One Hundred Fifty Reasons I'm Catholic - And You Should Be Too!

http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org ^ | January 23, 2014 | Dave Armstrong

[NKP_Vet]

1. Best One-Sentence Summary: I am convinced that the Catholic Church conforms much more closely to all of the biblical data, offers the only coherent view of the history of Christianity (i.e., Christian, apostolic Tradition), and possesses the most profound and sublime Christian morality, spirituality, social ethic, and philosophy.

2. Alternate: I am a Catholic because I sincerely believe, by virtue of much cumulative evidence, that Catholicism is true, and that the Catholic Church is the visible Church divinely-established by our Lord Jesus, against which the gates of hell cannot and will not prevail (Mt 16:18), thereby possessing an authority to which I feel bound in Christian duty to submit.

3. 2nd Alternate: I left Protestantism because it was seriously deficient in its interpretation of the Bible (e.g., "faith alone" and many other "Catholic" doctrines - see evidences below), inconsistently selective in its espousal of various Catholic Traditions (e.g., the Canon of the Bible), inadequate in its ecclesiology, lacking a sensible view of Christian history (e.g., "Scripture alone"), compromised morally (e.g., contraception, divorce), and unbiblically schismatic, anarchical, and relativistic. I don't therefore believe that Protestantism is all bad (not by a long shot), but these are some of the major deficiencies I eventually saw as fatal to the "theory" of Protestantism, over against Catholicism. All Catholics must regard baptized, Nicene, Chalcedonian Protestants as Christians.

4. Catholicism isn't formally divided and sectarian (Jn 17:20-23; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 1:10-13).

5. Catholic unity makes Christianity and Jesus more believable to the world (Jn 17:23).

6. Catholicism, because of its unified, complete, fully supernatural Christian vision, mitigates against secularization and humanism.

7. Catholicism avoids an unbiblical individualism which undermines Christian community (e.g., 1 Cor 12:25-26).

8. Catholicism avoids theological relativism, by means of dogmatic certainty and the centrality of the papacy.

[Iscool]

As Newman said, and he certainly knew more about Church History than you ever could, “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”

I don't think that I would take the word of a bible denying homosexual cardinal as being all that truthful...

[metmom]

“To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”

TO be deep in Scripture is to cease to be Catholic.

[bike800]

So why was he adding to the original text when it clearly states to not do so?

[metmom]

So Christ sent out something into the world that St. Paul called His Body and His Bride but it isn’t needed?

Jesus didn't *SEND* His church into the world, He is building His church.

And no, the *church* is not needed for salvation.

Anyone can come to Jesus as he is without the help or interference of Catholicism or any other denomination.

[BlatherNaut]

“Who can fathom the Spirit of the LORD, or instruct the LORD as his counselor?”

[cuban leaf]

That’s like saying, “The county I happen to live in now is part of the State of California. I don’t live in California.”

---

I have a hard time finding an analogy for my situation because we are talking about something spiritual. I guess it’s like going to MIT engineering school and saying you are not really an MIT student, per-se. Rather, you are an engineering student first. What school you go to is not all that relevant as long as they have a good engineering program. So would not relate to MIT so much as relate to being an engineering student. What school I go to is relevant regarding the quality of the school, and that’s about it.

And since I’ve gone to so many “schools”, I prefer to focus on what my degree is in, rather than what school I’m getting it at.

I’m a Christian that attends a Babdis church.

[CynicalBear]

>>John 15:22 is a scripture verse that seems to point to invincible ignorance. Do you agree?<<

No it doesn’t. At least not in the sense you seem to imply. The Greek word used in that verse means that they didn’t acknowledge or consider their sin until Jesus pointed it out. It in no way says they did not have sin until then. That is why we must proclaim the gospel to all. We need to point out that they are lost already unless they turn to Jesus.

The claim by the RCC that those who “through no fault of their own” do not know Christ are saved is nonsense. If that were true it would be cruel to proclaim the gospel to them. If they were saved in their ignorance but we proclaimed the gospel to them and they didn’t believe they would then be lost. If they were already saved why risk their salvation should they not then believe?

[cuban leaf]

That’s like saying, “The county I happen to live in now is part of the State of California. I don’t live in California.”

---

An even better way of saying it is that I am an American that lives in KY, but I’m not a kentuckyan. If my state does something really bad, I’ll move, as I moved from Seattle a few years ago. My citizenship is not dictated by state. It’s dictated by country. You can see it in my passport.

Same with Churches.

[Iscool]

You will find that the word alone is not in the original text...but was added by Luther...

Where do you suppose Luther got that idea???

[impimp]

“The claim by the RCC that those who “through no fault of their own” do not know Christ are saved is nonsense.”

Heinously ignorant statement. I didn’t say that. Are you propagating lies intentionally or is this innocent?

Let me fix your statement:
The RCC claims that those who “through no fault of their own” do not know Christ MAY BE saved.

If you dispute that then you have become the judge of people’s souls. Congatulations.

[cuban leaf]

That’s like saying, “The county I happen to live in now is part of the State of California. I don’t live in California.”

---

I should mention that there is a reason this is a big deal to me. When you tell people who are not christian that you are a catholic, protestant, baptist, etc., they pidgeon hole you into some “quaint” organization. But when you say you are a “Christian”, they tend to take it more seriously. If they are strongly anti-Christian, they bristle, while if you are a “baptist”, they see it as quaint.

It’s why “they” will often ask me, after I say I am a Christian, “what church are you a member of”. I won’t let them drill down any further or, conversely, dilute the point. I go to a church near my house that is filled with Christians. That is all they get from me.

Same with Churches.

[redleghunter]

“NKP_Vet” - I always find it interesting when someone dumps and runs on a post like this here on FR - ZERO follow up reply posts. Zero.”

I call it dropping out of warp firing a few photon torpedoes and engaging the warp drive.

[Iscool]

I’m a Christian that attends a Babdis church.

I have no trouble at all understanding that...

They are trying to convince each other that there are so many degrees of separation between the Protestant denominations that there can't possibly be any unity when they don't have a clue what they are talking about...

[redleghunter]

That is a very sober assessment. Boils down to, as all denominations are not innocent, love of mammon.

[Arthur McGowan]

Have you ever read the gospel of St. John?

[Salvation]

Have you ever read the words of absolution? It is God who forgives one's sins.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

1449 The formula of absolution used in the Latin Church expresses the essential elements of this sacrament: the Father of mercies is the source of all forgiveness. He effects the reconciliation of sinners through the Passover of his Son and the gift of his Spirit, through the prayer and ministry of the Church:

 

God, the Father of mercies,
through the death and the resurrection of his Son
has reconciled the world to himself
and sent the Holy Spirit among us
for the forgiveness of sins;
through the ministry of the Church
may God give you pardon and peace,
and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

[redleghunter]

And the Truth Jesus revealed to His disciples was what exactly? The catechism? Or was it this very direct and simple message:

Luke 24:44-49 KJV

And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things. And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

[Arthur McGowan]

http://biblehub.com/john/20-23.htm

Of course, you realize you are quoting the ENEMIES of Jesus to support your position?

[CynicalBear]

>>As I said, we are saved by grace alone. That’s exactly what Ephesians 2:8 says.<<

That’s not what Ephesians 2:8 says. It says that we receive faith by grace but it’s the faith that saves as I showed from scripture in my previous post.

>>We receive that grace through faith and works and not by faith alone (James 2:24).<<

That is absolutely backwards from what scripture states. Once again, it is by grace that we have the faith that saves. I for the life of me fail to understand how Catholics take one verse and make it mean something contrary to the rest of what scripture says.

[redleghunter]

Only those washed in the Blood of The spotless Lamb of God.