You as a Christian Evangelizing Catholics.

Oh, I have no doubt that there are lost Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, Anglicans, etc. I don't presume that a person is saved by their affiliation any more or less than I presume they're lost. In fact, I don't presume at all, until I get to know them personally.

Interestingly, it was a Roman Catholic Priest who helped me come to know Christ as my savior. But admittedly, he wasn't a typical priest, either. I have a former classmate of mine, who went into the priesthood (which was funny, considering that we dated some of the same girls in high school). There is no doubt that he is saved, because I personally know his testimony.

I know with certainty that most of my Catholic friends are. I know this because I know their testimony, as surely as they know mine. Therefore, I say with 100% assuredness that most of my friends who are Cathoilc are saved. That said, I also know some who are not. I personally think it's a bit silly (not to mention a bit judgemental) for you to make a determination of people I know based solely on their demoninational affiliation, when I know their testimony. That being said, I don't think it was your intention in this thread to judge their salvation, or anyone else's. Just wanted to clarify I'm not accusing you of something intentional.

 

Your quote actually shows why the DC's are not part of the Bible...they contradict Scripture. You have to wonder how a church can hold to teachings from "history books" that contradicts as Scripture. </font>[/QUOTE]I'm unsure in which way these books contradict Scripture if they're accepted as Scripture.

 

I agree that there are born again Baptists.

But I would venture that more than likely 9 out of every 10 Baptists one might randomly encounter are no more saved than Satan is. And if they are a member of the clergy...preacher, deacon, choir director etc...the percentage becomes much much smaller than 1 of 10. (personally I think the 1 of 10 figure is being very generous)

I believe you would be shocked if you knew how few...if any...of the Baptists you personally know are saved.

 

Priests and other "good Catholics" are saved like anyone else: by grace through faith, which is not of themselves, but rather a gift from God.

Being "good" in any religious system has nothing to do with salvation nor the maintainance thereof. The above is completely incongruent with the RCC catechism.

In the end, some are saved, inspite of their religious accomplishments. Nicodemus was a "right reverend doctor"--as lost as he could be. Jesus told him he must be born again to enter the kingdom. That applies to every one, having nothing to do with good works. See John 3:1-21.

We have been trying to save ourselves ever since Cain made an unacceptable sacrifice. It still does not work.

One can be beatified, cannonized, deified and whatever by the acts of mortal man and not go to heaven. Salvation is of the Lord, not by any of our filthy rags burned on a corrupted altar.

Selah,

Bro. James

[ March 29, 2006, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: Bro. James ]

 

I'm unsure of your argument here.

 

No argument. We are saved by grace through faith, not of ourselves.

We could join every church in the world, get baptized daily and serve daily in the temple, tithe daily, and still go to hell.

Grace not works. It cannot be both, or an admixture.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

We hhave been asking about whether they CAN be saved in RCC and saying - "yes they can" - but the real question in the OP is WHY evangelize them?

Even if you grant that some can be saved while still RC - which many here accept -- the question in the OP remains.

Does the degree of error that they have embraced - result in a view of God, salvation, the Gospel, that is so darkened as to greatly "Benefit them" by having them step into the light?

Why evangelize them? What do Christians like DHK and Mike say - who used to be Catholic and now have the light of the Gospel shining?

Do they simply say "well I PREFERRED to be Catholic then and now I PREFER not to be"??

Is that really all the substance there is to the difference between "truth and error"??

That seems to be the real thrust of the language used in the OP regardless of the intent of the author.

In Christ,

Bob