Roman Catholicism , cult or not? Part II

Phew, thank goodness! Thankfully all Christian groups believe this. Purgatory is not taught by the Catholic Church as a place of punishment. That's a way in which we were lied to somewhere down the line and it has been allowed to persist. If you get your theology information from The History Channel, then you might get confused like this. Truth is, Purgatory is considered by Catholics to be a place of cleansing and purification (purgatory, purge, purify) before standing before God. Of course Christ has died for our sins already, but do we not continue to sin? Surely we should be purged fully from those sins before we stand before the throne of God.
-Michael </font>[/QUOTE]It is the Catholic Church that has lied to you and deceived you. Their game of semantics and redefining words to appeal to the evangelical world without recanting the damage done by the anathemas of councils such as the Council of Trent is horrid and hyporcitical. Those anathemas still stand today, and every protestant alive stands under condemnation of them. If it weren't for the law of the land there would nothing preventing the Catholic Church putting me to death.

Here is the actual beliefs of the Catholic contrary to what you think they belief. First from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm (CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA)

And now from Augustine:

http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/purg.htm

Purgatory is a real place with real suffering. Don't let anyone deceive you from thinking otherwise.
DHK

 

DHK,

Can I assume you meant to post something like...

"Purgatory, in the Catholic world, is presented as a real place with real suffering. Don't let anyone deceive you from thinking otherwise."?

Mike

 

The Catechism states

1031: "The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent"

The Catechism states

The Revised and Updated Edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia explains:

Catholic Encyclopedia. Refers to Purgatory as

</font>[/QUOTE]The Faith Explained
Catholic Commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II

 

Isn't it interesting how modern Catholic e-pologists try to water this doctrine down making more palatable to the evangelical saying such things as:
It isn't a real place.
It is a place where purging takes place.
But purgiing takes place in the mind. It is a state of mind, etc.
They emphasize that it isn't a real place.
In effect, they deny their own faith.
DHK

 

Yes I am struck by the VAST DIFFERENCE between the spin that the pro-RC view "would have us" believe about Purgatory vs what THEIR OWN SOURCES actually say about it!

IT is almost as if they are saying "HERE is what we WISH our own church said about Purgatory - without also saying all the OTHER things they admit to about torment, punishment, suffering in Purgatory".

How sad that they feel bound to a man-made doctrine that they seem to confess - they would prefer not to accept.

In Christ,

Bob

 

So, ultimately, what this comes down to is that I can pray for my wife today, but never mention her in my prayers if she dies tomorrow? Is that what you believe?

Because we're not supposed to worship her. And neither Catholics nor Orthodox do. Get that through your head.

 

The RCC FORBIDS you to pray TO your wife today. But it WILL allow you to pray TO her once she is among the dead.

BTW "Making stuff up" about her being tormented in death - does not help her in death. Why not just stick with "the Bible" as the trustworthy Word of God on that point?

 

Correction: the Catholic Church forbids you from praying to your wife today or after she's dead. They do however permit you to ask her to pray for you both today and after she's dead.

 

Matt Black,

Really.

They permit their people to ask those who have passed on to pray for them, and thats it.

And you actually believe that, Matt?

This is a perfect example of what both Bob Ryan and DHK posted just a few posts ago at the end of the previous page. About the differance between what the Catholic Church actually teaches and practices, and what pro-Catholic apologetic *spin-meisters* SAY that the Catholic Church teaches and practices.

Here is an example of what Catholic apologists say is simply, (wink) "we just permit people to ask those who have passed on to pray for us. Nothing more.(wink wink)...

But they are...supposedly...simply permiting Catholics to "ask Mary to pray for them", just like when I say to a friend..."Could you pray for my wife. She cant seem to kick this bad cold she has. Thanks, brother"

Right.

P.T. Barnum.

Sadly,

Mike

 

Living Stone,

But Catholics dont worship her, right?

Mike

 

Right. And neither do the Orthodox.

You need to understand when flowery language is just that - flowery language.

1 Here we see the shockingly idolatrous core of Browningism. Mrs. Browning's real religion is nothing less the worship and adoration of a mere creature: Robert Browning. Clearly this constitutes a complete rejection of the Bible-believer's doctrine of God.

2 Ascribes to a mere creature (Robert Browning) the ultimate Perfections reserved only to God himself: the "ends of Being and Ideal Grace".

3 This passage is a clear expression of the Pelagian (or at least semi-Pelagian) underpinnings of Browningism. It constitutes a clear denial of the biblical doctrine of Original Sin since no fallen human being can love "purely" or "freely" without the aid of divine grace. Obviously, Mrs. Browning rejects the entire biblical doctrine of justification by grace.

4 Bible-based Christianity rejects the practice of necromancy. Mrs. Browning is advocating the practice of spiritism and witchcraft.

Worse still, Browning is not the only one. Here is Shakespeare's "Sonnet XVIII", another damning piece of evidence showing that many poets seem to be riddled with gross theological errors:

1 Commits crude pagan error of identifying the sun with the eye of God.

2 Denies God's sovereign and providential rule of nature and ascribes alterations in nature to either "chance" or nature itself.

3 The last six lines of the sonnet constitute the idolatrous, heretical and blasphemous claim that eternal life is given to the recipient of this sonnet, not through trust in Jesus Christ, but through Shakespeare's own poetry.

And so on and so forth.</font>[/QUOTE]Source.

 

From your highlights...

Flowery, but not heretical.

Directed at GOD

Very common Christian belief until the 17th century and later. Has historical precident, and biblical support.

Jesus is the Davidic King of Kings. Mary, as his mother, is the queen. That's all this says. By selecting her to be the Mother of his Son, God elevated her defacto. She wasn't just a birthing tube to be discarded. God doesn't work that way.

Too flowery even for me, but not heretical.

A title we will all bear some day. She was the first Chrisian, and in a special way. She is the new eve, the gate throughwhich Christ became man.

Very pious thought. Nothing heretical at all. Inspire us not to sin. w00t.

Flowery, but not heretical.

See previous.

As a pure creature, Mary symbolizes the perfection to which we are all called. Her humble heart said "be it done unto me according to they will", even when she knew what pain would accompany that will.

If we could all be like that, we'd all be better Christians.

 

1 Here we see the shockingly idolatrous core of Browningism. Mrs. Browning's real religion is nothing less the worship and adoration of a mere creature: Robert Browning. Clearly this constitutes a complete rejection of the Bible-believer's doctrine of God.

2 Ascribes to a mere creature (Robert Browning) the ultimate Perfections reserved only to God himself: the "ends of Being and Ideal Grace".

3 This passage is a clear expression of the Pelagian (or at least semi-Pelagian) underpinnings of Browningism. It constitutes a clear denial of the biblical doctrine of Original Sin since no fallen human being can love "purely" or "freely" without the aid of divine grace. Obviously, Mrs. Browning rejects the entire biblical doctrine of justification by grace.

4 Bible-based Christianity rejects the practice of necromancy. Mrs. Browning is advocating the practice of spiritism and witchcraft.

Worse still, Browning is not the only one. Here is Shakespeare's "Sonnet XVIII", another damning piece of evidence showing that many poets seem to be riddled with gross theological errors:

1 Commits crude pagan error of identifying the sun with the eye of God.

2 Denies God's sovereign and providential rule of nature and ascribes alterations in nature to either "chance" or nature itself.

3 The last six lines of the sonnet constitute the idolatrous, heretical and blasphemous claim that eternal life is given to the recipient of this sonnet, not through trust in Jesus Christ, but through Shakespeare's own poetry.

And so on and so forth.</font>[/QUOTE]Source. </font>[/QUOTE] Priceless!

I think that answers your point, Mike.

 

You know, I feel like Bob Ryan, DHK, myself and all the others are like Bill O'Reilly and his TV program.

You know..."the SPIN stops HERE!"

The old and worn out "Its just flowery language!"(wink) nonsense.

It doesnt fool us and it doesnt fool God.

To God it is...

Goddess worship.

Idolatry.

Blasphemy.

Wickedness.

This Maryolatry comes straight from the pit of Hell.

It simply numbs the mind the lenghths that Catholic apologists will go to in order to defend the indefensible.

Mike

 

Heb 4:14-16 14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.


Why would anybody pray to anybody else, to pray to God for them? Jesus Christ came to do away with all middle men. We all have direct access to the very throne of God. This gift was purchased for us by the precious blood of the Lamb of God. To place a human being between God and humanity, is an insult to the infinite sacrifice made on our behalf by God.

God has established access directly to His throne through His Son Jesus Christ. All are invited to the Father, through the Son. Anyone who would attempt to stand between God and the people which He has purchased with His own blood, is manifesting the spirit of anti-christ. This is the spirit of the church of Rome. She has set herself up betwenn man and God through her false doctrines, and false priesthood.

Rev 18:4-5 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.

Bye for now. Y. b. in C. Keith

 

Cause you know Fox NEVER puts a spin on ANYTHIGN...EVER!

Yes. As does all Idolatry. Which is why Catholics and Orthodox don't practice it.

You say "Catholic" all the time...why only them? Let's at least be accurate!

"We don't worship her" is not a terribly large length to go to.

It simply numbs my mind how much more you think you know about the Catholic/Orthodox faith than a practicing member of that faith.

Riddle me this: Why would Paul ask people to pray for him when he could "just go dirctly to god"?

 

"The first Problem" is that you are not supposed to communicate with the Dead - according to Scripture - and the RCC promotes praying to the dead. Those that 2Mac 12 calls "the DEAD" and those that 1Thess 4 calls "The DEAD in Christ"

That's a problem.

The second problem is that when the RCC "makes stuff up" like the torments and punishments of purgatory -- then invents "another man-made doctrine" to solve the problem of purgatory - they are simply adding man-made games to man-made doctrines.

In Christ,

Bob

 

EVEN the RCC admits that IF the non-Catholic view of the Gospel is correct and it is true that the RCC priest can not confect God - then they practice idolatry --

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/28/3755/22.html#000329

 

2 Macc isn't about communicating with the dead. It's about praying for them.

But others are not "dead". They are living. Scripture is clear on that point, and that they can present our prayers to God. 2 Mac has nothing to do with that.

The problem is when people start thinking they can interpret the bible better than Christ's Church, "the pillar and foundation of the truth".

Purgatory is a belief as old as Christianity. We can find evidence of it in the apostolic age, not ot mention the sacriptures.

 

We can simply notice how wicked human beings are!
As Paul mentioned in ACTS 20:30

Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them .

Even during the first generation of the Early church, there started the Apostasy. It is not surprising to notice the apostasy of Augustine.

As for Purgatory, I mentioned this at the other Thread titled : Purgatory

I never admit Purgatory. However, let's assume that Purgatory exist.
The Only way to get out of Purgatory would be to rely on the Blood and His Death at the Cross. No human prayer and / or alms-giving will be sufficient to the satisfaction of God. Even our own efforts would not be sufficient for God's Standard. How much insufficient the other persons' prayers and alms-giving would be ?

If anyone can get out of Purgatory by dint of Blood and Death of Jesus Christ, remembering His blood and His crucifixion, then why didn't he do it while he was alive and go to the heaven directly?

Look at 1 John 3:2

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is .


Bible is not that complicated as the Purgatory theory: Suddenly we become like Jesus Christ when we meet Him. Does it say that we will come out of the Purgatory?