Ten doctrines which render Rome outside of Christ

You didn’t actually look at the list!

It is typical.

Go back, each statement STARTS with a scripture reference.

Surly you have a Bible to look them up, if not here are abundant ones from which to search.

Bible Hub: Search, Read, Study the Bible in Many Languages

 

I absolutely read your list.
Every verse stated is absolutely TRUE.
Beautiful scripture.

Not a SINGLE ONE STATES your fake rule.


Show me which verse says Scripture is the ONLY and FINAL authority.


I hope you realize all your rage and frustration comes from not having a verse you claim exists.

 

Ok, obviously there are much better time wasting things to do, so I bid this thread, bye.

Should anyone care to get a glimpse at the truth of what is consistent with Scriptures look here:

IFCA Home - Doctrine

 

You have the easiest job in the world. Slap down the verse that claims your rule is true.

What you going through is quite normal its called DENIAL.

The holy scripture of our Lord says, don't go beyond what is written.

 

Guess the testimony of all of the Prophets and the Apostles, and most of all Jesus, mean zilch?

 

All the scripture is TRUE, it is PERFECT, it is Beautiful.

Scripture states don't go beyond what it is written, don't add fake rules that don't exist.

You have the easiest challenge of all. Slap down that verse that claims scripture is the FINAL and ONLY authority.

Folks tell me your rule is a FAKE RULE, folks tell me its a LIE that it is UNBIBLICAL.

Lets prove them wrong brother, Show me the verse that claims scripture is the FINAL and ONLY authority.

 

Things must be getting a bit stale around here for Baptists to start with Catholics

 

We do. The Scri

All in good fun. We Papists love a good argument.

 

You nailed it, Adonia! What saves us is our friendship with Jesus. Agedman does not have a clue what Catholicism teaches. He is convinced we worship idols and Mary and we will surely burn unless we leave 'apostate Rome'. I can say I once believed just the way he does now. I thought Catholics were un-saved. Now, I 'R' one!

I believe in God,
the Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth;
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son,
Our Lord;
who was conceived by the holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died,
and was buried.

He descended into hell;
the third day He arose again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
sitteth at the right hand of God,
the Father almighty;
from thence He shall come to judge
the living and the dead.

I believe in the holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic (Christian) Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting.

I doubt very much he would actually read it, but he could learn something about Catholic Christians if he were to pick up a copy of 'Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Cathlic' by David Currie. It, and reading the Catholic threads on this board, sent me to the banks of the Tiber. Another book Agedman is probably not going to read is: 'Evangelical Exodus:
Evangelical Seminarians and Their Paths to Rome
Over the course a single decade, dozens of students, alumni, and professors from a conservative, Evangelical seminary in North Carolina (Southern Evangelical Seminary) converted to Catholicism. These conversions were notable as they occurred among people with varied backgrounds and motivations—many of whom did not share their thoughts with one another until this book was produced. Even more striking is that the seminary's founder, long-time president, and popular professor, Dr. Norman Geisler, had written two full-length books and several scholarly articles criticizing Catholicism from an Evangelical point of view.

 

Oh come on, I was just getting started. IFCA, what is that? I never heard of that one before. That now makes it 300,000 plus one worldwide Christian sects.

 

I liked Scott Hahn's conversion story. Then in his book " The Lamb's Supper", where he described his first time at Mass and seeing the Scriptures come to life right before his very eyes.

 

You are forgetting,”Why be Catholic?” By Richard Rohr OFM

 

Yea now he is making a very good living as a pitchman for Roman Catholicism. Me, I prefer my bible and the Holy Spirit.

 

I know you have decided (long ago) that scripture is the only and final authority in matters of the Christian faith. I believe that bible makes it clear that the Church is the final authority. But years ago (on this forum) Carson Weber was discussing 'sola-scriptura' and put forth some ideas which conflicted with what I had always been taught as a Baptist.

In Matthew 18:15-18 we see Christ instructing His disciples on how to correct a fellow believer. It is extremely telling in this instance that Our Lord identifies the Church rather than Scripture as the final authority to be appealed to. He Himself says that if an offending brother "will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican" Matthew 18:17 – that is, as an outsider who is lost. Moreover, Our Lord then solemnly re-emphasizes the Church’s infallible teaching authority in verse 18 by repeating His earlier statement about the power to bind and loose Matthew 16:18-19, directing it this time to the Apostles as a group rather than just to Peter: "Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven." Matthew 18:18

Of course there are instances in the Bible where Our Lord does appeal to Scripture, but in these cases He, as one having authority, was teaching the Scriptures; He was not allowing the Scriptures to teach themselves,as I believe you were asserting in this post. For example, He would respond to the Scribes and the Pharisees by using Scripture precisely because they often tried to trip Him up by using Scripture. In these instances, Our Lord often demonstrates how the Scribes and Pharisees had wrong interpretations, and hence He corrects them by properly interpreting Scripture.

 

Are you trying to use the Old Testament ceremonial law to defend transubstantiation?

 

I was brought up in a Baptist family, came to Christ (repented of my sins and trusted Christ as my Savior and Lord) at the age of eleven and was taught that if something is Catholic it has to be wrong.

Liturgy is definately part of Catholic worship and so it was to be rejected as ritualistic and repetitive praying. As an evangelical I thought the symbolism and ritual of Catholicism, Anglicanism, Lutheran or any high church as devoid of meaning, empty, rote, and mindless. Of course there have been cases or even tendencies at times for people to lose track of the meanings of their religious practices, and to do them without thinking about why they do them– but Baptists do this too– sometimes even with their prayers, devotions, church-going, etc. To say that all symbolic ritual in the Catholic church is rote and thoughtless ritualism is as uncharitable as someone saying that evangelicalism is legalistic unthoughtful literalism which practices bibliolatry with no concern for making a concrete difference in this world. But I digress!

I began a bible study in my church of the book of Hebrews and I saw just how important liturgy was for the covenant and that became increasingly evident to me as I studied the book of Hebrews. Also I found that overwhelming historical evidence exists proving it was important to the Early Church. I came to believe that liturgy represents the way God fathered his covenant people and He renewed that on a regular basis. It became evident to me as to what the relationship of the Old Testament was to the New and how the New Testament Church became a fulfillment and not an abandonment of the Old. These ideas were confirmed by the writings of the Early Church Fathers. Reading the ECF's, I began to believe that the Catholic Church might most accurately reflect the intentions of the Early Church Fathers and found other evangelicals seeking a church whose roots run deeper than the Reformation. However, I had always believed that people only leave the Catholic Church for 'True Christianity' and not the other way around. But, according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life’s 2007 Religious Landscape Survey, roughly 8 percent of Catholics were raised in other churches as evangelicals. This compares with 9 percent of evangelical Christians who were raised Catholic. Not much difference.

As I continued to study I became aware that the one only place where Jesus used the word 'covenant' was when He instituted 'The Lord's Supper'. Yet, we only observed communion four times a year.
I began to study the Gospel of John and became aware that the Gospel was chock full of sacramental imagery. I was raised to believe that liturgy and sacraments were to be rejected and certainly not to be studied. These things I was programed not to be open to. But going through Hebrews I noticed the writer made me see that liturgy and sacraments were an essential part of God's family life. Then in John six, I came to realize that Jesus could not have been talking metaphorically when He taught us to eat His flesh and drink His blood. The Jews in His audience would not have been outraged and scandalized by a mere symbol. Besides, if the Jews had merely misunderstood Jesus to be speaking literally and He meant His words to be taken figuratively, why would he not simply clarify them? But He never did! Nor did any other Christian for over a thousand years!

All this and the fact that my Aunt, a Baptist missionary, had announced to her family that she was becoming a Catholic and this started me looking deeper into a Church I had long considered heretical and even the Great Whore of Babylon (I had read David Hunt's book). Then I began to read some of the writings of the recent popes. Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have been highly regarded in the evangelical community. Their writings are very focused on the person of Jesus Christ and very attentive to scripture. That was certainly important to us evangelicals.

Of course there were the questions about supposed 'Mary worship' (Catholics place Mary and the saints above Christ and Catholics bow to idols, don't they?) and I was taught in my Baptist church that Catholics believe Purgatory is place where people are given a 'Second Chance' at salvation. Of course, I knew that was un-biblical. And wasn't Catholicism a 'works-righteousness' based religion? The list went on and on so I began to read and see for myself what the Catholics had to say to my objections to their 'un-biblical' doctrines. My first book was 'Born Fundamentalist, Born-Again Catholic' by David Currie. This answered most of the nagging questions I had had as to whether or not the Catholic Church was biblical or not. I then read 'Crossing The Tiber: Evangelicals Discover The Ancient Faith' by Steve Ray, a former Baptist. Then came books by other evangelical converts such as Scott Hahn and books by Karl Keating. (cont.)

 

There are many other reasons why I and other former evangelicals convert to Catholicism. One reason is: Certainty
To have certainty and knowledge of truth leads many evangelicals to look elsewhere beyond all the doctrinal differences and “choose-your-own-church syndrome” within evangelical churches. I had the desire for certain knowledge, this is something I could not find within evangelical churches. If I were to ask ten evangelicals what their churches teach about marriage and divorce, how many different answers might I get?

Another reason for conversion is that I wanted to be connected to the ENTIRE history of the Christian Church and not just from the Reformation forward. I do not buy into Baptist successionism as their is a lack of historical evidence for it. Baptists trying to connect themselves to various groups that split from Catholicism prior to the Reformation falls short. Their beliefs and practices were closer to Catholicism than present day Baptists. The Waldenses are an example.

Also, I have issue with the "interpretive diversity” (EWF mentioned that in an above post) that occurs in evangelicalism, I prefer to accept the authority of the Catholic Church instead of trying to sort through the numerous interpretations of evangelical pastors and theologians. The authority that is found in the Catholic Church’s Magisterium has been consistent for two thousand years. The non-ending threads on the BB pitting Christian against Christian over doctrine many times resulting in either board members directly or indirectly questioning each others salvation and the myriad of denominations created because of such squabbling is evidence enough of the dangers of 'interpretive diversity' or 'individual interpretation' of scripture.

 

It is a prophecy. Can you pin a moment before Jesus existed where the whole world made pure grain offerings all day long.

. 11“For from the rising of the sun even to its setting, My name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense is going to be offered to My name, and a grain offering that is pure; for My name will be great among the nations,” says the LORD of hosts.

Or we can say God is joking this isn't going to happen.