Respect, Respect

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicChef
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CatholicChef

Guest
Read Joe Monahan’s “Forum Swarming.” I had one of my earlier threads removed because of this. I was hurt and angry because of something I had read, but had no intentions of having other’s swarm to a particular site. But I do now see that probably would have happened. What I was looking for was some feedback from my catholic friends.
I know what it feels like for others to ridicule my faith and so do most of you, so lets all try and set a good example and treat others with respect.
We are sometimes accused of not being christian, so doesn’t that in itself prove we must work harder to be Christ like? Whatever we do, we should never treat others in a way we ourselves don’t want to be treated. This is a tough world and we as christians (whatever denomination we may be) should love and give strength to each other instead of tearing each other down.
 
40.png
CatholicChef:
I know what it feels like for others to ridicule my faith and so do most of you, so lets all try and set a good example and treat others with respect.
You can count on me CatholicChef! 👍

Peace,

George
 
We are sometimes accused of not being christian, so doesn’t that in itself prove we must work harder to be Christ like? Whatever we do, we should never treat others in a way we ourselves don’t want to be treated.

Aye, sorta like that golden ruler…Midas, if I remeber correctly.

Anyhoo, How could they accuse us of not being Christians? We’re the First Church of Christ! 😉
 
I try not to ridicule other’s beliefs, but honostley, I cant see how they dont seem to get it. Its so obvious that God is the only one and Jesus, Peace be upon him(i like that part), is his son that died for us.

I really cant empathise with them.

Sometimes they come across and say, religeon is a way to escape the pains of the owrld, used by the weak.

And I say(in my brain) DENYING GOD IS YOUR SELFISH WAY OF ASSURING YOUR DONT HAVE TO PAY THE CONCEQUENCES YOU NO-GOOD DIRTY (&^(&^^(*^%%$^^$&…ext

I dont know…I cant belive i missed the crusades and the inquisition 😛

jk. I respect those that have the cojones(sp?) to say there is a God and accept responsibility for their actions. Even if the god isnt my God.

Aetheists get my goat :banghead: , and agnostics are far to slow for me :yawn: , but its a start, no? :yup:
 
Of course, there’s a big difference between claiming that someone is bad (simply because what he believes is heresy) and calling the heresy bad. Sort of like calling sin a sin, but loving the sinner. We can’t tell people what they believe is the truth if it isn’t, but we can do it with love, understanding, and patience.
 
“What the world needs now, is love, sweet love; that’s the only thing, that there’s just…too little of…”

I always gag when it runs through my brain, but it’s true.

:yup: :confused: :nope:
 
From my time on other non-Catholic forums, with only a couple of exceptions, I’d have to say that the folks here at CAF, both members and moderators are some of the best on the net. I’ve seen about every allegation that can be made about us Catholics here and other Catholic forums (and had some tossed at me in private messages here at CAF as well. :eek: ) by non-Catholics or de-facto anti-Catholics, and by and large the assertions have been ludicrous in light of the rhetoric laid on us. Most of us here at CAF are far and away more charitable in our responses to questions and rhetorical allegations than the n-Cs/a-Cs on their own forums. Most times I can’t wait to get back here where a discussion can be made without being told I am arrogant, hateful, or a deceived child of the devil, when I attempt to simply provide accurate information in context. I find it distressing if I or my beliefs are mocked or derided and I praise God that that isn’t tolerated here on CAF.

There is one a-C forum right now that most of the Catholics are currently boycotting because they got outright pornographically offensive in a discussion of the Blessed Virgin, and then hit at least 2 Catholics with warnings (one long time Catholic poster caught 2![3 =banning]) when they objected to the remarks and that the offending poster wasn’t chastised at all. there was a half-hearted apology made by a couple of other n-C members, but nothing was done about the offenders and so now they comment that none of us answer their posts. The silence is deafening. (As well it should be.) Here’s an example:
being a former Catholic, I can tell you first hand that the RCC is anything BUT Christian.
…Even satan believes in Christ. It takes much more than that to be Christian. The RCC does not even share the same God, and it different, even to its very foundation.
The RCC has NEVER been Christian.
and again:
In my opinion the catholic church is not Christian any more than the mormon or JW’s are Christian. Because they don’t believe that the only way to eternal salvation is through personal belief that the blood of Jesus is all-sufficient for the penalty of sin and an acceptance of him into your life as Lord and Saviour and that salvation is by grace alone, and that salvation is immediate and eternal upon acceptance of Jesus as a one-time sacrifice for your sins, and not obtained through any works, sacraments, traditions or merits of our own.
and last 2, talking to each other:
One of the more outrageous aspects of lay Catholic Internet Apologists is that they do not necessarily have to engage their opponents in debates over the truth or falsehood of their positions. . .
They can simply dismiss their opposition with magic pixie dust responses like hate-filled, anti-Catholic, bigoted or basher.
Lay Catholic Internet Apologists rarely expend the effort to study the Bible, Church History or even keep up with recent events and trends in their church: they just don’t see the need to examine the stuff they have embraced.
Since they have come to rely so heavily on sound bite dismissals of their opponents, they have few arguments.
This is so true! They are famous for quoting or putting links what the Early Church Fathers said. None can actually give you any details.
The reasons they study their Catechism in their bible classes. (The Bible Study classes in the RC in Brooklyn do this) You will not see a bible in the classroom.
When I was Roman Catholic back in the 1960’s & 1970’s the thought of someone reading the bible without a priest present to tell you what scripture is saying was totally against the church’s teachings because we were not allowed to read it for ourselves except for their cut and paste version on Sunday!
It’s pretty eggregious, as you can see and any time you run into this type of talk, you’re probably best off to just dust off those sandals and keep walkin’. :o

“Board Swarms” are always a drag and almost never do any good whatsoever. Over time my own philosphy has become that if someone really is interested in the truth about Catholicism, they’ll come here or one of the other faithful Catholic sites and get the facts and then decide for themselves, and when they ask their questions, they’ll talk to us like human beings and listen when we answer.

Are Apologetics and Evangelism at Odds?
Pax vobiscum,
 
Lay Catholic Internet Apologist…that means we’re CIAs…oooooh now we need badges…

-ACEGC
 
AWSOME!!! CIA, I like it. Wonder if there’s copyright protection…Or would that just be Central…ext

My dads friend, owns a plumbing co, Called Century Twent One, cept the real estate folks didnt like that, so now their CTO, c’ept now its the 22nd…
 
We owe more than respect to each other…
Most people did not have a say in the way they ended belonging to a certain religion, most of them got the religion of their parents.

If someone believes and claims to hold the truth, should not he be thankful to his God to have favored him over millions others who did not have the same favor he had to be born to a family holding the truth? What should that person do to thank his God to have favored him over many others? Should he hate them just because they did not have the same chance he had? Or should he try his best to deliver what he thinks to be the truth to those who did not have the same Divine favor he had? I am sure if we all start from asking ourselves how to be thankful to God, we will end up in very healthy discussions.

I am sure we owe more than respect to each other, we owe mercy and compassion.

Salaam.
Joseph.
 
Originally posted by ChurchMilitant (this was a quote, not his statement)

"In my opinion the catholic church is not Christian any more than the mormon or JW’s are Christian. Because they don’t believe that the only way to eternal salvation is through personal belief that the blood of Jesus is all-sufficient for the penalty of sin and an acceptance of him into your life as Lord and Saviour and that salvation is by grace alone, and that salvation is immediate and eternal upon acceptance of Jesus as a one-time sacrifice for your sins, and not obtained through any works, sacraments, traditions or merits of our own. "

The blood of Jesus is all-sufficient…salvation is immediate and eternal upon acceptance.

This is the part I’m having trouble understanding. Does this mean that once you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal saviour, whatever you do in your life after that doesn’t matter? Once I’m saved I can do whatever I please? I’m not getting this, am I? This isn’t what they mean.

I’ve been reading a particular non-Catholic board I saw mentioned here for the last few days, and I’m amazed at how others see us. I knew that many other Christians didn’t think Catholics were Christian, I just didn’t realize how vitriolic they could be about it.

Deb
 
40.png
daeve:
… Does this mean that once you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal saviour, whatever you do in your life after that doesn’t matter? Once I’m saved I can do whatever I please? I’m not getting this, am I?
You’re getting it. This heresy is called antinomianism.Antinomianism

General Information

Antinomianism (Greek anti,“against”; nomos,“law”) is the doctrine that faith in Christ frees the Christian from obligation to observe the moral law as set forth in the Old Testament. The insistence in the Epistles of St. Paul upon the inadequacy of the law to save, and upon salvation by faith without “works of the law” or “deeds of righteousness” (see Romans 3:20, 28; Ephesians 2:9; 2 Timothy 2:9; Titus 3:5) could easily be interpreted as a claim of freedom from all obligation to obey the moral law. Thus, righteous persons might well hold such a doctrine and behave in an exemplary way, not from compulsion but from a devotion higher than the law. Gross and vicious persons, however, might well interpret the exemption from obligation as positive permission to disregard the moral law in determining their conduct.

Such concepts had evidently begun in the apostles’ own day, as appears from the arguments and warnings in the epistles of the New Testament (see Romans 6, 8; 1 Peter 3:5). The term was first used during theReformation by Martin Luther to describe the opinions of the German preacher Johann Agricola. The Antinomian Controversy of this time, in which Luther took a very active part, terminated in 1540 in a retraction by Agricola. Views more extreme than his were afterward advocated by some of the English nonconformists and by the Anabaptists.
 
Matt16_18,

Thanks for the information. All I can say is Wow, What a concept. I read the links you provided; I appreciate the extra effort.

Deb
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top