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

The Pope has apologized for the Inquisition; I'll give him credit for that.

So, to our RC brethren here: did your earthly lord thus apologize for something which you deny happened?

 

Pastory Larry,

Because you call us ignorant (you did), does not make us so. It was an ad hominem.

As to the inquisition, no, I do not deny that it happened. I DO deny the revisionist history which grossly escalates the number of deaths that occurred simply to demonize the Church.

 

The word "ignorant" means unknowing. We have seen in many cases on this forum how many catholics are unknowing about theology and history.

But the number of deaths is not the issue and I never brought up the number of deaths. One is just as wrong as one million, whatever the actual number is. The fact is that is happened, which if you recall is what I said at the beginning of this whole thread, is the issue and several people jumped in to deny that the church had these people killed. The church, in the name of religion and the pursuit of God, killed people. Some try to blame that on individuals. Yet these individuals were acting under the authority and auspices of the "holy mother church." The church, in her role as "the church" was wrong.

On the issue of doctrine, the RCC has been shown to be in contradiction to Scripture on many occasions. As with the above, many Catholics do not know this. They accept the teaching of the chruch without question (as the catechism demands that they do). To not know that the RCC contradicts Scripture is to be ignorant about theology.

Those are simple statements of fact. Ignorance is not necessarily an ad hominem attack. It was a statement of the intellectual knowledge of some people. I think what this thread shows yet again is that some people will defend the RCC no matter what, even in the face of her many sins and false teachings. Blind loyalty to a man-made institution and the man that leads it is wrong. It does not matter what the institution is and it does not matter who the man is.

 

Brother, I am very versed on history and my faith. To say otherwise, without knowing me personally or examining all of my posts on this board, is to attack my person. Quit trying to get around the fact that you were insulting my knowledge of my own faith.

So, from this point on, you will not engage in the number game that is so often played here? Good for you, because apparently the numbers seem to be very important to other people here.

This has not been shown, brother. Individuals DID do the killing, and individuals may have believed the Church approved of violent measures to carry out the Inquisition (which in itself, is not violent...it is literally an inquiry of those who are preaching heresy as truth), but there is no official document which details specific measures to be taken. Should the Church have sought to stop the violence sooner? CERTAINLY! Was her vagueness wrong? CERTAINLY. Were there Church leaders who probably promoted the violence? CERTAINLY. This, however, does not make it CHURCH SANCTIONED, that is, an official teaching of the Church. You refuse to accept that, and that is your loss; it is not a matter of ignorance on my part, however.

Sure, according to your interpretation. But what does that mean? Ultimately, nothing.

Ah yes, generalizations. Those are great to any discussion.

To follow blindly yet willingly the misconceptions about the Church and teach them as truth is evil, Pastor Larry.

I personally think pride is much worse, Larry. You are very proud of your knowledge; why else would you deem others ignorant when they disagree with you? After all, you hold the Truth and only those who agree with you.

Yeah, that's really been shown, eh, Larry? You guys keep throwning out his byline like its based on something substantial, when it never is. Because as long as you pull that card, it makes you look better. "Thank you God for not making me like those sinners." Ring any bells, Larry?

And my, I sure do pity the illiterate masses out there without their PhDs and their years of Bible College, because they'll never be able to understand the Truth like you (that is, unless you personally tell them, since everyone else is wrong).

 

How can you call a practicing Catholic a brother in Christ? Do you not know that they worship a different Christ?

In His love,
al soto
A TRUE CHURCH

Catholics graphically turn the grace of God into lewdness (Jude 4) in their teaching on homosexuality.

"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition." (CCC, p. 566, #2358)

There is no such thing as a Christian homosexual ("if they are Christians"). 1 Corinthians 6:11 says, "and such were some of you", not "such are some of you." (see 1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

 

There is only one Christ, friend, and He is Lord.

 

Wow, way to misunderstand what is being said there. When it says that homosexual activity is acceptable, you have a point. Until then, you don't have a clue what you're reading.

 

Matthew 24:24
For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

al

 

My goodness, it never, ever stops, does it?! </font>[/QUOTE]Brother Mike,

It takes faith to cure blindness, and even then, it takes opening the eyes. I think you know what I mean. Pray for them.

 

So what false christ has risen up that we worship? Who? The pope? Can't be him. Can't be ANYONE, because that doesn't fit your line of thought. You are claiming we are worshipping a non-existant Jesus, and that which is not existant cannot "rise up and show great signs and wonders."

No contradiction is too great when Truth needs to be sacrificed and division spread like wildfire.

 

A False Christ

One of the above "sacraments" " necessary for salvation " is the Eucharist, a false Jesus.

In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained." (italics in original ,CCC, p. 346, #1374)

In other words, the bread literally becomes Jesus' body and the wine literally becomes his blood.

It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament. (CCC, p. 346, #1375)

At the heart of the Eucharist celebration are the bread and wine that, by the words of Christ and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, become Christ's Body and Blood. (CCC, p. 336, #1333)

The signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ; (CCC, p. 336, #1333)

Only validly ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist and consecrate the bread and the wine so that they become the Body and Blood of the Lord. (CCC, p. 355, #1411)

The Catholics call this "transubstantiation" (CCC, p. 347, #1376), and claim it is the "true Body" and "true Blood" of Christ.

"That in this sacrament are the true Body of Christ and his true Blood is something that 'cannot be apprehended by the senses,' says St. Thomas, 'but only by faith, . . . (CCC, p. 348, #1381)

What is meant by the "true Body" and "true Blood" of Christ? The same literal body and blood that was hung on the cross some 2000 years ago!

In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he "poured out for man for the forgiveness of sins." (CCC, p. 344, #1365)

The Eucharist is most important in the life of the Church because it is Jesus Christ. It is the incarnation continued in space and time. ( Question and Answer Catholic Catechism , question 1212, p. 244, by John A. Hardon, copyright 1981)

Catholic Answers goes so far as to say,

After the consecration of the bread and wine, no bread or wine remains on the altar. Only Jesus himself, under the appearance of bread and wine, remains. ( Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth , p. 17)

As should be seen from the above, the wafer and the wine is the Catholic Jesus. And this Catholic Jesus (a piece of bread and some wine) is worshipped. This is idolatry. God is not a piece of bread (Isaiah 46:5). Bread should not be worshipped (Deuteronomy 5:7). Catholics believe otherwise.

Is Jesus Christ present in the Eucharist as long as the species remain? Yes, Jesus Christ is present in the Eucharist as long as the species remain. Therefore, we worship the Blessed Sacrament as we would worship the person of Jesus Himself. ( Question and Answer Catholic Catechism , question 1227, p. 246-247, John A. Hardon)

Worship of the Eucharist . In the liturgy of the Mass we express our faith in the real presence of Christ under the species of bread and wine by, among other ways, genuflecting or bowing deeply as a sign of adoration of the Lord. (CCC, p. 347, #1378)

The Church and the world have a great need for Eucharistic worship. Jesus awaits us in this sacrament of love. Let us not refuse the time to go to meet him in adoration, . . . (CCC, p. 348, #1380)

This false god and false Christ is the result of some serious twisting (2 Peter 3:16) and adding (Proverbs 30:5-6) to the words of Christ. In 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 Paul wrote,

For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me." In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes.

This bread and "drink" is for "remembrance", not " substantial presence" as the CCC ( Catechism of the Catholic Church ) proclaims.

. . . it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present. (CCC, p. 346, #1374)

Scripture nowhere says what the Catholics teach. Nowhere does the Word of God say anything about the bread (or wine) becoming anything. In fact, in John 6:53 where Jesus said, " Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you ," even here, Jesus lets us know He is not speaking of His literal body and blood.

It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. (John 6:63; see also Matthew 4:4)

Nonetheless, this Eucharistic worship (worship of a piece of bread) is the centerpiece of the Catholic way.

The Eucharist is the heart and summit of the Church's life, . . . (CCC, p. 355, #1407)

In brief, the Eucharist is the sum and summary of our faith: "Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking." (CCC, p. 334, #1327)

Furthermore, in the celebration of this Eucharist (the Mass), the Catholic false Christ is continually offered up as a sacrifice.

The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, . . . (CCC, p. 344, #1366)

The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice : "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the alter of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner." (CCC, p. 344, #1367)

This is completely contrary to Hebrews 7:26-27; 9:25-28; and 10:11-14.

Moreover, according to Catholics, forgiveness of sins (for both the living and the dead) comes through this false Christ (the Eucharist) and this false sacrifice (the Mass).

Holy Communion separates us from sin . The body of Christ we receive in Holy Communion is "given up for us," and the blood we drink "shed for the many for the forgiveness of sins." For this reason the Eucharist cannot unite us to Christ without at the same time cleansing us from past sins and preserving us from future sins: (CCC, p. 351, #1393)

The Eucharist sacrifice is also offered for the faithful departed who "have died in Christ but are not yet wholly purified," (CCC, p. 345, #1371)

This is in opposition to Romans 8:1, " There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus ," Hebrews 9:12, ". . . with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption ", and Hebrews 10:14, " For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified ."

In His love,
al soto
A True Church

 

And this means we worship a false Christ...how? Because we believe THE CHRIST, THE ONE AND ONLY CHRIST, is present in the Eucharist, BECAUSE HE SAID THAT HE WAS? Call it a misunderstanding all you want, but to stretch that to worshipping a false Christ is not only uneducated but ultimately judgmental and presumptious. After all, none of the early Christians were in agreemen with you.

But, whatever. I'm going to bed, but you'll be in my prayers to the Risen Lord, Jesus Christ, who has died once for the sins of all men, purchased us back when we could not pay the ransom ourselves, when we were most weak. Yes, that same Risen Lord who has ascended to the right hand of the Father! Amen, amen!

You can disown me, brother, but I will not disown you.

Peace in Christ,

Grant

 

The posts you have given here may show your knowledge of your own faith, but they fail to show a true knowledge of the biblical truth. That is not mean to be offensive. It is a call to study and understanding of what God has said in his word. So many people have been freed from false doctrine and false teaching simply by a serious and careful study of his word.

I never have played that game and don't intend to start now.

the church sanctioned the turning over of heretics to the civil courts knowing exactly what would be done. The church actively participated in torture and persecution against heretics. This can be seen in teh church's own writings such as the Fourth Lateran Council and other documents. It was church sanctioned. Read the article on heresy in the New Advent site for starters. Then begin to branch out to read other histories. You will see that the church did sanction such activity against heretics.

Here you ago again playing the "interpretation" card. I have already shown that to be a straw man. We are not talking about issues of interpretation. The issues under discussion here are issues of clarity. When I say "The sky is blue," we don't claim "That's just your interpretation." Why? BEcause it is abundantly clear and beyond dispute that the sky is blue. There are certain scriptural teaching that are "blue sky" clear; they are not open to charges of "That's just your interpretation."

I understand that. That is why I refused to do it. What I have said is verifiable truth.

I am not proud of my knowledge. But neither do I deny that I have it. I have no axe to grind, no church to support. I can be objective about it, something you cannot be. Your objectivity is limited by your loyalty to the RCC. I use the word "ignorant" because it is an apt description of the state of affairs. There are many things that I am ignorant about. I know very little about Buddhism or Hinduism. I know less about how to write computer programs. Theology is not something I am ignorant about. I am sorry ... that is just the way it is.

A great many have because they have been willing to listen to the Bible and what God has revealed in it. There is no need for Bible College or PhDs to understand that. The most simple minded person can grasp it. My own position is not the standard of the truth. I have never claimed that and your attempt to make me out to believe that is misplaced. The truth is determined by God's word. There are a great number of things I don't understand about it and that is why I continually study it. But the issues here are really far simpler than that.

 

So now you're denying the divinity of Christ?! </font>[/QUOTE]Not at all ...

 

MikeS,

Well, let's see.... the pope has declared himself infallible, accepts titles such as "Holy Father," "His Grace," "His Eminence," "His Holiness," etc.--sounds to me as if "earthly lord" is an apt description.