Posted on 05/16/2008 3:19:30 PM PDT by netmilsmom
Stemming from this comment
>>I think the RCC doctrines are a product of the enemy<<
Please tell us where we stand here. Examples welcome, but I'm not sure that actual names can be used when quoting another FReeper, so date and thread title may be better.
Without question I do. And there are certain aspects of Catholic theology and practice that I find superior to those of my own faith. Catholocism, despite all of its dogma and official trappings, remains more contemplative on the whole, I believe, than most Protestant denominations. I find the spiritual experience of mass to be far more reverent and do attend on occasions.
That said, I can’t accept the Catholic Church and all of its beliefs as a whole, so I’d have a hard time converting. There are a few lagging issues that keep me where I am as a Presbyterian.
But yes, Catholics are absolutely 100% Christian. And any Christian who would limit the words of John 3:16 more than they are in a literal translation is someone who I have far greater theological differences with than I’ve ever had with the Catholic Church.
You simply assume these scary Greek words to mean something worse than the latter two. In fact, "anathemized" means separated and "heretic" means defective (in essence if not lexically). Had you not been Christian, and therefore brethren, neither "anathema" or "heretic" would apply to you.
By what definition of 'changed' do you base that on? Cahtolic teachings have changed drastically over time.
I'm a Protestant and I do. I just disagree with the Catholic Church on certain points of theology.
There you go! :^)
That wasn't what was said.
Anyway, Fur Shur the Islamofascists would have no difficulty selecting which heads to chop off.
Worthy of note John Smith of Jamestown fame, was a well-known Protestant. He was taken prisoner fighting in an army drawn up to protect Europe from the Turks then trying to expand their domains in the Balkans.
I think that's when Protestants and Catholics in Europe first figured out that they were going to have to defend Christendom even if they didn't like each other. The Treaty of Westphalia had, of course, seen them agree to stay out of each other's hair.
Anyway, John Smith was selected by the Virginia Company to be the Governor of Jamestown colony precisely because he could speak fluent Turkish. In those days it was believed Turkish was commonly spoken along the East Coast. Fact was the Spanish had been running a POW camp for prisoners seized in their wars against the Turks in the Eastern Mediterranean. Many such prisoners were actually Orthodox Christians ~ they regularly escaped from the Spanish POW camp and fled up the coast to live with Indians. Odds are good that Turkish was commonly spoken on the East Coast in those days.
Now, is there some sort of dispute going on between the RCs and the Protestants? One would hope not.
Are you sure he said that? Can you show me where? I googled it. BTW, I know what he said.
Best Atheists in the world, IMHO!
As a W.A.S.P. (White And Scandinavian Protestant), without question, of course they are.
BTW, many well known Protestant groups do not use the creeds. If you want to I suppose it’s OK, but it’s not necessary.
By what basis do you make this judgment?
You, of course, are aware that some on this forum do question our belief, our faith, and our doctrine. I have been told that my beliefs are heretical, that I am going to hell because of my beliefs, and a miriad other contemptable things.
If your name happens to be Barack Hussein Obama, I think it is necessary.
Short answer, absolutely!
YES THE ROMAN SYSTEM IS VERY MUCH CHRISTIAN!
90% OF THE SO-CALLED PROTESTANT SYSTEM IS APOSTATE!
WE LOOK TO THE COUNCIL OF ORANGE:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/canons_of_orange.html
“About the Council of Orange
The Council of Orange was an outgrowth of the controversy between Augustine and Pelagius. This controversy had to do with degree to which a human being is responsible for his or her own salvation, and the role of the grace of God in bringing about salvation. The Pelagians held that human beings are born in a state of innocence, i.e., that there is no such thing as a sinful nature or original sin.
As a result of this view, they held that a state of sinless perfection was achievable in this life. The Council of Orange dealt with the Semi-Pelagian doctrine that the human race, though fallen and possessed of a sinful nature, is still “good” enough to able to lay hold of the grace of God through an act of unredeemed human will. The Council held to Augustine’s view and repudiated Pelagius. The following canons greatly influenced the Reformed doctrine of Total Depravity”
CALVIN WAS VERY AUGUSTINIAN AND INSPIRED BY HIS TEACHINGS.
THE MAIN POINT OF DISPUTE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL REFORMERS AND ROME WAS MAN ATTRIBUTED SALVATION,[ARMINIANISM] VS GOD-CENTERED SALVATION, [SOVERIEGN GRACE].
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
Ephesians 2:9
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Ephesians 2:10
For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.
(NKJV)
NO ADD ON’S NEEDED!
GRACE IS FREE,THOUGH NOT CHEAP!
5 SOLAS!
that I am going to hell
Please supply a quote, I will give them the dickens.
Ahem... turn the other cheek?
Ok, just jesting. I'm neither Catholic, nor Protestant, by the way.
With God, anything is possible. We don't presume to put limits on His Divine Mercy. However, a full answer of your question would probably require a long discussion on what exactly is meant by "mortal sin" in the Church!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.