The Big Discovery [by David, former Presbyterian]

Journeyof ImperfectSaint.blogspot.com ^ | October 4, 2009 | David

[Salvation]

Sunday, October 4, 2009

The Big Discovery

        I made some good friends outside my church and found out that they were all Catholics.  Now, I did not know much about Catholicism at the time.  By the way, the Mass did seem somewhat mysterious to me externally.  In fact, what little I had heard from other church members was all negative.  There was a Mrs. J at my church, who had just retired from her missionary post in China.  She was such a kind and endearing soul to all.  One day she got back from visiting someone at a hospital and looked extremely sad and disturbed.  It turned out that when she got to the hospital room, she saw that a Catholic priest was already there with the patient.  Now the question was if the patient would ever get to heaven. 

 

        Nevertheless, my Catholic friends all looked quite normal and happy.  Then could the Catholic Church, the largest church in the the world, be in error?  It so happened that at that time I was also beginning to question my Protestant faith.  The fact that there were numerous different denominations around the world bothered me.  Also, as a Protestant, whether you're a minister or lay person, you are free to marry and divorce any number of times.  It's hard to see that Jesus would be happy with these two facts.  Since I am the kind of person who always likes to find the answer to any question that's important, I decided to look into Catholicism.

 

        I made up my mind not to talk to anyone about my investigation.  I was single then and had a lot of free time to myself.  The local public library housed an excellent collection of books on Catholicism, so I started borrowing books on the subject.  I read every weekend, even taking notes as I read.  The went on for over a year.  I read all those books that viciously attack the Catholic Church too, but somehow they did not affect me much because I sensed that these attacks could not have been prompted by the Holy Spirit.  The books that really helped me were the ones on early Church history.  I could see that the continuity was there and the beliefs and practices of the early Church had been preserved to this day in the Catholic Church.  The only conclusion I could come to was that the Catholic Church was indeed the church Jesus had come and established.  Like Christ himself, the Church, being his body, must be accepted (or rejected) totally, with no middle ground. 

 

        Here's some advice for those who seek the truth.  Your chances of success will greatly improve if, first, you start out with a completely open mind and secondly, go to the source(s) directly to get the facts.  Many who misunderstand the Catholic Church today have already made up their mind that the Church is wrong, thus never bothering to pick up a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to find out what the Church really teaches.  This is being close-minded. 

[metmom]

You’ve read this thread before jumping in and lecturing me, right?

[metmom]

Thanks for posting that information, daniel.

It IS being read by those who are willing to hear the truth.

[Cronos]

boatbums: regarding infant baptism, it is such a minor issue that I marvel that anyone has to make such a big production over it that they go so far as to deny fellowship to others who disagree with them or resort to labeling them "heretics" just because they think differently about a minor issue

interesting -- I'll remember that the next time we have a conversation with Baptist and will point out you when they say I'm sorry, but infant baptism makes a mockery of God's plan of salvation. In some churches it's taught that the clergy say some "magic words" and grace is infused into the infant. We are talking about infants who have no understanding of anything other than their diaper is wet and their hungry. In other churches they claim it is a "means of grace" where the Holy Spirit will finish the job later. Either way it mocks the examples given in Scripture of belief first and then baptism.

[Cronos]

boatbums: regarding infant baptism, it is such a minor issue that I marvel that anyone has to make such a big production over it that they go so far as to deny fellowship to others who disagree with them or resort to labeling them "heretics" just because they think differently about a minor issue

Interesting -- why don't you ask iscool about that -- when he says here is no infant bapatism in the NT...To call infant baptism biblical is to tell a lie...Anyone that can read can see there is no infant baptism in the bible

So, boatbums, how come no peep from you about others "making such a big production"?

[Cronos]

and some more for ya by izz: I wear that heretic moniker quite proudly. and Jesus gave salvation to the Gentiles to make the Jews jealous or The theme of the Bible is not salvation for mankind....

So go ahead bb, if unitarians and mormons and others are good enough bedfellows because they ain't orthodox, then go ahead...

[Cronos]

ooh... little crybaby? Grow up!

[Cronos]

Among the things that I agree with you are the rights of the unborn child. For that, we are completely in alignment. Remembering your admirable persistence I have no wish to further escalate this argument with you

[CynicalBear]

It’s not all that difficult these days to look up the history. As I posted yesterday about the comment of Lubomyr Cardinal Husar of the UGCC “We were told: If you want to be a real Catholic, you have to be Latin. And they pushed us into it.” It is obvious that there was and is a schism. Husar wasn’t just some lowly lay person within the Ukrainian church after all. One would have to be rather dense or simply in complete denial to not see that what metmon says is truth.

[CynicalBear]

>> Because the claims she's making based on some conversation she may or may not have had are not true.<<

Not true? You have the audacity to claim what metmom says about her own experience is “not true”? Where you there throughout her life to know? How about let’s just take one of her comments you claim is “not true” shall we?

Here is one of the comments you claim is “not true”.

>> Roman Catholics don't consider Ukrainian Catholics quite good enough and the Ukrainian Catholics know it.<<

Now here is a comment by the head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

“We were told: If you want to be a real Catholic, you have to be Latin. And they pushed us into it.”<<

Did you notice the “if you want to be a real Catholic” portion of that statement? Most with any sense at all realize that comment indicates that he knew that Roman Catholics don’t consider Ukrainian Catholics quite good enough just as metmom stated. It looks to me like history and facts would show who is correct in this matter.

Maybe you don’t like “the posse” coming in as you put it but you had better get used to it. You don’t get to spew your own version of history without others shining the light of truth in an open forum.

[Cronos]

It is obvious that there was and is a schism.

err... no. A schism is a religious split. There has never been a religious split between Ukrainian Graeco-Catholics and Ukrainian Latin-Rite Catholics.

A schism is like when you have your Western Branch of Pentecobaptoluthpresbytedotism splitting into the North-Western Branch of Pentecobaptoluthpresbytedotism and the South-Western Branch of Pentecobaptoluthpresbytedotism on whether one person believes in the Gap theory or not.

[Cronos]

What is a false statement is in post 353 Neither considered the other legit.

That is quite different. At no point has the Ukrainian Catholics not been considered legitimate.

to say otherwise is a false statement.

[Iscool]

Catholics do consider the Ukrainian Greek Catholics to be real Catholics.

Sure they are...They don't bow down to your popes...They don't pray to Mary, but they are real Catholics...

They claim THEY can trace their Bishops back to the Apostles just like your religion does...Sounds like the Roman Catholic religion was Greek Orthodox before it split off and became what it is...

To me, it sounds like Hamas and Hizbollah fighting over which one of them owns Israel...

[Iscool]

how does your line of thinking here work in 1 Corinthians 1:16? can you prove from the Scripturs that there were no babies or infants in the household of Steph’anas?

oh, do you have any Scripture that support “ the scriptures forbid the baptizing of babies”

It's all over the scriptures...NO ONE gets baptized without first making a conscience decision to BELIEVE on Jesus...

We already know that your religion has been caught forging records of popes/bishops/historians...And your religion still references these known forgeries as tho they don't exist...

The apostle Paul tells us there were people who were perverting and corrupting the words of God during his time on earth...We don't really know if Irenaeus wrote everything attributed to him...It appears that Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp's ministry but that doesn't prove that Irenaeus or the ones after him followed exactly what he taught...

But we do have the words of God in the scriptures who promised he would preserve those words forever...

So who are we going to believe; the traditions of men which has no record of their origin nor biblical support, i.e., the assumption of Mary, OR,
the preserved words of God in the scriptures??? That s an easy one for me, and a few hundred million other folks plus countless former Catholics who chose to believe God...

[Iscool]

Listen. I’ll be honest with you here. I’m not really interested in discussing out of context cut and paste snippets that can be construed into whatever position someone wants to make.

I don't see how you could construe anything in the post to make it mean what you want it to mean

[Iscool]

Why support someone who disavows the trinity?

Your problem is that you haven't shown any where that I might have disavowed the Trinity...As usual, you are making things up...

1l1f1b: Modalism teaches, the Father is God, Jesus is the Father and the Holy Spirit is the Father.

Iscool: Well guess what...That's what the bible teaches...

Obviously your religion can't stand this...But who cares what your religion thinks...What does God say???

1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

God was manifest in the flesh...Jesus is God...The Father is God...The Holy Spirit is God...They are three...But they are one...

Bible spells it out...And that's why it took your religion 400 years to create it's own unbiblical version of the Trinity since your religion didn't want to again, believe the scriptures that God gave us...

[Iscool]

Sorry, I thought you were of the male persuasion...You could use a make-over tho; just sayin’...

[Iscool]

Interesting -- why don't you ask iscool about that -- when he says here is no infant bapatism in the NT...To call infant baptism biblical is to tell a lie...Anyone that can read can see there is no infant baptism in the bible

Baptizing a baby does nothing more than get the poor little rascal wet, and uncomfortable...It's a minor issue in the sense that it does absolutely nothing spiritually...

What makes it a major issue is that it puts the parents under bondage to your religion...

Poor little bugger is gonna go to hell if he dies before the Catholic church can baptize him...

And if yer not Catholic,,,,well, you'd better get on down here an join up and PAY your penance...

[Iscool]

and some more for ya by izz: I wear that heretic moniker quite proudly.

and Jesus gave salvation to the Gentiles to make the Jews jealous

Rom 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.

Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

Can you see it now???

Uh, you don't seem to have much use for the scriptures, the Holy words of God...

or The theme of the Bible is not salvation for mankind....

The main theme of the bible is the Jewish Kingdom...

[Titanites]

Gee, bb, who knew you were going to call anyone a liar?

Wasn't that you recently lecturing about reading comprehension?

Here is what I said:

626 "that does not mean or imply that I have called him a liar. You can just hold on to that accusation before it leaves your fingers".

It was about her accusing me of calling someone else a liar. It was not about her calling me a liar. Understand?

She had previously done that very thing and accused me of calling someone else a liar:

594 "But I think you are WAY out of line accusing someone of lying because they have been critical of your church."

Projection is a very revealing thing.

So, stop doing it.

[Titanites]

You have the audacity to claim what metmom says about her own experience is “not true”?

Can you tell the difference between "her own experience" and the claims she's making based on that experience? My argument is with the claims about the Catholic Church.

Now here is a comment by the head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

That was not about being good enough. It was a reference about the liturgy in use. There were already Ukrainian Latin Catholics in place the region when the Greeks rejoined the Church in the 1400's.

It looks to me like history and facts would show who is correct in this matter.

History does and the fact is the UKGCC is in full unity with the Latins, under the same Pope. In fact, Husar was one of the leading candidates to become Pope.

Maybe you don’t like “the posse” coming in as you put it but you had better get used to it.

I'm fine with the posse coming in, and I'm used to it. My comment was about someone getting so worked up they had to call the posse, which hasn't really turned out to be much of one.