Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 3   [ 48 posts ]   Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2018 12:16 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:38 pm
Posts: 848
Religion: Roman Catholic
If Protestants just believed the Bible they claim to believe in, they would begin to understand Catholicism. In fact, many who read the Bible and know it fairly well have actually become.. I guess you would say: half Catholic already

for example: Jesus says in Mt 16:18 that he will build his Church and the gates of Hell (heresy, apostasy, etc) would not prevail against it

So either they beleive Jesus said that or not

which one is it?

so if they say they believe Jesus said that, well, they will bring up the notion that the Church is all of us regardless of "denomination" and there was never meant to be an actual, physical Church and etc... etc..

well, where does it say THAT in the Bible?

Jesus just says Church, he doesn't say it will be a NON-physical place.. doesn't say one way or the other

so anyway, if Jesus established a Church that was meant to last forever (Mt 28:20, etc), ask them: Where is that Church today? Which one is it? Only the Roman Catholic Church goes back to the time of Christ/the Apostles (they can read the Church Fathers and see that even in the first centuries, the Church was "very Catholic"--Eucharist, etc)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:28 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 4845
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Religion: Christian & Missionary Alliance
Just to be clear, you aren't actually suggesting that Protestants haven't actually studied the Bible--every single word and verse in painstaking detail--are you?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 9:16 pm
Posts: 901
Religion: Catholic
flyingaway wrote:
If Protestants just believed the Bible they claim to believe in, they would begin to understand Catholicism. In fact, many who read the Bible and know it fairly well have actually become.. I guess you would say: half Catholic already

for example: Jesus says in Mt 16:18 that he will build his Church and the gates of Hell (heresy, apostasy, etc) would not prevail against it

So either they beleive Jesus said that or not

which one is it?



Actually, most Protestants understand that passage in a much different way, to wit; gates do not go on the offensive, they are set up as a defense. So when the gospel is advanced, the gates of Hell will not prevail, by the power of Christ, the Church goes on the offensive and smashes through them, in a manner of speaking.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 5:04 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:38 pm
Posts: 848
Religion: Roman Catholic
theJack wrote:
Just to be clear, you aren't actually suggesting that Protestants haven't actually studied the Bible--every single word and verse in painstaking detail--are you?

laugh

no, i certainly would never want to imply THAT!

they THINK they know the bible, though.. they always seem to think they know it, all the ones i have talked to

and you know.. human nature being what it is, people just hate when you catch them in a.. um.. what do you call it? when you point out to them that what they have always believed is not so.. dangerous waters there, for us Catholics.. :? might literally get the Book thrown at us... I have seen some nasty responses in my time.. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:38 pm
Posts: 848
Religion: Roman Catholic
Sabbath wrote:
flyingaway wrote:
If Protestants just believed the Bible they claim to believe in, they would begin to understand Catholicism. In fact, many who read the Bible and know it fairly well have actually become.. I guess you would say: half Catholic already

for example: Jesus says in Mt 16:18 that he will build his Church and the gates of Hell (heresy, apostasy, etc) would not prevail against it

So either they beleive Jesus said that or not

which one is it?



Actually, most Protestants understand that passage in a much different way, to wit; gates do not go on the offensive, they are set up as a defense. So when the gospel is advanced, the gates of Hell will not prevail, by the power of Christ, the Church goes on the offensive and smashes through them, in a manner of speaking.



the Church offends the devil

the devil goes on OFFENSE big time, when you accept and appreciate Christ's original Church


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:08 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 9:16 pm
Posts: 901
Religion: Catholic
I have no doubt about the devil going after the Church, just don't see that passage describing that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:49 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 4845
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Religion: Christian & Missionary Alliance
flyingaway wrote:
and you know.. human nature being what it is, people just hate when you catch them in a.. um.. what do you call it? when you point out to them that what they have always believed is not so.. dangerous waters there, for us Catholics.. :? might literally get the Book thrown at us... I have seen some nasty responses in my time.. :shock:

That's a rather shallow take on things. There's also a circularity in the reasoning. If non-Catholics are right, then they can just as well say about you, "human nature being what it is, people just hate when you catch them in a.. um.. what do you call it? when you point out to them that what they have always believed is not so.. dangerous waters there, for us non-Catholics.. :?" And then they would accuse you of throwing Tradition at them and say they've seen plenty of nasty responses in their time.

You can take my comments here as constructive criticism if you like or you can ignore them. Non-Catholics, certainly of the evangelical variety, absolutely do go by the Bible. The reason they are not Catholic is not that they don't by the Bible; it's that they don't go by the Bible as interpreted by your Church. Now if your Church really is the authority she claims to be, then it is important to understand the Bible they way the Church does. But if your Church is not the authority she claims to be, then non-Catholics may well have a claim in going by the Bible.

As I always say, the issue is authority. I strongly advise you not to put yourself in an unnecessarily weak position by trying to argue your faith from the Bible. Argue it from the authority of your Church, from the history and continuity of the faith, etc. But if you make this about competing private interpretations, you've already given away the farm. All the more so when you imply that non-Catholics do not understand or have failed to study or follow Scripture.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:49 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 333
Religion: Looking for answers
theJack wrote:
flyingaway wrote:
and you know.. human nature being what it is, people just hate when you catch them in a.. um.. what do you call it? when you point out to them that what they have always believed is not so.. dangerous waters there, for us Catholics.. :? might literally get the Book thrown at us... I have seen some nasty responses in my time.. :shock:

That's a rather shallow take on things. There's also a circularity in the reasoning. If non-Catholics are right, then they can just as well say about you, "human nature being what it is, people just hate when you catch them in a.. um.. what do you call it? when you point out to them that what they have always believed is not so.. dangerous waters there, for us non-Catholics.. :?" And then they would accuse you of throwing Tradition at them and say they've seen plenty of nasty responses in their time.

You can take my comments here as constructive criticism if you like or you can ignore them. Non-Catholics, certainly of the evangelical variety, absolutely do go by the Bible. The reason they are not Catholic is not that they don't by the Bible; it's that they don't go by the Bible as interpreted by your Church. Now if your Church really is the authority she claims to be, then it is important to understand the Bible they way the Church does. But if your Church is not the authority she claims to be, then non-Catholics may well have a claim in going by the Bible.

As I always say, the issue is authority. I strongly advise you not to put yourself in an unnecessarily weak position by trying to argue your faith from the Bible. Argue it from the authority of your Church, from the history and continuity of the faith, etc. But if you make this about competing private interpretations, you've already given away the farm. All the more so when you imply that non-Catholics do not understand or have failed to study or follow Scripture.

How does one determine whether or not the "Church really is the authority she claims to be"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:42 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 79750
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
You realize that theJack doesn't think that the Church is that authority? He's not Catholic.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:18 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 333
Religion: Looking for answers
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
You realize that theJack doesn't think that the Church is that authority? He's not Catholic.

Yes, I am well aware of that. My question is for anyone to answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:27 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 79750
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
Ok. How do you know anything at all? (That's a question, not an insult.)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:04 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 9:16 pm
Posts: 901
Religion: Catholic
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
Ok. How do you know anything at all? (That's a question, not an insult.)


Heck I'm not even sure that you exist!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:21 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 79750
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
If I'm the best your imagination can come up with, you need to work harder at it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:09 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 333
Religion: Looking for answers
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
Ok. How do you know anything at all? (That's a question, not an insult.)

I'm inclined to be skeptical, and somewhat agnostic, which is why I have never been able to commit myself to any particular religious path. But I'm not a total skeptic or total agnostic. I'm realistic and practical.

There are some things I know for sure, through experience, or through intelligent reasoning, but there are many things I'm not absolutely sure about, but I have varying degrees of confidence in them. For example, when I travel on an airplane, I am not absolutely certain it won't crash but I have sufficient confidence that it won't crash, sufficient enough to enable me to comfortably travel by plane when I need to.

I don't need to know for certain that there is a (benevolent) God before I try to live in the way I believe God wants me to live, but I need to have sufficient degree of confidence that there is a (benevolent) God.

I don't need to know for certain that "the Church really is the authority she claims to be" but I need to have sufficient confidence in that claim before I could commit myself to it, before I could commit time, energy, enthusiasm, and even money. I'm very impressed by Catholic teachings and agree with most but not necessarily all Catholic teachings. Maybe I'd be better devoting myself, my time, my energy, enthusiasm (and some money) to Quakerism, or Buddhism, or be a non-specific Christian, or something else.

So I'm not looking to know for certain, as that would restrict me from doing anything positive, but I need to be sufficiently convinced to have sufficient confidence that I'm on the right path.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:42 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 79750
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
What you're looking for is referred to as "moral certainty," although that's confusing because "moral" gives it connotations that don't apply. A person is morally certain when he's certain enough to act on something.

I can't speak very well to general principles about how one gains moral certainty. For myself, I can say that based on what I already believed, and my understanding of history, and my understanding of Scripture, I became morally certain that the Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ and that I (at least) could not be saved outside of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:36 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 333
Religion: Looking for answers
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
What you're looking for is referred to as "moral certainty," although that's confusing because "moral" gives it connotations that don't apply. A person is morally certain when he's certain enough to act on something.

I can't speak very well to general principles about how one gains moral certainty. For myself, I can say that based on what I already believed, and my understanding of history, and my understanding of Scripture, I became morally certain that the Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ and that I (at least) could not be saved outside of it.

That's a more satisfying answer than I expected. Thank you, Obi.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:37 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 4845
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Religion: Christian & Missionary Alliance
Perhaps a better word than "moral certainty" is "practical certainty"--not better in an absolute sense, but better for discussing it with people who don't have a lot of philosophical training and are looking for easily accessible language to get a handle on things. For instance, Denise, you talk about being confident enough that a plane won't crash to ride on it even though you don't have absolute certainty. And that's a good illustration. Even if you've never ridden on a plane, you can be practically certain that it won't, practical in the sense that, shy of strong reasons to object to what is usually true, you may as well treat this plane as if it's not going to crash.

So how do you get that degree of confidence? How can you say, for all practical purposes, "I know X," even if "know" here isn't exactly the same strength as knowing that 2+2=4 or that all triangles have three sides?

I actually think the approach is more pragmatic and straightforward than we most philosophers might want you to think--especially most modern philosophers. If you'll indulge me a bit of explanation, I'd start by pointing out the wrong approach. Descartes is the best example there is, I think. He's the one who said the famous, "I think, therefore I am." Here's a guy that, unlike you, wanted absolute certainty in anything and everything he claimed to know. His method, which I think was silly, and I hope you'll agree, was to doubt everything that could be doubted and only believe what was impossible to doubt. So you think the world is real? Maybe not! It could all be a dream! But at least I'm not a dream. Ah, but maybe I am. You've seen the Matrix. Maybe my body isn't real. Maybe some demon has my mind under a spell and I only think the world is real. Yada, yada.

Now there are answers to Descartes' method, but let's just ignore all the complicated stuff and just respond by rolling our eyes. You are right not to ask for absolute, perfect certainty that the plane won't crash, and you're right not to require that for mundane questions like, "Do I really exist?" and "Is the world a real place?"

In other words, let's just start with what is obvious--yourself and the things around you. That's the basis of all knowledge. The general principle is to start with the more obvious and think more deeply through to the less obvious. What must be true, or at least what is more likely to be true than not, based on what you already see and know to be true?

To cut straight to religious questions, let's ask that about Jesus. The first and most obvious thing is that there really was a guy named Jesus who existed. I know there are some skeptics who want to deny that, but remember there are always Descartes' asking you to prove the obvious, as if raising silly doubts about the obvious ("We might be living in a MATRIX!!!!1!1") is somehow good reason to think the obvious isn't really true. It's also obvious He got Himself crucified by Pilate, a Roman ruler, at the behest of the Jewish leadership. And while it's less obvious, it doesn't take much searching before you discover that it's incredibly obvious that just a few days later, all of His disciples were absolutely, 100% convinced that they saw Him raised physically from the dead. Anyway, I'm not going to do a full analysis of that type of argument, but those are the types of things you learn about Jesus pretty quickly. I'd encourage you to watch the video just below for a REALLY good explanation of how that argument works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay_Db4RwZ_M

So let's step away from those type of arguments and come back to the present. Are you practically certain that God exists? If not, again, just look at things practically--don't be a Descartes. You see the world exists, so just ask the most famous philosophical question of all time: why is there something rather than nothing? Just imagine for a moment that there really was at one time absolutely nothing (side note: that question is grammatically meaningless, but I think you know what I mean). I mean take that seriously--there is just NOTHING. Then there is just something? And all of this? Out of nothing? How? That's just absurd. It's much easier just to recognize the obvious, practical fact that your senses have told you your whole life: nothing never produces something, and something always comes from something else. So the universe as a whole has to have come from something else, and what would you call that "something else" that caused the entire universe to exist? May as well call it God!

Well how do you know it's the CHRISTIAN God? Lots of ways, but I'd take you back to Jesus. If Jesus really did raise from the dead as very much seems to be the case, then it's probably better to believe Him on religious matters than not. In other words, if I believe what Jesus did (and if there is a God, as there seems to be, then no reason not to believe what He did), then I end up as some sort of Christian. By the way, the general existence of a God who cares about us is the virtual universal experience of all sorts of people, Christian or not. So, again, I just don't see how that's something that we practically argue against without becoming some silly Descartes.

So then what kind of Christian? Here's where I need to stop, because I obviously answer this question differently than the Catholics on this board, but I think the general rule still applies. I will say this much: we have the words of the earliest people who followed Jesus, and just as importantly, we have a lot of writings about their very early followers. In other words, Paul had to get his ideas from somewhere; John, Peter, Jude, Luke, Peter, James, they had to get their ideas from somewhere. And the earliest Christians after them, people like Clement and Ignatius had to get their ideas from somewhere. If you've already decided that Jesus is who He said He is and that the Christian God exists at least in some form, then those people matter a LOT. So ask yourself the practical question: is it more likely that those first Christians after the apostles--Clement and so on--got their ideas from the Apostles or that they made them up? If they got them from the Apostles, and the Apostles got them from Jesus, then that's a pretty strong and very practical argument for being Catholic. Now, full disclosure, I read history a little differently, but I think those questions still have to be answered fully and honestly.

Anyway, this post is entirely too long and I've not given many general principles--I'm mostly giving examples of how you think about questions related to Jesus, God, and the Church. But I hope you see the basic approach. You start with what is obvious. You avoid the temptation to ask for too much proof, to move the goalposts. You try to accept the world as it really presents itself to you. Then when you discover a new fact, you compare it to what you already know or what you think you know. If the new fact confirms what you already know, then great! And if it challenges or refutes what you already know, you ask yourself which observation has more to commend it--is the new fact so obviously true, or more obviously true than your old view, that you should adopt it and change your mind? Or is what you already believe based on ideas that are more obviously true than this new observation such that the new observation ought to be rejected?

And you spend your entire life like that, each day trying to learn a little more. If you conclude with the Catholics that Jesus really is God and that He really founded a Church and that Church really is the Catholic Church, then you can read what the Catholic Church says and take it with a lot of authority! That's why you'd be Catholic. And if you aren't sure about any of those things (if there is a God, if Jesus is God, if He founded a Church, if the Catholic Church is that Church), then you use the methodology I'm poorly describing here to decide if you think those things are, in fact, true.

------------------------

The alternative, by the way, to the above long process really is to just accept something by faith. If you do that, I would encourage you not to stay there but to take your faith and then start examining it and basing it on solid reasons. And either way, at some point, you'll realize that you've come to a place where you have more than enough reason to place your faith in something. At that point, you stop demanding proof and just say, Amen, deciding not to be a Descartes, just trust. So why would you just trust? Well look at people like PED and Obi, Jack3, and even the pickle, and others like them and decide if their experience (which is real!) and their own study and character is strong enough for you to say, "You know, I don't have all the answers, but they have more than I do, so I'm going to trust that as I study, I'll either get to where they are or find myself discovering the same answers they are." That's what we do when we're kids. We believe our parents. There's nothing wrong with that. Fr Obi is called "Father" for good reason, you know.

But in general, I'd say something like the above is how you know anything at all. You take what is obvious, what you can't deny, and you reason from there to what isn't so obvious but what is more likely true than not. You insist on not being a silly philosopher who wants absolute undoubtable proof for everything, and you just be realistic. It's amazing what you can find if you do that. Even better, I promise you from experience, it's even more amazing how much undoubtable truth you DO end up finding if you just let yourself have a little faith.

Sorry for the length of all this. God bless if you if you made it all the way through it. And if not, God bless you anyway! Merry Christmas. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:46 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6081
Religion: Christian
flyingaway wrote:
If Protestants just believed the Bible they claim to believe in, they would begin to understand Catholicism. In fact, many who read the Bible and know it fairly well have actually become.. I guess you would say: half Catholic already

for example: Jesus says in Mt 16:18 that he will build his Church and the gates of Hell (heresy, apostasy, etc) would not prevail against it

So either they beleive Jesus said that or not

which one is it?

so if they say they believe Jesus said that, well, they will bring up the notion that the Church is all of us regardless of "denomination" and there was never meant to be an actual, physical Church and etc... etc..

well, where does it say THAT in the Bible?

Jesus just says Church, he doesn't say it will be a NON-physical place.. doesn't say one way or the other

so anyway, if Jesus established a Church that was meant to last forever (Mt 28:20, etc), ask them: Where is that Church today? Which one is it? Only the Roman Catholic Church goes back to the time of Christ/the Apostles (they can read the Church Fathers and see that even in the first centuries, the Church was "very Catholic"--Eucharist, etc)


My2cents:
It comes down to the definition of the word 'Church'.

Among the non denominational Christians that I have known, and of which, I am one; to be a Christian and therefore a member of Christ's body, the Church ... By definition is; to accept the sacrifice of Jesus as sufficient atonement for sin and iniquity, make a personal declaration of that fact, ask God's forgiveness, declare that Jesus Christ is Lord and invite Jesus to come in and take Lordship of the individual's life. Those that believe the above in their heart and then confess them with their mouth, are a part of the body of Christ (Christians) ... which is the 'Church'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 2:30 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:38 pm
Posts: 848
Religion: Roman Catholic
Quote:
How does one determine whether or not the "Church really is the authority she claims to be"?


The Catholic Church is the ONLY Christian Church that goes back to the time of the Apostles. If anyone reads the early Church Fathers, they will see tht the Church then (circa 100 AD etc) was very Catholic (believed in Transubstanatiation and all the rest of Catholic doctrine/dogma)

problem is, most Protestants don't bother w/ the history of the Church. Now, you would think they would, you'd think anyone calling himself Christian would be interested in the history of his faith, but it aint so


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Protestants went by the bible, they'd be Catholic
PostPosted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 2:35 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:38 pm
Posts: 848
Religion: Roman Catholic
Quote:

My2cents:
It comes down to the definition of the word 'Church'.

Among the non denominational Christians that I have known, and of which, I am one; to be a Christian and therefore a member of Christ's body, the Church ... By definition is; to accept the sacrifice of Jesus as sufficient atonement for sin and iniquity, make a personal declaration of that fact, ask God's forgiveness, declare that Jesus Christ is Lord and invite Jesus to come in and take Lordship of the individual's life. Those that believe the above in their heart and then confess them with their mouth, are a part of the body of Christ (Christians) ... which is the 'Church'.

That is only part of what is necessary to be a true Chrstian.

Don't you agree with the logic that says that if Christ founded ONE Church (noncatholic "churches" can be in imperfect union with the Original..) that ALL should belong to that Church?

When he said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against HIS Church, don't you think He meant that? and if you agree w/ that you have to agree that no historical event (Luther, et al) could .. cause Mt 16:18 to fail?

If we can trust that Jesus estabslihed only ONE Church, then we have to (upon studying history of the Church) conclude that that one Church is the Roman Catholic Church

and all others are lacking in some way or another, egregiously

I say Egregiously, because it is only logical that they would be seriously lacking if they are not the Original[b]
[/b]

it is all about JESUS

and what HE wants

It seems that anyone who really loves Jesus will love His Church.. and if he doesn't know which one that is, well, by gosh, he ought to go looking for it.. in which case he will be led the RCC


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 3   [ 48 posts ]   Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Jump to:  
cron