|
|
|
|
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/28/2008 1:38:00 PM | happiemom, some other types of christians don't feel they are, no. Or people feel the RCC is basically just the legacy of the Roman Empire. Probably (or possibly) some of this, even before the Reformation, stems back to basic northern vs. southern European differences & rivalries, etc, to an extent. Who knows? This link I found seems to about sum up the tenor of the ........evidently these are called just "bible-believing" baptist Christians' view(s) on the RCC:
http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/Catholic.html | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/28/2008 1:42:46 PM | I got a kick right off the bat from the VERY FIRST post.
QUOTE: "Its like a snake eating its own tail. "
I got a kick out of it becuase the "SNAKE EATING ITS OWN TAIL" symbolism comes from an 'order' of Knights who defended the faith which all the other 'faiths' came from .
So now im wondering how THEY came up with that same Symbology... Im just a garden variety athiest.
not even interested in the rest of the thread sorry. Religions are all about control , thats it thats all. Ive taken the time to educate myself on the origins of them all.
Carry on . | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/28/2008 2:52:05 PM |
world's Christians (Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, which together make up between 75 and 80% of the world's Christian population) really do believe that Jesus of Nazareth founded the Catholic Church, pope and bishops and sacraments and all. I'm fully aware of the dogma and tradition...and more aware of the facts. Christianity predates Catholicism and certainly the Roman Catholic pope. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/29/2008 8:19:45 AM | xNEROx:
QUOTE: You are free to disagree with that, of course, but I'm just saying.
^^^ Well at least you give those others a bit more leeway there than Franco or Pinochet would have....
LOL, just a bit........... and just a bit more than the Roman Emperor who shares your screen name, too!
Call me a very tolerant dogmatist, I guess.
Let me just add, though, that during WWII, believe it or not, Francoist Spain was considered a haven for Jewish refugees. The Generalissimo refused all Axis pressures to implement anti-Semitic laws.
My dear marathonman:
I'm fully aware of the dogma and tradition...and more aware of the facts. Christianity predates Catholicism and certainly the Roman Catholic pope.
Now, call me a silly papist if you like, but personally, it seems quite clear to me from the gospels that the Apostle St. Peter was appointed by Christ to be the head of the Church after Himself, and that is the core idea of the "Roman Catholic pope". Christ gave the keys to the kingdom to Peter, saying "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
The primacy of Peter over all the Apostles is demonstrated in that he is almost always listed first among them, how the New Testament often uses the language "Peter and the apostles", and how Peter alone is mentioned 155 times while all the other apostles are mentioned 130 times when put together. Peter speaks to Christ on behalf of the other apostles (Matthew 19:27, Mark 10:28, Mark 11:21). In the Acts of the Apostles, Peter acts as the leader of the ancient Church by initiating the selection of a replacement Apostle for Judas (Acts 1:15), by declaring the anathema of Ananias (Acts 5:3), etc.
It is also universally attested by the early Christian writers that Peter suffered his martyrdom in Rome, and that his successors are the bishops of Rome, aka the popes. For ex:
Dionysius of Corinth: "You [Pope Soter] have also, by your very admonition, brought together the planting that was made by Peter and Paul at Rome and at Corinth; for both of them alike planted in our Corinth and taught us; and both alike, teaching similarly in Italy, suffered martyrdom at the same time" (Letter to Pope Soter [A.D. 170], in Eusebius, History of the Church 2:25:8). | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/30/2008 10:30:33 AM | I waited for someone to mention this passage...found in Matt. 16..you copied Matt 16:18 but in doing so take out of context the chapter...in vrse 15 Yeshua asks Who do YOU say I am...to which peter answers " You are the Christ the son of the Living God"(verse 16) to which Yeshua replied Blessed are you for flesh and blood have not revealed this to you but my Father which is in heaven.
He THEN goes on to say....UPON THIS ROCK WILL I BUILD MY CHURCH.
The Rock on which the Church is build is the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT that Yeshua Bin Yoseph is the Son of the Living God made flesh.....THE Messiah....who further fulfilled prophacy and was cruxified and rose from the dead to once again be with the Father to come again.
To this end John 3:16 reaffirms.
Now even when we look at the HISTORY of the "papal church" as well as simply using COMMON sense, we see CLEARLY that Christianity begins with the belief in Yeshua Bin Yoseph as THE Messiah, not with anything of peter. The catholic church CLAIMS a lineage however it CANNOT claim that Christianity begins with its formation. Christianity is the belief in Yeshua as THE Messiah, THE Christ, The ONLY SON of the Father made flesh. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/30/2008 11:29:45 AM |
waited for someone to mention this passage...found in Matt. 16..you copied Matt 16:18 but in doing so take out of context the chapter...in vrse 15 Yeshua asks Who do YOU say I am...to which peter answers " You are the Christ the son of the Living God"(verse 16) to which Yeshua replied Blessed are you for flesh and blood have not revealed this to you but my Father which is in heaven.
He THEN goes on to say....UPON THIS ROCK WILL I BUILD MY CHURCH.
The Rock on which the Church is build is the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT that Yeshua Bin Yoseph is the Son of the Living God made flesh.....THE Messiah....
RIGHT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You got it in one. The words of Jesus (and the word play between "petros" and "petra") have to be forced to do semantic gymnastics to support the position that Peter is the Rock upon which the Christian Church is built. To then take a weak argument and position it as absolute proof that the Roman Popes somehow inherited the "keys" dishonours Jesus' words and the acknowledgement of all who have said the same as Peter said, and smacks of elitism. The Church is a company of equals. The Pope is one Christian at the table.
An interesting aside: The phrasing of the question (asked of the group) and Jesus' response indicated to me that He did not know who the Father would reveal this truth to. That makes sense to me insofar as Jesus acknowledges that it is the Father's revelation. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/30/2008 11:38:06 AM | marathonman11x7:
I waited for someone to mention this passage...found in Matt. 16..you copied Matt 16:18 but in doing so take out of context the chapter...in vrse 15 Yeshua asks Who do YOU say I am...to which peter answers " You are the Christ the son of the Living God"(verse 16) to which Yeshua replied Blessed are you for flesh and blood have not revealed this to you but my Father which is in heaven.
He THEN goes on to say....UPON THIS ROCK WILL I BUILD MY CHURCH.
The Rock on which the Church is build is the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT that Yeshua Bin Yoseph is the Son of the Living God made flesh.....THE Messiah....who further fulfilled prophacy and was cruxified and rose from the dead to once again be with the Father to come again.
The name that Christ gave to Simon is Peter, or in Aramaic, Kepha. That means "rock". So, in effect, Christ said, "You are the rock, and upon this rock I will build My church." The confession of Peter is also very important, but the the rock spoken of is a person.
Now even when we look at the HISTORY of the "papal church" as well as simply using COMMON sense, we see CLEARLY that Christianity begins with the belief in Yeshua Bin Yoseph as THE Messiah, not with anything of peter. The catholic church CLAIMS a lineage however it CANNOT claim that Christianity begins with its formation. Christianity is the belief in Yeshua as THE Messiah, THE Christ, The ONLY SON of the Father made flesh.
If common sense was able to solve it, we wouldn't be disputing the issue.
Romanticoptimist:
You got it in one. The words of Jesus (and the word play between "petros" and "petra") have to be forced to do semantic gymnastics to support the position that Peter is the Rock upon which the Christian Church is built.
As far as I know, the Greek words petros and petra are a non-issue. The name that Christ gave to Peter was Aramaic (Kepha), and that is shown by how, in the letters of St. Paul, he refers to Peter as Cephas, which is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic name. It simply means "rock", with no distinctions as to "large stone" or "small pebble". Even if the name had been Greek, though, the distinction is found only in Attic Greek, not in the Biblical Koine. At least, I think that's the argument you were referring to. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 4/30/2008 9:02:48 PM | I think we all believe the same (Christians and Catholics) We just have different ways of excerziing (sp, duh, it's late) our faith. Christians do give Catholics a bad rap and that's wrong. As long as it points you towards God and Jesus it doesn't matter. And the Bible says you can tell "them" by their fruit. Bashing people is not, I repeat not fruit.
However, I do wonder why Catholics won't let you take communion in their church if you're not Catholic??? | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/1/2008 11:51:52 AM | | I am a Catholic/Episcopal mutt, and can provide a comment on the communion issue. I agree with the Episcopal side of me that any baptized Christian should be able to receive Communion. But as for the Catholic Church not granting Communion to non Catholic Christians, I don't know why they do this, but I do know that some "rebel" priests give Communion to non Catholic Christians on occasion. I also like the Episcopal Church's practice of kneeling when you receive Communion, out of respect for Jesus. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/1/2008 12:57:46 PM | maxandme123 asked:
However, I do wonder why Catholics won't let you take communion in their church if you're not Catholic???
Catholics believe that the Eucharist (Communion) is one of the seven sacraments. The Latin word sacramentum literally means "oath". Thus, to receive Communion in a Catholic church is to swear that the person is "in full communion" with the Catholic Church. In other words, he swears his life to all of the teachings of the Catholic Faith, and most especially those regarding the Eucharist: that it is not only a symbolic offering of bread and wine, but that it has literally transformed into the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ on the altar.
Catholics consider the sacrament so sacred that if a Catholic were to receive without being in a state of grace (having confessed any mortal sins on his conscience) then he would be profaning the Body and Blood of Christ by eating or drinking Jesus with impure lips. We take this practice from the instructions of St. Paul, who said "Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)
I think it's a very reasonable position. When I first converted to the Catholic faith, but before I was baptized and confirmed, I attended the Mass regularly without ever going forward to receive Communion for 2 years. And this was despite the fact that I did (and still do) swear to all of the teachings of the Faith and especially on the Eucharist. Receiving Communion is not required in order to participate in the Mass. In fact, before the reforms of Pope St. Pius X in the early 1900's, most Catholics did not receive Communion except on special feasts or even only once a year on Easter Sunday.
Also, a Catholic is not allowed to receive Communion in any non-Catholic church.
I also like the Episcopal Church's practice of kneeling when you receive Communion, out of respect for Jesus.
I agree. This used to be a universal practice in the Catholic Church as well. I attend a very traditional parish with the Latin Mass, and when we receive Communion, it's kneeling along an altar rail under a traditional medieval rood screen, with the priest or deacon dipping the Host into the Chalice, making the sign of the cross with it and then placing it directly on the tongue. An acolyte holds a golden plate under the communicant's chin in case the Host or any particles fall to the ground. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/1/2008 6:12:43 PM | --Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)--
Do you think that that all the s--t you just pushed out, its going to get you to heaven. Let look at this little scripture.
"Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily" that means to decisive,"shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord." Hell what does that mean, "guilty of the Crime." { and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice.} Freewill{ But let a man prove himself.] Prove is the word here, what is prove. To stand up to. To be heard. No Fear. Prove would mean qualities. [and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice]Honour and integrity are the path.[For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord."] Karma.
Oh kay, let condense it.... Deception creates guilt, a choice, But to stand up for the truth with honour and integrity shows the true qualities, and those who pursue the negative path will suffer the pain.
Myth is allegory, myth is how they wrote there teachings. A myth is like a picture, it has a thousand words. Do we really need to create a sabbath out of this, do we really need to create a pompous explanation of this simple proverb. Thats all Jesus every stated, do you at any point in the bible, or NT or Old. Tell you what heaven Is. What is it, we are going to, can someone tell me what this is all about. Where do I go when I die. Its all about being here and now. There is nowhere else. Hell, welcome to it, the gates of hell is the birth channel. No way out but death. So are you afraid of death. In the Tibetian book of the Dead they say that life cannot be fulfilled unless one deals with the idea that you are going to die. That makes every moment you live, exciting. Here and now. Jesus said unless we are like children. Exciting. Imagine you will wake up tomorrow and be ALIVE, THATS G_D. Being. Thats exciting.
Or you can go to a church bow, stand, bow, stand, bow, stand, bow stand, bow, stand. bow stand, bow stand.
Hes inside you and me. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/1/2008 11:34:53 PM | pappy009:
Do you think that that all the s--t you just pushed out, its going to get you to heaven.
Tsk tsk tsk, Pappy. That was pretty rude, and seems to only add to the theme of the thread (which is anti-Catholicism). Do my beliefs offend you that much? I tried to put it in as diplomatic terms as possible.
Anyway, I didn't say anything about going to heaven, but yes, I actually do believe that the Blessed Sacrament is the means of salvation, when received with faith. John 6:54, "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day."
Myth is allegory, myth is how they wrote there teachings. A myth is like a picture, it has a thousand words. Do we really need to create a sabbath out of this, do we really need to create a pompous explanation of this simple proverb.
I think the only one "creating a sabbath" out of anything is you. All I did was answer a question about why Catholics believe in a certain thing.
Or you can go to a church bow, stand, bow, stand, bow, stand, bow stand, bow, stand. bow stand, bow stand.
Certainly. There is a rich and meaningful purpose behind all of the gestures, postures and prayers of the Mass.
In fact, I have a better plan, one that I've been doing for some time now.....
I'll go to church and do my bowing and standing before God on a regular basis, even daily if I can...... AND I'll live a fulfilling and exciting life! Or even better, I'll have fun AT church, AND outside of it! Brilliant, isn't it? | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/2/2008 4:50:02 AM | "Receiving Communion is not required in order to participate in the Mass. In fact, before the reforms of Pope St. Pius X in the early 1900's, most Catholics did not receive Communion except on special feasts or even only once a year on Easter Sunday."
Personally I prefer not the recieve the Eucharist regularly. I just feel more comfortable with that, spiritually speaking. I appreciate though to others, having it more often is very important to their 'faith journey.'
It is true the Christian community is divided along many lines, over various issues. The Eucharist and what it means is one of them, and that is unfortunate, since the Eucharist has always been very important for the life of the Church since very early times. I think the idea of banning people from the Eucharist, for reasons of denominational adherence or theological beliefs or refusing to assent to certain teachings, tends to be only more divisive and counterproductive to the life of the church, both for people within it and for those outside looking on. People should always think carefully before taking it to ensure they receive this sacrament properly, but it should not become a symbol of what divides Christians, rather than what unites them. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/2/2008 3:01:19 PM | The Episcopal part of me supports allowing any baptized Christian to receive the Eucharist. That is the position of the Episcopal Church.
 | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/6/2008 5:57:51 PM |
That means "rock". So, in effect, Christ said, "You are the rock, and upon this rock I will build My church  NOT This is why it is important to understand and READ scriptures . You are correct that THAT scripture shows Yeshua refering to Peter as A rock. He also refers to Peter as Satan! Matthew 16:23. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.Mark 8:33."But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men."
Clearly Yeshua being the leader and encourager he saw things that weren't as though they were and thusly spoke into being Peter to be AS A ROCK. However, CLEARLY it is peter's admission/onfession that Yeshua is the son of the father,THE Messiah, THE ROCK that is THE ROCK upon which the church is built. Why is this so clear? It is repeated many times in many other scriptures
1 Corinthians 10:4; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."
Ephesians 2:20 ;"And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;"
Deuteronomy 32:3-4 "... I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. He is the Rock..."
(Romans 9:33) For they stumbled or the stumbling-stone, as it is written, "Behold I lay in Sion, a stumbling-stone and a ROCK of offence: and whosoever believeth on him (Christ) shall not be ashamed."
Psalm 18:2, 94:22. The Lord is my ROCK, and my fortress, and my deliverer. My God, is the ROCK of refuge.
II Samuel 22:2;"THE LORD IS MY ROCK, and my fortress, and my deliverer"
Peter himself refered to Yeshua as the Corner Stone; Acts 4:10-11 "...by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth... This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner."
1 Peter 2:7 the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,"
The scriptures are actually CLEAR! Its pretty simple. What does John 3:16 say?"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,
that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." THIS is the ROCK or the principle upon which the church is built. The admission that Yeshua is the 1 and only son of the Almighty God; the Father , who was in the beginning and spoke all else into being and fulfilled prophecy. The admission is the ONLY price that is paid for the wages of sin.Without admission, confession and repentence there is no admittance into the kingdom.
Peter NOR any of his "successors" can be THE rock nor The head of THE church of Yeshua the Christ. Yeshua himself said
I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me(John 14:6)....., I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. (John 8:12)
. All of these scrioture clearify that Yeshua and confession/admittance of HIM being THE Messiah is the ROCK; THE Cornerstone upon which HIS church is built.
Some of what the Roman Catholic church has taught is HERESY! Yeshua is the head of the Church, NOT peter, Nor any so called succesor(s).
Colossians 1:18 And he (Christ) is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he (Christ) might have the preeminence."
Ephesians 1:22" And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him (Christ) to be the head over all things to the church,"
Not enough evidence? When the scriptures refer to "the church" it refers to be;ievers of that very admittence/confession uttered by peter in Matthew 16:"
‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’ who at that time hadn't yet died thus paying for our sins and subsequently rose from the dead fulfilling prophecy.
Ephesians 5:25 ;"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;"
1 Corinthians 1:2 ;"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord..."
Which actually brings me back to my original statement which brought the attempt at some kind of rebutal."There was Christianity BEFORE the Catholic church. .........Christianity predates Catholicism and certainly the Roman Catholic pope." There can be no resonable nor rational dispute of this.
yes, Roman catholicism is as much a different religion as the so called Church of latter Day Saints.
  | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/6/2008 9:15:08 PM | ^^^
It's AMAZING how people believe when they come IN to this forum that if they TYPE some words in ALLCAPS that this will GET - THE - POINT - ACROSS when it is the visual effect of attempting to win a debate with a tire iron.
There can be no resonable nor rational dispute of this.
Apparently there can be because you are in one. You may also want to check out one of this forums key rules before running off at the mouth in here. For the sake of civility between believers of differing faiths it is considered in good taste not to make statements of absolute exclusivity of truth such as the ones you have been making which frankly are highly speculative and subject to debate and interpretation - obviously - by many different sects and groups of believers.
Roman catholicism is as much a different religion as the so called Church of latter Day Saints.
And so is whatever the heck it is you believe in. There is no "one true faith"... the sooner you get that in your head, the sooner you will be able to play nice in here. Failing that, the moderators are a button click away. Consider this a first and last friendly heads up from your neighbour. Now can I have my Caps Lock key and tire iron back please? | |
|
| |
| |
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/7/2008 6:21:50 AM | ahem
I am the lord thy god who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have NO OTHER GOD before me!
(and he is said to be a jealous god)
All that power and homage ya know
Catholics (like the jewish or other faiths bound by doctrine) have a certain lifestyle.
Its a lot about how you live and do things.
And a little about religion.
Other sects of christianity kinda do their own thing in life and how they DO stuff
But the core of their 'faith' is more about the religion
Which is not always integral with their every day life
Add to that confusion
A pope
Who might be the nicest bloke out but makes up new rules on how catholics are to go about being catholics
The buck stops with him, not god
Ultimately he separates the worshipper from god by standing between them
Other christians put Jesus in that position (between them and god)
It beats me why anyone would put anyone in between themselves and a jealous god (unless its for some kind of protection) but this WHO is in between them and god seems to be the crux of the argument.
cheers | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/7/2008 7:31:30 AM | I'm neither Catholic nor Christian. However, from what I've seen in Catholic masses, Catholics are just as Christian as any evangelical group. I think what turns a lot of evangelical Christians off Catholicism is the veneration of Mother Mary and the saints. However, Orthodox Christians also use icons. Both the Catholic and the Orthodox faiths have been around for at least the past 1,000 years, so if anybody were "true" Christians, it would be them. Nevertheless, IMO, the faith that Jesus Christ taught died when his closest disciples like Peter passed away. As Yeshua himself said, he didn't come to destroy the Old Testament Law but rather to fulfill it. Paul, on the other hand, decided to make Christianity as European-friendly as possible by not requiring the giving up of eating pork or having male converts undergo circumcision. He was quite instrumental in removing the observance of Jewish holidays as well, which is why Christian holidays tend to look more like ancient European Pagan holidays than Jewish ones.
 | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/7/2008 8:25:08 AM |
Apparently there can be because you are in one. Aparently NOT! the key words were REASONABLE and RATIONAL dispute. You have displayed niether. You have attempted to inform me of rules I am veruy much aware of. I have violated no rules...however.
There is no "one true faith"... the sooner you get that in your head, the sooner you will be able to play nice in here. Depends upon what you refer when you say "faith" . Even given that it depends on the belief of each individual. I'm not posting to make you nor anyone feel good. I am doing what this forum is geared for....expressing thought on a particular thread. Now I submit that my comments have been much more inkeeping with the rules of these forums given that I stay ON TOPIC. Your post does nothing to answer the thread nor address a suposition pertinent to this thread. If my neighbor wishes to give me a word of advice without addressing this topic he may address me directly in my mailbox.
The use of caps to emphasize a word/point as oppose to using all caps"screaming" I believe is well within forum rules. So my brother is so caught up in my delivery(use of caps) that he can't see the full picture? I'll take it under consideration
Now, there was 1 thing I failed to mention in my rebuttal about peter and the RCC. Its simply history. I touched upon it in my 2nd post on this thread and I'll simply touch it again...look at the RCC's history in conjunction with all of the scriptural evidence. Again, my original statement was and is that there were christians long before there was a RCC. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/7/2008 9:44:48 PM |
Aparently NOT! the key words were REASONABLE and RATIONAL dispute. You have displayed niether. You have attempted to inform me of rules I am veruy much aware of. I have violated no rules...however.
Well you can characterize my post how you see fit, I will let my words speak for themselves. Obviously it is quite debatable, despite your protestations that it is not, as obviously Catholics believe their Church was founded by Jesus and was not as you suggest a later development. Whether or not this is born out by historical data is obviously a matter of debate as well. But I sense there is some issue as to whether or not there is a stream of "true Christians" who's existence is being implied here - you may feel free to correct me if I am wrong but this:
is that there were christians long before there was a RCC
and this:
Some of what the Roman Catholic church has taught is HERESY! Yeshua is the head of the Church, NOT peter, Nor any so called succesor(s).
and this:
Which actually brings me back to my original statement which brought the attempt at some kind of rebutal."There was Christianity BEFORE the Catholic church. .........Christianity predates Catholicism and certainly the Roman Catholic pope." There can be no resonable nor rational dispute of this.
yes, Roman catholicism is as much a different religion as the so called Church of latter Day Saints.
Especially where you refer to The LDS church using the seemingly pejoritive "so-called" seems to imply that they are not of equal status in your eyes as a valid religion. Now, don't let me put words in your mouth. If that is not what you are saying feel free to correct me...however it does seem to be the implication that you are equating the Roman Catholic Church, and Mormonism, and saying that they are somehow less than valid. If that is the case, at least have the courtesy to hide such prejudice behind the shield of the phrase "In my personal beliefs I hold that..." That way everyone will at least know that it is your personal beliefs and bigotry being held up rather than you spouting it as an "absolute truth". In both cases, such ideas can be held to scorn, but at least in the latter it would be a clear forum violation and you would be snapped back into place by the mods for being unneighbourly.
So which is it? I trust that question is laid out reasonably and rationally for you in plain English? | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/8/2008 9:50:25 AM |
Well you can characterize my post how you see fit, I will let my words speak for themselves. Obviously it is quite debatable, despite your protestations that it is not, as obviously Catholics believe their Church was founded by Jesus They have, and they've shown that you are willing to make post out of ignorance on the subject matter. ANYTHING is "debatable",all it takes is someone to disagree. There is no question nor debate as to what Catholics believe. I know and having being brought up in the tradition;have been fully aware fo what Catholics are taught for years.The question here is the merit and logic, I dare say SUBSTANCE of the disagreement. You have brought none of these things to the table of debate, you DO and are entitled to disagree however with even the earth being a planet as oppose to a traveling spaceship motored by nuclear waste.  I'll leave discussions in which disagreement without substance,evidence nor logic for those who wish to debate with teens. Without scriptural and historicl support there is no need for a discussion on a topic that revolves around scripture and history. I've read 3 post from you and you have not cited scripture nor historical record.You seem to argue for the sake of it, regardless, I have no time to debate with someone who simply argues.
was not as you suggest a later development Perhaps you should read my post again. I suppose my english wasnt plain enough for you...let me break it down FURTHER for you. Christians are those who believe that Yeshua is the Messiah,Son of God made flesh, who died as perfect price for the transgressions of man, in fulfillment of phophecy. Throngs of people beleived in Yeshua. This even before the confession of peter in Matthew 16. Peter wasn't the only person to believe Yeshua was the Messiah, he was the 1st disciple to outwardly state this. Christianity means the belief in Yeshua as the Christ. All people had to do then and now to become christians is to believe....or as the scriptures say; 'confess with thy mouth... and believe in thy heart...."Not all in the crowds of poeple who surrounded Yeshua believed him to be the Messiah, but it is clear that many of them did. Christianity and thus the church begins with that belief.
"so-called" seems to imply that they are not of equal status in your eyes as a valid religion. Now, don't let me put words in your mouth. You seem to be having more than enough trouble understanding relatively simple concepts,putting words in my mouth would be far too difficult for you to achieve. however, you can and have misunderstood many of those words. I do not imply nor state that LDS nor the RCC are not religions. It is OBVIOUS that they are RELIGIONS. You are duely corrected There are many world religions, this thread has nothing to do with any outside of Catholicism and Christianity. The statement I made is that the RCC is as different from LDS as they both are from non denominational Christians....sometimes known as Full Gospel Christians. It is clear that you have not understood the concepts nor posts and entirely possible that you cannot go beyond that point as you have yet to demonstrate that ability. Again, when and IF you wish to debate these issues bring something other than "your feelings" to the table. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 5/8/2008 12:42:23 PM |
They have, and they've shown that you are willing to make post out of ignorance on the subject matter. ANYTHING is "debatable",all it takes is someone to disagree. There is no question nor debate as to what Catholics believe. I know and having being brought up in the tradition;have been fully aware fo what Catholics are taught for years.The question here is the merit and logic, I dare say SUBSTANCE of the disagreement. You have brought none of these things to the table of debate...
On the contrary, there seems to be more than a bit of question to that. Leaving your ad hominems aside, as well as your questionable grasp of what constitutes reason and logic, I'm going to take a stab at suggesting your posts have done nothing more than continue to add to this threads basic overtone of anti-Catholic bigotry. It should have been pulled from the get-go.
Perhaps you should read my post again. I suppose my english wasnt plain enough for you...let me break it down FURTHER for you. Christians are those who believe that Yeshua is the Messiah,Son of God made flesh, who died as perfect price for the transgressions of man, in fulfillment of phophecy. Throngs of people beleived in Yeshua. This even before the confession of peter in Matthew 16. Peter wasn't the only person to believe Yeshua was the Messiah, he was the 1st disciple to outwardly state this. Christianity means the belief in Yeshua as the Christ. All people had to do then and now to become christians is to believe....or as the scriptures say; 'confess with thy mouth... and believe in thy heart...."Not all in the crowds of poeple who surrounded Yeshua believed him to be the Messiah, but it is clear that many of them did. Christianity and thus the church begins with that belief.
That would include Catholics, no debate there.
You seem to be having more than enough trouble understanding relatively simple concepts,putting words in my mouth would be far too difficult for you to achieve. however, you can and have misunderstood many of those words. I do not imply nor state that LDS nor the RCC are not religions. It is OBVIOUS that they are RELIGIONS. You are duely corrected There are many world religions, this thread has nothing to do with any outside of Catholicism and Christianity. The statement I made is that the RCC is as different from LDS as they both are from non denominational Christians....sometimes known as Full Gospel Christians. It is clear that you have not understood the concepts nor posts and entirely possible that you cannot go beyond that point as you have yet to demonstrate that ability. Again, when and IF you wish to debate these issues bring something other than "your feelings" to the table.
This is a common technique of weaseling out of a debate known as "moving the goalposts"... combine it with the attacks on the man such as "trouble understanding simple concepts", "misunderstood simple words", yada yada... It's obvious to any reader that nothing in the least was misunderstood, that in fact everything was all too clearly understood. I plainly said you characterized them as not valid religions - which is to say not valid belief systems...you however are now selectively using the word "religion." This is the old ploy of describing any "untrue" faith as a distant, dead hollow "religion"...a mere human practice. Oh they are not... "Full Gospel Christians" which is a thinly veiled way of saying in this instance "real Christians" or those who have a real "relationship" with Jesus/Yeshua...which is the typical weasel word used to denigrate any outsiders religious experience other than your own.
There is no rhyme or reason to it...just plain old xenophobia. No proof that such an experience is more real, more "true". Oh sure, such individuals will attempt to use every scriptural justification that they can twist to their own interpretation.
More justification that this thread was just an excuse to play whack-a-papist from the get go. Pretty sick. Also untenable in any real sense unless you are some kind of fanatic. | |
|
| Why are christians so against catholics?
Posted: 6/13/2008 2:06:41 PM | Cleopatracutie writes:
I just don't understand this because one religion sprung from the other and it just doesn't make any sense to me...I can't count on both hands and feet how many christians I have known in the work place or school or where-ever that preech their religion in the work-place or school or where-ever when it is in fact not legal for them to do so. How is it that they can get away with being like that? By playing the freedom of speech card yet they get so mad when you speak freely on your own believes and they get more surly when you refuse to accept their believes as your own. I just find it queer when in reality they are similar religions.
Simillar religions but not the same. Some say that, because the Jews proclaim themselves to be the chosen people of God that others have revolted against such an idea and took to attacking them in order to supplant their claim.
Likewise we have The Roman Catholic church drawing attention to a well marked out, and well defined lineage substantiating that the church or Rome is the church founded by Jesus Christ and - oh my lord - people start in and like rabbid dogs, will not let up.
Bottom line is anyone can put down anything, and the only thing that makes an ounce of difference is what is happening where the rubber meets the road.
Pray hard, live right, love God. | |
|
|
| Page 17 of 18
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 |
|
Home
login 
