BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 20,936
- 3,387
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Difference between Catholic and Protestant.
- Thread starter dev553344
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
ScottA
Well-Known Member
- Feb 24, 2011
- 11,741
- 5,593
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 20,936
- 3,387
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
No I committed a long time ago.
Just not to YOUR version of history.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
"And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” Matthew 16:18-19
Over "the years" a lot of discussions have occurred about these verses.
The word hades is a topic because Hades is a Greco-Roman god that reigned over the realm of the dead, of the same name. It is a good example of the Apostles having to improvise the Greek...a Pagan language that did not convey Christian morals or concepts or imaginary. Christ spoke these words but what language did He speak them in? If it was Hebrew the word would have been Sheol. Then the Apostles used the closest Greek word to that. They could not use the word hell because it had not been coined yet. The word 'Hell' is derived from an Anglo-Saxon word hellia (derived from the Old English, Old Norse, Old High German, hel, helle, circa. 725 AD. Most of our imagery of hell comes from writings called poems...The Divine Comedy an Italian narrative poem by Dante Alighieri, circa 1320 and Paradise Lost an epic poem in blank verse by the 17th-century English poet John Milton (1608–1674).
The word "church" in verse 18 has caused some confusion. No designated church buildings in this era. And it is another example of the Apostles improvising with Greek language that had no connection to Christianity. The word used ἐκκλησίαν means a place of meeting or assembly, with no religious connection. Like the assembly of Greek senators in Athens.
And then Yeshua said all this to Peter....but how did it actually manifest? Christians take these verses to heart and understand them at face value. Peter was an important figure in early Christianity, but there is no indication that he was "the leader of the twelve" or the Christian group - movement. And there is no evidence of a succession from him to what people call pope. The word Pope first came into use in the mid 10th century. The Catholics have a tendency to bestow the term on earlier Christian figures but the term or title was not used in those earlier time periods. The term that was used was "overseers" But the English term bishop, a much more modern term, derives from the actual Greek word that was used.... ἐπίσκοπος epískopos, meaning "overseer" This was the term that was used pretty early on in Christianity.
But back to Peter....two of the Gospels were written by Apostles that were among the twelve chosen. Mark and Luke were disciples of Peter and Paul respectively. Mark does not show up in the Bible or history as a Christian leader. Christians do not like change and they certainly do not like it when things do not turn out as stated in the scriptures. But as it was Peter went on to couple up with Paul to start a ministry to the Gentiles. He never did become the primary leader of Christianity. James the brother of Christ became the leader of the twelve....the Jewish-Christians. Paul and Peter became leaders of the Gentile-Christians. Paul was a citizen of Rome but neither Paul or Peter was connected to Rome in any special way....except it was Rome that killed them.
We do not have a lot of information on why and how James came to be the leader of the Apostles. But in relation to what Yeshua said to Peter, it may not have been about a leadership role, but rather a personal authority. This is another topic of discussion. Nothing like this was said of Paul.....so the question is posed....was Paul the brains of the Gentile ministry and Peter the authoritative power. What is known of the ministries of the other twelve Apostles? Not much, John would be the exception. The focus and details after Christ's resurrections in the scriptures are on Paul and Peter. One might conclude this was the focus of God's attention too.
Like I said Christians do not like change but it is nearly a rule in the storyline of the Bible. The Jews were looking for a human Messiah that would be a warrior king that would be married and have kids....This is one of the reason they rejected Yeshua....the last thing they were expecting the Messiah to be was a God. In there beliefs Elijah was a senior figure to the Messiah and he would introduce the Messiah...it did not workout that way. The concept of a God impregnating a woman and she giving birth to a god was a Pagan motif. So that did not workout well. God impregnating a woman that was betrothed to a man was considered adultery. There is no prophecy that foretold that. The Apostles believed they were living in the last days and Christ would return soon. That did not workout that way. The concept of change is something a person that studies has to understand....and why the change occurred. Not to deny it or to be offended by it because it happened so often. It is a separate study of why.
The Catholics try to paint a clear picture but it is not clear and they try to adjust Christianity to what they think it should be.... Virgin Mary...virgin birth....perpetual virginity...Original Son, Peter's authority inherited by the Catholic Church...things like that. Overall they can only trace their history to the Emperor Constantine and the Ecumenical Councils that standardized Christian beliefs to form the universal church....the Roman Catholic Church. Which I cannot express how important that was.... because if it did not happen... Christianity may not have survived. For one, before Constantine, Rome was out to extinguish Christianity. And for two Gnosticism was gaining popularity.
The modern Catholic Church is just that, they need to move forward from here. Stop trying to claim supremacy over other denominations. The effort alienates the Church from Christianity. If they want to be a leader, they need to start acting like one.
They are not superior and nothing in the past will support that....The Catholics are great people and I love them....and I stand and worship with them, but they just need to move forward.
There are a lot of Christian beliefs out there....a lot of Protestant denominations and non-denominational personal beliefs that do not agree with other Protestant denominations....which pretty much provides an unlimited targets to disagree with or hate. The shear number of Protestant denominations prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no agreement on the interpretation of the scriptures between the Protestant denominations. Which is why I say we should love our fellow Christians and why I am multi-denominational and why I can stand with so many and praise the Lord with them. I don't think any of them got it exactly right, but they love the Lord and that is something I have in common with them. Hard headed and full of grudgery, is that the Christian Way? My favorites churches are the Holy Ghost churches. There are Protestants that are Cessationists that do not believe in miracles and I have heard them say that miracle healings and or tongues are of the work of the devil. And say the same thing about the miracles and appearances of Miriam. All those thousands of people were seeing the devil!
With no agreement on the interpretations of the scriptures we need to be a little more tolerant of other Christian beliefs....Is it a surprise to God that we have all these denominations? Is it a surprise to God that we menz would it mess up? What would Yeshua and the Apostles say? Is there a Spirit of Christianity that should be considered, a character that should be reflected?
The Johnny Appleseed of truth....Be good and do good.
Over "the years" a lot of discussions have occurred about these verses.
The word hades is a topic because Hades is a Greco-Roman god that reigned over the realm of the dead, of the same name. It is a good example of the Apostles having to improvise the Greek...a Pagan language that did not convey Christian morals or concepts or imaginary. Christ spoke these words but what language did He speak them in? If it was Hebrew the word would have been Sheol. Then the Apostles used the closest Greek word to that. They could not use the word hell because it had not been coined yet. The word 'Hell' is derived from an Anglo-Saxon word hellia (derived from the Old English, Old Norse, Old High German, hel, helle, circa. 725 AD. Most of our imagery of hell comes from writings called poems...The Divine Comedy an Italian narrative poem by Dante Alighieri, circa 1320 and Paradise Lost an epic poem in blank verse by the 17th-century English poet John Milton (1608–1674).
The word "church" in verse 18 has caused some confusion. No designated church buildings in this era. And it is another example of the Apostles improvising with Greek language that had no connection to Christianity. The word used ἐκκλησίαν means a place of meeting or assembly, with no religious connection. Like the assembly of Greek senators in Athens.
And then Yeshua said all this to Peter....but how did it actually manifest? Christians take these verses to heart and understand them at face value. Peter was an important figure in early Christianity, but there is no indication that he was "the leader of the twelve" or the Christian group - movement. And there is no evidence of a succession from him to what people call pope. The word Pope first came into use in the mid 10th century. The Catholics have a tendency to bestow the term on earlier Christian figures but the term or title was not used in those earlier time periods. The term that was used was "overseers" But the English term bishop, a much more modern term, derives from the actual Greek word that was used.... ἐπίσκοπος epískopos, meaning "overseer" This was the term that was used pretty early on in Christianity.
But back to Peter....two of the Gospels were written by Apostles that were among the twelve chosen. Mark and Luke were disciples of Peter and Paul respectively. Mark does not show up in the Bible or history as a Christian leader. Christians do not like change and they certainly do not like it when things do not turn out as stated in the scriptures. But as it was Peter went on to couple up with Paul to start a ministry to the Gentiles. He never did become the primary leader of Christianity. James the brother of Christ became the leader of the twelve....the Jewish-Christians. Paul and Peter became leaders of the Gentile-Christians. Paul was a citizen of Rome but neither Paul or Peter was connected to Rome in any special way....except it was Rome that killed them.
We do not have a lot of information on why and how James came to be the leader of the Apostles. But in relation to what Yeshua said to Peter, it may not have been about a leadership role, but rather a personal authority. This is another topic of discussion. Nothing like this was said of Paul.....so the question is posed....was Paul the brains of the Gentile ministry and Peter the authoritative power. What is known of the ministries of the other twelve Apostles? Not much, John would be the exception. The focus and details after Christ's resurrections in the scriptures are on Paul and Peter. One might conclude this was the focus of God's attention too.
Like I said Christians do not like change but it is nearly a rule in the storyline of the Bible. The Jews were looking for a human Messiah that would be a warrior king that would be married and have kids....This is one of the reason they rejected Yeshua....the last thing they were expecting the Messiah to be was a God. In there beliefs Elijah was a senior figure to the Messiah and he would introduce the Messiah...it did not workout that way. The concept of a God impregnating a woman and she giving birth to a god was a Pagan motif. So that did not workout well. God impregnating a woman that was betrothed to a man was considered adultery. There is no prophecy that foretold that. The Apostles believed they were living in the last days and Christ would return soon. That did not workout that way. The concept of change is something a person that studies has to understand....and why the change occurred. Not to deny it or to be offended by it because it happened so often. It is a separate study of why.
The Catholics try to paint a clear picture but it is not clear and they try to adjust Christianity to what they think it should be.... Virgin Mary...virgin birth....perpetual virginity...Original Son, Peter's authority inherited by the Catholic Church...things like that. Overall they can only trace their history to the Emperor Constantine and the Ecumenical Councils that standardized Christian beliefs to form the universal church....the Roman Catholic Church. Which I cannot express how important that was.... because if it did not happen... Christianity may not have survived. For one, before Constantine, Rome was out to extinguish Christianity. And for two Gnosticism was gaining popularity.
The modern Catholic Church is just that, they need to move forward from here. Stop trying to claim supremacy over other denominations. The effort alienates the Church from Christianity. If they want to be a leader, they need to start acting like one.
They are not superior and nothing in the past will support that....The Catholics are great people and I love them....and I stand and worship with them, but they just need to move forward.
There are a lot of Christian beliefs out there....a lot of Protestant denominations and non-denominational personal beliefs that do not agree with other Protestant denominations....which pretty much provides an unlimited targets to disagree with or hate. The shear number of Protestant denominations prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no agreement on the interpretation of the scriptures between the Protestant denominations. Which is why I say we should love our fellow Christians and why I am multi-denominational and why I can stand with so many and praise the Lord with them. I don't think any of them got it exactly right, but they love the Lord and that is something I have in common with them. Hard headed and full of grudgery, is that the Christian Way? My favorites churches are the Holy Ghost churches. There are Protestants that are Cessationists that do not believe in miracles and I have heard them say that miracle healings and or tongues are of the work of the devil. And say the same thing about the miracles and appearances of Miriam. All those thousands of people were seeing the devil!
With no agreement on the interpretations of the scriptures we need to be a little more tolerant of other Christian beliefs....Is it a surprise to God that we have all these denominations? Is it a surprise to God that we menz would it mess up? What would Yeshua and the Apostles say? Is there a Spirit of Christianity that should be considered, a character that should be reflected?
The Johnny Appleseed of truth....Be good and do good.
Last edited:
The principle difference between Roman Catholicism and the churches of the Reformation go well beyond marriage, but to the gospel itself, the existence of an authoritative priesthood, and the means of receiving God's grace.
The Catholics divide their church into clergy and laity.
The Reformation recognizes the priesthood of believers.
The Catholics define saints through the performance of miracles.
The Reformation defines saints through their faith.
The Catholics crucify Christ over again in every "communion" service (through transubstantiation.)
The Reformation observes the ordinance of communion as a remembrance of the cross and the promise of His return, effectively a form of nonverbal testimony of faith.
The Catholics distribute God's grace through "sacraments."
The Reformation recognizes God's grace as distributed by the Holy Spirit with no other intermediary but Christ.
The Catholics have a hierarchy of elected or chosen authority with the pope at its head.
The Reformation has a hierarchy of pastors, elders and deacons based upon recognized spirituality and maturity (in ideal churches), but with all equally accountable to each other and the congregation.
The Catholics recognize one elected man to be the "vicar" of Christ and with the authority of Christ over spiritual matters and the interpretation of scripture.
The Reformation recognizes Christ as the head of the church, scripture as the ultimate authority, and interpretation ( or illumination) as the work of the Holy Spirit.
The Catholics teach the necessity of receiving sacraments regularly to maintain a state of grace.
The Reformation teaches the necessity of self examination and repentance to maintain a right relationship with God, who alone is the source of grace and dispenses it as He pleases.
The Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation without the church.
The Reformation teaches that salvation is by faith in Christ alone (and the other 4 "solas", grace alone, faith alone, scripture alone, for God's glory alone.)
Catholics tend to reduce the gospel to John 3:16.
The Reformation recognizes the gospel of salvation as Paul preached it, and as preached beforehand by Isaiah in chapter 53 of the book Isaiah. (That God regenerates men with His Spirit through faith in Christ, when they believe not only in His person, but enter into covenant with Him by making the sacrifice of Christ the propitiation of their sin, and submitting to His authority as the risen Christ, the Son of God.)
I'm sure more differences persist, including prayer to saints, "veneration" of Mary and an entire subculture based upon nonbiblical traditions, but I see the gospel and priesthood as the most significant differences. They are the only differences relevant to salvation (evangelists frequently evangelize Catholics or former Catholics with the gospel of salvation, simply because it isn't preached by Catholic priests and runs contrary to church dogma.)
Last edited:
Illuminator
Well-Known Member
Wrong. The clergy and the laity share the same common priesthood. Priests constantly tell the laity that they are no holier than anybody else. Ordination does not remove a man's humanity.
So do Catholics.
That's only one criteria. Saints are identified by their exemplary life in Christ. Summaries of their lives are available on line for everyone to see. Saints & Angels - Catholic Online
So do Catholics.
A blatant lie and a total misrepresentation of the Mass.
Within the first 65 years following the Protestant Revolt, there were 200 conflicting interpretations of "This Is My Body".
Yes, like Baptism and Matrimony. See Biblical Evidence for Sacramentalism
So do Catholics, and the Bible does not rule out subordinate mediators. You are a subordinate mediator every time you pray for someone, but you just don't get it.
Yes, that is how Jesus designed His Church. See Ephesians 4.
Most "reformed" churches have no bishops, an office clearly found in the NT.
Yes, to facilitate the unity that Christ wants for His Church. "reformed" churches have no vicar (which means servant) thus they have no unity.
So do Catholics. But your "work of the Holy Spirit" doesn't add up to thousands of conflicting denominations.
Yes, when you have an understanding of what a sacrament really is, and escape the stupid mockeries invented by reformists.
So do Catholics.
Because that is what the Apostles taught, and the CC does not have the authority to change that. "No Salvation Outside the Church" is another statement constantly misrepresented by anti-Catholics.
First we find that the Church insists many times over that those who through no fault of their own do not find the Church, but keep the moral law with the help of grace, can be saved....
we don't reduce "No Salvation Outside the Church" into a cheap tabloid headline.
A Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura
Nonsense. Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995) | John Paul II
\
Isaiah 35:8,
– this prophecy refers to the Church as the Holy Way where sons will be taught by God and they will not err. The Church has been given the gift of infallibility when teaching about faith and morals, where her sons are taught directly by God and will not err. This gift of infallibility means that the Church is prevented from teaching error by the power of the Holy Spirit (it does not mean that Church leaders do not sin!) Reformist theology flatly rejects this prophecy.
This is an uncharitable, divisive rant packed with lies and falsehoods.
Last edited:
Sorry, I guess I was poorly instructed at St. Martin of Tours, RCC. I'm not a student of the Reformation, but a former catholic that was taught and experienced these things.
You don't know your own religion, but I know the Lord.
He's my older brother.
Illuminator
Well-Known Member
Obviously. A Catholic by inertia or ethnicity is NOT a Catholic by practice. PARENTS are the primary religious educators by their example, schools and catechisms are SECONDARY. My theory is that ex-Catholics who become anti-Catholics come from dysfunctional families with lapsed parents, usually the father.
But you can't escape outdated 16th century politics that has been refuted a million times.
"former Catholic" is a standard feeble qualifier in order to bolster a testimony that gives false credibility to support prejudice. Explain the exodus of your best ministers and scholars who become Catholic by the hundreds, if not thousands.
That's strange, you admit you are not a student of the Protestant Revolt, but use outdated reformist arguments, and assume I don't know my own religion. Vatican II eliminated the need for a so called "reformation", but you don't investigate it's documents because that would take too much work.
You know the Lord in part, since you turned your back on Jesus in the Eucharist. John 6:66.
He's my older brother too, and my Priest, the same as the Pope.
I'm not anticatholic and never was. My first work as a born again Christian was a letter written to Pope John Paul, addressing him as a brother in the Lord and calling him to repentance on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church, not of the sins of Church history, but of false self serving doctrines and accepted idolatrous practices.Obviously. A Catholic by inertia or ethnicity is NOT a Catholic by practice. PARENTS are the primary religious educators by their example, schools and catechisms are SECONDARY. My theory is that ex-Catholics who become anti-Catholics come from dysfunctional families with lapsed parents, usually the father. But you can't escape outdated 16th century politics that has been refuted a million times. "former Catholic" is a standard feeble qualifier in order to bolster a testimony that gives false credibility to support prejudice. Explain the exodus of your best ministers and scholars who become Catholic by the hundreds, if not thousands.
That's strange, you admit you are not a student of the Protestant Revolt, but use outdated reformist arguments, and assume I don't know my own religion. Vatican II eliminated the need for a so called "reformation", but you don't investigate it's documents because that would take too much work. You know the Lord in part, since you turned your back on Jesus in the Eucharist. John 6:66.
He's my older brother too, and my Priest, the same as the Pope.
He moved in that direction with a public confession of the church's historical sin, and a call to "new thinking" but fell short of tearing down the images, grinding them to dust, and casting them in a river, or denying false dogma.
My mother was indeed abusive, but as a direct result of her uninformed faith. My father however, only marginally Catholic, was an honest loving man that I respected and did my best to honor up until his death and beyond.
All my relatives by blood are Roman Catholic, some devout, some even serving as teachers in that church, many attempting to live righteous lives, yet not one of them ever could explain or preach the gospel. It was never taught to them. While I've heard some of Isaiah chapter 9 read in Christmas masses, I never once heard Isaiah chapter 53 read or taught in the Roman Catholic Church. Is it being expounded now?
A gospel that includes the church is another gospel, not the gospel of salvation. A priesthood that dispenses grace is another gospel. A man with sole authority over the church (other than Christ Himself) is another gospel.
A few nights ago, I watched the movie "the two popes."
I don't know if it reflected reality and if the actors portrayed Benedict III and Pope Francis accurately, but I found the portrayal lovely and Pope Francis actually inspires hope in me that the church of my family is turning from vain practices and dogma to the light of God's truth.
It's not something any Catholic wants to hear, but the state of the RCC spiritually resembles the church of Laodicea in the book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, and I'm not suggesting that this is unique to the RCC. The false prosperity gospel reflects the same dying spiritual state wherever its taken hold. The Christian world is sickest where the church is the wealthiest, and healthiest where poverty and persecution makes real faith a necessity of survival.
Until the sick are willing to accept their illness, they do not seek a physician. Jesus did not abandon any of the churches, but calls them to believe and abide in Him, to repent of sin and keep their faith where it belongs, in Him.
I hope you've grown beyond knee-jerk reactions to challenges to your faith, but where does your faith rest, in men, or in scripture, in the church, or in Christ?
Last edited:
marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
Who knows. Only you can answer that question. I started at Baptist, went to the Brethren, then the Restoration movement, then Pentecostals, then His Church, then Baptist, then Charismatic, and then back to His Church where I am today.
Illuminator
Well-Known Member
"false self-serving doctrines and accepted idolatrous practices." is stupid insulting bigotry and intensely anti-Catholic.
Scripture in the form of art is not forbidden in the Bible. You made it into a false dogma following Calvin's insane iconoclasm. You have a different definition of "doctrine" and "idolatry" that renders any reasonable discussion impossible.
That is the seedbed of your prejudice. You were never a practicing Catholic as you never fell in love. You reject false caricatures, not the real thing as obviously you don't know what you are talking about.
Allow me to enlighten you:
1. The Gospel of life is at the heart of Jesus' message. Lovingly received day after day by the Church, it is to be preached with dauntless fidelity as "good news" to the people of every age and culture.
At the dawn of salvation, it is the Birth of a Child which is proclaimed as joyful news: "I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord" (Lk 2:10-11). The source of this "great joy" is the Birth of the Saviour; but Christmas also reveals the full meaning of every human birth, and the joy which accompanies the Birth of the Messiah is thus seen to be the foundation and fulfilment of joy at every child born into the world (cf. Jn 16:21).
When he presents the heart of his redemptive mission, Jesus says: "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10). In truth, he is referring to that "new" and "eternal" life which consists in communion with the Father, to which every person is freely called in the Son by the power of the Sanctifying Spirit. It is precisely in this "life" that all the aspects and stages of human life achieve their full significance.
The incomparable worth of the human person
2. Man is called to a fullness of life which far exceeds the dimensions of his earthly existence, because it consists in sharing the very life of God. The loftiness of this supernatural vocation reveals the greatness and the inestimable value of human life even in its temporal phase. Life in time, in fact, is the fundamental condition, the initial stage and an integral part of the entire unified process of human existence. It is a process which, unexpectedly and undeservedly, is enlightened by the promise and renewed by the gift of divine life, which will reach its full realization in eternity (cf. 1 Jn 3:1-2). At the same time, it is precisely this supernatural calling which highlights the relative character of each individual's earthly life. After all, life on earth is not an "ultimate" but a "penultimate" reality; even so, it remains a sacred reality entrusted to us, to be preserved with a sense of responsibility and brought to perfection in love and in the gift of ourselves to God and to our brothers and sisters.
The Church knows that this Gospel of life, which she has received from her Lord, 1 has a profound and persuasive echo in the heart of every person-believer and non-believer alike-because it marvellously fulfils all the heart's expectations while infinitely surpassing them. Even in the midst of difficulties and uncertainties, every person sincerely open to truth and goodness can, by the light of reason and the hidden action of grace, come to recognize in the natural law written in the heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15) the sacred value of human life from its very beginning until its end, and can affirm the right of every human being to have this primary good respected to the highest degree. Upon the recognition of this right, every human community and the political community itself are founded.
In a special way, believers in Christ must defend and promote this right, aware as they are of the wonderful truth recalled by the Second Vatican Council: "By his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some fashion with every human being".2 This saving event reveals to humanity not only the boundless love of God who "so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16), but also the incomparable value of every human person.
The Church, faithfully contemplating the mystery of the Redemption, acknowledges this value with ever new wonder.3 She feels called to proclaim to the people of all times this "Gospel", the source of invincible hope and true joy for every period of history. The Gospel of God's love for man, the Gospel of the dignity of the person and the Gospel of life are a single and indivisible Gospel.
For this reason, man-living man-represents the primary and fundamental way for the Church. 4
Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995) | John Paul IIAt the dawn of salvation, it is the Birth of a Child which is proclaimed as joyful news: "I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord" (Lk 2:10-11). The source of this "great joy" is the Birth of the Saviour; but Christmas also reveals the full meaning of every human birth, and the joy which accompanies the Birth of the Messiah is thus seen to be the foundation and fulfilment of joy at every child born into the world (cf. Jn 16:21).
When he presents the heart of his redemptive mission, Jesus says: "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10). In truth, he is referring to that "new" and "eternal" life which consists in communion with the Father, to which every person is freely called in the Son by the power of the Sanctifying Spirit. It is precisely in this "life" that all the aspects and stages of human life achieve their full significance.
The incomparable worth of the human person
2. Man is called to a fullness of life which far exceeds the dimensions of his earthly existence, because it consists in sharing the very life of God. The loftiness of this supernatural vocation reveals the greatness and the inestimable value of human life even in its temporal phase. Life in time, in fact, is the fundamental condition, the initial stage and an integral part of the entire unified process of human existence. It is a process which, unexpectedly and undeservedly, is enlightened by the promise and renewed by the gift of divine life, which will reach its full realization in eternity (cf. 1 Jn 3:1-2). At the same time, it is precisely this supernatural calling which highlights the relative character of each individual's earthly life. After all, life on earth is not an "ultimate" but a "penultimate" reality; even so, it remains a sacred reality entrusted to us, to be preserved with a sense of responsibility and brought to perfection in love and in the gift of ourselves to God and to our brothers and sisters.
The Church knows that this Gospel of life, which she has received from her Lord, 1 has a profound and persuasive echo in the heart of every person-believer and non-believer alike-because it marvellously fulfils all the heart's expectations while infinitely surpassing them. Even in the midst of difficulties and uncertainties, every person sincerely open to truth and goodness can, by the light of reason and the hidden action of grace, come to recognize in the natural law written in the heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15) the sacred value of human life from its very beginning until its end, and can affirm the right of every human being to have this primary good respected to the highest degree. Upon the recognition of this right, every human community and the political community itself are founded.
In a special way, believers in Christ must defend and promote this right, aware as they are of the wonderful truth recalled by the Second Vatican Council: "By his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some fashion with every human being".2 This saving event reveals to humanity not only the boundless love of God who "so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16), but also the incomparable value of every human person.
The Church, faithfully contemplating the mystery of the Redemption, acknowledges this value with ever new wonder.3 She feels called to proclaim to the people of all times this "Gospel", the source of invincible hope and true joy for every period of history. The Gospel of God's love for man, the Gospel of the dignity of the person and the Gospel of life are a single and indivisible Gospel.
For this reason, man-living man-represents the primary and fundamental way for the Church. 4
I hope you grow beyond your knee-jerk bigotry and baseless insults.
I know you can't see it, but I see multiple self contradictions in your posts. A dead man can't reason, but you can know knew life in Christ Jesus."false self-serving doctrines and accepted idolatrous practices." is stupid insulting bigotry and intensely anti-Catholic.
Scripture in the form of art is not forbidden in the Bible. You made it into a false dogma following Calvin's insane iconoclasm. You have a different definition of "doctrine" and "idolatry" that renders any reasonable discussion impossible.
That is the seedbed of your prejudice. You were never a practicing Catholic as you never fell in love. You reject false caricatures, not the real thing as obviously you don't know what you are talking about.
Allow me to enlighten you:
1. The Gospel of life is at the heart of Jesus' message. Lovingly received day after day by the Church, it is to be preached with dauntless fidelity as "good news" to the people of every age and culture.Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995) | John Paul II
At the dawn of salvation, it is the Birth of a Child which is proclaimed as joyful news: "I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord" (Lk 2:10-11). The source of this "great joy" is the Birth of the Saviour; but Christmas also reveals the full meaning of every human birth, and the joy which accompanies the Birth of the Messiah is thus seen to be the foundation and fulfilment of joy at every child born into the world (cf. Jn 16:21).
When he presents the heart of his redemptive mission, Jesus says: "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10). In truth, he is referring to that "new" and "eternal" life which consists in communion with the Father, to which every person is freely called in the Son by the power of the Sanctifying Spirit. It is precisely in this "life" that all the aspects and stages of human life achieve their full significance.
The incomparable worth of the human person
2. Man is called to a fullness of life which far exceeds the dimensions of his earthly existence, because it consists in sharing the very life of God. The loftiness of this supernatural vocation reveals the greatness and the inestimable value of human life even in its temporal phase. Life in time, in fact, is the fundamental condition, the initial stage and an integral part of the entire unified process of human existence. It is a process which, unexpectedly and undeservedly, is enlightened by the promise and renewed by the gift of divine life, which will reach its full realization in eternity (cf. 1 Jn 3:1-2). At the same time, it is precisely this supernatural calling which highlights the relative character of each individual's earthly life. After all, life on earth is not an "ultimate" but a "penultimate" reality; even so, it remains a sacred reality entrusted to us, to be preserved with a sense of responsibility and brought to perfection in love and in the gift of ourselves to God and to our brothers and sisters.
The Church knows that this Gospel of life, which she has received from her Lord, 1 has a profound and persuasive echo in the heart of every person-believer and non-believer alike-because it marvellously fulfils all the heart's expectations while infinitely surpassing them. Even in the midst of difficulties and uncertainties, every person sincerely open to truth and goodness can, by the light of reason and the hidden action of grace, come to recognize in the natural law written in the heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15) the sacred value of human life from its very beginning until its end, and can affirm the right of every human being to have this primary good respected to the highest degree. Upon the recognition of this right, every human community and the political community itself are founded.
In a special way, believers in Christ must defend and promote this right, aware as they are of the wonderful truth recalled by the Second Vatican Council: "By his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some fashion with every human being".2 This saving event reveals to humanity not only the boundless love of God who "so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16), but also the incomparable value of every human person.
The Church, faithfully contemplating the mystery of the Redemption, acknowledges this value with ever new wonder.3 She feels called to proclaim to the people of all times this "Gospel", the source of invincible hope and true joy for every period of history. The Gospel of God's love for man, the Gospel of the dignity of the person and the Gospel of life are a single and indivisible Gospel.
For this reason, man-living man-represents the primary and fundamental way for the Church. 4
I hope you grow beyond your knee-jerk bigotry and baseless insults.
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 20,936
- 3,387
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
If you’re an “ex” Catholic – how could you NOT be a student of the Reformation?
I can assure you that just about every argument you have against the Church has already been argued.
I’m referring to your earlier rant against the Church in post #345., which shows an abject ignorance of Catholic doctrine. It’s not surprising to me that you left the Church because MOST, if not ALL ex-Catholics I’ve come in contact with are almost completely ignorant of whet they left behind in their former Catholic faith. For example:
- YOU decry the sacrament of Communion as “RE-Crucifixion” of Christ.
It is a RE-presentation of the ONCE for all sacrifice, which is an ETERNAL sacrifice (Rev. 13L8).
- YOU condemn the ministerial priesthood because we are ALL part of the priesthood of believers.
Apparently, you are ignorant of Scripture, which shows THREE levels of Priests in the OT:
1. The High Priest (Lev. 16, Haggai 1:12-14 S).
2. The Levitical/Ministerial Priesthood (Lev. 16).
3. The rest of the people were a General priesthood of believers (Exod. 19:6).
There are also THREE levels of Priests in the NT:
1. Jesus, our High Priest (1 Tim. 2:5, Heb. 7:22-25)
2. The Ministerial Priests (Rom 15:15-16, James 5:14-15)
3. The General priesthood of all Christians (1 Peter 2:5-9).
- YOU claim that the Holy Spirit distributes grace without ANY intermediaries but Christ.
The BIBLE, on the other hand, states that grace is imparted THROUGH (not BY) His Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, John 20:21-22, 1 Tim. 4:14, 1 Tim. 5:22, 2 Tim. 1:6, Hebrews 6,:2, Acts 2:47, Acts 6:6, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 10:44-48, Acts 13:3, Acts 19:6).
- YOU condemn the Catholic clergy and claim that Scripture is the “ultimate Authority” and that Protestant hierarchy is “equally-accountable”.
The BIBLE, however, states that the CHURCH is our final earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18,Luke 10:16, John 20:21-22), that there ARE those who are “over us” in Christ (1 Thess. 5:12 , 1 Tim. 5:17) – and differentiates between the laity and the clergy (1 Cor 12:27:31, 2 Cor. 5:18-20:2, Thess. 2:16, 2 Thess. 3:6, 2 Tim. 2:2).
- YOU condemn Catholic teaching because it does NOT include the Protestant inventions of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura.
Ummmm, neither does the BIBLE, which is your “Ultimate” Authority . . .
- YOU claim that Catholics “reduce” the Gospell to John 3:16, whereas Protestants teach that God regenerates men through faith alone.
The BIBLE states that we are regenerated through BAPTISM in faith (John 3:5, Mark 16:16, 1 Pet. 3:21). NOT sure where you got the “John 3:16” comparison because most Protestants would claim that we ADD more to the Gospel than “reduce”.
Suffice it to say that your post is FULL of gaping holes because you’re NOT a student of the Reformation .
Illuminator
Well-Known Member
TRANSLATION: I can't refute the Gospel of Life as described in Evangelium Vitae, so I'll reply with a hollow flaming zinger instead.
Illuminator
Well-Known Member
It amazes me how non-denominationals deny following any reformer, but they all stick to purely reformist 16th century inventions and present a delusion of non-bias.
Daniel B. Wallace is an American professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. (Protestant) His view of non-denominationalism isn't flattering:
I am unashamedly a Protestant. I believe in sola scriptura, sola fidei, solus Christus, and the rest. I am convinced that Luther was on to something when he articulated his view of justification succinctly: simul iustus et peccator (“simultaneously justified and a sinner”).
But with the birth of Protestantism there necessarily came a rift within the western church. By ‘necessarily’ I mean that Protestants made it necessary by splitting from Rome. Jaroslav Pelikan had it right when he said that the Reformation was a tragic necessity. Protestants felt truth was to be prized over unity, but the follow-through was devastating. This same mindset began to infect all Protestant churches so that they continued to splinter off from each other. Today there are hundreds and hundreds of Protestant denominations. One doesn’t see this level of fracturing in either Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Not even close.
“But unity in falsehood is no unity at all,” some will protest. To a degree that is true. If the unity of the church meant that we would all deny the bodily resurrection of the theanthropic person, then that would be unity against an essential of the Christian faith. But there is no thinking Christian who agrees lock, stock, and barrel with what his pastor teaches. Yet, he is a part of that church. In this respect, he has prized unity over truth. We all have to do this. If we didn’t, each Christian would be his or her own church. The fellowship would be awfully predictable and quite boring!
Several evangelical scholars have noted that the problem with Protestant ecclesiology is that there is no Protestant ecclesiology. In many denominations—and especially in non-denominational churches—
- there is no hierarchy of churches responsible to a central head,
- no accountability beyond the local congregation,
- no fellowship beyond the local assembly,
- no missional emphasis that gains support from hundreds of congregations,
- and no superiors to whom a local pastor must submit for doctrinal or ethical fidelity.
First, I have spent a lot of time with Greek Orthodox folks. It doesn’t matter what Orthodox church or monastery I visit, I get the same message, the same liturgy, the same sense of the ‘holy other’ in our fellowship with the Triune God. The liturgy is precisely what bothers so many Protestants since their churches often try very hard to mute the voices from the past. “It’s just me and my Bible” is the motto of millions of evangelicals. They often intentionally forget the past two millennia and the possibility that the Spirit of God was working in the church during that time. Church history for all too many evangelicals does not start until Luther pounded that impressive parchment on the Schlosskirche door.
The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology
Within the above faulty premise of "non-denominationals", they qualify themselves as authoritive critics of Catholicism while denying their own roots.
Last edited:
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
Upon reading this, tell me if I'm wrong in concluding that in summary, I could say Catholics believe their salvation comes from the sinless life of Christ? That the merits of His life is imparted to the repentant sinner and is thus saved from sin? That's the gospel according to catholicism?
A corollary to that I assume is the impartation of the merits of the lives of Mary and various saints that sustain the Catholic in his faith? I don't quite understand the details of that, but is that generally correct?
what commandments?
there must be more to fundamentalists than protests, accusations, and the triple curse of pride, presumption, and arrogance!
Prophecy of the new covenant and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. (The new covenant church) Jn 15:1-5
Dan 2: 44 And in the days of these kings (Roman Caesars) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
Isaiah 2:2
And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
Micah 4:1
But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.
Daniel 7:18
But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
Rev 21: 10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
Lk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Lk 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:
Matthew 5:14
Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
Matt 21:43 taken from Israel given to Peter and the apostles Matt 16:18-19 18:18 Jn 20:21 eph 2:20
1 Peter 4:11
If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Jude 1:8
Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
Jude 1:25
To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
Christ is king and has all authority and dominion!
Christ appointed Peter, the apostles, and their successors to govern the church and administer the kingdom until He returns in glory!
Submission and obedience to them is submission and obedience to Christ!
Like Joseph under pharaoh the king and his brothers bowed in obedience to Him as God willed!
But Protestant fundamentalists will not, for satan the first Protestant was in rebellion against God saying: I will not serve! I will not obey!
So who is you’re leader?
All those who submit and obey are Christ’s!
Those who do not are satan’s!
ACTS 16: HOW THE PHILLPIAN JAILER WAS SAVED
29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, 30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
not until the hour of death!
Matt 24:13 endures to the end.
Mark 13:13
And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
Heb 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
Heb 6:11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end:
1. Romans 11:22 – God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness
2. Colossians 1:21-23 – holy and blameless, if you continue in the faith"
3. The race of faith: the example of Paul
4. Hebrews 12:22-25: "we shall not escape if we turn away from Him"
5. Hebrews 4:1-3, 9-12: "strive to enter the rest of God"
6.Hebrews 6:4-9 – those who became partakers of the holy spirit and fell away
7. Hebrews 10:23-29, 35-39: "if we sin willfully", "if anyone draws back".
8. Matthew 24:13: He that endures to the end, the same shall be saved
9. Hebrews 3:4-6: Holding fast our confidence firm until the end
10. Matthew 24:13: "But the one who endures to the end will be saved"
11. 1 John 2:24-25 – "if what you heard from the beginning abides in you"
12. 2 John 8-9 : to "everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ
13. 2 Peter 1:5-11 : "Make every effort to supplement your faith"
14. Philippians 2:12-16: "work out your salvation with fear and trembling"
15. 1 Timothy 6:10-16: the love of money
16. Galatians 5:2-4 "Severed from Christ"
17. 2 Timothy 2:11-13: "if we deny him, he will also deny us"
18. James 5:19-20: the wandered brother
19. Some will abandon the faith
20. 1 Timothy 5:8: "he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever"
22. The real family of Jesus: "Those who hear the Word of God and do it"
23. 1 Corinthians 5:5: "so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord"
24. Peter 2: "It would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness"
25. Jude: "Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness" - a much relevant warning
26. 1 Cor. 9:27 ....Lest I myself might become a castaway
27. Heb 1:14 shall be heirs of salvation
Romans 1:5
By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
(Must remain obedient)
(He who endured to the end) one who dies in a state of grace united to Jesus Christ by faith and baptism!
Mk 16:16 acts 8:36-38 1 pet 3:21
Matt 24:13
Romans 13:11
And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.
So salvation by “faith alone” is completely false and impossible!
Is baptismal regeneration included in what we must believe?
- Status
Similar threads
