-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Introduction & BIG question: Can I be both Catholic & Baptist?
- Thread starter Trinity47
- Start date
- Status
Hey, I was just pointing s different translation out. I see that you still think "cleanse" and "exterminate" are one and the same. So be it.
Many of the Muslims today will say of those involved in ISIS, "They aren't true Muslims, they are terrorists." You can believe what you want on their statement. It doesn't matter to me.Wow.....last time I checked......I Thought we WERE the PAGANS!
In the same way often the Catholics try to distance themselves from their own "terrorists."
The fact is, whether Muslim or Catholic, they still committed the same kinds of atrocious crimes that the Bible speaks against. And if those crimes are akin to acting like the worst kind of pagans, as you infer, then perhaps you fill the shoes. That is up to you to draw proper conclusions.
The Bible has already drawn the conclusion for you:
2Co 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing;
I can't give up Mass at the Catholic church so I won't be converting. It's too important to me. I will however listen to Preachers explain scriptures until which time they say something like "All Catholics are going to hell," and then I will just pray for them. I don't believe in just the Bible alone so I guess I am not Baptist but I can learn things about the scriptures from them so it's all a good thing
Hi Trinity,
I am getting in on this late but as I was reading your post your words "I can't give up Mass at the Catholic church" struck me. May I ask why you can't give it up? I think in a previous post you claimed it was a man made thing not even found in the Bible. Why can't you give up something that even you don't claim is Biblical?
I am going to ignore the Catholic proselyters on this thread and just talk to you about what you have said and why you are on this thread. First, let me give you my position on your question. No, you can't be a catholic and a Baptist as they are mutually exclusive of each other on the most important doctrines in the Bible. It would be like asking can I be Black skinned and White Skinned at one and the same time all over my body. Yes, you can be saved and be in the Catholic Church or in any kind of church.
In my estimation what should determine your choice of denomination is which one is providing you the most important answer to the most important question and that is "How is a person saved?" If one or the other is wrong on that question, then who cares what else they may teach if than cannot provide the most important answer. Besides, the bible says those who preach "another gospel" that is, a wrong way of salvation are "accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9). I would think it would be aweful important to be on the right side of that issue, don't you?
olation of the scriptures
FAR more than just representing the Cross, as they view it as being literally jesus redying again for sins, that the elemets become his body and flesh, so that is a definte deniel of jesus death being just once and for all!
We so the very same thing today, when we tell others about jesus, and based upon how they respond to Him, can declare their sins are forgiven or still remain!
You are denying the official Church of Rome position on this though!
Oh really? In the Catechism of the Catholic Church Passage #1364 says: "In the New Testament, the memorial takes on a new meaning. When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, she commemorates Christ's Passover, and it is made present: the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the cross remains ever present".
Passage #1366 says this: "The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies it's fruit".
In passage #1367 it reiterates by stating: The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice". And continuing on: " In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and offered in an un-bloody manner".
I really like Passage #1368 where it states in part: " ..... The lives of the faithful, their praise, sufferings, prayer, and work are united with those of Christ and with his total offering, and so acquire a new value. Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering".
So we can readily see that I am maintaining the Church's position correctly, you are the one who is in error.
Last edited:
Trinity47
New Member
I don't want to offend any here. That just isn't who I am and I feel completely underversed (is that a word? lol) in scriptures which is why I sought out the Baptist faith. I feel more Baptist these days than I do Catholic. So far as giving up Mass, I'm not really sure why I even said that since I already left the Catholic church three years ago, but when I say left I really mean that I just stopped going and took my son out of it too. I suppose that I said what I did about Mass because that was one of the only times during the Mass that I felt close to Jesus. I don't want to be wishy washy here though and play both sides of the fence, which I have been doing (sorry). I got the answer to my question though so thank you all! No, I can't be both. That is why I am Baptist and why I have been teaching and studying at home with my family on our own because I just don't know if I am ready to walk into a Baptist church just yet. There is some fear there, and I don't really know why. I guess I'm just not as learned as I wish I were, and maybe when I feel like I am I will go. In the mean time my whole family knows that I am pursuing the Baptist faith, but that I have no pressing need to officially convert, mainly because I don't really beleive in organized religion all that much. I don't hate it either though. I always liked going to church and I think it's awesome if anyone has found a church that isn't run by false teachers teaching feel good lies like Joel Olsteen who I absolutely cannot stand along with scads and scads of others. I don't want to bring my son with me to any church that is wicked. I am not inferring that the church that I left is wicked either though. It was fine, I just didn't like the Priest they brought in who could barely speak English. That is why I left, it wasn't any other reason than I wasn't getting anything out of going to Mass and listening to someone I struggled to understand. Sorry if the wicked church thing sounds conspiracy theorist, but really, look around at the world we are living in now and it IS downright scary. I've read Revelations just like most and I can't ignore the signs of where we are headed. If that means studying on my own and teaching my son alone with my husband then that is what I will do. I don't agree with everything of any Christian denomination, but I do agree that some Baptist churchs over others are teaching the true word of God. I did actually look into my local Baptist church but then when I learned that they used the NIV Bible I said nope, not for me.
Last edited:
Remember, the only thing you will be getting in a Baptist church is their interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. They reject just about everything of the Christian orthodox (Catholic/ Eastern Orthodox) tradition. They can't even agree among themselves as to doctrines and they split apart and run off and start new congregations when differences arise.
As for them teaching the "true word of God', where is the Holy Eucharist? Where is the memorial of Christ - the re-presentation of his sacrifice on Calvary? The reality is, you won't find such a thing at any Baptist church. But hey, you have to go wherever you find yourself being led and that is that.
One more thing, have you ever read about the early Christian Church after the Apostles, specifically the things written by the Bishops of the early One Universal Christian Church? They have some very interesting things to say about God, Jesus and the Christian Church - they are worth looking into.
may the Lord himself guide and lead you spiritual...
Just remember that the church of rome CANNOT prove from either scripture nor history that it is the true and only Church, that there is a legit papacy, that there should be the Mass and the entire sacraments system, and worst of all, it denies that one can be saved by faith in Jesus alone,
It holds that we MUST co operate with the sacraments grace of god well enough to get right enough to merit God saving us..
Even Rome knows that would be impossible to do, can they came up with Purgetory, as a means to have people get right enough to atone for their sins...
Either I plead and lean ONLY on jesus and his work at the Cross, or trust in my own good works, that is ONLY 2 methods today one can go in order to get saved!
Just remember that the church of rome CANNOT prove from either scripture nor history that it is the true and only Church, that there is a legit papacy, that there should be the Mass and the entire sacraments system, and worst of all, it denies that one can be saved by faith in Jesus alone,
It holds that we MUST co operate with the sacraments grace of god well enough to get right enough to merit God saving us..
Even Rome knows that would be impossible to do, can they came up with Purgetory, as a means to have people get right enough to atone for their sins...
Either I plead and lean ONLY on jesus and his work at the Cross, or trust in my own good works, that is ONLY 2 methods today one can go in order to get saved!
The Mass states that the element becomes his very blood and body, so is another sacrificing of Him, correct?
No, not correct. Did you not read the part which says: ".....the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and offered in an un-bloody manner"?
Why offer himself at all though> Was not His one time sacrifice on the Cross sufficient to saved?
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
The more modern term for eexterminate - is "ethnic cleansing".
=============-- 25 million killed by Pope Benedict's own count - as he admitted that more than half were not in his report.
So then that council calling for the "extermination" of Jews and heretics - is truly a crime against humanity -- nothing at all infallible about it.
The Fourth Lateran Council, the council that dogmatized transubstantiation, offered indulgences to those who would "exterminate heretics" and participate in a Crusade. Since this council refers to the RCC's influence over the state (John 19:11), it points to the fact that the state was acting at the command of the RCC. The council declared (http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp
CANON 3“Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff [the Pope], that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those
who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land.”
In that post we have the step for going forward to the point of saying "All that stuff in the past was truly evil - lets all agree to that and lets all commit that we will not let that happen again" ..
So then Lateran IV instead of "STILL being upheld as infallibly correct" -- is in fact a crime against humanity.
So also every Catholic and Protestant effort to torture or kill (exterminate) somebody just because they hold to an opposing opinion on doctrine. All of that sort of thing is totally alien to the NT. It is not a matter of older cultures being clueless - because the older culture of the NT Apostles was not at all about killing all the Jews and gentiles that opposed the doctrines of Christianity.
Rather all of that "kill and exterminate others" mentality sprang up after the Apostles died.
=============================================================
Well you and I find agreement then - ethnic extermination... ethnic cleansing... genocide.
And so with the 25 million killed by the Catholic church as part of the "Extermination of heretics" in the dark ages. Could be called 'heretic cleansing'
=============-- 25 million killed by Pope Benedict's own count - as he admitted that more than half were not in his report.
So then that council calling for the "extermination" of Jews and heretics - is truly a crime against humanity -- nothing at all infallible about it.
The Fourth Lateran Council, the council that dogmatized transubstantiation, offered indulgences to those who would "exterminate heretics" and participate in a Crusade. Since this council refers to the RCC's influence over the state (John 19:11), it points to the fact that the state was acting at the command of the RCC. The council declared (http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp
CANON 3“Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff [the Pope], that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those
who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land.”
In that post we have the step for going forward to the point of saying "All that stuff in the past was truly evil - lets all agree to that and lets all commit that we will not let that happen again" ..
So then Lateran IV instead of "STILL being upheld as infallibly correct" -- is in fact a crime against humanity.
So also every Catholic and Protestant effort to torture or kill (exterminate) somebody just because they hold to an opposing opinion on doctrine. All of that sort of thing is totally alien to the NT. It is not a matter of older cultures being clueless - because the older culture of the NT Apostles was not at all about killing all the Jews and gentiles that opposed the doctrines of Christianity.
Rather all of that "kill and exterminate others" mentality sprang up after the Apostles died.
=============================================================
Well you and I find agreement then - ethnic extermination... ethnic cleansing... genocide.
And so with the 25 million killed by the Catholic church as part of the "Extermination of heretics" in the dark ages. Could be called 'heretic cleansing'
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Baptists generally hold to the "Sola Scriptura" model of testing all tradition and doctrine by the Bible - just as we see being supported in the NT in places like Acts 17:11 and Mark 7:6-13.
Here are some easy steps for getting started.
1. Is the Bible the Word of God in your opinion?
2. If so - is the creation account and the fall of mankind as given in the Bible really true?
3. If so then the fall of mankind is just as the Bible has stated it and so also is Marriage just as the Bible has stated it ... and so also is the Sabbath in Genesis 2 -- just as the Bible states it - summarized by God in Exodus 20:11.
And this is not just the Bible - but also the view of D.L. Moody.
And this is the view of the " Baptist Confession of Faith".
It is the view of C.H. Spurgeon
And it is the view of "the Westminster Confession of Faith."
Where I would differ with them is on what happens to marriage and the Sabbath after the cross.
I claim the Bible teaches that these two Genesis 2 institutions are -- unchanged.
I don't know of any Baptist church that would reject the NKJV or the KJV - there might be some but I have not heard of any.
God bless you in your study.
in Christ,
Bob
Why offer himself at all though you ask? You read what I post but somehow do not comprehend. There was but one sacrifice on the Cross, sufficient for all time and for all souls here on earth - that is what the Church most assuredly teaches. We simply follow Christ's command, (like all Christians should) that we do the same by re-enacting what happened in that fateful time as the permanent memorial to his sacrifice. As I posted earlier: "Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering". You might not accept this, but it is what it is.
Good grief, that was then and now is now. The Protestants no longer throw Catholics in the dungeon before lopping their heads off now either. Mankind has thankfully changed from such behavior
There is plenty of proof for Catholic doctrine from the Scriptures and the historical record is on our side for there being but one Universal (Catholic) Christian Church - you simply reject the overwhelming evidence.
Who were the Early Church Fathers? Why the Bishop's of the one Universal (Catholic) Church that's who. They were the one's who developed the doctrine of the Trinity, gave us the New Testament as we know it, and fought against the various heresies that arose as the newly developing Christian Church went forward.
- Status