Darron Steele said:
Your person may say he is Catholic, but he is not. You have to be Christian to be a real Catholic.
To become a true and real Christian, one should not be Catholic which is worshipping Idols, insulting God to be called a son of a sinful woman, bounding for Purgatory which is virtually Catholic version of Hell where even the Robber at the Cross didn't go, performing the baptism unto the babies who never understand the Gospel or confessing the faith, full of paganism like Holy Water, worshipping cookie god!
This person you are talking about would not meet the approval of Catholic teaching. I think it as unfair to judge Catholicism by people who claim to follow it, but really do not, just as it would be unfair for a skeptic of Christianity at large to exploit professing Christians who are not really Christians.
No, such people firmly believe that he or she is a good Catholic!
What about the Catholic Priests and Dioceses which pay millions of Dollars to compromise the lawsuits?
Are the Catholic Priests who assaulted altar boys not Catholic?
What about Pope Alexander 6 who had many bastards thru prostitutes, eventually died of STD?
Is a self-described "Baptist" who does the same things you are talking about, except obsess about Mary, a real Baptist? No; you have to be a Christian to be a real Baptist.
Yes, in case of Baptists, they deny the fellowship if such behaviors and such status of faith are found. But in case of Catholic, do they accept the members by listening to the testimonies? What about John Kerry when he supported gay marriage and abortion? Was he excommunicated ?
In that aspect isn't Roman Catholic a kind of political association to distract the people from the true Christianity ?
Lot was well-aware of the problems of Sodom and Gomorrah;
Lot didn't know about the desitny of Sodom and Gomorrah, as you don't know about Roman Catholic now! That is why he was a kind of elder there sitting at the gate of the city and tarried in leaving there despite the urging by angels. Eventually he lost his wife and all the assets he earned. He was saved in naked form.
he begged the angelic visitors to stay with him instead of on the city square, where it would have been too dangerous.
I didn't say that Lot was not saved. He was righteous man. You misunderstood my points.
Behold the testimony of God written by Peter:
There are many born again believers who continue to comit sins even after the salvation. Read 1 Cor 5. Lot didn't know about Sodom and Gomorrah as much as Abraham did. Abraham knew about their destiny very well, therefore asked God if He destroy the cities even if there are 50 righteous men, down to 10 righteous men. There were no more righteous persons than 3. Understanding 2 Peter 2:7 is a common sense to the Christian believers. I was not denying that Lot was righteous person saved from Sodom and Gomorrah. What I was pointing out is that in the spiritual world, one staying away from the eveil world knows the wickedness of if much better than the persons who are deeply involved in there.
Let me ask you this:
There are many porn magazines and porn movies, gay people, drunken people, abortion advocators, weed smokers, etc.
In order to know about their problems and their destiny, do you need to participate in those group and be a member of gay bar, watching porn movies? Is this why many Roman Catholics do the same things as the non-believers do like drinking, smoking, drugs, abortions, etc?
In your logic, you may say that you have to be deeply involed in there, and the more experience you have with such people, the better you know about their world.
In my logic, the farther I stay away from such group of people, the more clearly and more correctly I can understand their problems and their destiny.
It seems that you don't have such experience of spiritual discernment, which is a great pity for you.
You are wrong about Scripture in this regard, and you are wrong about Catholicism. I know enough about Catholicism, ancient church writings, and Scripture to know Catholicism's REAL problems -- which pale in comparison to what some are posting here.
Have you ever read thru the Bible so far?
I have a Catholic relative and he said all the time " Many protestants say Catholics don't read Bible but we read Bible very much" One day he joined the family bible hour at my home, then I said " let's read Isaiah 53" then he was looking for it in the New Testament, later on he excused he heard about it several times and therefore he thought it was in NT. Then when we read Hebrews, he was searching for it in OLd Testament. When we read Zechariah, he was looking at me for the help. At the end the Bible hour lasted 3 hours and he confessed that he read the Bible for the first time so much and such amount was more than what he read at Catholic church throughout his life. I am not telling you vain story but what happened at my home.
Have you ever read the Bible seriously and wholeheartedly?
If so, how did you over look so many condemnations on idol worships?
How much expression, adoration, veneration are needed to be construed as "worshipping" idol or goddess?
Read the following from Catholic site:
But in the Bible all prophecies applied to Mary apply also to the Church, and vice versa... in Gen.1:15, in Revelation 12:1-5... so, the Queen is Mary, and it is the Church of Christ!.
It is like a riddle: The Bride of the King is also the Daughter of the King, and the Mother of the King... it is Virgin Mary!, the Mother of Jesus,
the Spouse of the Spirit, the Daughter of the Father... and it is the Church!: The bride of Jesus, the mother of Jesus who came from the People of God, and the daughter of Jesus who founded his Church!.
http://biblia.com/christianity2/psalms.htm
IN the above logic, Catholic say Mary =Church= Bride of Jesus Christ. How come Mother and Son become spouses? Isn't this heard about Semiramis and Nimroth who married between mother and son?
Are they the profound theory of Catholic?
