Featured Savior versus Sacrament

by no means! As it is always to be the bible as the truth that we build ALL doctrines upon!

just was saying that there are several baptists posting here who hold as I do from the Bible concerning the Universal church...

Not saying that means i am right, its just my current understanding, and is NOT essential doctrine that a Christian MUST accept/reject, to me under an area of 'conviction/persuasion!"

 

actually, islam probably has more adherents as your figures for christianity includeds liberal churches/RCC/Orthodox etc, and many of the people in those churchs probably not genuine Christians!

 

The Catholic Church is less liberal than your church. We don't allow use for contraception or abortion. The Catholic Church declares homosexuality to be a sin. The Catholic Church takes a dim view of Divorce and re-marriage, and actually teaches you are not allowed to divorse. Catholic Church also doesn't hold to marriages outside of the Church. It doesn't allow for invitro fertalization. And is conservative on just about every political issue.

On the Other hand The RCC/Orthodox Churches are the original Christian churches.

 

I mentioned liberal AND RCC/orthodox!

There many liberal catholics here in the USA...

Neither RCC/orthodox were original church!

 

There may be liberal Catholic but then again they aren't real catholics they are only Cultural Catholics. Nancy Pelosi falls into this crowd.

And you are wrong about the original Church.

 

That being the case, I wonder why so many Catholics vote Democrat.

 

Because they are "Catholic in Name Only" or "Cultural Catholic". These are those catholics that are secular Catholic. They don't have Catholic Faith. Kind of like a baptist I knew who came to church occasionally but when they got to church were drunk. I don't consider this person a "saved" baptist person but a cultural baptist. Her family was baptist and she at one time responded to an alter call. She is secular as any non-christian I know. I lump these people into the same catagory. Note Catholic who vote for a canidate that supports contraception and abortion does so against the teachings of the Church.

 

Liberal catholics

I find that Catholics that go the church regularly
Are very conservative

People that call them self catholic because the were confirmed as a teen and go to church less than 2 times a year are very unitarian or episcpalian in practice.

My study of united states history has brought me to the conclusion that a main reason behind this is the descrinination Catholics received. This made them want to fit in.

In my studies I find that the catholic church is getting more conservative because there teachings dont change the liberals are leaving and conservatives are converting. There were 1200 adult converts in the Seattle area last year from other christian denominations

 

I thought the reason might be because many Catholics are conservative morally and socially but liberal economically. Could that be the case for some?

 

In some respect but limited. For instance I agree with the Obama Care aspect that pre-existing conditions shouldn't prevent you from obtaining insurance. However, the fact that as an employer I'm required to pay for someone elses contraceptive use flies in the face of my belief. Therefore I can't compromise with the bill because I agree with one aspect of it. The other aspect forces me to Sin. So, I'm against it entirely. Though Catholics hold to social justice catholics shouldn't compromise their morality in favor of social justice programs.

 

When compared to Islam, there is a good chance that Islam may still be greater. Looking at one of the sites that broke down "Christianity" down either further, Christianity includes all of those who deny Christ as deity.

Now, Islam would never include anyone that would deny that Allah is the only God and that Mohammed is his Prophet. That is their creed. You cannot be a Muslim without believing that.

Christianity is a follower of Christ. But if it is not the Christ of the Bible, at least that Christ is deity, the second person of the triune Godhead, then who is the Christ that they are following? How much of "Christianity" would be eliminated?
It would eliminate all the cults--those that believe he is just an angel, a man, a prophet, another god, etc.
It would eliminate most mainline liberal religions that no longer believe he is deity.
It would eliminate all the "Benny Hinn" types who believe that the trinity has nine persons, not three.

After one eliminates all those who either deny the trinity or deny the deity of Christ, those who call themselves (even if they are not born again), would be less than those that call themselves Muslims, even if they are not devout Muslims.

 

Would you as an ex Catholic know when per history the papacy and rcc officially is seen as being started, as being the Church as known today?

 

a further example you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church's creed is spelled out in the Nicean creed and you must believe everything espoused by that Creed to be 1) Catholic, and 2) Christian. And deviation from it puts you outside orthodox christianity.

 

Hey I got a radical idea for you. Now it may not be your common fare but you should give it a try. Find out for yourself. Study Christian history and find out. I suggest you read from several different sources to get the bigger picture than just rely on one persons view.

 

based upon what I have read though, the officail papacy/rcc did not get strated up until around time of Constatine, as before that was NOT the RCC as held to today!

 

If you really want to be specific you can't be a Christian and believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. The Catholic Church teaches that a person goes to hell and not to heaven. They teach salvation by works, and not by faith alone in Christ. They teach that the new birth is by baptism and not by the Holy Spirit. You can't believe in those doctrines and expect to go to heaven. Teaching and believing those doctrines will only send one to Hell. The RCC never was, is not, and never will be within the realm of Christianity. So cut that figure out of Christianity and automatically the number decreases a whole lot doesn't it.

 

DHK has spoken! So let it be written - so let it be done.

WN

 

Fact you can't believe in once saved always saved and go to heaven. If you choose to live in sin God loves you and he will
Give you want you want eternally in what ever sin you wish to live in.

Dhk. I suggest you stop looking at things through a modern southern American eye and start looking at it through a 2000 year old Jewish or pagan eye.

What you wrote down is inaccurate in your understanding

It's never been faith plus works

It's faith and works through faith

Is a osas person saved if they go murder someone everyday or neglect the poor

 

Have you read Ignatius who wrote his letters approximately in 110 AD. He certainly uses the term Catholic Referring to all Christian churches. Why is that you suppose? Also Justin Martyr in approximately 150 AD in his Apology to the Roman Emperor expresses the Catholic View of the Eucharist? Why is that you suppose? Clement wrote his letter to the Corinthians approximately around 90AD expresses Catholic view on Church Leadership. Why is that you suppose? The Didache expresses the Christian view of Liturgy written approximately in 50 AD. Why is that you suppose? Ireneaus writes in his apologetic support for the Papacy as Rome understands it in his work dated approximately around 180 AD. Why is that you suppose? Constantine didn't become Emperor until 312 AD. And the Papacy was already firmly established. In fact we see evidence of it 150 to 200 years before Constantine!!!! And certainly we see scriptural support for the Church structure that is espoused by the Catholic Church. Try reading your history a bit more. In fact actual scholars who don't hold the view which the Catholic does of the Papacy, indicates that in their research that the rise of the Papacy as we now see it or what they term Monarchical Episcopate, occurred under Pope Victor I who became pope in 195 AD, and whom they blame for the shift. This is over a hundred Years before Constantine! Your opposition would be interesting save it lacks real scholarly look at the historical events. It’s too easy to blame Constantine. All Constantine really did was 1) was one of two promoters of the Edict of Milan (which doesn't make the Catholic Church) which was a document for Christian Toleration in the Empire. It certainly didn't promote Christian Leaders to the head position in the empire. and 2) Call a council to have the Bishops work out their own issues. He had no direct say in that decision making process other than a decision needed to be made. And if Constantine were to have started the Catholic Church it would be ironic to note He personally sided with the Arians. We would still have Arians today if Constantine made himself the head of the Catholic Church