Would you stay?

[utilyan]

View attachment 2386

Is it St. Matthew's Church? Did he die to save sinners?

LOL. I seriously doubt Baptist worship Matthew.

Anyone who actually experience the love of Jesus would have a tough time believing anyone would pass it up, any more then the idea someone would pass up a free suitcase of a million dollars.

But if you got nothing to praise Jesus for, one will believe their own kin let alone their own mother will betray God.

If I could meet someone who knows Jesus is God and say he isn't first it would be a real shock to me.

 

[Adonia]

View attachment 2386

Is it St. Matthew's Church? Did he die to save sinners?

Oh good grief, what a ridiculous question. No Catholic believes such a thing, we worship Jesus Christ as the Savior, so much so that His death and resurrection is the core of our worship service.

Now, please explain to me what exactly is meant by a certain church located on Main street that is called the 1st Baptist Church. Now, by that name am I to assume that some Baptist person died for our sins? Or maybe it was John the Baptist who gave the full measure? See how ridiculous your post was?

 

[JonShaff]

Oh good grief, what a ridiculous question. No Catholic believes such a thing, we worship Jesus Christ as the Savior, so much so that His death and resurrection is the core of our worship service.

Now, please explain to me what exactly is meant by a certain church located on Main street that is called the 1st Baptist Church. Now, by that name am I to assume that some Baptist person died for our sins? Or maybe it was John the Baptist who gave the full measure? See how ridiculous your post was?

You're right, those names are not right either

 

[church mouse guy]

Islam in Europe will destroy Europe and thus will destroy Catholicism.

 

[Davyboy]

StopBaptistPredators.org Many Baptist churches cover up their pastors diddling children.

For the most part, the huge child sex abuse scandal in the Protestant churches has been ignored. Protestant churches have 3 insurance companies for liability against child sex abuse and other sexual misconduct. These insurance companies are Church Mutual Insurance Co, GuideOne Insurance Co, and Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Co. The Associated Press reported that 260+ reports are received every year for the past three decades.

 

[Walter]

For the most part, the huge child sex abuse scandal in the Protestant churches has been ignored. Protestant churches have 3 insurance companies for liability against child sex abuse and other sexual misconduct. These insurance companies are Church Mutual Insurance Co, GuideOne Insurance Co, and Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Co. The Associated Press reported that 260+ reports are received every year for the past three decades.

The Protestant Clergy Sex Abuse Pattern | HuffPost

'The perception that Catholic priests are overrepresented among offenders is correct. They do offend at a higher rate. But because this country is predominantly Protestant, more children are abused by Protestant ministers than by Catholic priests. In 1990, the Freedom from Religion Foundation issued a study on pedophilia by clergy. At that time, two clergy per week were being arrested in North America for sex crimes against children. Fifty-eight percent of them were Protestant.'

Why is the horrific pedophilia problem in the Protestant churches largely overlooked? Since most Americans are Protestants, the Catholic sex abuse scandal is a story about “them.” Protestant Pedophilia is a story about “us,” which makes it less gratifying and more uncomfortable.

 

[Yeshua1]

The Protestant Clergy Sex Abuse Pattern | HuffPost

'The perception that Catholic priests are overrepresented among offenders is correct. They do offend at a higher rate. But because this country is predominantly Protestant, more children are abused by Protestant ministers than by Catholic priests. In 1990, the Freedom from Religion Foundation issued a study on pedophilia by clergy. At that time, two clergy per week were being arrested in North America for sex crimes against children. Fifty-eight percent of them were Protestant.'

Why is the horrific pedophilia problem in the Protestant churches largely overlooked? Since most Americans are Protestants, the Catholic sex abuse scandal is a story about “them.” Protestant Pedophilia is a story about “us,” which makes it less gratifying and more uncomfortable.

the obvious solution to this problem would be to have priests able to marry and have their urges expressed in a way pleasing to the lord! Priests being required to be celibate is NOT from god nor the Bible, but from tradition!

 

[Davyboy]

the obvious solution to this problem would be to have priests able to marry and have their urges expressed in a way pleasing to the lord! Priests being required to be celibate is NOT from god nor the Bible, but from tradition!

Your comment is just ignorance. Celibacy may be problematic for you but it wasn’t for Paul or Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:32-35, 38 & Matthew 18:12. The following people are not celibate but still have committed sexual abuse to children-many Protestant ministers, Jewish rabbis, Buddhist monks, Islamic clerics and Hare Krishna officials.

 

[Yeshua1]

Your comment is just ignorance. Celibacy may be problematic for you but it wasn’t for Paul or Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:32-35, 38 & Matthew 18:12. The following people are not celibate but still have committed sexual abuse to children-many Protestant ministers, Jewish rabbis, Buddhist monks, Islamic clerics and Hare Krishna officials.

My point is that several of them are acting out on sexual desires and urges that cannot be fulfilled as in a marriage situation.

 

[Walter]

You're right, those names are not right either

I am addressing both you and Yeshua1.

I have been posting on this board for years. I have participated and followed many Catholic focused threads. What is so puzzling is that when the anti-Catholics are clearly wrong on a subject, they will not concede ANYTHING to a Catholic. Years ago I debated DHK over whether priests of the Eastern Rite Catholic Church (who are allowed to marry, btw) were truly part of the Catholic Church. I presented overwhelming evidence to the affirmative. DHK would NEVER concede to a Catholic and the closest I got in the way of an apology from him was: 'you might be correct in one respect but I know for a fact 'that Catholic priests cannot marry'. BTW, for those not aware there are 23 Eastern Rite Catholic (not Eastern Orthodox) Churches which are shepherded by the Pope. Here is a link that will show you that they are part of The Holy Catholic Church.

Eastern Catholic Churches - Wikipedia

I find it sad that when people are clearly found in the wrong, they will insist that they are not. Here is an example a person posting nonsense about including 'saints names on churches equivocates believing their blood was shed for mankind'. He won't concede after being shown multiple examples of large Baptist churches including the name of a saint and other reasoning that he couldnt or wouldn't refute.

 

[Walter]

the obvious solution to this problem would be to have priests able to marry and have their urges expressed in a way pleasing to the lord! Priests being required to be celibate is NOT from god nor the Bible, but from tradition!

Your problem is that Eastern Rite Catholic priests CAN marry. They are Churches that are fully part of The Holy Catholic Church. So your 'all priests in The Catholic are forbidden to marry' position is a false one. Only the Latin Rite practices the discipline of celibacy. If a person receives the call to the priesthood and also is called to be married, he can pursue his vocation in an Eastern Rite church

 

[Adonia]

the obvious solution to this problem would be to have priests able to marry and have their urges expressed in a way pleasing to the lord! Priests being required to be celibate is NOT from god nor the Bible, but from tradition!

The OT prophet Jeremiah was celibate, as was John the Baptist, as was the Savior of us all Jesus Christ. Sounds like celibacy is indeed from God and is expressed in the Scriptures as evidenced by the three names I have mentioned here.

 

[steaver]

Where are we to take our problems to get resolved? To the Church my friend!

What problems are you speaking of?

you know the people of the new Christian Church who decided Christian doctrines

Christian doctrines were settled by the Apostles, found in the Scriptures they penned on behalf of the Holy Spirit. Any doctrines found in Christian congregations are to be measured against what the Apostles had to say about the matter.

The Scriptures are not the Church, they are words printed on paper, the guide for the human decision makers, the leaders of the institutional Church here on earth.

Exactly! And when those human decision makers go beyond what has been written, we the Church may call them on their conjecture and reject any doctrine by men which does not measure up to the Scripture. The Final Authority is the Scripture, the Word of God, not anyone's person interpretations thereof, not any group of Church leaders interpretations thereof.

 

[JonShaff]

I find it sad that when people are clearly found in the wrong, they will insist that they are not. Here is an example a person posting nonsense about including 'saints names on churches equivocates believing their blood was shed for mankind'. He won't concede after being shown multiple examples of large Baptist churches including the name of a saint and other reasoning that he couldnt or wouldn't refute.

Sir, are you not reading what i'm posting?

Likewise, if i baptist assembly says, "St. Matthew's Church," i believe it is deplorable.

 

[Davyboy]

The Final Authority is the Scripture, the Word of God, not anyone's person interpretations thereof, not any group of Church leaders interpretations thereof.

What Jesus clearly taught in the Bible is that He didn't give us a Bible, He gave us a Church. Jesus said, for example in Matthew 18:15-18, He says, and this is instructions that are perennial till the end of time, He says, "If your brother shall offend against thee, go tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you've gained your brother." If he won't hear you, what do you do? You don't get your Bible out and start arguing; He says, "Take one or two with you, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. If he will not even hear them, tell it to the church; and the one who fails to hear the church shall be as a heathen and a publican." In other words, Jesus established the Church to be His authority to speak for Him; that's exactly what we see happen in the book of Acts. Acts chapter 15 when there was a heresy that threatened to tear a fledgling church apart there in Antioch in the first century, what did they do? Paul and Barnabas came in, tried to settle it; they couldn't settle it. What did they do? They had a council, the Church declared on the matter, and the matter was settled. That's the way the Church functioned.

 

[Yeshua1]

Your problem is that Eastern Rite Catholic priests CAN marry. They are Churches that are fully part of The Holy Catholic Church. So your 'all priests in The Catholic are forbidden to marry' position is a false one. Only the Latin Rite practices the discipline of celibacy. If a person receives the call to the priesthood and also is called to be married, he can pursue his vocation in an Eastern Rite church

I did not think the Eastern orthodox recognize the validity of the Papacy though?

 

[Yeshua1]

What Jesus clearly taught in the Bible is that He didn't give us a Bible, He gave us a Church. Jesus said, for example in Matthew 18:15-18, He says, and this is instructions that are perennial till the end of time, He says, "If your brother shall offend against thee, go tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you've gained your brother." If he won't hear you, what do you do? You don't get your Bible out and start arguing; He says, "Take one or two with you, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. If he will not even hear them, tell it to the church; and the one who fails to hear the church shall be as a heathen and a publican." In other words, Jesus established the Church to be His authority to speak for Him; that's exactly what we see happen in the book of Acts. Acts chapter 15 when there was a heresy that threatened to tear a fledgling church apart there in Antioch in the first century, what did they do? Paul and Barnabas came in, tried to settle it; they couldn't settle it. What did they do? They had a council, the Church declared on the matter, and the matter was settled. That's the way the Church functioned.

The supreme and final authority rests in the scriptures, and not in any church!

 

[steaver]

He says, "If your brother shall offend against thee

Right. Not, "If you and your brother have an disagreement with Scripture". Stay in context please.....this is a PERFECT example of the misuse of Scripture.

 

[steaver]

Acts chapter 15 when there was a heresy that threatened to tear a fledgling church apart there in Antioch in the first century, what did they do? Paul and Barnabas came in, tried to settle it; they couldn't settle it. What did they do? They had a council, the Church declared on the matter, and the matter was settled. That's the way the Church functioned.

Again this is false. The "Church" did not settle the matter. The "Apostles" settled the matter and we have the Apostle's conclusion recorded for us to read and to know. The Apostles left the Church with their Final Authoritative instructions for abiding in sound doctrine. This is God's perfect plan, so groups of men would not go about setting themselves up as the Authority over the people. God gave His Apostles the Authority by His own leading to pen the doctrines for His Church. This is God's perfect way, so everyone of His children would have the exact same instructions and there SHOULD be no divisions on the core essentials of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The letters were addressed to ALL believers, not just to the leaders so they could then add their own conjectures. It's really remarkably perfect! Of course we have a remarkably Perfect God. It's a perfect "checks and balance" system, everyone gets to hear perfect doctrine straight from God. Otherwise you end up with sects trying to have sole authority and manipulating the people for their own personal power hungry benefits. This way the people can say to the leaders, wait a minute, Paul said...Peter said....Jesus said....John said....etc, etc. and the unadulterated truth explained by the Apostles stands as the Final Authority, not any group of power hungry men.

 

[Yeshua1]

Again this is false. The "Church" did not settle the matter. The "Apostles" settled the matter and we have the Apostle's conclusion recorded for us to read and to know. The Apostles left the Church with their Final Authoritative instructions for abiding in sound doctrine. This is God's perfect plan, so groups of men would not go about setting themselves up as the Authority over the people. God gave His Apostles the Authority by His own leading to pen the doctrines for His Church. This is God's perfect way, so everyone of His children would have the exact same instructions and there SHOULD be no divisions on the core essentials of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The letters were addressed to ALL believers, not just to the leaders so they could then add their own conjectures. It's really remarkably perfect! Of course we have a remarkably Perfect God. It's a perfect "checks and balance" system, everyone gets to hear perfect doctrine straight from God. Otherwise you end up with sects trying to have sole authority and manipulating the people for their own personal power hungry benefits. This way the people can say to the leaders, wait a minute, Paul said...Peter said....Jesus said....John said....etc, etc. and the unadulterated truth explained by the Apostles stands as the Final Authority, not any group of power hungry men.

The Church in acts was NOT the Roman church, peter was NOT the first Pope etc!