Baptist Church

[Anna_Scott]

James,
What are the “distinctive Baptistic” practices to which you refer?

Are you saying Baptists are this remnant? Please clarify.

Peace,
Anna

---

Sola Scriptura was not originated by Luther. Put Sola Fidelis in there too. These are New Testament teachings followed by The Way. Many Baptists are known for such things as believer’s baptism(this one got them burned), freedom of conscience and separation of church and state in addition to the solas. Such things were not discovered by Luther, Calvin, etal. Church-states have persecuted many for practicing such things–Baptists were persecuted as well.

Please provide proof that Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidelis are New Testament teachings followed by The Way. You are making claims, but I’m not seeing support for those claims.

The remnant: is who ever is following the pattern of a New Testament Church as described in the Acts of the Apostles. The names of these groups have changed. The name Baptist is filled with ambiguity, starting with things called Arminianism and Calvinism–Protestant terminology. Salvation is of the Lord, the pattern was laid in the New Testament–See Ephesians 2:8-10, long before the 16th century reformations of Rome. The world of Christendom is still in three camps: saved by grace alone, saved by works, or saved by an admixture of grace and works. All of this cannot be of God.
Where will we be in a hundred years? Are we certain?

James,

I don’t think anyone will deny that “salvation is of the Lord.”

I just need you to name and support those Baptistic distinctives you claim date back to Apostolic times.

Peace,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna,

true. I was a Baptist minister and trained in a Southern Baptist Seminary.
John Carroll and his work was laugh at and dismissed. No one denied
they, Baptist, came out of the Reformation. In fact they were and are
proud of that fact. In my old Association, the only and I mean the only pastor who
held to the “we came from John the Baptist” was an older minister who never
went to seminary or recieved any formal training. When he went on about
this, if the younger pastors could roll their eyes any harder they would come out of their heads. We all quickly learned you could not reason with him and facts meant nothing,
unless it supported his error.

Mark

Mark,

I just came across a Fundamentalist Baptist website comparing Baptist and Catholic beliefs. I was so disturbed by what it said; I just sent the pastor an e-mail. It’s 1:27 a.m. and I’m really tired. I hope the e-mail did some small justice to the Catholic faith. I can’t link the Baptist site because it is an anti-Catholic site (against forum rules.)

I can post a copy of my e-mail:

Dear Pastor,
I read Baptist vs. Roman Catholic Beliefs. I am a conservative Anglican convert (I grew up in the Southern Baptist Church.) However, I am very familiar with Catholic doctrine. You have seriously misrepresented Catholicism in your comparison. Please review the following quotes from The Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Catholics do not worship icons or statutes. Veneration does not equal "worship."

1192 Sacred images in our churches and homes are intended to awaken and nourish our faith in the mystery of Christ. Through the icon of Christ and his works of salvation, it is he whom we adore. Through sacred images of the holy Mother of God, of the angels and of the saints, we venerate the persons represented. Link: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1192.htm

Catholics do not believe in "salvation by works."

1067 “The wonderful works of God among the people of the Old Testament were but a prelude to the work of Christ the Lord in redeeming mankind and giving perfect glory to God. He accomplished this work principally by the Paschal mystery of his blessed Passion, Resurrection from the dead, and glorious Ascension, whereby ‘dying he destroyed our death, rising he restored our life.’ For it was from the side of Christ as he slept the sleep of death upon the cross that there came forth 'the wondrous sacrament of the whole Church.”’

For this reason, the Church celebrates in the liturgy above all the Paschal mystery by which Christ accomplished the work of our salvation. 
Link: [scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1067.htm](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1067.htm)

183 Faith is necessary for salvation. The Lord himself affirms: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mk 16:16). Link: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/183.htm

161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. “Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life ‘But he who endures to the end.’” Link: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/161.htm

2044 The fidelity of the baptized is a primordial condition for the proclamation of the Gospel and for the Church’s mission in the world. In order that the message of salvation can show the power of its truth and radiance before men, it must be authenticated by the witness of the life of Christians. “The witness of a Christian life and good works done in a supernatural spirit have great power to draw men to the faith and to God.” Link: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2044.htm

1816 The disciple of Christ must not only keep the faith and live on it, but also profess it, confidently bear witness to it, and spread it: “All however must be prepared to confess Christ before men and to follow him along the way of the Cross, amidst the persecutions which the Church never lacks.” Service of and witness to the faith are necessary for salvation: “So every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.”
Link: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1816.htm

Catholics do not “re-sacrifice Christ” during Communion.

1364 In the New Testament, the memorial takes on new meaning. When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, she commemorates Christ’s Passover, and it is made present the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the cross remains ever present. “As often as the sacrifice of the Cross by which ‘Christ our Pasch has been sacrificed’ is celebrated on the altar, the work of our redemption is carried out.”
Link: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1364.htm

I’m not sure where you found these false claims regarding the Catholic Church. I would urge you to edit your comparision between Baptists and Roman Catholics to reflect the truth.

May the peace of the Lord be with you and your congregation. +

After the Baptist site made the comparisons, some terrible things were said in summary. I won’t quote them here. I find this all so disturbing. Somehow, there has to be an end to hate.

Peace,
Anna

 

[CopticChristian]

---

Sola Scriptura was not originated by Luther. Put Sola Fidelis in there too. These are New Testament teachings followed by The Way. Many Baptists are known for such things as believer’s baptism(this one got them burned), freedom of conscience and separation of church and state in addition to the solas. Such things were not discovered by Luther, Calvin, etal. Church-states have persecuted many for practicing such things–Baptists were persecuted as well. This not about a name–it is a faith and practice once handed to the Saints–this does not mean apostolic succession. This faith and practice was handed to every generation, long before Constantine had an in hoc signo vinces. The stretch of evidence of apostolic succession from A.D. 33 to 325 A.D. is only verifiable in the writings of those who believe such Petrine primacy. They also happen to be in control. Find the rest of the story: read the Acts of the Apostles; follow the trail from the New Testament through today and compare the doctrines. Most of what is found today is man-made, including churches.

The remnant: is who ever is following the pattern of a New Testament Church as described in the Acts of the Apostles. The names of these groups have changed. The name Baptist is filled with ambiguity, starting with things called Arminianism and Calvinism–Protestant terminology. Salvation is of the Lord, the pattern was laid in the New Testament–See Ephesians 2:8-10, long before the 16th century reformations of Rome. The world of Christendom is still in three camps: saved by grace alone, saved by works, or saved by an admixture of grace and works. All of this cannot be of God.
Where will we be in a hundred years? Are we certain?

Peace,

James Least

Camps.

Saved by grace alone
Saved by works
Saved by grace and works

We here at this thread that believe in a OHCAC believe in none of your camps.

Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone that allows for works to be done working in love.

We are certain this was declared at the Council of Orange and Council of Trent.
What is your camp?

 

[James_Least]

Please provide proof that Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidelis are New Testament teachings followed by The Way. You are making claims, but I’m not seeing support for those claims.

James,

I don’t think anyone will deny that “salvation is of the Lord.”

I just need you to name and support those Baptistic distinctives you claim date back to Apostolic times.

Peace,
Anna

Galileo proved the heliocentricity of the solar system–he was still excommunicated. He died on house arrest. Three hundred and fifty years later he was re-communicated? Does he get credit for time served or would he still be in purgatory? Maybe he is in hell–the record shows he had three illegitimate children by a significant other. Maybe he repented and was saved by the Grace of God–regardless of his sins.

We obviously have a completely different set of paradigms regarding what proof might be acceptable. It still boils to: when two disagree, they both cannot be right; they could both be wrong by the same reasoning. Who is the referee? One side says The Scripture only is the authority; the other side says the scripture, the traditions of the fathers, the magisterium, the catechism, church councils and infallible papal decrees must decide in church matters. There is no common ground and the field of play is definitely slanted toward the Vatican.

The distinctive which has caused so much consternation is believers baptism. This practice excludes the baptism of infants. There are still those who believe and practice believers’s baptism. This practice was a major portion of the Inquisitions in Europe. Many anti-pedobaptists were tried, convicted and executed, refusing to recant. Others were just summarily exececuted with their babies where they were discovered. See: History of the Evangelical Churches of the Valleys of Piedmont, by S. Morland. Warning: the illustrations will make one sick in the tummy.

I have no bones to pick with any individuals in the Inquisition system. I do have a problem with a religious system which could birth such a practice. Some apologies have been forthcoming in recent years; but the system remains.

Peace,

James Least

 

[asd72]

Galileo proved the heliocentricity of the solar system–he was still excommunicated. He died on house arrest. Three hundred and fifty years later he was re-communicated? Does he get credit for time served or would he still be in purgatory? Maybe he is in hell–the record shows he had three illegitimate children by a significant other. Maybe he repented and was saved by the Grace of God–regardless of his sins.

We obviously have a completely different set of paradigms regarding what proof might be acceptable. It still boils to: when two disagree, they both cannot be right; they could both be wrong by the same reasoning. Who is the referee? One side says The Scripture only is the authority; the other side says the scripture, the traditions of the fathers, the magisterium, the catechism, church councils and infallible papal decrees must decide in church matters. There is no common ground and the field of play is definitely slanted toward the Vatican.

The distinctive which has caused so much consternation is believers baptism. This practice excludes the baptism of infants. There are still those who believe and practice believers’s baptism. This practice was a major portion of the Inquisitions in Europe. Many anti-pedobaptists were tried, convicted and executed, refusing to recant. Others were just summarily exececuted with their babies where they were discovered. See: HISTORY OF THE EVANGELICAL CHURCHES OF THE VALLEYS OF PIEDMONT BY S MORELAND. Warning: the illustrations will make one sick in the tummy.

I have no bones to pick with any individuals in the Inquisition system. I do have a problem with a religious system which could birth such a practice. Some apologies have been forthcoming in recent years; but the system remains.

Peace,

James Least

James, I would encourage you to do some research on that book. It has been found that most of the source documents he used for that book were forgeries.

 

[asd72]

James, I would encourage you to do some research on that book. It has been found that most of the source documents he used for that book were forgeries.

I just wanted to add a resource for you to check this out. I used ‘Oxford dictionary of national biography.’ You can find it online.

 

[James_Least]

James, I would encourage you to do some research on that book. It has been found that most of the source documents he used for that book were forgeries.

Forged to what end–sell books? If these atrocities are wishful thinking of some anti-Catholic groups, why have several popes recently apologized for Inquisitions and such?

S. Morland had no interest in either side of this issue. He was an unbiased reporter–if there is such a person. He probably made little from royalties at B. Dalton. This book has been popular.

A man convinced against his will, is, in the end, unconvinced still. (copied)

Peace,

James Least

 

[asd72]

Forged to what end–sell books? If these atrocities are wishful thinking of some anti-Catholic groups, why have several popes recently apologized for Inquisitions and such?

S. Morland had no interest in either side of this issue. He was an unbiased reporter–if there is such a person. He probably made little from royalties at B. Dalton. This book has been popular.

A man convinced against his will, is, in the end, unconvinced still. (copied)

Peace,

James Least

I don’t mean Samuel Morland made forgeries himself!

He received the documents from Waldenses. The trouble was they were dated at 1120, which was before Walden even had obtained his translated scriptures. This seemed to show that the Waldenses preceded Waldo.

However the documents Morland obtained show the bible divided into chapters, which did not happen until 1250 or later, so the 1120 dating is false, and it can not be used to proof Waldenses existed before Waldo.

The document with the ‘Confession of faith’ has now been dated to the 16th century, it contains the teaching of Martin Bucer, the reformer of Strasbourg copied almost verbatim.

It seems to confirm the more logical notion that Waldenses were not ‘bible Christians’ preceeding the reformation, but rather they were excommunicated Catholic’s who had been largely absorbed into the Protestant Church.

 

[asd72]

As for the inquisitions, that is something I have not had time to look at in a lot of detail. I do believe the Catholic church has preserved the teaching of faith and morals from the Apostles though.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Please provide proof that Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidelis are New Testament teachings followed by The Way. You are making claims, but I’m not seeing support for those claims.

James,

I don’t think anyone will deny that “salvation is of the Lord.”

I just need you to name and support those Baptistic distinctives you claim date back to Apostolic times.

Peace,
Anna

. . . .The distinctive which has caused so much consternation is believers baptism. This practice excludes the baptism of infants. There are still those who believe and practice believers’s baptism. . . .

James Least,

So far, you have named Sola Scriptura, Sola Fidelis, and believer’s baptism which excludes infant baptism. Still no support.

Since you believe in Sola Scriptura, you should be able to give support from Scripture to support these 3 “Baptistic distinctives.”

I’m still waiting for you to provide support for your beliefs. Anyone can throw out a belief–pull something out of thin air. Supporting a belief is another matter altogether.

I await your Biblical support for Sola Scriptura, Sola Fidelis, and Believer’s Baptism, with proof that infants should be excluded from baptism.

Keep in mind Galileo, the Magisterium, the Catholic Catechism, and the Inquisition have nothing to do with proving “Baptistic distinctives.” Mud slinging does not add credibility to your claims; but it is a common and very obvious avoidance tactic.

Peace,
Anna

 

[gift1]

Its nice Chris, thanks for such info.
by Gifteveryone

 

[James_Least]

James Least,

So far, you have named Sola Scriptura, Sola Fidelis, and believer’s baptism which excludes infant baptism. Still no support.

Since you believe in Sola Scriptura, you should be able to give support from Scripture to support these 3 “Baptistic distinctives.”

I’m still waiting for you to provide support for your beliefs. Anyone can throw out a belief–pull something out of thin air. Supporting a belief is another matter altogether.

I await your Biblical support for Sola Scriptura, Sola Fidelis, and Believer’s Baptism, with proof that infants should be excluded from baptism.

Keep in mind Galileo, the Magisterium, the Catholic Catechism, and the Inquisition have nothing to do with proving “Baptistic distinctives.” Mud slinging does not add credibility to your claims; but it is a common and very obvious avoidance tactic.

Peace,
Anna

---

While Jesus is the best example of one being persecuted for truth, Galileo is a good example, of someone who had a truth which was in effect squelched by the religious powers that be. Pointing out religious hocus pocus in satire is an effective way to make a point–to those with open minds-- the ones who can think outside the box of the religious status quo. Oops, there goes the mud again.

Let me restate the controlling factor: We have completely different paradigms concerning what constitutes proof. If we cannot agree as to the fact of Sola Scriptura, we have no basis for a discussion. If fact, in many instances we have a different set of definitions for our religious jargon. It is kind of like a Capitalist having a conversation with a Communist. Each seem to have similiar sounding terminology; yet in practice the meanings are vastly different. This is confusion. God does not author confusion. Man is quite adept at such.

Baptism is a classic example. Some practice sprinkling, some affusion(heavy sprinkling), some practice immersion (the basic meaning of the Gk. word baptizo, which is transliterated into English). Some use “holy” water. Others just use polluted water sufficient to immerse–rivers, ponds, oceans, concrete pools.

If the original word meant to immerse, dip, or plunge, who authorized a changing of the mode?

Re: believer’s baptism. All of the scriptural references to baptism have believers as the subjects. Some try to infer that since the Philippian jailer and his household were saved and baptized, surely this must have included infants. This is an unnecessary inference, probably wrong in light of the many scripture which teach the contrary.

Then there is the supposed sacramental aspect of baptism–a bone of contention as well. Millions have died refusing to bow to the state religions which are trying to force such doctrines on the people–i.e. infant baptism. " Only a small percentage were actually tortured and killed", according to some in authority. Some say only a few were killed in the Holocaust of WWII. Many folk believe a lie–in fact will die for a lie.

Who should we believe and follow? The unadulterated Word of God? Or the commandments of men? Peter, and the other apostles, said,“We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29.They were in front of the Jewish Sanhedren(the religious power that be) which had already warned them not to preach Jesus and Him crucified, putting His blood on them. This was the same kangaroo court(religious system,not the individuals) which convicted Jesus of blasphemy and had Him crucified by the Romans.

Man has not been able to get it right of himself since Cain changed the sin offering from innocent blood to fruits of the field. We still have a problem with this unauthorized change in worship. Abel got it right–he was murdered. Can we infer anything from this fact across the five millenia, especially the so-called Dark Ages.

Let God be found True–and every man a liar.

Peace,

James Least

p.s. This is probably my last post in this regard. The seed is planted. The Word of God does return void. We are all without excuse. Even so, come Lord Jesus.

 

[pismopal]

Camps.

Saved by grace alone
Saved by works
Saved by grace and works

We here at this thread that believe in a OHCAC believe in none of your camps.

Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone that allows for works to be done working in love.

We are certain this was declared at the Council of Orange and Council of Trent.
What is your camp?

Please name the Christian “camp” which teaches that one is “saved by works” …and just a little documentation to back that up.

 

[Anna_Scott]

James Least,

So far, you have named Sola Scriptura, Sola Fidelis, and believer’s baptism which excludes infant baptism. Still no support.

Since you believe in Sola Scriptura, you should be able to give support from Scripture to support these 3 “Baptistic distinctives.”

I’m still waiting for you to provide support for your beliefs. Anyone can throw out a belief–pull something out of thin air. Supporting a belief is another matter altogether.

I await your Biblical support for Sola Scriptura, Sola Fidelis, and Believer’s Baptism, with proof that infants should be excluded from baptism.

Keep in mind Galileo, the Magisterium, the Catholic Catechism, and the Inquisition have nothing to do with proving “Baptistic distinctives.” Mud slinging does not add credibility to your claims; but it is a common and very obvious avoidance tactic.

Peace,
Anna

. . . . .Re: believer’s baptism. All of the scriptural references to baptism have believers as the subjects. Some try to infer that since the Philippian jailer and his household were saved and baptized, surely this must have included infants. This is an unnecessary inference, probably wrong in light of the many scripture which teach the contrary.

James,

Again, since you believe in Sola Scriptura, it should be easy to provide Scriptures to prove “Believers Baptism” and prove that infants should be excluded from baptism.

Then there is the supposed sacramental aspect of baptism–a bone of contention as well. . . . .

Please prove this. Provide Scripture that proves there is no Sacramental aspect of Baptism.

. . . . .p.s. This is probably my last post in this regard. The seed is planted. The Word of God does return void. . . . .

James,

First, I’m assuming you meant to say, “The Word of God does not return void.”

You haven’t posted any Scripture to support your beliefs. So, saying God’s word does not return void does not apply to your posts.

As for saying, “The seed is planted”: the only seed you have planted is one of judgment and insults against Catholics and those who do not agree with you–combined with the fact that you are obviously unable to support your claims.

So, after hurling many offensive insults and judgmental statements, failing to engage in any serious discussion about your beliefs, and failing to provide any support for your beliefs; you decide to leave?

The sad thing about this is that you are not the first Baptist to come here and behave this way.

I pray you will find God’s truth.

Peace,
Anna

 

[James_Least]

---

I apologize for having offended anyone. It is not my intention to be offensive. Sometimes things debated get personal. I do not apologize for saying what I think. The rifts and schisms are long standing and deep. They are probably without reconcile. Jesus paid it all.

Scriptural proof of millions dying for their faith: Rev. 7:9, "After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people and tongues, stood before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands… Go all the way through verse 17. There are other scripture which say basically the same thing.

My analogy to Holocaust was to try to show that the religious powers that be water down the significance of their participation in the writing of World History. It is the: “Yes, we may have done some of these things, but is was not that much.” I hasten to point out that the Jews in Spain were, shall we say," not treated kindly", in the Spanish Inquisition. They had to convert or die. Many chose to convert–in a feigned sort of way anyway. What I am saying is kind of corroborated by the apologies given for Inquisitions, Crusades and such, by Vicars of Christ–ex officio. Why the apology if nothing bad happened?

Let God be found true and every man lying.

Peace,

James Least

 

[amber_lux]

Galileo proved the heliocentricity of the solar system–he was still excommunicated. He died on house arrest. Three hundred and fifty years later he was re-communicated?

It would behoove you to read up on what his heresy was.

Heliocentricity wasn’t one of the issues.

Amber

 

[CopticChristian]

---

While Jesus is the best example of one being persecuted for truth, Galileo is a good example, of someone who had a truth which was in effect squelched by the religious powers that be. Pointing out religious hocus pocus in satire is an effective way to make a point–to those with open minds-- the ones who can think outside the box of the religious status quo. Oops, there goes the mud again.

Let me restate the controlling factor: We have completely different paradigms concerning what constitutes proof. If we cannot agree as to the fact of Sola Scriptura, we have no basis for a discussion. If fact, in many instances we have a different set of definitions for our religious jargon. It is kind of like a Capitalist having a conversation with a Communist. Each seem to have similiar sounding terminology; yet in practice the meanings are vastly different. This is confusion. God does not author confusion. Man is quite adept at such.

Baptism is a classic example. Some practice sprinkling, some affusion(heavy sprinkling), some practice immersion (the basic meaning of the Gk. word baptizo, which is transliterated into English). Some use “holy” water. Others just use polluted water sufficient to immerse–rivers, ponds, oceans, concrete pools.

If the original word meant to immerse, dip, or plunge, who authorized a changing of the mode?

Re: believer’s baptism. All of the scriptural references to baptism have believers as the subjects. Some try to infer that since the Philippian jailer and his household were saved and baptized, surely this must have included infants. This is an unnecessary inference, probably wrong in light of the many scripture which teach the contrary.

Then there is the supposed sacramental aspect of baptism–a bone of contention as well. Millions have died refusing to bow to the state religions which are trying to force such doctrines on the people–i.e. infant baptism. " Only a small percentage were actually tortured and killed", according to some in authority. Some say only a few were killed in the Holocaust of WWII. Many folk believe a lie–in fact will die for a lie.

Who should we believe and follow? The unadulterated Word of God? Or the commandments of men? Peter, and the other apostles, said,“We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29.They were in front of the Jewish Sanhedren(the religious power that be) which had already warned them not to preach Jesus and Him crucified, putting His blood on them. This was the same kangaroo court(religious system,not the individuals) which convicted Jesus of blasphemy and had Him crucified by the Romans.

Man has not been able to get it right of himself since Cain changed the sin offering from innocent blood to fruits of the field. We still have a problem with this unauthorized change in worship. Abel got it right–he was murdered. Can we infer anything from this fact across the five millenia, especially the so-called Dark Ages.

Let God be found True–and every man a liar.

Peace,

James Least

p.s. This is probably my last post in this regard. The seed is planted. The Word of God does return void. We are all without excuse. Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Sola Scriptura is a proposition, fantasy, that fails…not a fact:thumbsup:

 

[James_Least]

Please name the Christian “camp” which teaches that one is “saved by works” …and just a little documentation to back that up.

All those who believe that one must be baptized to be saved–probably 95% or more of Christendom.

Baptism is a good work. It requires a work on the part of the participant and the work of an administrator. See Eph. 2:8-10–it is in the Douay too.

Peace,

James Least

 

[Anna_Scott]

---

I apologize for having offended anyone. It is not my intention to be offensive. Sometimes things debated get personal. I do not apologize for saying what I think. The rifts and schisms are long standing and deep. They are probably without reconcile. Jesus paid it all.

Scriptural proof of millions dying for their faith: Rev. 7:9, "After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people and tongues, stood before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands… Go all the way through verse 17. There are other scripture which say basically the same thing.

My analogy to Holocaust was to try show that the religious powers that be water down the significance of their participation in the writing of World History. It is the: “Yes, we may have done some of these things, but is was not that much.” I hasten to point out that the Jews in Spain were, shall we say," not treated kindly", in the Spanish Inquisition. They had to convert or die. Many chose to convert–in a feigned sort of way anyway. What I am saying is kind of corroborated by the apologies given for Inquisitions, Crusades and such, by Vicars of Christ–ex officio. Why the apology if nothing bad happened?

Let God be found true and every man lying.

Peace,

James Least

James,

It truly breaks my heart to see this path that you are on.

Ironically, a few days ago, I came across a Baptist website comparing the beliefs of Baptists and Catholics. I was so disturbed by the false claims made against Catholics, I sent the pastor an e-mail with quotes from the Catechism attempting to correct his false assumptions and claims.

I just found an e-mail reply from the pastor. I won’t give his name; but this is what he said to me:

"I too have extensively studied Roman Catholic doctrine. And yes, Catholics do indeed worship both statues and icons, as both of us already know. To bow before a statue is worship. Bowing down before a statue = worship (See Exodus 20). You can call it “veneration” if you wish, but it is still bowing down before a stature or idol, which is worship and which is strictly forbidden by God in the Bible

Yes, Roman Catholics do most definitely belief in salvation by works. You either belief in salvation by your own works or you do not. We believe in salvation by works - the work of Christ in the cross. You live in salvation by your own works, which is what we both mean by the term used “salvation by works”. Roman Catholics believe that the seven (Baptist have only two) sacraments (name removed by moderator)ut grace. Therefore they believe that their works are necessary for salvation.

Of course Roman Catholics believe in the re-sacrifice of Christ during communion. That is the very definition of the Mass. This is what the wafer and goblet is when the bell is wrung. Ask any priest. Are you that ignorant of basic Roman Catholic doctrine?

So out of three complaints, you are wrong on all three. Sure, many New Evangelicals, all the way back to Billy Graham have been fooled by lying Roman Catholics, but I am not.I am a Fundamentalist Baptist. I believe what the Bible says… That is my authority.

Shame on you for trying to deceive a Baptist preacher! (Christ wrote down your wicked sin in His book and will read it out at the last Judgment. Be afraid. Be very afraid.)"

My reply:

**"This is a very sad and tragic reply. Where is the love of Christ in what you have said below?

Peace and blessings."**

What is the source of all this judgment and blatant hatred? It certainly does not come from Christ.

Please think about what you are saying, James. Please prayerfully consider the path you are following.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

 

[James_Least]

Sola Scriptura is a proposition, fantasy, that fails…not a fact:thumbsup:

I believe you just made my point, Sir.

Let God be found True, and every man lying.

Peace,

James Least