T
TaterTot
Guest
goodness, this thread has gotten ridiculous. No one is going to change the other one, so maybe we should just let it die (and bury it??)
Sorry couldnt resist.
-
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!
Since you have been a Baptist, have you . . .
- Thread starter Craigbythesea
- Start date
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
The problem Tater is that people make baseless accusations based on a misinterpretation of scripture, never give and answer, and hope it will go away.
standingfirminChrist
New Member
Wherefore come out from amongst them and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I am not a part of the Catholic church and do not touch their artificial sacrfice.
I assume you apply this to all walks of life. There are plenty of unclean things on the internet and you have not chosen to separate from it.
I assume you apply this to all walks of life. There are plenty of unclean things on the internet and you have not chosen to separate from it.
T
TaterTot
Guest
(ouch)
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
The Glories of Mary is a very well know work, and Catholic scholars that I have debated verified the quotes. I gave page numbers and book references to all of the quotes that I posted from other works as well.
As for true Catholic dogma, one need only go to The Council of Trent to see what they really believe on Justification. Why Craig to you think that this council was called in the first place? To lend credibility to Luther and his views on justification?
Here is a sampling from this heretical work:
"If anyone denies that by baptism the guilt of original sin is remitted (or) denies that justice, santification and redemption of Jesus Christ is applied both to adults and to infants by the sacrament of baptism...let him be anathema.
If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law (i.e. the seven sacramenst of the RCC) are not necessary for salvation...and that without them...men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification (see what I mean Tim)..let him be anathema.
If anyone says that baptism...is not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema.
If anyone says that after the reception of grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotteed out...and that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.
If anyone says that the sacifice of the mass...wherein that life-giving victim by which we are reconciled to the Father is daily immolated on the altar by priests...is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one...offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities, let him be anathema."
In 1962, at the opening of Vatican II in Rome, Pope John XXIII affirmed, "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council of Trent." Vatican II itself "proposes again the decrees of the Council of Trent." On 12/31/95, honoring the 450th anniversary of the opening of Trent, Pope John Paul II declared, "Its conclusions maintain all their value." (From The Berean Call) </font>[/QUOTE]Since the language spoken at the opening of Vatican II in Rome was not English, I knew immediately that these “quotes” could not possibly be genuine but it took me a few hours to run them down and find where they came from. Here is what I learned:
On August 13, 1997, a patient at Saint Mary’s of Bethlehem had a nightmare about Pope John and posted to the hospital’s message board that John Paul said these things at the opening of Vatican II. On September 6, 1997, a fanatical anti-Catholic “ministry” found these “quotes” on that hospital’s message board and quoted them as actual quotes on their web site. Since then, 769 more anti-Catholic web sites have copied these words word for word and quoted them on their web sites. Whoops, I just woke up from a nightmare!
That and while you sleep, Tinker Bell will fly in your window and take you off to Never-Never Land.
And also while you sleep, your Catholic 'friends' are on the highway to hell. </font>[/QUOTE]In the highly unlikely event that a Baptist may wish to know the actual contents of the Canons and Decrees of the Ecumenical Council of Trent rather than the rubbish so very often circulated by infidels whose goal in life is to make assaults on the portions of the Body of Christ with which it disagrees because of their own deliberate and willful ignorance of the Bible, I am posting here a link to a table of contents of the canons and decrees of the Ecumenical Council of Trent that includes links to the contents themselves.
The editor and translator of this edition of the Ecumenical Council of Trent was J. Waterworth and was first published in London by Dolman in 1848
http://history.hanover.edu/early/trent.htm
standingfirminChrist
New Member
I do not go to the unclean sites on the internet, if that is what you are implying. My internet experiences are research into Biblical studies.
And email.
... Oh, and the BB.
And email.
... Oh, and the BB.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Exactly, thank you for proving my point.
Just being someplace does not make one a partaker. I do not partake of the unclean thing when I go to a Catholic funeral so we are even.
Just being someplace does not make one a partaker. I do not partake of the unclean thing when I go to a Catholic funeral so we are even.
standingfirminChrist
New Member
so, since you have convinced yourself that it is ok to attend catholic services, how about dropping by the goliath site and shed some light on the madness there.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Since no one has given any evidence why it is wrong I am simply exercising a wonderful aspect of being a Baptist - soul liberty.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
Wherefore come out from amongst them and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you so bold as to call the Lord Jesus Christ a heretic and deny the truth of his teachings by example?
Matt. 8:1. And when he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.
2. And behold, there came to him a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.
3. And he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou made clean. And straightway his leprosy was cleansed. (NASB, 1995)
And so far, all of your posting in this thread has been based upon your personal belief that the Roman Catholic Church is not a Christian Church but you have posted no evidence to support your belief, and the evidence posted by others to support that belief has been shown to be of no merit.
The Romans Catholic Church is recognized as a Christian denomination by every mainline denomination and the large majority of Baptist denominations and individuals. The primary exceptions are far-right radical fundamentalist extremists who are typically the least educated and most ignorant of all Christian bodies giving rise to their hateful bigotry based upon lies rather than the truth.
standingfirminChrist
New Member
A little leaven leaveneth the who lump.
Ya know if ya put a drop, just a drop of poison in ground beef, it has poisoned the whole lump of ground beef.
To say I can attend catholic services as long as I don't participate in the unscriptural parts of the Mass, the funerals, the weddings, whatever, you are still taking part in the whole... which is poisoned with ungodly practice.
Ya know if ya put a drop, just a drop of poison in ground beef, it has poisoned the whole lump of ground beef.
To say I can attend catholic services as long as I don't participate in the unscriptural parts of the Mass, the funerals, the weddings, whatever, you are still taking part in the whole... which is poisoned with ungodly practice.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Just as posting on the internet is partaking of the whole - which is poisened by the ungodly sites.
standingfirminChrist
New Member
The majority of Baptists and individuals recognize that church that does not line up with the truth that is set forth in God's Word to be christian... Wow!
Let's just all join hands with the devil and sing 'Kum-ba-yah'.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
How about the unscriptural parts of the services in the Baptist church that you attend? Considering the very great diversity in the teachings in Baptist churches and the newness and novelty of many of the doctrines, including major doctrines regarding justification, sanctification, glorification, water baptism, spirit baptism, the second coming of Christ, the millennial kingdom, the role of women in the church, modes of church government, etc., etc, the chances that your particular Baptist congregation believes and does everything in agreement with the true teachings of Scripture are infinitely small.
So does a little legalism.
How come the "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" concept is completely ignored by you in regards to Jack Chick? Seems a bit hypocritical on your part. You have no problem joing hands and singing 'Kum-ba-yah' that that devil. Next, you'll be singing the praises of Kent Hovind as well.
ccrobinson
Active Member
If we've learned nothing else from this thread, we've learned who rightly divides the word of truth and who does not.
I asked a Catholic fellow that I know who is a Catholic scholar and historian about the Council of Trent and if Pope John Paul II endorsed it.
I asked him this:
>And did John Paul II ever
>endorse The Council of Trent
>in any of his speeches
>or writings?
He answered: "Yes, most definitely when it made sense. He once addressed the following to traditionalists: "I desire that all the members of the Church remain the heirs of the faith received from the Apostles, worthily and faithfully celebrated in the Holy Mysteries, with fervour and beauty, in order to receive grace in an increasing manner (Council of Trent, sess. VII, 3 March 1547, Decree on the Sacraments) and to live with the Divine Trinity in an intimate and profound relationship. While confirming the good based on the liturgical reform wished by the Second Vatican Council and initiated by Pope Paul VI, the Church grants also a sign of understanding to those persons "attached to certain previous liturgical and disciplinary forms" (motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei, n.5). It is in this perspective that one must read and apply the motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei. I desire that everything may happen in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, in full harmony with Tradition, aiming at unity in charity and loyalty to the Truth."
"It is under "the action of the Holy Spirit, by whom the flock of Christ maintains itself one and whole and progresses in the unity of the faith" (Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen Gentium, n.25) which the Successor of Peter and the Bishops, Successors of the Apostles, teach the Christian Mystery. In a very particular manner, the Bishops, gathered in Ecumenical Councils cum Petro and sub Petro, confirm and affirm the doctrine of the Church, Faithful Heiress of the Tradition already existing for almost twenty centuries, as a living reality which goes on giving a new impetus to the whole of the ecclesial community. The latest Ecumenical Councils - Trent, Vatican I, Vatican II - applied themselves to clarifying the mystery of the faith and undertook the necessary reforms for the good of the Church, solicitous for the continuity with the Apostolic Tradition, already recognized by St. Hippolytus.
I can guarantee you that his quotes are not bogus.
He gave me this site for their Catechism:
http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=trent&xsubmit=Search&s=SS
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a10.htm#I
Craig; if you still think that they have no doctrinal error as it pertains to their soteriology, then you lack discernment. Gal. 5:4,9.
And if you still think that the Council of Trent wasn't written to directly combat the Reformation, especially grace alone by faith alone, then you are sadly mistaken.
http://www.carm.org/catholic/trent.htm
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/REFORM/COUNTER.HTM
I asked him this:
>And did John Paul II ever
>endorse The Council of Trent
>in any of his speeches
>or writings?
He answered: "Yes, most definitely when it made sense. He once addressed the following to traditionalists: "I desire that all the members of the Church remain the heirs of the faith received from the Apostles, worthily and faithfully celebrated in the Holy Mysteries, with fervour and beauty, in order to receive grace in an increasing manner (Council of Trent, sess. VII, 3 March 1547, Decree on the Sacraments) and to live with the Divine Trinity in an intimate and profound relationship. While confirming the good based on the liturgical reform wished by the Second Vatican Council and initiated by Pope Paul VI, the Church grants also a sign of understanding to those persons "attached to certain previous liturgical and disciplinary forms" (motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei, n.5). It is in this perspective that one must read and apply the motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei. I desire that everything may happen in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, in full harmony with Tradition, aiming at unity in charity and loyalty to the Truth."
"It is under "the action of the Holy Spirit, by whom the flock of Christ maintains itself one and whole and progresses in the unity of the faith" (Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen Gentium, n.25) which the Successor of Peter and the Bishops, Successors of the Apostles, teach the Christian Mystery. In a very particular manner, the Bishops, gathered in Ecumenical Councils cum Petro and sub Petro, confirm and affirm the doctrine of the Church, Faithful Heiress of the Tradition already existing for almost twenty centuries, as a living reality which goes on giving a new impetus to the whole of the ecclesial community. The latest Ecumenical Councils - Trent, Vatican I, Vatican II - applied themselves to clarifying the mystery of the faith and undertook the necessary reforms for the good of the Church, solicitous for the continuity with the Apostolic Tradition, already recognized by St. Hippolytus.
I can guarantee you that his quotes are not bogus.
He gave me this site for their Catechism:
http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=trent&xsubmit=Search&s=SS
It also said this though:
But that justification only lasts until you sin again. Then it's the sacrifice of the Mass and penance for the removal of sins. This denies the sufficiency of the cross and the blood of Christ.
Note: all reference numbers of for the Catechism of the Catholic Church and can be easily looked up by anyone.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a10.htm#I
Craig; if you still think that they have no doctrinal error as it pertains to their soteriology, then you lack discernment. Gal. 5:4,9.
And if you still think that the Council of Trent wasn't written to directly combat the Reformation, especially grace alone by faith alone, then you are sadly mistaken.
http://www.carm.org/catholic/trent.htm
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/REFORM/COUNTER.HTM
Gold Dragon
Well-Known Member
I would agree that Trent was written largely as a reaction to the Reformation. Trent corrected the primary abuses pointed out by Luther and other protestants, namely the sale of indulgences. A major part was also to clarify on grace alone and faith alone and point out where those doctrines are in error when they go against James 2.
I would agree that Trent was written largely as a reaction to the Reformation. Trent corrected the primary abuses pointed out by Luther and other protestants, namely the sale of indulgences. A major part was also to clarify on grace alone and faith alone and point out where those doctrines are in error when they go against James 2.
</font>[/QUOTE]No Gold Dragon. They were rather inflicting more error by misinterpreting James 2 to say that works + faith + salvation. James never implied that. If he did then either his epistle or Paul's epistles and the Gospel of John were not Scripture.
What James was trying to point out was that so-called professing Christians that showed no change as per 2 Cor. 2:17, or fruit as per Gal. 5 were never saved in the first place.
Catholics are still misinterpreting this text. (1 Cor. 2:14)
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/doctrine/JamesPau.htm
This Catholic site insists that the sacraments are the cause of grace:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13295a.htm#II