BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
Home › Forums › Wow... what a shame!
General

Wow... what a shame!

S
sermonindex

THis is not an attempt to re-start a thread that the mods locked. But I have to say that I started that other thread about the RCC yesterday, but was unable to look at it again until about 5 minutes ago... and was shocked to see that in about 12 hours the personal attacks and hot-headedness took place anyway despite my begging everyone to keep it civil or not participate.What a shame! We should be able to discuss these issues in love and grace. That thread could have been a really good and educational thread, but certain ones have to ruin it for others.I'm pretty upset about this.If you cant talk about these issues without losing control... then find something else to do on the internet, or start your own blog.Krispy

S
sermonindex

Sorry about that Krispy. I really don't underdstand what went wrong. I thought I was being very civil. I never accused anyone of anything. My questions were questions I would ask anyone, or even share of my own experience. I was merely trying to make a point about the topic.

S
sermonindex

I had no intention of writing such a long post, and I think I may have re-started the previous thread. But I got on a roll, and some of this just came out of me. If the moderators do not wish to have these words on here, please let me know and I will edit this post for you.Thanx,KrispyHere is what I wrote:Well, my comments were not directed at everyone. One thing that happens when this kind of topic comes up is that people tend to associate honest opinions as hate-speech. For instance, if I say that "IF Mother Teresa was putting her faith in the Catholic doctrines for her salvation, then she died without salvation", someone will always get upset and offended by that and call me hateful.I'm not being hateful when I say that. I'm merely paraphrasing God's Word when it says:Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God...Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. I do not sit in judgement over anyone's salvation. However, when it comes the Pope John Paul or Mother Teresa, we can read their writings and hear their voices as they proclaimed their salvation thru the rites of the Catholic Church and thru Mary... but not thru faith in Jesus alone, as scripture declares: Rom 5:1,2 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. The Pope and Mother Teresa had faith... but not in Jesus atoning blood alone.Is this hate-speech? No! It's God's Word, and God is love. And sometimes love is tough. Truth hurts. But it sure beats a lie.It's these same types of attitudes that cause some countries to consider Biblical preaching against certain moral sins "hate-speech". Thats the world talking, and I wouldnt expect anything less. But now we hear this in the CHURCH.Now, as to the accusation that I was comparing the Catholic Church to homosexuals. I was not. What I said was that joining hands with unrepentent sinners in ministry makes as much sense as joining hands with the RCC in ministry. I wasnt comparing the RCC to homosexuals. I was saying that if you have a group that is diametrically opposed to the God of the Bible, why in the world would you join with them to do ministry??Read the scriptures:Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.(I guess Paul would be accused of hate-speech by reproving those who are in error)2Co 6:14-17 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? (Ever notice all the idols in a Catholic Church?? - Krispy) for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 1Ti 6:3,4 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings. Of course... many Christians are ignorant of the truth behind the Catholic Church. But here are a few of the doctrines that we Bible Believers hold dear, but the Catholic Church rains down curses on us for believing:DECLARATIONS OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENTSIXTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION: "If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12).SEVENTH SESSION, CANONS ON BAPTISM: "If anyone says that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and mistress of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on Baptism, Canon 3).SEVENTH SESSION, CANONS ON BAPTISM: "If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on Baptism, Canon 5).THIRTEENTH SESSION, CANONS ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST: "If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a sign, or figure or force, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, Canon 1).FOURTEENTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: "If anyone says that in the Catholic Church penance is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord for reconciling the faithful of God as often as they fall into sin after baptism, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance, Canon 1).FOURTEENTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: "If anyone denies that sacramental confession was instituted by divine law or is necessary to salvation; or says that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Catholic Church has always observed from the beginning and still observes, is at variance with the institution and command of Christ and is a human contrivance, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance, Canon 7).TWENTY-SECOND SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS: "If anyone says that it is a deception to celebrate masses in honor of the saints and in order to obtain their intercession with God, as the Church intends, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 5).TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION, DECREE ON PURGATORY: "Since the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, following the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught in sacred councils and very recently in this ecumenical council that there is a purgatory, and that the souls there detained are aided by the suffrages of the faithful and chiefly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar, the holy council commands the bishops that they strive diligently to the end that the sound doctrine of purgatory, transmitted by the Fathers and sacred councils, be believed and maintained by the faithful of Christ, and be everywhere taught and preached."Now... I ask you all... which is hate-speech? Krispy

R
RobertW

Hi Krispy,I think what strikes folk is the thought that a person could be as well beloved and do as many good works as some have done and yet they may not have been saved. We know that Galatians clearly teaches that if anyone brings any other Gospel than the one which was originally received, they are accursed. That is strong language for sure. It is a fearful thing to ponder.The question for me is, what is our obligation? Is it any different than what we are seeing today in the Church with folk believing they can say a little prayer and be eternally saved? I feel towards that kind of falsehood probably like you feel about the Roman Catholic Church. Yet, I really have to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit in dealing with these things because of the nature of the problem. I can prove in the plainest of scripture that folk must be born again or turn to Christ in repentance and faith- but yet- loose the people in the process by slamming the sinners prayer, etc. We see the error. We see the souls in danger. How must we act and reach these folk in a way that is pleasing to God? More excellently, what is the coarse of action that God has ordered for these things? God Bless,-Robert

G
geddingsm

I'm with ya Krispy. I personally like Paul's "counsel of Galatians" which states:Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.I guess Paul was bashing in his "hate speech".In my reading of the New Testament I found nothing on penance,purgatory, etc.I'm a simple fellow, I call it like I see it or in this case don't see it.The RCC is the most dangerous type of belief because it takes just enough christianity to call itself christian but not enough to save you, just like Jehovah Witness, Mormon, etc.In Him,geddingsm

S
sermonindex

Robert... Thanks, and easy-believism is something that I have spoken on before as well. I am equally frustrated by that.Notice in all that I wrote I did not "bash" anyone. I speak strongly against the entity, or the institution if you will, of the RCC. But we cant "bash" Catholics. But we should speak the truth. We should never hold back from shining the light of truth... even tho someone may be offended.I have a plaque on our wall in our house that says this:“I defy the Pope and all his laws. If God spare my life ere many years, I will cause the boy that drives the plow to know more of the scriptures than you!” - William TyndaleMy wife's friend who is Catholic has seen this before, yet she is not offended by it. Besides, it's in my house. I'm not offended when we go to their house and they have pictures of the Pope on the wall... it's their house.But should we shy away in order to not offend?Rom 9:33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Zion a stumblingstone and rock of offense: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. The cross of Christ is an offense! Of course we should not be offensive in our presentation... in that, I mean obnoxious. And on a forum like this we all read and decipher each other's posts thru our own eyes. Many times people are offended when they shouldnt be. I know for a fact that if those who get offended when I speak strongly against something had a chance to talk to me face to face they would not be offended by me as a person.We have to walk a fine line on this forum. I've learned that the hard way. I've offended some needlessly in the past, but I have put that behind me. I will speak the truth, but if folks would slow down and catch the spirit in which I write, I think many times they will have a different impression... and may actually understand me better.Krispy

R
roadsign

In my reading of the New Testament I found nothing on penanceWhat about James 5:16? Maybe if we practised that more diligently we would see more divine healings. So many are burdened down with buried sin, and it would be so helpful if they could admit it and talk about it with someone they trust. .. could be very therapeutic. Have we lost something? EDIT: Sorry, I'm mixing up confession and penance. (later clarified, thanks)Diane

B
BeYeDoers

Transubstantiation denies the incarnation of Christ. CARM on TransubstantiationAccording to 1 John, denying the incarnation means denying Christ. So who is anathema? Oh that's right, we must be since we deny the tradition of the Catholic Church. Not sure what Bible verse that is.

S
sermonindex

but not enough to save you, just like Jehovah Witness, Mormon, etc.Now there is an interesting thought... when we discuss the JW's and the Mormons erroneous doctrines on here, thats not considered hate-speech. Why is that? Why is it only hate-speech if we speak against the heresies of the RCC?Krispy

B
BeYeDoers

Diane, penance does not apply to me, b/c I am not "a wayward Catholic" :-) yes, confession to one another is something we need to be doing, but often don't. It can bring great peace and physical healing. But the RCC doctrine on this is far diff. than what James describes. It is a set list of things to do given by your "Father" (the priest, not our God), and upon completion you can only receive final forgiveness of that sin if the "Father" gives it to you. Very different than the blood of Jesus cleansing us from all sin, but confessing unintentional sin to our brothers for healing.But I do agree that James 5:16 is often preached and discussed but not done, and we must get back to it.

G
geddingsm

I really don't see where the problem is concerning RCC false doctrine. If your bible fell off a shelf and just fell open you could easily find conflict with RCC doctrine.Here is a brief list that I've used on another site in my discussion with catholics and I've never had a good answer to any of the points:If the Bible is a Catholic book: * 1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6). * 2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28). * 3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9). * 4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11). * 5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2). * 6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5). * 7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12). * 8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9). * 9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11). * 10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5). * 11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). * 12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27). * 13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26). * 14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church? In Him,geddingsm

S
sermonindex

Well... I originally did not intend this to re-start the old thread, but I guess I'm to blame for re-starting it anway.All I ask is that everyone be civil!! Both sides. Let's talk about this like mature adults and believers... or I'll be the first one to request this thread be locked too.So far so good, folks... Krispy

C
CJaKfOrEsT

geddingsm wrote:I really don't see where the problem is concerning RCC false doctrine. If your bible fell off a shelf and just fell open you could easily find conflict with RCC doctrine.This is beautiful and simple, the way it should be. Edgar Parkyns mentioned that the Reformation was sparked by people reading their Bible and figuring out the truth about the Popes identity.

C
CJaKfOrEsT

KrispyKrittr wrote:Well... I originally did not intend this to re-start the old thread, but I guess I'm to blame for re-starting it anway.I don't think anyone would mind, as long as it remains civil. I think that this is the calmest discussion on Catholicism so far here. All that and no compromising.I bet you never thought you'd see the day KK:-).

S
sermonindex

I bet you never thought you'd see the day KK.Well, if we all can set our emotions aside (easier for us guys than it is the gals) and discuss it from a Biblical perspective, there really isnt anything we cant discuss calmly. Sometimes people are too sensitive, and sometimes people are not sensitive enough.Krispy

R
roadsign

Just some thoughts that came to mind as I read your list, Geddingsm. I think you need to do more studying and find firmer grounds for your concerns. I will comment on each of your questions. * 1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).This reference speaks mainly of attitude – loving the places of honor. I hate to say it, but I have seen this in any church I have been affiliated with, and I have been tempted such a way myself. It is not good to judge a person’s heart according to their garments. I wear a robe every Sunday because it is tradition (I am a worship leader). I have learned to appreciate how it “hides” us and prevents us from putting on a fashion show .* 2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).I think Jesus is not addressing Mariology here, he is expressing a blessing to all who trust in him, not just to his mom. * 3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).All denominations have special titles for their laders: Bishops, pastors, ministers, presidents etc. Even without the clerical collar, there are always people who venerate their leaders above where they should – put them on a pedistal. This is not merely an RC tendency. * 4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).Who are we to talk on this issue??? Christmas, Easter, Palm Sunday, valentines day.... etc etc* 5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).I don't call believers saints because the word tends to mean something else.* 6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).We make images too, and we adore them. Idolatry is a heart issue. What one person idolizes another doesn’t. It is not the thing/status/etc that is the issue.* 7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).This is talking about a spiritual baptism. * 8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9).We give special titles to our religious leaders too. * 9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).If only our churches would put Christ back in his rightful place – the foundation of our lives and our church families. Now, that would be revival!* 10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).How easy is it for people to assume that their church affiliation grants them a ticket to heaven. I think that this is a very common problem. * 11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).I think it says that he should not have more than one wife. * 12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).This is talking about heierarchy within the church family – which is forbidden. No one is to lord over (rule) others – that is a worldly way of governing. You may appreciate a threat ‘What is a Pastor, and what is his role” and you will see that our churches do not follow the biblical model. (generally speaking) * 13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).Many evangelicals also believe in an interim period between this life and eternity - about 1000 years long. And it is believe that the Jews will come to Christ during that time. * 14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?It is not, really. There are verses about instrumental use in the Psalms: harps, trumpets, cymbals, As far as the silence of the others - there is nothing said about pews, pulpits, amplifyers, nurseries, sunday school classes... Well, if we all can set our emotions aside (easier for us guys than it is the gals) Krispy, you are so sweet. I wonder where you got this idea. ??? on this forum??? Diane

S
sermonindex

Having been raised Catholic, may I suggest some writings that I read about 20 years ago and haven't been able to re-locate until this link was posted on SI....They're only $7.00 for the set by Keith Green http://www.rarechristianbooks.com/His Love.Annie

P
phebebird

Hi Everyone and especially Krispy,Hey, I just was just reading over the posts on this thread and thinking how wonderful and civil it is--I'm sure because I haven't been in it! :-) Anyway, seriously, I wanted to apologize publically for my heated remarks on past threads (i.e. Catholic Church, Jesuits, etc.). I still do not agree with many of the views here about the RC, but I could have been much more diplomatic in my approach ("love is not rude"). Krispy, I think I saw your true colors when you did not respond in like form to my heated post. Thank you for bearing with me. Your attitude is not one of theological arrogance like I had thought. It is interesting that so many of you have come out of the RC. Perhaps that is a better vantage point for seeing it's faults. I see a lot of things wrong among evangelicals, but that is probably because "I is one". Roadsign, I really like your post below. I like how you examined each of the points and picked out the splinter in our own protestant eye first before taking the plank out of the RC eye. (Not saying there isn't necessarily a plank, but we need to look at ourselves and not just the faults in others)My husband often teases me that I feel I have to "die on every hill"--that I think everything needs my two cents and is worth debating to death. I am sorry about this and am trying to get better at being coolheaded and letting things slide--not getting angry first and asking forgiveness later (a dispostion that is good for not holding grudges, but not much else :-) ).Anyway, I have been remembering all the times sermonindex has been a blessing to me (you guys and the sermons), and I appreciate you all. I really am getting busy lately (I'm just now starting back to work after a long maternity leave), but hopefully I'll get to check in from time to time. I promise to stay away from RC forums--I tend too much towards "underdog champion syndrome". :-) Phebe

S
sermonindex

Phebe, can I tell you a story that I've never shared here on SI ?First I want to congratulate you on your baby bird :-D .... I have two grandchildren that God has blessed me to be able to see. I was even blessed to see my daughter pregnant with them ... by pictures of her only, but there's much to explain regarding why this is such a miracle.You see, my Mom left my wonderful Dad with us five kids when I was two months old.Because my poor dad couldn't find anyone to stay with an infant ... he could only find a couple that was willing to live there with him and the children if they were older .... so I had to be shipped out. It was Not my dad's fault and it broke his heart irreparably.Anyhow, to make a long story short, by the time I was 13, I was in my 5th home and had been abused and made to feel unwanted in each of those 5 homes.So when I met a nice young boy, who also had no parents, we fell in love and wanted to get married because we were the only love that we knew in our lives.I knew my Dad would not let me marry at 16 years old, so I always dreamed, since I was about 5 years old of having a husband and "a daughter".I thought, if we could have "a daughter", then my Dad would have to let us get married besides, even at that age.Well, after dating for two years, I realized I was crazy to think something like that and saw that this relationship was not for the good, so I broke up with the young man.But what I didn't know when I broke up with him, was that I had conceived in the midst of that "plan" of mine, but now he was mad and gone and wouldn't marry me.My dad sent me off to a Home for unwed mothers and I was forced to sign her up to an Adoption Agency.When I was still in the Maternity ward of the Hospital, the agency came in while I was still groggy from the anesthesia and had me to sign my child away.When I woke up more fully, I got out of bed to go to the window to see my baby. When I saw "her" I broke in a million pieces. I came back to my room, where my room mates husband was visiting. He had a camera and asked did I want a picture of my baby that he would mail to me at home, after he'd get the roll developed, with the pictures of their own baby .... I said yes of course.But the Nurse behind the window caught us and could not by law allow that.The day I had to leave the hospital, I had to be physically escorted out because of my hysteria, as I just wanted to see her one more time, but really did not by any means want to leave without her. My arms felt so empty as they took me to the car. I walked back wards, in case she would be coming out too, with the Agency lady, crying all the way.I cried for 11 years, until my husband got me to learn how to talk about her without breaking down.When I got married in 79, I called the Agency again, and told them my new name so she could find me someday.I'd call whenever and they'd tell me what they could, about how she was.Finally, in Jan. of 1998 I couldn't wait anymore to see her. I asked the Lord, please, she's 29 ... where is she ? I can't wait anymore.In August of that same year, I got a letter from the Agency that she wanted my permission to contact me. Well, talk about Hysterics. My husband thought we had won the million dollars or something, and I told him, No it's something much better than that.Anyhow, we met and became instant best friends, like twins separated at birth. She did not know the Lord and was living with a not yet divorced man who drank and did drugs.I told her about Jesus, and told her, I brought you into this world and even if you get mad at me and not want to see me again, I must bring you to Him.After two years, she left the guy and came to Jesus. She at first was a Protestant ... but soon after, an old boy friend of hers, a Catholic theologian started courting her.She converted to Catholicism and they were married. And she's given me two beautiful grand babies.What do I think about her converting ... as I've said, I was raised Catholic and my whole family still is ... but about her personally, I feel bad she believes now in Purgatory and a few things like that, but it has not stopped us from talking about Jesus and I try to keep it there with our conversations, because she did meet Him, in the sense that one would in true conversion and Salvation.She believes I'm saved. That's nice, huh ? Ha.I believe she still knows the Lord.So, to end this story and why I'm telling you all of this .....I sure hope you won't stop coming to SI because of anything I say.He loves you and so do I.Annie Oh, this may explain why "Grannie Annie" to those who've wondered.Oh and another P.S. She is my only child. And I told her I was glad of that because she deserved to have my sole attention. :-D

R
roadsign

Phebe said, My husband often teases me that I feel I have to "die on every hill"--that I think everything needs my two cents and is worth debating to death. I am sorry about this and am trying to get better at being coolheaded and letting things slide- Phebe, your post here is a highpoint for me on the forum. I see it as the ultimate product of God’s merciful dealings and an answer to many prayers here. It is a tiny taste of revival - and I look forward to much more. There always seems to be a price to this kind of experience – ex: conflict and confusion. Also it is when we hear ourselves “out loud” that we discover what has been lurking deep within – and that can be humiliating. Sometimes it is when something (ex dialogue) looks the worst, God’s best is being birthed in the heart. What looks like a shame in our eyes becomes God's glory. He covers our shame with his glory. I learned years ago that our emotions are not the problem, just the symptoms. They are like thermometers – they measure the temperature of our minds - our beliefs, our desires, our fears, anger, pride etc. “Being right” is a much-coveted desire for most of us, and it is hard to die to that, to be wronged, to let someone else win the argument, or to let it drop. However, isn’t it liberating to let go of the need to be right, and the need to defend every “truth” to the death? I’m sure that, from this cyber church experience, you will be closer to the Lord. Praise God for a place to share and work through your thoughts – and bounce them off of others. I know that you will have many other priorities in the coming days, but I hope to see you around some time. Diane

P
phebebird

Hi Annie,Thank you SO much for sharing your story!! I got tears in my eyes to read it, holding my own 4 month old baby close and hearing my 4 yr old in the other room. I am truly so blessed to be able to have my children around me. I cannot imagine what it must have been like for you all those years! I am so glad that God worked it out for the two of you to meet again.I don't know if I've mentioned this before, but I'm a labor and delivery nurse. It broke my heart to read your story. I am so glad the laws about signing over parental rights, etc. have changed. I don't think I could take away someone's baby that way. From time to time we have mothers who give up their babies for adoption, or mothers who lose their rights (until they complete rehab) due to drug abuse or some such situation. It is always a very difficult time. Nowadays, though, adoptions always have a cooling off period (a few days or a few weeks, depending on the state), in which the mother can change her mind for any reason. I wish someone had signed that into law much sooner and spared your heartache. Ironically enough, my brother and his wife recently adopted a newborn girl and had her for ten days before the mother did change her mind. Of course it was so hard for my brother and sister-in-law to give up a baby that they already felt was theirs, but God gave them peace through it all and now they are trying to adopt again. They were really glad the mother loved her daughter so much and was willing to raise her, despite the difficulties she was in at the time.Sometimes I get tired and cranky (like all mothers raising small children), but your post made me give my daughters extra kisses and thank God that they're in my arms. Thanks so much.Phebe

P
phebebird

Thanks, Diane, for being so gracious. Thanks to all of you. Apologizing is never a barrel of fun--but, hey!--I'm getting better at it! :-) Lord knows I've had a lot of practice! :-)

C
crsschk

Dear Annie,Thank you for sharing this about your daughter. Having been adopted and raised a Catholic this is just a tremendous perspective to hear.Edit: Obviously it is far much more than that and wonderful that you have been granted this after so many years. I guess I just wanted to allude to the difficulty sometimes of what may appear to be such strong shades of black and white.

C
Compton

Thank you for sharing this...Yes, thanks to everyone sharing in this thread. In fact, all day long I have been humbled by the things people are sharing in the forums today.What a priviledge it is to hear about these profound firsthand testimonies.MC

S
sermonindex

This is what Diane replied with to my comment that it's easier for us guys to set our emotions aside than it is for the gals...Krispy, you are so sweet. I wonder where you got this idea. ??? on this forum??? No Diane, I've been married for awhile now. :-) Oh, and we have four boys. I observe my neices and realize God has truly blessed us... lol!!Krispy

S
sermonindex

Phebebird wrote:Krispy, I think I saw your true colors when you did not respond in like form to my heated post. Thank you for bearing with me. Your attitude is not one of theological arrogance like I had thought. Hey, thanx for not ignoring my request that you drop in on this thread. Thanks for taking the time to really catch the spirit in which I write the things I do. I wish more of us would do that, myself included. I havent always conducted myself appropriately here either... there is a learning curve.I can understand why you would want to avoid an RCC thread if you find it hard not to get heated over it. I dont want this to be a stumbling block. I would like to encourage you to keep up with the thread and ponder some of things that are being talked about. You may never agree with some of us, but you may be abel to understand us a little better.There was a time when I railed against anyone who defended the KJV. Not just railed against, but made fun of. I was a mocker and a scoffer. I had 12 modern versions on my shelf (still do), and I was a die hard NIV guy. However, when I slowed down and really began to dig into why people hold to the KJV and reject modern versions... I found out that they had good reason... and now I am a firm KJV defender.(please, dont anyone turn this into a KJV thread... I'm merely making a point!)I find that many times there will be someone on here that I agree with most of the time... and then a topic comes up that we are on the opposite side of the fence about. But thats ok, so long as we agree on the important things such as salvation by grace alone, scripture alone, Christ's redemptive work on the cross, etc. These are things that the RCC has made abundantly clear that they DONT agree with us on... and therein lies the issue.Krispy

S
sermonindex

Annie... wow, what a blessing your post was to me this morning. Thank you for sharing that!I want to make something clear. I dont believe any of us is casting judgement on individual Catholics. How do we know their heart? We dont. Only God does.What I am saying (and others too) is that the Catholic Church does not teach Biblical salvation. If a Catholic holds to the RCC's teachings concerning salvation, then they are not saved. Is that to say that an individual Catholic can not come to a Biblical understanding of salvation? No, in fact I know that some have.But the fact remains that the Catholic Church is a false religion. It's teachings are blasphemous. And it's no fluke that the new Pope is a staunch and rigid supporter of hardcore Catholic doctrine. Pope John Paul attempted to bring Protestants and Catholics together, Pope Benedict is more hardline. But they both propogate doctrines of demons. (If they are not doctrines of God, they are doctrines of demons.)So lest anyone think we are coming against the Catholic neighbor down the road, we're not. We're coming against an institution that has done more harm to the cause of Christ than any institution in the last 2000 years.By the way, let me say this... I do not consider myself a Protestant. I am a Christian. And Bible believing Christianity did not begin with the Reformation. God has always had His remnant. There were always those who rejected the Catholic Church from it's inception until now. That is who I identify with.Krispy

R
roadsign

my comment that it's easier for us guys to set our emotions aside than it is for the gals...Krispy, I was just 'throwing' around some words. But in all seriousness, I cannot pass by this comment without pointing out that the notion that "setting aside" emotions is a virture. It is not. In fact, our society in general tends to encourage the "setting aside" and it is devastating. It is like taking away all our pain nerve endings - you have leprosy. Our society has a lot of emotional leprosy. It destroys relationships, emotional health, and it keeps us from knowing our real selves, and thus keeps God at arm's length. I wonder, how can anyone read Annie's testimony about her baby without being deeply moved. It moves me to tears just mentioning it here. Not only because of Annie, but because this level of pain is all around us all the time whether we see it our not. (Thank you Annie for your timely words. They bring us back to real people. Truely God is using your pain to touch many others.) "Rejoice with those who rejoice.... weep with those who weep" Unerneath all the theological discussions there are real people. We must move beyond our theological baricades in order to minister to and be ministered to on a deeper level - which involves emotions, true feeling, vulnerability - our spirit. (and risk!!) And God's glory shines though these cracked clay vessels - and his love pours out. Diane

S
sermonindex

Diane... understand that I'm not saying there isnt a place for emotions. Just saying that when we're discussing issues like this we do need to base our arguments on scripture and facts, and not emotions. When emotions are used then we say things like "Well... this person was Catholic and they did a lot of good in the world, therefore they were saved." But thats not what the Bible says. Emotions say that, but not God's Word.I'm not advocating apathy by any means. I have a burden on my heart this morning for a friend of mine who I coach football with. I just heard he got fired from his job and in jail. I havent confirmed it yet, but it came from a reliable source. I suspect this friend of mine is drinking again. I'm emotional about that... not crying... but emotional. I care about this guy.I care about all y'all on here. I'm just saying that we need to not let our emotions and feelings dictate truth. Usually it's anything but truth because our human emotions are deceptive.Gotta run... got an appointment in 15 mins.Krispy

R
roadsign

"Well... this person was Catholic and they did a lot of good in the world, therefore they were saved." But thats not what the Bible says. Emotions say that, but not God's Word.I would not say, "emotions say that" but rather faulty belief said that. Emotions flow out of beliefs, more than the reverse. Very typically, when someone's cherished beliefs are threatened, they react with some sort of strong emotional response. Who wants to be told they are wrong?! That's why it is often not helpful to try to convince someone that they are wrong. You merely threaten them (whether they admit that they FEEL it or not) and they just work all the harder to "prove" that they are right and you are wrong. (Have you noticed that?) Ask me how I know. I can drive people crazy trying to convince them there is a different way to see something. So really, I'm just talking to myself here. Do you ever wonder why Jesus was much harsher with the Pharisees than the "sinners". Maybe it was because their barriers were so rigid. They lacked emotion, sensitivity, empathy... Jesus didn't "pull rank" , or assert dominance over someone's mind - and maybe that is something worth considering. .. a way to avoid strong emotional reaction to our words. (?)I think that it really helps to build trust first before we tell someone that there is a different way to look at things.Above all, the Spirit can guide us.I find life is easier when I just assume that I could be wrong about a thousand things, and at any time God could put someone in my life to let me see some error in my thinking. Diane

R
RobertW

I think that it really helps to build trust first before we tell someone that there is a different way to look at things. Above all, the Spirit can guide us. Yes. I used to have a professor who would teach his material and then at the end ask the class if they had any 'ah- ha' experiences while listening. That would then lead to a time of discovery. When folk can 'discover' for themselves the truth it carries so much more weight than when we kind of drag them by the collar. There is much less resistance to the truth when it is self-discovered, or if I might so say, if they are allowed to make their own conclusions. Sometimes you can convince a person and yet they still remain unconvinced; not because of the facts in the case, but because of other variables that are weighing in also that the person has to reckon with one at a time as they come to mind.

S
sermonindex

Sooo... does anyone here who feels the Catholic Church is a Christian Church have any questions? We kinda got on a roll, and then fell off the radar. Krispy

R
roadsign

Krispy, we may have fallen off of your roll, but not necessarily off of God's roll. When Jesus was asked yes-no questions he never answered them as expected. He got to the heart of the issue - and I think we have done that here. It's impossible to answer a close-ended question when we are not dealing with close-ended definitions (the terms Christian/Christianity). Paul dealt with that same problem in his day. He said, "A Jew is not a Jew unless he is one inwardly." (Rom. 2) So, clearly, the definintion of "Jew" varies according to whose eyes one looks through - man's or God's. Apply that to the word "Christian" Here is a dictionary definition of Christainity: 1: a monotheistic system of beliefs and practices based on the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus as embodied in the New Testament and emphasizing the role of Jesus as savior 2: the collective body of Christians throughout the world and history (found predominantly in Europe and the Americas and Australia) "for a thousand years the Roman Catholic Church was the principal church of Christendom" Clearly, the RC falls under the wide umbrella of Christianity by definition and the way the word is used globally. Now consider how Jesus defined his followers. He also made it clear that many would be taking his name in vain: ie, Calling themselves his(Christ followers, Christians) when they were not inwardly. According to Christ's definition there is no such thing as a "Christian" church - ie religious organization. (Sorry, Baptists, Pentacostals, Fundies, Presbys, Anglicans, Independants .. etc) One is a Chrisitan (ie Christ follower) only if they are one inwardly. And no one can claim to be one by way of association with other Christians/ denomination/family..We tend to label people by association, don't we? Even Jesus was labeled a "glutton and drinker" - maybe because he hung around with some. That doesn't make it right. So we can't label all RC's non-Christians because of their hang-out. One's term of identification is not necessarily an indication of their inward state. It is a term of association. I suspect that there are many nominal Muslims, but we still call them Muslims (I know one)So: Can a Catholic individual be a Christian? The answer is: Of Course - not only according to the earthly use of the word, but also by God's definition. I wonder how Jesus would answer your question. Would it be in any way similar to my words here... probably not. He had a way of going right to the heart of the issue - the conscience of the one asking the question. Ex the Good Samaritan. etc.... I don't seem to be much help, do I? Diane

S
sermonindex

Diane... you think to hard. I feel like whenever I write something... ANYTHING... I have to spend even more time clarifying myself when I dont think I really need to.Christian, as most of us here on this forum understand it is: Someone who has put their faith in Christ, repented of their sins and believes the Bible.When I ask the question "Is the Roman Catholic Church a Biblical Christian Church" ... everyone here knows what I am asking.I love ya Diane... but you do tend to nit-pick things a bit too much sometimes. :-)Krispy

C
crsschk

Do you ever wonder why Jesus was much harsher with the Pharisees than the "sinners". Maybe it was because their barriers were so rigid. They lacked emotion, sensitivity, empathy... Diane, find it not the least bit odd that I had the same similar thoughts this morning praying. My own train of thought was running along the notice that the Lord was quite capable of getting the point across in few words with the "sinners" (well postioned quotes there).Jesus didn't "pull rank" , or assert dominance over someone's mind - and maybe that is something worth considering. .. a way to avoid strong emotional reaction to our words. (?)It is quite noticable all the 'defending' that the Lord never did...I find life is easier when I just assume that I could be wrong about a thousand things, and at any time God could put someone in my life to let me see some error in my thinking. Ahhhhhh ..... yes, precisely. It has a great way of proving itself out anyway ;-)

R
roadsign

Diane... you think too hard. Some refer to this malady divergent thinking. I would like to think that I eventually converge onto one point. ...Don't know if restating my concluding point in the negative would be any better: ie: Many RC's are NON-Christians - according to Christ's definition. The RC church contains many deceived teachers. (Even many of their own members would quickly admit that). Do I get a good grade on my answer here?Diane

R
roadsign

Diane, find it not the least bit odd that I had the same similar thoughts this morning praying. It brings me joy and encouragement to see the work of the Spirit amidst this diverse company. Surely the Spirit works beyond our finite limitations in order to refine and build his Church. (Universal)Diane

S
sermonindex

ie: Many RC's are NON-Christians - according to Christ's definition. The RC church contains many deceived teachers. (Even many of their own members would quickly admit that). Yea, something like that. Except I would contend that all RCC teachers are deceived, and deceivers. They would not be allowed to teach if they were presenting things that do not coincide with RCC doctrine.Simple and to the point... and I give you an A+ with a smiley face. :-)Krispy

R
roadsign

I would contend that all RCC teachers are deceived, and deceivers. Oh, Krispy, I hate to unravel your neat packaged answer here.I have a RC friend whom God called me to intercede for a few years ago. She got saved, and became filled with the Spirit. She was given the role of teaching confirmation class in her church, and the Spirit spoke his truth through her in an amazing way - even beyond what she could plan. She preached the gospel! I heard her "preach" in unplanned situations, and trust me, she was filled with the Spirit - fearless of what any man would say about her. I have another friend who was saved in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal in Gibraltar/Spain. The movement got right out of control of the RC church. Many leaders in places of prominence were saved. I know that the RC church, rather than lose thousands of members decided to take this movement under its umbrella and accept it. I'm not sure where it stands right now. I hope these commments don't reduce my grade. I like to get A+'s.Diane

S
sermonindex

She was given the role of teaching confirmation class in her church, and the Spirit spoke his truth through her in an amazing way Really? Hmmm... how do you teach confirmation (which the teachings of the RCC) and teach the truth at the same time? Sounds like confusion to me.This is from a Catholic website:The Sacrament of Confirmation often happens in the middle of a Mass (ie: blashpemey - Krispy); after the sermon and before receiving Communion.Presentation of the candidateThe names of everybody to be confirmed are read out. Each one stands up so everyone can see and then goes to the Bishop at the front. The Renewal of Baptismal PromisesEach candidate is asked questions about what they believe. They promise to reject evil. These promises are like an enrolment in to the Catholic Church. It is a bit like joining a club, except that the promises affect the whole of a person's life.The Laying on of HandsThe Bishop lays his hands on each of the candidates. This is to show them that they have the special job of living like Jesus would want and showing other people how to do the same. The hands are a symbol of the power and strength that will come to them through the Holy Spirit. The Anointing with ChrismThe Bishop says the candidate's name. This can be a special confirmation name (normally a saint's name) or the name they usually use. The Bishop then draws the sign of the cross on the forehead of the candidate with the oil of chrism. This oil is an ancient sign of being chosen by God. It is also used in baptism. The sign of the cross shows that the candidate is a child of God. Oil can be used to heal or to give strength.The Bishop then says "Be sealed with the gift of the Holy Spirit," followed by "Peace be with you," and the candidate replies, "And also with you." Can you not see the heresy behind this? Once a person is saved... they saved, and part of the Body of Christ.I dont need any Catholic bishop to confirm me, or declare me sealed with the Holy Spirit. I have God's Word.As for the other people in Spain, if they got out from the control of the RCC, then yes I can believe they were teaching the truth... because they got out.You cant teach Catholic confirmation and the Bible at the same time. It's like oil and water.Krispy

G
Greenquality

I have question.With so many differing groups,that can't agree on basic aspects of what the bible say's,or even what it means to be a christain?why can a Baptist,a Jehovah's Witness,a Charismatic, and a Methodist,Evangelelical,All claim to believe "What the bible say's" and yet no two of them agree" What it is that the bible say's ?"

S
sermonindex

On fundamental truths of salvation Baptist, Charismatics, Reformed Presbytarians, Nazerene, Assembly of God etc all DO agree.The JW's dont agree.The RCC doesnt agree.The Mormon Church doesnt agree.THere will always be disagreement on some non-salvation issues, but there can be no compromise on the basic Biblical beliefs of who Jesus is, and salvation.And the RCC clearly does not teach Biblical truths. They teach a man-made works-oriented religion.I am not an Assemblies of God person, but I consider those who are to be my brothers and sisters because we preach the same salvation. Same for Reformed Presbytarians.It's not that hard to understand, Greenquality. Your question is too general. We can get into generalities.Krispy

S
sermonindex

To be more specific, Greenquality... fundamental Christians (which most on this forum are, meaning they believe in the fundamentals of the faith) believe in the Bible ONLY. The RCC does not believe in the Bible only, they also add "traditions" of man, which is forbidden in scripture.It's not merely a disagreement over what the Bible says. It's a disagreement over what the Bible says... PLUS all the other stuff the RCC has added to their religion that is forbidden in scripture. In other words, they claim to believe the Bible, but they dont.Does that help?Krispy

R
roadsign

You cant teach Catholic confirmation and the Bible at the same time. It's like oil and water.That's right. But when the Spirit speaks through someone there is a divine authority that overrules man's doctrines. That's what happened to the apostles. It can happen anywhere. Sure it is costly and risky, but it has happened throughout history and it is still happenning. Do you believe that?Diane

G
Greenquality

The Bible was intended to be the last word on faith, piety, and worship.This diagreement of Holy tradition, and Holy scripure,Vs Sola Scriptura.The most Obvious assumption that underlines the doctrine of "Scripture alone"Is that the bible has within it all that is needed for everthing that concerns the christain life.Than why is their some many "books, and tapes written on worship etc..."" outside of scripture conserning the Christain life.( in 2 timothy3:15-17..From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures,Which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus...... All scripture is given by inspiration of God,and is profitable for Doctrine,for reproof, for correction,for instrution in righteousness:That the man of God may be perfect,throughly furnished unto all good works.....Those who would use this passage to advocate Sola Scritura argue that this passage teaches the 'All sufficiency' of scripture are abl to make a pious man perfect,and there is"no need for "tradition"..We should ask what is paul taking about,when he speaks of "Scripture" that Timothy has known since he was a child.?In Fact the "New Testament" had not yet been written when Timothy was a Child.Paul is speaking of the Old Testament,so if this passage is going to be used to set limts on inspired authority,not only will Tradition be excluded but this passage itself and the entire New Teasament.

S
sermonindex

I dont believe you can teach Catholic doctrinal heresy at the same time your teaching truth. She was teaching a class on how to be confirmed in teh Catholic Church... and just the fact that she was teaching a class (i.e. encouraging people to join) on being confirmed is a contradiction to scripture. Does scripture encourage us to join false religions? No... Scripture says just the opposite:Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Krispy

S
sermonindex

Than why is their some many "books, and tapes written on worship etc..."" outside of scripture conserning the Christain lifeGreat question, and I partly agree with you. Too many Christians today spend more time reading books ABOUT the Bible instead of reading the Bible. On the other hand, God has gifted some to be teachers, and there is nothing wrong with expository teaching. Thats what this website is about.As for how do we know we have all that there is to scripture? Faith does play a part in it, but there is a lot of history about how the Bible was put together AND preserved. There has been a lot written about it in this forum, and there is google. In Matthew Henry's Commentary On The Bible he wrote extensively about how the Canon was settled. I'd start there.Krispy

G
Greenquality

How ever very few referces in the new Teatament that touch upon the worship of of early Church,far from being a group of wild free sprited 'Charismatics'....The Chritians in the New Teatament,Worpshiped liturgically as did their fathers before them:They observed hours of prayer(acts 3:1;they worshiped in the temple(acts 24:46, 3:1,21:26);and worshiped in synagogues(acts 18:4

S
sermonindex

How ever very few referces in the new Teatament that touch upon the worship of of early Church,far from being a group of wild free sprited 'Charismatics'....Well, I certainly dont agree with all that Charismatics do, however I think scripture does speak about worship and praise:The fathers before - Psa 149:3 Let them praise his name in the dance: let them sing praises unto him with the timbrel and harp. Psa 150:4 Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs.As for the NT church spoken of, Paul was quite critical of the church in Corinth for their disorder, abuse of spiritual gifts (particularly tongues and prophecy), and about allowing there to be blatant sin in their midst without dealing with it. But I do not read where he instituted liturgy. They did not repeat prayers, in fact scripture forbids that:Mat 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.God doesnt want us to merely repeat words to Him. What naturally happens is that eventually they mean nothing to us, and we end up not paying any attention to what we're saying. Like hymns in church... some of them have some pretty powerful lyrics (and some dont!) but we pay no attention to what we're singin cuz we've sang them a thousand times.Thats not what God wants. He wants us to talk to Him like a friend. Imagine if your spouse just repeated the same words to over and over again in monotone. "Oh baby, I love you"... wouldnt mean much, would it? No, you want your spouse to open up and talk to you.They observed hours of prayer(acts 3:1)I dont think there is anything wrong with setting aside a time for prayer. Especially in this day when everything is pulling us in every direction. But you cant simply build an argument that we should have certain hours for prayer on one verse. In another scripture it says Peter went up on the roof at the sixth hour to pray. So now we should pray at the ninth hour and the sixth? Is that EST or Jerusalem time? See what i mean?My personal time with the Lord is from 5am - 6am. Thats what works for me. For you it may be something else.they worshiped in the temple(acts 24:46, 3:1,21:26);and worshiped in synagogues(acts 18:4Well, they did gather at the temple. Why? One main reason was because the temle was the main social meeting place they had. It was like gathering at the park. Same for the synagogues. But the Bible says "they" were in one accord, meaning the Christians were united together in their faith... but what did they do in the temples and synagogues?Act 5:42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. The OT was still the law and faith in the temples, and the OT does what? Points to Jesus Christ. Many Jews at that time, even after Christ's death were looking for Messiah to come. And what better place for the Jewish Christians to witness than in their own social places? The temple! And many of them got in trouble for it. Like Paul.But the gospel of Christ was by and large rejected by the Jews. You claim that the early church fathers used liturgy in their worship. Have you actually read their writings? Which early fathers are you referring to? Many early "church fathers" that a lot of well meaning Christians point to were heretics and not the true church fathers. I've heard people who ought to know their history better refer to certain "early church fathers" who were either Gnostics, or were early Catholic church fathers. I reject their notions and practices, so I would need to know which ones you're talking about before I can address that issue. Once you tell me, give me a little time cuz I'll need to do some research to be sure I'm conveying information that is accurate.Krispy

S
sermonindex

Krispy, I posted this website elsewhere's last night, but I think it's a good one, because it's by a former Priest. He respects people and has good stuff under his "Articles" section and offers Books by former Priests and Nuns, and has a good Links page, etc.He has a gentle heart.http://www.bereanbeacon.org/

S
sermonindex

On the top of the homepage of that site I just posted http://www.bereanbeacon.org , on the top of this homepage, there's a title "Emergent Church" ...Phew, just started reading some.The thing is, all this when it's "done", will be the One religion we know through end-times teaching that will be. One Merged Mess ... persecuting 'The' Church. Back to your topic...Also at top of the Homepage, see "Testimonies".

S
sermonindex

MeAgain... excellent site. I've heard this man's testimony before, and he is right on.Greenquality, check that site out.My wife and I have some Catholic friends, and a year or so ago they were having their baby baptised. They invited us to come, and we did only because we love them and also wanted to show them that we are not afraid of the RCC (if God is for me, who can be against me?).We sat there and didnt participate in the kneeling and standing and singing and all that, but I did notice something very telling.Two alter boys brought up to the front a Bible (Catholic version, of course) and the Catechism. The priest kissed the Cathechism and then the Bible. Then he set them both on the pulpit... and the Cathechism was twice as big as the Bible. He slid the Bible to the side, and then proceeded to preach out of the Catechism and never once opened the Bible.Krispy

G
Greenquality

when the Church officially canonized the books of scripture,the primary purpose in establishing an authoritive list of books which were to be received as sacred Scripture.was to protect the church from spurious books which claimed apostolic authorship but were in fact work of heretics.If Paul meant to exclude Tradition as not being profitable,then we should wonder whyPaul uses non-biblical oral tradition. such as "Jannes and jambres" are not found in the Old Teatament,yet in 2Timothy 3:8 Paul refers to themas opposing Moses,Paul is drawing upon Oral Tradtion that names the two most prominent Egyptians magicians in the Exodus account ch7-8 .also Epistle of St.Jude, which Quotes from the book of Enoch Jude 14-15 cf.Enoch1:9

S
sermonindex

Hia Greenquality,There are certain rules to proper Hermeneutics that cannot be broken.#1 - One Scripture verse cannot contradict or 'put out' another, when forming Doctrine.Not even two, against the weight of verses on the opposing side.#2 - Don't confuse "history" with "teachings".In other words, in this particular case, Doctrine of N.T. is not being formed here by neither of these "historic" verses you've given and neither of these affect Doctrine and "tradition" is not affecting N.T. Doctrine in neither of the Scripture verses you've brought up. And neither verse even involves "tradition", but both are just verbal Historic knowledge of those times, not doctrine nor traditions. There is no "Oral Tradition" in N.T. Doctrine of Christianity. Symbolism in some cases but the NEW Covenant is the New Covenant. Paul was a Pharisee of the Pharisees, educated under Gamaliel, so he knew all the "history" of these things out of the writings they had at that time. But he never formed "doctrine" out of his former "traditions", neither did he incorporate what he knew Prior to Christ, into N.T. "laws", so to speak. (see Galatians)These two "historic" quotes from Paul and Jude, did not change or affect Christianity in any N.T. Doctrine, such as Salvation by grace through faith, etc. etc..Never. And as far as what the Word of Christ is on "tradition" .... this is where we must go with the "weight" of Scripture ....Mat 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. Mat 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? Mat 15:6 And honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.Mar 7:1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. Mar 7:2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. Mar 7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. Mar 7:4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables. Mar 7:5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? Mar 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Isaiah prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoreth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Mar 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. Mar 7:10 For Moses said, Honor thy father and thy mother; and, whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: Mar 7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. Mar 7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do aught for his father or his mother; Mar 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye. Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. {This whole chpt is good} 1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spotI have no problem with reading Enoch. I downloaded it when studying Eschatology.But, I wouldn't and wouldn't need to form Doctrine out of anything from the Old Covenant .... since Christ.His Love.Annie

G
Greenquality

Keep in mind I'm speaking of Holy tradation of the Church and Holy Scripture.not man's tradation.

G
Greenquality

This dependece upon tradition is evident in the New Testament writting's in them selfes.for example.Saint Paul exhorts the Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 2:15( therefore, brethren stand fast,and hold the "traditions"which ye have been taught,whether by word,or our epistle.(tradition)i.e."oral tradition"Read john ch 21:25

G
Greenquality

Also for your #1 It is not an accident that Jehovah's Witness all believe the same things,and Southern Baptists generally belive the same things.when they both read the same ver in the bible they can not agree.throwing verses at each other as if they were rocks,in hoping to to hit some sence in each other.

S
sermonindex

Hia Greenquality,Regarding your first post, you brought up the Canon.We share the same N.T. and that is where we derive our "Doctrine".2Th 2:14,15 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Again, we derive our Gospel from the New Covenant as in New Testament ... so Paul keeps us there and there only.No "oral" traditions, but "that which is written" for us now.He was speaking directly to a Church he had personally visited (by word), but gives warning that we never go beyond what "is written".John says in that verse "if" they should be written .... he said nothing more than that.We have it all that HE wanted us to have in our hands. What is written is all that we are to adhere to. Never to add or subtract from the Scriptures. That's a very dangerous thing to do. Now, what "traditions" do you think are not contained in our N.T. ?

S
sermonindex

Greenquality wrote:Also for your #1 It is not an accident that Jehovah's Witness all believe the same things,and Southern Baptists generally belive the same things.when they both read the same ver in the bible they can not agree.throwing verses at each other as if they were rocks,in hoping to to hit some sence in each other.I'm going to have to quote you in order to keep up with these little posts ;-) .In reply to your quote above .... you did not understand my "#1".#1 means .... that in order to prove out a Doctrine, one must have every verse from beginning to end that pertains to that topic to make it stand.We can blow a JW out of the water with tons of verses about the Deity of Christ ... just for one.Now, maybe we should stick with just the Doctrine of Salvation, just to keep this more compact.Everyone that I know of on this website and all the Authors believe in the same Salvation Doctrine ... so maybe we could start with that.Are we missing any "traditions" in our N.T. that we would need to acquire elsewhere, in order to be saved ?

G
Greenquality

I'm not Rcc,and you can Quote me on that.The point I'm trying to make,telling some one who loves God in the Rcc.that they are wrong,that they worship a flase god,and that they are going to hell,won't cut it from some one who base their interpretation on logic,or some one interpreting Scripture in their cozy den.....2Peter1:20-21 knowing this first that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation or (one man's Idea) read 21.

S
sermonindex

Hi again Greenquality,I guess that leaves me out, because I'm not in a cozy den.Anyhow ... I reckon we still could discuss the salvation doctrine though ... that never hurt a true believer. I thought that was what we were going to do.I think there is a thread already going on that though, but I haven't had the chance to look at it. I 'think' it's called "Born again by what means" or something like that.I'm doing two forums at once ... Ha, that's a lot for me.The other isn't "Christian" though, but it's a blessing to sit in my uncozy sick room and witness Christ to sick people.Now there's another subject, "witnessing".There's some good threads on that here too.Well, I'm off to read some more.Enjoy the Site.His Love to you.Annie

S
sermonindex

telling some one who loves God in the Rcc.that they are wrong,that they worship a flase god,and that they are going to hell,won't cut it from some one who base their interpretation on logic,or some one interpreting Scripture in their cozy denSo are you saying that the common person, the common man, cannot read scripture for him/herself and have God speak truth to them... w/out it being filtered thru church authority? Most of the time when Jesus taught, it was one on one, or one on twelve. Very private situations. Like the woman at the well.This thought that the church needs to interpret scripture for the common man is what turned William Tyndale into a martyr. The RCC went to great lengths to keep the Word of God out of the hands of the common man. Why? The Catholic Church will tell you that the history behind that (or "church tradition") was to protect the flock and keep heretics from rising up. I personally suspect a more diabolical reason... I think they knew that if the common man could read God's Word for himself, it wouldnt take long and everyone would recognize the RCC for what it truly is: False.So now the RCC has it's own Bibles, BUT... they are told that scripture needs to be interpretted by Church Traditions. In other words, if it's in the Bible but the church teaches otherwise, go with Church teaching.That IS tradition of man, whether you choose to call it that or not. As for me, I'm gonna bet on God's Word everytime.Why dont we get down to the core issue tho... how are we saved? Loving God is not salvation, as you seemed to imply. I'd like to follow this thru a little bit. How are we saved according to God's Word, and how are we saved according to the RCC?Krispy

R
rookie

I have been away for a week and have been reading through various threads all morning. I got to page three on this thread so I have not read to the point where I am posting this thought. Sorry.I went home to bury my father this past week. I was raised in the Greek Catholic (Traditions). At that time our branch of Catholicism did not submit to the pope. Our priest was a married man with children and we celebrated Christmas in January. For my first 17 years, mass and worship was said in Ukrainian. I served as an altar boy for many years and once told a visiting arch bishop that I believed that I was called to be a priest.And then I went off to college. For the next 20 years I lived for the things of this world.Then one day a highschool friend, who had since become a Catholic priest sent a cross to my family as a gift for our recently born son. I hung that cross on my son's bedroom wall. Each day as I kissed him goodnight, I saw the cross as I left his room. This led to my conviction, that i too, would introduce my son to religion. But, God spoke to me one day while I was out working in the garden. "How can you teach you son about Me, you do not know Me." Tears of conviction and grace filled my soul that day. God had used a Catholic priest to prick my soul in preparation for the work He has prepared for me. God works in many ways which always continue to humble me in my carnal understanding. I began to read the Holy Scriptures and attend a local Baptist chuch. The Scriptures as Krispy has related began to teach me in a most wonderful way. I found myself looking back at my upbringing in the Greek Catholic church as something of lie that led many people astray. But I also began to see (traditions) in the Baptist church which also seemed to lead people astray from where Scripture points. All things are found in Christ. Yet people around me could not explain faith in a way that created Christ in them. So I went to another church, and here too I found that there still seemed to be something missing according to Scripture. Last week a little old lady, poor and of no outward appearance of religion, came to me and shared with me about my father's life of the past few years. As she spoke, my heart sang with praise. Before me was a woman who spoke the things of Christ. Her inward beauty began to flow out of her as she spoke of a prayer life that she and my father shared daily. She is a believer. Yet, this old lady was not my mother. My mother does not possess the beauty of Christ. Her life is filled with the hopes of this world. Her life is submerged in darkness. She is a dead person walking. I say this as a testimony of how God has worked through and is continuing to work through all my unbelief. With God all things are possible. He can even deliver us from the (traditions of men) which cause us to stumble. Where Christ is preached, where men begin to listen to Him, this is the foundation that will stand for He is able to make us stand in the midst of men's carnality.In ChristJeff

C
crsschk

Dear Jeff,Thank you kindly for bringing this very needful understanding. I fear a ruin of it by inserting any words here.Can only but pray and plead that we might take this all to heart and be humbled by it.My prayers are with you Jeff.

G
Greenquality

Hi Kk, I believe .The Lord Christ is the Head of the church.He Is The Living Word Made Flesh.When He spoke to someone, or as a group,He is the Voice of the Father. I believe in the Church which Christ speaks of.The Body of Christ......now here is a prime example of sola scriptura...,being used against the the Head of the Church....I want you to look this up and study this,in matt ch4:6, satan is interpreting ps,91:12-13,To the Head of the church,in order to temp the Lord. now tell me what is satan trying to do here when interpreting ps 91 ?????

S
sermonindex

Rookie, I'd like to echo Mike's sentiments also.The Lord knows those that are His.When I was still ignorant of Biblical Christianity, I felt the call of God, but thought I'd become a Nun after I got out of the military and told my step-mother so ... Not too many years later while in the Military, I heard my first Gospel message on TV, where I was stationed and immediately broke, because I had never heard The Message before and I was already near 23 years old. So when I got out, I was able to use the GI bill benefit to go to Bible College instead.God is SO Great and I know what you felt with that cross on the wall. We had a picture of Jesus on our wall as young children and I was blessed to find the same picture in an antique shop and purchase it, because He was real to me as a little child and that picture told me, He calls us and HE knows who'll respond down the road.I'm glad to have read your post. It increases my hope for my family also.Thank you much Jeff.Annie

R
roadsign

Rockie’s testimony reminds me of Spurgeon’s in some respects. Spurgeon, actually had a godly heritage, a praying mom and a Baptist minister father, and yet had a great deal of difficulty finding the solutions to his deep inner sense of condemnation. Sunday after Sunday he went to various churches seeking answers for his troubled soul and yet, he did not hear the needed words. One stormy Sunday he attended a tiny nearby church. Their minister could not get in because of the snow, and the service was almost cancelled. A shoemaker bungled his way through a crude impromptu message. He, of all people, had the answers Spurgeon needed, which led to his powerful transformation. I believe God works in spite of man more than because of man. And he speaks through the least expected people. God had used a Catholic priest to prick my soul in preparation for the work He has prepared for me. When we “critique” any denomination, we must remember whose eyes we are looking through – ours – not theirs. I am inserting this RC link Frequently asked questions that is their defence to all the critiques against them. Please keep in mind that I see many holes, I am not condoning their defences. This is NOT which I wish to discuss here But if you do take a peak, try to understand why their doctrines have been perpetuated and why they might be cherished by many millions of people. For us to tell them they are wrong won’t likely do much good. They, just like every one of us, need divine enlightenment in order to shake away the blind spots and age-old delusions.Perhaps as you read you will discover some beliefs and practises that God might use in order to draw people to himself. There is a lot there: divine creation, Christ’s atonement,sin, the cross, the resurrection etc. And they have the Bible!!! And we can capitalize on our common ground when we share Christ with them. Now, I noticed Rookie mention that he found dead traditions in the Baptist church too. There is something about everyone that craves to cling to some sort of tradition, heritage, predictability, and sense of religious righteousness. By the way, yesterday I spoke about some of my concerns, with a Catholic who I regard as very intelligent thinker, and he was quite defensive, pointing out to me all the misconceptions I had been taught. I could tell that he, as yet, is not ready to let go. Actually he had been in the evangelical church for the past 7 years and found it too flaky and flippant. Sadly he has recently returned to the church of his roots because, as he said, “I miss the reverence, the adoration, the respect…” He feels that he finds Christ there. And who am I to disagree. I pray that this person, regardless where he's at will desire Christ above all that this world, including anything in any church, has to offer him. Diane

G
GaryE

Dear Jeff,I'm sorry to hear of your dads passing.Your story of how the Lord used a small action like being given that cross made me think of how God used people and there actions in my own life to lead me to him. Often a simple action of love is used more than a powerful sermon. Maybe the best powerful sermons are actions of love.Just this morning, as I was driving to chapel service, my mind was focused on the people and situations the Lord used to lead me to him and towards growth. Later, during a testimony, I could not help but weep as I told about some of the people God used to get my attention. They were all poor in this world. Two of them lived in a house without a bathtub. One was educated and the rest weren't. One was a former pastor's widow. What they all had in common was love and loves actions towards a very sinful young man. As they walked with Christ, not one of them criticizied me in my obvious sins.The little old lady, poor, and no outward appearance of religion must have been a God send for you.

C
crsschk

By the way, yesterday I spoke about some of my concerns, with a Catholic who I regard as very intelligent thinker, and he was quite defensive, pointing out to me all the misconceptions I had been taught. I could tell that he, as yet, is not ready to let go. Actually he had been in the evangelical church for the past 7 years and found it too flaky and flippant. Sadly he has recently returned to the church of his roots because, as he said, “I miss the reverence, the adoration, the respect…” He feels that he finds Christ there. And who am I to disagree. Hard to disagree with that. Think something else that I picked up over the years from my dad in more than one way and is likely just as prominent is similar to this; That for many Catholics the sense is of the "Church" having an authority and a authenticity, a 'proper understanding' that only gets reinforced by what they see of the other side, well summed up by the above quote. The trust is in the Church and the priest. Much of modern day Christendom isn't giving them any reason at all to have a hearing.“I miss the reverence, the adoration, the respect…”

S
sermonindex

In the story of Balaam we read where God used a donkey to speak. Scripture says that if we dont declare the wonders of the Lord that the rocks will cry out. God can and does use many things to speak to our hearts and lead us into truth. My contention is not about that. And I dont question the sincerity of any Catholic. As I've said before, there is a family who we love and have become the best of friends with... and they are hardcore Catholic. Oh that I knew more Bible believing Christians who were as devoted as this family is!But that does not take away from the fact that they do not know Biblical salvation. We've talked at length about it many times. They are good, moral, decent people. They strive to serve God... but they have not accepted his salvation by grace alone. They believe in the ordinances of the church for their salvation. But we are not saved by ordinances or works. If we were then Christ died in vain, and what greater blashemey could there be than to ignore His death on the cross and try to work our way in?There are many good moral, decent Mormon's out there (Our neighbors are Mormon)... but I dont see anyone defending the Mormon Church. Why is that?Salvation is not about being good, and moral... and decent. It's not even about being devoted. It's about God's grace toward us, and us accepting it. No strings attached. No need to do works in order to obtain it. I appreciate the wonderful story of the Cross given by a priest, and I appreciate that God did speak thru that. But I'm gonna have to stick to my guns on this one... and say that scripture is paramount.If a Mormon gave me a Bible... God will still speak to me thru it, but that does not mean that the Mormon Church has any truth in it's teachings at all.Krispy

R
rookie

Br Gary wrote:The little old lady, poor, and no outward appearance of religion must have been a God send for you.The day of my father's funeral I rejoiced. It has been one of the best days of my life. Everything is made perfect in Agape love. In Christ Jeff

R
rookie

Br. Krispy wrote:They strive to serve God... but they have not accepted his salvation by grace alone. Neither should we. Scripture teaches that we are saved (by grace) though (faith). Andrew Murray wrote:"Seek to get very clear hold of the truth that He is only a Savior as He is a Leader, Salvation is being led by Him."The prophet Balaam is often given as an example of one who knew God by His grace. Yet, Balaam clearly rejected God's grace for mammon. Christ said that we cannot have two masters. Where does one's faith lead him? "Our Path creates the evidence fo what we hope for."In ChristJeff

R
rookie

There are many things in the Catholic faith that lead men astray. Yet, as I listened to the mass in English, (for as a child, I had only heard it in Ukranian), 90 % of the words which are repeated day after day, consist of a prayer to Jesus. In many ways the liturgy reminded me of a Psalm. I thought to myself, If only people who voiced this liturgy listened to the words that they spoke. I also thought about all the Hymns we sing to God, and my thoughts including myself are "if only we would listened to the words we sing." In ChristJeff

S
sermonindex

Well Jeff, I offer up a friendly challenge :-) to you... using the Councel of Trent, show me how the Catholic Church teaches Biblical Salvation.They may offer prayers to Jesus... but I remind you of what Jesus said... "Not everyone who says to me 'Lord Lord'..."Krispy

Z
ZekeO

Where does one's faith lead him? "Our Path creates the evidence fo what we hope for."Very Good. That really spoke to me.

R
roadsign

That for many Catholics the sense is of the "Church" having an authority and a authenticity, a 'proper understanding' that only gets reinforced by what they see of the other side,Let's admit, the Reformation was not a good way to start. It did not leave a very good impression - militant hostility, slashing art work, etc etc. It did not display the humble attitude of Christ. And even in more recent years, not far from where I formally lived there was intense prejudice between the two sides - school children even crossing over to the other side of the street if they saw an "opponent" coming towards them. There has been a lot of prejudice - and things that we would rather sweep under the carpet. Perhaps the best testimony we can give to the RCC of the authenticity of our faith is to humbly admit our own sins. Diane

S
sermonindex

Diane, While I certainly do not condone un-Christlike behavior, lets not forget the blood that is on the hands of the RCC. You are only telling one side of the story in your post. To ignore the murderous past of the RCC is to disrespect those who suffered and died for Christ under the rule of the RCC.As for slashing artwork... do you know why the artwork was slashed? Two reasons: They thought it was making a graven image of God, and also the artwork depicted rank heretical teachings. I'm not convinced that it was bad thing. I wouldnt resort to that myself, but I can understand why they did it and sympathize with it.At Bob Jones University (in Greenville SC) there is a Museum & Gallery that is astounding. It has the largest collection of Religious Art in the world, second ONLY to the Vatican. Even tho BJU is a fundamental Bible beleving University, 85% of the artwork is Catholic, and some of it over 800 years old. I've been there, and I recommend if you're ever in the area... stop in. However, in the artwork the depictions of heretical Catholic doctrine is all over. BJU has little signs underneath describing the Catholic doctrine in the painting, and scripture that shows that whats being depicted is unscriptural.It's really a neat place, and I say all that to say I am not against artwork... but I do understand why those people 500 years ago destroyed some of it. They saw it as blasphemey. I agree with them on that point.Here's the link to BJU Museum:http://www.bjumg.org/But lets not forget the bloody past of the RCC. Maybe Luther has something to apologize for, but I dont. I wasnt there. I havent treated any Catholics in a bad way. I dont apologize for other people's behavior. Thats like asking me to apologize to African Americans for slavery because I am a southerner. While it was an evil sin, I didnt have anything to do with it.By the way, lets not forget who it was who overturned the tables of the money changers and chased them out of the temple. People tend to picture Jesus in their minds as being gentle and soft and fuzzy... and while He did manifest those qualities at times... He was also a firey and controversial preacher... and yes, He even got angry. Especially when it came to people perverting the Word of God and oppressing those who merely want to know God. Kinda like the RCC has done for centuries.Krispy

R
rookie

Br Krispy:According to the promise given to Abraham, all generations would receive the promise for God to be their God. (see Genesis 17) Before the Reformation, there was always a remnant. Scripture always demonstrates that a remnant exist. Even in the time where Israel had rebelled against God during the time of Elijah, what does Scripture say?Romans 11:2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, 3 “LORD, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life”? 4 But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. So even with all the things that were wrong with the Catholic church back before the Reformation, I believe that God reserved for Himself a remnant according to grace and not works. Biblical Salvation is through Jesus Christ alone. Jesus came and changed Paul's mind about salvation. I believe He can still do it today. I do not disagree with your positions Krispy, neither do I seek to limit the arm of God.In ChristJeff

I
IRONMAN

it seems to me that the practices in protestant churches are very similar to the ones in Catholic churches, the priest is now called pastor, the litergy is essentially the same, while there may be no or perhaps a few carvings, there're a lot of stained glass art and a lot of other things that are the same in protestantism as in catholicism. now there is blood also on the hands of protestants or if not at least they didn't do enough if anything to stop the violence against my ancerstors during the rape of Africa or during the slave trade days.when the british came through and took over the majority of the continent they came with mainly anglican missionaries. the one thing that is different though is the gospel of salvation but even so being an ex catholic myself, that's where i first heard of Christ and believed in Him. i wasn't familiar with the doctrines and all but i did come to know Christ and Him crucified for my sins.i believe we are all brethren in Christ and we all have things lacking and things which need to be done away with. our Catholic brethren need for us to expose the false doctrines they adhere to that as many as would be saved would indeed be saved and we need to learn their reverence for God. the foot can't say "i don't need the leg"also as it pertains to people being saved who remain in the catholic church, the Lord reminded me of my own experience after He began dealing with me. He showed me that the church i was going to had very very few Spirit-filled people. in my pride i told the Lord i saw no need for me to be there coz i needed to be among other Spirit-filled ones and draw from them. Then the Lord said to me "if they are not filled with the Spirit, how will they know what it is to be filled with the Spirit of there is noone to show them?" so i had to repent of that pride. it's easy to think that people may stay in their situation or denomination out of comfort but i think most actually want to leave but are called of God to stay there as an example of what God requires. that way on that last day those who will have refused to do right by God won't have any excuse even though people may or man not be saved from that denomination.

S
sermonindex

Rookie wrote:So even with all the things that were wrong with the Catholic church back before the Reformation, I believe that God reserved for Himself a remnant according to grace and not works. Biblical Salvation is through Jesus Christ alone. Jesus came and changed Paul's mind about salvation. I believe He can still do it today. I do not disagree with your positions Krispy, neither do I seek to limit the arm of God.Absolutely! I couldnt agree more. In fact, I do not consider myself to even be a Protestant. All down thru church history before the Reformation there were pockets of Bible believing Christians who refused to have anything to do with the Catholic Church. The remnant was outside of the Church. Thats where I drawn my Christian heritage. People can call themselves Protestant if they wish, it's really a benign title at this point anyway... but I am not one.God's remnant previous to the Reformation was met with torture, rape and murder at the hands of the RCC. All one needs to do is read Foxe's Book Of Martyrs if you want to know about how Rome treated those who stood up for the Word of God.Here is a poem written about such martyrs who were murdered by the RCC in the 1200's by someone who lived then...Avenge O Lord thy slaughter'd Saintswhose bones Lie scatter'd on the Alpine mountains cold,Ev'n them who kept thy truth so pure of oldWhen all our Fathers worship't Stocks and Stones,Forget not: in thy book record their groanesWho were thy Sheep and in their antient FoldSlayn by the bloody Piemontese that roll'dMother with Infant down the Rocks. Their moansThe Vales redoubl'd to the Hills, and theyTo Heav'n. Their martyr'd blood and ashes sowO're all th' Italian fields where still doth swayThe triple Tyrant [the pope]: that from these may growA hunder'd-fold, who having learnt thy wayEarly may fly the Babylonian wo.The blood of the martyrs is on the hands of Rome.Rev 17:6a And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus...Krispy

S
sermonindex

it seems to me that the practices in protestant churches are very similar to the ones in Catholic churches, the priest is now called pastor, the litergy is essentially the same, while there may be no or perhaps a few carvings, there're a lot of stained glass art and a lot of other things that are the same in protestantism as in catholicism. now there is blood also on the hands of protestants or if not at least they didn't do enough if anything to stop the violence against my ancerstors during the rape of Africa or during the slave trade days.when the british came through and took over the majority of the continent they came with mainly anglican missionaries. the one thing that is different though is the gospel of salvation but even so being an ex catholic myself, that's where i first heard of Christ and believed in Him. i wasn't familiar with the doctrines and all but i did come to know Christ and Him crucified for my sins.Alot of the Protestant churches that came out of the Reformation still held onto a lot of Romish doctrine. It was almost as tho they didnt go far enough, as you pointed out, Ironman. Luteran, Anglican, etc... Catholic Lite.And thats exactly why I dont call myself Protestant.A lot of sins have been committed in the name of God, and you're correct that in a lot of cases slavery was one of them. History does show that those who were involved in the slave trade (capturing/transporting/selling) were the wretches of society. A few of them may have called themselves Christians, but the reality of it was that it was anything but a noble business and society considered those involved to be vile and wicked people.And slavery in America was preached against from it's very inception. Even in the South. General "Stonewall" Jackson did not justify slavery, and took a lot of heat for teaching slaves and children of slaves how to read and write, and taught the first known Bible class for children of slaves.So again, God has His remnant, even when the entire church is off course.Krispy

R
roadsign

While I certainly do not condone un-Christlike behavior, lets not forget the blood that is on the hands of the RCC.Krispy, I'm glad you said this, because, if you didn't, this thought would still lurk in the backs of many minds. I remember once reading an article about restitution - restoring long standing disagreements hatred, and rivalries. I read, "The other party may be 99% wrong, and you may be 1% wrong. Admit your part of the wrongs. That is the part YOU are responsible for. And let God deal with their wrongs. Do not take vengeance in your hands. From the eyes of the other party, we are 99% wrong and they are 1% wrong. that was abundantly clear to me when I read the RC defence I posted earlier. So, you see, admitting our failures goes a long way in breaking down walls and paving the way for Christ's mercy and forgiveness. Think how many marital conflicts could be resolved if this principle was observed. Or political, or national, or ...... Diane

S
sermonindex

I can certainly find myself on common ground with you on that matter. I've done some limited marriage counseling in the ministry God has called me to... and NOBODY wants to own up to their part of the problem. If they do admit to any faults, then they blame their faults on their spouse... and around and around it goes.In this particular conversation tho, I was trying to stress that for nearly 1500 years the Roman Catholic Church persecuted true believers unmercilessly... and so while not condoning, I do understand why some (not the majority, mind you!) involved in the Reformation may have gone overboard in their actions.Kinda like if someone ever touched one of my children in a sexual way. You may not condone my actions when I find the person... but you could certainly understand why.Krispy

G
Greenquality

all of you need to read ((((matt7:2)))), you known if I was a Non-believer and came across to read this thread,I would stay that way.your doing more harm than any good.[font=Georgia]Luke 11:23 He that is not with me is against me:and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.[/font]

I
IRONMAN

bro KrispyA lot of sins have been committed in the name of God, and you're correct that in a lot of cases slavery was one of them. History does show that those who were involved in the slave trade (capturing/transporting/selling) were the wretches of society. A few of them may have called themselves Christians, but the reality of it was that it was anything but a noble business and society considered those involved to be vile and wicked people.well not necessarily all those involved in this trade were dregs, some were upstanding citizens of their respective countries i'm sure. can't think of any examples right now but i do know of a couple of well known men who bought slaves which made possible the capture, transport etc. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington had slaves even though they were involved in the declaration of independance and revolution. not sure how much they spoke against it, seems like they had no problem with it though :-? these 2 men were/are revered even today and not counted among the "wicked" who were involved in the capture and transport of slaves, seems to me that to buy or to capture and sell is just as wicked.at the end of the day the Lord allowed it in order to fulfil His purposes. and yes, the Lord always has a remnant...but then again i think an important thing to remember is that our conduct speaks much louder than our words. we can dispute doctrine all day long with anyone who is a heathen but our conduct is convicting if it is Godly.

S
sermonindex

you known if I was a Non-believer and came across to read this thread,I would stay that way.your doing more harm than any goodWell, scripture says that it's impossible for the unbeliever to understand the things of God. So it wouldnt surprise me if an unbeliever read this forum and didnt understand what's being discussed. However, I think if someone is really searching, and the Holy Ghost has His hand on their life and leading them to the truth... this forum would be more interesting than offensive.Krispy

S
sermonindex

IRONMAN, I agree with you about Jefferson, etc. I was speaking of those directly involved in the slave trade. Those who owned slaves obviously created the market that made the slave trade possible.It was a scourge on this land all the way around. Yet God's mercy and hand was upon this country anyway. But it took a lot of bloodshed to rid the land of it... and another 100 years to begin to make things right. We're not quite there yet, but we're not where we were. Kinda like our walk with God in our personal lives.Krispy

R
roadsign

all of you need to read ((((matt7:2)))), you known if I was a Non-believer and came across to read this thread,I would stay that way.People stayed away from Jesus too! Greenquality, This generalized "chastizement" is confusing and unhelpful. I think that you are concerned about the sin of judging, and justificably that is a concern. But the word "judge" is actually a God-given responsibility, and we here are wrestling through it. Could you please check this out: Judging - good and bad judgingand then share specifically how you feel we are transgressing God's laws. Diane

P
PreachParsly

Greenquality wrote:all of you need to read ((((matt7:2)))), you known if I was a Non-believer and came across to read this thread,I would stay that way.your doing more harm than any good.[font=Georgia]Luke 11:23 He that is not with me is against me:and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.[/font]I hear this "you are doing more harm than good" a lot. When I go out to preach on the street, soo many say that. Well, to be honest I pray to God their complacency in sin is shattered, or harmed. That's a great scripture in Luke. Do you think that the ones who have been posting extensively on this thread are purposing to push people away from Christ? It would seem impossible to me, that if you are exalting Christ, the Truth of His Word, and doing it in the right spirit to "scatter" people away from Christ. EDIT: Oh, I didn't see Roadsign's post. We are not trying to beat you over the head Greenquality.

G
Greenquality

Oh , the subject is about slavery,and not about" Are they christian, Rcc as a church" the people who conducted THis pratice of slavery,and you are blaming the rcc Church,and your venting your anger at them. I'm sorry that i must have read the post wrong. I should be venting about the Rcc, when the Ottmen Turks,who are not christian ,and made it their job to kill any and all, rape and bondage or salvery,for about 600 yr, the christian asked the rcc, for help,and they watched and did nothing to help their brother and sister in christ.Do i harbor hate or rage or unforgivness the answer is NO!

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
First
1 of 90 posts
Last

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate