Catholics Come Home

Tell me, if you were to take on a study of Islam, would you go to an Islamic school in an Islamic nation to study under Islamic teachers? Or would you gather some of your own material and seek the teaching of wise and studied Christian teachers who have already studied the subject thoroughly?
Which would be the wisest and most beneficial way of learning about Islam?

 

There is nothing I said that is not a verifiable fact -- historical and theological.

I have been a member of several denominations and an attender of many more. The only one that I could never be a member of is the RCC. Theology and church history have been my passion for 37 years, and from studying I know that the RCC and the first century church have little in common.

 

Well then I want to hear it directly from Thinkingstuff. In my private discussions with him he never professed Catholism rather he did quite the reverse. The man then is completely confused just as you are. I will have to pray hard for him.

 

One more thing -- and one of THE most important -- that disqualifies the RCC as the true church: Their murder of dissenters all down through the ages. That alone puts them as far from what Jesus taught as you can get. Killing others for Christ -- a mark of the true church alright!

 

You haven't had any recent conversations with him or read his recent posts explaining his return to the Catholic faith. You may think I am confused, I am not. I just am finding Catholic apologists handling of the typical objections (both historical and biblical) that most Baptist present to be more than adequate.

 

You are assuming I am not doing just that. In fact, I am. However, I must tell you, the 'wise and studied Christian (in this case, Baptist) teachers have not provided me with good answers. In many cases, they have not even agreed with each other. I find it interesting that you would advise people to avoid Catholic apologists. As I said before, time will tell and I will make up my own mind by way of prayer and study.

 

I haven't read this thread and actually have purposely avoided it because I deemed that people with minds already set wanted to share their opinions of the Catholic faith whether based in fact or not and that my commentary would just bring contention with no real effort to discuss issues or clarify other issues. However, I see that there is contention on my behalf anyway and though I thought I had been clear I would like to clear up the matter. When I joined Baptistboard I was a baptist attending a Church affiliated with The Southern Baptist Church called Country and Town Baptist Church. Over time and through my own research and studies over a period of a couple of years my views and Paradigm changed somewhat and I returned to the Catholic Church. Its a long complicated journey but not without much study and prayer and the fruits of my decision to return have been abundant. So not to offend anyone I just wanted to set the record straight. I did notify management when I converted and hold myself to the restrictions of the rules for the Baptistboard. I don't mind answering questions or engaging in debate which I do occasionally.

 

An honest reading of the Gospels and Acts shows that Jesus' intent and the Jerusalem Churches's intent was to reform Judaism from the inside. After Jerusalem fell Paul's gentiles gained control of the Church. It was Paul who invented the top-down controlled Orthodox Catholic Church.

 

>Tell me, if you were to take on a study of Islam, would you go to an Islamic school in an Islamic nation to study under Islamic teachers? Or would you gather some of your own material and seek the teaching of wise and studied Christian teachers who have already studied the subject thoroughly?

I would study historical Islamic material.

>Which would be the wisest and most beneficial way of learning about Islam?

Go to the source.

It is the "Christian" way to do everything backwards. You want to learn about Judaism? Read Christian authors. Christian "Bible" reading? The OT is only commentary on the NT. You can't understand the OT by reading it.

 

Brother, I will provide you the same curtisy you provided me in avoiding discussion on this decision of yours. If we talk it will be privately. I wish you all the luck in the world in trying to bring True Christianity to Roman Catholics & will pray that you will be successful.

 

Obviously, you still have not gone back to read his recent posts. He believes he has returned to 'True Christianity'. You need to take the time to find out why he did this. I did.

He is either, according to you, l. lying about a genuine conversion to the Catholic faith, or 2. a 'closet' Baptist masquerading as a Catholic in order to teach the 'True Faith' to poor deceived Catholics. I suspect he is telling the truth to us on this board and genuinely reached a decision that the Catholic Church is the church established by the apostles. I suspect you believe he is lying. You throw that accusation around pretty freely. BTW, an apology would be appreciated.

 

I would like to say openly that EWF and I are friends and though he doesn't understand my conversion and he didn't know until just today; he has been relying on post made before my conversion. A couple of things I wanted to respond to in your post to hopefully clear things up.

1) Unlike the reformers I haven't thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Namely, I did not have a personal growing relationship with God until I responded in faith to an evangelical sermon calling me to that relationship. With the knowledge I had at that time I began my faith journey and it was in evangelical circles. Therefore, there are certian things I am greatful for and as Francis Beckwith also testifies to I consider still a certain truths to be so in the faith I had while with evanglecals. Ie emphasis on scripture (though not sola scriptura) in my daily life and a continued prayer life to name just two aspects. Francis Beckwith would say he's and evangelical Catholic and I agree with him in some respect.

2)I do believe the Catholic Church is one Holy and Apostolic Church, as you say. However, I also believe there are Bishops, Priest, and layity that are carnal. And have been engaged in agressively attacking the Catholic Church by spouting things the Catholic Church never taught as doctrine. These people have used certain dispensations allowed for from Vatican II to make a whole sale assault on Catholic Beliefs. Ie... The Nancy Pelosi types. The Church teaches abortion is wrong but certain Bishops, Priest, layity give the wink wink nod nod that its ok and accept relativism in the Church allowing for this politician to support abortion against the teachings of the church. This group is also responsible for neglegence and inadhereance to scripture. In the Catholic point of view Apostolic Teaching is both Tradition and Scripture one not greater than the other each equally authoritative. But this group subjects one under the other. This is also the group that margenalize anything spiritual. I have started to teach Catholics I meet what their Catholic Faith Actually teaches. I've been involved in getting scriptural studies in my Parish, starting a mens group for prayer and scripture study, and help with RCIA. However, I see these things as being very Catholic and having been somewhat lost to a culture of liberalism attacking the Catholic Church. Its great to see the number of Catholics actually hungry for what their church teaches and what the scriptures have to say. I've encountered great priest who are involved with this and the Bishop I am under is very involved in this renewing Catachesis of Catholics bringing them back to the faith they claim to have. And if you look in the US you see a shift of this return to the original Catholic faith fighting back against the liberal fortifications within the clergy and layity and soon I think you'll find better educated catholics with in their faith and you'll see evangelical Catholics speaking up for the faith.

So there are Catholics today of great faith and some on the level of those you've heard spoken about like Mother Teresa, Francis of Assisi (who went to Egypt and witnessed the Gospel to the Caliphate), and others like them that are Truelly Catholic. And there are those that are secular Catholics or better described as Catholics in name only. It is this latter group I speak of as liberal and to which the Call has gone out to Come Home to the real Catholic faith.

 

I find when someone rushes to call someone a liar and then is confronted with the truth and refuses to apologize, it speaks volumes. EWF called me a liar, was given plenty of evidence to the contrary and has not apologized. If he was relying on posts of yours from before your conversion, fine. He still has not apologized for falsely accusing me.

 

My aunt also converted to Catholic faith and has also mentioned that the RCC in the U.S. is turning the tide on the liberal element. Unfortunately, it seems to be gaining ground in many non-Catholic churches, PCUSA, TEC, UMC, UCC, etc.

 

I have notice many Lutherans returning to the Catholic Church from the group that supports gay clergy. Also there is a large element of Episcopalians. There are fewer Baptist. In fact, in two of my RCIA classes there were 2 baptist. To be fair I would say one wasn't really (in baptist vernacular) a "born again" faithful baptist but a "carnal Christian".

 

I found this on a Catholic blog 'Standing On My Head'. Arianism Today: 'The difference between Arius and the modern heretics is that Arius was actually explicit in his teaching. The modern heretics are not. They inhabit our seminaries, our monasteries, our rectories and presbyteries. They are the modernist clergy who dominate the mainstream Protestant denominations and who are too many in number within the Catholic Church as well.

Many of them don't even know they are heretics. They have been poorly catechized from the start. Their beliefs about Jesus Christ have remained fuzzy and out of focus. They hold their beliefs in a sentimental haze in which they vaguely feel that what they believe is
"Christian" but would not want to pin it down too much. This is because they have been taught that dogma is "divisive". They deliberately keep their beliefs vague, and focus on "pastoral concerns" in order to avoid the difficult questions. They have been taught that dogma is part of an earlier age in the church and that we have matured and moved on from such nit picky sort of questions. "God, after all, can't be put into a box.'

It is interesting that the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church, Katherine Jefforts Schori, made the 'I can't put God in that small of a box' statement while explaining why she did not believe that Jesus Christ was 'the only way' to God. Very sad.

 

I find I generally agree with that blog and not just for the Catholics but Protestants. What comes to mind are the E-Free, Charasmatic, and Mega Churches. Kind of modeling themselves after Schuller.
It is sad which is why we must catachize against it and be bold. I've made some Catholics not like me because of this very politically correct vague faith thing - Ie "God is Love" la de da "no one goes to hell." Stuff. When I tell them that Catholic Eschaton is 4 points 1) death 2) judgement, and based on that judgement they go to either 3) Heaven 4) hell. They get pretty miffed. But of course they don't know enough to defend their position.

 

Why should you be surprised?
Should I send my teen-age children to Mormon missionaries to learn about Mormonism?
Should I send them to J.W. apologists to learn about the Jehovah Witness cult?
Should I send them to Buddhist monks to learn about Buddhism? Is this the way you think? Is this the method of teaching you will advocate for your own children; your own close relatives?
I hope not!

 

Some observations:
If Mother Teresa died believing in what she professed to believe, then she is in hell today. Salvation is in Christ alone.

Concerning yourself you have an important decision to make.
What does it mean "to be born again"?
You have seen discussions on this topic many times on this board.
You ought to know what the new birth means by now.

The Catholic Church teaches from their Catechism that the new birth, or to be born again = baptism.
That is a heresy. It is baptismal regeneration which is one of the earliest heresies of of Christendom. If that is what you believe then you are not born again.

You must either believe what the Bible says on this or what the RCC states it is. You can't believe both. They are diametrically opposed to each other on one of the most important doctrines of the Bible. Have you been born again? If so, how?

 

:applause:

I have agreed to not discuss my friends decision....end of discussion. Oh & keep asking for that apology..... :smilewinkgrin: