Roman Catholics are lost.......unless they're not

Catholics are lost - across the board. It is no wonder the CBF is so friendly to them.

 

Preach,

That post caused me to look at your profile. I've never seen anyone identify themselves as an "Anti-CBF Baptist" before. Did someome from the CBF toilet-paper your yard or something?

Joshua

 

PreachtheWord you can not make a blanket statement like that. While I believe that most catholics are lost, I also believe that a few are saved. I was raised in a catholic home and there are a few I know who certianly show the fruits of being saved. If they are or not is only known by God.

Bill

 

Josh, I don't want to stray from the point of Catholics and salvation, but I will quickly say this:

I am against ALL ecumenicalism. "There is not an ecumenical bone in my body."

I am against ALL efforts to water down Scripture and its teachings.

I am against ALL groups that deny and/or cooperate with those who deny inerrancy, the virgin birth, deity of Christ, bodily resurrection and bodily return.

 

Bible Believing Bill, I can make that statement just as sure as you can make yours. Give me one Scriptural reason as to why you believe they are saved. Profession of faith is the primary indicator that we can use. Their "faith" is rooted in idolatry, paganism, and works. It matters not what kind of fruit you think they show or not.

Let us face it. The popes are in hell.

 

Not something that I would assert, but such can be heard from some Baptists, unfortunately, from which I have heard since I was a little boy. Since Vatican II, Catholic theologians, for example, Dulles, Rahner, Tracy, von Balthasar, Merton, Ruether, and Schillebeeckx, have contributed some of the best theology of the twentieth century. We are the richer for it.

[ August 29, 2002, 10:24 AM: Message edited by: Norm ]

 

Norm said:
Not something that I would assert, but such can be heard from some Baptists, unfortunately, from which I have heard since I was a little boy. Since Vatican II, Catholic theologians, for example, Dulles, Rahner, Tracy, von Balthasar, Merton, Ruether, and Schillebeeckx, have contributed some of the best theology of the twentieth century. We are the richer for it.

Preach says:
How have they contributed in their theology? Their "theology" is dictated by outside sources and not the Word of God. Explain to me how someone can believe in a salvation that is faith + works and still be saved. Why do they practice idolatry?

 

I don't agree that all Catholics will go to Hell. I feel that along the way some have accepted Christ as their Lord and Savior, just as many Baptist (including Baptist Preachers) will be in Hell.

 

First of all, Yes you can make your statement. I should have said it is wrong to make a blanket statment.

I am talking about individuals not about all catholics. Is it really your position that of the millions of catholics throughout history not a single one has ever been saved? I find that hard to believe, just as I don't believe that all Baptists who have made a profession of faith are saved. You must look at the individual and see if they are bearing fruit.

Both of these verses tell us that we will bear fruit when we believe in Christ Jesus.

These verses tell us that a courpt (unsaved) person will not bear good fruit.

In the end I can not say if any individual catholic is saved or not, but then I can't say that for any Baptist either (other than myself of course). Only Jesus knows and the individual know who is saved.

Bill

 

Here is a distinction you fail to make: Baptists and Catholics are not on equal ground. The confession of faith that Baptists teach is faith alone in Christ alone. Catholics do not teach this.

Now, of course individual baptists are lost and only going through the motions. The problem is with the person and not the confession of faith.

It is not the same with catholics. Their confession of faith damns them.

Why is it that some baptists have such a hard time calling catholicism exactly what it is: the largest gateway to hell since the Church was founded.

My comments about the fruit should be understood in this way:

a) a person could be kind and soft-spoken and generous and very moral. In fact, catholics can be very good for society. I do not hate catholics. Their doctrine though is antiChrist. Did not Jesus say that His sheep hear His voice and not that of a stranger?

b) do you also say that some Jehovah's Witnesses are saved because of similarity in doctrines and their moral living and their evangelistic zeal?

c) John 14:6

d) If believing what I do about catholics sets me at odds with the majority of people, so be it. Romans 1:16.

 

PreachtheWord, You need to seperate the individual from the institution. I do not believe in or support the catholic church. I also do not believe that all catholics are going to hell.

Bill

p.s It think this is going to be one of those topics where we need to agree to disagree.

Bill

[ August 29, 2002, 11:09 AM: Message edited by: Bible Believing Bill ]

 

BBB, on what basis do you make your statement? Do you have family in catholicism? I do and still don't change my position.

I gave you reasons for why I reject the idea that catholics are saved. If they get saved, they will leave catholicism. That would be part of their fruit.

What about the JWs?

 

You need not me to explain their positions (it is a quite lengthy assignment, I might add); I suspect you are capable of reading these theologians on your own. However, before one offers an assessment of another's theology, it behooves one to have read the other, don't you think? Or perhaps you have read these people? However in terms of idolatry, you ask a good question. Why do Catholics, Baptists, you or me hold to idolatrous beliefs? When we reify a conception of God that was originally a(n) (incomplete) conception that sought to help us understand the mystery of God we are engaged in idolatrous beliefs (that is, we allow a(n) (incomplete) conception to encapsulate God (that is, again, we allow the finite to grasp, manipulate, and control the infinite and the understanding of the infinite). When we speak of God, I think we do well to say, "yes, but, however, I am open, but for now this is where I stand" or something like that.

 

Norm, When you can point out where any of the New Testament writers ever hinted at such a thought, let me know.

Until then - Romans 1:16

 

Preach, you hit the nail on the head! People can be saved as a catholic, but they will leave that cult, because of the conviction of the Holy Spirit. If they don't have the discernment to realize that it is a cult.....there has been no conversion!

 

I think it is great that you are not ashamed of the gospel (and am unaware that my previous comment speaks against one embracing the gospel with their being), and that you have a complete understanding of the mystery of God is commendable, too. For many people the theological task has been achieved.

 

PTW,
What does one do to reconcile the fact that there are many great hitorical Christian men who died in the ranks and file of the Roman church prior to the reformation, i.e Augustine of hippo (City Of God), Origen, St. Thomas Aquinas, Chrysostom, Justin Martyr, Polycarp, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Ignatius.

I was churched as a child in Roman theology; I attended parochial schools. Keep in mind, the average RC does not have any idea they are involved in heresy. There is a question to whether they are truly involved in heresy because they have no foundation to which they can glean from knowledge to compare for error; the priests do not suggest studying the scriptures. They have essentially no biblical knowledge. Roman doctrine in light of the scriptures, is not taught. Many who attend, do love Jesus and are following that which they believe to be true.

Prior to the reformation and Wycliffe's(sp) bible being transliterated into the common language, no one had access to the scriptures.....do you want to tell me that for that extended period of time, no one went to Heaven?

 

Scott, one has to bear in mind that many of the great lumiaries, like Augustne, did not believe much of what current RCism teaches regarding the Papacy, mary, etc. They died catholic, yes, but Roman Catholic? That is not the case.

However they did not die as Evangelicals either. They did not hold to a view of the Eucharist, for example, that a baptist would accept. Does that mean they are damned? I don't think so. The biblical admonition to belive on the Lord Jesus christ and be saved is sufficient. That doesn't mean that one is free to beleive whatever and go to heaven, but it does mean that one need not have advanced theolgy to be saved.

 

Latreia,
Did not Augustine die a bishop for the RC church?

Whatever the case, their view on the eucharist is central (IMO). One could run with that thought, but that might undermine my point I was trying to make to my Orlando neighbor (PTW). I agree, God saves! And during this era, are we to shorten the arm of the Lord? It is mindless to believe that no one was saved during this tenure (which was'nt short either, mind you). Human dysfunction will not dismantle the decree of our mighty God!