What's with all these Baptist-bashing threads here?!

Nope, not talking about them. The "Trail of Blood" is a bad book and it is bad history. Most Baptists reject it. I am talking about those who were burned at the stake as heretics, who were imprisoned and tortured because they disagreed with the RCC.

WHat I "feel" doesn't really matter. The Bible teaches us that we are to submit to human government becuase that government is ordained by God. The only exception, according to the pattern of Acts 5, is when that government demands disobedience to God. In such cases, we must obey God rather than man. But that is irrelevant here. If you would like to start a thread on that, you would probably get some interaction on it.

 

Because that is a bad form of argumentation and an irrelevant question. It would have been to prejudice the conversation, something I was not willing to do.

The points that I made are historical realities carried out by the "holy mother church." "Beating your mother" may not be. That is an issue that must be dealt with. My point was not disgust that it happened (although it was wrong). My point was to remind us that the RCC has not been so generous historically as many here would like to pretend. This "brotherhood" idea with dissenters was not a doctrine of the church. It was grounds for separation and persecution in many instances. Don't rewrite history simply because you don't like it. Let's deal with the past.

 

Pastor Larry, your last name isn't Hatfield or McCoy is it?

You seem to have a blood feud mentality.

Human relationships change.

So should your feelings.

Jesus calls us to love.

Ron

 

thessalonian,

You said, 'Nowhere does Jesus say "the Lord's supper is to be just a symbol". "Baptism, well it's an optional ordinance".'

Neither can one find the word, Transubstantiation.

 

Yes, this is a danger. Many "independent" churches manage to do this, blindly following their pastor and assuming that everyone else is wrong. I have heard horror stories from friends who have experienced such things personally. However, such things have happened in denominations too. But those who are "independent" from denominations are in just as much danger.

In Christ,
Neal

 

Of course not. This is a human understanding of what is divine. Just like the Trinity. The concept makes enough sense, but my wee understanding of it will pale in comparison to my understanding in Heaven. Transubstantiation is the way in which we understand a reality beyond understanding.

 

UM Ray, you missed the sarcasm in my post. I suggest you read A_Chriatians first then read mine and see if you can catch it. I don't care if a word that encapsulates a biblical concept for us is in the Bible or not.

Blessings

 

Is that why they called us "accursed" and "outside the holy mother church" and tried to kill many of our ancestors?? Are you fine with that too?? </font>[/QUOTE]Pastor Larry - clearly you have not learned the rules.

#1. If you don't engage in revisionist history - many modern catholics will consider that you are being "mean" to our RC bretheren.

#2. You must agree to ignore the "historic deeds" of the RCC that would tend to discredit the good image she would have the world see.

#3. You must agree to ignore the command to "exterminate heretics" that the church demanded at the council of Lateran IV. If you say anything about it - it must be said that she meant "exterminate in a good way".

#4. If you speak of heretics burned at the stake - and the fact that even EWTN's Dr Carroll says that Billy Graham would qualify - you must find some redeeming reason as to why a Christian church could take such a stand - and still be pretty much ok.

#5. If you speak of the Church's statement that there is no salvation outside of the RCC - and that all heretics must burn - then you must find a way where that too is "a good thing" for the RCC to do - EVEN though you are not RC or else you are "being mean" to our RC bretheren.

#6. You must pretend not to notice that the RCC limits participation in the New Covnenant to those that participate in the Catholic Mass - SINCE the Mass IS the New Covenant in Christ's blood and ONLY the RC MASS is that covenant. You must be satisified knowing that she graciously allows you a non-Catholic to suffer in purgatory but then to go to heaven by some unbiblical means and not by the Gospel means of the "New Covenant".

If you differ on any of these rules - you must not meantion it on a debate board such as this --- or else once "Again" you are being "mean" to our RC bretheren with your "details".

I have learned each of these rules - on their own thread - but at least I learned them.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob and Larry,


It's not that we don't want you to bring up history. You just refuse to study, understand, and put things in proper context and then in the end of it all let God be the judge. You take the snippets and quotes of men such as Boetner and Chick as ver batum truth with no real historical analysis yourselves to see if you bearing false witness. A command Mr. Bob violates every day. Bob how about Saturday Sabaath. Are Protestants violating that one?
Do people go to hell for violating Saturday Sabaath Bob? I believe I have seen some SDA writers call Protestant religions the daughters of the whore. What do you think Bob. They do after all submit according to SDA teaching to Rome on Sunday worship.

Blessings

 

You have the wrong person here. I am not the one refusing to study history or refuse to put it in context. What context is necessary to defend killing people in the name of the church?? Perhaps you can enlighten us as to that.

I have read nothing by Boettner related to Catholicism. I think Jack Chick is an idiot and I don't read him. The problem you have is that you don't think people can come to conclusions without the help of the RCC. The truth is that a great many people have looked at the truth objectively, apart from the RCC glasses, and have come to see the truth of God's word. I hope that one day you too will come to that position.

As I have said before, I have read very little "anti-Catholic" literature. The vast majority of what I know comes from Catholic writings themselves, such as the Catechism. In their words are all that is necessary to see the contradictions with Scripture. Where you assert the authority of man over truth, I do not. I accept the authority of God's revelation. So long as that divide exists, there will always be that problem. But the history is the history. It can be looked at objectively by all those who are willing to do so. I would encourage you to.

 

Mike S,

One day you and thessalonian and other Catholics will be judged by Jesus Christ and not by Catholicism. [John 5:22b] And, of course, all Protestants and all other people will have to stand before Jesus tribunal but not the Catholic catechism or your holy Father/the pope.

 

Gee Ray, that's exactly what our Catechism tells us. But like Moses led the isrealites through the desert to the promised land, following the pillar of fire, we are lead by the pillar and support of the truth, the Church. The Church leads us and feeds us through the desert of life. Hey I though your judgement was over? Aren't you already saved?


Blessings

 

I grew up around Catholics. I have also been a member of a worship band in which I was the only Protestant, and, as a part of the pro-life movement, we played the musical accompaniment for masses called on behalf of the movement and its workers, as well as the mothers and babies we served. The members of the band prayed and studied the Bible together, and we shared a genuine fellowship. They felt bad for me when it came time in the mass for communion, that I could not partake. But we would always hold hands during the Lord's Prayer, as that united us.

All of that experience taught me that there are Catholic believers I will expect to see in heaven, who trust Christ's atonement (and not "the Church" persay) for their salvation.

My experience also taught me that many Catholics place their trust in "making" this or that ceremony as a way to please God. I think that while it is not impossible to find the saved in the Catholic church, it is difficult. Most Catholics I knew over the years were only taught ceremony, not true repentance and the personal acceptance of God's grace. Their lives and manner of talk certainly did not show evidence of regeneration or of having integrated their faith into their daily lives, other than having to do "holy duty," "fulfilling obligations" or wearing medals or scapulars.

Not that there aren't plenty of Protestant churches, including Baptist, where true salvation isn't taught, there are. It's just that the "culture" in the Catholic church makes it difficult for that truth to shine through. Those who still find it there are blessed indeed.

 

Debbie:

Mark 9:40-41
"For he who is not against us is for us.
"For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because of your name as followers of Christ, truly I say to you, he will not lose his reward."


Perhaps the judging isn't as easy as you think. Maybe you should leave it up to God.

 

In other words, many people have looked at the truth apart from "the pillar and foundation of the truth." No wonder they're confused! </font>[/QUOTE]Not at all. The church is the pillar and support of the truth, not the determiner or changer of it. True churches have always defended the truth. They never needed a magesterium. There has always been teachers in teh church who faithfully passed on the truth to succeeding generations in tbe pattern Paul recorded in 2 Tim 2. Unfortunately, along the way some got tied up in the man made system of Catholicism and left the church which is the pillar and support of the truth. Their authority is misplaced and as a result their doctrine is confused.

Many people are misguided into thinking that truth is determined by the church, or that truth is seen by which church teaches it. That is backward. A true church is determined by their loyalty to the truth. Do they accurately and faithfully uphold the truth? Or have they exhcanged the truth for a counterfeit, however cleverly arranged that counterfeit may be. The truth does not need to controlled and disbursed by a heirachy. It is like a lion; it just needs to be let loose. When the truth is let loose, it does its own work, either protecting those who come to it or destroying those who refuse it.

 

In other words, many people have looked at the truth apart from "the pillar and foundation of the truth." No wonder they're confused! </font>[/QUOTE]Not at all. The church is the pillar and support of the truth, not the determiner or changer of it. True churches have always defended the truth. They never needed a magesterium. There has always been teachers in teh church who faithfully passed on the truth to succeeding generations in tbe pattern Paul recorded in 2 Tim 2. Unfortunately, along the way some got tied up in the man made system of Catholicism and left the church which is the pillar and support of the truth. Their authority is misplaced and as a result their doctrine is confused.

Many people are misguided into thinking that truth is determined by the church, or that truth is seen by which church teaches it. That is backward. A true church is determined by their loyalty to the truth. Do they accurately and faithfully uphold the truth? Or have they exhcanged the truth for a counterfeit, however cleverly arranged that counterfeit may be. The truth does not need to controlled and disbursed by a heirachy. It is like a lion; it just needs to be let loose. When the truth is let loose, it does its own work, either protecting those who come to it or destroying those who refuse it. </font>[/QUOTE]Just how many truths are there? You have various denominations (even individuals) who claim to hold to the 'truth' but all disagree on various elements of doctrine. Last time I checked these denominations are still going strong....no signs of being destroyed.

Jesus did not intend a divided house.


LaRae