Questions my baptist friend had about the catholic faith

  • Thread starter Thread starter holtster15
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To be quite honest…most evangelical fellowships…including the various Baptist groups all share similar if not the same beliefs…they differ usually on church policy and government…example, while the Church of the Nazarene, Free Methodists and Weslyan groups all have similar beliefs…where they differ is that they stress certain points of Weslyan theology…which they share with the Methodists…and church government and structure…they agree on the “essentials”…but disagree on the “non-essentials”…

What I often read here at CAF is that different denomiantions believe “completly different things”…no a true statment and IMO down right dishonest. Evangelical Friends share much with the “Weslyan traditions”…where they differ…they do not believe santification is a “definte second work of grace subsequent to regeneration”.
I beg the differ. If they are “similar” and share the “same” beliefs,then why are they separate entities? Obviously they differ more than just church policy and government.I have never understood that premise: Divided we stand,but still part of Jesus Christ Church. I would love to know where Jesus taught divisions yet still part of His ONE Body?
 
I beg the differ. If they are “similar” and share the “same” beliefs,then why are they separate entities? Obviously they differ more than just church policy and government.I have never understood that premise: Divided we stand,but still part of Jesus Christ Church. I would love to know where Jesus taught divisions yet still part of His ONE Body?
The denominational names are differnent and some if not most work together…National Association of Evangelicals…World Counsil of Churches…local congregations that share a theological perspective and ethnic history does not make them separate…they are not separate churches…they are members of the One Church… they are members of the same Church…the same Body of Christ…there IS One Body…Catholics seek to impose their understanding on ecclesiology when discussing with Protestants…no wonder the confusion…what you claim to understand as Protestant belief does not reflect Protestant belief…no more than when Protestants claim Catholics worship Mary…you DO use the word "worshp at times…only when Latin or an explanatory phrase as “latria” or "dulia’ or “hyperdulia” is made is the distinction seen…but many Protestants refuse to see the difference and so persist in falsehoods as to “what Catholics believe”…similar situation…what is claimed as “what Protestant beleives” is a falsehood…a misrepresentaion of what is believed…not a representation.
 
We really have to admit that we don’t in this era understand with any depth the Jewish customs in place in those days.

Joseph was a “just” man, well versed in Jewish laws of purity, etc. etc. I think any such man whose virgin wife delivered the Son of God, would be super-heroically respectful of her purity, abstinence, and chastity.

Are you the husband going to ask for more sons and daughters after God gave your family the Son of God?

I don’t think we’re quite getting our mind to the place that Joseph had gotten to.
 
From personal experience, growing up in a Baptist church, I can honestly say, the average protestant church today has gone from conservative in belief to very very liberal. And yes, the Protestant churches all have totally different beliefs. It drove me crazy and yes, when some dont like whats going on, the church splits, and then before you know it, there is a new protestant church opening down the street, with different beliefs. very confusing, very sad. The biggest problem with the protestant church is, which one holds the truth? they all believe something different. Some Protestant churches deny the Virgin Birth, some believe all go to heaven, no matter if one believes in Christ or not. Some Allow Gay Clergy. So, Which one is right? Thats why I love the Catholic church… it Holds the Truth! Have a question, you can go to the RCC and have the answer, the one true answer, period! Im so happy I left the Protestant church and now catholic! 🙂 So, All you Protestants out there, since I was very active in many protestant churches, these catholics who say you all hold different major and minor differences in beliefs are 100% correct in saying so!
 
From personal experience, growing up in a Baptist church, I can honestly say, the average protestant church today has gone from conservative in belief to very very liberal. And yes, the Protestant churches all have totally different beliefs. It drove me crazy and yes, when some dont like whats going on, the church splits, and then before you know it, there is a new protestant church opening down the street, with different beliefs. very confusing, very sad. The biggest problem with the protestant church is, which one holds the truth? they all believe something different. Some Protestant churches deny the Virgin Birth, some believe all go to heaven, no matter if one believes in Christ or not. Some Allow Gay Clergy. So, Which one is right? Thats why I love the Catholic church… it Holds the Truth! Have a question, you can go to the RCC and have the answer, the one true answer, period! Im so happy I left the Protestant church and now catholic! 🙂 So, All you Protestants out there, since I was very active in many protestant churches, these catholics who say you all hold different major and minor differences in beliefs are 100% correct in saying so!
Someone clever said that Protestants “multiply by dividing”. : >
 
I also had a USA Presbyterian Church Denomination, Pastor tell me at a Bible Study, that She will see all her muslim, hindu, Jewish and all other Religion friends in Heaven with Her. So, anotherwords, one doesnt need Christ to get to Heaven. what a false teaching. But it doesnt surprise me, because that denomination allows gay clergy now too. So, if thats how they believe, whats the purpose of that church? Why is it a “church”? And yet, you go down the street to the PCA Presbyterian church, and its totally different… very conservative in its beliefs, and believes one must have Christ as Lord to get Eternal Life in Heaven… SO… Thats my problem with the Protestants… who is right? I know who is right, but to the Non Christian seeking… what a shame, and how very very sad! So many are in the wrong churches.
 
To be quite honest…most evangelical fellowships…including the various Baptist groups all share similar if not the same beliefs…they differ usually on church policy and government…example, while the Church of the Nazarene, Free Methodists and Weslyan groups all have similar beliefs…where they differ is that they stress certain points of Weslyan theology…which they share with the Methodists…and church government and structure…they agree on the “essentials”…but disagree on the “non-essentials”…
As Disunity on Essentials points out,
One problem with this argument is that Protestant churches have no effective method of determining which beliefs constitute essentials and which do not. The absence of a functional magisterium leaves each group of Protestants to decide for itself what beliefs are essential. If one group decides that a particular doctrine is essential or non-essential, then other groups have no effective way of refuting it. They could, of course, appeal to Scripture, but presumably the interpretation of the relevant passages is under dispute, and Scripture does not tell us which of its teachings are essential and which are not.

Good tests of practical unity in Protestant churches are: Whom do they let join? Whom do they let preach? Whom do they let pastor? If a particular congregation, as a matter of policy, will not let an individual with a particular belief join its fellowship, preach from its pulpits, or serve as a pastor in one of its churches, then this belief is considered an essential for unity. When these tests are applied, one can see that there is a great deal of practical disunity among Protestant churches—a disunity that goes far beyond the “essentials” named by Protestant apologists.

For example, for non-Lutherans, a good test would be: Could Martin Luther pastor your church, given his beliefs in things like baptismal regeneration, infant baptism, high predestination, and the Real Presence? The problem is much more general than Luther, however. Pastors from one Protestant tradition typically are not allowed to serve as pastors in Protestant churches of other traditions. A Lutheran’s belief in baptismal regeneration will prevent him from pastoring a Calvinist church, a Calvinist’s belief in high predestination will prevent him from pastoring a Methodist church, a Methodist’s belief in infant baptism will prevent him from pastoring a Baptist church, and so on.

Perhaps the most fundamental problem for users of the “unity in essentials” argument is the fact that they disagree on the meaning of the distinctively Protestant essentials on which they claim to be united: the slogans “faith alone” and “Scripture alone” (sola fide and sola scriptura).
 
I also had a USA Presbyterian Church Denomination, Pastor tell me at a Bible Study, that She will see all her muslim, hindu, Jewish and all other Religion friends in Heaven with Her. So, anotherwords, one doesnt need Christ to get to Heaven. what a false teaching. But it doesnt surprise me, because that denomination allows gay clergy now too. So, if thats how they believe, whats the purpose of that church? Why is it a “church”? And yet, you go down the street to the PCA Presbyterian church, and its totally different… very conservative in its beliefs, and believes one must have Christ as Lord to get Eternal Life in Heaven… SO… Thats my problem with the Protestants… who is right? I know who is right, but to the Non Christian seeking… what a shame, and how very very sad! So many are in the wrong churches.
Playing “devils advocate” today…did the pastor believe “one doesn’t need Christ” or that “Christs sacrifice offers salvation to all”…did he mean “Christ wasn’t needed” or “all salvation which occurs is through the merits of Christ”/

There is a difference…
 
the minister made it very clear that anyone can get to heaven, with or without Christ, which is false teaching! Only through Christ can one get into Heaven. there is no other way. And if this USA Presbyterian Minister is saying this, imagine how many other protestant minister are saying the same. Very Sad!
 
the minister made it very clear that anyone can get to heaven, with or without Christ, which is false teaching! Only through Christ can one get into Heaven. there is no other way. And if this USA Presbyterian Minister is saying this, imagine how many other protestant minister are saying the same. Very Sad!
Interesting…those believers I know who embrace a univesalism do not deny that Christ is not needed…but that ALL salvation is God’s work in Christ…no matter whom salvation is granted to…be the Muslim, Buddhist, Catholic, Protestant or Jew.
 
well, there again is a example of how churches, although they may be the same denomination, all can believe entirely different… I guess whatever the Pastor of that church believes, controls what that local church believes…
 
well, there again is a example of how churches, although they may be the same denomination, all can believe entirely different… I guess whatever the Pastor of that church believes, controls what that local church believes…
I know you are not saying that all Catholic priests believe and teach exactly the same things…why would you hold pastors to a much more stringent disipline of belief than what your church holds it’s priests to? Since it is a fact that not all Catholic priests beleive and teach the same things…do you think this is an issue with the Catholic church since one priest to the next is teaching different things…are they separate churches…or just different views within the same church body?
 
The denominational names are differnent and some if not most work together…National Association of Evangelicals…World Counsil of Churches…local congregations that share a theological perspective and ethnic history does not make them separate…they are not separate churches…they are members of the One Church… they are members of the same Church…
They may be members of the One Church by virtue of trinitarian baptism, but they’re emphatically not members of the *same *church.

From What “Catholic” Means
Early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes: “As regards ‘Catholic,’ its original meaning was ‘universal’ or ‘general.’ . . . in the latter half of the second century at latest, we find it conveying the suggestion that the Catholic is the true Church as distinct from heretical congregations (cf., e.g., Muratorian Canon). . . . What these early Fathers were envisaging was almost always the empirical, visible society; they had little or no inkling of the distinction which was later to become important between a visible and an invisible Church” (Early Christian Doctrines, 190–1).

Ignatius of Antioch

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains *. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (*Letter to the Smyrneans *8:2 [A.D. 110]).

Cyprian of Carthage

“They alone have remained outside [the Church] who, were they within, would have to be ejected. … There [in John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest, and the flock clinging to their shepherd in the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishops; and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priest of God, believing that they are secretly in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and catholic, is not split or divided, but is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere to one another” (Letters 66[67]:8 [A.D. 253]).

Cyril of Jerusalem

“[The Church] is called catholic, then, because it extends over the whole world, from end to end of the earth, and because it teaches universally and infallibly each and every doctrine which must come to the knowledge of men, concerning things visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly, and because it brings every race of men into subjection to godliness, governors and governed, learned and unlearned, and because it universally treats and heals every class of sins, those committed with the soul and those with the body, and it possesses within itself every conceivable form of virtue, in deeds and in words and in the spiritual gifts of every description” (Catechetical Lectures 18:23 [A.D. 350]).

“And if you ever are visiting in cities, do not inquire simply where the house of the Lord is—for the others, sects of the impious, attempt to call their dens ‘houses of the Lord’—nor ask merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the name peculiar to this holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God” (ibid., 18:26).

Augustine

[T]here are many other things which most properly can keep me in her bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave the charge of feeding his sheep [John 21:15–17], up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And last, the very name Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called ‘Catholic,’ when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house" (*Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” *4:5 [A.D. 397]).
*
 
well, if one wants to know what the catholic church teaches, you can go to the cathecism and there it is. In the Protestant church, you have to ask your pastor and again, that belief can change when the church gets a new pastor. It seems like its the Protestant pastor that decides on the belief of that local assembly.
 
well, if one wants to know what the catholic church teaches, you can go to the cathecism and there it is. In the Protestant church, you have to ask your pastor and again, that belief can change when the church gets a new pastor. It seems like its the Protestant pastor that decides on the belief of that local assembly.
Would not one go to the Presbyterian “catechism” to find out what the church body as a whole believed…instead of indicting the whole community by one pastor’s belief?
 
yes, but the problem there is, there are so many different types of Presbyterian churches. Which one is true? Christ founded the Catholic church, so All catholic churches are the same in beliefs and teachings.
 
yes, but the problem there is, there are so many different types of Presbyterian churches. Which one is true? Christ founded the Catholic church, so All catholic churches are the same in beliefs and teachings.
Not all Catholic churches are…the Eastern Catholics do not embrace fully western sotierology and practice do they?
 
I know you are not saying that all Catholic priests believe and teach exactly the same things…why would you hold pastors to a much more stringent disipline of belief than what your church holds it’s priests to? Since it is a fact that not all Catholic priests beleive and teach the same things…do you think this is an issue with the Catholic church since one priest to the next is teaching different things…are they separate churches…or just different views within the same church body?
All priest are suppose to believe and teach the same thing. I have attended many different parishes in the US Canada and Europe. I don’t see a variation in belief or teachings. It is a fact? What do you base this fact on?
 
While I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday, we got on the topic of religion and catholicism. He had alot of questions and I answered most of them. But there where some that I wasn’t sure about so I told him to send me the questions he had and I would find them out and get back to him as soon as possible.
holtster,
This thread went from answers to your friends questions, some very helpful, to bashing Protestants in general, not helpful–and off topic.

I would urge you to do a lot of praying before you pass on any answers to your Baptist friend. I grew up in Southern Baptist Churches, and it’s difficult to make any headway on the issues of your friends questions. When I started asking questions in the SBC, I ended up in trouble, but no one actually answered my questions.

For Southern Baptists, the Lord’s Supper and Baptism are purely symbolic.

The same Baptists, who are part of the Southern Baptist Convention, who denies any Sacramental nature of the Lord’s Supper and Baptism; told me I had a “faith issue” because I didn’t believe in a literal 6-day creation. Doesn’t make sense–literal translation in creation, but deny literal translation of the Words of Christ regarding the Eucharist in John Chapter 6.

So, I would pray before proceeding with your friend. He probably already has some answers ready for what he expects you will tell him. Many Baptists proselytize aggressively–and converting you may be the intention behind the questions.

Peace,
Anna
 
A reminder for non-Catholics:

The teaching authority rests with the Bishops; priests assist the bishop in this mission. If priests “roll their own” they are doing it without the authority of the Church.

There is an order to things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top