Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Are There Any Catholics On Here?


Recommended Posts

  • Members
On ‎6‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 8:53 PM, OLD fashioned preacher said:

You "gave your life to Christ" 20 yrs ago. 10 people might define that 6-10 different ways. What do you mean? How does that work? If someone came to you and said, "Hey how can I get all my sins forgiven?", what would you tell them?

 

Yes, I asked 3 separate questions.

I mean by that I gave my life to Christ that I prayed to Him and asked Him to come into my heart and become my Savior, Lord and King. If I was asked by someone "Hey how can I get all my sins forgiven?" I would respond to pray to Jesus and ask Him to come into your heart and become your Savior, Lord and King and then to ask Jesus for forgiveness of sins.

 

6 minutes ago, Invicta said:

I ask again.

Which do you consider to be a fale religion?

I only put this thread under false religion because there was no section titled "other denominations" to put this thread under. I consider the Catholic Church to be partially false and not entirely false since there are some scriptural Catholic doctrines and scriptural parts of the Mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As far as the Eucharist is concerned, Catholics believe that, with the consecration by a validly ordained priest (Lutherans do not believe in sacramental ordination that confers an ontological character – rather, every man is his own priest), bread and wine are changed in their substance into the Body and Blood of Christ even though the outward appearance and characteristic accidents of bread and wine remain for our human senses. After this change of substance, trans-substantiation, Christ is truly present in the Eucharistic species, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. So long as the outward accidents remain and the species are recognizable as, in their accidents, being bread and wine, they are still the Eucharist and Christ is truly present in them, even in very small quantities of the Eucharistic Body and Blood. When the Eucharistic species are destroyed or significantly altered in their outward accidents, they cease being the Eucharist and Christ is no longer present in them. Furthermore, we Catholic believe that the celebration of the Eucharist represents and renews and makes present again both the Last Supper of the Lord during His Passion as well as the Sacrifice of Cross on Calvary. The celebration of the Eucharist is Christ’s atoning, propitiatory Sacrifice, which, though it occurred at one fixed point in time, is renewed and made present again through the actions of the priest, who acts as alter Christus. Mass is the true, real, renewal of the Sacrifice in an unbloody way that once took place in a bloody way, historically, on Calvary. This is done through the actions and words of the ordained priest.

Lutherans believe that anyone can celebrate the “Lord’s Supper” (some few Lutherans call it “Mass”) though some are called by the community to preside in the central role. The Lord’s Supper is not the Sacrifice renewed. Lutherans do not believe that the substance of bread and wine change, transubstantiation. They think that Christ is present together with the bread and wine for as long as Christ is needed to be there, a kind of “consubstantiation”. (Some Lutherans don’t like that term, but I’m not getting into that fight.) That is to say, that for Christ to be present, there must be institution, distribution and reception.  If it is not received, Christ isn’t present. Once no longer needed there for reception, Christ is no longer present and there is left merely bread and wine. They believe Christ is truly present, when required for reception, but not in an enduring way. Luther used the image an iron that is heated and then it cools again: the iron and the heat are there together and then only the iron is there.  However, some Lutheran churches are starting to reserve their eucharistic species and even to adore what they reserve, even kneeling outside their eucharistic communion services.  An interesting development as they become more “sacramental”.  Furthermore, the Lord’s Supper is a memorial merely. It does not renew the Sacrifice of Calvary or the Last Supper, but rather commemorates them. Lutherans believe in a priesthood of all believers. There is no sacramental priesthood or consecration of the Eucharist or sacramental absolution of sins or conferral of confirmation. Matrimony is not a sacrament, nor is anointing. Lutherans have two sacraments, Baptism and “Eucharist”. Their baptism is valid because water is poured on the skin while the Trinitarian form is pronounced. Their “Eucharist” is not the Eucharist. They do not believe it is a sacrament in the sense we do and there is no valid priesthood to confect it, etc. They do not believe, as Catholics do, that sacraments are outward signs instituted by Christ Himself that confer grace. For Lutherans, they are outward signs of realities that are taking place.

John,

You really need to rethink what you're arguing for. I still haven't made my mind up as to whether you're sincere or not. At times, you seem sincere and searching. At other times...well...

(Luke 22:19) And he took bread, and gave thanks , and brake it, and gave unto them, saying , This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

The Lord's Supper is a REMEMBRANCE of what Christ did; it's not a RENEWAL in any way whatsoever...whether it be the Catholic's trans-substantiation or the Lutheran's consubstantiation. Christ is not present; it merely represents him.

When you partake of the Catholic eucharist under Lutheran pretenses, do you perceive that it is Christ...whether literally or in presence?

Edited by No Nicolaitans
separated words that were running together
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 2017-6-22 at 6:53 PM, John Yurich said:

I only put this thread under false religion because there was no section titled "other denominations" to put this thread under. I consider the Catholic Church to be partially false and not entirely false since there are some scriptural Catholic doctrines and scriptural parts of the Mass.

Thank you for clarifying that. 

Remember that a little leaven leaven's th whole lump.

Remember that the Jews tried to worship God and Baal at times.  Also they worshipped in the temple but held sunrise services facing east towards the rising sun.  All are condemned as false religion.

The mass is NOT Holy Communion or the Lord's supper.  It is the worship of a wafer.  A man made god.  When the priest raises the wafer, the host, the people worship it.  You will probably say you don't, but then you are differing from Roman doctrine.

Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
24 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

As far as the Eucharist is concerned, Catholics believe that, with the consecration by a validly ordained priest (Lutherans do not believe in sacramental ordination that confers an ontological character – rather, every man is his own priest), bread and wine are changed in their substance into the Body and Blood of Christ even though the outward appearance and characteristic accidents of bread and wine remain for our human senses. After this change of substance, trans-substantiation, Christ is truly present in the Eucharistic species, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. So long as the outward accidents remain and the species are recognizable as, in their accidents, being bread and wine, they are still the Eucharist and Christ is truly present in them, even in very small quantities of the Eucharistic Body and Blood. When the Eucharistic species are destroyed or significantly altered in their outward accidents, they cease being the Eucharist and Christ is no longer present in them. Furthermore, we Catholic believe that the celebration of the Eucharist represents and renews and makes present again both the Last Supper of the Lord during His Passion as well as the Sacrifice of Cross on Calvary. The celebration of the Eucharist is Christ’s atoning, propitiatory Sacrifice, which, though it occurred at one fixed point in time, is renewed and made present again through the actions of the priest, who acts as alter Christus. Mass is the true, real, renewal of the Sacrifice in an unbloody way that once took place in a bloody way, historically, on Calvary. This is done through the actions and words of the ordained priest.

Lutherans believe that anyone can celebrate the “Lord’s Supper” (some few Lutherans call it “Mass”) though some are called by the community to preside in the central role. The Lord’s Supper is not the Sacrifice renewed. Lutherans do not believe that the substance of bread and wine change, transubstantiation. They think that Christ is present together with the bread and wine for as long as Christ is needed to be there, a kind of “consubstantiation”. (Some Lutherans don’t like that term, but I’m not getting into that fight.) That is to say, that for Christ to be present, there must be institution, distribution and reception.  If it is not received, Christ isn’t present. Once no longer needed there for reception, Christ is no longer present and there is left merely bread and wine. They believe Christ is truly present, when required for reception, but not in an enduring way. Luther used the image an iron that is heated and then it cools again: the iron and the heat are there together and then only the iron is there.  However, some Lutheran churches are starting to reserve their eucharistic species and even to adore what they reserve, even kneeling outside their eucharistic communion services.  An interesting development as they become more “sacramental”.  Furthermore, the Lord’s Supper is a memorial merely. It does not renew the Sacrifice of Calvary or the Last Supper, but rather commemorates them. Lutherans believe in a priesthood of all believers. There is no sacramental priesthood or consecration of the Eucharist or sacramental absolution of sins or conferral of confirmation. Matrimony is not a sacrament, nor is anointing. Lutherans have two sacraments, Baptism and “Eucharist”. Their baptism is valid because water is poured on the skin while the Trinitarian form is pronounced. Their “Eucharist” is not the Eucharist. They do not believe it is a sacrament in the sense we do and there is no valid priesthood to confect it, etc. They do not believe, as Catholics do, that sacraments are outward signs instituted by Christ Himself that confer grace. For Lutherans, they are outward signs of realities that are taking place.

John,

You really need to rethink what you're arguing for. I still haven't made my mind up as to whether you're sincere or not. At times, you seem sincere and searching. At other times...well...

(Luke 22:19) And he tookbread, and gave thanks , and brake it, andgave unto them, saying , Thisismybodywhich is givenforyou: this do in remembrance of me.

The Lord's Supper is a REMEMBRANCE of what Christ did; it's not a RENEWAL in any way whatsoever...whether it be the Catholic's trans-substantiation or the Lutheran's consubstantiation. Christ is not present; it merely represents him.

When you partake of the Catholic eucharist under Lutheran pretenses, do you perceive that it is Christ...whether literally or in presence?

When Luther held a conference with the Swiss reformers, Zwingle etc, he came into the room and wrote on the table "This is my body"  and would not budge from that.  Think!  was Jesus actually holding hie body in his hand when he said that?  He followed by saying "Do this in remembrace of me.

Jesus also said of the cup. "This is my blood"  One of the martyrs to the Catholic Church, Nicholas Shetterton, had long discussions with the bishops over this.  He said If the bread was the Lord's body then the cup, not the contents were his blood. He was burnt to death in Canterbury only about 8 miles from here.

I am going to ask two you more questions

Do you  believe the Catholic teaching that Christ is present in the conscrated wafer, (the good god) in body soul and spirit? or do you beleive the Christian teaching that, as Jesus said ,"Do this inremembrace of me."?

You know, we forget so soon.  The Jews were given the passover meal to remind them what God had done for them,  Christians were given the Lord's Supper to remind us what God, in Christ has done for us.

Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On June 20, 2017 at 11:00 AM, John Yurich said:

Of course I did not make my Baptist pastor cognizant that I attend both the Catholic and Baptist Churches as it is none of his business. I don't like to discuss my beliefs that much with clergy. I am growing in Christ at that Baptist Church that I attend on Sunday mornings because I attend Adult Sunday School before worship, I fellowship with the congregation before worship and I am friends with half of the congregation. And I am very involved in various church activities at that Baptist Church from attending Adult Sunday School before worship to going to soup lunches and other meals after worship. Before I started attending that Baptist Church I was not that social and did not make friends easily. It is a lie that every Catholic doctrine is diametrically opposed to Biblical and Baptist doctrines as there are some biblical Catholic doctrines. And Catholics are not unbelievers since they worship Jesus as God. Unbelievers do not worship Jesus as God. Stating that 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 is required for salvation and entering Heaven is adding another requirement onto salvation.

You said you are growing in Christ at the Baptist church, which (correct me if I'm wrong) suggests you were not growing in Christ at the RCC. 

So why not just leave the RCC altogether & make the Baptist church your church home?

Do you tithe at both?

Do you believe the King James Bible is the Word of God?

Does your church go soul winning, and if so, do you go knock doors with them?

i apologize for all the questions, I just do not understand how you can tolerate the unscriptural teachings that confront you at the RCC.

Finally, please explain exactly WHICH teachings of the RCC do you believe are biblical? Because certainly, if the RCC actually BELIEVED in the sinless life, death, burial AND bodily ressurrection of Christ Jesus, they would NOT attempt to bring Him back down in Mass.

it just doesn't add up.

My take on the RCC is that it is an idolatrous, works-based, man-made false religion with its OWN scriptures(not based on the Word of God) it's OWN head(the pope), its OWN rules & bizarre rituals that resemble witchcraft & center eerily around death, as evidenced by their worship of dead body parts (relics):

 

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
5 hours ago, John Yurich said:

I mean by that I gave my life to Christ that I prayed to Him and asked Him to come into my heart and become my Savior, Lord and King. If I was asked by someone "Hey how can I get all my sins forgiven?" I would respond to pray to Jesus and ask Him to come into your heart and become your Savior, Lord and King and then to ask Jesus for forgiveness of sins.

 

I only put this thread under false religion because there was no section titled "other denominations" to put this thread under. I consider the Catholic Church to be partially false and not entirely false since there are some scriptural Catholic doctrines and scriptural parts of the Mass.

John,

 

Lordship salvation is a works-based false Gospel that CANNOT save.

the ONLY way you can be saved is to BELIEVE on Jesus Christ; salvation is a free GIFT, you cannot earn it or pay for it.

To sum it up:

Salvation is a FREE GIFT, given by the grace (because we don't deserve it) of God, paid for by the Blood of Jesus Christ, received the MOMENT you BELIEVE the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and once you receive it you will KNOW that you have just passed from death to life everlasting, and once you have it you can never lose it.

Ask yourself -- Do you KNOW that if you died today, would you would go to Heaven?

If you cannot immediately respond with an emphatic, "Yes!" It is because you are NOT saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
16 hours ago, BabeinChrist said:

John,

 

Lordship salvation is a works-based false Gospel that CANNOT save.

the ONLY way you can be saved is to BELIEVE on Jesus Christ; salvation is a free GIFT, you cannot earn it or pay for it.

To sum it up:

Salvation is a FREE GIFT, given by the grace (because we don't deserve it) of God, paid for by the Blood of Jesus Christ, received the MOMENT you BELIEVE the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and once you receive it you will KNOW that you have just passed from death to life everlasting, and once you have it you can never lose it.

Ask yourself -- Do you KNOW that if you died today, would you would go to Heaven?

If you cannot immediately respond with an emphatic, "Yes!" It is because you are NOT saved.

River of Life Church(where I attend on Sunday morning) and Pastor Steve teach the biblical doctrine of salvation by stating that salvation comes by accepting Jesus as ones Savior and Lord and putting ones trust entirely in Him alone for salvation. Listen to some of  Pastor Steve's sermons on the website for River of Life Church(www.rolchastings.org) to find out that that Pastor Steve preaches the biblical doctrine of salvation in his sermons. I know if I died today I would go to Heaven because I accepted Jesus as my Savior and Lord and I put my trust entirely in Him alone for salvation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
19 hours ago, BabeinChrist said:

You said you are growing in Christ at the Baptist church, which (correct me if I'm wrong) suggests you were not growing in Christ at the RCC. 

So why not just leave the RCC altogether & make the Baptist church your church home?

Do you tithe at both?

Do you believe the King James Bible is the Word of God?

Does your church go soul winning, and if so, do you go knock doors with them?

i apologize for all the questions, I just do not understand how you can tolerate the unscriptural teachings that confront you at the RCC.

Finally, please explain exactly WHICH teachings of the RCC do you believe are biblical? Because certainly, if the RCC actually BELIEVED in the sinless life, death, burial AND bodily ressurrection of Christ Jesus, they would NOT attempt to bring Him back down in Mass.

it just doesn't add up.

My take on the RCC is that it is an idolatrous, works-based, man-made false religion with its OWN scriptures(not based on the Word of God) it's OWN head(the pope), its OWN rules & bizarre rituals that resemble witchcraft & center eerily around death, as evidenced by their worship of dead body parts (relics):

 

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

I was not growing in Christ but remaining still in Christ at the local Catholic parish because I chose not to get involved in any church activities at the local Catholic parish. But when I started to attend River of Life Church I started to grow in Christ because I like the Adult Sunday School before worship, the fellowship before worship, the worship service and the sermons of Pastor Steve and the lunches from time to time after worship. I am choosing to remain in the Catholic Church because I like the liturgical worship. I also like the non liturgical worship of River of Life Church I attend on Sunday mornings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
23 hours ago, John Yurich said:

I would not tell my Baptist pastor of my membership in the Catholic Church. And I was Baptized and raised Catholic from the time I was born and thus I am not a Catholic convert.

Okay, well the lengthy process I was thinking of is called in the Anglican church 'confirmation' and it applies to folk born into the Anglican church as well as newcomers and it involves attending lessons about the creeds and, eventually, stating that you believe them. I assumed pretty much the same thing happened in Catholic churches.

23 hours ago, John Yurich said:

I don't believe that if the priest found out that I reject some Catholic doctrines that I would be prohibited from receiving Holy Communion in the Catholic Church.

I'm surprised to hear that. I know that some churches, even some Baptist churches, let people partake in the Lord's supper member or not and no questions asked. I thought the Catholic Church was the opposite. Do you think there would be any grounds, for example if you told them you didn't believe in God?

23 hours ago, John Yurich said:

I do not know if the priest and pastor would want to know certain information about my beliefs.

Well, maybe we can say that they don't want to know enough to ask. If that's so, perhaps all your joint membership means is that it's possible to find churches that aren't rigorous about membership.

Edited by Alimantado
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
46 minutes ago, Alimantado said:

Okay, well the lengthy process I was thinking of is called in the Anglican church 'confirmation' and it applies to folk born into the Anglican church as well as newcomers and it involves attending lessons about the creeds and, eventually, stating that you believe them. I assumed pretty much the same thing happened in Catholic churches.

I'm surprised to hear that. I know that some churches, even some Baptist churches, let people partake in the Lord's supper member or not and no questions asked. I thought the Catholic Church was the opposite. Do you think there would be any grounds, for example if you told them you didn't believe in God?

Well, maybe we can say that they don't want to know enough to ask. If that's so, perhaps all your joint membership means is that it's possible to find churches that aren't rigorous about membership.

I was not Confirmed in the Catholic Church when I was a teenager because I chose not to be Confirmed as a teenager as I was too busy with homework to take the required lessons to be Confirmed in the Catholic Church. I waited until I was almost 24 years old to be Confirmed. And I had to take lessons for several weeks once a week after I came home from working half days. The lessons were given at the local Catholic parish in the previous town I resided in and were given by a nun since I was the only adult getting Confirmed. At that Baptist church I attend on Sunday mornings anybody who has accepted Jesus as their Savior and Lord is permitted to receive the Lord's Supper. The Pastor just states that if anybody knows they have some sin that they have not confessed to Jesus to do so before receiving the Lord's Supper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, John Yurich said:

I waited until I was almost 24 years old to be Confirmed. And I had to take lessons for several weeks once a week after I came home from working half days. The lessons were given at the local Catholic parish in the previous town I resided in and were given by a nun since I was the only adult getting Confirmed.

Ok, so going back to what I said earlier then:

"And as for the Catholic church you attend, at some point you went through a fairly lengthy process of becoming a member that involved signing up to a load of doctrines, yes?"

You addressed this question by saying you weren't a convert, but can we now say that yes you did go through a process of learning and then professing belief in various creeds/doctrinal statements? And that your being confirmed as a member was conditional on professing those beliefs? Now you say you don't know whether the chief priest or whatever would question your membership of the church if he knew you've since ditched some of those beliefs that were a condition of your being confirmed as a member. I suggest maybe he would.

As for the Baptist church you go to, it sounds like folk 'self certify' and then they ask as few questions as possible. But I do wonder, if I asked to joined that church and I did as you did--told them that Jesus was my Lord and Saviour and made a public profession of it--and then it came out later, let's say over a cup of coffee with Pastor Steve, that when I'd said 'Jesus' I'd been referring to a giraffe at London zoo called 'Jesus', whether that would cause Pastor Steve to question my being a member of that church. And if the answer to that is yes, I wonder if other things, like being a member of a second church with very different doctrines, would be cause for concern in Steve's mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
2 hours ago, John Yurich said:

I was not growing in Christ but remaining still in Christ at the local Catholic parish because I chose not to get involved in any church activities at the local Catholic parish. But when I started to attend River of Life Church I started to grow in Christ because I like the Adult Sunday School before worship, the fellowship before worship, the worship service and the sermons of Pastor Steve and the lunches from time to time after worship. I am choosing to remain in the Catholic Church because I like the liturgical worship. I also like the non liturgical worship of River of Life Church I attend on Sunday mornings.

No, Pastor Steve teaches the false gospel of Lordship salvation(works).

I went to the website & I have concerns...

1. You claim it is Baptist, but "Baptist" is NOWHERE in the title. It is obviously non-denominational, ecumenical.

2. The statement of faith is that of a non-denominational church. Watered down, cookie cutter & not firm in beliefs.

3. They believe Hell is "eternal separation from God", but the Bible says it is a real, physical place of eternal torment in fire, where the unsaved go:

"So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.".......Matthew 13:49-50

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
15 hours ago, John Yurich said:

I was not Confirmed in the Catholic Church when I was a teenager because I chose not to be Confirmed as a teenager as I was too busy with homework to take the required lessons to be Confirmed in the Catholic Church. I waited until I was almost 24 years old to be Confirmed. And I had to take lessons for several weeks once a week after I came home from working half days. The lessons were given at the local Catholic parish in the previous town I resided in and were given by a nun since I was the only adult getting Confirmed. At that Baptist church I attend on Sunday mornings anybody who has accepted Jesus as their Savior and Lord is permitted to receive the Lord's Supper. The Pastor just states that if anybody knows they have some sin that they have not confessed to Jesus to do so before receiving the Lord's Supper.

As a born and raised catholic, I was confirmed too and had 1st Communion as well. All those classes, and to this day I can't remember what went on or was said in any of them. It's just more man made traditions which has nothing to do with God or our eternal salvation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have just been watching a prgramme on yesterday channel called Forbidden History, about the vatican archives. They have 52miles of shelves of documents.  The Vatican is built on on pagan temples.  Osiris and Isis are integrated into Catholic saints.  Well we knew that, but I have not seen it said on TV before.  Some anti christians on there.  THey refer to Christians, not realising the the RCC church is not Christian, but pagan with and very thin Christian veneer.  Very interesting I don't know if you can get it oversseas but it is on  Uktvplay https://uktvplay.uktv.co.uk/shows/forbidden-history/watch-online/?video=5453746319001

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
18 minutes ago, Invicta said:

I have just been watching a prgramme on yesterday channel called Forbidden History, about the vatican archives. They have 52miles of shelves of documents.  The Vatican is built on on pagan temples.  Osiris and Isis are integrated into Catholic saints.  Well we knew that, but I have not seen it said on TV before.  Some anti christians on there.  THey refer to Christians, not realising the the RCC church is not Christian, but pagan with and very thin Christian veneer.  Very interesting I don't know if you can get it oversseas but it is on  Uktvplay https://uktvplay.uktv.co.uk/shows/forbidden-history/watch-online/?video=5453746319001

Yes, Roman Catholicism adopted many pagan beliefs from places like Egypt and later "christianized them.
 
The skull cap that the pope wears came from the ones that the sun priests of Egypt would wear.
 
I even read that back in the early days of the RCC priests and monks  all had the same hair style with the bald patch on the top which symbolized worship of the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...