Officating a funeral

The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. Your avoidance of it as the answer to questions of doctrine exposes the holes in your faith or the RCC faith and you don't accept that. In that you don't accept the Scripture as the final authority, (the same as the Catholics). Until we come to that position, a Baptist distinctive, that the Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine, our discussions are in vain. The Bible must decide doctrinal matters, not Tradition, not the ECF, not the Catechism, but the Bible. Unless you accept this one truth it is futile to proceed any further. Giving evidence from the Word of God is not "pontificating."

A stock RCC answer. Wrong answer, but exactly what the Catholics wrongly accuse ex-Catholics of--almost all the time. Can't you come up with something more original? Or is it in your style that when you can't answer Scripture you attack the messenger of the Scripture.

So? It so happens my father was the same way and never changed. Even after leaving the RCC, I continued studying the Catholicism, but now in the light of what it is--a false world religion--a religion that no longer holds me in bondage.

One may run into the occasional saved Catholic, not because of the Catholic Church, but in spite of it. One cannot seriously believe in the doctrine of the RCC and be saved at the same time. One cannot reconcile the teaching of the new birth: what the RCC teaches about it and still be saved. The RCC teaches that the new birth = baptism. Baptism does not save. That is heresy and that is not what the new birth is You believe that doctrine and you end up in hell. That is one good example of their heresy. They preach a false gospel; a message which is no gospel at all.

What do you mean by "the church"? There is no "church", only churches in the first century, as Paul wrote to various churches that he established in his missionary journeys. The RCC did not come into existence until the 4th century. When it did it had all kinds of idolatry with it.

Pagan culture is still pagan. The RCC is pagan because it adopted pagan culture into its church. It worships statues, relics, prays to dead "saints," etc. It does all those things that a pagan religion would do. In the fourth century the paganism was carried into the church, and the church was paganized. That is the RCC of today.

When culture is wrong, change the culture. Paul taught that in the Scriptures. If you and your wife are missionaries to a tribe in Africa where the women go topless does your wife adapt to the culture and go topless as well? Or do you in your Christian testimony try to change the culture as you work among them? Which one? Are you going to allow paganism to enter into your brand of Christianity for culture sake?

 

First of all you are talking about two different things. I accept scripture as my final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. However, when it comes to history, or what a particular denomination believes I hold to their documents of what they say they believe. For instance my church states that

This is it's document and in practice we sing all the old hymns. Now for you to say we don't have a "traditional" worship service or sing old hymns is just wrong. I don't go to the bible to prove to you that this is the case but to our church's document. And in the same case if you say the Catholic Church holds to something it does not I disprove you not by going to the bible but to the church's document. Its a simple concept. Now I disagree with certain Catholic doctrinal beliefs but ones they actually have not one they are perceived to have. That is the difference you can't seem to get past. And when discussing those beliefs I disagree with I go to the scripture. You on the other hand 1) say they believe something they dont and 2) quote scripture where it doesn't apply to them. That is the difference between you and I.

Refer to the above post.

Forgive me if I wonder at your involvment in the study of the Catholic Catachism.

Yes! and I've been saying this all along! There are saved Catholics!!!!!

I partly disagree because I honestly believe you can hear the gospel message in the Catholic church. Where I do agree is that its by the power of God that saves not the church.

I disagree.

Pray tell what do they believe? I believe there are CoC people who are saved and hold to the same doctrine btw.

Oh good you do know. How is that any different from CoC?

I agree with you here. Baptism doesn't save. Faith does. However, The faithful recieve baptism. And strangely enough the catholic church states that if you're baptised and do not live according to faith you can't be saved either.

I didn't feel like typing out Catholic Church. since it was our conversation I thought you could figure it out. However, I believe in an invisible Church that spans the denomination. Scripture speaks of a church in this sense.

I agree Paul wrote to different churches but I believe he viewed them as a single body of believers.

And Mammon is still mammon and how many of our churches value it above the gospel message? I see no difference. We incorporate our cultural understanding into our churches. The same for them.

It does not. They do not worship statues relics. ETC... They have statues and relics big difference. I have pictures at home too and our country has a statue of Abraham Lincoln. We don't worship him. It claims all christians are alive after their physical death. I personally have a problem with this but there is a distinction worth noting.

As do all churches. Raise money worship a deity have pracitces it follows. Big whoop!

To some extent this is true. Just like Baptist churches use TV screens and sound systems and other things that are culturally relevant today.

I agree.

Nope. But neither does she brow beat them to change.

Uf they are profane sure.

The issues which deal with morality.

We have here in the US. However, if its a question of morality change it.

 

So how does one get saved in the first place if they deny Biblical soteriology?

Oh, so then you were misrepresenting us on purpose. I think they call that lying.

...says the guy who just called us "hateful" and accused us of being "anti-Catholic".

 

On the contrary. I state what they believe, however I often state it in Biblical terms.
Then I quote Scripture to back it up.
Example: Does the RCC go against the Ten Commandments in making graven images (of God), and then, further to that, does it break the subsequent command of bowing down to them?
The answer on both accounts is yes they do. Christ is God. They make graven images of Christ and bow down before him. They treat Mary the same way. They bow down before each and every station of the cross as they pray before them. All of this is idolatry. They don't count it as idolatry. I didn't when I was a Catholic either. But from a Biblical perspective it is. The Bible says it is. The Bible is my authority not the catechism.

Why should I refer to the above post. What does name-calling, demeaning, false accusations, etc. have to do with the above posts. You state something that is false and you know nothing of. It is a lie. It is false. It is the typical RCC lie when they can't defend themselves. The Pharisees used the same tact against Peter and John:

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus. (Acts 4:13)

See above post. Forgiveness not granted. Sarcasm noted.

There is no gospel message in the Catholic Church: not in its message, not in the Catechism, not in the documents of Vatican II which I have and have read--it is not there. There is no gospel in the RCC. It is a false religion.

I said:
One cannot seriously believe in the doctrine of the RCC and be saved at the same time.
--You can disagree all you want, but the teachings of the Bible and the teachings of the RCC are diametrically opposed to each other. If you can't reconcile Christianity to Hinduism, then neither can you reconcile Christianity to Catholicism. They are two very different religions. Catholicism is not Christianity; it never has been. I have already given you the example of the "new birth," and you didn't even take that seriously.
Baptismal regeneration is a heresy that directs people to hell. It does not save.

I don't. One cannot be saved by works. Baptism is a work. As long as you believe you are being saved through your works it is impossible for you to be saved. Check Eph.2:8,9.

It isn't. Both hold to the same heresy. The CoC is a cult as well.

Infants (which are baptized in the RCC) don't have faith. They are incapable of believing the gospel and understanding it to the point that they can believe it or have faith in it. Infants are not "the faithful." Yet they are the ones that are "born again" through their baptism. You are not reading your Catechism.

That is another topic for another day. The Greek word is ekklesia, and it means assembly. It is impossible to have an unassembled assembly. It is impossible to have an assembly that never assembles, never worships together, never does anything that an assembly or congregation does. It is a contradiction of the very term ekklesia or assembly to say "universal assembly (church).

There is no evidence for that at all, though many believe it. He wrote to churches and pastors of churches, and that is all.

No, you are mixing apples with oranges. Even Jesus recognized the money of Caesar. "Give unto Caesar..." He didn't condemn it. You are using Scripture out of context. There was money in the time of Christ which was not evil (the widow's mite), as in our culture today. It can be good or bad depending on your attitude.
However when Constantine and others brought idols into the churches of his era, the church was paganized with pagan idolatry and has been ever since. That isn't cultural understanding.

"Worship" is the key word here. According the the Bible's definition of worship, yes the RCC does worship idols, relics, etc. But the RCC has changed the definition of worship and thus says they don't according to their definition.
The possession of a picture doesn't mean you worship it. I never even implied such. Why bring it up. Lincoln has nothing to do with it either. Those are all red herrings.
Go back to the Ten Commandments. They violate them. They make images of God (not of Lincoln), and bow down to them. Again--the stations of the cross.

You won't find our church practicing pagan practices.
We don't have idols made of wood and stone, and don't bow done before them. All churches don't do those things.
We don't pray to dead people.
We don't superstitiously believe that pouring water on a person will wash away their sins.
--All of this is paganism.

A sound system has to do with technology, not idolatry. The RCC worships idols.

 

Many Bible-following, faithful Christians believe in the validity of paedo-baptism. I'm not going to disparage or reprimand anyone for that belief.

 

I didn't ask about "many Christians", I asked about you.
I didn't ask if you would disparage/reprimand paedo-baptizers; I asked if you differed with them.

 

No, that isn't what you do. This is what you do. You set up an issue by saying they worship idols. Then quote scriptures as if to apply it to Catholics Such as

The catholics say they don't worship idols.

Catholics have statues and pictures but they do not idolize these as according to their above teaching. Also then you try to apply this to all things but then God himself gave the command to

Which if taken as you've taken Exodus 20 God then breaks his own command. Which goes against the nature of God. Thus it must not mean exactly as you mean it to mean. On the most revered Jewish item God makes an image of angels which are in heaven above. So the issue is not the creation of them but to create them to worship them. Abraham Lincoln then is not so different or an apple to an orange.

You quote scripture to support a premise not applicable.

Because it explains what was where you erred.

I did not name call you.

I am studied in the topic under discussion.

What you miss about this verse is the significance of this verse. They were amazed at the disciples because they were uneducated but understood the intricacies of the debate and realized Jesus gave them an education.

No sarcasm intended. However, an amazement that you have read a document and did not understand anything any better.

I disagree entirely.

and I disagree.

Nope. Does the catholic church teach that you must take advantage of the poor or the widow? Or that you must seek another savior other than Jesus? No. So its not diametrically opposed.

Entirely untrue. Catholic Church perserved the bible for many years before the reformers. Hinduism is a polytheistic religion. Catholicism is not.

It's a distinction I don't believe people will loose their salvation over. All faithful are baptized. So in the end everyone is baptised.

Not in the sense you mean it. its not a work its an act of faith. I believe as Jesus said if you don't care for the poor, widows, people in jail, the sick, etc... You haven't done it for him. And he says people who don't do that are condemned to eternal damnation. He said it not I. So those things aren't a work or are they?

Nope not saved through works. Works exemplify faith. As james said No works no faith.

I disagree. You might want to also put pentecostals under this view as well. But with speaking in tongues. I disagree with them as well but I don't believe they are a cult or have lost their salvation.

Irrelevant. I said if some one is baptized and don't live according to the faith Catholics don't think they attain heaven as you are trying to say. Infants are just infants scriptures are silent on them.

So are you saying all infants go to hell? Sounds like it.

Its not my Catachism. But the catholic Church's. And you aren't understanding what you've read. Specifically the catholic church regards this baptism of infants as a significant change to their nature. Doesn't mean they can't be tempted or automatically get salvation if they sin.

If you understood the greek word you would understand it means and assembly of those called out. The roman senate was an ekklesia. We are all called out of the world. And our assembly is assured when Christ comes again.

Oh yes there is. He taught them the same things. Expected them all to have an orthodoxy. He asked them to support other churches. He asked them to listen to people he sent to them with his authority. Lots of stuff. you refuse to see it.

You can idolize money. Pastors who bleed their churches dry so they can make 100,000 a year is this type of thing. Having only men who are well off become deacons is this same type of thing. etc... I see it all the time. How about the teleevangelicals? or the Mega Churches? My point made.

They were there before constantine I have proof of that. and its no different from the Jesus Movie that is used as an evangelization tool etc...

"

The bible is not a dictionary and doesn't define worship. it signifies what things are to be worshiped or how something is worshiped. its not a dictionary.

Its exactly the same thing.

So, I have no problem with a Catholic. However, I would ask them not to say the Hail Mary as I don't understand it nor would it be appropriate for people who don't believe in the communion of saints in the after life.

 

Wouldn't you like to know.

I will tell you that I was dunked at the age of 12.

 

I believe I came to faith at 7. I don't like to say "saved" in this context as much because salvation won't be complete until I'm on the renewed earth. I needed to mature quite a bit before I was ready for baptism. Long story, but my parents pressured me so much about baptism even as a small child, that it took a while before I could get there on my own.

 

There's so much wrong with this that I'm not even going to bother. It does tell me quite a bit about you though...

 

You did bother since you bothered to write anything. Just what exactly is so wrong about this statement? I'm giving you free license to poke a hole in the theology of my statement.

Really. I'm curious.

 

Seriously, dude, what makes you such an expert on everyone else?

 

I got my "everyone else" merit badge.