Is Roman Catholicism accurate in every detail?

[BobRyan]

I do not think it is vitally important if the Vatican publicly renounces its past. The vitally important thing, as I see it, is that they changed.

As I said - what a horrible corner to be placed in!!

Imagine if the German government was still saying "Our Nazi history was morally and doctrinally correct.". And the German people were left having to say "Well we don't need to say that it was wrong to mass murder as long as we are not doing it now".

How tragic that such a morally compromised position is being forced onto the membership of the RCC when they are confronted by the glaring facts of history!!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

What is most important? As Christians, what is most important:
1) being God's `little helpers' in ways He never specified for us, or
2) trustingly serving Christ in the ways He ordained by following His values?

I posit the latter.

Part of the requirement to BE LIGHT in the world is to KNOW the difference between right and wrong!!

IF the RC magesterium can not say that mass murder and torture of the saints was wrong -- (as a church that DID it) - HOW in the world are they "LIGHT" in the world!!??

Christ is the "way the TRUTH and the life" John 14 -- the institution that feels it needs to "fling truth to the ground" in order to hold it's head up and carry on as an institution is compromising it's own christian mission.

Men like Dr Carroll of EWTN take a bold step in the righ direction when they admit "IF Billy Graham had taught in the dark ages what he taught in the 20th century - he would have been burned alive by order of the Catholic Church leadership"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darron Steele]

As I said - what a horrible corner to be placed in!!

Imagine if the German government was still saying "Our Nazi history was morally and doctrinally correct.". And the German people were left having to say "Well we don't need to say that it was wrong to mass murder as long as we are not doing it now".

How tragic that such a morally compromised position is being forced onto the membership of the RCC when they are confronted by the glaring facts of history!!

in Christ,

Bob

Part of the requirement to BE LIGHT in the world is to KNOW the difference between right and wrong!!

IF the RC magesterium can not say that mass murder and torture of the saints was wrong -- (as a church that DID it) - HOW in the world are they "LIGHT" in the world!!??

Christ is the "way the TRUTH and the life" John 14 -- the institution that feels it needs to "fling truth to the ground" in order to hold it's head up and carry on as an institution is compromising it's own christian mission.

Men like Dr Carroll of EWTN take a bold step in the righ direction when they admit "IF Billy Graham had taught in the dark ages what he taught in the 20th century - he would have been burned alive by order of the Catholic Church leadership"

in Christ,

Bob

As far as I am concerned, you can have all the objections you want to the Vatican's deeds and decrees -- done without consultation of the laity. I have my own.

Unlike a certain person other than you, for me, it stops before it arrives at hating my Roman Catholic neighbors.

It stops before it arrives at persistently accusing them of beliefs they would reject when I have been informed of reality.

It stops before it arrives at accusing them of worship practices they do not engage in at present when I have been informed of reality.

It stops before holding them guilty for events that happened centuries ago.​

As I said, I have my problems with the Vatican. I have my problems with Catholic teaching. However, it stops before it arrives at hating my Roman Catholic neighbors.

I read my Bible. "Right/wrong" has more meanings than academics and knowledge. From my reading, I know the difference between doing what is right, and doing what is wrong.

"Light of the world" refers to deeds. Read Jesus' sermon that the phrase appears in -- start at Matthew 5:1 and go to 7:27. 2 Timothy 3:16-7 “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for |doctrine|, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness: so that the| person who serves God| may be complete, | entirely instructed for all good work.”* How sad that so many are willing to take the written Word of God, given by God to promote good deeds, and use it to fuel their acts of malice for people.

For now, I am done on this thread.

______
*ESV|KJV, NKJV|NBV|ICB|ASV|RVR 1909 “enteramente instruído para toda buena obra” translated.

 

[BobRyan]

You can have all the objections you want to the Vatican's deeds and decrees, done without consultation of the laity. I have my own.

However, for me, it stops before it arrives at hating my Roman Catholic neighbors.

Why in the world is "hate" required to "admit to history" and to object to a white wash of it -- and objecting to the wild claim that it was morally RIGHT in morals and doctrine -- no matter how much it is clearly a crime against humanity??

It stops before it arrives at accusing them of beliefs they would reject when I have been informed otherwise.

It stops before it arrives at accusing them of worship practices they do not engage in at present.


It stops before holding them guilty for events that happened centuries ago.
​

WHen their own Popes and their own historians are quoted the argument is NOT that THEY hold the opinions of their Popes or that they would do the SAME in history as their own historians SAY the RCC did such that the historic church would have "burned Billy Graham alive" for example IF he were teaching that same doctrine in the dark ages.

The point is to ask them to "wake up" and smell the coffee! SEE what kind of institution could commit such crimes against humanity and yet STILL defend that as morally and doctrinally without error!!

As I said, I have my problems with the Vatican. I have my problems with Catholic teaching. However, it stops before it arrives at hating my Roman Catholic neighbors.

Now see - we can all agree on something.
​

I read my Bible. "Right/wrong" has more meanings than academics and knowledge. From my reading, I know the difference between doing what is right, and doing what is wrong.

So the Canon Law of Lateran IV calling for the extermination of heretics was "morally wrong"?? If you can admit that - and if all Christians can "easily get the point" -- then what is the MEANING of the RCC of TODAY not wanting to step out into the light on that point?

Clearly they are being hamstrung by a conflicting doctrine-from-tradition which states that they were SUPPOSED to have been GUARANTEED to never blunder into such gross immoral - doctrinally corrupt positions that led to crimes against humanity. Because IF they are at risk of that level of gross moral and doctrinal error in Canon Law then NO LONGER can anyone EQUATE RC tradition with the authority of scripture!!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darron Steele]

Mr. Ryan, I have been very clear on how I meant "hate."

It had nothing to do with what you allege I meant.

I believe the misrepresentation was deliberate. A thread you created for the purpose of misrepresenting someone was locked not too long ago
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38492 . I have seen enough of similar in widespread practice among radical Churches of Christ to know how far that can go. If appearing to `win' is that important to you, I quit.

 

[D28guy]

"As I said, I have my problems with the Vatican. I have my problems with Catholic teaching. However, it stops before it arrives at hating my Roman Catholic neighbors."

Well, there it is again.

The charge of "hate" when someone expresses their views regarding the teachings of Catholicism.

WHY...IN...THE...WORLD...does this keep happening?

I dont understand why people can give their views, objections, convictions, and disagreements regarding anything under the sun and there is no problem, but when those concerns are expressed regarding Catholicism...we suddenly (((HATE!!))) Catholics.

Folks, none of us hate Catholic people. We love them. We understand the truth regarding Castholicsim, so we share that truth. That doesnt mean we hate Catholics. Like I said on a different thread when this same weird charge came up, if we hated Catholics we wouldnt tell them about our concerns and just let them suffer the consequences of buying into the Catholic idolatries and blasphemies. But we love them enough to share the truth with them.

And its only in specific discussion that these things come up. If we and a bunch of Catholics were all neighbors on the same street, and we evangelicals got together with Agnus Dei and Matt Black and other Catholics from here some times to play ping pong, or go play golf together or any number of things...we would all get along fine. I know that to be the case because I have friends who are Catholic and we get along just fine. They are nice folks and I enjoy spending time with them. If a doctrinal issue comes up we talk about it, we usually disagree, and we part as friends *agreeing* that we *disagree*. :thumbs:

Please folks, dont go overboard by thinking that how things go in theological discussions on a message board are the same thing as how things go in "real life".

We dont hate Catholics! :wavey:

God bless,

Mike

 

[Darron Steele]

D28guy: It is not expressing negative views about Catholicism that is hate in itself -- although too many Catholic polemicists like to pretend it is.

It is hate when those views result in ugliness towards its adherents. I suggest you look at what it was that I was talking about.

Speaking the truth in love: `I believe your reward will be diminished if you do not stop splitting your devotion between Christ and Mary. Scripture does not authorize worship-related activity to be directed at Mary. Also, do the acts of violence that the Vatican encouraged centuries ago seem like the mark of a leadership of Christians? I think not.'

Hate speech: `It does not matter what their sentiments actually are, Catholics are idolatrous worshipers of Mary as a goddess, and I insist on saying that. Furthermore, the Catholics of now are guilty of the tortures and murders of Christians centuries ago.'

Now, please go back and read earlier posts. Afterward, I hope what I am REALLY talking about is clearer to you.

 

[D28guy]

Darron,

"Speaking the truth in love: `I believe your reward will be diminished if you do not stop splitting your devotion between Christ and Mary."

You do realise dont you that many times its not a matter of loss of rewards? Its a matter of Mary worship keeping them from Christ.

"Also, do the acts of violence that the Vatican encouraged centuries ago seem like the mark of a leadership of Christians? I think not.'"

But do you acknowledge that saying it that way does not actually give an accurate view of the hidiousness of the topic being discussed? Why "sugar coat" it?

Do you feel that it is improper that we talk stongly of what Hitler did? Do you think we should we say "You know, Adolph did a poor job of displaying good leadership during his tenure?"

"Hate speech: `It does not matter what their sentiments actually are, Catholics are idolatrous worshipers of Mary as a goddess, and I insist on saying that."

Well, are you saying that we should not call idolatry...idolatry??? We should "sugar coat" it?

Did Christ "sugar coat" it when he angrilly turned over the tables in the temple when they were turning Gods house of prayer into a place of merchandise?

Did Paul "sugar coat" it when he said to the sorcerer "Oh, you full of all deceit and all fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of all rightiousness, will you not cease perverting the straight ways of the Lord?"

"Furthermore, the Catholics of now are guilty of the tortures and murders of Christians centuries ago.'"

I have never heard anyone say that they are.

I agree that sometimes I have heard some evangelicals become too vitriolic regarding Catholicsm. Maybe I've gotten that way sometimes in discussion. (I try not to) But I think you are advocating going too far in the other direction. You are advocating "sugar coating" things that are in fact terribly TERRIBLY wrong, and blasphemous in nature.

Mike

 

[Melanie]

gonna change my little picture to a target..........I love this Board....it has honed my apologetics over the years.....and of course the really keen Catholic bashers are prayed for every day when I say my rosary............. raying: :godisgood: :thumbs:

 

[Matt Black]

and we evangelicals got together with Agnus Dei and Matt Black and other Catholics from here

Ahem...! For about the hundred-millionth time,


I'M NOT CATHOLIC!:BangHead:

Thank you. Now I'll go and lie down...

 

[BobRyan]

I have to admit- Matt is one of the MOST Catholic-baptist not-Catholics I have ever met! Maybe it is his childhood coming back to haunt him.

 

[BobRyan]

Speaking the truth in love: `I believe your reward will be diminished if you do not stop splitting your devotion between Christ and Mary. Scripture does not authorize worship-related activity to be directed at Mary. Also, do the acts of violence that the Vatican encouraged centuries ago seem like the mark of a leadership of Christians? I think not.'

Now see - we agree on something!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Part of the requirement to BE LIGHT in the world is to KNOW the difference between right and wrong!!

IF the RC magesterium can not say that mass murder and torture of the saints was wrong -- (as a church that DID it) - HOW in the world are they "LIGHT" in the world!!??

Christ is the "way the TRUTH and the life" John 14 -- the institution that feels it needs to "fling truth to the ground" in order to hold it's head up and carry on as an institution is compromising it's own christian mission.

Men like Dr Carroll of EWTN take a bold step in the righ direction when they admit "IF Billy Graham had taught in the dark ages what he taught in the 20th century - he would have been burned alive by order of the Catholic Church leadership"

in Christ,

Bob

In my statement about "The LIGHT of the world" and "knowing right from wrong" -- I see it in John 8 "The TRUTH shall set you free".

I see it in John 1 "LIGHT shining in darkness... but men loved darkness RATHER than light because their deeds were evil" -- evil deeds THRIVE in ignorance, superstition, man-made-tradition -- moral darkness where TRUTH is no longer held in honor. In Dan 8 we are warned about institutions that HAVE the truth and then "fling TRUTH to the ground".

I see it in John 14 "I am the way the TRUTH and the life".

I see it in John 3

I see it in the clear warning, clear teaching of Christians that state to the world "Abortion is wrong". The church is NOT to be the SOURCE of doctrinal and moral error for the world friends!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darron Steele]

D28guy: about my comments

D28guy: It is not expressing negative views about Catholicism that is hate in itself -- although too many Catholic polemicists like to pretend it is.

It is hate when those views result in ugliness towards its adherents. I suggest you look at what it was that I was talking about.

Speaking the truth in love: `I believe your reward will be diminished if you do not stop splitting your devotion between Christ and Mary. Scripture does not authorize worship-related activity to be directed at Mary. Also, do the acts of violence that the Vatican encouraged centuries ago seem like the mark of a leadership of Christians? I think not.'

Hate speech: `It does not matter what their sentiments actually are, Catholics are idolatrous worshipers of Mary as a goddess, and I insist on saying that. Furthermore, the Catholics of now are guilty of the tortures and murders of Christians centuries ago.'...

Darron,...
I have never heard anyone say that they are....

Then you did not see this:

...
If God applies the same treatment which RCC did to the Christians by condemning them as Heretics, then He has to torture and kill all the 1.3 billion of Roman Catholics immediately...

By the way, and I know our resident Catholic bashers here do not care, but again, Catholics do not worship Mary as a goddess. Their "veneration" of her does stop short of that. They believe -- quite wrongly -- that by honoring Jesus' mother so much, they are honoring Christ. I know, I know: `Who cares, the allegation makes nice ammunition, and darn it we are going to keep using it.'

When proselytizers willingly and persistently misrepresent the beliefs and sentiments of their desired converts, the desired converts are not as inclined to take them seriously. Frankly, people like our resident Catholic bashers make me think of the Catholics I know, and cause me to think more positively of their religion -- the exact opposite intent, I am sure. I can only imagine its effects on those who actually buy into it.

Further, when professing Christians present the truth while engaging in conduct Christ preached against, it does not honor Christ.

 

[D28guy]

Matt Black,

"I'M NOT CATHOLIC!"

Ooops. sorry bout that. I remember now you sharing that a long time ago. I guess its just that you defend their heresies so vigorously, and with the exact same tired old un-convincing arguments that Catholics use that cause me to sort of think of you as a *sort of* Catholic. :laugh:

Sorry,

Mike

 

[D28guy]

Darron Steele,

"By the way, and I know our resident Catholic bashers here do not care, but again, Catholics do not worship Mary as a goddess."

It is nothing short of Goddess worship. That is simply ((THE TRUTH)), Darron.

They bow down to her. They pray to her. They attribute to her attributes of diety, such as omnipresense. They refer to her as the "Queen of the Universe", the "Queen of Heaven", and the "Mediatrix of all Grace". Millions of Catholics travel the world over to these sites where supposedly Mary grants visitations and gives "messages from heaven". In some countries they parade an image of her...high and lifted up...through the streets of the city as the multiplied thousands are in exctacy as they sing the praises of this Goddess that they worship. During the rosary there are 10 vain repititions of the "Hail Mary" prayer to every 1 vain repitition of the "Our Father" prayer.

I could go on and on.

"Their "veneration" of her does stop short of that."

No it doesnt, and this is another example of the utterly insufficient little "word games" that the Catholic Church indoctrinates its people to regurgitate.

If I used a machine gun to mow down a group of people, and was then charged with murder, should I go free if I just *presto chango!*...decided to call it something else? Its not murder, Judge Darron, because I dont call it that. I call it "bliffing". See? I "bliffed" those people, I didnt "murder" them.

Would that work in a court of Law?

They believe -- quite wrongly -- that by honoring Jesus' mother so much, they are honoring Christ."

They dont "honor" her, Darron. They "worship" her. What we evangelicals do is honor Mary. We think highly of her, we speak well of her, we honor her.

The Catholic Church has created a "Goddess" that they worship. That Goddess is Mary.

"I know, I know: `Who cares, the allegation makes nice ammunition, and darn it we are going to keep using it.'"

Its not ammunition Darron, its...calling...it...what...it...is.

Mike

 

[BobRyan]

"Worship at Mary's Altars" seems to be something that has Papal approval.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Mr. Ryan, I have been very clear on how I meant "hate."

It had nothing to do with what you allege I meant.

I believe the misrepresentation was deliberate. A thread you created for the purpose of misrepresenting someone was locked not too long ago
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38492 . I have seen enough of similar in widespread practice among radical Churches of Christ to know how far that can go. If appearing to `win' is that important to you, I quit.

On the thread you referenced - your complaint was accepted without reviewing the details in the thread or what was actually stated. You provided NO quote AT ALL from me showing any error in detail -- not even once. The actual quotes given on the thread were simply being review for detail and the details did not "please you" sir. As on this thread you are trying to ignore the detail -- of what is being discussed when it does not please your preferences.

You certainly have that right sir.

However you are wise to bring up the idea of shutting down inconvenient facts when they do not please you on a thread like this one that deals with the actions of the RCC in the dark ages and the hard questions that must be answered given the FACTS of history.

I for my part prefer to leave the personal issues alone - and deal only with solid facts.

By contrast your quote above, complaining now about this thread as well, is an excellent example of another no-details sweeping complaint. It "relies" on the reader being takn by your earnest fervor and the hope that the reader will not take the time to go back and try to validate your sweeping allegations to see if they actually have any substance at all.


Fact noted.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

When proselytizers willingly and persistently misrepresent the beliefs and sentiments of their desired converts, the desired converts are not as inclined to take them seriously. Frankly, people like our resident Catholic bashers make me think of the Catholics I know, and cause me to think more positively of their religion -- the exact opposite intent, I am sure. I can only imagine its effects on those who actually buy into it.

Wouldn't it be better to deal in specifics and details rather than your vaguries and general sweeping attacks sir? The point of the thread is to look at the DETAILS and answer the HARD questions.

Think about it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I

As for the quote of Eliyahu that you quoted from me, well, I believe his sentiments are much stronger than yours.

From the looks of it, he is holding ALL living Roman Catholics guilty for events that happened centuries ago, and which they would want nothing to do with repeating.

Let's cite an example - a quote from him showing it then.

in Christ,

Bob