Setting Argumentive Things Aside

I wish Protestants could just accept that we disagree and leave it at that. So we have devotion to Mary, we believe in Purgatory, we have devotion to the saints, etc. So what? So we have Sacraments. Why are Protestants so obsessed with this?
Because you're the one shoving it in our faces. There are lots of Catholic message boards you could have gone to to talk about these things, but you chose to come to a message board that purports to be a Christian board.
Obviously you are Protestant becasue you do not believe these things. Fine. Whatever. Do what you want in your sect. Leave us to our practices and Faith.
So, I guess that means the Catholics will no longer be starting threads about Catholicism here.
 
You mean like--I don't know---Double predestination, infant Baptism, the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, sacraments vs. ordinances, etc? You mean like that?

You consider Christians who disagree with you on the above subjects--you know--just merely "minor variances to true biblical teachings?"

I love how Protestants minimize the differences they have with other Protestants as just "minor variances to true biblical teachings" or "brothers in the Lord having respectful disagreements" but then act like Catholics are Satan becasue of the differences they have with Protestants.

If Protestants didn't have double standards, they would have no standards at all. What you are basically saying above is "As long as you aren't Catholic, the differences and disagreements don't matter."
The difference is that those things, while wrong, are not essential doctrines that define another gospel. The heresies of Catholicism are. Even if Purgatory were the only difference between Catholicism and Christianity, that would be enough, as it denies the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.
 
romishpopishorganist said:
And you think "Bible Thumping" is what Jesus had in mind when he commanded evangelization, do you?

Well, since all the examples of evangelism we see in scripture involve the quoting of, or reference to, scripture, it sure looks that way.

You think "Bible Thumping" attracts people to your Gospel, do you? You think "Bible Thumping" makes me want to be part of your religion, do you?

No. Only the Holy Spirit, through the effectual calling and regeneration can do those things. The preaching of the law and the proclamation of the Gospel is just the means by which he chooses to do so.

Jesus came Bible Thumping, did he (sic)?

Yes. Constantly.
 
Last edited:
Do you think that the differences between Roman Catholics and Evangelicals can be set aside?
RayneBeau said:
Do you think that the differences between Roman Catholics and Evangelicals can be set aside?

Mike McK said:
The theological differences? No. The theological differences between Christians and Catholics are so profound as to be insurmountable. It's why we had the Reformation.
============================= end Mike Mak reply

And he said unto them,
Ye are they which justify yourselves before men;
but God knoweth your hearts:
for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.


after upbraiding these Pharisees
he says
Luke 16
If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon,
who will commit to your trust the true riches
?

12 And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's,
who shall give you that which is your own
?
---

There was a certain rich man,
which was clothed in purple and fine linen,
and fared sumptuously every day:

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus,
which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs
which fell from the rich man's table:
moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died,
and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom:
the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments,
and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said,
Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus,
that he may dip the tip of his finger in water,
and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame
.

25 But Abraham said,
Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things,
and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented
.

26 And beside all this,
between us and you there is a great gulf fixed:
so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot;
neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence
.

27 Then he said,
I pray thee therefore, father,
that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them,
lest they also come into this place of torment.

29 Abraham saith unto him,
They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

30 And he said,
Nay, father Abraham:
but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

31 And he said unto him,
If they hear not Moses and the prophets,
neither will they be persuaded,
though one rose from the dead
.


And beside all this,
between us and you there is a great gulf fixed:
so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot;
neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike says
The theological differences? No. The theological differences between Christians and Catholics are so profound as to be insurmountable. It's why we had the Reformation.
============================= end Mike Mak reply
 
And you think "Bible Thumping" is what Jesus had in mind when he commanded evangelization, do you?

You think "Bible Thumping" attracts people to your Gospel, do you? You think "Bible Thumping" makes me want to be part of your religion, do you?

This is what you think Jesus came to do? Jesus came Bible Thumping, did he?

Well, then, by all means, keep it up!
Of course! You can demean it all you want by calling it "Bible Thumping", but to overlook Christ's command to spread the gospel is just plain ignorance. Jesus was pretty adept citing the OT when correcting those who needed correcting, I guess you would consider Him a "Bible Thumper" as well.

Well, I guess I'm in good company.

Peace,
Ray
 
Of course! You can demean it all you want by calling it "Bible Thumping", but to overlook Christ's command to spread the gospel is just plain ignorance. Jesus was pretty adept citing the OT when correcting those who needed correcting, I guess you would consider Him a "Bible Thumper" as well.

Well, I guess I'm in good company.

Peace,
Ray
Great point. Also this is the RC who hates caricatures but loves to make them.
 
The difference is that those things, while wrong, are not essential doctrines that define another gospel.
If these differences of which you speak are so unimportant and unessential, why all the sects? The existence of hundreds of separate Protestant sects would suggest that these differences are decidedly important and essential.
The heresies of Catholicism are. Even if Purgatory were the only difference between Catholicism and Christianity, that would be enough, as it denies the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.
Why does Purgatory deny the "sufficiency" of Christ's atonement?
 
If these differences of which you speak are so unimportant and unessential, why all the sects? The existence of hundreds of separate Protestant sects would suggest that these differences are decidedly important and essential.
We get our doctrine from scripture, not from how many "sects" you believe there are.
Why does Purgatory deny the "sufficiency" of Christ's atonement?
Because, Catholicism teaches that it is required to expiate one's sins.
 
We get our doctrine from scripture, not from how many "sects" you believe there are.

Because, Catholicism teaches that it is required to expiate one's sins.
Thus, making it seem that Jesus Christ's sacrifice of Himself on Calvary's cross wasn't complete or perfect enough to expiate our sins entirely, that WE must do something to expiate our sins.

Heresy!
 
Thus, making it seem that Jesus Christ's sacrifice of Himself on Calvary's cross wasn't complete or perfect enough to expiate our sins entirely, that WE must do something to expiate our sins.

Heresy!
I would rather trust Jesus and not anyone else especially not the RC popes. Jesus never lied, never hurt another, looked after children, was spotless.

Let us think when Peter took his focus off Jesus he sank/sunk, this shows do not look at another for rescue. The only one who can help us, save us is Jesus.
 
We get our doctrine from scripture, not from how many "sects" you believe there are.
Not how many sects "I believe" there are?

I do not create reality, sir. The fact is that there are hundreds of competing Protestant sects. I grant there might not "33,000" but there are hundreds. There are even sects within sects. The POINT, sir, is that whenever Catholics bring up the divisions within Protestantism, the Protestants always minimize, deny, or otherwise rationalize the differences away as not important. If those divisions were not important-----there wouldn't be hundreds of competing sects.

Catholicism is not divided into sects. There is just Catholicism. Whenever a Catholic appeals to Church teaching, it is just Church teaching. Protestants cannot just appeal to "The Protestant Church" becasue there is no one Protestant Church.
Because, Catholicism teaches that it is required to expiate one's sins.
And how does that deny the sufficiency of the atonement? If Christ's atonement were not sufficient---the person would not be in Purgatory, they would be in Hell.
 
I do not create reality, sir.
I agree. Nothing in your posts is reality.
The fact is that there are hundreds of competing Protestant sects.
In your unsupported opinion.
whenever Catholics bring up the divisions within Protestantism, the Protestants always minimize, deny, or otherwise rationalize the differences away as not important. If those divisions were not important-----there wouldn't be hundreds of competing sects.
And, as we explain to you slowly and patiently each time you make this claim, the Bible, which is our authority, allows for disagreements on matters of adiaphora.

In fact, not only does it allow for disagreements on matters of adiophora, it says we must extend liberty and charity to brothers who hold such disagreements.

In any event, your point is moot, as we're not talking about disagreements among Christians, but disagreements between Christianity and Catholicism.
Catholicism is not divided into sects.
Actually, there are many Catholic sects, beginning with the "Great Schism" of 1054.

Romishpopistorganist said:
Protestants cannot just appeal to "The Protestant Church" becasue there is no one Protestant Church.

No Protestant would appealy to the "Protestant Church", because that's not our authority. God's Word is our authority, not the "Protestant Church".
And how does that deny the sufficiency of the atonement? If Christ's atonement were not sufficient---the person would not be in Purgatory, they would be in Hell.
If Christ's death is sufficient, then there is no need for the sinner to expiate his own sin in Purgatory. That sin would already have been expiated by Christ at the cross.

But Catholics don't believe that. Much like Mormons believe "grace" simply refers to the opportunity to earn their salvation, so Catholics believe Christ's atonement only gives them the opportunity to expiate their own sins in Purgtory.

Because you believe Purgatory must be added to Christ's atonement, you therefore believe Christ's atonement is insufficient.
 
I would rather trust Jesus and not anyone else especially not the RC popes. Jesus never lied, never hurt another, looked after children, was spotless.

Let us think when Peter took his focus off Jesus he sank/sunk, this shows do not look at another for rescue. The only one who can help us, save us is Jesus.
"Nothing in hand I bring, simply to Thy cross I cling"
 
Hi,

To do so would be a complete misunderstanding of evangelization. If a Protestant (and I use this word in its conservative sense) were to practice his/her faith, this would mean that evangelization (not "proselytize") would be central to his/her faith. It comes with the territory, per se. Hence, if one is convinced that Rome preaches a false gospel, yet refrains from evangelizing Roman Catholics, that person isn't practicing his/her faith whether forthright or in ignorance. So, biblically, if we truly believe that a Catholic, or any other religion for that matter (even some "Protestant" faiths), believes a false gospel, to ignore this would be a complete compromise of the Great Commission. True, it may be just a waste of time, but that's really not up to us. Jesus commanded us to spread the gospel and we just obey.

Peace,
Ray
Hi Ray,

Roman Catholics are not focused on Jesus's command of: "spreading the gospel of Christ," their sole focus is on "spreading the gospel of Roman Catholicism." Their interest is undoubtedly in regards to their importance of the Eucharist as their focal point of evangelization, and it is without any doubt that their Eucharist is the very heart of the Roman Catholic belief system. Take for instance the following statement:

Roman Catholics believe that the Eucharist is an action of
celebrating community signifying oneness in faith,
life and worship of the community. Reception of
the Eucharist by Christians not fully united with us
would imply a oneness which does not yet exist and
for which we must all pray.

"Questions and Answers on the Eucharist: Proclaiming the Faith in the 3rd Millennium." (Pennsylvania Catholic Conference 2000m Harrisburg, PA.)
 
Well, since all the examples of evangelism we see in scripture involve the quoting of, or reference to, scripture, it sure looks that way.



No. Only the Holy Spirit, through the effectual calling and regeneration can do those things. The preaching of the law and the proclamation of the Gospel is just the means by which he chooses to do so.



Yes. Constantly.
Well, the RCC has some facts about the RCC's 'New Evangeliztion' program that they haven't shared at this point, for various and sundried reasons. EWTN web site however presents an article under the heading, "The New Evangelization Building the Civilization of Love. It reads:
As the Holy Father entrusts the 3rd Millennium to the BLessed VIrgin Mary, EWTN inaugurates it's New Evangelization specialty site. . . . . . . . . . . . . . the universality of the Roman Catholic Church and its mission.

Then, one additional and yet very significant statement was revealed:
"Under the protection of St. Therse of Lissieux, Patroness of the Missions, and Our Lady of Guadalupe, to whom the Pope has committed the New Evangelizatio, may the Spirit of God bring about the new Pentecost to which the [Roman Cathoic] Church looks forward with hope."

This Roman Catholic Evangelization program is committed to "Our Lady of Guadalupe." Remember, it was the apostle Paul who warned the Corinthians about "another spirt" that was associated with"another gospel" and "another Jesus."

www.ewtn.com/new_evangelization/introduction,htm, Eternal Word Television Network.
 
Last edited:
Well, the RCC has some facts about the RCC's 'New Evangeliztion' program that they haven't shared at this point, for various and sundried reasons. EWTN web site however presents an article under the heading, "The New Evangelization Building the Civilization of Love. It reads:
As the Holy Father entrusts the 3rd Millennium to the BLessed VIrgin Mary, EWTN inaugurates it's New Evangelization specialty site. . . . . . . . . . . . . . the universality of the Roman Catholic Church and its mission.

Then, one additional and yet very significant statement was revealed:
"Under the protection of St. Therse of Lissieux, Patroness of the Missions, and Our Lady of Guadalupe, to whom the Pope has committed the New Evangelizatio, may the Spirit of God bring about the new Pentecost to which the [Roman Cathoic] Church looks forward with hope."

This Roman Catholic Evangelization program is committed to "Our Lady of Guadalupe." Remember, it was the apostle Paul who warned the Corinthians about "another spirt" that was associated with"another gospel" and "another Jesus.".
The same lady who is "said to have asked for a church to be erected at that site in her honor" Her honor. Not her son's. 😲

--Rich
"Esse quam videri"
 
The same lady who is "said to have asked for a church to be erected at that site in her honor" Her honor. Not her son's. 😲

--Rich
"Esse quam videri"
Yep! One and the same!

Enter this statement from Pope JP II where the pope, in 2003, published an article in Zenit which reported that Pope John Paul II had called for all Roman Catholics to re-focus on the Roman Catholic Eucharist and Eucharistic Adoration from an encyclical that he had written titled: "Ecclesia de Eucharistia." On the same day, Zenit sent out another news item that was equally important. The title for this article was: "Mary Has a Place In Latest Encyclical: Pope Describes Her as "Woman of the Eucharist."

The article began the following way:
The last chapter of John Paul II's encyclical "Ecclesia de Eucharistia" is dedicated to the Virgin Mary - a surprise in a document that is strictly dedicated to the Blessed Sacrament.
 
Back
Top