SYDNEY, Australia - A recreation of the crucifixion and last days of Jesus played out against the backdrop of some of the city's most famous landmarks Friday, as an actor playing Christ was strung upside down, dragged through the streets and eventually "nailed" to a cross.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Rick Rycroft)The final scenes from the Stations of the Cross are played out at Barangaroo in Sydney, Friday, July 18, 2008. The Stations of the Cross, where actors recreate the biblical account of Jesus Christ's final days, has 13 acts in total and will be played out at sites across the inner city.
Pope Benedict XVI, in Sydney for the Roman Catholic Church's World Youth Day festival, offered a prayer before the grim three-hour performance, known as the stations of the cross. The pope attended the first act, a live recreation of The Last Supper, at St. Mary's Cathedral in downtown Sydney.
Hundreds of thousands of pilgrims lined the city's streets, many weeping openly along with Alfio Stuto, a 27-year-old advertising professional from Sydney who took on the role of Jesus.
Crowds of faithful jammed the steps of the Opera House and watched as the nearly naked actor was strung up by his feet, his body swaying slightly in the chilly wind. Stuto's face contorted in mock agony as men portraying Roman soldiers jammed a crown of thorns onto his head before forcing him to shoulder a giant wooden cross. Stuto then boarded a boat and sailed under the landmark Sydney Harbor Bridge to a waterfront site where he spoke to actors portraying the women of Jerusalem.
Pilgrims watched the crucifixion scene solemnly as darkness fell, some clutching each other for comfort and wiping away tears. As Stuto's limp, bloodied body was brought down from the cross and taken away, they broke into applause.
The reenactment had a uniquely Australian tone, with an Aboriginal man wearing a kangaroo skin and body paint taking the cross from Stuto to the strains of the didgeridoo.
Organizers said they expected 500 million people across the world to watch the television broadcast of the performance, which featured 100 actors.
Despite the dark subject matter, 19-year-old Alice Neville of Nottingham, England, said seeing the suffering Christ endured played out so dramatically was deeply moving.
"It's totally different to being in church," Neville said as she watched the crucifixion. "It's ... goosebumpy."
RSS
act11:17 tells us that Peter witness others recieve the Spirit just as he did
John 16: 5-15 tells us the Spirit guides our judgment(discerning Truth) I think you are confusing recieving Truth that the disciples got from the Spirit in in order to spread it to us, in which the spirit guides our judgement to know Truth from teachers and scripture following the departure of the apostles.
1 john 2:26-27 after talking about decievers and the anti-christ reassures us that we will be able to discern truth for ourselves by the spirit without teaching.
chris, I am very content being in the center of God's will for my life at this time so why would I want to be any where else but there since there is no better place to be and as a matter of fact tomorrow I leave to go be a counselor at a camp for kids whose Mom or Dad is in trouble because of substance abuse and I am looking forward to seeing how God is going to use me at this camp. Plus how do you know I'm not a better saint than the ones you mentioned and in fact what others think of my life doesn't matter anyways it only matters what God thinks of the way I lived my life and to be honest my only desire is to live my life in such a way that when I die and appear before the Judgement Seat of Christ, that Christ will say to me, well done my good and faithful servant. But that will be entirely God's call and no one elses.
Believer,
Do you have the chance to be saved as any Catholic? Yes. Does your life as a Saint compare to those like St. Brigid, St. Dominic and St. Francis. No. Does this mean their salvation is more than yours'? No.
What I am saying is that because you don't have the Sacraments with actual Grace within them and not just mere symbols, you are limited to the amount of work and the greatness of your witness for God.
Believer, you could be so much more for God if you came home. You love scriptures so much and that would only add to your gifts if you received the REAL sacraments which are tools of God's Grace.
The more access to Grace you have the more you can live in God's will and do more for His Glory. Protestants are not second class Christians at all. They are just limited because of the Grace they reject which is only available in Christ Church.
Here is an analogy to think of. Take two people of equal size and strength. Feed one of them the best organic food, highly oxygenated water and give them supplements for protein and vitamins. Take the other one and give them only regular food with no supplements. At the end of one year who will be in better shape internally if both excersize the same way? There is no comparison. The first person has better health because of what he puts in it.
You are no different. Put more Grace into your life through the Sacraments and see how your life will change for the better.
James,
But those who eat HIS FLESH AND DRINK HIS BLOOD have life. You don't eat his flesh or drink his blood do you?
"For my flesh is food indeed" "I am the Bread of Life".
The fact is God gave us many gifts and they all are important;Bible, Church, Sacraments, Morality, Church Hiearchy, laity, etc. You say that you are the bible alone, but you are not since the Bible is not self attesting. You are Bible plus your own interpretation. You can't help but interpret. This is why God gave only certain power to discern Truth to specific men.
I'm sure the Holy Spirit works in your life or otherwise you wouldn't love God and have faith in Christ, but not all the Gifts of the Holy Spirit were given to you. The gift to know ALL TRUTH, not just some truth was given to His Apostles, then to Bishops, through the laying of hands it was transmitted. You didn't get the laying of hands, so you do not have this authority or gift.
Msnchris70 said: "Try reading a book on the Saints of the Catholic Church. Their witness expounds Christ Truth within their lives." [End quote]
We need to be careful what we read and who we allow to influence us, lest we end up adopting dangerous beliefs or doctrines. Let's consider St. Bridget:
"This the blessed Virgin herself revealed to St. Bridget: 'I am,' she said to her, 'the queen of heaven and the mother of mercy; I am the joy of the just, and the gate of entrance for sinners to God'" [End quote from The Glories of Mary by St. Alphonsus Liguori]
No matter how one may try to shuffle the word of God, Mary is not the joy of the just, nor the gate of entrance for sinners to God:
"...For the joy of the Lord is your strength" (Ne 8:10).
"For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Ro 14:17).
Jesus said, "I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture" (Jn 10:9).
just another perspective
God told Isereal while it was in the desert to only eat manna. He provided for their physical needs with just one type of food in which he said not to store it up, but that He would provide daily for their needs. HE then gave them a land full of different kinds of foods, in which He told them to never forget who provided for them all those years. Today He provides for our spiritual needs with just Scripture which has in it all things needed for spirituality. he said His word would endure forever and it has in the form of the Bible. He said store it in your hearts and share this with all those you meet. He then will provide us a new earth with all things physical and spiritual. so yes God can provide us physically with one food, and with one book alone He provides for us spiritualy. remember Christ fought satan with scripture only.
Catholics think they deem who saints are, however Christ said that all believers are saints for they are set apart from the rest because the holy spirit dwells in them
Chris
yes many books are written for instruction by many pastors and degreed people, however it is with Bible scripture that they reference. I do not read and take direction from secular books. If a pastor wrote a book without clear reference to scripture for all thoughts I would not use it. This would mean in my case Bible alone. To me this would be a sermon in written form.
I am saved and have the Holy spirit within me and it is the Holy Spirit which helps me to descern Truth. I am commissioned by God as you are to spread the Truth.
Physical needs and spiritual needs are seperate, and it is God's word only that I need to live spiritually. That is a bad analogy to which I would say the same as Christ, I do not live by bread alone.
chris, why do you consider anybody who is not a catholic to be a 2nd class Christian, because the last time I checked the ground at the Cross was level, and the Bible teaches that there is neither Jew or Gentiile, male or female, slave or free, so it appears that in God's eyes all of His children are equal in His sight.
James,
Try reading a book on the Saints of the Catholic Church. Their witness expounds Christ Truth within their lives.
You can't help reading about these Saints and not clearly see what God has done in the Catholic Church. No Protestant Group could ever match this group of Saints who live their lives for God with discipline and Holiness.
I'm not saying there are not wonderful Saints within Protestantism, but the comparison between Catholic Saints is unmatched. Why? Because Christ lives more fully in these Catholic Saints because they have the fullness of Truth that help them to live these amazing lives. They have the Eucharist, confession and the Mass which Protestants do not have.
If you have more access to Grace, then you will have the opportunity to live more Saintly.
I think Protestants do amazing things with the Grace they have, but I think how much more these wonderful people could do if they had available to them the Sacraments of God's Holy Church.
James,
Since you are a Protestant, then please use Scripture when you say God says something so I don't just assume that you think you are God and that you are speaking for him. Thanks.
Only the Bishop of Rome in communion with all the bishops of the world can make the doctrines of faith and morals. If a specific bishop teaches something that is wrong, then he will be discipline. If he doesn't recant, then he will be removed over a period of time for prayer and reconciliation, if possible.
You are also assuming that Catholics are all just a bunch of Robots who do everything the Priest says and have no education. I hold degrees in Theology, and have read and studied scripture for 40+ years.
The reason I left being a Reformed Minister is because Protestants do not stick to all of Scripture. They have become an ala Carte version of Christianity. Each denomination picking and choosing what they follow and none of them agree with each other.
Authority is one of the many things I love about being Catholic.
James,
Take your statement to its possible end to see if it makes sense. You will find it is illogical.
Fruit is profitable for your body, but is fruit ALONE what you need?
Vegetables are profitable for your body, but are vegetables alone your only source of food?
Meat is profitable for your body, but is Meat alone your only source of food?
The Bible is profitable. The Scriptures are profitable for one's life. AMEN! But it is not the only thing that guides our life. Protestants read millions of books by Pastors that teach them things from the Bible and those books are good to read. They also teach things that are not directly from scripture like setting goals, being more financially responsible, etc.
When Jesus instructed His Apostles he gave them HIS authority over His flock. Jesus put them in charge. It was this same group of men who had authority to write the New Testament Scriptures. It was also these men who were given the power by Christ to forgive or retain sin. It was also these men who Christ gave the power to legislate, discipline and create doctrine. These men gave their authority to other men called Bishops. It was these Bishops who decided how many books belonged in the New Testament and how many Gospels were actually in it.
The Church hiearchy had the authority by God to decide what went into the Bible. You accept the authority of Scripture, and yet you do not accept the authority of men who were given this authority by God to determine which Scriptures were canonical. You cannot logically accept the authority of Scripture without accepting the authority of the Church that gave it to you.
None of the scriptures say that they belong in the Bible. There was no index before the Catholic Church decided what books were inspired and what were not.
You say that you go by the Bible alone, and yet no where in the bible does it tell you to do that. It says scripture is profitable and it is good and useful for reproofing and building up Christians, but no where does it say that it is the only source you should go by.
You should test all things by Scripture. Yes! You should keep the Traditions the Apostles handed down, and you must obey the Bishops who set doctrine for faith and morals for the Church. The Bishops have a teaching authority given by Christ.
If you reject the Bishops who have Christ authority, then you reject Christ.
James,
So you are an authority for what God says now? Could you show me where God says you have a right to interpret scripture?
Also, the bible is profitable but it does not say alone. Only you and old Luther put that in.
God says to be aware of false teachers to judge for yourself what is true as it is gridded through the word of God. As cotholics you are told what is true, what power do you have to remove false teachers in the catholic church.. None if the higher ups believe what is wrong then the church follows, you can not go to another church for they all are suppose to contain the same beleifs.
The Bible says through out that the teachings of the world are not profitable, therfore when it says all scripture is profitable it is clearly saying only scritpure alone. Since scripture is God's word(2 peter 1:20-21) and he said His word word last forever(1 peter 23-24)(the word endured through the Bible)and his word which is what is preached(1peter 1:25)has to some from the bible then yes it does clearly mean Bible alone
chris, please don't tell me what I believe since I don't tell you what you believe as a catholic, I only share what I was taught as a catholic. I believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is clearly taught in the Bible, but the word Trinity can not be found in the Bible. Plus I was responding to a comment made by fullgospel. Plus I can't answer for bro aaron but I do not believe the Bible is the only way God speaks to us, but that if something violates, contradicts, or supersedes God's Word then it is not God and finally I believe many of the teachings of the Catholic Church are extrabiblical teachings and apply to the Catholic Church and others who may feel led of God to follow them, but they are not mandatory practices or beliefs for all Chrisitans. And I also believe that some of them do indeed violate, contradict, and/or supersede the Word of God.
Believer,
We are not the ones who hold to the bible alone, so your example of Trinity for us was a poor one. We believe in the TRINITY because our CATHOLIC CHURCH DEFINED it. You accept this Traditional understanding since it is not explicit in scripture. You also accept the incarnation where Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time. Two natures one person is how the Catholic Church defined Jesus, even though it is not explicit in Scripture.
Do you still go to church on Sunday, celebrate Christmas and Easter and read the Bible, then you my friend accept some of Catholic Tradition. You simply reject the Mass even though this is how the Apostles taught the Bishops to Worship God. The Apostles taught the Bishops the Tradition of how to Worship God in the way God wants it.
It was not just doctrines that was meant by hold fast to the traditions. Your church wasn't there, so don't claim something you don't know for certain. You are only going with an interpretation that came after the fact. Our interpretation comes from the actual people WHO WERE THERE!
Again, this is a perenial Protestant Problem. Since your church was not there you have to make up what was meant by the original scriptures. You don't follow our interpretation even thought we were there, because you have rejected the authority established by Christ.
You reject Jesus if you reject those he put in charge of you.
You and many others are ala carte Christians. This is not a slam but a fact. You take what you want from the Catholic Church and toss anything out you don't like or that doesn't fit your interpretation. Ala Carte Christianity is another sad form of relativism.
fullgospel, do you believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, if you do I guess you've got a problem since you won't find that word in the Bible either. What difference does it make if you call it the Bible, the Word of God, or the Holy Scriptures, the important thing is that we believe that in it's original autographs it is the God-breathed, inerrant, plenary Word of God which is not to be added to or taken away from.
Hey brotheraaron, peace to you. If you're holding to the "book alone" theory, then I'm sure you don't use the word "Bible" to describe "the book," because the word Bible isn't in the Bible. That's an extra-Biblical tradition that all Christians accept, even you. Peace.
The Thessalonians were being exhorted to hold fast the traditions they had been taught - doctrines and gospels. These had to have been delivered by the apostle. None of these would have been in addition to what we have as the gospel today. At this time, the canon wasn't even complete, therefore whatever was delivered by the apostles had to have been under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. Christians were then bound to these doctrines as though they had come directly from God. Now that the canon is complete, there is absolutel no argument for regarding any oral traditions. Whatever doctrines they had traditionally adhered to at the time could not have been in conflict with the Scriptures then or now. There is no evidence to support that extra-Biblical teaching was traditional. When it became a tradition, the apostle Paul would usually make it very, very clear that they were separating themselves from God.
It was Bible alone then, and Bible alone now. Sola Scriptura wasn't some modern dogma. Christians have been living by the very inspired writings of God since the book of Job...
James, welcome to the Board.
By the way, you won't find anywhere in the Bible where it says to go by the Bible ALONE, but you will find a lot of verses in Scripture that says that scripture is useful. You will find a lot of scripture verses that say to "hold fast to the Traditions" 1 Cor 11:2, 2Thess 2:15, 1Thes 3:6, 2 Tim 2:2.
The early church always believed that it was the Scriptures plus Tradition handed down by the Apostles and it was the role of the Church hiearchy to establish doctrine, discipline and legislate on behalf of Christ. Bishops, Priests and Deacons are the Servants of God's people and the Bishop is in charge for a specific area, but the Bishop of ROME is also in charge of the Universal Church of Christ by the power of the "KEYS".
Read the Early Church Fathers like Polycarp, Ignatius of Antioch, Clement, Irenaus with your Bible and you will see that these men who were taught by the Apostles were Catholic to the CORE.
Best wishes on this board.
Sure, from Deut 8:3
He therefore let you be afflicted with hunger, and then fed you with manna, a food unknown to you and your fathers, in order to show you that not by bread alone does man live, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of the LORD.
This is backed up by Jesus in Matt Chapter 4
But as we all know, words can be spoken or read.
2 Tim 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness
or from another version -
All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,
But this only says that scripture is useful for teaching & rebuking. Kind of like a tool, but not the final authority. Yet we are told that it's the Church which holds all truth. Which Church?
1 Tim 3:15
so that if I am delayed, you will know how people must conduct themselves in the household of God. This is the church of the living God, which is the pillar and foundation of the truth. Which Church?
Which church do you suppose he was talking about?
And we are told to Stand Firm on the traditions that were taught to us (notice the words Stand Firm on the Traditions). What Traditions? Which Church?
2 Thes 2:14
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.
So, Mr. James Reynolds, you'll have to show me where it says "bible alone"
It must seem confusing, but in answer to your earlier question, truth is, each diocese is to hold exactly to Rome. Each parish is to follow exactly. Those that don't are not part of the Church.
But, pride gets in the way. You see these little groups; women who want to ordain as priests, catholics for "choice", catholics who support homosexuality, etc. Just know that these are not official, and in fact they have ex-communicated themselves from the Church, i.e. they are in no way, shape, or form part of the Church. They are on their own and have no right or authority to use the name Catholic. Do not be fooled by these groups, they are not part of the Church.
Yet these hasn't been excommunicated from the church and still are property of the Vatican.
"there is no place in the Bible that even implicitly says that we should base all our beliefs on the Bible alone. The key word is "Alone"."
revelations states he so ever addeth or taketh away from this will be dealt with. Christ said that scripture was suffecient for life.
Tall Guy...welcome! You will find here that the treads sometimes get woven just a bit. :-) It's an artistic tapestry kind of thing....
james, you were following the direction of the posts which in many if not most cases are a different subject matter of the article. You keep responding as God leads you. But it could be your stepping on some toes that don't want to be stepped on.
tallguy,
how was I out of line with my post since it was my first in this forum and I followed the example of the post set by those of you discussing church history(you) and baptsim.
"Thousands see idolatry in the form of "man" attempting to portray Christ. Blasphemy."
Now, now...it's called theater. That's like saying translating the Bible into other languages is 'adding to' when the Revelations specifically say not to. It takes more words in English than it does in Greek.
I call it sharing the Gospel.
chris, you're right water baptism is not required for a person to enter heaven, case in point the thief on the cross. Your reference to John 3:5 was talking about physical birth and spiritual birth and not about baptism. Your Mark 16:16 talked about baptism in conjunction with someone making a profession of faith and being baptised and no where once again have you found a verse of scripture that states we are to baptize infants or that water baptism alone can save a person. As Southern Baptists we teach that water baptism is the first command given by God to every new believer, that it follows a person making a profession of faith and that it is not a part of the salvation process. We believe that water baptism is important, but because there are to many verses in the Bible such as Ephesians 2:8-9 and the Roman Road passages that do not include water baptism as a requirement then water baptism is not required for a person to be saved. But as I have said before we do not consider it as a point of fellowship with those denominations who do.
Tallguy1000 - James Reynolds may be off topic in regard to the article but not in regard to the topics that msnchris70 has brought up on this thread.
Thousands see idolatry in the form of "man" attempting to portray Christ. Blasphemy.
James Reynolds .... yawn....
How'd you get off topic? I thought the topic of this thread is "Thousands See Reenactment of Jesus' Crucifixion". I'm confused...
It is oK brotheraaron, mistakes are made.
oops I didn't mean to flag star... it was only a message to me anyway.
The Catholic church was not founded by Christ for he sent out his apostles to spread the Truth and to form new churchs(place to worship God), in every city they ministered to. There is only one True church and that is called the body of Christ which to all believers are a part of that are in different places to worship. There is heirarchy in each place of worship, but not in a universal setting in which Catholics make it. Christ is the ultimate head of His church not the Pope.
Tallguy1000 - The topic on infantile baptism came about because msnchris70 made the following statement to brotheraaron on his Tues Jul 22,2008 7:24pm post: "The Baptists position on infant baptism is unbiblical and denies that all need saving."
How'd we get onto baptism again? I thought the topic of this thread is "Thousands See Reenactment of Jesus' Crucifixion". I'm confused...
...continued...
4) Households were baptized - does that mean infants - no. Do the Scriptures point to baptism being a covenantal relationship - NO (note he provides no scripture for that statement). Do all Scriptures point to original sin (I don't like that term a lot but we can use it), yes. Must we be washed clean? YES - but not by water, by the blood of Christ, not by works of our own hands but by the power of God - not by covenant but by faith. (You're now introduced to "covenant theology" instead of our "dispensationalism" - welcome to theology).
5) Romans 6:3-5, this person seriously misunderstands the Scriptures and basics of interpretation - let alone "logic". We know that infants and young children are safe from destruction should they die. We have the example of the child of David and Bathsheba in the OT and we have Jesus' interactions and speeches regarding children in the NT. Thus we have an "age of accountability" so to speak, but when children grow into adulthood or reach maturity, they like everyone else are required to make a personal decision, will you be washed or no? Will you take God at his word or will you reject Him and live following the 'god of this world'. Will you take God at His word...
Eph.2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:"
v.9 "Not of works, lest any man should boast."
v.11 "Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;"
v.12 "That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:"
(here it comes)
v.13 "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ."
Clearly, not from baptism, not from works, but from the washing of our sin by the blood of Christ are we brought nigh - by grace, through faith nothing else...
________________________________________________________
This is not my own writing. It comes from the Pastor of our Church. It has been abridged.
In prayer and love,
Brother Aaron
Believe it or not, these are ancient objections to Believer's Baptism, it's the same old argument. It's the basic justification for the practice of infant baptism - if they didn't have some obscure Scriptural reference they probably wouldn't still be doing it - in the same way they would argue for transubstantiation - "Jesus said, "this IS my body.."" is that tired old argument. Infant baptism and it's "Scriptural support" is the same deal.
1) Yes, we deny that baptism is required for entering heaven - Jn.3:5 - "born of water" is natural birth, Jesus is here contrasting the natural birth (which Nicodemus had) with the spiritual birth (which he did not as of yet have), born of water gives you life in this world, born of the spirit, life in the next. Mk.16:16 actually proves our point - "He that believeth and is baptised..." belief MUST come first. We don't say that baptism is irrelevant, but that it is a human publication of our God-given new life. This is abundantly clear in the case of Philip and the eunuch, against which there is no argument Acts 8:27-37 (esp.36,37) (Think also of the thief on the cross who was saved by the mouth of Jesus - wasn't baptized)
2) Yes, the Scriptures affirm that baptism is NOT a replacement for circumcision. Col.2:11-12 refers to the fact that we have circumcision of the heart (brought into a covenant relationship) NOT with hands (by nothing that we do), and that this was shown through our sharing with Christ in Believer's Baptism, this is related to this more detailed and doctrinal reference in Romans 6:3-15 which clearly proves our point.
3) Our view of baptism is exclusive - Yes, because the Gospel is exclusive - to all those who believe in Christ, to the exclusion of everyone else. The gift (not promise) of salvation is open and available to everyone, but it is conditional - upon faith in Christ and His shed blood on the cross. Even OT circumcision was conditional, in that they needed to keep the law or they would not be held blameless.
continued...
You are right wbmoore. My flesh has gotten in the way.
Everyone needs to take a breath and stop reacting.
Tallguy - There are many other Protestants that preach a similar or the same message as I do. Some of them are wbmoore, Prophet, believer, Online4Him, Quecat, swordbearer, Wilderness1, brotheraaron, mathetes, and igh. I have never heard, though maybe you have and I just didn't see it, you call anything they have written against the teachings of the RCC as "mindless rants". How come? They preach the same or a similar message as I do.
You guys see star2 differently than I. I see confidence in God, and His word, and a distrust of anything that contradicts either. I think her confidence is well placed. God places leaders in our lives, without doubt. However, just as without doubt, the final authority is God, not man. Men can be wrong. I can be wrong, as can you, as can star2. Because of this, everything taught by men must be verified against the Scriptures (just as the Bereans did). If what is being taught goes against scripture, we must agree with Scripture, not man.
I find her research to be accurate. I have yet to see her post anything that is not a plausible reading of Scripture - regardless of whether it is considered in the mainstream. We all belong to different denominations/churches because we do not agree with the interpretations of other denominations/churches. This does not place them outside the pale of orthodoxy.
We should ALL be able to say the Holy Spirit guides us. If we can't then something is wrong with our relationship with God.
This is getting out of hand! It is one thing to make a defense of the scriptures, but quite another to take it in a direction that this is going. Remember, forgiveness is a commandment.
IHS, msnchris70
John 14:26 - "But the Comforter, which is the HOLY GHOST, whom the Father will send in my name, he SHALL TEACH YOU ALL THINGS, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."
John 16:13 - "Howbeit when he, the SPIRIT OF TRUTH, is come, he WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL TRUTH: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."
1 John 2:27 - "But the anointing (Holy Ghost) which ye have received of him abideth in you, and YE NEED NOT THAT ANY MAN TEACH YOU: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."
I live by these scriptures. Massive ego because I take God at His Word and seek Him for understanding of the Word of God? You all would do well if you did the same.
IHS - It is so sad that the cemetary you go to to get educated in the Word of God is so inflitrated with deceived professors who don't know the different between false teaching and truth.
You claim to be called to be a Pastor. You have shown no proof of it. Some emotional high you got in Israel doesn't prove that you were called to be a Pastor. FYI, you won't be one either. You are too young and immature in the Lord for any Church to call you to be a Pastor. The best you can be is a Youth Leader. Based on what I see coming from you, good luck at even that. I pity the poor congregation that gets you in any kind of ministry.
"I most assure you I am going nowhere." Words from Star2.
This is true.
Star2,
I am a non-denominational seminarian. I think that you incite dislike toward you because of your attitude. You always say that you use the Word of God and say that God directs you. Show me the proof? A Catholic, Lutheran or a non-denominational could say the exact same thing.
You are belligerant towards fellow Christians. I haven't seen any name calling in a while. Your ego is too large for just one person is a fact.
Tallguy and Msn,
Just don't respond to her. She is in a world of her own making and there is not that many people in it.
I now understand why the Mormon and Jehovah Witness Churches started. You find someone from a fundamentalist background, who is led by something other than the Holy Spirit add a bunch of ego to it and there you go. Seventh Day Adventists would be in this bunch too.
Normally I would flag you Star2, but I think it is important for people to see how "OUT to Lunch" you are.
So then Star, are you calling yourself Jesus?
Tallguy - Maybe a lot of people don't like me but then many of the religious people of the Jesus' day didn't liked him either.
Good morning wbmoore.
It must seem confusing, but in answer to your earlier question, truth is, each diocese is to hold exactly to Rome. Each parish is to follow exactly. Those that don't are not part of the Church.
But, pride gets in the way. You see these little groups; women who want to ordain as priests, catholics for "choice", catholics who support homosexuality, etc. Just know that these are not official, and in fact they have ex-communicated themselves from the Church, i.e. they are in no way, shape, or form part of the Church. They are on their own and have no right or authority to use the name Catholic. Do not be fooled by these groups, they are not part of the Church.
As far as unity, if I attend Mass in Frankfurt today, London, Paris, New York, Los Angeles, or Vancouver BC, it's the exact same. All Catholics are on the same page today. The same readings, the same psalms, the same Gospel verses are spoken. However, the local priest is to prepare his own homily (message) within that Mass.
Catholics have been reading daily prayers ever since they (the apostles) began this practice as mentioned in the book of Acts. The daily prayers are mostly a reciting of psalms and scripture, beautiful to listen to, soothing to pray. This chain of prayer has gone unbroken for 2000 years. All Catholic bishops, priests, deacons, monks, brothers, sisters, laity (the people) are on exactly the same page today, and this is throughout the world. Talk about powerful! The same prayer prayed to Jesus a million times today by millions of people! Praise God, Amen!
msnchris70
The Word of God establishes what truth is. The Word of God in John 1:12-13 tells us that we can only become a child of God (become born-again) by the will of God. There is no other way.
John 1:12-13
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
We see from this verse that a person cannot become a child of God or be born again by
1) being born into a Christian family (of blood)
2) by deciding on his own to be saved without God convicting his heart of his need for salvation (will of the flesh)
oo examples:
-- a non-believer marries a believer and decides to get saved for family unity
-- person affirms a belief that was bestowed on him through infantile baptism
-- person decides for Jesus because that is what is expected of him
3) parents deciding for them (will of man)
oo example
-- infantile baptism
-- a non-believer is saved based on the faith of someone
A person becomes a child of God by being born-again by the Spirit of God (of God).
When God decides it is time for you to make a decision for Jesus He will move on you by drawing you to Jesus, He will convict your heart of your need for the Savior and He will grant you grace to receive Jesus as Savior and Lord.
Your doctrine of infantile baptism violates John 1:12-13.
Star2, I noticed you were gone, and reasonable discussions/debates have been discussed. Nobody needs your mindless rant, I notice that most people (most) on this thread weather Catholic or Protestant don't like you. You've got nothing to say. Why don't you please go away...
beleiver - chris70 does not want to hear the truth. He has no defense against the unscriptural teachings of the RCC. The best he can do is name call.
Believer,
By restricting Baptism to only adults or children who are of reason then you deny that Baptism is required for entering heaven. Jn 3:5, Mk 16:16.
You also negate the fact that in Col 2:11-12 that baptism has replaced circumcision. Hmm, now who was circumcized in the old covenant? BABIES-Infants! Pretty interesting analogy.
A promise is only given through a covenental relationship. Now how was that relationship established? It was established through baptism. In Acts 2:38-39" Repent, and be baptized EVERY ONE OF YOU in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit(Holy Spirit is received at baptism). For the PROMISE is to you and to YOUR CHILDREN(the greek includes infants) and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."
Your view of baptism is exclusive and our view of baptism is inclusive. Why? Because the promise is for every one. You turn faith into a work. The kingdom of God is for everyone, believer.
We do see in scripture 1 Cor 1:16, Acts 16:15 where whole households were baptized. Does it spell out that infants were involved. No, but does all the other scriptures point to baptism being a covenantal relationship and that relationship is for everyone? Yes. Do all scripures point to original sin and the fact that nothing impure can enter heaven. WE MUST BE WASHED CLEAN.
Romans 6:3-5, You negate this passage for infants, so we cannot guarantee infants are saved using your logic.
"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were bruied therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the ded by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. FOR IF WE HAVE BEEN UNITED WITH IN A DEATH LIKE HIS, WE SHALL CERTAINLY be united with im in a resurrection like his."
Ok, now you spin every one????
msnchris70 - One cannot use the passages about whole households being baptized after one member was saved. A closer examiniation of the Philippian jailor will reveal that Paul and Silas preached the gospel to ALL members of his household (Acts 16:32), ALL believed (Acts 16:34), and ALL were then baptized (Acts 16:33).
ALL means every member of the houshold. There were no members of the Philippian jailor's household who were infants. No infant is capable of understanding language and he does not know how to talk. It would be impossible for him to understand the gospel let alone believe it and call upon the name of the Lord for salvation.
Face the truth Chris70. The teachings of the RCC are heretical.
Acts 16:30-34
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.
"Each individual Catholic Church has the same exact beliefs as the Global Church."
This is an interesting statement. While true on the surface, each order and rite has its own interpretation of the beliefs. Some are liberal, some are conservative, some have a more literal interpretation, others a more fluid interpretation. From an outsider's perspective, there appear to be as many differences in the Roman Catholic Church as in all the rest of the church bodies combined.
chris, the Baptist view on infant baptism is unbiblical. How can a view be unbiblical if that practice can't be found any where in the Bible. You or no one else has yet to show us a passage of scripture that in any way endorses the practice of infant baptism. The closest you come is the story of the Philippian jailer's family being baptized, but the problem is there is no record that there was an infant present and considering the jailer accepted Christ as Savior before he was baptized, common sense would lead one to believe his family did the same thing before they were baptized. None of the apostles and most importantly Christ gave any indication that infants were to be baptized or that baptism alone could save anyone.
My last couple of posts were from a Palm, so sorry if some of my wording was off a bit.
Brotheraaron,
Buy yourself a Catechism of the Catholic Church. It is deep and answers so many questions that are relevant for today.
You will also notice very little grey. It is either black or white with us. It is either True or False. Truth can live between the weeds, but it is important to identify the weeds. Some can't see the weeds.
When I was at Seminary I met many baptists who converted to Reformed or Lutheran by the end of seminary. Why? The Baptists position on infant baptism is unbiblical and denies that all need saving.
I saw many Baptist Seminarians who became Lutheran and Reformed also because these erudite individuals needed more than just their Pastor's interpretation. They wanted to see what the early Christians believed and once they did they became a Part of the Reformation Churches. Some, like me, swam a little farther and became Catholic.
The more you search out history against the scriptures the more you will see how very Catholic the Church that Christ founded was.
Brotheraaron,
The Baptist World Alliance has a much broader version and depth to their beliefs that is not present at the local level is my main point. Also, the BWA does not have the depth of intellectuals within that denomination compared to Lutherans or Reformed. The local Church's beliefs can usually be found in some sort of mission statement or a one page document of beliefs, while the BWA has a lot more depth than the local. The local church tries not to have too much depth because then it will leave it more open to interpretation for the individual.
Each individual Catholic Church has the same exact beliefs as the Global Church. It is extremely deep. Our beliefs set the tone for our concerns about the world; social justice, moral theology, materialism, etc. Within those beliefs based on Scripture and Tradition, we also have the Church authoritatively speak on behalf of Christ.
This authority tells us(Magisterium)that abortion is never right, homosexual activity is never right, remarriage is never right, materialism is never right, etc. We have a definitive authority that is back up by centuries of deep thinking.
When your mission or belief statement is on one page it leaves itself open to heresy. The more that is written on a particular subject, the less likely a heresy will occur. If it does occur then at least you know they are not of your fold.
You may email me anytime for more info. msnchris70@hotmail.com
I don't understand what you meant by Baptist doctrine not being very expansive or deep? Plese give me an example...
Brotheraaron,
Your original statement of beliefs were solid on the surface. Baptist theology and doctrine is not very expansive or deep. It is simple and useful until you run into a problem and because their theology is not that complex it has created so many off shoots.
I did also mention there were some areas that were incorrect, but in no way does those incorrect beliefs make you less of a Christian, to be specific.
Baptists are a denomination since their form did not occur till the 1600's. To denominate is to make less to fall below the original. Baptists are a denomination or a sepparitist group of anabaptists, mennonites and congregationalists. Everyone has a beginning. Yes, you are Christian as I am, but our specific name portends our set of beliefs that may be different from other groups.
The Catholic beginning started in Matt 16:18 and at Pentecost as a community. We are not a denomination because nothing historically preceded us. We are a continuation of the original Apostles.
Let us try with prayer to discern Truth and fellowship between us with a fruitful conversation.
Hi TG,
I understand what you are saying, but to me, based on my beliefs, which are based on what has been proven to me, which come from the Word of God, God has already established a church, and it's not the one formed in 313 by Constantine. I could use the same logic, the same argument, against you! Just replace your list of denominations with the word 'Catholics', rewrite the same argument but from my standpoint, and there you have it! You see, I don't believe any of what you have written. It doesn't line up with the Bible. Our universal leadership is Christ, our foundation is Christ, our guide is the Holy Spirit. There are many different Christian churches, but the majority (who are not obviously cultic, as per the LDS and JW, etc...) are fundamentally (that is, the core doctrines of the truth) the same. It is a Catholic misunderstanding and frequent misrepresentation (as in 'straw man') of the protestants and others (i.e.: us) that we are scattered and without foundation. We are, on the otherhand, superficially diverse, but fundamentally the same. This could be likened to the metaphor of the church being the body of Christ: we all have different functions- fingers, kidneys, bones; we are superficially different; however we are fundamentally the same- blood, tissue, dna, protien, fat, etc...
Aaron, for sure, Christians c/w gigantic hearts for Jesus. Many of my friends come from these groups, Baptist, Mennonite, Pentecostal, etc., I've even known a few Hutterites over the years. But, who gave these groups any kind of authority. Again, it goes back to the words spoken by Jesus when He gave authority to Peter, who was followed by Linus, who was followed by Anacletus, who was followed by Clemens, who was followed by....right up to Benedict XIV today.
Do you think it's possible that our loving God would establish one (1) church for his people, or would He leave us to flounder around on our own with no clear direction after Christ died? A church with authority, with a universal leadership, a church with a solid foundation? Wouldn't it make sense that before Jesus died for us He would establish a solid Church that would carry His message for the generations to come? One Church, the one (1) Church that He prayed to God for in John 17. Do you think Jesus' prayer would be answered or denied? Was His prayer weak or strong? The prayers of a righteous man are always answered, and I'm pretty sure He was a righteous man, my bible sure says so!
All we are saying, is consider the church that Jesus Himself founded. Check it out with an open mind and an open heart. Look at the fruit it produces. The "mother Theresas" of this world are always Catholic. Respect and dignity of all of mankind! Life from conception to natural death. Feed the hungry, cloth the naked, give drink to the thirsty.
I know that you already have Christ, but now come and receive Christ more fully, remain in Him. You won't be dissappointed.
Amen
PS we don't consider ourselves a denomination. The term Baptist is a general description, but fudamentally we are Christians.
msnChris: thanks for your opinion on the matter.
BTW, after posting our statement of faith on this site before, you concurred that the teachings of the Church are "solid". Why have you seemingly changed your position to fit your offensive?
Also brotheraaron, Baptist are the most well known within Protestantism for excessive division. No other denomination breaks up more than Baptists. Pentecostals are a close second. Protestants out of the Reformation even attacked anabaptists, baptists and mennonites alike because of their unorthodox beliefs that bares little resemblance to early Christians.
I've been in ministry a long time and when I was a Reformed Pastor I saw seven Baptist churches split into fourteen churches based over doctrinal disagreement. These fourteen churches didn't last long and by the time I had left the area there were only four left.
Baptists had their run for a while, but this denomination is shrinking fast and has almost no international presence. If bringing Christ to the World was left up to the Baptist, then most the world would go to Hell since the Baptists have not been that successful in bringing in new members. There are maybe 40 million baptist in the entire world and the vast majority are limited to the US.
God sent his apostles out to preach the Good news throughout the world. Baptists have not done this. The Catholic Church brought Christianity to every single country on every single continent to every race and creed on the planet.
There is a Catholic Church in every major city in the entire world. We took that great commission and we continue still today with bringing more people to Christ.
Aaron, got it thnx, go ahead and delete, I'll send you a note in a bit....
Brotheraaron,
The early church didn't go by the Bible alone. They didn't have a Bible until the Catholic Church created it and called it a "bible". So, the earliest Christians got their faith from their HIEARCHY(Bishops and Priests and Deacons) and from Oral Tradition. Once the scriptures were collected and canonized, at that point the scriptures were used by the church for refutation and proving doctrines and how to live a good Christian life.
The early church was always a three legged stool; Scripture, Tradition and Teaching authority. There is no place in the Bible that even implicitly says that we should base all our beliefs on the Bible alone. The key word is "Alone".
As a former Reformed Pastor, I know that only extreme type Baptists even believe that garbage about Baptists going back to the beginning. Baptists have almost nothing in common with any Christian Group of the first century in practice or beliefs. The Baptist didn't exist historically and their beliefs didn't exist either.
Read the earliest Church fathers and you will find they all sound EXTREMELY CATHOLIC.
I am thankful that Baptist still haven't watered down that Christ is their savior, because they have certainly watered down everthing else and all Mainline Protestants would agree with me.
Your are right about "Baptist" (etymologically) being around since the 1600s, but Church today holds to the Bible just as they did back then, and just as they did back to the apostles. Go back even further to the anabaptists...
"This principle of infallibility and Church succession is the central corruption of Rome, and has so polluted her faith that she scarcely holds any truth purely, both in the abstract and the concrete. She believes in the proper Deity of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Spirit,--in the Unity and Trinity of the Godhead,--in the authenticity and inspiration of the Scriptures,--in the doctrines of incarnation and atonement,--and in eternal glory and retribution. But which of these has she not modified and perverted, under the pretense that she is endowed with Catholicity and perpetual visibility, as the rightful church Apostolic, all her defilement to the contrary? and now she makes her errors her real life. What is true of the hierarchy is equally true of most of the bodies which have protested against and shaken off her heresies. They clung to some truths which she trod underfoot, but they hugged some of her errors as closely as she hugged them, defended them as stoutly, and often persecuted unto death those who differed with them, even in minor matters."
taken from: http://www.wayoflife.org/articles/armitage03.htm
Hi Aaron,
Congrats on speaking at the homeless shelter. God is working in your life, that's great! Keep up the good work!
Hey, I've heard this same story before, about the Baptist church going back to the time of Christ and having to stay hidden in the background, but I have a hard time believing it. I just went on to Google and is seems the Baptist church was only founded 1n the 1600's. Make sure you're not being fed a wrong version of your church's history. To what I can tell it's only been around for 300 to 400 years.
In Christ...
"We mainline Christians are not surprised by your "NEW" interpretations on scripture that are divergent from the rest of us..."
We trace our Church back to the first Christians. We are not Protestant, because we did not split from the Catholic Church. We were never a part of her, historicall speaking. Our hermeneutic is not "new". The teachings of the church are exactly and perfectly in line with the great doctrines of the Bible . The RCC has no monopoly on interpretation since it began not with Peter, but 300+ years later. The RCC was, in its beginnings, corrupt by teaching that even now it cannot reconcile with Biblical Truth. Also, there is no way you can even prove a connection to Peter between now and then. An unbroken line of Popes does not exist.
We are small. We have always been small. We have been persecuted by both the RCC and the Protestants, yet we have absolutely no history of ever doing violence to anyone.
Here is a better explanation: http://bibletruth.org/BaptistHistory.html
Please forgive me in my shoddy attempt to articulate what I have learned in my short life as a Christian. Somtimes I wish that a real teacher or Pastor could take my place to write this. I probably shouldn't think that way though, as since this is done prayerfully, and based upon my salvation and baptism, the Holy Ghost is working through me. I am no scholar; I am a faithful witness of Jesus Christ. Yet my faith even fails me at times. I pray fervently for you all today.
Last night was a blessing. I can only describe it as powerful. I have been a seminary student since the beginning of the year, and am studying doing a B. Religion, Pastoral Ministries. I had the chance to prepare a short message (20-30 min) and to preach at a homeless shelter. Even though I had been praying all day, I was so nervous. When I got up to preach, the fear completely vanished. My prayers had been answered. The message was on sin and eternal life. Praise God! I asked Him to take Aaron completely out of the picture and to use me to reach these men. I am telling you this to give testimony of the power of the cross, and of the Holy Spirit. He Is Alive!
A very good conversation.
There are hundreds, if not, thousands of scholars, of which I am not one, who would disagree with you and fight the same fight from the side of the line that we would call the truth. With truth, there could be no compromise, as truth is not relative. I stand convicted, by the power of the Holy Spirit which indwells me, of the truth. As He has guided me thus far, by the means of my prayers, I can say with certainty and boldness that I am in the light. I have been a Christian for just over a year now. I was raised an agnostic. I have prayed fervently and often for truth and light. This is what has been speedily given to me. God always answers my prayers, even if I am immediately unaware, or lacking the humility to accept His response. The life changing power of the Blood has saved me from the moment of my salvation and on in to eternity.
More to come...
I say objective because I won't try to convince you, but rather provide my evidence and the Holy Spirit will tell you what is Truth.
You will also need to deepen your prayer life with God, when searching for the Holy Spirit to guide you into Truth. The better your prayer life is, the easier it is to discern Truth and the more prudent your decisions are.
Brotheraaron,
If it was possible for you to make a mistake about us Catholics being a "Saved by Works" church, then could you have other feelings about the Church that could also be wrong too?
When I was a Reformed Minister I had many more doubts about Catholicism that you have mentioned. I am happy to discuss these with you offline. msnchris70@hotmail.com if you really want an objective opinion based on scripture, Tradition and History.
No Catholic belief goes against scripture. All Catholic beliefs are implicitly or explicitly in Scripture and none contradict or supercede the Word of God.
Brotheraaron,
I've met thousands of Traditional Catholics who like fundamentalist Christians all think each other are going to Hell because of their perversion of the Holy Bible.
A lot of the issues you have with us, you would also have with Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians and Reformed Christians which are all the largest numbers of Protestant Christianity.
You must think based on your historical views that Christ was a failure because you and a very small group of Christians have everything right and interpret the Word of God inerrantly and the rest of us are all wrong. The Vast majority of Christianity thinks closer to what I believe than what you believe and we believe Christ was very successful. These churches both Protestant and Orthodox are not afraid to marry scripture with historical narrative to prove their case.
We mainline Christians are not surprised by your "NEW" interpretations on scripture that are divergent from the rest of us since when the scriptures were written and when the Apostles taught these scriptures your church was not present to validate what was meant by these scriptures. Our Catholic Church has always existed. Since, 60 ad there has always been a Bishop of Rome and that was Peter and we can trace our church not just through a succession of Popes, but more importantly we can trace our beliefs from that time to today. This is a historical fact. Our Church was founded by Christ and built on the foundation of the Apostles, especially Peter which means ROCK in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew.
Our beliefs are not different from the early Christians.
Taking your position, you basically reject historical Christianity and have developed new interpretations because of your lack of historicity.
also... I don't believe Christ uses the Catholic church. Christ did not come to unite people who may or may not worship God in spirit and truth. He came to divide, and to make holy his people. Holiness is separation from what is wicked. Why would God unite light with dark? Jesus said that no one comes to the Father but through Him. It all depends upon who knows who Jesus is then, doesn't it?
And the "company I'm in" is not dependent upon who rejects false teachers. It makes no difference to the Church who else is rejecting the RCC. What matters, is who is following the Word of God truthfully and inerrantly.
Satan can devise as many ploys as he wants to turn people away from the truth. That includes pitting a false-church against a false church... as long as it keeps you from knowing Jesus.
My humble apologies if I was wrong about Catholicism being 'Works Based." However, I still cannot reconcile what I see the Catholic church doing (mass, infant baptism, apocryphal teaching, claiming papal infaliblity, claiming a stake in history starting at the time of Christ, etc, etc...) with what I find in the bible.
Even the image of the church is disturbing. In no way do I see a resemblance of alignment between the RCC and the Holy Bible. The scriptures tell it all: the past, present and future of God's people. Of this stream, I am but a drop. I clearly see the church I belong to, and all of the other Churches in the world who cleave to God's Word, as the body of Christ. By this standard do I utterly reject the Catholic Church. In the words of Paul, "let them be accursed."
And it does not "drive me nuts" to see their good works. Without Jesus, the works of any church are but filthy rags to Him. It only makes me sad that every day, millions of people who have not entered through the narrow gate, who are not of the few who have found it, are eating crackers and wine and thinking this is actually God.
Brother Aaron
Ps. I am wondering, according to Catholic tradition and/or doctrine, what does this strong position I have taken mean for my eternal security?
Like Jesus said, "A house divided against itself will not stand."
Hmmm, Catholics are pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-biblical moral values. We are also the most generous church on the face of the earth and the most charitable to the poor. Wow, our hiearchy is really leading us astray, eh?
Who generally attacks the Catholic Church....Hmmm; Fundamentalists, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Satanists, Pagan worshippers, secularists, atheists, freemasons, etc. Look at who doesn't like us, you are in nice company brotheraaron.
The Catholic Church is proud to call mainline Protestant Christians, evangelicals and the Orthodox our brothers and sisters in Christ.
It must drive you nuts brotheraaron to see how effectively Christ uses the Catholic Church.
Brotheraaron,
The Catholic Church does not, and has never believed that works save you. You are in error.
You will find in our official Catholic doctrine this is not the case and you will also find that we have signed a joint declaration on the justification of faith with the Lutherans.
Catholic Popes fought against Pelagianism which denies original sin and believed we can save ourselves through our works. This has always been categorically rejected.
We are saved by Grace through an active faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Of course hell won't prevail against the Catholic Church. Why would it? The Catholic Church does not face the attacks that the Body of Christ faces. How could darkness prevail against darkness?
I am not talking about a Catholic's faith. It is my feeling that there are numerous Catholics (past, present and future)who are Christians, and will be with us in the Heavenly Kingdom. But the CC itself... the vatican, its heirarchies, teachers and leader... destined for the Lake of Fire. That is partly why I love Catholics, and sometimes write on this message board. In the hopes of being a light of truth, and seeing you 'come out of her'. I have a co-worker who I have been praying for, and witnessing to, for months. He and his family are 'devoutly Catholic.' God willing they are starting to come out from her. It has been a long, hard discussion, and it always, without fail, ends up -scripture -vs- church fathers/tradition. The bottom line with the few Catholics I have spoken to is always the RCC's traditions.
Every single person you see, be them Catholic, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormon, or any other salvation-by-works false religion, is made in the image of God, and is a POTENTIAL BROTHER OR SISTER. Love them regardless of their religious affiliation. This is the first step in winning souls to Christ, which is commanded of us.
Just another servant in Christ,
Brother Aaron
Yes, put your trust in CHRIST-but discern through prayer where and in what church HE can be found-many will say HIS name but not follow HIM.
Amen to that! Yes Canadian, if you sincerly pray that beautiful prayer you just printed, you will soon become Catholic. There is only one Church founded by Jesus, and it sure wasn't the "Church of the Hubba Bubba (fill in your own church here)". No sir, it was and is the Holy Catholic Church that Jesus said hell would not prevail against. Well Canadian, it's still around 2000 years later. So just know that hell won't prevail against it, not even with your assistance.
Do yourself a favor, read church history. Amen!
False teacher's are everywhere, don't put your trust in people who blindly follow error in their church because it's been in error for a long,long,time.Don't put your trust in the traditions/rituals of a church because it makes you feel good, put your trust in THE HOLY WORD OF GOD.Don't put your trust in the majority-the road is wide that leads to destruction.
Yes, put your trust in CHRIST-but discern through prayer where and in what church HE can be found-many will say HIS name but not follow HIM.
The catholic church was not founded by CHRIST,it came well after our LORD was risen-yes put your hope in GOD'S HOLY WORD-open a King James Bible and study GOD'S WORD,don't study the traditions of men-we are all wicked and not worthy of salvation, we are ALL sinners in need of salvation and repentance through our LORD AND MASTER JESUS CHRIST.
My brothers and sisters in Christ of all denominations, consider this statement:
"Organizers said they expected 500 million people across the world to watch the television broadcast..." 500 MILLION. One subject, one focus: Jesus.
Consider for a moment the effect that this same message, presented by ANY denomination reaching that audience every week for a year would have on our world!
Lord, let us work together so that it may be. In Jesus' name, amen.
Steiner,
If you take all the practicing Christians in the world, then we are all in the minority.
Yes, there are many false teachers. Don't put your trust in charismatic speakers or people who founded their own church on their own interpretion, but rather put your Trust in Christ. The Catholic Church, being the only Church founded by Christ, is the beacon of Hope for millions. Let us put our hope in God's Holy Word as we work for unity.
Ecuminism without Truth is a waste. We must work toward doctrinal unity.
power in numbers?!
Did Jesus not predict the end of days to be like those of Noah?
Noah alone and his family were saved. Might in numbers does not make right before Christ. Those who wish to follow Christ ought to remember this...and understand that they are personally called to decide what and whom they believe.
To go with the majority may in the end be the wide road to perdition.
And the mahority is basking in the light of ecumenism, as it claims to follow the same god.
That in fact would be quite true. Except that that god is not in Christ, but in the devil. Be wary, for Noah and his family only were saved, while the ecumenists drowned.
A link to this article has been posted on the website GoodNewsNow.com.
The article stated, "Pope Benedict XVI, in Sydney for the Roman Catholic Church's World Youth Day festival". The Pope is not only for Roman Catholic, he is for all Catholics. We are not the Roman Catholic Church, we are the Catholic Church. Some of us are Roman Catholics, some are Byzantine, some are Melkite, Coptic, Chaldean, etc. There are 21 Rites within the Universal Church.
Yes, 500 million people did watch this. The second largest tv audience except for Pope JPII death which had 3.5 Billion.