Why do other faiths believe we have pagan roots?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rarra1985
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just my two cents on Mary…

I am no theologian or expert on the subject by any means. I unfortunately cannot refer anyone to scripture passages or any reading to back up what I believe. I am working on that

However, I do want to say that I believe 100% that Mary was sinless. I can’t wrap my head around her being just like any other woman, chosen to give birth to the Savior, and that’s about it. I think that if Mary was not exceptional and perfect, meaning completely sinless and full of grace, then perhaps people wouldn’t have taken Jesus so seriously. Or perhaps people may have not taken her very seriously when she immaculately conceived before getting married to Joseph. These are just speculations of course, but I feel like it makes perfect sense for God to choose an immaculate, sinless vessel to give birth to Jesus. It also adds credibility to the belief that Jesus is in fact our Savior. Mary cannot be tainted with sin if she was to give birth to Jesus. It just does not make sense.

I understand that perhaps in the Bible it does not explicitly say that Mary was sinless, but she was “full of grace”. When you are full of grace, that leaves no room for sin. God gives you the grace to not sin, and I believe Mary was born without sin. She was full of grace since she was conceived. How is this possible? Because God wanted it that way.

She is also the Ark of the New Covenant, who brought the word of God made flesh. If the Ark of the Old Covenant was immaculate, why would the Ark of the New Covenant be any different?

Oh and Jesus doesn’t mostly get forgotten…
 
Randy_Carson said:
When someone is baptized into the Body of Christ, he or she becomes a member of the Church. Historically, the one Church that Jesus promised to build (cf. Mt. 16:18) has referred to itself as the Catholic Church.

I am saying what the gospels said. Paul and the apostles, with the saints that were being saved DID NOT preach a church.

Paul, especially, preached Christ crucified. Teaching from the old testament, the "red thread’ the lineage of the Saviour) which takes them to the cross, the resurrection and repentance. The lineage of Jesus is that red thread, the blood of the cross which can save to the uttermost.

If the church isn’t preaching the salvation message, as Paul did, the Catholic church and any other church is exactly that; a dichotomy.

Is the church preaching Christ as Paul did?
Are you making converts to Christ OR Catholoscism?
They are not one and the same. Why? Because the bible shows us how we ought to evangelize and that is not to a denomination!
If you brought someone to Christ, equipped them with the word of God they should be so well grounded in the truth of God’s Word that you would see a marked change in them. And if they had to move they would be able to fall back on their relationship with God until He moved them to the church he has prepared for them.
Click to expand...
 
carmenp1 said:
Is the church preaching Christ as Paul did?
Are you making converts to Christ OR Catholoscism?
They are not one and the same. Why? Because the bible shows us how we ought to evangelize and that is not to a denomination!
If you brought someone to Christ, equipped them with the word of God they should be so well grounded in the truth of God’s Word that you would see a marked change in them. And if they had to move they would be able to fall back on their relationship with God until He moved them to the church he has prepared for them.
Click to expand...
Carmen, the OP has been derailed. If you have questions not related to the OP, you should start a new thread. I know there are many who would love to help you learn more.
 
carmenp1 said:
Randy Carson;12776129:
When someone is baptized into the Body of Christ, he or she becomes a member of the Church. Historically, the one Church that Jesus promised to build (cf. Mt. 16:18) has referred to itself as the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
I am saying what the gospels said. Paul and the apostles, with the saints that were being saved DID NOT preach a church.
Click to expand...
Neither do Catholics. However, it is theologically correct to say that anyone who accepts and is baptized becomes part of His body - the Church.

Therefore, where you seem to find two things, the scriptures do not.

Jesus and the Church cannot be separated. He is the head of the Church, His body. For this reason, Jesus said:

Matthew 18:16-18
16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church

And Paul wrote:

1 Timothy 3:15
15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The Church - not the Bible - is the pillar and ground of the truth.
Paul, especially, preached Christ crucified. Teaching from the old testament, the "red thread’ the lineage of the Saviour) which takes them to the cross, the resurrection and repentance. The lineage of Jesus is that red thread, the blood of the cross which can save to the uttermost.
Click to expand...
Which is why all Catholic Churches are required by Church law to have a crucifix either on or behind them like this:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The cross is central for a reason.
If the church isn’t preaching the salvation message, as Paul did, the Catholic church and any other church is exactly that; a dichotomy.
Click to expand...
Is the church preaching Christ as Paul did?
Click to expand...
Have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? If not, how do you know with certainty what the Catholic Church is preaching?
  1. Does the Catholic Church teach that Jesus Christ is God, the second person of the Trinity?
  2. Does the Catholic Church teach that Jesus died on the cross and rose again on the third day?
  3. Does the Catholic Church teach that Jesus will come again to judge the living and the dead?
I could go on, of course, and all your answers would (or should) be yes.
 
Carmen,
You have it in your head that you have been fed accurate information and we can prove that that is not the case.

A great deal of what you have put forth is merely anti-Catholic propaganda and you can see where these have been examined an refuted in the following excellent article.
The Nightmare World of Jack T. Chick

Moreover you would do well to actually listen to what we tell you since in spite of your early Catholic education (as stated in your profile) you have very little knowledge of what we Catholics believe and why, which is probably the main reason that you were led away from the faith and converted by Baptists. I had a similar experience and you can read it in My Testimony

You might also be interested in the following articles from my blog.
Once you have seen the facts, then you can decide for yourself…just as I and many others here have done.

oh yeah…and don’t forget this article that addresses the OPs question in detail. Is Catholicism Pagan?
 
Church_Militant said:
Carmen,
You have it in your head that you have been fed accurate information and we can prove that that is not the case.

A great deal of what you have put forth is merely anti-Catholic propaganda and you can see where these have been examined an refuted in the following excellent article.
The Nightmare World of Jack T. Chick

Moreover you would do well to actually listen to what we tell you since in spite of your early Catholic education (as stated in your profile) you have very little knowledge of what we Catholics believe and why, which is probably the main reason that you were led away from the faith and converted by Baptists. I had a similar experience and you can read it in My Testimony

You might also be interested in the following articles from my blog.
Once you have seen the facts, then you can decide for yourself…just as I and many others here have done.

oh yeah…and don’t forget this article that addresses the OPs question in detail. Is Catholicism Pagan?
Click to expand...
Your testimony is awesome!!! I’m working my way into the Catholic Church myself, from a Baptist upbringing.
 
carmenp1 said:
It wasn’t to deceive. Woodrow denies recanting.
Click to expand...
You need to read more carefully. What Woodrow denies is that Catholics had pressured him into recanting. Unfortunately, the conclusions of his first book, based on fatally flawed methodology as they were, have become so widely accepted among many Protestants, that they couldn’t believe Woodrow had pulled his book off the market for his own conscience, but assumed that he must have caved to intense pressure from Catholics.

Woodrow plainly states there was no Catholic pressure. He pulled the book when he realised how flawed the methodology used by Alexander Hislop was. Have you read Woodrow’s second book, “The Babylon Connection?” ?
 
carmenp1 said:
Where is the scripture that calls Mary sinless?
Click to expand...
Just a quick comment to what has already been said

Re: kecharitomene. the root word is “charito” which is grace

Note: Luke 1:28 Mary is κεχαριτωμένη, = perfect passive participle of highly graced

What does perfect passive participle for grace mean, in Greek?

definitions:
Therefore, kecharitomene (perfect tense, passive voice for graced) means , At the time the Angel Gabriel visits Mary, Mary is already perfectly graced. And Gabriel acknowledges who she is before God. Angels don’t speak on their own. They speak only what God wants them to say. They are messangers. By definition of the word and tenses of the word, Her being in this perfect state of grace, happened from her beginning, by a completed past action (fully accomplished), and the results of this continue, and because it’s passive voice, she is graced without her doing anything for it. Mary received this grace and title freely from the source of all grace…God,
 
Mintaka said:
Constantine was Catholic for most of his life as Emperor, except for the times when he was being Arian.

Getting Baptized right before you died was actually pretty common for lifelong members of the Church, and Constantine probably picked up the bad habit from people who’d been in the Church a lot longer. The idea was that it acted to forgive your sins, whereas committing big sins in the Church after Baptism meant you had to deal with the embarrassment and hard work of public confession and penitence. (And penances lasted yearrrrs back then.) So if you waited, you could have a lot more leeway to sin as a lifelong catechumen, even if you couldn’t receive Communion or attend Mass beyond the Gospel reading.

Needless to say, the bishops spent several centuries killing that bad idea off. It took a while.
Click to expand...
Without baptism no-one can be considered catholic. That’s a truth of the catholic faith from the beginning. A cathechumen is exactly that: a cathechumen but that’s all. He/she is not a catholic yet. I’m not denying that you say is true but Constantine never was catholic because he didn’t receive the baptism until his last days. And years before his arian baptism (not valid accord some fathers of the Church as Athanasius) he persecuted with cruelty the bishops who defended the Holy Trinity and the doctrine of the One, Holy and Catholic Church of Christ in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire. So he not only wasn’t catholic de facto but a consummate persecutor of the Christ’s Church.
 
slh3016 said:
Carmen,

QUOTE] = beginning of quote
/QUOTE] = end of quote
Blessings to you.
Click to expand...
With respect, you have no idea what personal experiences, I have had over the past 24 years. I can share them with you in a different response.

Now, regarding the book, I did go to his site. He denies recanting it. I did read all the other stuff he wrote. However, it does require some time set aside to really understand what he is now saying. Having said that, I am sorry to have caused offence. That was not my intention. This book, can be used as an example of what not to rely on for absolute truth. I always base my beliefs on scripture. The word of God is the only authority that can be trusted.

I am not convinced by references to the Greek which, when used in context are valuable. But I know what the bible says and if God did actually give Mary this “one off” imacculate conception, I think He would have given us scripture that was clear enough for us to understand that Mary is blessed above other women. But the scripture says, you are blessed AMONG women; not above women. The angel should have said, Mary you are blessed above all women! She is a important figure in the bible and she is blessed to have been chosen by God to give birth to the Saviour of the world.

In response to your suggestion that I study church history, there is a lot of controversy of what happened with some Popes etc, the Spanish Inquisition, selling indulgences, buying loved ones out of purgatory, etc etc.

When I was looking for a church, after moving back to Melbourne, I went to Baptist churchs, other denominations, (not Catholic) and found them to be wordly and I knew God was not in those churches.

I attended the Summerhill Baptist church in Launceston for 6 months before leaving Tasmania. The church leadership were godly, prayerful and truly loved God. The presence of God was in this church. I never did anything major without confirmation from God that this was His will. Confirmation to move, was in the preaching I heard, in the bible readings I did at home and lastly, God confirmed this move to the Pastor. I discussed this with him and he believed God was wanting me to move.

God had a purpose, which I will share on a different response as it needs time to explain properly.

Thank you for your patience and care.

God bless you in all that you do.
Carmen
 
Randy_Carson said:
How to use the Catholic Answers Forum Quote Function

If you want to respond to something that someone else posted, you can simply hit the “Quote” button on the lower right…not the “Post Reply” button on the lower left. Simply begin typing after the text that the forum automatically copies for you. That’s what I did at the beginning of this post above.

If you want to insert your comments into the middle of something you are quoting, you have to manually insert square brackets. Here is the original passage I want to comment on:

Mary had a little lamb whose fleece was black as soot, and everywhere that Mary went, his sooty foot he put.

In order to show you what you need to do, I have to use a different set of brackets for illustrative purposes only. I’ll use { and } instead of and ] so that you can see where the brackets should be located, and I’ll insert my comments in red text. To begin a quote, you must insert {quote} at the beginning of the passage and {/quote} at the end. The / is the key to ending the quoted section. Here’s what it would look like:

{quote} Mary had a little lamb whose fleece was black as soot, {/quote} I’m inserting my comments here in red. {quote} and everywhere that Mary went, his sooty foot he put. {/quote} Hope this helps.

Remember, wherever you see the { or } you have to actually use a square bracket or ] so that the paragraph above comes out like this:

I’m inserting my comments here in red. Hope this helps.

One more thing: the quote function will automatically insert the name of the person to whom you are replying so that person can find your response more easily.
Click to expand...
Randy,
I know I should use the quote button. I was having a lot of trouble posting. My browser just kept closing down. So I tried to just get something up as best I could. I don’t know what the issue was. I have run a full virus scan on my laptop.

But, thank you for your advice, I didn’t know the other stuff you have given me.
and I like your version of little lamb :yup:
Carmen
 
carmenp1 said:
Randy,
I know I should use the quote button. I was having a lot of trouble posting. My browser just kept closing down. So I tried to just get something up as best I could. I don’t know what the issue was. I have run a full virus scan on my laptop.

But, thank you for your advice, I didn’t know the other stuff you have given me.
and I like your version of little lamb :yup:
Carmen
Click to expand...
:tiphat:
carmenp1 said:
What is OP?
Click to expand...
Original Post (the First Post in the thread) or
Original Poster (the person who started the thread)

Context determines which is correct. 👍
 
What I’ve told Protestants before respectfully,

Is that they are 2,000 years and 2 continents removed from the time of Christ. That has to have an effect.
 
fasolislithuan said:
And years before his arian baptism (not valid accord some fathers of the Church as Athanasius) he persecuted with cruelty the bishops who defended the Holy Trinity and the doctrine of the One, Holy and Catholic Church of Christ in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire.
Click to expand...
Citation?
 
Rarra1985 said:
I work with a lady who is Jehovah’s Witness. She is one of the most kind hearted people I have met, and we both respect each other’s faiths. She has never once tried to shove her beliefs down my throat. However, today we had a patient come in who is Jewish, and they had a very lengthy conversation about how our Catholic beliefs about the Trinity and Mary, among other things, are rooted in paganism. This is not the first time I have heard this, but I am still unsure why people of other faiths believe this. She also mentioned that the Jehovah’s Witnesses are the religion that most resembles the Jewish faith, and she really felt that this conversation with this man validated her beliefs.

Why is it that so many people of other faiths feel our religion has pagan roots?
Click to expand...
I had a discussion with a guy on Twitter who claimed that the Catholic Church was pagan because it held mass on Sunday, which meant that we did not worship God and Jesus Christ but the sun.

He also had the claim that the Holy Spirit was not a person in the Trinity, just God’s will. To call the Holy Spirit = God was a blasphemy.

Then he claimed that the Catholic Church took out 14 books from the KJV Bible. Also, KJV was 99% accurate with its translation.

It was the most difficult conversation I have ever had. The claims were so off base, I hardly knew how to respond.
 
Larryk113 said:
Your testimony is awesome!!! I’m working my way into the Catholic Church myself, from a Baptist upbringing.
Click to expand...
I didn’t mean to offend with the quotes from Woodrow. My apologies. The majority of my posts, I quote the bible.

There was spiritual activity in the house I grew up in. When I did the ouigi board, I opened myself up to more nasty entities. My first encounter, though was when I was 9 yrs or so. This thing attached itself to my life. (I can tell you how God put this right in another post)

This entity tormented me for many, years. I started reading my bible, asking God to lead me to Him. Every time I read my bible, I heard “if you read that bible, tomorrow is going to be a bad day” And it was. I persisted on and off.

In 1988, my husband moved us to Launceston. We had no family in Tasmania. There was one rental house available. A neighbour, having seen my disabled son, invited me to her church. Pastor Spurgeon was humble and godly. The torment had stopped for a while. But once I went to this church, it started again worse than before. I told Alina, who said, you need to speak to the pastor. I explained my history to him. He showed me scripture from the bible. I was hesitant, but as he showed me more scripture, I knew this was the truth. He led me in a prayer of repentance and I accepted Jesus Christ as my Saviour.

I was never motherly. I never wanted kids. My children were an irritation to me. I had this burden, this uncleanness. But I started to realise that there were changes in my attitude to my children. I wanted to spend time with them. The burden was gone. I felt clean. Thirst to know God more. I had joy and peace. As I continued to hear the preaching, pray and read my bible (NKJ), I was learning who God was.

When they prayed for me to receive the Holy Spirit, that gift, helped me to pray and draw nearer to God. I knew I was saved from the time I accepted Jesus Christ as Saviour. The bible made sense, where before it just frightened me. I no longer feared death. That just seemed to fall away.

You think I was fed information. You are wrong. This is what happened. I started to put my trust in God and the truth of His Word. He promises His children, if they seek Him, they will find Him. How do I know I got saved? That I was reconciled to God? Where I once was alienated from Him? Besides the big change in my character, good desires replaced bad desires. I noticed the little amount of finances I had didn’t evaporate any more. God provided.

My son (disabled) and I were in our family van. A truck reversed at high speed, out of a driveway three lanes to my right. The back of the truck headed straight towards my driver’s door. I waited for it to go thru my legs. But upon impact, I felt something hold me (and Steven said he felt this too) from the top of my head to my feet. I didn’t move at all. Neither did Steven. The back of the truck somehow, just slid of the door. We were fine. I have been in a car accident before I got saved. When the car hit us, I bumped heads with my husband. We were tossed around. This time, God protected us.

My husband left me because I had changed from a wife, who liked to flirt, drink and dance with other men. Weird, and no, he didn’t mind me dancing with other men. Once I changed, he was not happy.

He left taking my 3yr and 4yr old daughters. I didn’t know where he was so my solicitor could serve him with an Order to bring them back. My solicitor sent me off for half an hour. I prayed in the park near his office. I prayed out loud, arms raised to God “God, please bring my husband to me, I don’t know where he is” I didn’t care what anyone thought, I just cried and prayed out loud.

I made my way back to the street. There across the road, stopped at the red light was my husband. I waved him down. He stopped. We made a time to meet. My solicitor told me police would be on call. I was to ring them before I let my husband in. My husband arrived, very arrogant, laying down the law. If I did what he said, I might, see my kids in October, it was early July. The police rang the door bell. I let them in. They served him with the Court Order and I had my girls back within 7 days. It was the most agonising and heartbreaking experience I had gone through for many years.

This, together with so many more experiences, I know beyond any doubt that I have a relationship with my Heavenly Father and I am saved by the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Not by water baptism.

The help God has given me over the past 24 years, prayers he answered, were prayers I prayed to God in the name of His Son Jesus Christ. As He is the Way, the Truth and the Life and I know, I cannot go to the Father, except thru His Son.

I read how you were also saved. I have learnt through my own bad experiences, that a church is made up of people, who will and do let you down. The most wonderful thing God did for me in Tasmania was to always help me, answer desperate prayers when I was either at home, or out. Never when I was at Church! When things went badly with my church because the new pastor and his wife were not so godly, I left and found myself completely alone. With no family and no church. I had my complete dependence and close relationship with God. So I knew that everything I had seen Him do for me, was not connected to the Church. It was purely my faith and trust in Him. He would never leave me nor forsake me. And so it is to this day.

Carmen
 
carmenp1 said:
Now, regarding the book, I did go to his site. He denies recanting it. I did read all the other stuff he wrote. However, it does require some time set aside to really understand what he is now saying.
Click to expand...
ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-mystery.html
Having read his book (and Hislop’s) and knowing what he claimed in it, based on what he got from Hislop’s ‘work’, what he writes in the page linked above is very much “recanting”

I honestly don’t understand why you are so adamant that he didn’t recant. Is it the following paragraph?According to one rumor, “the Catholics” put so much pressure on me, I had a heart attack and almost died! Consequently, I “recanted” and wrote the other book. There is no truth to this!He states plainly that there is no truth to the rumor that he recanted under pressure from Catholics. He doesn’t state there is no truth to him having recanted, and if you had read his second book you would recognise that is indeed what he has done. Everything he had based on Hislop’s work, he has recanted, because he later recognised that Hislop’s conclusions were rubbish.
His own research he has not recanted and neither should he, and he includes everything of value from his first book in his second.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top