10 Misconceptions of the RCC

[Earth Wind and Fire]

EWF, I know its been a while since you were Catholic and you have many preconceived ideas from your own experience. But if I may assist you with this question. Most Catholics I know don't really have an interest in their own faith. They generally warm the pew so to speak. Have you ever availed yourself of Catholic training from your diocese? Why don't you find out whether I'm telling the truth? Call to speak with someone from your diocese to see what Catholics are teaching. I know in my area there is a concerted effort to get accurate Catholic teaching out focusing on the "marginal catholics". Just find out for yourself. Feel free to disagree but at least know rather than depend on past experiences.

Yes I have & Catholic dogma & intimidation are still rampant....and please do not refer to it as my diocese. Its nice to hear that you've found a bishop that will make a concerted effort to get accurate Catholic teaching out (now here is my sarcasm) but how long has it been ....because you have a well recorded history of corrupt practice & personnel, I remain skeptical.

I will PM you one recent story.....there are more but why go there.....this should be sufficient.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Yes I have & Catholic dogma & intimidation are still rampant....and please do not refer to it as my diocese. Its nice to hear that you've found a bishop that will make a concerted effort to get accurate Catholic teaching out (now here is my sarcasm) but how long has it been ....because you have a well recorded history of corrupt practice & personnel, I remain skeptical.

I will PM you one recent story.....there are more but why go there.....this should be sufficient.

I didn't mean to refer to it as YOUR diocese just the diocese in your area as there should only be one. And there is corrupt practices and personnel of every Christian denomination unfortunately. In fact during the Civil War Southern Baptist Covention supported Slavery just to mention one but every denomination has its corruption.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I didn't mean to refer to it as YOUR diocese just the diocese in your area as there should only be one. And there is corrupt practices and personnel of every Christian denomination unfortunately. In fact during the Civil War Southern Baptist Covention supported Slavery just to mention one but every denomination has its corruption.

Perhaps I should explain what I have found after 56 years in the darkness.

A pastor who I can reach out to at anytime of the day or night that instructs and guides me via Scripture. He will try not to judge me but still will tell me where I am falling off the beam spiritually. He works a secular job, is raising a family, & is devoted to Christ.

He maintains a church structure with a operating budget of 10,000 dollars per year & with that money they flush the toilets, keep the heat on & the AC in the summer.

Plus he is more humble than I will ever hope to be , God love him & his family......they are living the Christian life day in & day out.

I hope you can find that somehow, though ....... well you know where Im going with that!

 

[Yeshua1]

When you say something is official please site the source otherwise you're just repeating heresay. Because the offical document may differ from what you have stated. In other words you are just repeating what someone else told you and you really have only done a cursory review rather than study but you try to sound as if you had by saying "official". The truth is you couldn't tell me what was official and what isn't official or even what documents to turn to, to determine what is official. I'm saying this to protect you from looking silly by making these statements.

Please see the postings on that made here byOld regular in this OP!

The reformers were given by God the opportunity to have the RCC reform teachings and doctrines to adhere to the Bibly ALONE, and to repreach and teach the TRUE Gospel, but Rome decided to stay with their perverted gospel and vain traditions of men!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Please see the postings on that made here byOld regular in this OP!

The reformers were given by God the opportunity to have the RCC reform teachings and doctrines to adhere to the Bibly ALONE, and to repreach and teach the TRUE Gospel, but Rome decided to stay with their perverted gospel and vain traditions of men!

I have seen Oldregulars posting and I answered him. Have you read the canons of Trent. The fact is the Church Gave the opportunity to align their teachings with the historical Christian Church and they refused. The Catholic Church in fact did reform but you don't know enough about it to even know that. There were Catholic reformers btw. But of course you wouldn't know that either. The fact is you should start by studying the context of trent and then read its documents in order rather than jumping around. What OR did is the same as me going to Calvin's institutes and pulling something out of the middle of his work and quoting it showing Calvin didn't uphold what he taught.

 

[DHK]

I've considered what you have to say. This is my conclusion after considering what you have to say. First of all to equate Catholicism with Islam is not only unwarrented but shows a total ignorance of Catholic belief. Catholics and Muslims aren't even alike. And to hold that Catholics aren't Christian is beyond the pale. Let me point out some facts for you that doesn't require faith just some knowledge.

If you think I equated Islam with Catholicism then you missed the whole point of my post. I didn't. And though I could refute each one of your points, point for point for point I am not going to. You missed the point of the entire post.

So I find your assertion to be invalid.

You didn't understand the post.

I hope you will agree that one cannot be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time. Or a Hindu, or a Buddhist, or a J.W. (who by the outside world are called Christians) and be a Christian at the same time.

Why? Because a Christian is one who is saved by grace through faith, and not of works. That is what the Bible defines a believer as, but the RCC disagrees with the Bible on this point so clearly elucidated in Eph.2:8,9.

True Biblical Christianity is the only religion is the only religion in the world that is built on "faith alone," and not on works. Every other religion of the world is built on works. Christianity requires no works. Salvation is a free gift of God, freely given to those who trust in Christ by faith. That is the big difference. We have a living Savior, one whose Savior has risen from the dead. Their founders are all in the grave--dead.

The Catholic church has taken paganism and parts of Christianity and mixed them together. The praying to the dead, the idolatry, the practice of the priest sprinkling incense (straight from the occult), Mariolatry, images and icons, etc. All of this comes from paganism, along with a system of works--salvation by works just like all the other pagan religions of the world. You stand no different. You are in total opposition to the gospel of Jesus Christ which offers the free gift of salvation by grace alone, by faith alone, by Christ alone. You have added to this Biblical message. Paul, in Gal.1:8 declares that if anyone comes and gives another message than the one that he has given, let him be anathema. Your entire system is anathema. One cannot be a Christian and accept the Roman Catholic system at the same time. It is impossible.

Just like the heathen system of whatever religion in the world you want to choose, one cannot choose the Roman Catholic system and be a Christian at the same time. I didn't have to use Islam. I can use Judaism (as I did in referring to Saul/Paul), who gave up his Judaism when he became a Christian. Paul wrote to the Christians at Corinth. In 1Cor.12:2 he reminds them of their pagan past. They can't hold on to their pagan past and be a Christian at the same time. Neither can you, but you do.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Please see the postings on that made here byOld regular in this OP!

The reformers were given by God the opportunity to have the RCC reform teachings and doctrines to adhere to the Bibly ALONE, and to repreach and teach the TRUE Gospel, but Rome decided to stay with their perverted gospel and vain traditions of men!

Let me give you an example of what I mean. What no one on this board apart from a very few is that Trent was about reforming the Church and answering the seperatist protestant reformers. From the Bull of Convocation (legal terminology for a formal proclamation).

Under Pope Paul III, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, for a perpetual remembrance hereof

Recognizing at the very beginning of our pontificate, which the divine providence of Almighty God, not for any merit of our own, but by reason of its own great goodness, has committed to us, to what troubled times and to how many distresses in almost all affairs our pastoral solicitude and vigilance were called, we desired indeed to remedy the evils that have long afflicted and well-night overwhelmed the Christian commonwealth;...Whilst we deemed it necessary for the integrity of the Christian religion and for the confirmation within us of the hope of heavenly things, that there be one fold and one shepherd[2] for the Lord's flock, the unity of the Christian name was well-nigh rent and torn asunder by schisms, dissensions and heresies...Whilst we desired the commonwealth to be safe and protected against the arms and insidious designs of the infidels, yet, because of our transgressions and the guilt of us all, indeed, because of the wrath of God hanging over us by reason of our sins, Rhodes had been lost, Hungary ravaged, war by land and sea intended and planned against Italy, and against Austria and Illyria, since the Turk, our godless and ruthless enemy, was never at rest and looked upon our mutual enmities and dissensions as his fitting opportunity to carry out his designs with success... But since it is written:

Commit thy way to the Lord, and trust in him, and he will do it,[8] we have resolved to trust in the clemency and mercy of God rather than distrust our own weakness, for in undertaking good works it often happens that where human counsels fail the divine power succeeds.

Knowing the context is important and just from these passages I can draw parallels to ocurrances today in our political climate. And that it was an effort to reform the wrongs in the Church is clearly stated in its opening session

Does it please you, for the praise and glory of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for the advance and exaltation of the Christian faith and religion, for the extirpation of heresies, for the peace and unity of the Church, for the reform of the clergy and Christian people, for the suppression and destruction of the enemies of the Christian name, to decree and declare that the holy and general Council of Trent begins and has begun? They answered: It pleases us.

You should pay particular interest to Session IV speaking to salvation under the title Justification.

CHAPTER I: THE IMPOTENCY OF NATURE AND OF THE LAW TO JUSTIFY MAN

The holy council declares first, that for a correct and clear understanding of the doctrine of justification, it is necessary that each one recognize and confess that since all men had lost innocence in the prevarication of Adam,[3] having become unclean,[4] and, as the Apostle says, by nature children of wrath,[5] as has been set forth in the decree on original sin,[6] they were so far the servants of sin[7] and under the power of the devil and of death, that not only the Gentiles by the force of nature, but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses, were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom, though free will, weakened as it was in its powers and downward bent,[8] was by no means extinguished in them.

and in the next chapter we see

CHAPTER II: THE DISPENSATION AND MYSTERY OF THE ADVENT OF CHRIST

Whence it came to pass that the heavenly Father, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort,[9] when the blessed fullness of time was come,[10] sent to men Jesus Christ, His own Son, who had both before the law and during the time of the law been announced and promised to many of the holy fathers,[11] that he might redeem the Jews who were under the law,[12] and that the Gentiles who followed not after justice[13] might attain to justice, and that all men might receive the adoption of sons.

Him has God proposed as a propitiator through faith in his blood[14] for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world.[15]

Strange but isn't it saying the same thing that you say when you "preach the gospel?" What people don't understand about how things are written in the Catholic Church that sections called canons are stated negatively. Thus things you shouldn't do. But these do not detract from the actual teachings of the Church. Note when God gave us the commandments they were stated in the Negative as well. Not that God didn't teach us what it was he wanted us to believe. This same format was used at Trent as well. So you actually have to read the sessions to get at what they are really saying. OR doesn't know this thus he just quotes canon thinking it means the same thing when we refer to which texts are scripture in the bible. It does not have those same connotations.

CHAPTER III: WHO ARE JUSTIFIED THROUGH CHRIST

But though He died for all,[16] yet all do not receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom the merit of His passion is communicated; because as truly as men would not be born unjust, if they were not born through propagation of the seed of Adam, since by that propagation they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, so if they were not born again in Christ, they would never be justified, since in that new birth there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace by which they are made just.

For this benefit the Apostle exhorts us always to give thanks to the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, and hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love, in whom we have redemption and remission of sins.[17]

CHAPTER IV: A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER AND ITS MODE IN THE STATE OF GRACE

In which words is given a brief description of the justification of the sinner, as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior.

This translation however cannot, since promulgation of the Gospel, be effected except through the laver of regeneration or its desire, as it is written:

Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.[18]

 

[OldRegular]

I have seen Oldregulars posting and I answered him. Have you read the canons of Trent. The fact is the Church Gave the opportunity to align their teachings with the historical Christian Church and they refused. The Catholic Church in fact did reform but you don't know enough about it to even know that. There were Catholic reformers btw. But of course you wouldn't know that either. The fact is you should start by studying the context of trent and then read its documents in order rather than jumping around. What OR did is the same as me going to Calvin's institutes and pulling something out of the middle of his work and quoting it showing Calvin didn't uphold what he taught.

My understanding is that the Council of Trent was called in response to the Reformation. But if the Canons of Trent were supposed to reform the RCC it would be terrible to see the state of the RCC beforehand. I am aware of course of the debauchery of the medieval papacy, the multiple popes, and the reprobate, unbelieving popes. That being said the Canons of Trent lay on the backs of Roman Catholics a system of works salvation that made the ordinances of the Levitical System trivial in comparison. That is obvious to anyone who reads the Canons of Trent. I had a printed copy, along with the other creeds, but gave it to a nephew who was contemplating the ministry!

And you really don't know what OR did! Incidentally, someone said in response to the Trent use of "anathema" that it mean't "cut off" or excommunicated which in the RCC means "loss of salvation". Small comfort to those in the RCC. But of course that applies to any and all who deny Trent. The RCC has never repudiated that teaching: It is Roman Catholicism or the fires of hell.

 

[DHK]

if they were not born again in Christ, they would never be justified, since in that new birth there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace by which they are made just.

This quote from the canon is absolutely meaningless for the definition of Biblical terminology has been deliberately changed so that the statement is actually heresy.
"new birth bestowed upon them" meaning baptism bestowed upon them, correct?
In the Catechism "new birth" is defined as baptism, and thus baptismal regeneration. One has to read between the lines. There is no comparison here between what the Bible teaches, what we believe and what the RCC teaches. The canon teaches heresy which cannot be reconciled to evangelical teaching. Water does not save; it simply gets you wet.

 

[OldRegular]

Thinkingstuff

You can post all the empty rhetoric you wish about what a pope may or may not have said. Salvation in the RCC is not by grace through faith but by works imposed by the Teaching Magisterium. You cannot truthfully deny that!

You are apparently a convert to Roman Catholicism. Start a thread showing all the teachings of the RCC that you had to endorse to be "full fledged". Then perhaps those converts from Roman Catholicism can comment!

 

[OldRegular]

This quote from the canon is absolutely meaningless for the definition of Biblical terminology has been deliberately changed so that the statement is actually heresy.
"new birth bestowed upon them" meaning baptism bestowed upon them, correct?
In the Catechism "new birth" is defined as baptism, and thus baptismal regeneration. One has to read between the lines. There is no comparison here between what the Bible teaches, what we believe and what the RCC teaches. The canon teaches heresy which cannot be reconciled to evangelical teaching. Water does not save; it simply gets you wet.

Thinkingstuff is pushing meaningless semantics that sound good to cover the actual dogma of the Teaching Magisterium!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

If you think I equated Islam with Catholicism then you missed the whole point of my post. I didn't. And though I could refute each one of your points, point for point for point I am not going to. You missed the point of the entire post.

I don't think I did but I will go through each point you made here.

I hope you will agree that one cannot be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time. Or a Hindu, or a Buddhist, or a J.W. (who by the outside world are called Christians) and be a Christian at the same time.

Yes. I agree.

Why? Because a Christian is one who is saved by grace through faith, and not of works. That is what the Bible defines a believer as, but the RCC disagrees with the Bible on this point so clearly elucidated in Eph.2:8,9

I would agree with your first sentence. Your second sentence is wrong. Let me flush out what we are talking about and because you lump a lot of consepts into one word I will use the appropriate words to get at the actual meaning. So when you say

a Christian is one who is saved by grace through faith, and not of works.

I say this is true but more specifically Justified. Catholics do teach this so you are wrong about that. Works conform us and "save" us only in the sense that they conform us into the likeness of Christ not that they justify us by themselves. They do not. You cannot work to make God owe you salvation (Rom 4) but you can be conformed to the image of Christ (Rom 12). However, Faith does justify. Specificially what kind of faith the faith that acts in love. But all this is by the grace of God without which you couldn't even get to faith.

True Biblical Christianity is the only religion is the only religion in the world that is built on "faith alone," and not on works.

No, here you are wrong. James doesn't agree with you. True Biblical Christianity is the only religion that God reaches down to us to bring us up to him. All others strive to climb their way up to God without him.

Every other religion of the world is built on works.

Yes. and might I add work alone. To appease God. Works for Catholics is a result of Grace given by Faith. Its cooperating with what God wants you to do because you love him. Not to make God owe us salvation.

Salvation is a free gift of God, freely given to those who trust in Christ by faith.

Who will then act on that faith. Those who do not act on that faith are not saved. Just ask Jesus and James.

That is the big difference. We have a living Savior, one whose Savior has risen from the dead. Their founders are all in the grave--dead.

yes I agree.

The Catholic church has taken paganism and parts of Christianity and mixed them together.

Nope this is just false. You never understood Catholicism even when you were Catholic.

The praying to the dead,

1 Cor 15:29 says differently.

the idolatry

Just because Catholics have statues and pictures reminding them of Gospel events doesn't mean we worship statues and pictures. You need to study the council of Nicea 787.

the practice of the priest sprinkling incense straight from the occult)

I don't know if you know anything about the incense but you don't sprinkle it. And I don't know if you know anything about the bible but the Jews used incense and the book of Revelations refers to incense. Strangely not occultic.

Mariolatry

that is a made up word and doesn't represent what we believe.

, images and icons

I already spoke to this.

, etc. All of this comes from paganism,

Oh? So you are saying that God didn't say

The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the people of Israel, that they take for me a contribution. From every man whose heart moves him you shall receive the contribution for me. 3 And this is the contribution that you shall receive from them: gold, silver, and bronze, 4 blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen, goats' hair, 5 tanned rams' skins, goatskins,[a] acacia wood, 6 oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, 7 onyx stones, and stones for setting, for the ephod and for the breastpiece. 8 And let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell in their midst. 9 Exactly as I show you concerning the pattern of the tabernacle, and of all its furniture, so you shall make it.

So you are also saying that God didn't say:

“You shall make a mercy seat[c] of pure gold. Two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth. 18 And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. 19 Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end. Of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. 20 The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.

Then take this out of your bible because according to you it couldn't be the same God who said

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Sorry. Either you have the wrong Bible or you are just wrong about this. We see that all the things that you considered "pagan" regarding Catholicism actually find their origin in God and the bible. So it seems you are just wrong about this paganism thing.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Thinkingstuff

You can post all the empty rhetoric you wish about what a pope may or may not have said.

I don't need to use Rhetoric. I have documents that support it. Just because you like to jump into a middle of a document doesn't mean you're correct because you aren't. I bet you haven't even read the sessions of trent have you?

Salvation in the RCC is not by grace through faith but by works imposed by the Teaching Magisterium. You cannot truthfully deny that!

I absolutely can and I can use Catholic Documents to prove it as I have just above this post.

169 Salvation comes from God alone - ccc

1058 The Church prays that no one should be lost: "Lord, let me never be parted from you." If it is true that no one can save himself, it is also true that God "desires all men to be saved" (1 Tim 2:4), and that for him "all things are possible" (Mt 19:26). -ccc

2575 Here again the initiative is God's. -ccc

153 When St. Peter confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, Jesus declared to him that this revelation did not come "from flesh and blood", but from "my Father who is in heaven".24 Faith is a gift of God, a supernatural virtue infused by him. "Before this faith can be exercised, man must have the grace of God to move and assist him; he must have the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and 'makes it easy for all to accept and believe the truth.'"25- ccc

so I certianly can!

You are apparently a convert to Roman Catholicism. Start a thread showing all the teachings of the RCC that you had to endorse to be "full fledged". Then perhaps those converts from Roman Catholicism can comment!

I don't need to if you know the Apostles' Creed then just look at it. It was the only statement of faith I needed to make. It was just that simple. I didn't need to get "rebaptized" so on and so forth.

 

[OldRegular]

If it weren't for the Roman Catholic Church DHK you and I am pointing you out. Would not be Christian. Why is this so? Well let me point some things.

That is a most asinine statement! Only God can make someone a Christian, not the Roman pontiff. You wrap up in this one simple claim the terrible, terrible error of Roman Catholicism: That they are the way to Salvation, not Jesus Christ.

1. It wasn't baptist congregations that united and defined the Trinity as Orthodox doctrine but Catholic ( I inlcude Orthodox because this was before the Catholic/Orthodox schizm). Yes Catholics preserved Orthodox teaching about the Trinity nature of God and the Nature of Christ. Otherwise all Christians today may very well be closer to Muslims in following Arius' teachings.

You are propagating the erroneous teaching that the RCC and the early Church fathers are one and the same.

2. It wasn't Baptist Congregations that preserved Scripture in the West which eventually became accessable to everyone. Also it was Catholic Monks who painstakenly copied and preserved scripture for the Catholic Church. Had it not been for the Catholic Church, Europe (and I'm suspecting you are European decent) would never have been familiarized with the scriptures at all.

It was the sentence of death imposed by the RCC on anyone outside the priesthood who possessed the Scripture that is most likely responsible for the Dark Ages in Europe.

The RCC had the nasty habit of executing any and all who dissented from the RCC during those years of Roman benevolence! Baptists had it rough but they persevered and were kept free from the errors/heresies of Roman Catholicism.

3. It wasn't Baptist Congregations that converted Europe to Christianity. If it hadn't been for the Roman Catholic Church that purposely went out evangelizing Europe; Europe would be no better off than Afganistan, or Pakistan. It wasn't the Baptist that Gentiled the roving bands of Vikings believing that Ragnarok was just around the corner raping and pilaging. It was the Catholics. Europe would still be in its tribalism. Had it not been for the Catholic Church converting all of Europe to Christianity there wouldn't have been a reformation and decenters from the Catholic Church culminating the the formation of the Baptist. So you wouldn't even have been Baptist much less Christian.

You seem to forget that Rome was not the sum total of Christianity at that time in history. You seem to forget, as does the RCC, that God is supreme and not the Roman pontiff, successor not of Peter, but Constantine!

4. It wasn't Baptist Congregations that created the University system of education. If it weren't for the Roman Catholic Church Charlemagne would have seen no reason to create the University System in order to educate his people on understanding their Christian faith and the study of scripture. Better known as The Carolingian Renaissance. Europe would be today as they were then highly illiterate. Thus the bible wouldn't even have been and issue because not only would Europe not have access to the scripture but they wouldn't have been able to read it if some how it had. Also education wouldn't have been as prized in Europe as it became because of the University system and very possibly the "New World" would never have been found and the American Natives like the Maya would still be making human sacrifice and the North American Natives would have continued as they always have as hunter gatherer societies being anamist in beliefs. Thus Canada and the United States would never have come into existance. Much of the modern world's value of life and other moral sensibilities are due to Roman Catholic influence on Europe. It was the Roman Catholic Church that Gentiled Europe and allowed for the spread of Christianity.

So I find your assertion to be invalid.

And the earth would quit spinning if the Roman pontiff did not wave his hands. With such an exhalted view of RCC perhaps you have found what you seek!

 

[OldRegular]

The Catholic church has taken paganism and parts of Christianity and mixed them together. The praying to the dead, the idolatry, the practice of the priest sprinkling incense (straight from the occult), Mariolatry, images and icons, etc. All of this comes from paganism, along with a system of works--salvation by works just like all the other pagan religions of the world. You stand no different. You are in total opposition to the gospel of Jesus Christ which offers the free gift of salvation by grace alone, by faith alone, by Christ alone. You have added to this Biblical message. Paul, in Gal.1:8 declares that if anyone comes and gives another message than the one that he has given, let him be anathema. Your entire system is anathema. One cannot be a Christian and accept the Roman Catholic system at the same time. It is impossible.

I believe that you have captured the essence of the Roman Catholic heresy in the above remarks. I said in an earlier post that Roman Catholicism, in order to dominate the world, brought the world into their midst. They have incorporated whatever was expedient and made it dogma.

I frequently wonder why God has allowed this to happen and I have no answer; but I do see the record of the apostasy of Israel in the Old Testament!

 

[OldRegular]

Original post by OldRegular
You are apparently a convert to Roman Catholicism. Start a thread showing all the teachings of the RCC that you had to endorse to be "full fledged". Then perhaps those converts from Roman Catholicism can comment!

I don't need to if you know the Apostles' Creed then just look at it. It was the only statement of faith I needed to make. It was just that simple. I didn't need to get "rebaptized" so on and so forth.

So you are dodging the request. I must assume you are afraid of the response.

I would say the Apostles Creed is far superior to the Canons of Trent but still not without error!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

That is a most asinine statement! Only God can make someone a Christian, not the Roman pontiff. You wrap up in this one simple claim the terrible, terrible error of Roman Catholicism: That they are the way to Salvation, not Jesus Christ.

All bolded and everything. Just shows where you are mentally. When people start yelling they aren't being civil or reasonable.

You are propagating the erroneous teaching that the RCC and the early Church fathers are one and the same.

In fact that is not an error. We can see as early as Ignatius 100 AD that Christians were calling themselves Catholic.

It was the sentence of death imposed by the RCC on anyone outside the priesthood who possessed the Scripture that is most likely responsible for the Dark Ages in Europe.

You are misinformed. Before the printing press bibles could only be copied by hand at a heafty cost. Thus they would be stolen. However, the Roman Catholic Church made scriptures available to a mostly illerterate populace by having Scriptures read from a liturgical calendar ensureing that the entire bible would be heard over a period of 3 years. People who stole bibles were prosecuted. The dark ages wasn't caused by of the Roman Catholic Church rather by pagan hords of Ostragoths and Visagoths and financial woes of the Roman Empire causing it to colapse leading Europe at the mercy of hords of tribesmen and warlords. The fact that Europe got through the dark ages is a tribute to the Catholic Church. When people no longer had the security of the empire they turned to the leaders of the Catholic Church to help maintain order. Which they did when they could.

The RCC had the nasty habit of executing any and all who dissented from the RCC during those years of Roman benevolence! Baptists had it rough but they persevered and were kept free from the errors/heresies of Roman Catholicism.

There weren't vikings during the reformation or the begining of baptist churches. The environment they came from was already a Christianized Europe.

You seem to forget that Rome was not the sum total of Christianity at that time in history.

It was in Europe particularily in the West.

You seem to forget, as does the RCC, that God is supreme and not the Roman pontiff, successor not of Peter, but Constantine!

This is rhetoric and not an ounce of truth. I know God is supreme and he used the Catholic Church to Evangelize Europe. He didn't use Baptist. And Constantine was never Pope show how little history you actually know.

And the earth would quit spinning if the Roman pontiff did not wave his hands.

I never said that.

With such an exhalted view of RCC perhaps you have found what you seek!

I think I have.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I believe that you have captured the essence of the Roman Catholic heresy in the above remarks. I said in an earlier post that Roman Catholicism, in order to dominate the world, brought the world into their midst. They have incorporated whatever was expedient and made it dogma.

I answer you just I did DHK. This is incorrect.

I frequently wonder why God has allowed this to happen and I have no answer; but I do see the record of the apostasy of Israel in the Old Testament

Because God didn't let something that never happened happen. Its pretty simple.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

So you are dodging the request. I must assume you are afraid of the response.

I would say the Apostles Creed is far superior to the Canons of Trent but still not without error!

I haven't dodged anything. To enter the Catholic Church all I had to do was affirm the Apostles Creed. And it is without error.

 

[OldRegular]

All bolded and everything. Just shows where you are mentally. When people start yelling they aren't being civil or reasonable.

I was just making sure you could read what I said. There is little to nohing in the Roman Catholic Communion of today that was instituted by Jesus Christ. It took ~1700 years from Constantine to Vatican II and what has the RCC become.? Not a Church of Jesus Christ but an apostate organization inspired by ROME!

In fact that is not an error. We can see as early as Ignatius 100 AD that Christians were calling themselves Catholic.

Another problem of the RCC. They confuse the "Universal Church" with Roman Catholicism!