Will you be in heaven?

[Lillith]

12volt_man:

First of all, there’s no such thing as mortal sin.

Hello 12volt man. Ummmmm… you are incorrect.

Matt. 5:22…Jesus teaches his disciples about varying degrees of sin…

"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgement; Whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says ‘You fool!’ Shall be liable to the fire of Hell.

more about Mortal sin from John…1 John 5:16-17

"God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal…all wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal…

Death=Mortal…synonyms

 

[12volt_man]

Eden:

I can’t believe you are missing the distinction. Quite clearly the infusion of grace is not a ritual. Please do not equate your Baptist rituals with Sacraments. That is like comparing a plastic plant to a real, living, thriving flower.

Believe me, I would not compare Baptist rituals to Roman Catholic rituals.

 

[JoeyWarren]

12volt_man:

Like I said, whatever you choose to call them does not change the fact that they, by their very definition, are rituals.

Nor does the fact that you pour more importance into their meaning make them any less ritualistic.

Do you have a problem with rituals then? Matrimony is a ritual by your reasoning. Do you have a problem with Matrimony?

Okay let’s call them rituals then. To you, they are symbolic, so they are nothing more than lip service to God. To us they have Holy and Spiritual conatations.

As for the ones that are required frequently for maintaining Salvation? Eucharist and Reconcilation.

Eucharist : Do this in rememberance of me. Well not doing it says: I don’t care to remember Jesus.

Reconciliation: We are never without sin. My more adept Apologists friends can provide the Biblical proof of this.

Time for lunch.

 

[12volt_man]

Eden:

As you have rejected the Church knowingly, that seems more likely. Surely, you realize that none of us here has the final say. And of course, there is always the possiblity that you will embrace the truth before death.

Are you saying that the Roman Catholic church is more “true” than Christ?

That is your opinion. The origin of the Church is clear. There is to be only one. If you are a member of a heretical group that broke away from His Church (such as Baptist) you are not a member of His Church. You are a member of John Smith’s church from 17th century.

I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to take the word of God over your word.

You did equate the two.

No, I never did.

And are they still Catholic today?

The father is dead. I’ve lost touch with the children over the years. I assume they still are.

 

[shannin]

LutheranStudent:

For my part, I don’t like saying that I’m absolutely sure of my afterlife destination–not because I disbelieve in God’s promises, but because it seems presumptious and rude, like taking a contract He signed and waving it under His nose.

Maybe this hits on a different perception of salvation between Lutherans and Catholics. Without getting into the whole sola fide argument, Lutherans see heaven as a promise rather than a* contract.*

Dear Lutheran Student,
Come home to the Catholic Church where the real truth lies. The Catholic faith is awesome and will satisy all of your spiritual needs and questions.

 

[Eden]

12volt_man:

Are you saying that the Roman Catholic church is more “true” than Christ?

The Church is the Bride of Christ.

I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to take the word of God over your word.

I am following the Word of God. “Jesus assured the apostles and their successors, the popes and the bishops, “He who listens to you listens to me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16). Jesus promised to guide his Church into all truth (John 16:12–13). We can have confidence that his Church teaches only the truth.”

catholic.com/library/pillar.asp

No, I never did.

We’ll just have to disagree on that.

 

[12volt_man]

JoeyWarren:

Do you have a problem with rituals then?

No, as I’ve already explained, there is nothing wrong with ritual.

Where the problem comes in depends on the meaning that you pour into that ritual.

Matrimony is a ritual by your reasoning. Do you have a problem with Matrimony?

Only mine.

Okay let’s call them rituals then. To you, they are symbolic, so they are nothing more than lip service to God.

No, they are not “lip service to God”. I resent that. We are very sincere in carrying out our ordinances.

To us they have Holy and Spiritual conatations.

I understand that. That still doesn’t mean that they’re not rituals.

As for the ones that are required frequently for maintaining Salvation? Eucharist and Reconcilation.

We don’t believe that salvation can be maintained by ritual. Either you’re saved or you’re not.

Eucharist : Do this in rememberance of me. Well not doing it says: I don’t care to remember Jesus.

We have a similar ritual to your eucharist. We do it as Jesus instructed, in rememberance of His sacrifice on our behalf. We simply believe that it is symbolic, not that Jesus lives in the cracker.

Reconciliation: We are never without sin. My more adept Apologists friends can provide the Biblical proof of this.

You’re right. As long as we’re housed in this flesh, we’re not without sin. In fact, the Bible even tells us that he who says he is without sin deceives himself.

However, that doesn’t mean that Christ’s righteousness is not imputed to our behalf.

 

[12volt_man]

Eden:

The Church is the Bride of Christ.

I agree, but that wasn’t the question.

I am following the Word of God.

OK. Then show us where in the Bible we’re told that those of us who are depending solely on Jesus for our salvation are not a part of the church.

We’ll just have to disagree on that.

And anyone who reads my posts will see that you’re not telling the truth. They’ll disagree with you, too.

 

[Mickey]

12volt_man:

Where the problem comes in depends on the meaning that you pour into that ritual.

I would rephrase this as: The Word of God pours the meaning into the sacrament–and there is never a problem with that.

12volt_man:

We simply believe that it is symbolic, not that Jesus lives in the cracker.

That is extremely uncharitable. You had better watch your words.

 

[catsrus]

originally posted by 12volt_man
We simply believe that it is symbolic, not that Jesus lives in the cracker.

This insult to the core of our Faith is reallllly stepping over the line!
Further, having been catachized in The Holy Catholic Church, you know better!

 

[12volt_man]

Mickey:

I would rephrase this as: The Word of God pours the meaning into the sacrament–and there is never a problem with that.

But the word of God doesn’t do this.

That is extremely uncharitable. You had better watch your words.

Why? Do Roman Catholics not believe that Jesus is actually present in the host?

 

[Mickey]

12volt_man:

But the word of God doesn’t do this.

Sure it does.

12volt_man:

Why? Do Roman Catholics not believe that Jesus is actually present in the host?

Hmmm? That’s not how you worded it the first time.

 

[Eden]

12volt_man:

But the word of God doesn’t do this.

Why? Do Roman Catholics not believe that Jesus is actually present in the host?

Please do not feign ignorance as to why referring to the Host as a “cracker” is offensive. You came here to explain your faith to us. If you can’t do so in a polite way, please don’t do it at all.

 

[john_ennis]

12volt_man:

But the word of God doesn’t do this.

Why? Do Roman Catholics not believe that Jesus is actually present in the host?

Because you could have used words such as “bread,” “host,” or even “wafer.” We can imagine the wheels turning in your head as you typed the phrase you chose: “Cracker? Gee…I wonder how this word will go over?”

Don’t be disingenuous–no one is so ignorant as not to think that such word choice might be hurtful to those who believe that Jesus’s precious Body and Blood exist there.

But, Peace.
John

 

[catsrus]

originally posted by 12volt_man
Why? Do Roman Catholics not believe that Jesus is actually present in the host?

You know very well why! Don’t attempt to mask that insult with innocence of the text in which you put it to the Faith of Catholicism.
You claimed that your religion is insulted by Catholics and then come in here like gang busters with half truths, outright false statements and now a nasty reference to our core belief.
May I remind you, YOU are on a Catholic forum.

 

[12volt_man]

john ennis:

Because you could have used words such as “bread,” “host,” or even “wafer.” We can imagine the wheels turning in your head as you typed the phrase you chose: “Cracker? Gee…I wonder how this word will go over?”

Don’t be disingenuous–no one is so ignorant as not to think that such word choice might be hurtful to those who believe that Jesus’s precious Body and Blood exist there.

But, Peace.
John

I honestly did not know. In my church we use crackers.

 

[Eden]

12volt_man:

I agree, but that wasn’t the question.

It fully answers your question. Are you truly not understanding why?

OK. Then show us where in the Bible we’re told that those of us who are depending solely on Jesus for our salvation are not a part of the church.

Jesus said his Church would be “the light of the world.” He then noted that “a city set on a hill cannot be hid” (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. Jesus promised, “I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return.

If you are not a member of that Church you are not a part of the church. He did not say “I will build my Church and then men 1500 years from now will change it and if you belong to those breakaway churches started by Martin Luther, John Smith, etc., it still counts even though they teach contradictory beliefs.”

And anyone who reads my posts will see that you’re not telling the truth. They’ll disagree with you, too.

I’m not concerned with how anyone else who reads these posts responds to my assertion that you used Buddhism as a non sequitor to discredit the Church’s origins 2,000 years ago. “To thine own self be true”

 

[Eden]

12volt_man:

I honestly did not know. In my church we use crackers.

You went to Catholic school. You know what the Host looks like.

 

[catsrus]

originally posted by 12volt_man
I honestly rolleyes: ) did not know. In my church we use crackers.

With such an extensive background in Catholicism: oh yeah, you DID know!
You have severely damaged your credability.

 

[12volt_man]

catsrus:

With such an extensive background in Catholicism: oh yeah, you DID know!
You have severely damaged your credability.

Yes, I do.

It’s a very small, very thin wafer.

However, for the last twenty years, I’ve been a part of a tradition that teaches that it’s permissable to use all sorts of different bread types, including crackers, which we do. It was not something pre-meditated on my part, I was simply using the terminology that we commonly use to refer to the materials used in the Lord’s Supper.

I have apologized for this and I was sincere in my apology. You are free to accept it or not.