Pope says Hell is real

I'm glad he said this. There is certainly a wing of the RCC that would seek to move their church off this theological mooring.

Also the second statement is intriguing since he's pretty much dismissing purgatory which was huge for the RCC...helped them raise a lot of money.

I think Protestants and Catholics have more in common than we give each other credit for...(ducks)

 

Protestants certainly have many things in common with the RCC. We Baptists, however, are not a Protestant group and hold little common ground.

I am glad to see, and shocked as well, that they are finally moving away from such heresy.

 

I dont think that limbo and purgatory are the same thing. Maybe a former RC can confirm.

 

Limbo

Isn't limbo what you do at a beach party with a bamboo stick? or is that an abbreviation for limburger cheese?

:laugh:

 

I'm not a former Roman Catholic, but I've talked to many, and Purgatory and Limbo are two different things. Purgatory, in their view, is for Christians to finish the process of sanctification before entering Heaven. Limbo is the eternal resting place for... say... unbaptized babies, who wouldn't go to Hell because they have not committed sin, but would not be admitted into Heaven because they are not yet baptized Catholics.

Obviously, I disagree with the whole lot of it, but those are their views.

Michael

 

I am a former RC and you have it right (as my memory serves). I went to Catholic school through the 8th grade and I remember the Nuns teaching it as you state. I quit the RCC at 19 and became a Baptist at 27 - I am 51 now and some of my RC knowledge is disappearing in the mists of time!

 

My understanding (which could be faulty) after reading "The Trail of Blood" about the origin of the Baptist church is that it started completely separate from it and was NEVER a part of the Catholic religion. That's why I refuse to call myself a "protestant". By denomination I am a Baptist, but I am a born again Christian.

 

Not rated as very reliable by whom?

 

Tim answered this well previously so I'll just add in some details.

The "Trail of Blood" (aka Organic Successionism) is not, in my and many leading authorities' opinions, how Baptists actually originated. (btw: I went to SWBTS where this whole thing originated and studied it while I was there...including seeing an original chart done by Carroll.) Montanists, Novatianists, Donatists, Paulicians, Albigensians, Catharists, Waldenses, and the Anabaptists are all groups that are included in this supposed succession.

The problem is that several of these groups hold doctrines that are distinctively outside Baptist doctrine...and quite contrary to Scripture as well. Particularly the Albigensians did not believe that the God of the OT was God, but rather an imposter. Also they recognized reincarnation as a possible outcome of what happens after we die. And they denied a basic, orthodox formulation of the Trinity in favor of a more modalistic monarchian view that Jesus Christ wasn't real but a spirit. Nothing to do with Baptist doctrines here.

That is just an example of why the "Trail of Blood" is not an awfully legitimate way to understand Baptist formation. Many of the groups that Dr. JM Carroll wrote about and classified as Baptists actually didn't hold Baptist belief and were, rightly so, branded as heretics because they were.

Protestanism is just a heading for all Baptist since we originated after the Reformation out of the Protestant groupings and not from the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Church it is a proper designation for Baptists. We are Protestants just like Lutherans, Assemblies of God, Church of God, Presbyterians, etc.