Why are you persuaded that Catholicism is the true Christian faith?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GrantKlentzman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Grant,
Most thing Baptist are fine with me. Love of scripture, community and good preaching.
The Catholic faith has so much more, founded by Jesus Christ, liturgy, Priesthood, art, music, Pope, Saints, Bishops, Mary, universal beliefs. If you read the early church fathers you will see essentially the same church today as then. Best of everything in your seminary studies. Keep searching for the truth.
 
Last edited:
Luke chapter 9. Even when Christ was on earth there others casting out demons in His name but not from those among the apostles who challenged them to stop it. Jesus was not disturbed. He was patient with the imperfect people not completely with him. We need not waste our energy on this. We are to proclaim the good news, not insist on our way. Particularly on those who are in agreement He came, died, rose and will come again. The orthodox were one with us and there was a split before the reformation. We and they made different decisions along the path like married clergy and celebrate clergy. In the grand scheme of things it’s just a different way.
 
First of all the Protestant bible has taken away books, all so they don’t have to believe things like purgatory. Part of why other Christians wonder about why we Catholic Christians believe things they don’t see in scripture, don’t realize they are in the complete bible. If you are willing to exclude scripture I am not sure how sincerely sacred it is. I don’t worry about interpreting scripture since I don’t read and understand Arabic, Greek, Latin, etc, This is why we don’t panic over Jesus having brothers and sisters. The word is actually closer to Kin. Meaning relatives like cousins. It also could refer to children Joseph may have had. It doesn’t specifically require Mary to have had the child. It is more important to the believer reading that verse in English or Spanish without that church body with more clear understanding of language. If is odd God would keep his church safe enough to carry scripture yet want people to turn its back on the church once the printing press was invented. There is no respect for the church keeping scripture safe, translating it into common languages of the various ages at a time where almost no one outside the church was educated. How many books were already excluded from the Bible because they were considered uninspired or false in the centuries before Luther? The main focus really should not be on picking on a church or finding contradictions in scripture but on God. I am sure believers trying to tear down churches looking at contradictions is a dream for Satan. We are not all going to be one church. While Christ was alive others were casting out demons in His name and the apostles stopped them cause they were not one of them. Jesus said let them be.
 
The Bible being the sole authority is a man-made creation. Jesus never said make yourself a bible and do only what it says. Jesus told the apostles at the last supper that he would send the “Advocate” who would recall to mind all that I have taught you, lead you in all truth, teach you all NEW things, (which means things would be added outside of the bible as the church grew and mankind evolved) and be with you forever. Separated from this perpetual guidance by the spirit and all you have is the book. But Protestants argue endlessly different interpretations of scripture. It cannot be the sole authority if it is subject to corruption by men.
 
I’m not sure the man in Luke 9 is at all relevant to what I said.

First, I didn’t deny that Protestants did good. I said that they were missing a lot of important things, and them missing those important things probably breaks Jesus’ heart.

Second, there’s no indication that the man was actively teaching against anything Jesus gave, just that he wasn’t among the twelve. Furthermore, this was before the establishment of the Church and its hierarchy. Basically, there’s little indication that he was as separated from Jesus as Protestants are from His Church.

As a contrast, given Revelation 2-3, we see that Jesus is saddened and angered when we say and do things that go against Him. These letters were directed at people in full communion with His Church. How much more would that apply to those who profess His name but aren’t in full communion and not taking His sacraments?
 
I was raised Protestant although baptized Catholic. I’d attended Baptist, Fundamental, & Nondenominational churches. I grew up attending Catholic schools from 1st thru 12th grades. I was baptized in the Fundamental church at about age 16. I would attend mass with my classmates in school. I did pick up some Catholic teaching by osmosis, but not all.

For me it was history that helped to set the record straight…& a lady that I’d met online who shared her faith honestly with me. She broke down the walls & made me realize that we had much more in common than I’d previously thought. It set me off to research the Church more.

Talking to people during my time in RCIA helped to put Scripture in perspective. I remember not long after starting RCIA, I’d gotten an answer to prayer about entering the Church. It was this: “This is where you need to be: this is where you were meant to be…”

How could I argue with that?
 
Last edited:
Jesus established the church by then. He had already gathered and then sent out the apostles to do such works which is why the apostles were bothered.

Revelation was written in part in code. Much of which was about the present. It’s over my head.
 
Kris34 said:
Jesus established the church by then.
Click to expand...
I mean that He hadn’t died, resurrected, ascended, and sent the Holy Spirit yet. As far as I know, the birth of the Church technically occurred at Pentecost.
Kris34 said:
Revelation was written in part in code.
Click to expand...
Revelation 2-3 is more direct. It’s letters directed at seven churches.
 
It’s impossible for any Christian denomination’s theology to be gauranteed of truth based on interpretations of Scripture alone, which is the primary source of revelation for Protestantism, using Scripture as the “rule of faith” as it’s said.

In Catholicism, also in the EO Church, it could be said that the Church, herself, is the rule of faith, drawing with experience and guidance by the Holy Spirit understanding from Scripture as well as Tradition, both received at the beginning, having received and proclaimed the gospel before a word of the New Testament was written.
 
Last edited:
You are right in saying the Bible is our guide. The problem is the interpretation of the Bible. How do you know if your interpretation of it is correct? That’s the reason why there are 39000 Christian denominations today: they thought their interpretation of the Bible was correct and that it was “The Holy Spirit who interpreted it for them”.
 
Something I thought of when I k3pt seeing an ad for a Protestant church in my area: Catholicism is not a Bible-based religion; the Bible is a Catholic-based book.

Anyway, I am Catholic because the Church answers all my questions and then a lot more, and all the answers hang together.

For example, I asked a OSAS friend about the scandals then occurring in a couple of televangelist organizations: how could these men be “saved” and do the things they did? And she told me that they hadn’t really ever been saved.

So even though they had decided at one point to answer an altar call, to attend a school to be a preacher, etc., they hadn’t been saved? So… a OSAS believer actually couldn’t know whether or not he was properly saved until he died without having really messed up?

At least we Catholics could know where we stood!

BTW, that friend is now Catholic 😉
 
Zynxensar said:
You are right in saying the Bible is our guide. The problem is the interpretation of the Bible. How do you know if your interpretation of it is correct? That’s the reason why there are 39000 Christian denominations today: they thought their interpretation of the Bible was correct and that it was “The Holy Spirit who interpreted it for them”.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s why it is absolutely essential that the Church is our guide, the Church that Christ established for that purpose, the Church that has a historical, familial legacy dating from the beginning of our faith. Scripture is simply the written Word; it cannot interpret and explain itself.
 
I will keep my answer very short. History. That’s it.

I began to realize Protestantism was falling apart and built on a very unstable platform. So, I began a journey to find the original church. Surprisingly, it ended with the Catholic Church. Something I did not expect. Anyway, I spent about 8-9 years doing research, reading, studying, etc. I didn’t use my emotions or feelings. It was an intellectual journey. Why? Feelings are often deceptive. There are many books to get you started. I recommend starting with authors such as Scott Hahn and others like him who were once Protestants. Then dive into the more instructive teachings of other authors.
 
Letters to past churches or future churches?

Before the Holy Spirit came upon them and not in any particular orderJesus installed St Peter as the head, gathered the 12, sent them out in two’s, gave them the power to forgive sins and heal and cast out demons, instituted the eucharist, set the example of repentance and baptism… It was the time He was setting up how he wanted things to be.
 
Kris34 said:
Letters to past churches or future churches?
Click to expand...
Letters to first century churches. Ephesus, in particular, would be noticeable to anyone familiar with the New Testament. In general, though, Revelation is a book of encouragement to first century Christians dealing with tremendous resistance and persecution. There’s an eschatological factor, sure, but that just bolsters the encouragement of, “Hey, things are bad right now, but keep Jesus’ reign and Second Coming in mind!”
Kris34 said:
It was the time He was setting up how he wanted things to be.
Click to expand...
That still doesn’t get away from the fact that the man in Luke 9 was not separating himself from the Church, as Protestants have. The Apostles, however, did need to know that Christ might work through the laypeople. Corinth, in particular, proved to be a major example of how God could work through the laypeople. Paul even had to instruct them on maintaining unity and seeking charity in spite of the many different gifts among those in the church.
 
I am a cradle Catholic but I believe that Catholicism is the true Christian faith and that the Catholic Church is the true Church that Jesus founded and left behind.

The Catholic Church can trace her tradition in an uninterrupted line all the way to Jesus.

I agree with Steven Ray, a Catholic converted from Baptist denomination, that the Catholic Church is the true Church because:

(1) worship that involves offering and sacrifice
(2) authority in interpreting scripture
(3) moral

God bless.
 
I know all the baptized are included in the body of Christ. & I know God wants us to be one. But how do we know we aren’t all the Church Christ established?

Many Catholics were protestant. Many Catholics will be Protestants, etc, etc…

I believe The Roman Catholic Church contains the fullness of the faith. But a vine has many branches.

There were many Jewish sects… I’m sure many became Christians from all of them.
 
Last edited:
Grant,

The Constitution of the US does not intrepid itself. It needs a Supreme Court to do that. Now, I think you would say that the Holy Spirit interprets the Bible, and I would agree. But does the HS do that through individuals or through a church? If he did it through individuals, wouldn’t everyone get the same message? The fact is that the CC has very few passages that it has interpreted. The church speaks after years of study and debate so that we maintain unity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top