Roman Catholic...Christian or Cult?

[Dr. Walter]

Boy Doc, youd hate it where I live then (NYC Metro Area) Our Dear Anne who lives East of me in Long Island must have to wall herself & kin up so as not to be tainted......FYI, Catholics are the largest religious group on Long Island. Catholics make up 52% of the population of Nassau and Suffolk, versus 22% for the country as a whole, with Jews at 16% and 7% respectively versus 1.7% nation-wide. Even more surprising is the small percentage of Protestants, 7% and 8% respectively for Nassau and Suffolk Counties, versus 23% for the entire country on the same survey, and 50% on self-identification surveys.

Funny because NY & NJ was originally populated by the Dutch & the English & didn't they try hard to physically eradicate the Papists....now we are surrounded by the "evil ones". Maybe someone should start sending us missionaries...Hint, hint SBC!!! We are drounding in Papists.....LOL:laugh:

"Fear not LITTLE flock" - false religion will always be in the majority in this age. The true kingdom is always "hidden" amongst the stuff of the professing kingdom (Mt. 13:43-44).

It is not going to get better either. Jesus ask rhetorically, "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?"

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

BTW the Jehovah Witness Folks own half of Brooklyn & have the unmitigated gall to have all their printing of books, bibles & leaflets done right there! Can you believe it. Heathens to the left of me & heathens to the right.

 

[Matt Black]

Apparently you do not know the meaning of true "worship." True worship is "in spirt and in truth." The Bible speaks of individual worship, as well as, public institutional worship. There is nothing about the institutional worship conducted by the church of Rome that is true. It's ordinances are not true to the scriptures. Its ministry is not true to the scriptures. It's message is not true to the scriptures. It's membership is not true to the scriptures. Nothing about it as an institution is true to the scriptures therefore its worship is not true worship. It preaches an "another gospel" and therefore it's worship cannot possibly be regarded as true worship but rather as "accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9).

Unsubstantiated opinion. Do not presume again to tell me what I do or do not know. Show me where what it does is not 'true to the Scriptures'.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Yeah, just like the Mormons, the JW's are "Christian." Indeed, I regard the JW's more "Christian" than the Catholic Church. None of them are "Chrisitan" in the biblical use and sense of the term "Christian" (Acts 11). None of them render true worship to God as none of them have a Biblical ministry, a Biblical gospel, a Biblical membership, or Biblical ordinances. Worship must be conducted "in spirit and in truth" and Rome does not even come as close as the JW's in presenting true worship. They are accursed by God (Gal. 1:8-9). Please explain how you can be viewed "accursed" by God and yet are "Christian" in a Biblical sense OR that God would accept worship from that which is "accursed"?????????

You have misapplied the Catholic Position on each one of these subjects.

None of them are "Chrisitan" in the biblical use and sense of the term "Christian" (Acts 11)

This is entirely untrue. They are Christian in the biblical sense. Here is whats funny. Acts 11 doesn't define what a Christian is in a biblical sense it shows the conversion of Cornellius. However, I suspect you are thinking of this passage

15"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with[a]water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?"

18When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, "So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life."

Showing that Cornellius house had become believers and were baptized with the Holy Spirit. There is nothing against this type of conversion in the Catholic point of view. In fact, you mean this passage to be looked at alone when in context you miss out on this passage.

44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

Then Peter said, 47"Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Where Peter doesn't miss the requirement of baptism. Which he explains is necissary in Acts 2

38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call."

It just so happened that the order was changed at Cornellius house but no less effective. Also note Peter doesn't just claim its for adults but

39The promise is for you and your children

. So biblically Catholics hold to baptism by water and the Holy Spirit. There is no difference there. The Catholic Catachism states

All the Old Covenant prefigurations find their fulfillment in Christ Jesus. He begins his public life after having himself baptized by St. John the Baptist in the Jordan.17 After his resurrection Christ gives this mission to his apostles: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you."18 ... The renewal of the baptismal life requires penance. A church, then, must lend itself to the expression of repentance and the reception of forgiveness ...For all the baptized, children or adults

Shows baptism as Peter spoke about in Acts 2. So no difference there. So peter at cornellius house shows the necessity of baptism upon reprentance. The only difference between chapter 2 and 11 is the sequence of events. this statement

None of them render true worship to God as none of them have a Biblical ministry, a Biblical gospel, a Biblical membership, or Biblical ordinances

is also untrue. The Catachism

You shall worship the Lord your God" (Mt 4:10). Adoring God, praying to him, offering him the worship that belongs to him, fulfilling the promises and vows made to him are acts of the virtue of religion which fall under obedience to the first commandment.

So you're wrong there.

Worship must be conducted "in spirit and in truth" and Rome does not even come as close

ah you're wrong again

The worship "in Spirit and in truth"53...when the faithful assemble in the same place, they are the "living stones," gathered to be "built into a spiritual house."54 For the Body of the risen Christ is the spiritual temple from which the source of living water springs forth: incorporated into Christ by the Holy Spirit, "we are the temple of the living God."55

and as far as gal1:8-9 I find no where the catholic church mentioned. It does say that

8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

But you would have to prove that the catholic church teaches another Gospel than what Paul preached. Which of course you can't. So wrong on all counts.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

So you know Walter, most of the converts we speak to @ my Baptist Church are in fact RC. If you villify them then they retreat & call you all sorts of nasty names, however if you treat them with respect & dignity they generally turn into very devout Christians.

If you want a challenge, try converting folks from the Orthodox Catholic Churches! I spent 4 hours yesterday with a group of Slavic neighbors who we are trying to integrate into the faith. I hope & pray that these people see us as loving Christians vs their past alternative....a very viberent & stimulating group they are indeed.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yeah, just like the Mormons, the JW's are "Christian." Indeed, I regard the JW's more "Christian" than the Catholic Church. None of them are "Chrisitan" in the biblical use and sense of the term "Christian" (Acts 11). None of them render true worship to God as none of them have a Biblical ministry, a Biblical gospel, a Biblical membership, or Biblical ordinances. Worship must be conducted "in spirit and in truth" and Rome does not even come as close as the JW's in presenting true worship. They are accursed by God (Gal. 1:8-9). Please explain how you can be viewed "accursed" by God and yet are "Christian" in a Biblical sense OR that God would accept worship from that which is "accursed"?????????

Yea....let me know when JW's start believing in the Trinity & the power of the Holy Spirit. At least Catholics are on the same page on this issue.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Unsubstantiated opinion. Do not presume again to tell me what I do or do not know. Show me where what it does is not 'true to the Scriptures'.

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Gal. 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Rom. 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Rom. 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

Tit. 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Rome does not preach the gospel of Jesus Christ as Rome preaches justification by sacramental grace or grace through works rather than justification "without works." Rome preaches justification of the godly not "the ungodly."

 

[Dr. Walter]

Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Corneilus is in Acts 10!

I am going to make you happy by my first statement - I don't believe you are a Catholic!! and mad by my next statement - I believe you are just ignorant of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and deceived as you teach "another gospel" thus "accursed."

All who preach another gospel are deceived or lost or both and in addition to "accursed" and therefore think everyone else is deceived.

You have misapplied the Catholic Position on each one of these subjects. This is entirely untrue. They are Christian in the biblical sense. Here is whats funny. Acts 11 doesn't define what a Christian is in a biblical sense it shows the conversion of Cornellius. However, I suspect you are thinking of this passage Showing that Cornellius house had become believers and were baptized with the Holy Spirit. There is nothing against this type of conversion in the Catholic point of view. In fact, you mean this passage to be looked at alone when in context you miss out on this passage. Where Peter doesn't miss the requirement of baptism. Which he explains is necissary in Acts 2 It just so happened that the order was changed at Cornellius house but no less effective. Also note Peter doesn't just claim its for adults but . So biblically Catholics hold to baptism by water and the Holy Spirit. There is no difference there. The Catholic Catachism states Shows baptism as Peter spoke about in Acts 2. So no difference there. So peter at cornellius house shows the necessity of baptism upon reprentance. The only difference between chapter 2 and 11 is the sequence of events. this statement is also untrue. The Catachism So you're wrong there. ah you're wrong again and as far as gal1:8-9 I find no where the catholic church mentioned. It does say that But you would have to prove that the catholic church teaches another Gospel than what Paul preached. Which of course you can't. So wrong on all counts.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I would agree that defining the papacy as a cult is too broad.

Here is what I believe the papacy is:

VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.
WCF, 1646

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Corneilus is in Acts 10!

I am going to make you happy by my first statement - I don't believe you are a Catholic!! and mad by my next statement - I believe you are just ignorant of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and deceived as you teach "another gospel" thus "accursed."

All who preach another gospel are deceived or lost or both and in addition to "accursed" and therefore think everyone else is deceived.

ROFL!!!!!! You can believe what you want. " I know in whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed unto him against that day."

No. Be honest Dr. Walter. Quote how you actually mean the passage

All who preach another gospel than what I preach and how I understand it to be are deceived or lost or both and in addition to "accursed" and therefore think everyone else is deceived

(bolded mine) You are your ultimate authority on all scriptural truths.
as far as Cornelius yes but Peter explains why he did what he did in 11. So your statement is irrelevant.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I would agree that defining the papacy as a cult is too broad.

Here is what I believe the papacy is:

VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.
WCF, 1646

Then you've not properly identified what catholics believe. Catachism 424

Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.'8 On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.9

And later

The one mediator, Christ, established and ever sustains here on earth his holy Church, the community of faith, hope, and charity, as a visible organization through which he communicates truth and grace to all men."184 The Church is at the same time:

or

The Church is this Body of which Christ is the head: she lives from him, in him, and for him; he lives with her and in her.

which is how the catholic church views Christ's role. As far as the Pope

Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve

 

[jaigner]

They are a christian denomination.

I'm with you. I don't agree with them on a lot of things, but we are the same Church. I have known a number of Catholics that are believers.

 

[annsni]

Boy Doc, youd hate it where I live then (NYC Metro Area) Our Dear Anne who lives East of me in Long Island must have to wall herself & kin up so as not to be tainted......FYI, Catholics are the largest religious group on Long Island. Catholics make up 52% of the population of Nassau and Suffolk, versus 22% for the country as a whole, with Jews at 16% and 7% respectively versus 1.7% nation-wide. Even more surprising is the small percentage of Protestants, 7% and 8% respectively for Nassau and Suffolk Counties, versus 23% for the entire country on the same survey, and 50% on self-identification surveys.

Funny because NY & NJ was originally populated by the Dutch & the English & didn't they try hard to physically eradicate the Papists....now we are surrounded by the "evil ones". Maybe someone should start sending us missionaries...Hint, hint SBC!!! We are drounding in Papists.....LOL:laugh:

Well, we ARE missionaries in this world. I know that in the area we're planting our new church, a vast majority (I don't remember the exact number) are Catholic so we will be ministering to those. We're actually having a man come to our church at the end of the month (we'll be missing it because of vacation but we'll get it taped) who will be teaching on witnessing and ministering to the Catholics in our area.

Around here, I find that most are not "religious" Catholics but "cultural" Cathoics. In other words, they don't really believe everything the church teaches but they were baptized there and it's all they know. MANY don't go to church except on special occasions or they go because "they are supposed to". I do have some friends who are more "religious" Catholics who are quite involved in the church and believe all it teaches and love to be in the walls of their parish. They fully practice the Catholic faith and minister with the church as well (one is a deacon looking to become a priest and the other is a cantor who works with multiple churches in the area). There are a few others I know like them who I attended Catholic school with but they are certainly not in the majority.

 

[Dr. Walter]

There are not TWO or more ways! You are either right or wrong there is no middle ground. There are only two opposing options - the gospel of grace WITHOUT WORKS or "another gospel" justified by works - both cannot be true. You are either on one side or the other. And yes, you are wrong and your posts demonstrate it.

ROFL!!!!!! You can believe what you want. " I know in whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed unto him against that day."

No. Be honest Dr. Walter. Quote how you actually mean the passage (bolded mine) You are your ultimate authority on all scriptural truths.
as far as Cornelius yes but Peter explains why he did what he did in 11. So your statement is irrelevant.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

There are not TWO or more ways! You are either right or wrong there is no middle ground. There are only two opposing options - the gospel of grace WITHOUT WORKS or "another gospel" justified by works - both cannot be true. You are either on one side or the other. And yes, you are wrong and your posts demonstrate it.

You're arguing with yourself. I never suggested there were two ways. Only you brought that up. What I've suggested is that you have made yourself the authority on scripture and what it means. It never occurs to you that you may be wrong even according to scripture.

 

[DHK]

I have heard from many that America is a "Christian" nation, especially from those who live abroad. America is not a Christian nation, and never was. Today it is a secular nation driven by the religion of humanism which is the underlying religion taught in every public educational institution in the country. It is a pluralistic nation, a nation of many different religions and cultures. Within this nation are many religions. The fastest growing religion in America is Islam.

When the world looks at the "Christian" percentage of the population of America they take into consideration all of Christendom. They lump under one umbrella Catholics, J.W.'s, Mormons, Christian Scientists, Moonies, Worldwide Church of God, Baptists, and everyone else under the sun that may be ever so lightly related to Christ and Christianity.

Catholics do not preach justification by faith alone, and do not preach the necessity of the new birth as the Bible defines it. In that they are no more Christian than the Mormons or the J.W.'s.

Consider the New Birth, that which Jesus said that without it, one cannot enter the kingdom of God. It is of utmost importance and necessary to be saved.
The Catholics say that the new birth = baptism.
Evangelicals say that the new birth = trusting Christ as Savior.

The two definitions are a polar opposites. They are as night and day. One has to be wrong. Both cannot be right. What does the Scripture say:

John 1:12-13 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
12 Which were born... of God.

The new birth is to be born of God. How? By receiving Christ and believing on the name of Christ. That is how one become a child of God and is born into the family of God. This Scripture is very clear on this subject. There is no baptism here. In fact there is no baptism anywhere in any verse that speaks of the new birth.

This is what makes the RCC a cult. They have a different salvation message. It is contrary to the message of Jesus, contrary to the message of the Bible, contrary to the message of how to gain entrance into heaven.
Thus, as Gal.1:8 teaches, it is accursed, and points people to Hell, not heaven. The RCC falls under the definition of a cult.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Then you've not properly identified what catholics believe. Catachism 424 And later or which is how the catholic church views Christ's role. As far as the Pope

Pathetic! The pope and preists act as intercessors between the common pew sitter and God and you know it. Only a fool is blind to the confession booth to see that they usurp the believers full rights to come boldly before God directly without any human mediator. Praying to images, to dead saints all betray your foolish interpretations and defense of Rome.

There are only TWO opposing sides and you must stand on one or the other - there is no middle ground (Gal. 1:6-9). It is apparent you don't have a clue about the gospel of Jesus Christ or you would not spue out this religious pornography that fills the cup of Rome.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Pathetic!

The pope and preists act as intercessors between the common pew sitter and God and you know it.

Only a fool is blind to the confession booth to see that they usurp the believers full rights to come boldly before God directly without any human mediator. Praying to images, to dead saints all betray your foolish interpretations and defense of Rome.

There are only TWO opposing sides and you must stand on one or the other - there is no middle ground (Gal. 1:6-9). It is apparent you don't have a clue about the gospel of Jesus Christ or you would not spue out this religious pornography that fills the cup of Rome.

I can sense you're blood boiling. Your ears turning red ... etc

Pathetic!

Woah there doggy! Kind of early in the debate for such sentaments.

The pope and preists act as intercessors between the common pew sitter and God and you know it.

What? No. You're immagining that. The Catachism.

Freedom is exercised in relationships between human beings. Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognized as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. The right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person...Christ himself declared that he was marked with his Father's seal.108 Christians are also marked with a seal: "It is God who establishes us with you in Christ and has commissioned us; he has put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee."109 This seal of the Holy Spirit marks our total belonging to Christ, our enrollment in his service for ever, as well as the promise of divine protection in the great eschatological trial.110 ...Prayer and Christian life are inseparable, for they concern the same love and the same renunciation, proceeding from love; the same filial and loving conformity with the Father's plan of love; the same transforming union in the Holy Spirit who conforms us more and more to Christ Jesus; the same love for all men, the love with which Jesus has loved us. "Whatever you ask the Father in my name, he [will] give it to you. This I command you, to love one another."41 ...There is no other way of Christian prayer than Christ. Whether our prayer is communal or personal, vocal or interior, it has access to the Father

So, you see that the Catholic can go straight to God in prayer and intercede for themselves.

 

[Dr. Walter]

You're arguing with yourself. I never suggested there were two ways. Only you brought that up. What I've suggested is that you have made yourself the authority on scripture and what it means. It never occurs to you that you may be wrong even according to scripture.

What you brought up was my position on the gospel! Can't you read and understand your own paraphase you gave in regard to my position on the gospel????????? Here is what you said:

All who preach another gospel than what I preach and how I understand it to be are deceived or lost or both and in addition to "accursed" and therefore think everyone else is deceived

So, I am not arguing with myself! I am simply stating what Christ and Paul repeatedly state - there are but two opposing views and you are either believing and defending one or the other. Your own mouth condemns you as a defender of the "accursed" gospel. Don't say you don't believe or teach it as you just defended that very position on the other thread in defense of Andre.

No, I am not wrong on my view of the gospel and I have proven it and will continue to prove it and you nor Andre have been able to respond with any credible evidence to the contrary.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I can sense you're blood boiling. Your ears turning red ... etc Woah there doggy! Kind of early in the debate for such sentaments. What? No. You're immagining that. The Catachism. So, you see that the Catholic can go straight to God in prayer and intercede for themselves.

Rome is but hypocrisy and confusion! Get rid of the confessional booth then. Get rid of the candles in front of idols and pictures then! Get rid of Maryology then! Get rid of praying to the saints then! Get rid of the Pope as the "vicar" of Christ then!

Your response is absolute foolishness and you know it.